
The man in the three-piece suit — imagery and identities in Mandela's leadership (Part 3)
Imagery has always been important in liberation movement politics and history. In the case of the South African Native National Congress (the name of the African National Congress at its inception), the question of dress was always important.
Many people responded with ridicule, suggesting that ANC leaders were dressing like their masters to beg the king and his government to provide some reforms that benefited a section of the ANC. Cultural writer John Berger said that the suit emerged as the dress code of the ruling class. What one can legitimately say is that wearing the dress of the ruling class is in a sense a claim for rights which the ANC was making.
Likewise, when they sang Rule Britannia, it's important to understand that the ANC was still grappling for its identity as an African organisation.
But in the context of competing powers – the Afrikaner Nationalists and the British – the ANC sided with the British and played divide and rule in reverse (a phrase I owe to Professor Peter Limb, a very significant Australian historian of the South African Struggle), with a claim to British subjectivity, meaning the rights of the British men and women. Rule Britannia has such words as 'Rule Britannia, Britannia, rule the waves: Britons never, never, shall be slaves'. In other words, having the rights of the British meant one could not be a slave, one had to be treated equally.
The use of imagery is well interred within the history of the ANC. When Nelson Mandela came onto the scene, a man who was very self-conscious about his dress, wearing smart suits and similar attire, it's legitimate to read some of his identity from the clothes that he wore. (On dress and other cultural representations, see Raymond Suttner 'Periodisation, cultural construction and representation of ANC masculinities through dress, gesture and Indian Nationalist influence': Historia 2009, vol. 54, n.1, pp. 51-91).
From early in his life Mandela was very conscious of who he was in relation to others – his identity or identities and the imagery that he deployed to reflect these.
Given the pre-eminence in leadership that Mandela attained in later life, how he was perceived could have real material effects on the success of the often-fragile transition to democracy. It could impact on the state of conflict, whether or not the violence would increase or be reduced and ultimately eliminated.
In the eyes of many white people, Mandela was a dangerous man who threatened their wellbeing, or this idea of Mandela was conjured up to scare the followers of certain organisations. To secure peace Mandela and the ANC had to counter that.
On the side of very many black people, Mandela was admired for representing implacable opposition to apartheid domination, manifested through his unrepentant stance in court, after being the founding commander of uMkhonto weSizwe (MK). (This is, of course a perception that is being challenged by a new generation and some commentators who see Mandela as having 'gone soft' and actually having compromised the freedom for which he had fought, a claim that does not stand up against the evidence. This and negotiations need thorough probing, especially examining the tactical and strategic objectives at stake).
After 1990, following the release of his comrades, return of exiles and the unbanning of organisations, but also earlier, from prison, Mandela took actions aimed at unblocking the stalemate that had developed between the apartheid regime and the forces of liberation.
These were manifested in various agreements but Mandela then, and indeed throughout his life, also deployed symbolic gestures, ways of being, ways of self-representation that communicated messages about what he exemplified. Insofar as he was the primary figure in the leadership of the ANC and many looked to him to give a lead, what he did and how he appeared often mattered as much for the success of steps forward as what was contained in organisational decisions.
It used to be wrong, in the organisational self-understanding and practices of the ANC and the SACP, for an individual to loom larger than the organisation, but it was a fact that Mandela may well, at certain times, have enjoyed substantially greater popularity than the ANC itself.
In fact, this was largely a result of the ANC's campaigning. It had decided to galvanise international solidarity around Mandela as a leading political prisoner.
Conscious of the place he occupied in the international pressure it faced, in 1985 the apartheid regime offered him conditional release, requiring him to renounce violence. But he rejected the offer, making it clear that he and the ANC had not sought violence but responded to the attacks of the apartheid regime.
His standing had political effects. How Mandela conducted himself had more significant consequences in many ways than decisions of conferences and National Executive Committees in the period after his release.
Mandela was conscious of the need to bear himself and represent himself in a manner that was inclusive and reinforced a peace process. In many ways there was a break with the Mandela of before, especially the man who went to prison.
But in many respects the identities and imagery associated with him earlier were not erased but would periodically reappear when required, as when he felt betrayed by the primary negotiating party, the apartheid regime. Radicalism, as we saw in this and other instances, does not mean lack of flexibility.
Early life
Throughout Mandela's early life until after he arrived in Johannesburg, he was very conscious of what he was destined to be, not what he considered as existentially desirable or undesirable for himself or in a human being more generally. This was because he was 'destined' to become a counsellor to the future Thembu King, Sabata Dalindyebo.
In consequence of this responsibility, the regent had often told Mandela that it was not for him 'to spend your life mining the white man's gold, never knowing how to write your name'. Shortly after his initiation ceremony, he was driven by the regent to attend the Clarkebury Boarding Institute in the district of Engcobo.
