We need to ignore meaningless commissions and build on our hard-won freedoms
With reference to the spat between the ANC, EFF and MKP regarding Jacob Zuma's visit to Morocco, it is amusing to observe their defence of colonialism's biggest legacy in the light of their fervent anti-colonial rhetoric and historical "struggle" against colonialism.
The territorial demarcation of the map of Africa is colonialism's most enduring legacy. The boundaries of colonies were the result of territorial and economic greed among the European colonisers, each scrambling in the late 19th century to aggrandize their empires. Through invasion and conquest, the intervention of European powers in Africa was a violent collision between Western and African cultures the aftershocks of which persist to this day.
The biggest mistake the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) made on its formation in 1963 was its failure to redraw the map of Africa based on tribal and cultural integrity.
Instead, the newly emancipated pursued power and prestige as presidents of the "states" bequeathed to them by colonialism.
The only territory to break free of the colonial map is Eritrea – after a brutal and devastating 40- year war with Ethiopia.
History shows that boundaries are not permanent. Eastern Europe's boundaries changed twice in the 20th century – post World War I and after the collapse of the USSR.
Currently, separatist movements exist in Scotland and Spain. There is even one in the Western Cape.
So it is ironic that the ANC, EFF and MKP are vociferous about preserving national sovereignty based on colonial boundaries. It's a pity that fondness does not extend to some of the worthwhile legacies of colonialism, such as medicine, education and infrastructure. | DR DUNCAN DU BOIS Bluff
A tale of dreadful suffering and woe
This is the most severe and devastating phase of starvation the Gaza Strip has experienced.
Without exaggeration or distortion, the population is currently enduring a real famine.
Humanitarian aid is virtually nonexistent. Available goods are extremely scarce and limited. Prices have reached astronomical levels, unaffordable even for those who still possess financial means. Most citizens, already exhausted by war and repeated displacement alerts, no longer have any money.
The commission fees on withdrawing funds can be up to 45%.
Numerous individuals have reported that for several days, they and their children have not eaten bread – the staple and often sole item on the table – because the price of 1kg of flour has reached $20 (R355). Other food items are simply inaccessible.
Despite claims made nearly a month ago, when Prime Minister Netanyahu announced the allowance of humanitarian aid into Gaza – including the entrance of aid trucks through border crossings and the operations of Israeli-American companies distributing food in high-risk zones (which, according to the latest UN report, resulted in the deaths of 798 civilians) – the reality on the ground remains starkly different.
From the beginning, we warned that these aid deliveries were nothing more than misleading media propaganda intended to silence international criticism and obscure the ongoing campaign of military extermination being carried out by the occupying forces
.In truth, more than 80% of the population does not receive any of this aid due to multiple factors: The general scarcity of aid, widespread theft and looting along the supply chain and in storage facilities, and serious deficiencies in logistical organisation and distribution mechanisms.
In practical terms, civilians in Gaza have been under total siege and subjected to deliberate starvation since March 2, 2025 – the date the occupying forces closed the border crossings. That was 131 consecutive days ago. Since then, nothing new has entered their homes.
Moreover, the population has been completely deprived of all meat products, dairy, vegetables, and fruits. The limited aid that does arrive consists solely of canned goods, dried legumes, and starchy foods such as rice and pasta. Additionally, the complete lack of access to essential medications has led to thousands of preventable deaths.
This is an urgent message to all concerned parties: Gaza's people are enduring one of the most extreme forms of starvation, torture, and denial of their basic human rights – especially of late.
The narrative that aid is entering Gaza and reaching those in need is profoundly misleading. The reality is that most of the population – those who are paying the price with their lives and health – continue to be denied access to food and critical resources, while propaganda serves the interests of those benefiting from false claims about aid distribution. | Alaa (full name withheld) Gaza Strip
Commissions of inquiry rarely of value
A few weeks ago, South Africans heard serious allegations about the existence and operation of a sophisticated criminal syndicate that has allegedly infiltrated law enforcement structures.
