ANC may have struck a secret deal with Putin – SU researcher Dzvinka Kachur

by

This podcast reaffirms how the truth is often stranger than fiction. Only a few years ago, it took civic society activists and an independent legal system to block Russian President Vladimir Putin’s nuclear power plundering attempts, which would have bankrupted South Africa. But there was no stopping a secret deal Putin may have struck with the ANC ahead of Russia’s almost universally condemned invasion of Ukraine. In this fascinating interview, SA-based Ukrainian, Dzvinka Kachur shares the backstory to the SA government’s bizarre stance. Married to a South African and employed as a researcher (into Russian disinformation) at Stellenbosch University, Kachur combines her knowledge with on-the-ground insight from parents who live on the 5th floor of a Kyiv apartment block. She presents a mountain of circumstantial evidence that suggests SA President Cyril Ramaphosa agreed to a Faustian pact with Putin. The kind of deal the Russian president-for-life specialises in is similar to one struck with the Moscow-supporting Ukrainian president removed by the storied Revolution of Dignity in 2014. Kachur says this is the only explanation for Pretoria’s irrational approach, which is almost the opposite of what could be anticipated from a democracy with SA’s history. – Alec Hogg

Dzvinka Kachur on current developments in Kyiv

My parents have learnt very well to distinguish different explosions because Kyiv is attacked every single day and night. They can hear when the Ukrainian air defence system is catching the Russian bombs, and they can hear when the Russian scouts on the ground manage to get through like they did on Wednesday. They exploded the TV tower, which is positioned at the famous Holocaust, their place of worship. So, the sound of those explosions are different. They can also hear the gunshots on the streets. Regularly, the government announces that you cannot leave your homes because there are different Russian groups in Kyiv. [My parents] live on the fifth floor of the Martha Stewart apartment, and they can hear all different kinds of explosions and are learning about the war that we previously learnt from the books and from our grandparents. Now is their reality.

On Ukrainians who stay behind

They feel that the Ukrainian government [stands] very much with the Ukrainian population. My parents decided to stay in Ukraine because it’s their land. They spent their lives trying to fight for an independent Ukraine when it was still a Soviet Union. When we hear people in South Africa say the South African democracy was not delivered on the silver plate, this is exactly the case of Ukraine. In that sense, I feel Ukrainian people, whether young or old, are standing on their land. They are standing for their country, for their freedom, for their democracy. And this is the reason why they are there.

On the South African government taking a neutral stand in the Russo-Ukrainian war

I feel extremely sad because while we officially do not have the reasons to say there is an agreement between Russia and South Africa, there are so many questions [about] this behaviour that it leaves us with the assumption an agreement is going on between the two countries that is not transparent. This is exactly what happened in Ukraine back in 2013. The Ukrainian president signed a clandestine agreement with Putin, and we did not know about it for a few weeks until it was revealed. So, Russia is well known for striking agreements that are not open and transparent to the public. When we hear President Ramaphosa say South Africa takes a position of neutrality, yet, it goes against over 20 years of South African experience in public diplomacy, it leaves us with the question of why South Africa suddenly is not following its constitution that is very strong on human rights and freedom on sovereignty. It takes a stand of neutrality while at the same time mentioning that war could have been avoided if nature would hear its own leaders. Ramaphosa did not call on Russia to stop the invasion, which was a big principle in Mandela’s time, who always said that we need to stop violence. If you look at the anti-apartheid movement, Ukraine was part of the Soviet Union. A lot of ANC leaders studied in Ukraine. Ukraine contributed significantly to anti-apartheid movements. BRICS countries like Brazil voted in support of a UN resolution on 2 March that called for an immediate stop to the invasion of Ukraine. But South Africa decided to keep a so-called neutrality. It leaves us with the questions of what kind of neutrality it is and more so, what is it based on? What is so important for the South African government to protect that it sacrifices to stand with Russia?

