The MKP's two-faced foreign relations on Western Sahara
Image: Leon Lestrade / Independent Newspapers.
THE Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic is a complete African Union (AU) member state and is recognised by more than 40 United Nations (UN) member states. Despite decades of occupation by Morocco and the ongoing struggle for self-determination, its existence is a testament to the resilience of its people and the enduring principles of international law regarding decolonisation.
The UN classified this contested territory as a non-self-governing territory in 1963, following Spain's submission of information under Article 73(e) of the UN Charter. However, the territory has remained in a state of legal limbo despite multiple resolutions, diplomatic interventions and a protracted conflict involving Morocco, the Polisario Front and Algeria.
This status affirms that the Sahrawi people have yet to exercise their right to self-determination under international law. The recent political stunt by Jacob Zuma's Umkhonto weSizwe Party (MK Party), which dismissed this right as 'Balkanisation', reflects a troubling ahistorisation of a people's identity and a flagrant disregard for international legal norms.
South Africa's genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) relied on its reputation for principled support of the occupied peoples. The MK Party's stance on Western Sahara would cripple this moral standing, inviting accusations of hypocrisy. Worse, Zuma's use of the national flag during party-to-government talks with Morocco was improper, as he acted solely in his MK Party capacity, not in any official national role.
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 ✕
Ad loading
In an op-ed, MK Party parliamentarian Mzanyele Manyi attempts to reframe the party's position as a rejection of 'Eurocentric binaries' and a commitment to precolonial African structures. A closer examination reveals a deeply contradictory and, frankly, two-faced approach that undermines the very principles the MK Party claims to uphold.
Manyi's argument hinges on a romanticised and selective interpretation of history, conveniently overlooking the realities of international law and the fundamental right to self-determination that the AU has consistently championed. To suggest that Western Sahara was merely 'integrated with Morocco' through 'trade, kinship and religious institutions' before colonialism, and that this somehow equates to legitimate sovereignty, is to deliberately blur the lines between historical influence and political dominion.
While precolonial connections existed, they do not negate the distinct identity of the Saharawi people or their internationally recognised right to choose their destiny. The assertion that Moroccan Sultans exercised 'spiritual and political suzerainty' akin to the British monarch's role over the Commonwealth is a disingenuous comparison.
Based on colonial logics, the Commonwealth is a voluntary association of so-called independent states. Thus, it does not provide a historical justification for territorial claims over a people who have consistently sought their statehood.
Furthermore, equating Morocco's actions in Western Sahara to an 'African character' while simultaneously dismissing the Saharawi's struggle for independence as 'intellectually lazy and historically dishonest' reveals a profound bias. Who, then, defines 'African character' in this narrative? Is it only those who align with pre-colonial monarchies, regardless of the aspirations of indigenous populations?
Nevertheless, the 1975 International Court of Justice (ICJ) advisory opinion found no ties of territorial sovereignty between Western Sahara and Morocco. Manyi's dismissal of this advisory opinion as 'just that… an opinion, not a binding judgment' is a classic legal evasion, as it ignores its foundational role in the UN and AU's stance on decolonisation.
While advisory opinions are not directly binding in the same way as contentious judgments, they carry significant legal weight and are highly influential in international law.
The ICJ explicitly stated that it 'did not find any ties of territorial sovereignty between the territory of Western Sahara and the Kingdom of Morocco or the Mauritanian entity'. This critical finding, conveniently downplayed by Manyi, directly challenges the MK Party's narrative of historical Moroccan suzerainty. To suggest that those who rely on this opinion are 'disingenuously using it as a hammer' is to accuse the international legal framework itself of being disingenuous when it doesn't align with the MK Party's preferred outcome.
Furthermore, it is crucial to recall that Spain's 1975 tripartite agreement with Morocco and Mauritania, which ceded administrative control of Western Sahara without a referendum, was a direct violation of UN General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) on the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, which affirms the right to self-determination for all colonial territories.
