logo
South Africa: the World Bank's fattened lamb for slaughter

South Africa: the World Bank's fattened lamb for slaughter

IOL News8 hours ago

The hubris of dividing Africa along borders drawn on lunch break napkins, for no other reason than to cannibalise it, seemed eerily similar to the ways of the World Bank and the IMF today.
Image: Yuri Gripas/Reuters/File
LEE Camp of the programme Unredacted makes incisive observations about the dark manoeuvres of the 1884 Berlin Conference. The hubris of dividing Africa along borders drawn on lunch break napkins, for no other reason than to cannibalise it, seemed eerily similar to the ways of the World Bank and the IMF today.
From the same actors, continuing with the same insidious plans of plundering the vast mineral resources of the African continent, these Bretton Woods contraptions, with innocuously sounding names, became the latter-day agents of the Berlin Conference conspirators. If wild hogs, for whatever sinister reason, were to conference on the neighbour's corn yard, Lee calls it the Orgy of Pillaging.
In the Mandela and Mbeki successive administrations, the clarity of the vision and the determination of the resolve were unequivocal. It was to square the apartheid debts, grow the economy and bolster the fiscus, a strategy that yielded an average of 4.2% growth year on year.
The way to trivialise the success of this strategy, notwithstanding its weaknesses in reducing joblessness, was to claim that the prices of commodities were favourably high. Were this trivialisation rooted in political sentiment only, it would be understandable. But it has no bearing on scientific fact or economic reality. And the Zuma administration was heralded into office with a bountiful surplus.
And for purposes of context, commodity prices have been way higher since 2009, or at least the prices of those commodities on which the 'favourably high' claim is predicated. Yet to the collective shock of all citizens, they have helplessly witnessed a diminishing economic growth, recording a few recessions along the way.
To date, the country has borrowed oodles of money, eye-watering and mouth-dropping amounts! The gross loan debt has increased from R2.5 trillion in 2017 to R4.3trln in 2021. This means the government has borrowed an additional R1.8trln from both domestic and international investors.
The debt has been so heavy on the country's purse, so much so that the Treasury honchos have to borrow an estimated R2 billion every day to service the interest on capital borrowed and to keep the failing heart of their ICU patient ticking.
The Government of National Unity (GNU) is determined to borrow as much money as it can possibly sustain their mind-numbing vaudeville. It would have been entertaining if it were not so tragic.
The chronology of events is disturbing. First, the exchequer announced that the taxman had over-collected taxes in 2025, to great applause. Then the sequence of events and their timelines get blurred and indistinguishable.
Either before that announcement or contemporaneous to it, the geniuses at the Treasury went to Washington DC to apply for a loan of R26bn. Or how does the Minister account for the speed of approval of this amount shortly after the Constitutional Court ruled against a planned VAT increase?
But someone or something had to keep the masses entertained. And the famous stage is our Tower of Babel, the parliament of the people. And the captivating showdown of all, between the two main endearing partners of the GNU, is guaranteed front row television viewership.
The masses were entertained with a VAT increase imbroglio. It was rejected. And the World Bank approved the loan, all in great effort to avoid imposing the beneficiation tax on a sliding scale.
John Perkins, renowned author of Confessions of an Economic Hitman, has an insider articulation acuity. The World Bank and the IMF are frontline agents in the early stages of a regime change strategy. Beyond that stage, the creditors will take over the decision-making capabilities of the country or some government will be couped or someone will be swiftly murdered.
For a country that boasts of the best constitution in the world, how does it account for the fact that its eminent provisions determining the powers of different branches of government are silent about the most egregious executive abuse of power? This is when the executive branch contracts into foreign debt on behalf of the state secretly, pledging the entire sovereignty of the people as collateral?
It is not even helped by the fact that the preeminent conditionality for loans with the World Bank and the IMF is secrecy. Not even the representatives of the people convened in Parliament can know. It is very secret, they say. According to the late Minister of Public Enterprises, parliamentarians have to sign non-disclosure agreements. So much for voting.
At least we now know what the term 'ruling elite' means. It refers to those people who have been given privileged sight of the loan terms of the World Bank and the IMF.
Thomas Jefferson, from the vantage of his political heights, addressing his countrymen and countrywomen, once observed that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.
And for a country led by the ANC, a political party with a long and profound history, spanning over a century of various political and economic stages of the forging of this country's nationhood, its incumbent leaders are determined not to learn anything about money or debt or even the mastery of their predecessors.
It is a fairly documented epic of South Africa's complex historic narrative that the straw that broke the apartheid camel's back wasn't a straw. It was a crushing debt, and an irate mob of creditors beating at Darius Fourie's and Chris Stals' doors, Finance Minister and Reserve Bank Governor, respectively, who were at the service of the apartheid ignominy.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

