I learned about Hajaig’s “apology” almost simul­ta­ne­ously from two dif­fer­ent places. Here is the full text as reported by Z Word Blog:

I have just returned from a visit to Japan and learnt of the con­tro­versy sur­round­ing some com­ments that I was pur­ported to have made. I have reviewed the pro­ceed­ings of the meet­ing and wish to say, to state the fol­low­ing: Through­out my life I have been opposed to apartheid and all forms of racism. It is this oppo­si­tion that drove me into exile and to work with the African National Con­gress for decades. Along with all in the ANC and con­sis­tent with the recent res­o­lu­tions adopted at our Polok­wane con­fer­ence in Decem­ber 2007, I have long been cog­nisant of the immense suf­fer­ing the Pales­tini­ans have expe­ri­enced in the form of expul­sions, col­lec­tive pun­ish­ment and mas­sacres, of which the recent war in Gaza is but the lat­est exam­ple. It is to this suf­fer­ing that I spoke at the meet­ing. I deplore the attempts of Zion­ists to jus­tify poli­cies that have wors­ened the cri­sis in the Mid­dle East, in par­tic­u­lar unmit­i­gated state vio­lence directed against unarmed civil­ians as much as I deplore indis­crim­i­nate attacks against Israeli unarmed civilians.

At a sin­gu­lar point in my talk, and entirely unre­lated to any South African com­mu­nity, I con­flated Zion­ist pres­sure with Jew­ish influ­ence. I regret the infer­ence made by some that I am anti-Jewish. I do not believe that the cause of the Pales­tini­ans is served by any anti-Jewish racism. As a mem­ber of the South African gov­ern­ment and a com­mit­ted mem­ber of the African National Con­gress, I sub­scribe to the val­ues and prin­ci­ples of non-racism and con­demn with­out equiv­o­ca­tion all forms of racism, includ­ing anti­semitism in all its man­i­fes­ta­tions and wher­ever it may occur.

To the extent that my state­ment may have caused hurt and pain, I offer an unequiv­o­cal apol­ogy for the pain it may have caused to the peo­ple of our coun­try and the Jew­ish com­mu­nity in par­tic­u­lar. I wish to reit­er­ate that the major issue in rela­tion to the Pales­tin­ian Israel con­flict is the enor­mous suf­fer­ing of the Pales­tin­ian peo­ple and the strug­gle for peace for all its’ peo­ple based on jus­tice and secu­rity for Israelis and Pales­tini­ans alike.

As Deputy Min­is­ter of For­eign Affairs, I reaf­firm the government’s com­mit­ment to engage all par­ties in Israel and Pales­tine to find an ami­ca­ble and just res­o­lu­tion to the con­flict in that region.

There is no need for me to go through this point by point, since both David Schraub and Z Word Blog do a fine job. I want to empha­size one thing that they each allude to but don’t say quite this way. When Hajaig finally gets around to her apol­ogy, she makes the fol­low­ing state­ment, “At a sin­gu­lar point in my talk, and entirely unre­lated to any South African com­mu­nity, I con­flated Zion­ist pres­sure with Jew­ish influ­ence.” It’s not, in other words, that there is no such thing as “Jew­ish influ­ence.” The prob­lem is that she, this time, inac­cu­rately con­flated it with “Zion­ist pres­sure.” If you wanted a clearer exam­ple, in the antisemite’s own words, of how anti-Zionism is all too often used as a cloak for anti­semitism, you’d be hard pressed top find one. Then she has the audac­ity to say, though of course she also has to say or the whole exer­cise of her apol­ogy would be mean­ing­less, that she “regret[s] the infer­ence made by some that I am anti-Jewish,” show­ing that she is far more con­cerned for her own rep­u­ta­tion than for the feel­ings of the peo­ple to whom she is osten­si­bly apologizing. 

A final note. Take a look at how the story was reported on AfricaA​sia​.com:

South Africa’s deputy for­eign min­is­ter apol­o­gised Tues­day for a speech in which she said “Jew­ish money” con­trols the United States.

“To the extent that my state­ment may have caused hurt and pain, I offer an unequiv­o­cal apol­ogy for the pain it may have caused to the peo­ple of our coun­try, and the Jew­ish com­mu­nity in par­tic­u­lar,” Fatima Hajaig said in a statement.

Hajaig told a polit­i­cal rally in Johan­nes­burg last month that Jews “con­trol Amer­ica, no mat­ter which gov­ern­ment comes into power, whether Repub­li­can or Demo­c­ra­tic, whether Barack Obama or George Bush.”

“Their con­trol of Amer­ica, just like the con­trol of most west­ern coun­tries, is in the hands of Jew­ish money,” she said.

Out­raged by the remarks, the South African Jew­ish Board of Deputies — a civil rights group — said it filed a com­plaint against Hajaig at the human rights commission.

“Through­out my life I have been opposed to apartheid and all forms of racism. It is this oppo­si­tion that drove me into exile and to work with the African National Con­gress for decades,” the min­is­ter said.

“At a sin­gu­lar point in my talk, and entirely unre­lated to any South African com­mu­nity, I con­flated Zion­ist pres­sure with Jew­ish influ­ence. I regret the infer­ence made by some, that I am anti-Jewish. I do not believe that the cause of the Pales­tini­ans is served by anti-Jewish racism,” she added.

I just find it telling that the shap­ing of the story makes, or at least tries to make Hajaig sound not only like she is sin­cerely apol­o­giz­ing, but also like she really under­stands the mean­ing of her own words when she says that “the cause of the Pales­tini­ans is [not] served by anti-Jewish racism.“