World
What’s South Africa’s new school language law and why is it controversial?
A new education law in South Africa is dividing lawmakers and sparking angry emotions in a country with a complex racial and linguistic history.
Last Friday, President Cyril Ramaphosa signed the Basic Education Laws Amendment (BELA) bill into law but suspended the implementation of two hotly contested sections for at least three months for further consultations among opposing government factions.
Authorities insist that the law will make education more equitable. Stark economic inequalities in South Africa have contributed to lower literacy and post-school opportunities for the country’s Black majority. By 2022, even though 34.7 percent of Black teenagers had completed secondary school – up from 9.4 percent in 1996 – only 9.3 percent of Black people had a tertiary education. By comparison, 39.8 percent of the white population had a tertiary education.
“The law that we are signing today further opens the doors of learning. It lays a firm foundation for learning from an early age … It will ensure young children are better prepared for formal schooling,” Ramaphosa said during the signing event in Pretoria.
But critics of the law, mainly from the Afrikaans-speaking community, argue that clauses strengthening the government’s oversight over school language and admission policies would threaten mother-tongue education.
Here’s what to know about BELA and why some groups disagree with parts of the law:
What’s BELA and why is it controversial?
The new amendment modifies older school laws in the country: the South African Schools Act of 1996 and the Employment of Educators Act of 1998.
It includes new provisions, such as a ban on corporal punishment for children, jail terms for parents who fail to send their children to school, compulsory grade levels for children starting school, and increased scrutiny for homeschooling.
However, Sections 4 and 5, which regulate languages of instruction in school, and school admission policies, are causing upheaval among Afrikaans-speaking minority groups.
The clauses allow schools to develop and choose their languages of instruction out of South Africa’s 11 official languages, as well as their admissions policy. However, it also gives the National Department of Basic Education the final authority, allowing it to override any decisions. Until now, school boards had the highest authority on languages and admissions.
Authorities in the past have cited how some schools exclude children, especially from Black communities, based on their inability to speak Afrikaans as one reason for the policy update.
Following South Africa’s break from apartheid, Black parents were allowed to send their children to better-funded, previously white-only schools where Afrikaans was often the main instruction language.
Some Black parents, however, claimed their wards were denied placements because they did not speak Afrikaans. Accusations of racism in school placements continue to be an issue: in January 2023, scores of Black parents protested in front of the Laerskool Danie Malan, a school in Pretoria that largely uses Afrikaans and Setswana (another official African language), claiming their children were denied for “racist” reasons. However, the school authorities rejected the claim, and other Black parents confirmed to local media that their children attended the institution.
Why are some Afrikaans speakers upset over BELA?
Some Afrikaans speakers say the new law threatens their language and, by extension, their culture and identity. Afrikaans-speaking schools also accuse the authorities of pressuring them to instruct in English.
Afrikaans is a mixture of Dutch vernacular, German and native Khoisan languages, which developed in the 18th century. It is predominantly spoken in South Africa by about 13 percent of the 100 million population. They include people from the multiracial “coloured” community (50 percent) and white descendants of Dutch settlers (40 percent).
Some Black people (9 percent) and South African Indians (1 percent) also speak Afrikaans, particularly those who lived through apartheid South Africa, when the language was more widely used in business and schools. It is more commonly spoken in the Northern and Western Cape provinces.
Of a total of 23,719 public schools, 2,484 — more than 10 percent — use Afrikaans as their sole or second language of instruction, while the vast majority teach in English. Some Afrikaans speakers argue that giving locally elected officials more power to determine a school’s language will politicise the matter and could lead to fewer schools teaching in Afrikaans. Many also fault the section of the law that allows government officials to override admissions policy.
“There is only a government of national disunity,” one commenter posted on the website of the South African newspaper Daily Maverick on Friday about the divisions within the coalition Government of National Unity (GNU) that have emerged amid the language row.
“By opting to destroy Afrikaans and Afrikaans schools and universities, the ANC and Cyril are making a mockery of unity. This is what happens if the provincial department can unilaterally control the admission of learners and language mediums at schools,” the commenter said, referring to Ramaphosa and his party, the African National Congress (ANC).
Last week, Agriculture Minister John Steenhuisen, who is the leader of the Democratic Alliance (DA), the second-largest party in the GNU, condemned the government’s decision to move ahead with the bill despite reservations among the ANC’s coalition partners.
The politician, who is Afrikaner, also threatened a tit-for-tat response if the law is eventually signed as is.
“The DA will have to consider all of our options on the way forward … Any leader who tries to ride roughshod over their partners will pay the price – because a time will come when the shoe is on the other foot, and they will need the understanding of those same partners in turn,” he said.
Education Minister Siviwe Garube, a Black member of the DA, did not attend the signing ceremony in Pretoria in a show of defiance.