South Africa: the World Bank's fattened lamb for slaughter
South Africa: the World Bank's fattened lamb for slaughter

IOL News

time8 hours ago

  • IOL News

South Africa: the World Bank's fattened lamb for slaughter

The hubris of dividing Africa along borders drawn on lunch break napkins, for no other reason than to cannibalise it, seemed eerily similar to the ways of the World Bank and the IMF today. Image: Yuri Gripas/Reuters/File LEE Camp of the programme Unredacted makes incisive observations about the dark manoeuvres of the 1884 Berlin Conference. The hubris of dividing Africa along borders drawn on lunch break napkins, for no other reason than to cannibalise it, seemed eerily similar to the ways of the World Bank and the IMF today. From the same actors, continuing with the same insidious plans of plundering the vast mineral resources of the African continent, these Bretton Woods contraptions, with innocuously sounding names, became the latter-day agents of the Berlin Conference conspirators. If wild hogs, for whatever sinister reason, were to conference on the neighbour's corn yard, Lee calls it the Orgy of Pillaging. In the Mandela and Mbeki successive administrations, the clarity of the vision and the determination of the resolve were unequivocal. It was to square the apartheid debts, grow the economy and bolster the fiscus, a strategy that yielded an average of 4.2% growth year on year. The way to trivialise the success of this strategy, notwithstanding its weaknesses in reducing joblessness, was to claim that the prices of commodities were favourably high. Were this trivialisation rooted in political sentiment only, it would be understandable. But it has no bearing on scientific fact or economic reality. And the Zuma administration was heralded into office with a bountiful surplus. And for purposes of context, commodity prices have been way higher since 2009, or at least the prices of those commodities on which the 'favourably high' claim is predicated. Yet to the collective shock of all citizens, they have helplessly witnessed a diminishing economic growth, recording a few recessions along the way. To date, the country has borrowed oodles of money, eye-watering and mouth-dropping amounts! The gross loan debt has increased from R2.5 trillion in 2017 to R4.3trln in 2021. This means the government has borrowed an additional R1.8trln from both domestic and international investors. The debt has been so heavy on the country's purse, so much so that the Treasury honchos have to borrow an estimated R2 billion every day to service the interest on capital borrowed and to keep the failing heart of their ICU patient ticking. The Government of National Unity (GNU) is determined to borrow as much money as it can possibly sustain their mind-numbing vaudeville. It would have been entertaining if it were not so tragic. The chronology of events is disturbing. First, the exchequer announced that the taxman had over-collected taxes in 2025, to great applause. Then the sequence of events and their timelines get blurred and indistinguishable. Either before that announcement or contemporaneous to it, the geniuses at the Treasury went to Washington DC to apply for a loan of R26bn. Or how does the Minister account for the speed of approval of this amount shortly after the Constitutional Court ruled against a planned VAT increase? But someone or something had to keep the masses entertained. And the famous stage is our Tower of Babel, the parliament of the people. And the captivating showdown of all, between the two main endearing partners of the GNU, is guaranteed front row television viewership. The masses were entertained with a VAT increase imbroglio. It was rejected. And the World Bank approved the loan, all in great effort to avoid imposing the beneficiation tax on a sliding scale. John Perkins, renowned author of Confessions of an Economic Hitman, has an insider articulation acuity. The World Bank and the IMF are frontline agents in the early stages of a regime change strategy. Beyond that stage, the creditors will take over the decision-making capabilities of the country or some government will be couped or someone will be swiftly murdered. For a country that boasts of the best constitution in the world, how does it account for the fact that its eminent provisions determining the powers of different branches of government are silent about the most egregious executive abuse of power? This is when the executive branch contracts into foreign debt on behalf of the state secretly, pledging the entire sovereignty of the people as collateral? It is not even helped by the fact that the preeminent conditionality for loans with the World Bank and the IMF is secrecy. Not even the representatives of the people convened in Parliament can know. It is very secret, they say. According to the late Minister of Public Enterprises, parliamentarians have to sign non-disclosure agreements. So much for voting. At least we now know what the term 'ruling elite' means. It refers to those people who have been given privileged sight of the loan terms of the World Bank and the IMF. Thomas Jefferson, from the vantage of his political heights, addressing his countrymen and countrywomen, once observed that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. And for a country led by the ANC, a political party with a long and profound history, spanning over a century of various political and economic stages of the forging of this country's nationhood, its incumbent leaders are determined not to learn anything about money or debt or even the mastery of their predecessors. It is a fairly documented epic of South Africa's complex historic narrative that the straw that broke the apartheid camel's back wasn't a straw. It was a crushing debt, and an irate mob of creditors beating at Darius Fourie's and Chris Stals' doors, Finance Minister and Reserve Bank Governor, respectively, who were at the service of the apartheid ignominy.

