I was not paying 100% attention back when Apartheid ended. Were the South African blacks launching terror attacks on the whites? Were they wholly committed to destroying the whites nation to replace it with their own?
Something tells me not. That being the case, this is not an "apartheid wall" since this is not "apartheid". The only reason the palestinians do not have a state of their own right now is they turned down a sweetheart deal some years ago. As the saying goes, they never miss a chance to miss a chance.
Condemning Israel, especially for building that wall, is so shortsighted as to be blind.
Their military wing was Umkonto We Sizwe. The South African Govs answer to this terrorism was to turn SA into a police state with Security Police who were given very wide powers, totally unfettered by the courts.
Imprisonment without trial was commonplace under Anti-Terrorism Legislation and the Suppression of Communism Act, which empowered the Security Police to lock people away for years without access to the courts or an attorney and without the need to confirm that these people were in custody. They simply disappeared.
Death in detention was commonplace, see Steve Biko. Surveillance of anyone suspected of harboring ANY opposition to the government was the rule, not the exception.
Phones were tapped. Students, newspaper reporters & editors, academics, business leaders, writers, poets, play-writes, religious leaders were imprisoned, "banned" (which basically declared someone an unperson..prohibited from leaving their home for any reason, prohibited from meeting with more than 2 persons, including family, clergy, etc, using the telephone, unable to work, prohibited from being quoted, passport canceled and confiscated).
SA was a very repressive country not that far removed from the USSR.
So the comparison between SA (apartheid), and Israel is totally inaccurate, and is purely a PR maneuver.