On Sunday, July 13, President Cyril Ramaphosa announced the formation of a commission of inquiry to focus on the shocking allegations made by KwaZulu-Natal police commissioner Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi and how the alleged deep-rooted corruption will be addressed.
While I agree that the allegations must be attended to with the necessary diligence and that all parties must be given a fair chance to express themselves, citizens are tired of the many costly, time-consuming and unsuccessful commissions of inquiry.
The most famous commission of inquiry, the Judicial Commission of Inquiry into Allegations of State Capture, Corruption and Fraud in the Public Sector, also known as the Zondo Commission, has yet to see its recommendations fully implemented or justice served against those who benefited from the abuse of power and state capture.
Instead of a 'leave of absence', Ramaphosa should have suspended Minister Senzo Mchunu as a deterrent measure, thoroughly investigated the allegations, and then, if proven on a balance of probabilities, dismissed the minister after a fair hearing.Commissions that have the potential to uncover the truth only matter if their findings lead to action and are backed by consequences, sanctions, and justice. | MOHAMED SAEED Pietermaritzburg
We need to build on the freedoms we won
As we navigate the complexities of our 30-year democracy, it's essential to remember the principles that guided our struggle for freedom and continue to shape our path towards a more just and equitable society.
In South Africa, we have made significant progress since the dawn of democracy. We've built a Constitution that enshrines the rights and freedoms of all citizens, regardless of race, gender, or creed. We've made strides in promoting social justice, addressing the legacy of apartheid, and building a more inclusive economy. However, we still face significant challenges.
Inequality, poverty, and unemployment remain pressing issues, and we need to work together to address them. As liberals, we believe that individual freedom, equality, and democracy are essential to creating a society where everyone can thrive.
We need to promote economic growth, investment, and job creation, while ensuring the benefits of growth are shared fairly among all South Africans. We need to protect and strengthen our democratic institutions, ensuring that they remain accountable to the people and responsive to their needs.We also need to celebrate our diversity and promote social cohesion. South Africa is a rainbow nation, and our diversity is our strength. By embracing our differences and promoting tolerance, we can build a more harmonious and inclusive society.
As liberals, we believe the answers to South Africa's challenges lie in our shared values of freedom, equality, and democracy. We need to work together, across party lines and sectors, to build a brighter future for all South Africans.
Let us continue to uphold these liberal values, working together to build a South Africa where everyone can live with dignity, pursue their dreams, and contribute to the greater good. A South Africa where freedom, equality, and democracy thrive. | Thulani Dasa Khayelitsha
DAILY NEWS
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Maverick
2 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
US-SA trade deal still in limbo as tariff deadline looms
The Trade and Industry Ministry says it is still awaiting 'substantive feedback' from the US on its trade proposal as the 1 August deadline looms. South Africa and the US have still not reached a trade deal, days before US President Donald Trump's 30% tariff on South African goods is due to take effect. In a statement on Tuesday, 29 July, the Department of Trade, Industry and Competition (DTIC) said it remained committed to the conclusion of a trade agreement with the US, as it waits for feedback from the Trump administration on its trade proposal. 'The intersection of geopolitical, domestic and trade issues best defines the current impasse between South Africa and the United States, and a reset is unavoidable,' read the statement. 'Our view is that negotiations remain the best tool to deal with the issues that are on the table… We remain committed to the cause as we await substantive feedback from our US counterparts on the final status [of] our framework deal,' it continued. Earlier this month, Trump announced that he would impose a 30% tariff on South African exports to the US from 1 August. Multiple other countries are also facing varying tariff rates. While some countries, including the UK, Japan and Vietnam, have bagged trade agreements with the US, not a single African nation has reached a deal with America. 'Prepared for several potential scenarios' After Trump announced his global ' reciprocal ' tariffs in April, before agreeing to suspend their application for 90 days, Pretoria was eager to begin negotiations with America over tariffs. It proffered a proposed framework deal to US trade representatives in Washington in May, before President Cyril Ramaphosa and Trump met at the White House. Pretoria was later told it needed to revise this proposal, in accordance with the Trump administration's new template for US trade with sub-Saharan Africa, which it was told would be shared ' soon '. However, it appeared that as of Tuesday, Pretoria was still waiting for this template. 