For the first time at Clarkebury Mandela encountered a Western, non-African environment. He understood his life to be governed by his lineage, what he owed in respect to people like the regent, what was expected of him and the respect owed to him by virtue of his own position. But Clarkebury was not run on this basis:
'At Clarkebury… I quickly realised that I had to make my way on the basis of my ability, not my heritage. Most of my classmates could outrun me on the playing field and out-think me in the classroom and I had a good deal of catching up to do.'
Despite his attempts to meet the criteria for excellence at Clarkebury, he remained psychologically and socially located in a manner that displaced individual agency, for Mandela's life had been preordained:
'I never thought it possible for a boy from the countryside to rival them in their worldliness. Yet I did not envy them. Even as I left Clarkebury, I was still, at heart, a Thembu, and I was proud to think and act like one. My roots were my destiny, and I believed that I would become a counsellor to the Thembu king, as my guardian wanted. My horizons did not extend beyond Thembuland and I believed that to be a Thembu was the most enviable thing in the world.' (My emphasis).
Healdtown
In 1937, at the age of 19, Mandela joined Justice, the regent's son, at Healdtown in Fort Beaufort. Like Clarkebury, Healdtown was a Methodist mission school. The principal, Dr Arthur Wellington, claimed to be a descendant of the Duke of Wellington who had saved civilisation 'for Europe and you, the Natives'. Mandela joined others in applauding, 'each of us profoundly grateful that a descendant of the great Duke of Wellington would take the trouble to educate natives such as ourselves'.
Mandela's pride in being Thembu was not seen to be incompatible with aspiring to British subjectivity, an aspiration that was common to the early bearers of African political thinking in the Cape and even later in the ANC (Raymond Suttner, 'African nationalism' in Peter Vale, Lawrence Hamilton and Estelle Prinsloo (eds), South African intellectual traditions, (UKZN Press, 2014), 125, 129-132).
The 'educated Englishman was our model; what we aspired to be were 'black Englishmen', as we were sometimes derisively called. We were taught – and believed – that the best ideas were English ideas, the best government was English government and the best men were Englishmen.'
At Healdtown, Mandela mixed with Africans from a range of backgrounds and started to develop a cautious sense that he was part of something wider than the Thembu people, an African consciousness, though this was limited.
When Mandela and Justice fled to the Rand to escape forced marriages, Mandela's consciousness was still primarily that of a Thembu, not even an African.
The 1950s: Peaceful struggle but preparation for illegality and war
During the 1940s a new radical current of thinking emerged under the leadership of the ANC Youth League (YL) and Mandela, although a relative political novice, became part of this.
It is interesting to note that radical though they may have been and critical of their predecessors, the dress code of the YL was formal and by no means represented the type of associations that later generations of radicalism would have with casual or military dress. The Youth League dressed very much like their predecessors, with the exception of top hats and bow ties.
In fact, some of these individuals like Mandela, especially when he qualified as an attorney, paid considerable attention to their appearance and the suits they wore. Ellen Khuzwayo writes:
'I remember the glamorous Nelson Mandela of those years. The beautiful white silk scarf he wore round his neck stands out in my mind to this day. Walter Max Sisulu, on the other hand, was a hardy down-to-earth man with practical clothing – typically a heavy coat and stout boots. Looking back, the third member of their trio, Oliver Tambo, acted as something of a balance with his middle-of-the road clothes!'
This was a period when dress clearly served as a signifier of specific identities, notably masculinities. It was a time when gangsterism was rife in the townships and the main gangs were always distinguished not only by their daring law-breaking, but their flashy clothing.
The 1950s was an era that comprised lawyers in suits, defendants in many court cases, volunteers who engaged in mass democratic campaigns collecting demands for what later became the Freedom Charter, just one of a number of mass activities of the time.
In some ways, the Fifties, which are generally portrayed as struggling legally and nonviolently, were an interregnum between nonviolent, peaceful activities and the formal adoption of armed struggle by the ANC in 1961. In this period the imagery around Mandela as a boxer, a sport in which he engaged with considerable discipline, prefigured his later becoming a fighter of a different type.
The image of Mandela as a boxer coexisted with his wearing a suit as a conventional lawyer. It also resonated with his militant image. Letsau Nelson Diale, recruited to the ANC while working as a waiter, read the newspapers:
'The people I worked with said: 'This young man is very clever.' They asked me: 'What's in the Rand Daily Mail?' I told them: 'Mandela is coming to court.' They said: 'He will beat the hell out of the boers. He is going to beat them.''
Here we see this image directly translated in the minds of ordinary waiters and patrons into violent action against the apartheid regime ('the boers').
Mandela: Black man in a white man's court
In the first of Mandela's cases, after the banning of the ANC, where he was charged with incitement, having been underground for 17 months, he appeared in Thembu attire.