G7 Summit: Will Global South Voices Be Heard?
G7 Summit: Will Global South Voices Be Heard?

IOL News

time15 hours ago

  • IOL News

G7 Summit: Will Global South Voices Be Heard?

President Cyril Ramaphosa met several former African Heads of State and Government who are championing the African Leaders Initiative on Debt Relief at his official residence, Genadendal, in Cape Town on February 25, 2025. President Ramaphosa will attend the G7 summit in Canada today. For the Global South middle powers, an important responsibility in global G7 and G20 platforms is the commitment to articulate the interests of the G77 and the majority world, says the writer. Image: GCIS Ashraf Patel This year's G7 Summit takes place in Kananaskis Canada, under the theme Governance in a Fragmented World. The world in 2025 stands at a critical juncture. Geopolitical fragmentation, systemic economic shocks and accelerating technological change are reshaping the contours of the international order. While the values underpinning the postwar multilateral system — democracy, open markets, human rights and the rule of law — remain foundational, their global reach and efficacy face a real threat of erosion from multiple directions. In this context, a narrative has emerged of Southern powers that can, in some way, influence the global agenda via the G20 and some presence at the G7. Canada generally has good programs aligned with the UN SDGs and responsible middle power, but will it sway the big powers to a broader development agenda? What, then, is the value of Southern nations participating in the G7 in the current globally fractured era amidst trade wars and conflict? The BRICS nations bloc was conceived to chart an independent pathway due to these unequal relations in the world order. Currently, most G7 core nations are in perilous economic stagnation. The UK, Germany, France and the US face multiple crises. The US domestic situation is divided with major strife and an authoritarian turn, and today, many US cities mirror that of Global South societies. A key question then is what is to be gained from participation at the G7 when the policy prescripts in this context is a forgone conclusion. For President Cyril Ramaphosa, this is his 5th trip to a G7 Summit as an observer. Observer status of Global South leaders generally means they have at least a day to engage over lunch and working sessions with the G7's core leadership. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ For South Africa, it's a case of the same old dialogue. In 2020 the South African president was invited to the G20 in Gleneagles, UK. The Covid pandemic was at its peak and G7 nations and their pharmaceutical industries ensured Covid nationalism that left Africa languishing at the bottom of the pyramid. At that summit, a new Just Energy Transition (JET) program was conceived, and over the years transformed into an investment program JET IP. While couched in terms of 'development co-operation on climate', upon closer scrutiny, South Africans discovered that they were green loans repayable with interest. Even more concerning is that this year's G7 takes place against the backdrop of regressive Development Aid policies by core EU states - UK, Germany, and Netherlands which is predicated on a 'new development business interest paradigm' with cuts to core development aid, and linking Development Aid directly to investment and business outcomes. More concerning is the commitment by the EU and NATO states to increase Defence expenditure to 5% of GDP. Invariably, these structural shifts meant that the Northern world G7 would likely adopt more structural reforms, austerity and a push for neoliberalism in the Global South, meaning more extractive policies. This can be seen by increased oil and gas explorations by G7 nations across Africa, thus contradicting their commitments to UN Climate Change COP targets. It is in these multi-layered complexities - and contradictions that Middle Powers - India, South Africa and Brazil are invited to the G7 this weekend. Realistically, prospects for a 'new deal' on debt, climate finance and meeting SDGs in this austerity ecosystem are low indeed. By contrast, just this week China has removed tariffs for all 53 African states who export to China, thus boosting job creation and industrial development. In just one sweep it has done more for African trade than G7 nations communiques have done in a years. This is a concrete example of development solidarity and moves towards fair and balanced trade. By contrast, core G7 states are engaged in trade wars, tariff imposition and economic nationalism. The G7 themes do somehow weave into the G20 just as the BRICS nation's themes on green industrial development and IFI reforms have. In terms of Southern agency and agenda setting, South Africa is generally a middle power committed to multilateralism and the UN charter, a laudable approach, but it has limitations in the current era. For the Global South middle powers, an important responsibility in global G7 and G20 platforms is the commitment to articulate the interests of the G77 and the majority world. In the current context of Trump 2.0 trade wars and WTO ineffectiveness, geopolitical conflicts, and the lack of any agency or power by smaller nations such as Lesotho means that Low-Income Countries (LIC) are now most vulnerable and are facing ever deeper poverty as a result of trade wars and abrupt cuts in USAID etc. The recent G77 June statement has decried that at a time of converging global crises including conflict, climate change, hunger, poverty, food insecurity, rising inequalities, declining official development assistance, and rapid technological disruption and has reaffirmed development as a fundamental pillar of peace and security. Generally, the G7 agenda is about maintaining the hegemony of the Global North. Again, the current fractured era suggests that the Middle Powers now straddle the thin line between co-option into dominant patterns of unequal trade, finance and austerity, and Sovereignty. What pathways will be prioritised? * Ashraf Patel is a Senior Research Associate at the Institute for Global Dialogue, UNISA. ** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL, Independent Media or The African.