'As the Department of Trade, Industry and Competition, we have been in a period of intense negotiations with the United States. We have signed a condition precedent document and have readied our inputs for entry into the template, which is to follow from the US,' it said. Department of International Relations and Cooperation (Dirco) director-general Zane Dangor said on Tuesday, there were no guarantees of a trade deal with the US by 1 August, with issues such as black economic empowerment (BEE) obscuring matters, according to a News24 report. If implemented, Trump's punishing tariffs will kneecap South African industries, including the automotive sector and the citrus industry. But the DTIC suggested it was preparing for other eventualities should a deal not be signed. 'Despite the challenges that have been presented by this period, we have put our best foot forward, bringing together the subject specialists within our ranks that have dug deep to ensure that our country is adequately prepared for a number of potential scenarios. 'We have planned for these scenarios and have not sat idle. We are working with other government departments on a response plan, which includes a support desk within the DTIC. Our response package also focuses on demand side interventions in the impacted industries,' it said. The DTIC said it had no intention of 'decoupling' from the US. Details of the trade proposal Pretoria's initial trade proposal included deals on agriculture, critical minerals, automotives and other exports. According to the DTIC, some of the elements of the framework deal include: Importing 75-100 petajoules of liquefied natural gas from the US for a 10-year period, unlocking $12-billion. The simplification of US poultry exports under the 2016 tariff rate quota, which is expected to unlock about $91-million in trade. In addition, readiness to open market access for blueberries, subject to the necessary protocols. A commitment from South African firms to invest $3.3-billion in US industries such as mining and metals recycling, with an agreement from both governments to pursue joint investment in critical minerals, pharmaceuticals and agricultural machinery. The exemption of specific sectors from reciprocal tariffs to preserve supply chains. For example, ship-building, counter-seasonal agricultural trade, and exports from MSMEs [micro, small and medium enterprises] of less than $1-million per year. DM
Daily Maverick
3 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
US Africa Command beefs up military support to Angola and Namibia
Regional security threats include Isis 'franchises' and an 'emerging Mexican drug cartel issue' emanating out of South Africa, says the US military. The United States Africa Command (Africom) is helping Angola and Namibia to counter threats from Isis and Mexican drug cartels emanating from South Africa and elsewhere, says Africom's deputy commander. Deputy Commander Lieutenant General John W Brennan said this in an online media briefing about his recent visits to Angola and Namibia with Ambassador Robert Scott, deputy Africom commander for civil-military engagement. They were asked what the main focus of Africom's engagement with Angola and Namibia was, since these were 'two countries where jihadist groups don't currently seem to present much of a threat'. Brennan replied that Africom's security assistance was 'really preventative. 'There are jihadist groups that operate all along the periphery of both Angola and Namibia. Isis has franchises in Mozambique, South Africa, as well as an emerging Mexican drug cartel issue that we think is … getting worse over time, that's emanating from South Africa and from coastal West Africa. 'We want to keep Namibia and Angola free of those threats as well as to prepare them for any future threats' through training, exercises and equipment. In Angola, the two officials observed joint exercises between US and Angolan special forces, and held discussions there and in Namibia with their counterparts, 'underscoring US Africa Command's continued commitment to strengthening partnerships in Africa to promote stability and collective defence through cost-effective, African-led solutions that minimise direct US military involvement', said Africom. Scott said what struck him on the visit was how 'tightly interlocked … security is with prosperity, with economic development', especially with maritime and trade issues. They heard that Namibia was planning to turn Walvis Bay into a regional hub for the transhipment of goods, and Scott noted that the US was taking the lead in helping to develop the Lobito Corridor into a transformational corridor for trade, connecting eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) to the Atlantic. He said the Lobito Corridor showed how security was leveraging economic development and vice versa. He noted that the upgrading of the railway line from eastern DRC to the Port of Lobito had cut the transport time for goods like copper and agricultural products from an average of 28 days to seven days. And so the military exercises which the US was conducting with Angola were helping to keep its coastline secure. Africom was also providing Angola with technology to increase its maritime domain awareness, helping its navy and coastguard to know exactly what ships are off its coastline and what they're doing. Joint military exercises Brennan said that apart from the small special forces exercises like the recent one with Angola, Africom