This was at once an assertion of his lineage, deriving from a long line of warrior-leaders, and a declaration of the alien character of the white man's (for it was an almost exclusively male) judiciary. The imagery associated with his dress was used to deny the power and authority of the alien court.
He tells the court of the bygone days when men were warriors fighting for their people and their land. He asserts what often tends to be submerged by an overarching African nationalism, his identity as a Thembu. He shows that he was a person with multiple identities, suppressed under apartheid.
Mandela took this defiance into court proceedings, where he challenged the right of the court to preside over the case, in applying laws that he, as a black person, had no part in making. It was Mandela the lawyer and also the revolutionary speaking. It was more radical than delegitimising the apartheid state for Mandela refused to recognise the right of a key state institution – the judiciary – to hear his case.
Dancing for freedom vs dancing as threat: The toyi-toyi of Mandela and Zuma
In the post-1976 period the toyi-toyi emerged as a dance accompanying militant and military action. When Mandela was released from prison, it was a time where many ANC cadres were geared for war and felt disappointment at the onset of negotiations. As indicated earlier, many had not been adequately briefed on this changed direction, for they had been instructed to prepare for insurrection.
One of the manifestations of the militaristic orientation then prevailing was the toyi-toyi. The dance was accompanied by aggressive chants with words exhorting people to hit and shoot the enemy.
Mandela entered the groups who were dancing with his distinctive 'shuffle dance', smiling to all South Africans, affirming and evoking inclusivity, reaching out and unthreatening, as was the case with military exhortations.
Jacob Zuma also deployed the toyi-toyi, notably in his rape trial, but it was very different. Zuma's demeanour was aggressive (then as it is now). After emerging from court Zuma would sing his 'favourite song' – Umshini wam/Bring me my machine gun.
Singing about machine guns was itself at one level a manifestation of male power over women, a symbolic representation of the power of the gun – a phallic symbol. The firing of the gun is a well-known representation of ejaculation.
In effect the song was a re-enactment of a rape (that the court found did not take place). Unlike Mandela's toyi-toyi-ing, Zuma's was threatening.
Mandela's legacy of peace
Mandela's gestures were never random and ad hoc. He knew that how he represented himself and how he was understood by others was important, bearing symbolic importance. He did not want a civil war. Whites had to be reassured, while simultaneously having his base constituency among oppressed black people understand that what he wanted to do would lead to political freedom.
Graça Machel remarks: 'He knew exactly the way he wanted to come out, but also the way he addressed the people from the beginning, sending the message of what he thought was the best way to save lives in the country, to bring reconciliation.'
Many people have remarked on the stolid, sometimes tedious way in which Mandela delivered his speeches. This, he told Richard Stengel, was deliberate in that he wanted to impress upon people that he was serious and could be relied upon and did not resort to rhetoric in order to please. (Nelson Mandela: Portrait of an Extraordinary Man. 2012, page 51).
At the same time, in this period, some of what had been part of Mandela's private self became part of his public persona. In Fatima Meer's biography of Mandela, one sees the tenderness towards his children (Higher Than Hope: The Authorised Biography of Nelson Mandela, 1990).
One of the features of Mandela as president and retired president has been his obviously unaffected love and gentleness towards children. What we see here is how aspects of his personality that had been submerged under the tough image of guerrilla leader and uncompromising triallist became foregrounded in the context of his changed life conditions.
The Mandela who was imprisoned was remembered as a dignified yet angry man. The Mandela who emerged had become sober and evoked gravitas. He would often smile, yet the angry Mandela had not disappeared and could re-emerge where conditions made that necessary. On occasions where he felt betrayed by the last apartheid president, FW de Klerk, Mandela's anger would rise to the surface.
In general, however, when we review the imagery surrounding Mandela, we see, as suggested earlier, a series of journeys, where he constantly changes, but without abandoning everything that he has been before.