BEE is at a Crossroads - But Who Benefits from Its Destruction?
BEE is at a Crossroads - But Who Benefits from Its Destruction?

IOL News

time2 days ago

  • IOL News

BEE is at a Crossroads - But Who Benefits from Its Destruction?

BEE, as it has been implemented in too many cases, has failed to meet the aspirations of the majority, writes the author. Gumede is right to point to the recycling of beneficiaries, the political gatekeeping, and the elite capture of empowerment deals. But he is wrong, dangerously wrong, if his insight is used to argue for scrapping BEE altogether. Let me be clear: BEE, as it has been implemented in too many cases, has failed to meet the aspirations of the majority. It is a critique we cannot afford to ignore. But neither can we afford to allow this critique to be weaponised by those who have always opposed transformation, to delegitimise the very idea of economic justice in post-apartheid South Africa. The recent critique by Professor William Gumede that over R1 trillion has been 'transferred' under Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) to fewer than 100 politically connected individuals is a sobering wake-up call. It is ironic that the same voices calling BEE 'racist' rarely propose solutions to white economic over-representation. Here are the facts: 8 of the top 10 richest South Africans remain white men. Over 70% of agricultural land remains under white ownership. Access to venture capital, export markets, and finance remains racially skewed. The idea that 'BEE is the biggest scam in post-apartheid SA' dangerously distracts from the real structural crisis: the continued racial and gendered concentration of wealth. Certainly not the millions of unemployed black youth in townships and rural villages. Not the historically disadvantaged communities who still lack access to capital, land, and markets. And not the African, Indian and Coloured women who remain structurally excluded from the mainstream economy. We must ask ourselves: who benefits when BEE is destroyed instead of reformed? Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. The only ones who benefit from the collapse of BEE are those who were never in favour of transformation in the first place the economic oligarchs who would be thrilled to return to a status quo of white dominance wrapped in the language of meritocracy. Despite limitations, BEE is not a failure: Over 6 million black South Africans now hold direct or indirect ownership in companies through broad-based share schemes (e.g. MTN Zakhele, SASOL Inzalo, Phuthuma Nathi at MultiChoice). Black ownership on the JSE has grown from less than 1% in 1994 to an estimated 25–30% today (direct + indirect via funds and B-BBEE schemes). Over 50,000 black-owned SMEs have been supported via enterprise and supplier development obligations. BEE has enabled the creation of black industrialists, catalysed youth training schemes, and expanded procurement access. The BEE scorecard includes ownership, skills development, employment equity, socio-economic development, and procurement. It is a multidimensional framework, not simply elite enrichment. However now that we know better , we must do better. Acknowledge the Failures, But Don't Abandon the Mission As a former Member of Parliament and lifelong activist for social and economic justice, I have seen first-hand how some BEE deals were little more than rent-seeking schemes. Politically connected figures often acted as fronts for white capital, offering legitimacy without empowerment. These are not just moral failings they are strategic betrayals of the people. But the answer is not abandonment. It is reform, accountability, and reorientation toward true broad-based empowerment. We must ask: What models have worked? What does inclusive, community-rooted BEE look like? And how do we ensure that BEE no longer becomes a revolving door for the same elite, but instead a ladder for the many? What Broad-Based Empowerment Really Looks Like The idea of broad-based empowerment is not hypothetical. I have checked ,it actually exists though often drowned out by the noise of scandal. Let us spotlight real, replicable models that show us what is possible. 