The MK Party's purported 'rejection of the Balkanisation of Africa' is perhaps the most glaring hypocrisy. For a party to claim it stands 'firmly against the further splintering of our continent into externally sponsored micro-states' while simultaneously advocating for the annexation of Western Sahara by Morocco is a monumental contradiction.
The Saharawi Republic is a member of the AU, recognised by a significant number of African states, including South Africa. Its struggle is one of decolonisation and self-determination, not 'external sponsorship' designed to create a 'micro-state' for foreign interests. This is a classic case of projection, where the MK Party attributes to the Saharawi what many accuse Morocco of pursuing: territorial expansion under the guise of historical claims.
The appeal to 'African sovereignty' and the 'legitimacy of political structures that preceded colonial conquest,' specifically the Moroccan monarchy, is a dangerous precedent. While respecting indigenous institutions is crucial, it cannot come at the expense of human rights or the universally accepted principle of self-determination.
If the MK Party genuinely champions African Renaissance, it should uphold the rights of all African peoples, not just those aligned with powerful historical monarchies. To suggest that the AU's decision to readmit Morocco was purely an act of 'African agency' without considering geopolitical manoeuvring or economic influence is naive at best and intellectually dishonest at worst.
Morocco had voluntarily left the continental body in 1984 because it disagreed with the decision of the AU's predecessor, the Organisation of African Unity (OAU), to admit the Sahrawi Republic as a full member — effectively refusing to share a room with the very people it claims to share heritage and historical ties with.
What Manyi omits to mention is that Western Sahara suffered a similar fate to that of black South Africans during the 1960s, when Britain conferred political independence on Afrikaners. Spain ceded the territory to Rabat instead of the Sahrawi people, leading to a political standoff with Mauritania, which had also made a concurrent claim.
Following the colonial terra nullius myth, Afrikaners also make false claims that the land was empty or unused prior to their arrival and that Black South Africans were latecomers, erasing centuries of indigenous presence, land use, and political organisation by African communities. Moroccans follow almost an identical logic in Western Sahara, portraying the territory as historically ungoverned or inherently part of Morocco, thus denying the Sahrawi people's longstanding political identity and their right to self-determination.
Like Zambia and others, MK Party appears to have also fallen under the spell of the despotic foreign policy of a pariah state that seeks validation from former colonial powers. In effect, Morocco exercises what Moses Ochonu calls 'colonialism by proxy', a form of indirect rule on behalf of European interests eager to exploit Western Sahara's rich mineral wealth, particularly phosphates and iron ore, without Sahrawi consent. Phosphates are crucial for fertiliser production and global agriculture.
Morocco's extractivist agenda violates international law and entrenches neocolonial control over resources that rightfully belong to the Sahrawi people. The export of phosphates from Boucraa has been the subject of international legal challenges, including rulings by the European Court of Justice that trade agreements with Morocco cannot legally include resources from Western Sahara without the consent of the Sahrawi people.
Beyond phosphates, Morocco has developed significant wind and solar farms in the occupied territory, such as Nareva's 50MW Foum el Oued farm, specifically powering the Bou Craa phosphate mines.
Furthermore, European Union (EU) and Russian fishing fleets continue to plunder Western Sahara's rich Atlantic waters under trade agreements that, per ECJ rulings, cannot lawfully apply to Sahrawi territory. Similarly, Morocco has permitted large-scale agribusiness exports, including citrus and tomatoes, using water-intensive farming on occupied Sahrawi land, exacerbating local water scarcity and environmental degradation.
Under international law, primarily UN General Assembly Resolution 1803 (1962) on permanent sovereignty over natural resources, the Sahrawi people are the rightful owners of these resources. However, as the territory remains non-self-governing and partially occupied by Morocco, any extraction or export without their free, prior and informed consent is considered illegal by many legal scholars, the AU and the UN.