was trying to include Angola and Namibia in the larger joint military exercises with the US, like African Lion and Obangame Express, which involved 30-50 countries and which were typically conducted several times a year. He said that the difference between the way the US operated in Africa and the way that Russia, China and some European countries operated was that African countries led the joint US-Africa exercises. Scott added that this year's Obangame Express exercise had been organised to support the Yaoundé Code of Conduct, the regional construct of rules of engagement for maritime security organised by its member states themselves, from Mauritania down to Namibia. He said Obangame also included an interesting tabletop exercise on how to combat IUUF — illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing — and stop foreign country fleets 'taking all of their fish out of the ocean'. The training included 'knowing who's out in your oceans, being able to intercept them and then having the legal ability to actually prosecute them on land'. Brennan said Africom wanted to increase the participation of other Southern African Development Community (SADC) countries in joint military exercises. Africom was already hosting high-level discussions with their militaries, such as the annual Chiefs of Defense Conference. 'So the more African countries participating, the better,' he said, adding that the US was also adding partners and allies from across the world — for example, the last Cutlass Express exercise was partly hosted in East Africa and included India, Sri Lanka, South Korea and Brazil. He noted that holding the exercises in Africa helped to lower costs for both the US and the African countries. Africom had 'started the burgeoning relationship with SADC many years ago', said Brennan. Botswana was the hub of that, and Africom wanted to expand its security partners, who also provided troops to operations like those fighting violent extremist organisations in Somalia, as well as stopping illicit drug and human trafficking. Mozambique was also a partner, and Africom had recently given it boats to interdict drug shipments off its coast. He added that drug cartels making drugs in Africa and exporting them to Europe, the US and Australia, or for local consumption, were a growing problem. Brennan said that after the US and other Western countries had been forced (by pro-Russian juntas) to remove their militaries from some African countries, it had become more difficult for them to conduct counterterrorism operations when they were not on the ground. 'Which is why we're focusing on building our partners' capacities so that they can respond to terrorist activities … that we support from afar with our partners … with things like training and equipping.' DM
Daily Maverick
3 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
As the global economy rebalances away from a historic Western core, SA must act strategically
This is an edited version of Mcebisi Jonas's address to the Kgalema Motlanthe Foundation's winter seminar on growth and transformation. The ground is shifting under us and South Africa, like every other modern economy, needs to be agile to deal with systemic and emerging challenges. The expression 'May you live in interesting times' is an ancient Chinese curse. I'm sure that we join the global community in wishing for more boring times. What we are seeing right now are fundamental changes in global relations as the global economy rebalances away from the historic Western core. China's emergence, closely followed by India, presents an opportunity for a more diverse world order, one without a single pole of global power. The frictions and tensions built up over decades under the old order have begun to trigger political, military and macroeconomic crises. The early developmental states – Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and Malaysia – paved the way for change. But the sheer size of China and India (accounting for one-third of the global population) entails a much bigger global transformation. Global growth is now tilted decisively towards Asia and other emerging centres. The concentration of global capital is rebalancing towards Europe and China. However, the US dollar still holds its position as the apex currency of a single global hierarchy. As the demographic, economic and monetary base of the world continues to shift away from the Western alliance, a new architecture is needed to govern economic and financial relations. If we look to historical precedent in the 20th century, the transfer of economic leadership from the British Empire to American hegemony was facilitated by a shared language, history and culture. Now, there are fewer institutional factors to ease the waning of hegemonic power and the emergence of new centres of authority. The transition is not from one hegemon to another, but from one hegemon to many. The cold winds of protectionism, racial nationalism and militarism are currently blowing through global politics. The shift towards a multipolar world is fraught with danger: fragmentation, military confrontation and economic disorder loom large. The real and painful effects of war and economic distress have already engulfed large parts of the world. Globalisation, which once propelled economic growth and productivity gains, may have reached its limit as nations act to raise barriers to trade and migration, or cement closed