Latest news with #CarlNiehaus
IOL News
11 hours ago
- Business
- IOL News
The hypocrisy of South Africa's arms trade: Job creation or genocide?
IOL As South Africa grapples with its legacy of apartheid, the arms trade raises profound ethical questions. This article explores how economic arguments for job creation mask a troubling complicity in global atrocities, argues EFF MP, Carl Niehaus Image: File By Carl Niehaus As a proud South African and a staunch member of the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), I am compelled to speak out against the grotesque hypocrisy embedded in our nation's arms manufacturing industry. Companies like Rheinmetall Denel Munition (RDM), a joint venture between German arms giant Rheinmetall and South Africa's state-owned Denel, are churning out weapons of death—155mm Assegai artillery shells, high-explosive munitions, and components linked to incendiary horrors like white phosphorus bombs. These are exported to NATO countries, only to be funnelled onward to conflict zones where they fuel atrocities. In Ukraine, they bolster a grinding war; in Gaza, they enable a wanton genocide against Palestinians. And let's not forget shipments to places like Sudan, where human rights abuses are rampant. This is not economic progress—it's blood money, and the tired excuse of 'job creation' is a morally bankrupt shield that crumbles under scrutiny, much like the defences of German companies complicit in Nazi crimes after World War II. RDM's operations exemplify this depravity. As recently as July 2025, Rheinmetall announced a massive order for 155mm artillery ammunition from a European NATO member, with production heavily reliant on its South African subsidiary. Similar deals have poured in: Sweden signed a $526 million contract with RDM for ammunition, and multiyear frameworks supply NATO states with Assegai 155mm projectiles. 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 These aren't benign exports—they feed into a shadowy supply chain. NATO allies, including Germany, have ramped up arms transfers to Ukraine, with Rheinmetall directly involved in delivering 155mm rounds to Kyiv under Bundeswehr frameworks. But the trail doesn't stop there. Rheinmetall's global network has been implicated in arming Israel, whose military operations in Gaza have drawn well documented accusations of war crimes from bodies like Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International. Apartheid Israel has repeatedly used white phosphorus munitions—incendiary weapons that burn through flesh and cause excruciating, long-term suffering—in densely populated areas of Gaza and Lebanon, violating international humanitarian law when deployed against civilians. While Rheinmetall publicly disavows certain 'controversial' weapons like cluster munitions, their denial rings hollow amid reports of phosphorus use in ongoing conflicts, and their ammunition often ends up in the hands of those who wield it indiscriminately. This isn't speculation; it's a pattern of complicity. Rheinmetall's secretive factory expansions cater to 'friendly' NATO countries while parallel businesses arm volatile regions. Exports have reached Sudan, where civil war rages with documented atrocities, and Malaysia, a market for RDM's munitions amid regional tensions. But the most egregious is the indirect flow to Israel. German arms exports to Israel surged in recent years, including Rheinmetall components, enabling the bombardment of Gaza that has killed tens of thousands, displaced millions, and razed infrastructure in what the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has termed genocidal acts. South Africa's own history of apartheid should make us viscerally opposed to such enablement—yet here we are, manufacturing the tools of oppression in our factories, exporting them under the guise of legitimate trade, and watching as they rain down terror on innocents. The defenders of this industry—corporate executives, government officials, and even some economists—invariably trot out the 'job creation' argument. They claim that RDM's operations in South Africa provide employment for thousands, boosting local economies in a country plagued by unemployment rates hovering above 30%. Yes, factories hum with activity, workers earn wages, and supply chains ripple through communities. But this is a deeply flawed, ethically void rationale. Manufacturing weapons that enable mass murder cannot be justified by economic gains, no matter how desperate our nation's need for growth. The EFF is unapologetically committed to job creation and economic liberation— we fight for land redistribution, nationalization of mines, and policies that uplift the black majority disenfranchised by centuries of colonialism and apartheid. But we draw a red line: prosperity cannot come at the expense of human rights, nor can it