Even in his last days he remained attached to his Thembu identity and was buried near his place of birth. The Mandela who found peace for the country also found peace with himself as a man. DM
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Citizen
29 minutes ago
- The Citizen
'MK party only true hope for total liberation of SA people,'
Zuma's lecture focused predominantly on Brics and global politics. Former president and MK party leader Jacob Zuma has described his party as the 'only true hope for the last stage of the total liberation of the South African people.' Zuma delivered the 8th Annual Leadership Lecture at the University of Professional Studies Accra (UPSA) in Accra, Ghana, on Tuesday. Lecture The lecture was held under the theme 'The geo-politics and geo-economics of de-dollarisation: BRICS currency strategy, lessons for Africa's common currency, and beyond.' Zuma's lecture focused predominantly on Brics and global politics. But he also spoke about the MK party and the 'future of South Africa.' MK pillars The MK party leader said the party's manifesto, which is referred to as the 'People's Mandate,' outlines eight pillars, which serve as the foundation for our vision and policy proposals. Zuma said the pillars include reclaiming dignity; land and mineral resources; people's power; reclaiming the economy; building human capital and technological capabilities; reclaiming space, safety and security; and sovereignty and position in Africa and the world. 'Together, these pillars embody the uncompromising vision of the MK Party as the only true hope for the last stage of the total liberation of the South African people, a liberation not just from apartheid's political chains, but from the economic captivity, poverty, unemployment, and neo-colonial domination that continue to strangle our nation. 'Unlike the compromised so-called Government of National Unity, the MK Party represents the genuine continuation of the liberation struggle, carrying forward the spirit of our forebears to deliver full freedom, dignity and prosperity to every South African,' Zuma said. H.E. President Jacob Zuma was adorned as a Chief of the Ga Mantse Traditional Council in a ceremony led by the High Priest of the Ga State, Nuumo Akwaa Mensah III (Nae Wulomo), in Accra, Ghana. — uMkhonto WeSizwe Party (Official) (@MkhontoweSizwex) August 19, 2025 ALSO READ: Zuma files urgent bid to challenge Ramaphosa's Mchunu decision after ConCourt loss The West During the lecture, Zuma said Africa's dependency on the West 'is a form of slow death.' 'We export minerals and crops at the lowest prices, only to buy them back as manufactured goods at ten times the cost. We face tariffs on our exports, yet we are lectured about free trade. 'We borrow in dollars, only for our currencies to collapse under exchange-rate manipulation. And when we resist, coups are sponsored, leaders are assassinated, and sanctions are imposed. This is not a partnership. It is exploitation,' Zuma said. Africa's liberation Zuma said the MK party recognises that Africa's liberation is incomplete without strong intra-African solidarity. 'We will therefore continue to agitate for robust and action-oriented diplomatic relations between South Africa and Ghana, ensuring that these instruments serve the real needs of our people, advance pan-African unity, and resist external manipulation of our continental partnerships. 'It will be the women, youth, the students, the scholars, the innovators of Africa and the poorest and downtrodden people of our continent who must carry this revolution forward,' Zuma said. 'Chaining Africa' Zuma said: 'The West built its power by chaining Africa. 'The new generation of Africans must build our power by breaking those chains. We must move from the classroom to the policy room, from the laboratory to the marketplace, from the lecture hall to the halls of power. Africa must produce not just employees for foreign corporations, but inventors, thinkers, and builders of African systems. 'We are not beggars at the world's table, we are builders of a new table.' ALSO READ: Dirco blasts Zuma for using SA flag in meeting with Moroccan minister [VIDEO]


Daily Maverick
an hour ago
- Daily Maverick
Trump shock spurs Japan to think about the unthinkable: nuclear arms
TOKYO, Aug 20 (Reuters) – By Tim Kelly, John Geddie, Ju-min Park, Joyce Lee, Josh Smith and David Lague Matsukawa, a former deputy defense minister, traveled in March to historic Fordham Abbey for a top-level bilateral conference. At the estate, now home to a Japanese-owned sake brewery, she said she learned from British lawmakers, diplomats and business leaders that a tectonic shift in their thinking was underway. U.S. President Donald Trump was openly berating America's European allies and tilting toward Russia. And Europe had 'awakened,' she said, to the fact it could no longer rely so heavily on America and must take more responsibility for its security. This was also true for Japan, currently the home to the largest overseas contingent of U.S. troops globally, she realized. 'You can't really take the U.S. presence for granted,' said Matsukawa, a member of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party's (LDP) influential national security policy council. Matsukawa is part of a contingent of senior Japanese lawmakers who are beginning to think the unthinkable in the only nation to have suffered an atomic bomb attack: Surrounded by nuclear-armed neighbours China, North Korea and Russia, Japan too might have to deploy those weapons of mass destruction. 'Trump is so unpredictable, which is his strength maybe, but I think we have to always think about Plan B,' Matsukawa said in an interview at her Tokyo office. 