SA’s International Relations policies need be practised with a degree of restraint when prioritising challenges facing our country

·        Does South Africa have a ‘national interest’ common to us in all our diversity and is this national interest served by our International Relations policies and priorities? – Cheryllyn Dudley
 

I have chosen this topic for discussion because these issues have a significant impact on the people of South Africa and I believe it is a topic they would like to apply their minds to and make an input on.

My starting point will be the National Planning Commission which has attempted to align South Africa’s foreign policy with development priorities in the context of - shifting global dynamics and achieving SouthAfrica’s national interests. In Chapter 7 of the National Development Plan entitled “Positioning South Africa in the world”, the National Planning Commission argues that government’s global and regional policy-making stance should be South Africa-centric and improve South Africa’s integration in the region, on the continent, among developing countries, and in the world - with measurable outcomes.

The Commission argues that policy should focus on what is achievable without over-committing to regional and continental integration. That it should be evaluated on a regular basis to ensure that national interests are maximised and it should achieve measurable outcomes related to food, energy, education, health, transport and communication infrastructure, national defence, adjustment to climate change and economic growth to benefit all South Africans.

This debate, I suspect, will reveal a degree of consensus as to what constitutes our ‘national interest’ – of course it could do just the opposite!

It has been suggested that there is a need for a careful balance between national interests and other imperatives prioritised by South Africa – which makes me wonder - why we would prioritise anything that is not in our ‘national interest’?

The ACDP relates whole-heartedly to a vision of a better South Africa, better Africa and a better world. We do however expect our interaction with the international community to reflect national priorities such as human rights, job creation, poverty alleviation etc. We also expect our foreign relations to contribute to an environment conducive to sustainable economic growth and development.

South Africa has sought to play an active role in conflict resolution across the African continent from a very early stage in our democracy. While we recognise and appreciate this role, we note concerns that South Africa does not seem to have been assertive enough in following up and establishing economic opportunities.

We hear the Deputy Minister saying that “While South Africa would intervene to resolve the continent’s festering disputes on moral grounds such intervention was...a strategic consideration as well” and it makes sense - what doesn’t make sense is the arbitrary nature of many responses - sometimes entirely based on moral grounds, sometimes strategic and sometimes just based on past relationship. I think here of a few years ago when South Africa was openly supporting ‘one Sudan’ while supporting the right to self determination of Sawhari - presently Morocco.
The ANC reminds me at times, of the ACDP back in the 1990’s with our radical ‘all-or-nothing’ approach!  And I am thinking here of not only South Africa’s – in my opinion – emotional and irrational handling of the Israel Palestine issue but a UN motion on rape that South Africa chose not to support because it didn’t go ‘far enough’.

Now, there is no doubt in the thinking of the ACDP that peace and prosperity in Africa are intrinsically tied to our national interest. We recognise that no factor has hindered the realisation of the continent’s vast potential more than the chronic outbreak of crises and conflict. We also share concerns that despite more than seventy percent of Security Council deliberations being centred on conflict issues in Africa, with eighty percent of UN peacekeepers deployed in Africa, not a single African country is a permanent member of the Council.

South Africa’s policies we are told, are guided by the philosophy of Ubuntu - a philosophy which reflects the belief that we affirm our humanity when we affirm the humanity of others. Putting others before ourselves in terms of Ubuntu and our Christian beliefs is a concept most of us are familiar with and value. It would be wise however, for South Africa to practice a degree of restraint in this regard and to prioritise the challenges facing our country and then the continent, especially considering our financial constraints.  All other countries, when it comes down to the wire, put their own interests first – for some of course this means the interests of the people and for others it is the interests of a powerful elite – nevertheless the principle is the same.

In the current shift in the global balance of power and the rapidly closing capability gap between the developed world and the emergingglobal south, an environment of opportunity has opened up for countries to expand their influence within their regions.

There is also no doubt that South Africa has committed to a stronger SADC which is clearly in our national interest. When bordering states commit human rights abuses or fail to provide basic services and opportunities for their people to work and prosper, South Africa’s limited resources, including our available land, are put under tremendous strain. It follows then that stable government and development in the region is a plus for South Africa.

SADC is presently the strongest and most developed region in Africa.  It is one of two regions in the world containing the most significant mineral deposits in terms of variety and quantity – the other is Russia. The SADC region - South Africa in particular - is however water-strapped and will need the co-operation of other regions with water potential - the DRC could be important in this regard.

Something that hadn’t occurred to me was the fact that our relations with Zimbabwe are also important because our trade with the rest of Africa - which is significant – goes through Zimbabwe.  South Africa has growing trade relations within Africa and significant investments in energy, transport, roads, hospitals, mining etc in countries like Namibia, Botswana, Zambia and, I understand – Nigeria and East Africa among others.

I summing up, it may be helpful to note that our economy cannot grow to where it needs to be with 52 million people but with more than 800 million people on the continent of Africa there is enormous potential to expand.  South African land, as someone put it, is being ‘used up’ and we need to expand into other areas of Africa.  We are also no longer a country producing low-cost goods and must out of necessity integrate in markets in Africa.  It is important for us to heed Honorable van der Merwe’s warning that ‘as we plan and discuss – other countries are steaming ahead’.

Hon vd Merwe also mentioned BRICS in her input in the discussion and South Africa will host the fifth BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) summit in March next year. Noticeably, BRICS countries have divergent economic and political interests especially regarding the relationship of each state to its citizens.

So...it seems...South Africa is able to separate democracy and economics when it suits us! Hon Mubu just quoted Tony Leon as saying that South African policy has moved away from the policy of Mandela’s day and mentioned South Africa’s inconsistencies regarding Human Rights issues in other countries.

An observation I found interesting - made by BRICS partners - is that South isperceived as ungovernable.  The point being that to belong to BRICS you must be able to govern. The e-toll catastrophe and ‘wild-cat-strikes’ have created the impression that South Africa’s commitment to liberalism prevents us from governing while billions of Rands are being lost.

I will end by summarizing words Hon vd Merwe read earlier which caught my attention: ‘To be the best that we can be – everyone of us is important’. And I will purposely end with a question in the hope that the debate will find its way into the public square:

‘Does South Africa have a ‘national interest’ common to us in all our diversity and is this national interest served by our International Relations policies and priorities?