Right of Reply: Phillip v Niekerk - A smear campaign out of the old apartheid dirty tricks playbook
Key topics:
Van Niekerk denies allegations of spying, MTN ties, and ANC links
Exposes Andre Pienaar’s role in National Security News smear tactics
Warns disinformation aims to damage US-South Africa relations
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.
Support South Africa’s bastion of independent journalism, offering balanced insights on investments, business, and the political economy, by joining BizNews Premium. Register here.
If you prefer WhatsApp for updates, sign up to the BizNews channel here.
By Phillip van Niekerk
“Black Ops” is the term used for clandestine intelligence operations that fall outside official frameworks and whose aims include disinformation campaigns or character assassination. It is a methodology much beloved by the old apartheid regime, often with violent consequences for its targets.
Until this week, I did not believe I was important enough to merit that kind of attention. Then, on Monday, an almost comically defamatory article was published about me in National Security News and reprinted almost verbatim in BizNews, singling me out as “MTN’s shadow operative” in Washington, DC.
Based on no evidence, the reporter falsely asserted that I have an association with Iran, a sworn enemy of the US and Israel, and that I spy on South Africans visiting Washington for MTN and South African intelligence. The article concludes with a long list of my alleged sins, clearly inviting US authorities to investigate and act against me.
A case built on ghost articles
The report accuses me of criticising Donald Trump’s policy in the Middle East without disclosing my affiliation to MTN and concludes: “When MTN’s Washington consultant shapes US debate on Iran and Israel without disclosing his client’s ties, it is not just a corporate governance issue — it is a matter of national security.”
Of the eight “articles” relied on for this allegation, I can find no evidence that four of them were ever published. Two have nothing to do with the Middle East, and all but one — which was about the US election — predate my association with MTN.
If the reporter had indeed tried to contact me for comment before publication, as he or she falsely claimed in the report, I would have pointed all this out, and he or she would have left without a story.
Then again, it is absurd to claim that articles in the Daily Maverick or Nigeria’s Premium Times shape American foreign policy. And if a critique of Donald Trump’s Middle East policies is a “national security issue,” more than half of the New York Times opinion-page writers would be locked up for treason. Watch out, Tom Friedman: they’re coming for you.
When I write editorials for the Daily Maverick or Premium Times, I do so under my own name and the pieces are clearly marked “Opinion,” “Analysis,” or “Op-ed.” My views do not always align with those of my clients, which is one reason why I respect their confidentiality.
I am not an employee of MTN. It is one of several companies for which I have done consulting work, and I am proud to be associated with it. It is the second-strongest brand in Africa, connecting nearly 300 million daily subscribers. It is a key part of the continent’s future growth and development and one of Africa’s great success stories.
I am not a lobbyist — my clients in Washington use real lobbyists for that work, and I am not a communications or public relations officer.
I am an analyst. My area of expertise is geopolitics, especially as it relates to Africa, a continent I have worked in for many years and where, I like to believe, I have knowledge and networks of trusted contacts, some of whom I have known for more than three decades.
My clients hire me not because I am going to polish their corporate image but because they believe I can help them better understand the politics, the people, the geopolitics, and the economies of the markets in which they operate. They trust me to be honest and independent.
People who know me will tell you that I have never held back from expressing my opinions on any subject. As a young reporter at the Cape Times, the Rand Daily Mail and the Weekly Mail, I challenged the apartheid government and the mining industry. As editor of the Mail and Guardian in the nineties I challenged the ANC long before that became fashionable. I was hauled in front of the Human Rights Commission for my sins, accused of racism for reporting on “black corruption.”
The events in the Washington think tank community that I participate in are not spaces where secret intelligence is shared. They are generally excellent forums for scholarly discussion on current events and provide opportunities to hear and engage with African leaders and civil society activists who use them as a platform when they come to town.
Their audiences consist of a wide spectrum of people, including lawmakers, policy analysts, academics, journalists, lobbyists, and representatives of corporate interests — what former US diplomat Chet Crocker used to call the “think tank wildebeeste.”
What is National Security News?
It is a feature of “black ops” that you project onto your target the very things that you are guilty of.