'Plan B is maybe go independent, and then go nukes,' she added, raising the possibility of Japan reducing its reliance on American security guarantees. The Trump shock is also reverberating in neighbouring South Korea, currently protected under the U.S. nuclear umbrella like Japan. Up to 75% of the South Korean public is in favor of the country building its own nuclear weapons, polling shows. The election of left-center President Lee Jae Myung in June has dampened some of the more overt talk of nuclear weapons in Seoul. But even some in his Democratic Party are increasingly recognizing the need, should U.S. security commitments falter, to achieve 'nuclear latency' – possessing the means to quickly build a usable atomic arsenal. Support in Japan for developing its own indigenous atomic weapons is smaller. Matsukawa, for instance, stresses that the U.S. remains an important ally and says Tokyo needs to persuade the Trump administration that it is in America's interest to defend her country and deter a crisis over Taiwan. But interviews with a dozen Japanese lawmakers, government officials and former senior military figures reveal there is a growing willingness to loosen Japan's decades-old pledge, formulated in 1967, not to produce, possess or host nuclear weapons in its territory – what is known as the 'Three Non-Nuclear Principles.' Among the Japanese public, too, opinion surveys show a greater readiness to rethink the nuclear stance. Hiroshima native Tatsuaki Takahashi, whose grandfather survived the atomic bomb attack on the city, told Reuters that views on the issue are changing as the tragedy of the past becomes more distant. The shifting attitudes in Japan and South Korea, both key pillars of America's decades of dominance in the Pacific, have been spurred by a growing loss of faith among U.S. allies in Washington's commitment to their security, in particular doubts about whether America will come to their aid in a conflict. Trump's election on an America-First platform and his spurning of America's traditional allies has turbo-charged these concerns, interviews with lawmakers and officials in Japan and South Korea show. The president's sowing of doubt about continued U.S. support for NATO, imposition of tariffs on Japan, South Korea and Australia, and talk of absorbing Canada into the U.S., have spooked many of America's long-time allies. The White House did not respond to a request for comment, but a senior Trump administration official told Reuters that there are 'no changes in U.S. policy' toward Japan and South Korea. Trump and his senior national security aides have repeatedly stressed their commitment to allies in Asia. Japan's foreign ministry said the government considers the Trump administration's commitment to the bilateral alliance 'to be unwavering.' The defense ministry said Japan has 'full trust in the U.S. fulfilling its obligations using all types of capabilities, including nuclear forces.' South Korea's foreign ministry said its decades-old alliance with the U.S. remains 'the foundation of our diplomacy and has played a key role in maintaining peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula.' China's defense ministry said it opposed 'any attempt to hype up the so-called 'Chinese nuclear threat' in an effort to smear and defame China and deliberately mislead the international community.' China, the ministry added, continues to adhere to a no-first-use policy – 'not to use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear-weapon states or nuclear-weapon-free zones.' RETHINKING THE NUCLEAR UMBRELLA For Tokyo, which in recent years has taken historic steps away from its post-war pacifism to rebuild its military capabilities, the nuclear question is the final security taboo. Eighty years ago this month, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were devastated by atomic bombs at the end of World War Two. Japan renounced war and vowed never to possess the military means to attack other countries. It also became a vocal proponent of nuclear disarmament. Prime Minister Eisaku Sato, who formulated the Three Non-Nuclear Principles, won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1974 for this policy achievement and for signing the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. Last year, Nihon Hidankyo, an organization established by survivors of the atomic bomb attacks, also won the prize. Until now, Japan has relied on U.S. nuclear weapons, which once laid waste to Nagasaki and Hiroshima, to deter modern-day threats. In a security arrangement called 'extended deterrence,' Washington has committed to use the full range of its military capabilities, including nuclear, to defend Japan and other allies. In recent years, however, Tokyo has begun to adopt a more robust stance in its bi-annual closed-door talks on this arrangement with the U.S., Reuters has learned. Tokyo has been delving into subjects such as how its conventional military could practically support U.S. nuclear forces in a conflict, two former U.S. officials with direct knowledge of the talks said. This has included discussions on how Japan's ongoing efforts to acquire new, longer range 'counter-strike' missiles could allow it to take out enemy launch platforms to deter or assist in a nuclear conflict, said the two officials. They spoke on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the talks. The two sides have also explored how Japan's surveillance and intelligence apparatus could support the U.S. nuclear mission and chalked out a roadmap for how the two governments and militaries would coordinate in a nuclear emergency, the former officials added. These details have not been previously reported. Japan's foreign ministry declined to comment on the details of the talks. The defense ministry said Japan and the U.S. 