Discussing the flaws of SA foreign policy

Wait a minute, before we go any further with other matters that confuse our minds domestically – where do we stand on anything foreign affairs?

Why is our foreign policy so unclear that we are left guessing as to what we are to say or do when it comes to world affairs? For the past 11 years, including the “nine wasted years”, we had no voice shouting loudly about what should happen in the world in order to attain global socioeconomic stability and peace.

What happened to our uncompromising approach about the need to alter the status quo at the multilateral forums such as the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, the UN Security Council and even how the International Criminal Court at The Hague dealt with crimes affecting African heads of state.

Previously, under former president Thabo Mbeki, we were clear and undoubtable – him supported by his strong foreign affairs minister, Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma and an articulate ambassador to the UN, the late Dumisani Khumalo.

At the time, we ventilated a clear stand that the transformation of these forums was a must, so as to make them inclusive instead of being dominated by powerful nations.

Under Mbeki, Africa got respected as the continent, albeit a little, managed to pull itself off the weight of the West’s yoke.

We saw the African Union attending to its own peacekeeping efforts, inspiring democracy via the African Peer Review Mechanism and the earlier establishment of Nepad (New Partnership for Africa’s Development) and resolving political conflicts in South Sudan and Zimbabwe.

At least Nelson Mandela displayed an unequivocal stance towards the George W Bush administration.

Although Mandela initially favoured Taiwan over mainland China to establish diplomatic and trade relations because Taipei listened when the ANC was desperate for financial support to prepare for the April 1994 election while China offered nothing, which was in addition to only backing the smaller Pan Africanist Congress and ignoring the ANC armed struggle.

The wisdom of Mandela to allow himself to be persuaded by his fellow comrades to opt for Beijing instead of Taipei helped because today Chinese goods and technology are everywhere in the world, including the Western capitals.

Even some honest comrades among ANC leaders believe that we cannot carry on like this.

Said one of the senior party members: “We haven’t clearly spelt out how we are going to use the African leadership that we are holding in Africa. There is trading but on the ‘silencing of guns’ what is our contribution? Do we piggyback on the efforts of peacekeeping of the UN or a new initiative?”

The leader believes that South Africa should have a view on the simmering tensions between the US and Russia and China on a number of issues, including the Libyan civil war, Syrian war and trade wars between the US and China.

Others say when we come up with a stance, it would only be a disaster, just like when South Africa suddenly downgraded its embassy in Israel contrary to its own two-state solution approach.

International relations and South African politics lecturer at the University of Pretoria, Dr Sithembile Mbete, concurred that there had been gaps in the current South African foreign policy during the Zuma and the current administrations.

“During the Thabo Mbeki era, there was a clear vision of what South Africa wanted the world to be. Under Zuma there was a clear shift towards the East and he aligned himself with China and Russia and put emphasis on Brics (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) and he paid less attention to Africa, hence South Africa cut down on peacekeeping on the continent under Zuma rule,” Mbete said.

Mbete said Ramaphosa seemed to have no interest in geopolitical matters. Although he was involved in mediation efforts in Ireland and South Sudan, Ramaphosa has no strong foreign policy. That’s because he did not want to create controversies.

Eric Naki is political editor

For more news your way, download The Citizen’s app for iOS and Android.