So when I am accused of “blurring the boundaries between journalism, lobbying and foreign corporate influence,” I have to ask: what then is National Security News?
National Security News (UK) Limited, a UK company, is a subsidiary of National Security News LLC, a Delaware company — a jurisdiction often used by corporate entities to hide ultimate beneficial ownerships.
The CEO of the company as well as a reporter for National Security News came from ITC Secure, a UK cybersecurity firm which is a subsidiary of Haven Cyber Technologies in Luxembourg. Haven Cyber Technologies is owned by C5 Capital, a company controlled by Andre Pienaar.
Pienaar is the sole director of National Security News (UK) Limited.
A recently filed document with the UK Companies House stated that National Security News (UK) Limited owes money to three entities — C5 Holdings SARL in Luxembourg, C5 Accelerate LLC, and National Security News LLC. The three companies have one thing in common: they are owned and run by Andre Pienaar.
Pienaar regularly writes op-eds for National Security News, billing himself as the “co-founder of the Scorpions,” but he never mentions the fact that he owns what is effectively a sock-puppet publication.
Debunking the Falsehoods: My “Controversial Past”
I have never in 45 years seen so many falsehoods, inaccuracies, and unsubstantiated innuendos stacked into one report. Not a single source is named, and even the author is simply “staff reporter.” I strongly suspect that the MTN “whistleblower” is an invention.
I am compelled to correct the most egregious inaccuracies:
The only time I knowingly had contact with the South African secret service (pre- or post-1994) was when Nelson Mandela helped get me out of Liberia during the civil war in 1996, and the spooks were on the ground to meet my evacuation helicopter in Freetown. I felt I owed them a freebie briefing on the war.
I have no contractual relationship with the South African government, DIRCO, the South African Secret Service, or Special Envoy Mcebisi Jonas.
I am sure that the ANC is as surprised as I am to discover that I am a “de facto advisor to the ANC leadership.”
The claim that a consulting relationship with MTN began when Cyril Ramaphosa, then Chairman of MTN, introduced me to Phuthuma Nhleko, then Chief Executive of MTN, is false. I have never, to my knowledge, met Nhleko.
I was never sued by the Kazakh mining firm ENRC.
In that case, no one alleged that I stole sensitive information. I was subpoenaed to testify as a witness in a lawsuit ENRC was bringing against the Serious Fraud Office in the United Kingdom. ENRC claimed that the SFO had leaked to me the information that one of the oligarchs who control ENRC had been interviewed by the SFO, and that I had passed this information on to the media. The application was withdrawn when it became clear that I had never had any contact with the SFO.
I have never met, communicated with, or had any dealings with the former Kazakh Prime Minister Akejan Kajegeldin.
Thus, the sole cited instance of my “controversial past” is a nothingburger.
I did not attend Hudson Institute events with Solidarity and Afriforum. The first I heard about the purported treason investigation into the leaders of AfriForum and Solidarity was on the news.
When activist Rob Hersov visited DC, I had no idea he was in town, and would certainly not have attended any event with him had I known.
The “evidence” for the allegation that I spied on DA MP Emma Powell and then Deputy Minister of Trade Andrew Whitfield at the Hudson event in March was that I was taking “copious notes,” another falsehood. It wasn’t that interesting.
My only interaction with Powell at that event was when I asked her to back up her false claim in Parliament that the South African soldiers who had been killed in Goma were there to protect ANC mining interests in Eastern Congo. (There are no ANC mining interests in Eastern Congo.)
I had nothing to do with the National Security Council report that was published in the Sowetan. I never spoke to the reporter.
I was not responsible for Andrew Whitfield’s dismissal as Deputy Trade Minister by President Cyril Ramaphosa. I was actually impressed by his professionalism at the Hudson event and was sorry to hear that he had been dropped.
Andrew “Pioneer” Nhlapo is a dear friend and a stalwart of the liberation struggle. He is not my business partner.
I attended the event at Hudson for Corne Mulder, the leader of Freedom Front Plus, and I actually thought his presentation was fair and quite statesmanlike. And why would I report on this meeting to my clients? There is a video available on the Hudson website.
I cannot recall ever having published anything in City Press or News24.
Apart from an obituary of my friend Allister Sparks, I have not written for The Guardian in London in decades.