What is the history of school language controversies in South Africa?
Afrikaans is historically emotive in South Africa, dating back to British colonial rule.
To some, Afrikaans represents self-determination, but to many more, particularly in the Black community, it evokes memories of the brutal days of segregation and apartheid.
Originally, Afrikaans was regarded as an unsophisticated version of Standard Dutch. It was called “kitchen Dutch”, referencing the enslaved Cape populations who spoke it in the kitchen and to their settler masters. In the late 1800s, after the first and second Boer wars that saw Dutch settlers or “Boers” fight their British colonists and win independence, Afrikaans came to be regarded as a language of freedom for the white population. In 1925, it was adopted as an official language.
During the apartheid years, however, Afrikaans became synonymous with oppression for the majority Black population which faced the worst forms of subjugation under the system. Some scholars note (PDF) that the apartheid government uprooted Black families from urban areas to destitute self-governed “Bantustans” (homelands) partly based on their inability to speak the two official languages at the time, Afrikaans and English.
Most Black schools in South Africa at the time taught in English, as it was regarded as the language for Black emancipation. However, the government attempted to impose both English and Afrikaans as compulsory medium languages in schools starting from 1961.
That move ignited a series of student protests in June 1976 in the majority-Black community of Soweto, where the policy was meant to be implemented first. Between 176 and 700 people were killed when apartheid security forces used deadly force on schoolchildren in what is now known as the Soweto Uprising.
Apartheid authorities rescinded the language policy in July 1976. When Black schools were allowed to choose their medium of education, more than 90 percent opted for English. None chose the other African languages, such as Xhosa or Zulu, which the apartheid government had also pushed: it was seen as a measure to promote tribalism and divide the Black community. In addition to those, the country’s other official languages are Sepedi, Sesotho, Setswana, Siswati, Tshivenda, Xitsonga and Ndebele.
What’s next?
Authorities say the different arms of government will debate Sections 4 and 5 for the next three months. However, barring a resolution, the law will fully be implemented as is, President Ramaphosa said.
Meanwhile, Afrikaner rights groups such as the AfriForum, have declared they will contest the decision in court. The group has been described as having “racist” leanings, although it denies this.
“Afrikaans has already been eroded in the country’s public universities in a similar way,” Alana Bailey, AfriForum’s cultural affairs head, said in a statement last week.
“The shrinking number of schools that still use Afrikaans as a language of instruction now is the next target. AfriForum is therefore preparing for both national and international legal action to oppose this,” she added.
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Iran’s hardline parliament speaker and key negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf warned that Tehran would not honor its commitments under a newly signed memorandum with the U.S. if Washington fails to uphold its side of the deal, according to the media arm of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
“If the United States does not honor its commitments, there is no way Iran will honor its own commitments,” Ghalibaf said.
Ghalibaf’s warning was echoed Thursday by Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Quds Force commander Esmail Qaani, who threatened the U.S. in remarks translated by MEMRI TV, saying, “Americans should know their place and avoid confronting the Muslims.”
Qaani added that “Trump is trembling” and warned that the U.S. “should fear not only Hormuz and Bab al-Mandeb, but many other locations as well.”
MEET IRAN’S HARDLINE SPEAKER WHO THREATENED TO BURN US FORCES — REPORTEDLY TEHRAN’S POINT MAN FOR TALKS
The warnings came after President Donald Trump and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian Wednesday digitally signed a copy of the memorandum aimed at ending the war and resuming the flow of traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.
Iran’s hardline parliament speaker and key negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf warned that Tehran would not honor its commitments under a newly signed memorandum with the U.S. if Washington fails to uphold its side of the deal. (Majid Asgaripour/WANA)
The memorandum gives Iran major economic relief while leaving some of the most difficult nuclear questions for a final agreement to be negotiated throughout the next 60 days. Under the 14-point plan read by a senior U.S. official, Washington agreed to begin lifting its naval blockade, work with regional partners on a $300 billion reconstruction and development plan for Iran and terminate U.S., U.N. and other sanctions on an agreed schedule as part of a final deal.
The memorandum also says all licenses, waivers and permissions needed for related financial transactions would be granted by the United States.
In return, Iran reaffirmed that it “shall not procure or develop nuclear weapons,” and the sides agreed to resolve the fate of Iran’s stockpiled enriched material under a future mechanism, with the minimum method being on-site down-blending under International Atomic Energy Agency supervision.
The agreement defers many of the hardest questions — including how to wind down Iran’s nuclear program — until the 60-day negotiation period for a final deal.
But the Iranian figure at the center of the deal is not a diplomat known for moderation.
Ghalibaf, a former Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps commander and longtime regime insider, has threatened American forces, vowed Trump would “pay the price” and built his career through loyalty to Iran’s security establishment.