On a possible deal struck between Ramaphosa and Putin

I would think so. We know that at the beginning of December, Ramaphosa and Putin had a number of phone calls. Putin thanked South Africa during his cabinet meeting and also during a four-hour press conference on internal issues. Its opening remarks started with: “We are grateful to South Africa.” No other country had been mentioned. So, what was discussed during those December meetings were important. Russia has been manipulating Ukrainian authorities and the government through the gas pipe. Only in 2014, after Russia invaded Ukraine, our government made those bold decisions to jump off the gas pipe and become more energy independent. It is a question of what Russia is bringing to South Africa today. Russian citizens can easily come to South Africa without a visa. However, at the time of the conflict, Ukrainians were prohibited to come. Even those who were relatives were not allowed to apply for a visa. At the moment, this has been changed and the three embassies are taking Ukrainian citizens who are immediate relatives of South Africans or those who are permanent residents. However, if Ukrainians are living here on a temporary residence – for example, there are 11 researchers who are co-developing Ukrainian South African satellites – they cannot bring their wives and husbands to South Africa to stay with them. They are earning a salary and can afford it. What is the reason for the South African government not to allow Ukrainians to come to South Africa to stay here while Russians can come here without a visa?

Comment from BizNews community member David Lipschitz: 

Dear Alec,

My response to the question in your video: https://youtu.be/LJAu5Cjey04

At 8 minutes 30 seconds Ms Kachur asks a valid question “What is so important that would cause South Africa to vote as it did?” My answer: Food security. Look at the food and other imports from Russia to South Africa. And exports (we need forex). I’m not saying what’s right or what’s wrong. I’m asking if it makes strategic sense for a government far away from the theatre of war to put its food security on hold and potentially starve millions of people in exchange for denouncing this invasion (more South Africans could die from this decision than will die in the Ukrainian war)? The same goes for the UK potentially sending warplanes to Ukraine. The UK is already short of fighters. If it sends its home based fighters to Ukraine, it will be seen as a declaration of war and Russia could attack the UK. So we need to constantly look at geopolitics and grand strategy. Many countries have imported oil from Saudi Arabia (no women’s rights; no democracy; cutting off peoples’ hands if they steal something), Iran, Iraq, and other countries which even support terrorism. Countries turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries in order to keep their own countries stable. Why suddenly stop importing from Russia in this event?

I’m not saying it’s right or wrong. South Africa abstained from the vote. This is the most wise decision that our government has made in decades.

I also want to know why Ukraine ignored strategic advice from as far back as 1994 and then 2014 and 2015 to not be involved with NATO? And in February I believe the last straw for Putin, who had been asking for negotiation with Ukraine and NATO for over a decade, was pulled, when a container of Javelin anti-tank missiles was delivered from the USA to Ukraine. If you push someone into a corner. you must expect them to eventually react.

I have a friend from Kiev. This after a discussion with her. We also need to look at how the Ukrainian government for decades has treated their Russian citizens in their Eastern Provinces and why Russia has had to send truck loads of medical, food, and other supplies into those provinces during that time? Ukraine will say that Russia was arming those provinces. But Russians on the ground in those provinces will say that the hatred of Ukrainians for those Easterners is part of the reason Putin intervened with food and medical supplies. The invasion is to do with NATO.

There is lots going on. BizNews must report all sides, just as it has done for the past 2 years with the Covid debate.

IMHO, NATO must immediately withdraw to Ukraine’s Western Border. Russia at the same time must immediately withdraw to the Russian provinces of Ukraine who want to be with Russia. Ukraine must seek disarmament. Negotiations must take place in the highest echelons of power of what should happen to the Eastern (Russian speaking) provinces of Ukraine. If Ukraine is prepared to consider those people as its own and not keep harming them, then great. If not, an alternative must be sought. Why is it ok for the United States Empire in the body of NATO to march east, but it’s not ok for Putin to march west? Just asking.

Regards.

Read also: 

Visited 8,832 times, 5 visit(s) today

BizNews