Nor have I written for The New York Times in decades. Why would they call on me to pen a “sharp attack” on Trump?
The article in the Daily Maverick in which I allegedly called Trump “the devil” refers to a playful headline on the night of the election: America doubles down on the devil it knows. In my opinion, neither Trump nor then-candidate Kamala Harris is the devil.
I am taking legal advice on defamation proceedings against National Security News, though thus far I am advised that I should first establish whether it has any assets that would make it worth the candle. For now, I have chosen to refute the article immediately rather than waiting to do so through delayed legal proceedings.
A Pattern of Malicious Smears
I can only surmise that the smear was so ridiculously over-the-top because it was put together in haste to distract from the fact that Andre Pienaar was sued last week in Washington, DC, by Kenneth Glueck, the vice president of the tech giant Oracle. Pienaar is being sued, alongside his former public relations consultant Juleanna Glover, for defamation.
I go into detail here because it speaks of a pattern in Pienaar’s modus operandi.
Glueck is alleging that Pienaar smeared him to journalists in an effort to deflect from the spectacular business failure and collapse of IronNet, a cybersecurity company founded by former National Security Agency director Keith Alexander and financially backed by Pienaar.
IronNet went public in 2021 with a $3 billion valuation but declared bankruptcy within two years. Associated Press investigative journalist Alan Suderman described the implosion as one of the most high-profile flameouts in cybersecurity history.
Suderman scrutinized Pienaar’s role, suggested financial irregularities at C5 Capital and IronNet, and reported on Pienaar’s long-standing business relationship with the sanctioned Russian oligarch Viktor Vekselberg, who has close ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Suderman reported that Pienaar and C5 have been sued by the U.S. Institute for Peace to enforce charitable commitments and were also sued by an order of Catholic nuns over “C5’s handling of millions of dollars invested by the nuns in Pienaar’s businesses.”
Pienaar threatened to sue Suderman, holding up publication for a year while he attempted to salvage his reputation and raise funds for what Glueck describes as a Ponzi scheme.
Pienaar dropped his suit before discovery. Glueck alleges that, rather than litigate the claims in an open court, Pienaar sought to recast himself as the victim of a vendetta and to discredit Glueck by fabricating evidence and orchestrating a clandestine smear campaign at an October 2024 meeting with journalists.
Glueck’s interest in Pienaar stems from an entirely separate scandal involving alleged corruption and conflict of interest in a $10-billion Department of Defense cloud procurement contract, the JEDI. Glueck documented what he alleges were improper links between Pienaar, Amazon, a DoD official called Sally Donnelly, and the JEDI procurement process. This matter is still under investigation by Republican Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley.
Glueck concludes that “Pienaar has crafted and curated an image as a statesman, cybersecurity expert and philanthropist. In reality, he is a low-level private intelligence operative who has made a career trading on proximity to important people in industry and government, particularly in the national security space.”
The Real Target is South Africa
As his IronNet venture crashed and burned last year, the pages of National Security News were suddenly filled with attacks on South Africa’s foreign policy and on President Ramaphosa in particular, despite Pienaar’s long-standing ties to senior figures in the ANC.
Perusal of the National Security News site reveals that it has promoted a conspiracy theory conflating Iran, the ANC, Hamas, Ramaphosa, Jonas, MTN, and South Africa’s case against Israel at the ICJ.
This mixing up of lies, half-truths, and some actual truths (South Africa did bring a case against Israel for genocide at the International Court of Justice)—which is then parroted by some South African politicians and by think tanks and pseudo-academics in Washington — has all the elements of a classic black-op campaign.
It is designed to sabotage the relationship between the US and South Africa. The propaganda starts on the periphery but soon bleeds its way into the mainstream. The cost, if it succeeds, is billions of dollars in lost investment and the devastating loss of thousands of jobs for ordinary South Africans.
I do not have to support everything the ANC does to know this is both despicable and dangerous, and I will continue to call out lies and propaganda when I see them, even though I am not paid to do so.
Given that I have been criticised for not disclosing corporate affiliations, perhaps Andre Pienaar and National Security News could tell us which corporate and/or international interests are behind their campaign?
Journalists take note. The real story is there.