Despite international efforts to find a resolution, including the Baker Plans (Baker I and Baker II), which proposed varying degrees of autonomy for Western Sahara followed by a referendum on self-determination, viable alternatives remain underdeveloped. These UN-backed proposals, though at times accepted by one party and rejected by the other, represent pathways that prioritise the Sahrawi people's right to choose, offering a stark contrast to Morocco's unilateral autonomy initiative.
Beyond the MK Party's internal contradictions, Rabat's international manoeuvring also merits scrutiny. France's 2024 endorsement of Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara, following the US recognition, indicates a concerning shift by major powers, prioritising geopolitical interests over international law and Western Sahara's self-determination.
This trend is further amplified by Morocco's strategic utilisation of Israel normalisation, particularly through the Abraham Accords. This exploits a complex regional dynamic to garner global support for its occupation, at the expense of established principles of decolonisation and human rights.
The MK Party's position on Western Sahara, as articulated by Manyi, is not a nuanced 'African-centred reading of history'. It is a thinly veiled justification for an international relations position that prioritises a selective historical narrative and the interests of a specific state over the fundamental right of a people to determine their future. MK Party's stance effectively legitimises resource theft disguised as anti-Western posturing.
Therefore, the MK Party's foreign relations strategy is not only inconsistent but also fundamentally two-faced: it champions African unity and decolonisation in rhetoric, while actively undermining it in practice, particularly concerning the Saharawi people. The 'ghosts of colonial borders' that Manyi wishes to reject seem to linger quite strongly in the MK Party's approach, but only when it suits their political agenda.
There is a need to address the MKP's rhetoric-reality gap, evident in their endorsement of Morocco's 'autonomy plan' as 'decolonisation' while simultaneously silencing Sahrawi self-determination. This constitutes a colonial proxy masked in anti-Western slogans.
Siyayibanga le economy!
* Siyabonga Hadebe is an independent commentator based in Geneva on socio-economic, political and global matters.
** The views expressed here do not reflect those of the Sunday Independent, Independent Media, or IOL. Get the real story on the go: Follow the Sunday Independent on WhatsApp.
Hashtags

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


The Citizen
2 hours ago
- The Citizen
‘Open our eyes and ears' – Ramaphosa on how to tackle US tariff hike on SA cars
In response to the incoming US tariffs, Ramaphosa said South Africa needs to look at other markets. South Africa will feel the wrath of the Trump administration as it stands firm on implementing the 30% tariff on exports to the United States (US). Other countries will also be affected by President Donald Trump's decision, as their export tariffs are increasing as well. In South Africa, the automotive sector will be significantly impacted, as some brands, such as Mercedes-Benz, export to the US. President Cyril Ramaphosa, speaking at the BMW plant in Rosslyn, Pretoria, on Thursday, highlighted that the automotive industry has a significant impact on the country's GDP, as it contributes 4.9%. ALSO READ: US tariff of 30% on SA exports: where to now? Ramaphosa on US tariffs BMW Group SA hosted an engagement to highlight its commitment to strengthening South Africa's economic vitality and advancing its industrial innovation. 'The tariffs from the US have turned the world upside down and are a huge threat to us as well because we export a lot of products to the US, such as vehicles, agricultural products and mineral products,' said Ramaphosa. During his keynote address, he added that SA is the 22nd largest car exporter in the world. Ramaphosa added that the US market is important to SA; however, it is time to diversify the country's export base and accelerate domestic value creation. 'As we face this threat of higher tariffs, we need to open our eyes and ears and see where else our vehicles can go.' SA government engaging on US tariffs Ramaphosa added that producers of some industries have already felt the pressure of the incoming US tariffs. He said the South African government is engaging with the US, and he hopes this will yield success in the coming days. 'We need to look at other markets, and being an African country, with an African continental free-trade, we have got to see how we open up the rest of the continent, because we have a very positive tariff-free opportunity with the rest.' He applauded BMW for exporting the new X3 to Europe. He said that exporting cars to other countries demonstrates trust in the skills South Africans possess and highlights the industry's potential. ALSO READ: Devastating impact of US tariffs on SA automotive sector even before implementation BMW Group South Africa invited President @CyrilRamaphosa to a showcase of the successful implementation of the latest investment for production of the new BMW X3 Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle at the automaker's plant at Rosslyn in Tshwane. — The Presidency 🇿🇦 (@PresidencyZA) July 24, 2025 BMW not affected by tariffs Danny Bester, BWM plant director, told The Citizen that they are not affected by the US tariffs, as they are not currently exporting to the country. 'Right now, we are not affected by the US tariffs because most of our volumes are going to other parts of the world, like Europe, Australia and New Zealand.' He added that they would like to have access to the American market. However, they have sent 16% of the current generation to the US. When asked if they will be looking into expanding in the future, Bester said BMW is aiming to build a new record volume by the end of the year. NOW READ: Mercedes-Benz halts production in Eastern Cape – Will employees be paid?