relationships with chosen friends. Barriers and threats to the movement of people and commodities are likely to slow the pace of global growth, rather than accelerate it. Adding to this are the ongoing conflicts over technology access and choices. Foundations for a new multilateralism In this context, the need to rethink multilateralism is urgent and daunting. Whatever the threat to global stability, the integration of production into global value chains and the dispersal of technological innovation mean that strong countervailing forces will seek to preserve a rules-based global order. While global trade is unlikely to be a key driver of global growth, it is equally unlikely to go into reverse. As the trade economist Richard Baldwin puts it, 'global economic flows are being rewired rather than simply reduced', and this creates a 'transformation of globalisation rather than a retreat from it'. Part of this rewiring is an increasingly important role played by non-aligned countries in global production. As Pierre-Olivier Gourinchas, chief economist at the IMF, has recently pointed out, 'multinational firms responded to trade restrictions on their exports by moving production to countries that belong to neither Western nor China-led blocs and trade freely with both – notably Mexico, Morocco and Vietnam. 'This is an important difference from past episodes of geopolitical fragmentation, like the Cold War, when trade diversion via connector countries was much more limited. One reason for that difference is precisely that the connector countries have already moved up the value chain, benefiting from earlier trade integration.' In other words, the foundations of global integration remain strong, and the existence of non-aligned connector countries will facilitate continued global integration by serving as intermediaries between geopolitical rivals. Gourinchas believes that 'as advanced economies turn increasingly inward, emerging markets have an important stake in fending off global economic fragmentation'. There is also a new set of political actors with an interest in multilateral solutions. In addition to the EU, China and India, the process of globalisation has opened space for 'middle powers' including South Africa, Ethiopia, Brazil, Mexico, Türkiye and Indonesia. The new middle powers now have larger economies and greater global stature and will be permanent features on the global economic stage, with a strong stake in a multilateral, rules-based order. In addition, the oil-rich Gulf states have amassed vast wealth through hydrocarbon extraction and are now expanding their influence globally. Multilateralism could evolve into new forms, such as 'coalitions of the willing' or plurilateral arrangements that achieve consensus on global institutional reforms and invite others to join. Initiatives such as BRICS or African regional institutions might play a vital role in coordinating the response. The G20 and other forums will remain critical in negotiating a new global compact. The challenge of our presidency of the G20 is whether we can adequately propel this process. Africa and global development This multipolar world presents South Africa and the African continent with opportunities to break free from old modes of development, trade, investment and solidarity. New spaces for policy experimentation and autonomous development can be drawn upon. New forms of multilateral cooperation and new partnerships for development might be forged. The global crisis offers an opportunity for change. How will South Africa and the African continent respond? Beyond the rise of China, the wave of the future must certainly be African. Every year, millions of young people in Africa come of age, ready to work, innovate and contribute to their communities and the global economy. Europe's population has begun to decline, and China has also peaked below 1.5 billion people. The UN projects that India's population will peak at 1.7 billion and begin to fall in the decades ahead. By the middle of the century, Africans will number 2.5 billion out of a world population of 10 billion. But Africa has not fared well in the geopolitical shocks of the past two decades, and the narrative of Africa rising has been sorely dented. Now, in a context of falling commodity prices, the combination of slower global growth and higher interest rates has tipped many African countries into debt distress. For others, the rising burden of debt is crowding out vital investments in economic and human development, as noted by Joseph Stiglitz in the recent Jubilee Commission report released by the Vatican. Increased protectionism threatens an abrupt end to market access, including the future of Agoa and the spectre of the European Union's 'CBAM' tariffs. Added to this is the long-term scaling down of overseas development aid and other forms of concessional support from the US and Europe. Africa continues to attract investment into its commodity sectors, but a new scramble for the continent's mineral assets is not only proving destructive to the environment, but also engendering conflict. As growth slows in the rest of the world and the marginal return on investment declines, Africa offers the best prospects for investment and development returns. The most important response to the threat of tariffs has been an intensified focus on regional integration. Africa has made progress with the AfCFTA, but the current crisis must spur