1. Sasol Inzalo Trust (2011) – R26 Billion Empowerment for the Public One of the largest and most ambitious empowerment transactions in South African history. Over 200,000 South Africans from nurses to pensioners acquired shares in Sasol via the Inzalo Trust. This was not an elite project, but a mass participation vehicle offering dividends, ownership, and dignity. Yes, the deal had flaws (especially when Sasol's share price dropped), but the intent and structure were inclusive. We must learn from and build on this. 2. Absa Employee and CSI Trust (2023) – A New Vision for BEE In 2023, Absa created a model that should become the new gold standard. It allocated 7% of its ownership to: 3% for over 35,000 employees; 4% to a Community Trust focused on healthcare, education, and township upliftment. This is real empowerment linking productivity with ownership, and profit with community reinvestment. 3. PepsiCo / SimbPioneer Foods (2020) – Worker Trust PepsiCo's merger with Pioneer Foods resulted in a R1.66 billion worker trust benefiting over 12,000 employees 90% of whom are black. It wasn't politically brokered. It was structurally designed to include workers at scale. 4. Heineken's 'Bokamoso' Trust (2021) When Heineken acquired Distell, it was required by the Competition Tribunal to create a broad-based employee share scheme. 'Bokamoso' gave 6% equity to workers a model where empowerment was made a regulatory condition of doing business in South Africa. These are not isolated cases. They are models for the future evidence that BEE can work, and work for the people. Why can the JSE Top 100 Listed Companies not follow this and give shares to their workers, their customers and communities they serve? B-BBEE That Serves the Nation, Not the Network For BEE to be legitimate, it must: Stop recycling elites: No individual or consortium should benefit from more than one major BEE deal. Impose sunset clauses: Empowerment credentials must expire after a certain period. Create a National BEE Beneficiary Registry: All deals and beneficiaries must be publicly disclosed and tracked. Mandate community participation: At least 30% of all future equity deals must be routed through community trusts, worker funds, and township co-operatives. Align with the District Development Model: BEE must build local economies not extract value from them. We must turn BEE into a mechanism for building black productive capacity, not just redistributing shares. That means more funding for black industrialists, township-based manufacturing, rural cooperatives, and tech-enabled youth entrepreneurship. A Call to Action: Reclaim Empowerment from the Few, for the Many To comrades, policymakers, business leaders, and community activists: we are at a crossroads. Either we allow the failures of the past to paralyse us or we reclaim the transformative promise of BEE and remake it to serve all who were historically disadvantaged: Black Africans, Coloured South Africans, Indian South Africans, women, youth, people with disabilities, and the rural poor. I call on the ANC to: Codify a new generation of community-based empowerment deals Reject individual-based enrichment without public impact Strengthen the oversight powers of the B-BBEE Commission Incentivise cooperatives, worker-ownership, and community reinvestment We must restore the moral authority of economic redress by placing THE PEOPLE not political patrons at the centre of empowerment. Conclusion: Build, Don't Burn Professor Gumede has done us a service by exposing what went wrong. But let us not allow this moment to be hijacked by reactionaries who wish to dismantle BEE altogether. Let us not abandon the house of transformation because the roof leaked. Instead, let us rebuild it, repair it, and expand it, so that it shelters all South Africans who have for too long lived on the margins. We don't need to scrap BEE. We need to liberate it from the few and make it finally work for the many. That is the real empowerment and economic justice we must fight and struggle for. This opinion piece was first published in ANC Today * Faiez Jacobs is a former MP, Public Policy Strategist and Advocate for Economic Justice ** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL, Independent Media or The African.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store