IOL News
2 hours ago
- IOL News
Julius Malema: MK Party won't affect EFF support among progressive South Africans
EFF leader Julius Malema told the media in Cape Town that the Red Berets will only be reduced among tribalists, not among progressive South Africans. Image: Ayana Ndamane / Independent Newspapers EFF leader Julius Malema said on Thursday the MK Party, which is the third largest in Parliament, would not reduce its support base despite being relegated to fourth place after the 2024 elections. 'There is no MK that is going to reduce us. It will reduce us among tribalists, not among progressive South Africans,' Malema told the media during a briefing in Cape Town ahead of the party's anniversary celebrations on Saturday. 'There is no MK that can replace us ideologically, politically, and otherwise. You saw yesterday in Parliament, a mess in action,' he said. He was referring to the flip-flopping made by MK Party chief whip Colleen Makhubele during the vote on the Appropriation Bill in the National Assembly. Makhubele voted in support of the Bill only to change their vote, claiming she mistook it for the Ad Hoc Committee that was established to probe the serious allegations made by KwaZulu-Natal Police Commissioner, Lieutenant-General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi. 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 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. Next Stay Close ✕ Malema expressed his shock that Makhubele had not corrected herself when she was allowed to do so by Parliament's House chairperson Cedric Frolick, but 'she says we vote in support'. He also noted that Makhubele had 'thrown her toys' when Frolick did not recognise her, instead of EFF MP Omphile Maotwe, when there was an opportunity to object and call for a division when the schedule of budgets of the department was voted. 'The TG (treasurer-general Omphile Maotwe) said 'we are going against and called for a division'. She threw her toys. The issue was much bigger than emotions. When they objected and called for division, we supported them,' he said. 'She behaved like she was not a leader and threw toys,' Malema added. He also said the EFF has proven to be an effective opposition party in Parliament. Malema also said his party was making huge inroads in the Western Cape ahead of the 2026 local government elections. He said the Western Cape was one of the provinces where the Red Berets increased the number of votes during the May 2024 general elections. 'Research shows that the EFF is to have huge increases in the Western Cape and the Eastern Cape. We are here to consolidate the ground because this is where we want to grow,' he claimed. Explaining the Western Cape as the host of their 12th anniversary celebrations, Malema said the province had never hosted their anniversaries. 'We were told the season is not good, it's rainy and windy. We have had to take a bold decision that we can't have a province in the history of our organisation, which has never hosted the national celebrations of the EFF, because we are a national organisation.' The EFF national leaders moved the anniversary celebrations from Mthatha in the Eastern Cape following the devastating floods that displaced people and left communities in mourning. 'The EFF made the responsible decision to relocate the venue out of respect and solidarity with those affected.' He also said the choice of Khayelitsha as a venue was significant because it is the second largest township and home to thousands of poor and working-class Africans who lived under the weight of special apartheid and deliberate under-development. 'Khayelitsha remains physically and economically separated from the so-called World Class parts of Cape Town. When the DA-led city speaks of this smart city, they are not referring to Khayelitsha. They are referring to the wide enclaves of Sea Point, Claremont, Constantia, and Stellenbosch, while the people of Khayelitsha are left to swim in poverty, crime, poor sanitation, overcrowding, and the lack of basic housing.' Malema said they have erected a dome with a capacity to accommodate 10,000 people as the main venue for the rally. 'This structure includes all essential amenities, including sanitation facilities, and will be ready to host thousands of Fighters, supporters, and community members. 'We expect a powerful turnout from surrounding areas, including side B, Site C, TR Section, Nyanga, Gugulethu, Delft, and Belhar.'