rationalize the production of instruments of genocide and war crimes. This principle isn't novel; it's etched in the annals of history, particularly in the aftermath of World War II when German companies like Mercedes-Benz (then Daimler-Benz) and BMW faced reckoning for their collusion with the Nazis. During the Third Reich, Daimler-Benz transformed into a pillar of the Nazi war machine, producing vehicles, aircraft engines, and tanks while exploiting forced labor from concentration camps, prisoners of war, and Jewish slaves under barbaric conditions. Adolf Hitler himself favoured Mercedes vehicles for propaganda parades, and the company donated cars and funds to the regime. BMW, meanwhile, manufactured aircraft engines for the Luftwaffe and motorcycles for the Wehrmacht, with its founding Quandt family amassing fortunes through expropriated Jewish businesses and slave labor that claimed lives at an appalling rate—up to 80 deaths per month in factories. These companies weren't passive; they actively profited from the Holocaust, enforcing racial hierarchies and supplying the machinery of genocide. Post-war, the Allies imposed denazification, stripping Nazi-affiliated executives and seizing assets under the Potsdam Agreement. Factories were dismantled, foreign holdings lost, and production halted temporarily. While not dissolved outright—due to the need for West Germany's reconstruction—these firms faced investigations, management purges, and later, voluntary reparations. Daimler-Benz paid $12 million in 1988 to forced labor survivors, and BMW contributed to a 2000 industry fund totaling $5 billion for victims. Crucially, neither could hide behind 'job creation.' Their employment of thousands didn't absolve them; it compounded their guilt, as jobs were sustained through slave labor and war profiteering. The Nuremberg trials targeted industrialists like those from IG Farben for similar crimes, establishing that economic arguments don't excuse complicity in atrocities. BMW's Günther Quandt was classified a 'collaborator' and was forced to issue a public acknowledgement and apologies and also pay restitution to the families of the victims of the Nazis, but the moral stain lingers up to today. South Africa must learn from this. RDM's exports mirror that era's moral failure: producing arms that end up in genocidal hands, all while claiming economic benefits. In Gaza, white phosphorus shells—linked to suppliers like Rheinmetall—have caused horrific burns and environmental devastation, with Israel admitting use in past operations. In Ukraine, incendiary weapons have been deployed amid accusations of war crimes. Sudan and Malaysia add layers of instability, where munitions exacerbate conflicts. The EFF rejects this unequivocally. We demand an end to such exports, sanctions on complicit firms, and a pivot to ethical industries—renewable energy, agriculture, manufacturing for peace. Jobs yes, but not built on graves. Our nation's soul is at stake. We overthrew apartheid; we cannot now arm modern equivalents. Let history judge us not as enablers of evil, but as warriors for justice. The EFF stands firm: no rationalization of the indefensible. Stop any arms trade with enablers of genocide and war crimes now, before more blood stains our hands. *** Carl Niehaus is an EFF member of Parliament ** The views expressed here do not necessarily represent those of Independent Media or IOL IOL Opinion
IOL News
4 days ago
- Politics
- IOL News
Economic Freedom Fighters: A Beacon of Hope for South Africa's Forgotten Communities
Julius Malema delivers a speech during the launch of his new political party Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) on July 26, 2013 in Soweto. The EFF celebrates its 12th anniversary in Khayelitsha, Cape Town today. Image: AFP Carl Niehaus As we celebrate the 12th anniversary of the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) today, we are filled with a sense of revolutionary pride. This marks a celebration of a grassroots liberation movement that has been a beacon for the poor and marginalised African people, the oppressed, and the forgotten black masses of South Africa. Born from tragedy and injustice, the EFF represents the spirit of economic emancipation, turning despair into hope. From Marikana's bloodstained fields to Mthatha's flood-ravaged homes, the party's journey underscores its dedication to the poor over 12 years. In a landscape of empty promises, the EFF not only voices the forgotten's plight but lives and fights it relentlessly. The EFF's origins are rooted in the nation's sorrowful history, emerging from the 2012 Marikana massacre, where police killed 34 mineworkers during a wage strike. This exposed the exploitation of black labour in post-apartheid South Africa, which promised freedom but delivered inequality. The workers' anguish sparked radical