'have been working to strengthen extended deterrence,' but declined to comment further. The State Department said America's 'extended deterrence commitments' to Japan and South Korea 'are ironclad.' Now, lawmakers from Japan's ruling Liberal Democratic Party are considering how they can reinforce the credibility of the nuclear umbrella, according to interviews with Matsukawa and four other senior party members. They suggested that the non-nuclear principles could be revised or reinterpreted to allow U.S. nuclear weapons to enter Japanese territory, noting that the principles are not set down in legislation or legally binding. Matsukawa said the widely publicised visit of a U.S. submarine designed to carry nuclear weapons to South Korea in July 2023 provided an example Japan could follow to bolster deterrence. Matsukawa and three former senior military commanders said Tokyo should also prepare for the possibility of nuclear sharing, a concept that allows non-nuclear states to participate with its nuclear-armed allies in planning, training and use of nuclear weapons. Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey, for instance, have been hosting U.S. nuclear weapons on their soil as part of NATO's nuclear-sharing strategy. In the event of a nuclear war, these non-nuclear states could deliver those weapons to targets on behalf of the U.S., using their own aircraft. Before taking office, Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba advocated for an Asian version of NATO that could include nuclear sharing. Japan 'has no intention' of revising its non-nuclear principles, the Liberal Democratic Party said in response to questions. But Ishiba has instructed the party 'to examine Japan's future security arrangements in Asia,' it said. The foreign ministry said the government 'does not consider nuclear sharing to be permissible.' Japan, it said, 'will not possess nuclear weapons.' Ishiba's office said the foreign ministry's responses represented its views. CONFIDENCE SHAKEN Doubts about the reliability of American security guarantees didn't start with Trump. When the Obama administration didn't respond to Chinese island-building and reclamation in disputed territories of the South China Sea, starting in 2013, it raised questions about Washington's stomach for confrontation with Beijing, said Taro Kono, a ruling party lawmaker who previously served as foreign and defense minister. After Russia invaded Ukraine, President Joe Biden sent tens of billions of dollars in military aid to Kyiv. But Biden also said the U.S. wouldn't fight World War Three over Ukraine. The Biden administration's Ukraine policy rattled political and military strategists in Tokyo and Seoul. Russia has repeatedly threatened to use nuclear weapons to limit outside intervention in the war. The apparent success of that nuclear intimidation has fueled anxiety over the readiness of the U.S. to protect its allies, said Tomohisa Takei, a retired admiral who helmed Japan's navy from 2014 to 2016. 'Out of concern for escalation, the United States became cautious even about the types and capabilities of weapons it provided to Ukraine,' Takei said. 'I believe that the credibility of extended deterrence has been significantly shaken for countries under the U.S. nuclear umbrella.' Song Seong-jong, a retired South Korean military officer, said Ukraine's fate after earlier giving up its nuclear weapons served as a warning. 'Do you think Trump will retaliate with nuclear weapons for the sake of South Korea?' he said, referring to a potential conflict with North Korea. Song doesn't think Trump would. 'This is an inconvenient truth,' he said. Trump and top administration officials have repeatedly stated in public that the U.S. is committed to remaining a Pacific power. In meetings last month with the Japanese and South Korean foreign ministers, Secretary of State Marco Rubio discussed enhancing security cooperation, according to State Department statements. Adding to the anxiety in Asia has been Beijing's rapid expansion of its nuclear arsenal, a decisive break with China's earlier preference for a small force sufficient to maintain deterrence. North Korea's fielding of increasingly sophisticated ballistic nuclear missiles has also heightened concern. China has the fastest-growing nuclear arsenal globally, adding about 100 new warheads per year since 2023, the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute said in its annual inventory of the world's most dangerous weapons published in June. China has some 600 nuclear warheads, while the U.S. and Russia have stockpiles of 3,700 and 4,309 warheads respectively, according to estimates by the research institute. In 2016, before the presidential election, Trump suggested Japan and South Korea might need nuclear weapons because of the threat posed by North Korea and China. Actions he has taken at the start of his second term have made some in Asia think he was right. Since his re-election, Trump and senior members of his administration have raised questions about America's commitment to NATO, with the president saying the U.S. wouldn't defend member countries unless they increase defense spending. Trump's trade war, which targets even U.S. allies, has further eroded faith in American commitment to long-time friends. After threatening to impose tariffs of 25% on Japan and South Korea, Trump last month reached deals with Tokyo and Seoul that put a 15% tax on imports from both countries. 'Trump's tariffs hit allies the hardest,' said Itsunori Onodera, a former defense minister and currently the ruling party's policy chief. 'The tariffs risk pushing them closer to China, the very countries the U.S. should be aligning with' to counter Beijing. Ryoichi Oriki, who served as chief of staff of the Joint Staff of Japan's Self-Defense Forces from 2009 to 2012, said the American president's 'volatility on trade' has created doubts about U.S. security commitments. 