What Narrative for (South) Africa in a reloaded multi-polar world? Solly Moeng argues that Africa does not have to offer proxy grounds for global ideological tensions forever.
Sign up for your early morning brew of the BizNews Insider to keep you up to speed with the content that matters. The newsletter will land in your inbox at 5:30am weekdays. Register here.
By Solly Moeng*
Looking at the supportive/follower role that African states seem to be expected to play in some of the regional conflicts in parts of the world, notably in the Middle East (Israel and Palestine) and in Eastern Europe (Russia and Ukraine), one should be forgiven for fearing that the world is experiencing somewhat of a reloaded cold war. Only this time, it is progressively being fragmented into several more poles than it was the case when the divisions were almost clearly between the US-led West, largely described as Capitalist, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (a.k.a., The Soviet Union) pole, largely described as Socialist/Communist.
With the expanding BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) formation set to include six additional states in 2024; Iran, Saudi Arabia, Ethiopia, Argentina, Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates, and seen by analysts as having the potential to represent the voice of the nebulous ‘global south’ or – as seen by Russia – the ‘global majority’, what voice will the African block – assuming that there is such a cohesive block – project?
The tension between Rusia and the West, following Russia’s invasion of and war in Ukraine, is also contributing to the coalescing of some states, e.g., China, North Korea, Iran, Turkey, several African states, etc., around Russia while the broad West and a few other states continue to coalesce around the US position.
In all of this, some form of emotional warfare is taking place throughout the African continent with former colonies of Western powers being reminded, through what is suspected to be a concerted Russian psychological campaign by the latter’s proxy, the Wagner group, of the brutalities of colonialism and, in the added case of South Africa, apartheid. Much is being said about the lingering, painful, legacy of the past and the need to turn Africa’s back towards it by aligning with Russia and China, which never had any colonies in Africa and can therefore not be blamed for any of Africa’s contemporary problems, so the arguments go. To be fair, wearing a historic lens, it is hard to argue against this.
In short, the narrative goes that Africa is in its sorry state because of past actions of the Western colonial powers, with France being made to carry much of the brunt. It often gets placed at the centre of protests against the lingering legacy of Africa’s colonial past, as many accuse it of having continued even after the years of independence, in the early 1960s, to impose financially onerous conditions on the monetary affairs of its past colonies, including the management of their natural resources and the manipulation of electoral outcomes. France is said to have played a major part in election manipulation in favour of its preferred, anointed, presidential candidates throughout Francophone Africa, ensuring that only those guaranteed to remain at its beck and call would emerge, often to the detriment of human rights and the general national interests of the countries concerned.
Russia and China are often touted as respectful partners in that, unlike their Western counterparts, they do not interfere in the domestic affairs of their African partners, even in cases where such partners are brutal despots who routinely piss on the fundamental human rights of their people. In truth, it would be hard for these countries to preach the respect of and play caring big brothers on human rights in Africa when this is neither a point of strength nor pride vis-à-vis their own people. It is even scarier when one considers that incoming BRICS members such as Sudi Arabia and Iran are also not beacons of light on human rights. African populations are therefore on their own.
In truth, the sad reality is that the commitments made by the African political elite on behalf of their respective countries are often decisions made to suit the private interests of African leaders with no consultation with their people. Unlike people in the developed West, Africans, in general, get treated like children whose opinions are never sought, e.g., through referenda, before decisions get made which impact their daily lives. In too many cases, respective African leaders are known to enter deals that only materially benefit them and those close to them, irrespective of the lasting impact of such deals on the populations they’re meant to lead.
The Israeli-Palestinian Conflicts
While most people in the nebulous global South seem to agree and are happy with South Africa’s steps to take Israel to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on a charge of genocide against the Palestinian population, it is telling that no Arab state has ever thought of taking this step. Instead, several of them – The United Arab Emirates, Morocco, and Bahrain – had quietly been signing so-called Abraham Accords with Israel on a drive to normalise relations with the Jewish State. Saudi Arabia was reported to have been on the verge of signing such an accord before the horrific Hamas attack on Israel on October 7, 2023. This put an end to the Saudi Israeli normalisation, at least for now.
South Africa has received faint applause from parts of Africa for its stance, with each state seemingly looking over its shoulders, mindful of its own economic interests. There is no African consensus on this.
There is an African saying to the effect that (S)he who offers his/her head to be used to break the coconut never gets to drink of its milk. This begs the question, will South Africa’s otherwise laudable stance on the human rights of Palestinians – despite its perennially deafening silence on the abuse of the human rights of Africans under several African despots – lead to its exclusion from the US policy and commercial engagement with Africa through the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) and other vital Western investments? Can South Africa have its cake and eat it?
Finally, is it wise for South Africa and other African states to forever have to choose between the Russia aligned and US aligned poles, often serving as proxies for economic development stunting ideological wars between the two powers, China and their respective satellites, or must African states learn from history and refuse once and for all to be caught up in the foreign policy games of others, including occasional blackmail, and develop their own global positioning, truly unaligned from any of global players and rationally informed only by their respective national and collective continental interests? Additionally, is there an opportunity for African states to play the global powers against one another on African soil, for self-gain?
In the case of South Africa, one thing is clear; the ANC must be defeated or its hold on policy making materially weakened in the coming general elections, on May 29, 2024, for the new administration to enjoy a fresh opportunity to propose a more rational foreign policy positioning, with less tantrums, underpinned by human rights considerations, and informed by a drive to advance the country’s national interests in Africa and across the globe.
Read also:
- 🔒World on the brink: Hedge fund titans and leaders warn of rising World War III fears
- 🔒 FT: Macron says sending western troops to Ukraine cannot be ruled out
- An unflinching examination of humanity’s brutality in warfare – Max Hastings
*Solly Moeng: ActionSA’s Team Fix South Africa Member for International Relations