change. On July 26, 2013, at Uncle Tom's Hall in Soweto—a site of resistance—the EFF was launched, vowing economic freedom in our lifetime. This pledge to break inequality's chains has been upheld with resolve for a dozen years. Central to the EFF's ethos are its Seven Cardinal Pillars, a blueprint to end systemic exploitation and injustice faced by black Africans. These include expropriating land without compensation, nationalising mines and banks, and providing free quality education, healthcare, and housing. They confront colonialism and apartheid's scars, calling for wealth redistribution to empower the masses. For 12 years, these pillars have guided the EFF, inspiring actions aligned with the people's needs. Over these years, the EFF has become the champion of the African poor, oppressed workers, students, landless, unemployed, and exploited black women—not just in South Africa but across Africa. It extends solidarity to the continent's forgotten, positioning itself as their voice. The party has led campaigns against gender-based violence, highlighting how patriarchy worsens poverty. A key achievement was its role in the 2015-2016 Fees Must Fall movement, where students protested high fees barring access to education. The EFF provided strategic leadership, amplifying demands in Parliament and sparking a national reckoning. From this, a new generation of EFF leaders—youth from poor backgrounds—has emerged, carrying the torch with passion. 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 ✕ To the poor, the EFF is a lifeline and guardian of rights where service delivery fails. In local governance, EFF representatives have driven community upliftment in Ekurhuleni, Johannesburg, Tshwane, and other municipalities. They've fought for better housing, water, sanitation, and infrastructure against opposition. Notably, the EFF advocates for the homeless in Alexandra, Soweto, Daveyton, Tembisa, Seshego, and townships nationwide, demanding land reclamation for self-empowerment. This aligns with the vision of people-owned land utilisation, transforming barren areas into prosperous communities. The EFF consistently advocates for the black poor's needs, from workplace exploitation and unemployment to university barriers and NYDA failures. In healthcare, it pushes for 24/7 community centres and clinics. In Johannesburg, MMC for Health Cllr Ennie Makhafola has established such facilities, ensuring timely care for the poor. MMC for Safety and Security Dr Mgcini Tshwaku has tackled drug lords, reclaimed crime-ridden buildings, and sensitised police to the poor's vulnerabilities, prioritising township safety over wealthy suburbs. The EFF is deeply rooted in communities, earning recognition as the party that cares and delivers justice. It addresses unfair dismissals, women's exploitation, denied education, and unemployment through direct campaigns. Under Commander-in-Chief Julius Malema, it challenges authority, echoing Marikana's radical spirit. This was evident in opposing electricity tariff hikes; the EFF welcomed the rejection of Eskom's 35% proposal, condemned approvals, and pressured for reviews. It fought the 2018 VAT increase from 14% to 15% as a burden on the poor and recently halted a 2025/26 proposal via legal challenges. The party also battles fuel price rises, fighting to block levy hikes through court action. This purpose has made the EFF a target of vicious attacks from the political elite and monopoly capital, as it threatens their interests. No other party faces such misrepresentation, but the EFF remains undeterred in pursuing justice. In Parliament, the EFF advances transformative laws, like the 2025 Student Debt Relief Bill by MP Sihle Lonzi. This Private Member's Bill proposes a fund to erase debts under criteria, secure qualifications despite arrears, and democratise education for impoverished youth, addressing economic liberation barriers. The EFF's commitment has recently shone during the June 2025 Eastern Cape floods in Mthatha and beyond, which destroyed lives and homes. The EFF led aid efforts, with CIC Julius Malema embodying empathy. Though the anniversary rally was planned for Mthatha, it was relocated to Khayelitsha in sensitivity to the victims' suffering, worsened by poverty and ANC neglect. Instead, support initiatives were launched, putting people first. This defines the EFF: a people's movement elevating communities. As Frantz Fanon said, political education teaches the poor that everything depends on them, the EFF lives by this wisdom. In as much as our representation in legislature is considered low, we continue to do the work ourselves, letting communities know, from Marikana to Mthatha 12 years later, that they can depend on us. * Carl Niehaus is an EFF Member of Parliament. ** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL, Independent Media or The African.