The new warning underscored what experts say is the central risk of the agreement. Washington may be entering a deal with officials who can enforce Iran’s commitments but who have shown little sign of changing the regime’s long-term posture toward the U.S., Israel or the region.
Ghalibaf, 64, is a product of Iran’s security establishment. He rose through the ranks of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps during the Iran-Iraq War, eventually becoming commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps air force.
He later served as Iran’s national police chief, overseeing internal security forces responsible for suppressing protests, including the 1999 student uprising, alongside Qassem Soleimani.
After transitioning into politics, Ghalibaf attempted to run for president multiple times but failed. He instead built his career through loyalty to the system, serving as Tehran’s mayor for more than a decade before becoming speaker of parliament in 2020.
FAMILIES OF IRAN’S ELITE LIVE LAVISHLY ABROAD WHILE ORDINARY CITIZENS SUFFER AT HOME
Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf looks on as parliament members wearing military uniforms chant in support of the IRGC in Tehran, Iran, on Feb. 1, 2026. (Hamed Malekpour/Islamic consultative assembly news agency/WANA/Handout via Reuters)
“Ghalibaf doesn’t have an independent line. His strength is that he is a ‘yes man,’” Beni Sabti, an Iran expert at the Institute for National Security Studies, previously told Fox News Digital. “If he is told to shake hands with special envoy Steve Witkoff, he will do it. If he is told to escalate, he will. It is not about moderation, it is about who gives the orders.”
“His name has also been linked to multiple corruption allegations, including misuse of oil revenues and sanctions evasion networks involving his family. His sons have reportedly been involved and are under sanctions,” Sabti said.
“There have also been public scandals involving family members traveling abroad and making luxury purchases, including widely circulated images of them arriving with numerous high-end Gucci suitcases.”
Behnam Ben Taleblu, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said the image of Ghalibaf at a signing ceremony with a senior U.S. official would be a propaganda victory for the regime.
“There was a time when the Islamic Republic would have been terrified to be seen signing such a thing,” Ben Taleblu told Fox News Digital. “Postwar, this is a sign of the regime’s opportunism, and no one identifies that opportunism better than someone like Ghalibaf, who comes from the IRGC, who is a corrupt politician and is a wheeler and dealer.”
But Taleblu warned that Washington should not confuse Ghalibaf’s opportunism with moderation.
“The mirage is the myth of Iranian military moderation and the myth that, with time, this regime will integrate and put aside all the things that have kept it on the sidelines for so long,” he said. “Transforming Iran via a deal — that is a huge lift.”
Ghalibaf’s wartime statements reflect the hardline posture inside Iran’s leadership. In remarks aired on Iranian television Jan. 12 and translated by MEMRI, he warned that U.S. forces would face catastrophic consequences if they confronted Iran.
“Come, so you can see what catastrophe befalls American bases, ships and forces,” he said, adding that American troops would be “burned by the fire of Iran’s defenders.”
TRUMP ADMINISTRATION UNVEILS SWEEPING TERMS OF PROPOSED IRAN AGREEMENT
A man lights a cigarette with fire from a burning picture of Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf as Israelis rally in support of nationwide protests in Iran in Holon, Israel, on Jan. 14, 2026. (Ammar Awad/Reuters)
More recently, he warned that “the blood of American soldiers is the personal responsibility of Trump” and vowed Iran would “settle accounts with the Americans and Israelis,” adding that “Trump and Netanyahu crossed our red lines and will pay the price.”
John Hannah, a senior fellow at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America and a former national security advisor to Vice President Dick Cheney, said Ghalibaf’s expected role reflects the reality of who holds power inside Iran.
“If you’re going to sign an agreement with Iran, those are the forces in charge and calling the shots, presumably with the approval of the new supreme leader,” Hannah told Fox News Digital. “If the U.S. harbors hope that Iran will ever implement any of their obligations under the MOU, these are the people — odious as they are — capable of making it happen.”
But Hannah said the central question is whether Iran’s leadership sees compliance as useful or whether the agreement is simply a tactical pause.
“The big question is whether they see it in their interest to do so, or are they only buying time, rebuilding their power and preparing for the next round of conflict,” he said.
Ben Taleblu was even more blunt, warning that even a seemingly favorable agreement would not change the nature of the regime.
“Even if you’ve got the perfect deal, with this kind of regime, with this kind of mentality, they will escalate,” he said. “I thought we would have learned by now what the regime did after the JCPOA. It built a vast missile arsenal. It literally built an empire of terror proxies that took Israel years of blood, effort and money to dismantle, backed by American support.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf speaks during a press conference in Tehran, Iran, Nov. 27, 2024. (Majid Asgaripour/WANA via Reuters)
“If we engage in pay-to-play with these guys,” he added, “I’m sorry to sound the alarm bell like this — but something tells me this is bad either way.”