much stronger responses. There is a clamour for survival in the context of the current global tariff impasse and inertia in the World Trade Organisation (WTO), where no new market access negotiations are taking place. South Africa should expand its trade to new markets in Asia, the Middle East and Latin America, while strengthening trade and investment relations with North America and Europe. Export diversification can act as an insurance against market concentration and is a source of resilience. China, Africa and the world economy For South Africa and Africa as a whole, the economic implications of China's growth and the consequent reconfiguration of the global economy are somewhat contradictory. China has become a large investor in African development. This is most welcome, but it also means that China is an increasingly large creditor to African governments, with all the potential for tensions and misunderstanding that bedevil debt relationships. Political imperatives for cooperation have, in the past, collided with the global consequences of China's growth model, which is focused on very high rates of investment in physical infrastructure. This has sustained a historic global boom in the prices of primary commodities on which many African states remain heavily dependent. China has also become the leading global producer of labour-intensive manufacturing, and its unparalleled capacity to supply these goods reduces their prices on world markets, making it difficult for other nations to compete. While South African and African consumers benefit significantly from lower prices for clothes and other wage goods, the consequences in terms of employment and de-industrialisation can also be dire. Chinese infrastructure investment is helpful, but often neglects to build local value chains and a stronger development ecosystem. South Africa in the world South Africa is in the unique position of being the largest trading partner in sub-Saharan Africa of the US, China, the European Union and the UK. South Africa is one of the 11 members of the BRICS and holds the presidency of the G20 during a momentous year. Foreign policy can be a powerful motivator of patriotism, bringing South Africans together behind a shared vision. But the recent experience of South Africans spreading disinformation and campaigning against our country is counterintuitive and destructive to the national interest. Our foreign policy must, of course, be grounded on a clear set of values and principles that unite the people of South Africa. These principles are set out in the Constitution, which places democratic values, social justice and fundamental human rights at the core of our approach, alongside healing the divisions of the past. The Freedom Charter articulates the political principles that should inform international relations. The charter specifically calls on South Africa to 'strive to maintain world peace and the settlement of all international disputes by negotiation, not war' and to do so in close cooperation with other African states. These core principles, while fundamentally important, are only half the story. For South Africa, an effective response to the global crisis requires us to be clear-eyed about our own national interest. Ideally, this would be founded on a clear consensus that unites South Africans about our national identity, the path of economic growth and the investments required to overcome South Africa's deep social challenges. Building on a common definition of the national interest, we could then look soberly at the world and identify the opportunities and threats that the world outside presents: Which alliances/partnerships can help us achieve our national goals, including growth and transformation, and our aspirations for global peace, human rights and stability? Who has the technological capacities or resources that are necessary to take forward our national programme? Who can we convince to back our efforts with long-term stable financing on acceptable terms? What military alliances shore up our security and advance our economic expansion? and What posture and active diplomatic strategy is needed to consolidate these partnerships as the world changes? The imperative to actively rewire South Africa's production should have nothing to do with nostalgia or sentiment. We cannot be locked into an imagined ideological struggle that reflects the conflicts of a bygone era. Rather, we should leverage our foreign relations to advance trade and attract capital and investment in South Africa and tap into the growing global markets. Ideally, we should position ourselves as a middle power at the intersection of the supply chains of the West and the East; a stable platform for investment in Africa for all those with capital and good intentions. We should be among the countries, such as Brazil and India, that can leverage their capabilities and historical relations with countries across the geopolitical divide. Our credentials as a democracy, as an open market, as a reliable partner for trade, investment and economic opportunity, and as a good citizen of the world should be unquestionable. We are the most developed platform for investment into Africa, and we must urgently rebuild our reputation as the best and most transparent financial services sector on the continent. Successfully exiting grey-listing will enhance that. We must also ensure a functioning logistical and rail network to