IOL News
7 days ago
- Politics
- IOL News
The Hypocrisy of Jacob Zuma: A Betrayal of Sahrawi Solidarity
A demonstration in support of the March for Freedom, which aimed to raise awareness of the Sahrawi cause and that of political prisoners held in Toulouse, France on April 19, 2025. Image: AFP Carl Niehaus As a Member of Parliament for the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), I am consumed by a righteous fury that words can scarcely contain. Jacob Zuma's recent reversal on Western Sahara is opportunism and inexplicable hypocrisy of the highest order – a man who, as South Africa's president from 2009 to 2018, upheld Sahrawi solidarity with rhetorical flourish, now suddenly flip-flops to champion Morocco's so-called 'Autonomy Plan' for 'peace and development.' Twisting a dubious story about Morocco's 'historic support' for anti-apartheid exiles into justification for this betrayal, Zuma has sold his soul – and our principles – down the river. Allegations of financial lures, with Morocco's funds reportedly propping up his uMkhonto weSizwe party (MK party), swirl like a dark, toxic cloud, painting this flip-flop as crass opportunism at its ugliest. By displaying our national flag during his July 16, 2025, meeting in Rabat, Zuma falsely creates the impression that he speaks for all South Africans, undermining our sovereignty and the progressive foreign policy that has long stood with the oppressed Sahrawi people. This fractures African unity, weakens the African Union (AU), and emboldens oppressors across the continent. It is nothing less than counterrevolutionary betrayal – a stab in the back to the very ideals Zuma once professed to defend. Not in our name, Zuma! Your actions disgrace the liberation struggle and expose you as a fallen icon, prioritising personal gain over Pan-African solidarity. To appreciate the magnitude of this hypocrisy, let's revisit Zuma's record. During his presidency, Zuma aligned with South Africa's longstanding pro-Sahrawi stance, rooted in the anti-colonial ethos that progressive forces like the EFF champion as a cornerstone of our foreign policy. He hosted Polisario delegations, recognised the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR), and condemned Morocco's occupation, viewing it as akin to apartheid's domination. This was no mere rhetoric; it reflected a commitment to self-determination for Africa's last colony. Yet, after having formed the MK party, Zuma's principles evaporated into thin air for the lure of easy money to finance the MK party, which is nothing but a family enterprise for himself and his close family members. Now, as MK party leader, he jets to Rabat on July 15-16, 2025, meets Foreign Minister Nasser Bourita, and declares his party 'recognises the historical and legal context underpinning Morocco's claim to Western Sahara.' He praises the 'Autonomy Plan' as a path to 'peace, development, and stability,' ignoring its repressive core. This sudden about-face is inexplicable, save for the whispers of self-interest. Zuma justifies this by invoking Morocco's 'historic support' – referencing ANC training camps in Oujda during exile. But as is the case with so many of Zuma's stories, this mostly fake and twisted narrative lacks authenticity: Morocco's aid was selective and overshadowed by its covert alliances with apartheid South Africa, including arms deals. 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 ✕ To use it now as cover for endorsing colonialism is betrayal incarnate. And the financial allegations? Reports suggest Moroccan incentives have swayed the MK party's stance, turning policy into a transaction. These claims, emerging amid the MK party's internal turmoil, paint Zuma's pivot as crass opportunism – dirhams for doctrine, propping up a fledgling and faltering party at the expense of principles. The flag display is the crowning insult. In Rabat, Zuma unfurled our national colours during the meeting, creating the illusion of official South African endorsement. This falsely claims he speaks for the nation, undermining our sovereignty by misrepresenting our voice on the world stage. It erodes the progressive foreign policy that has positioned South Africa as a champion of decolonisation – recognising SADR, advocating referendums, and isolating occupiers. Zuma's opportunistic stunt fractures African unity, handing Morocco a propaganda win to weaken the AU's anti-colonial resolve and embolden oppressors from Rabat to Tel Aviv. This is counterrevolutionary betrayal: a former freedom fighter aiding imperialism, diluting the ethos of Mandela, Hani, and Sankara for personal vendettas and gain. The 'Autonomy Plan'? A Bantustan redux: nominal local rule under Rabat's boot, echoing apartheid's segregated Homelands – unviable puppets denying true freedom. As the late revolutionary icon Winnie Madikizela-Mandela aptly put it in her 2010 speech on Western Sahara, 'We also experienced an attempt at so-called autonomy. Several 'Bantustans', which were ethnically based, totally unviable, 'independent' states, were created on 13% of the most unproductive parts of the country. They were led by puppet dictators. The people rejected these 'countries' outright despite some having been given official recognition by certain Western and African countries.' This led her to suggest that Morocco must have taken lessons from the apartheid regimes. To fully grasp why Zuma's endorsement of this plan is so odious, one must understand the short but brutal history of the oppression of the Sahrawi people. Western Sahara, a vast desert territory on Africa's northwest coast, was colonised by Spain in 1884, becoming known as Spanish Sahara. The