Responding to questions about the threats from Ghalibaf and IRGC Quds Force commander Esmail Qaani, the White House defended Trump’s approach and warned Iran would face consequences if it failed to reach a final deal.
“President Trump has a great track record of good deals for the American people, and the President has been clear about the consequences if Iran fails to make a good, final deal,” White House spokeswoman Olivia Wales told Fox News Digital.
“What the president has achieved on the battlefield and at the negotiating table is nothing short of remarkable and will strengthen American security for many years to come.”
Tehran holds back from talks to cement ceasefire due to ongoing Israeli attacks on southern Lebanon.
Published On 19 Jun 2026
Planned talks in Switzerland between the United States and Iran to discuss the technical terms of their ceasefire deal have been postponed.
The Swiss Foreign Ministry confirmed early on Friday that the talks, which were scheduled to take place in Burgenstock, would now not go ahead.
list of 4 itemsend of listRecommended Stories
Reports suggest that Iran has delayed sending its delegation to discuss the technical issues linked to the ceasefire deal – digitally signed by the two countries on Wednesday – due to Israel’s ongoing military campaign in Lebanon.
Israeli strikes overnight and into Friday have reportedly killed at least 16 people in southern Lebanon, with Iran-linked Hezbollah reporting intense fighting.
Talks postponed
A ceremony followed by talks was expected to be held at the Burgenstock Resort in Stansstad, near Lucerne in central Switzerland.
It is owned by Katara Hospitality, part of Qatar’s sovereign wealth fund, which helped mediate peace in the conflict.
On Friday, in a message to media outlet AFP, the Swiss foreign ministry said: “The planned talks between the US, Iran, Qatar and Pakistan have been postponed”.
“Switzerland remains ready to facilitate these talks. The relevant preparatory work at Burgenstock is continuing,” it added, without providing a new date for the talks.
The announcement followed a report from media outlet Al-Mayadeen that Iran was delaying sending its delegation to Switzerland over Israel’s ongoing military campaign in Lebanon.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Thursday that Israel’s military will stay in a “security zone” of southern Lebanon as long as “Israel’s security needs require it.”
Israel and Hezbollah are not parties to the agreement, but Iran has insisted Israel must withdraw from the large swath of southern Lebanon it is occupying.
Logistics have never been ‘simple or predictable’
The US push to quickly begin high-stakes talks with Iran hit a snag just two days after the signing of a 14-point memorandum of understanding with the US that sets out a framework for talks during a 60-day negotiation period.
Vice President JD Vance had been prepared to make an overnight flight to meet with his Iranian counterparts at the mountainside resort in the tiny Swiss village of Obburgen.
His staff and a small pack of journalists had even gathered at Joint Base Andrews outside Washington in anticipation of the trip.
Meanwhile, dozens of White House officials, advance staffers and more media gathered in Switzerland to prepare for Vance’s anticipated arrival.
But then, abruptly on Thursday evening, the trip was called off.
The White House issued a statement explaining Vance – who has been tapped by President Donald Trump to lead the negotiations – and his delegation were prepared for talks, but they were unable to finalise plans and the vice president would remain in Washington.
“The logistics of these negotiations have never been simple or predictable,” the statement noted.
Also on Thursday, Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif cancelled his trip to Switzerland, his spokesperson told AFP.
new video loaded: A Small Election Could Change British Politics
transcript
transcript
A Small Election Could Change British Politics
Voters in the northern English district of Makerfield cast ballots on Thursday to choose their representative in Parliament, the outcome of which could lead to Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s ouster.
-
Well, I don’t think there should be a leadership election. I think that the last government proved that parties that spend their whole time in leadership elections don’t go on to win the next general election.
By Alisa Shodiyev Kaff
June 18, 2026
-
Technology5 minutes agoBarret Zoph is out at OpenAI again after just five months
-
World10 minutes agoIran hardliner behind US deal warns Tehran won’t honor agreement if Trump fails to deliver
-
Politics17 minutes agoTop GOP lawmaker rallies around conservative school board member facing calls to resign
-
Sports25 minutes ago2026 World Cup Odds: How Far Can Mexico Go After Winning Group A?
-
Technology32 minutes ago6 in 10 identity crimes now begin with a new account
-
Business35 minutes agoJanuary 2025 wildfire victims seek tougher penalties against State Farm over claims handling
-
Entertainment40 minutes agoReview: ‘Sugar,’ with Colin Farrell as an alien private eye, gets a new and improved second season
-
Politics50 minutes agoPolitical watchdog fines Newsom for failing to report $5.5M in solicited donations on time