IOL News
2 hours ago
- IOL News
Should we criminalise 'Coloured' like the K-word? The answer is complicated
Founder and Leader of PARC, Glen Snyman. Image: Supplied A poster created by the People Against Race Classification (PARC) created quite a stir on social media when it boldly stated, 'Criminalise the word Coloured, just like the K-word'. The PARC's poster has a fiery debate, with some feeling opposite, and saying that while the history of the term is ingrained with trauma, removing the word doesn't go on to address the real systemic issues facing Coloured people. In June, when speaking to the Director at the Centre for Education Rights and Transformation from the University of Johannesburg, Professor June Bam-Hutchison explained that the term 'Coloured' is problematic as it was part of the de-Africanisation process under colonialism, and a dehumanising process under apartheid. ''Coloured' identity is deeply problematic as founded in colonialism and apartheid. Identities are fluid and diverse, and constructed. An adoption of Khoi-San or hybrid ethnic identities within an inclusive South African and African identity is more preferred in existing and contemporary social movements, although there are different articulations. 'It is more about acknowledgement of genocide, and the historical intersecting specificities in oppression that occurred within the early Cape colony (land dispossession, genocide, enslavement). South Africa has not reckoned with these aspects of our painful shared past – yet this history makes up roughly 200 years of our colonial history,' Bam-Hutchison said. The Pan South African Language Board (PanSALB), the authority on language development in the country, said it acknowledges the concerns raised regarding the use of the term 'Coloured' and the complex historical and social implications associated with it. 'As an organisation mandated to promote and develop languages and foster linguistic diversity, PanSALB recognises the sensitivity of this matter. However, given the ongoing debate and lack of consensus among communities, as well as the legal nature of the question surrounding criminalisation, PanSALB is not in a position to provide an authoritative comment on this issue at this stage,' it said. 'We encourage continued dialogue and engagement among all stakeholders to address these concerns in a manner that promotes mutual respect and understanding.' Founder and Leader of PARC, Glen Snyman, said that in their 15-year history, they have always been against race classification, and the reason behind their campaign to criminalise the word Coloured is that when looking at the history of the word, it shows how damaging it is. 'This word, its history, is as damaged, as distorted, as degrading, as the K-word. We have enough proof, which will cause us to have a successful case in a court of law. We want to have this word criminalised as hate speech. And the reason for that is to encourage and subtly force people to stop the use of the word Coloured... 'We would rather want people to say, use the word bruin mense/brown people,' Snyman said. A poster created by the People Against Race Classification (PARC) created quite a stir on social media when it boldly stated, 'Criminalise the word Coloured, just as like the K-Word'. Image: Supplied 'We want it to be made a crime to call people by that, and it's an educational process. People need to be educated to change the way they talk about other people. When was South Africa educated about the K-word? When did that happen? I don't recall such a time in history. 'Now people know how negative the apartheid government spoke to them about the Coloured word. Marike de Klerk (ex-wife of former South African president FW de Klerk) said they are leftovers, that they are dependent on the white people, and that they are made in the kitchen. That's common knowledge to everyone. To me, the only way to force South Africans to stop this is to make a law. We need to have a law. A law must be made to stop them from using the word,' Snyman said. When asked about decolonisation of the term (the process of freeing an institution, sphere of activity, from the cultural or social effects of colonisation), Snyman said: 'You need to explain to me what the definition of decolonisation, because when I say I'm proudly a K*ff*r, or a H*tkn*t, or I call somebody else a K*ff*r, that would put me in jail. That's a crime. We want the same treatment with the word Coloured. 