indigenous Sahrawi, nomadic Arab-Berber tribes with a rich cultural heritage of poetry, camel herding, and resistance, endured harsh Spanish rule for nearly a century. By the 1970s, as decolonisation swept the continent, the Sahrawis formed the Polisario Front in 1973 to demand independence, inspired by global anti-colonial movements. Spain's withdrawal in 1975, amid UN calls for a self-determination referendum, opened the door to betrayal. Morocco, under King Hassan II, launched the 'Green March' – a mass civilian invasion backed by military forces – claiming historical ties dismissed by the International Court of Justice. Simultaneously, Mauritania invaded from the south. The secret Madrid Accords partitioned the territory, ignoring Sahrawi rights and sparking a guerrilla war. Mauritania withdrew in 1979, but Morocco annexed its share, escalating oppression. Moroccan forces bombed civilian camps with napalm and phosphorus, displacing over 100,000 Sahrawis into Algerian refugee camps, where generations have grown up in exile. Morocco's tactics grew more insidious: constructing the 2,700-kilometre Berm wall in the 1980s – fortified with landmines, radar, and troops – to bisect the territory and contain Polisario fighters. This 'wall of shame' symbolises division, trapping Sahrawis in poverty while Morocco exploits phosphates, fisheries, and potential oil reserves worth billions. Human rights abuses abound: arbitrary arrests, torture, forced disappearances, and suppression of Sahrawi culture and language. A 1991 UN ceasefire promised an independence referendum, but Morocco has obstructed it for decades, proposing instead the Autonomy Plan – limited self-rule under its sovereignty, excluding full freedom. The 2020 ceasefire collapse, triggered by Moroccan incursions, reignited low-intensity conflict, with Polisario resuming armed resistance. Over 170,000 Sahrawi refugees remain in Algerian camps, facing food shortages and harsh conditions, while occupied zones see protests met with brutality. This oppression, violating over 100 UN resolutions, echoes colonial patterns, denying self-determination and perpetuating Africa's last colony. As the EFF, we reject it with the utter contempt that it deserves; we will continue to protest, boycott, and demand justice. Zuma's actions won't deter us; they fuel our revolutionary fire. We call for probes into the MK party's financial ties with the very wealthy Moroccan Royal family, mass protests, and AU expulsion for Morocco. Forward to liberation for the Sahrawi people. The betrayal and oppression of the Sahrawi people will certainly not be tolerated in our name. * Carl Niehaus is a Member of Parliament for the Economic Freedom Fighters. ** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL, Independent Media or The African.
IOL News
30-06-2025
- Politics
- IOL News
Military Vets Database Crisis: A Betrayal of Liberation Soldiers
An MK military veteran protests outside the Durban City Hall. The Military Veterans Database should serve as a beacon of fairness, ensuring that all veterans receive their rightful benefits. Instead, the DVCE's verification process is a labyrinth of inconsistency and prejudice, says the writer. Carl Niehaus South Africa's Military Veterans Act No. 18 of 2011 was a solemn pledge to honour those who sacrificed their lives for freedom, promising them dignity through benefits like housing, healthcare, education, and pensions. At its core lies the Military Veterans Database, intended to identify and register those entitled to these hard-won rights. Yet, more than a decade later, this promise lies in tatters, broken by a verification process riddled with bias, bureaucratic failure, and factional malice. Overseen by the Database Verification, Cleansing and Enhancement (DVCE) under the Presidential Task Team on Military Veterans (PTT), the system has become a tool of exclusion, humiliating liberation soldiers and denying them their dues. Despite mounting complaints, Deputy President Paul Mashatile, who chairs the PTT, and Minister of Defence and Military Veterans Angie Motshekga have failed to act, with Motshekga's unfitness for office casting a shadow over the Department of Military Veterans. The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) condemn this betrayal and demands urgent reform to restore justice for our liberation heroes. A System Rigged Against Liberation Soldiers The Military Veterans Database should serve as a beacon of fairness, ensuring that all veterans receive their rightful benefits. Instead, the DVCE's verification process is a labyrinth of inconsistency and prejudice. Veterans of the apartheid-era South African Defence Force (SADF), armed with formal records and defence force numbers, are seamlessly registered. In stark contrast, members of non-statutory forces—heroes of the People's Liberation Army, uMkhonto we Sizwe (MK), and the Azanian People's Liberation Army (APLA)—face an arduous ordeal, forced to produce near-impossible proof of their clandestine service. Liberation soldiers fought under conditions that defied record-keeping. Many MK and APLA members trained in camps across Angola, Tanzania, or Zambia, while others operated within South Africa's townships as part of self-defence units (SDUs) or underground networks. These internal fighters, hailed by ANC President Oliver Tambo as the backbone of MK's internal machinery, risked everything in covert operations. Yet, the DVCE demands documentation they could never have—official records or testimony from commanders long deceased or scattered. This bias, compounded by ever-shifting criteria, locks countless veterans out of their entitlements. The