'The U.S. has become a variable, not a constant, which affects trust,' he said. In South Korea, former President Yoon Suk Yeol raised the prospect in early 2023 that Seoul could be forced to pursue nuclear weapons in the face of a mounting threat from North Korea. He backed off later that year when Seoul extracted extra security assurances from the Biden administration with the signing of the Washington Declaration. That pact included giving South Korea greater insight into U.S. nuclear planning for any conflict with North Korea. Yoon was impeached after plunging the country into crisis when he declared martial law in December last year. While newly elected President Lee Jae Myung has rejected the idea of nuclear armament, his intelligence agency chief, Lee Jong-seok, this year called for Seoul to secure the right to enrich uranium to demonstrate its 'potential nuclear capabilities.' It would be a mistake to 'interpret South Korean nuclear ambitions as a bluff,' says Ely Ratner, who served as assistant secretary of defense for Indo-Pacific security affairs in the Biden administration. South Korea's foreign ministry said the government isn't considering the acquisition of nuclear weapons. CHANGING ATTITUDES There is broad public support for acquiring nuclear weapons in South Korea, in the face of threats from nuclear-armed Pyongyang. In Japan, public opinion is constrained by the weight of its history – though attitudes are changing. A poll in March found that 41% of respondents were in favor of revising Japan's Three Non-Nuclear Principles. In a similar poll three years ago by the Kioicho Strategy Institute, a consultancy and think tank, just 20% backed the idea. Even some Japanese with personal connections to the atomic attacks are calling for a shift on the bomb. Tatsuaki Takahashi, the Hiroshima native, said his grandfather was just four years old when the bomb was dropped on the city at 8.15 am on August 6, 1945, but could still vividly recall the flash-and-boom and the windows in his home shattering. Some of Takahashi's relatives went missing during the disaster and were presumed to have died, he said. Growing up in Hiroshima, Takahashi believed that diplomacy and dialogue could help avert a repeat of that nuclear nightmare. Now 28, and living as an IT programmer in Tokyo, he thinks Japan may need a show of nuclear strength to achieve that goal. 'Personally, I think allowing U.S. nuclear weapons into Japan might be unavoidable as a form of deterrence,' said Takahashi, who runs a group called Youth Vote Hiroshima, which aims to engage young people in his home city in politics through social media. 'I'm still against using nuclear weapons, but just possessing them has strategic value.' Takahashi said Japanese views on the issue are changing as the memory of the bombings dims and younger people think more critically about the need for deterrence. There are signs that even in Hiroshima, where the 80th anniversary of the attack was commemorated earlier this month, some people are increasingly reluctant to dwell on the past. A survey published in April by public broadcaster NHK found more than 30% of people aged between 18 and 24 in the city and surrounding prefecture who had not heard the accounts of the city's atomic bomb survivors said that they did not wish to do so. That was more than 6 points higher than a similar survey five years ago and higher than a 25% figure for the rest of Japan. The most common reason given was that the accounts were too horrific. THRESHOLD STATE Both Japan and South Korea have committed not to develop or acquire nuclear weapons by signing the NPT. But security experts describe Japan as a threshold nuclear-weapons state – meaning it has the technical capacity, and could obtain the materials, to build and launch a bomb if it was determined to do so. Within a couple of years, Tokyo could build a nuclear device small enough to fit on a missile, said Jennifer Kavanagh, director of military analysis at Defense Priorities, a Washington-based think tank. One senior lawmaker close to Ishiba told Reuters that Japan could build a nuclear weapon in as little as six months, and that it should consider doing so if trust in the U.S. nuclear umbrella broke down. Japan has advanced nuclear know-how with a long-established fleet of civilian reactors, a sophisticated defense industry and technology from its space program, including solid-fuel rockets. This would allow it to build ballistic missiles to deliver a nuclear payload, experts say. As a by-product of its nuclear fuel consumption, the government says Japan has about 45 tonnes of plutonium – the fissionable material needed to make a bomb. Japan also has the capacity to enrich uranium, another path to produce weapons-grade nuclear material. South Korea has also developed and deployed a number of weapons that analysts say could deliver nuclear bombs – including a submarine designed to launch conventional ballistic missiles, and increasingly powerful missiles that could reach North Korea or China. But South Korea is not as close to the threshold as Japan because it lacks the capacity to reprocess fuel to extract plutonium or enrich uranium, despite operating 26 reactors to generate power. Seoul aborted a clandestine weapons program in the 1970s under pressure from Washington and ratified the NPT in 1975. Experts predict it would take several years for Seoul to build a nuclear weapon, even if it overcame these hurdles. 