transport Africa's goods to world markets. Achieving this will require us to remain resolute in fighting against the forces working to capture the state and repurpose it for narrow and sectarian ends. Beyond this, how should South Africa respond to the current global crisis and position itself in the new world? I suggest we consider the following. Africa and regional responses Other parts of the world have responded to the global crisis by taking bold action to strengthen regional economic blocs. Investing more heavily in cross-border infrastructure and institutions can yield substantial economic benefits. In this context, we must ask serious questions about the versatility of the Southern African Customs Union to respond to current trade challenges and whether this is the optimum moment to work towards its reform. Beyond the region, we need to leverage our strategic position in Africa. We need to champion Africa at global forums, such as the G20, on issues such as debt relief, conflict resolution, health and vaccines, and climate change mitigation. Africans should demand a fair shot to get their manufactured goods and agricultural produce into the markets of the rich world. We should strive to promote better commerce and common interests between key cornerstone economies on the continent. South Africa played a key role in convening the Nepad programme, which brought key nation-states into a programmatic consensus. We could consider a bloc of leading African economies that would link to the regional bodies and customs unions and the African Continental Free Trade Area. Is there a need for a G7-type grouping in Africa? The US Europe and China The US remains a central player in global developments. South Africa's relationship with the US is not merely transactional, but is based on a long partnership rooted in shared values of democracy, justice and progress. In the immediate term, South Africa is engaged in negotiations with the US to reach a solution to the tariff impasse that benefits both parties. More generally, we remain committed to negotiating through the immediate relational crisis. There is also the opportunity for collaboration on issues of mutual interest and concern, such as negotiating lasting solutions in the major conflict zones in the world. EU countries still offer the largest export market for value-added South African products. We need to strengthen ties with the EU, as well as with willing European countries, including the UK, around common interests such as trade and investment, the Just Energy Transition, new forms of multilateralism, African peace and security, African debt and other shared priorities. China may present another partner in the quest to preserve and transform global institutions. South Africa needs to help persuade China to accept stronger multilateral oversight of its role as an international creditor. This should include stronger transparency and more effective support for the creation of a global sovereign debt resolution mechanism. China could both strengthen a rules-based global order and build its partnership with Africa. There should be concerted efforts to negotiate increased access to the Chinese market for South Africa's value-added exports, open credit lines from Chinese institutions, and promote direct investments by Chinese firms that have the potential to substitute for domestic production and reduce Chinese imports on a sustainable basis. Take two examples: First, South Africa is working to ensure that Western powers are aligned behind its Just Transition. To our knowledge, there is no similar effort directed at China, despite its growing role as an international creditor and its dominance of 'green technology' imports. And second, South Africa has a very long history of integration with Western automobile firms' production chains. With the future of automobiles likely to be dominated by Chinese companies, we should strengthen our case for the assembly of Chinese vehicles for the African market. Getting to consensus on foreign policy South Africa is a non-aligned, strategic middle power, balancing national economic interests, upholding principles of democracy, human rights and social justice, and committed to the cause of Africa's development. Like many unequal societies, South Africa struggles to reach consensus over what constitutes national interest. Without consensus, a cacophony of competing sectarian interests will remain dominant and take precedence over the country's needs. We therefore need a stronger state, capable of defining and asserting the national interest. This requires agreement about policy fundamentals in a government which claims the moniker of 'national unity'. In part, this entails improving our agility and resilience on a number of policy fronts and processes. We must not allow our foreign policy to be captured by ideological cliques, partisan political factions, cabals of businesspeople with their own commercial agendas, or foreign powers exerting pressure and seeking to extort us. Instead of uniting around a national response to a global crisis, there has been a deepening of the fault lines that have long divided the nation. This is self-defeating. I have said it before, and I'll say it again: it cannot only be the Springboks that unite this nation. The 63 million people of our country need to know who we are and what we stand for – and should never allow anyone else to decide that for us. DM