process is further tainted by ANC factionalism, with the DVCE becoming a battleground for political score-settling. Factions wield verification as a weapon to exclude rivals, undermining the very struggle these veterans fought for. Deputy President Mashatile and Minister Motshekga, tasked with oversight, have turned a blind eye to these abuses, allowing factional politics to flourish unchecked—a failure that underscores Motshekga's inability to lead effectively. The Indignity of Erasure Under the chairpersonship of Retired Major General Mashoala, the DVCE has transformed verification into an exercise in humiliation. Legitimate MK veterans, particularly those who served in the internal machinery, face aggressive interrogations and outright rejection, their sacrifices dismissed with contempt. This is not mere bureaucracy—it is a deliberate affront to the liberation struggle. I myself, a documented military veteran and member of the People's Liberation Army, uMkhonto we Sizwe (MK), have endured this injustice. My 1983 court records, where I was charged with so-called high treason, meticulously detail my membership in MK and the ANC, resulting in a 15-year sentence by the apartheid regime. These records stand as irrefutable proof of my service, yet General Mashoala, driven by factional political motives, questioned my MK membership in a manner both aggressive and degrading. My ordeal reflects the plight of countless veterans whose contributions are being erased for political gain. In recent weeks, this crisis reached a boiling point in the North West Province. General Mashoala's DVCE meetings subjected genuine MK veterans—many from MK's internal machinery and SDUs—to hostile interrogations and public humiliation, summarily rejecting their claims. These rejections do not merely deny benefits like housing, healthcare, or education for their dependents; they negate the essence of their struggle. The inaction of Mashatile and Motshekga in the face of widespread outcry is a profound lapse in leadership. The Devastating Toll of Exclusion The human cost of this broken system is staggering. Excluded veterans are left without healthcare for ailments born of their struggle, without homes for their families, and without education for their children. This is a moral travesty, condemning those who fought for freedom to lives of destitution. The SDUs, who braved unimaginable dangers in townships to protect communities and shift the balance of power toward the 1994 elections, are particularly hard-hit. Their clandestine contributions, pivotal to our democracy, are ignored by the DVCE's narrow criteria, leaving many excluded and forgotten. A Demand for Justice The EFF will not stand idly by while our liberation heroes are betrayed. The DVCE process, under the PTT, is fatally flawed—its biased criteria and factional corruption are an insult to the struggle. The paper-based system, prone to fraud and maladministration as seen in the North West Province, must be scrapped. General Mashoala's leadership, tainted by political motives, is untenable; he must be removed as DVCE chairperson immediately. We demand a transparent, digitized verification system rooted in inclusive criteria that honour the full spectrum of the liberation struggle. It must recognize non-statutory forces, including MK's internal machinery and SDUs, accepting affidavits, community testimonies, and historical records as valid proof. This process must be purged of ANC factionalism, ensuring no veteran is excluded for political gain. Deputy President Mashatile, as PTT head, must champion this reform, rectifying his administration's failure to heed complaints. Minister Motshekga's unfitness for office, evident in her oversight of this crisis, necessitates her immediate dismissal by President Ramaphosa. A Nation's Moral Reckoning South Africa's soul is on trial. A nation's integrity is measured by how it honours those who fought for its freedom, and by this standard, we are failing. The Military Veterans Database crisis is a profound betrayal of our liberation soldiers, whose blood and sacrifice in camps, townships, and underground networks birthed our democracy. As a documented military veteran and member of the People's Liberation Army, uMkhonto we Sizwe (MK), I have witnessed this betrayal firsthand, my service questioned by General Mashoala's factional agenda despite court records affirming my role. This injustice is not mine alone—it is shared by countless MK and APLA veterans, SDU members, and internal operatives whose legacies are being erased. This crisis strikes at the heart of our liberation heritage, dishonouring the vision of Oliver Tambo and the collective courage that toppled apartheid. The inaction of Deputy President Mashatile and Minister Motshekga reflects a deeper failure of leadership, one that President Ramaphosa must address by removing Motshekga from office. The EFF's demands are unequivocal: remove General Mashoala, digitize the DVCE process, and establish criteria that uphold the truth of our struggle. We will fight relentlessly until our veterans' sacrifices are recognized, their dignity restored, and their contributions enshrined in a just system. South Africa owes this sacred duty to its liberation heroes—not as a favour, but as a matter of justice, for the integrity of our history and the soul of our nation hang in the balance. * Carl Niehaus is an EFF Member of Parliament (MP). He serves as the EFF's permanent representative on the Portfolio Committee on Defence and Military Veterans, and the Joint Standing Committee on Defence. ** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL, Independent Media or The African.