'Even if we announce a state of emergency and throw all national resources behind it, the steelmaking, the facility building and making fissile materials and so on, it's not easy. I'd say four to five years,' said Cheon Myeong-guk, a researcher at the Korea Institute of Science and Technology. Beyond the technical hurdles, other factors inhibit U.S. partners from developing their own nuclear weapons. If Japan began to build a bomb in breach of its NPT commitments, it could face sanctions by the United Nations and lose access to the imported nuclear fuel it needs to feed its nuclear power industry. The densely populated archipelago also lacks an area suitable for nuclear testing. Despite Trump's earlier apparent openness to Japan and South Korea acquiring nukes, it remains unclear if his administration would ultimately agree. The State Department said Trump and Vice President JD Vance 'have spoken frequently about their opposition to the spread of nuclear weapons.' Beijing would be highly unlikely to remain passive if it learned that either Seoul or Tokyo were taking this path. A nuclear armed U.S. ally in East Asia could end up precipitating the conflict that acquiring nuclear weapons was intended to avoid, according to Alexandra Bell, a former Biden administration official who was directly involved in nuclear deterrence talks with Tokyo and Seoul. 'Having doubts about the U.S. commitment to extended deterrence and actually pursuing proliferation are two very different things,' Bell said. 'The latter action would certainly provoke a response from the Chinese.' Any move to acquire nuclear weapons might prompt China to further build up its nuclear stockpile or increase the likelihood of conflict if Beijing perceived such actions as being a prelude to war, she said. China's foreign ministry accused Japan and South Korea of 'promoting so-called 'extended deterrence' to justify military expansion and military provocation.' Japan in particular, it told Reuters, claims to 'advocate for a 'nuclear-free world,' while in reality relying on the U.S. 'nuclear umbrella' to cooperate with the deployment of U.S. strategic forces. These practices are hypocritical and self-contradictory.' Japan's evolving attitudes to the bomb have dismayed some survivors of the 1945 attacks. Atomic bomb survivor Kunihiko Sakuma, 80, said he cannot understand that today a growing number of Japanese people are coming around to the view that nuclear weapons can offer protection, given the horrors he and others in Hiroshima experienced. He was an infant when the bomb fell, curled up on a futon on the floor of his family home as his mother sorted the laundry. There was a flash and then suddenly everything went dark, his mother later recounted to him. She described how she had whisked him up and carried him on her back to a nearby shelter through a radioactive shower of soot and ash known as 'black rain.' 'Just because we're under the U.S. nuclear umbrella doesn't mean we're safe,' he said. 'If nuclear weapons are used, it's over, isn't it. Real security only exists when there's mutual trust between nations.'

IOL News
an hour ago
- IOL News
Malusi Gigaba finds little love in the wake of his criticism of the ANC
File picture: Themba Hadebe/Associated Press. Former Finance Minister Malusi Gigaba has set tongues wagging online Image: File picture: Themba Hadebe/Associated Press. Former finance minister and ANC NEC member receives backlash from his party after he publicly criticised the organisation for including DA in the Government of National Unity (GNU) @ZizinjaAbelungu Malusi Gigaba spoke about a number of issues that are affecting the ANC! Opulence within the party, embedded corruption as well as the wholesale of buying votes in the ANC Conference in Nasrec 2017. Cyril Ramaphosa being in the centre of buying that Conference. The ANC has issued a Letter of disapproval of these rhetoric and has labelled it as a 'flagrant violation of ANC communication protocols'. @AfricaisBlack The ANC has responded with 'serious concern and disapproval' to recent public statements by Malusi Gigaba and Senzo Mchunu. The party says their comments, which criticised the ANC's direction and its role in the Government of National Unity, violate internal discipline. The ANC statement warns that no one will be exempt from action for undermining unity. @XFactor079 Dr Malusi Gigaba is speaking the truth about ANC buying votes That's why some people in the ANC are rattled by his comments. @Judaeda3 Malusi Gigaba explaining how the ANC has been playing with people's emotions but has never delivered anything so far. @Mbalulafikile The ANC has noted with serious concern and disapproval the recent conduct and public statements made by Cde Malusi Gigaba and Cde Ssenzo Mchunu. @Ke_Moeletsi ANC is dead, nothing said by Gigaba and Mchunu is unknown. We will bring ANC to its knees, the arrogance will come to an end. You have been talking 'renewal since 2018, you gotten worse ever since, ANC ibolile and it must rejected by the masses. @Goolammv During the very dark days of state capture and corruption, Malusi Gigaba was one of the biggest enablers for the Gupta family from a Nadia to loot. He is corrupt, corrupt, corrupt. The Zondo commission report which is gathering dust, was damning against him. When he wanted to delete actual evidence from his ex wife Norma's phone, he got the Hawks to come from Mpumalanga to Pretoria to arrest her. Take all her devices and wipe out actual evidence. @Rasor896 Malusi Gigaba is the only sober person in the ANC. It a pity that he will be receiving his latter after this interview. In ANC they don't want someone who speaks the truth. He confirmed that ANC has a culture to steal votes. @Yanga_Co Mbalula is using the ANC to fight his battles, he is eliminating Gigaba because of potential ANC presidency candidate. @Markosonke1 ANC is not ready for self reflection people are busy in their little corners little groupings campaigning for 2026; 2029 – Malusi Gigaba. @Cinstitution_94 Malusi Gigaba showed a total disdain of Cyril Ramaphosa. He is launching his political campaign at the expense of the ANC & its current leaders. Senzo Mchunu must be thrown out for the nonsense he caused at SAPS. @KhanyaMsika So Mbalula is angry at Gigaba for saying we shouldn't have been in bed with the DA? A party that cant be criticised by its members is undemocratic. DAILY NEWS