'Why, after 1994, why did the millions of what they call 'Black People' only criminalise their word, the K-word? Which is an insult to them. What about the three million or so brown people? Why didn't they criminalise the word Coloured as well? 'We feel that 'white people' and 'black people' don't have a say in this because they don't know how it feels to be called Coloured. It's degrading to feel Coloured. Plus, it disguises our true name. We want to be called Khoi-San,' he said. 'COLOURED - How Classification Became Culture' co-author Tessa Dooms, who wrote with Lynsey Ebony Chute, hit back at Snyman's position. In the book, the two challenge the notion that Coloured people do not have a distinct heritage or culture, and delve into the history of Coloured people as descendants of indigenous Africans and as a people whose identity has been shaped by colonisation and slavery, and unpack the racial and political hierarchies these forces created. 'To respond directly to his assertion that compares the word Coloured to the K-word, I reject that outright, and the reason I reject it outright is this. There were demeaning ways to call Coloured people that are equivalent to the K-word. That was never the word 'Coloured'. 'Let's be serious. There was B*esman (Bushman), and there were other derogatory ways to refer to us that are akin to the K-word. That is not the word 'Coloured'. That is like saying that the word Xhosa or Zulu is derogatory. It simply is not. 'The closest equivalence, because it was on the same classification sheet during apartheid, is the word native. If you want to compare it to native, I don't have a problem. 'But to compare it to the K-word is a hyperbolic falsehood for effect. And it's simply unhelpful,' Dooms said. 'If you want to change the classifications or do away with them, then you don't start by doing away with them. You start by doing the work to undo their meaning in people's real lives. 'For as long as being white means a certain life is ascribed to you, and you can attain certain things that other people can't, we must continue to use the word White to point out that privilege. For as long as the word black means that you're going to have certain levels of discrimination, we must continue to use the word black. Co-author of 'COLOURED - How Classification Became Culture' Tessa Dooms. Image: Facebook / Supplied 'In the same way, as long as the word Coloured denotes this kind of marginality from society, we continue to use the word because the word Coloured is also helping us to point out that those things that made that word exist in the first place can exist now. 'People want shortcuts in democracy and transformation. We want to get rid of the words, but not get rid of the systems, and so until we get rid of the systems, we have no business just getting rid of the words,' Dooms said. In conversation with Dooms, it was also highlighted that the terms Snyman seeks to use in its stead, 'Khoi-San' and 'brown people', don't fit what some people understand their heritage to be, and could cause further confusion. Taking to social media for people's thoughts on the matter, this is what others had to say: Tamlyn Hendricks: 'Although there is a lot of sordid history around being coloured. We already have a word that's offensive to us. I have always felt that we, as coloured people, have taken on the word with pride and are trying very hard to uncover our vast and extensive history around it. It doesn't offend, nor do I think it should be criminalised. I do think that more conversations around this need to be had, though, and more information should be uncovered and made available for people to try and learn.' Ashly Schoeman: 'I personally don't find the term offensive at all. I'm proud of my family and heritage; however, if I'm being honest, I don't really care much how race is classified, especially not the name/label. Call me what you want, my heritage and culture will stay the same. 'I've always thought that fitting someone into a racial box and then further dividing them into different types of coloured people, for example, causes more harm than good, creating a rift between people of the same race. Colourism is a bigger issue, in my opinion. I don't imagine changing a name will solve any of these problems. 'Painting the house a different colour without addressing issues with the foundation is a waste of time.' [email protected]