IOL News
14-06-2025
- Politics
- IOL News
EFF demands urgent parliamentary discussion on alleged arms exports to Israel
Earlier this week, the Red Berets proposed that the National Conventional Weapons Control Committee's inability to fulfil its domestic and international weapons control commitments be discussed urgently by the National Assembly. Image: Ian Landsberg / Independent Media The EFF wants an urgent debate in Parliament over the alleged failure by the National Conventional Arms Control Committee (NCACC) to prevent South African manufactured weapons from being transferred to Israel. The Red Berets moved the motion earlier this week that the National Assembly debate, as a matter of urgency, the NCACC's failure to uphold domestic and international arms control obligations. MP Carl Niehaus said the National Assembly should note the NCACC's non-implementation of the end-user certificates for arms and ammunition produced by South African companies such as Rheinmetall Denel Munitions (RDM). 'We condemn the export of South African arms to apartheid Israel – a state charged by South Africa with genocide at the International Court of Justice. We reject this complicity as a hypocritical betrayal of our heroic Struggle against apartheid and our human rights commitments,' Niehaus. 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 ✕ The call for the debate comes on the heels of a detailed letter from Niehaus to the Joint Standing Committee on Defence, in which he presented allegations regarding South Africa's non-compliance with international arms control commitments. He had also sent two sets of questions to Minister in the Presidency Khumbudzo Ntshavheni on the matter. In her written response, Ntshavheni said there were no official registers and records indicating any transfer of controlled items to Israel and Ukraine. She said the end-user certificate applied universally to all the countries intending to trade in conventional arms with South Africa. 'To date, the NCACC has not initiated a request for on-site verification. United Nations, through its disarmament structures, thus far did not raise any concern regarding possible diversion or malicious use of controlled items (conventional arms) transferred by South Africa.' She was responding to Niehaus when he asked if countries in Europe and the Middle East, where South African-manufactured weapons are exported, have refused any inspections by the NCACC to monitor whether the end-user certificates are complied with. Ntshavheni said should the need arise, upon reaching consensus with any country suspected of any gross arms violations, inspectors will be deployed accordingly. 'Such deployment may not be considered in countries where there is active international conflict(s).' Meanwhile, Defence Minister Angie Motshekga did not respond when asked by DA MP Chris Hattingh whether she had consulted Ntshavheni regarding the allegation that RDM increased production of NATO-standard 155 mm ammunition primarily for use by Israel and Ukraine. Instead, Motshekga said RDM operated strictly in accordance with national legislative requirements, and that South Africa adhered to a number of international treaties, agreements, and arrangements that have an impact on non-proliferation, disarmament, and arms control. 'There are various international treaties, agreements, and arrangements that have formed part of national legislation that RDM needs to adhere to,' Motshekga said. Hattingh enquired whether the allegation that RDM ammunitions were being used by Israel and Ukraine could have negative diplomatic consequences for South Africa. Motshekga explained that RDM could only supply its products after receipt of the required national South African governmental approval from the NCACC and the required export permits from the Directorate of Conventional Arms Control (DCAC). 'In the supply agreements entered into between RDM and its clients, they are required to issue end-user certificates as required in terms of the NCACC Act. Therefore, RDM is not able to deliver products to clients until the receipt of an end-user certificate and an export permit from the DCAC has been issued,' she said. 'Furthermore, the third party attending to the shipment and delivery can only deliver the products to such address listed in the export licence, and all other legislative requirements are met.' Motshekga insisted that RDM as an ammunition manufacturer was required to adhere to the national legislative requirements. 'No contracts can be executed without approval from the applicable regulatory entity as outlined.' In another development, Sport, Arts and Culture Minister Gayton McKenzie said he and his department were guided by the government's directives on all matters of international relations. 'As such, any minister would act accordingly once the government has made a directive or pronouncement on the matter,' McKenzie said. He was asked whether he would heed the call for a sports boycott in support of the Palestinian struggle against occupation and genocide perpetrated by Israel. McKenzie said he was not in a position to confidently indicate whether the role of sport that led to the liberation of South Africa can similarly be used in the case of Palestine.
