African Union needs SA leadership
SIR — Mzukisi Qobo’s opinion piece (AU chairmanship could damage SA’s credibility, July 27) opens up a useful debate. I believe he is quite wrong in his assessment. The African Union (AU) chairmanship will enhance SA’s credibility, not damage it.
Among the achievements of Thabo Mbeki, who was ably assisted by foreign minister Nkosazana DlaminiZuma, was the transformation of this country from the new boy at the table to a major player in Africa, trusted on all sides to perform a significant peacemaking and peacekeeping role.
Our foreign policy was aimed at Africa first, and many initiatives, some of them successful but others less so, were taken to promote Africa and its interests in the councils of the world. SA has followed an unusual path in international politics: sometimes our own obvious or immediate interests have been subordinated to the larger interests of the continent. We have also been prepared to put money, energy and resources behind other African countries in the pursuit of peace and stability.
All of this has enabled SA to punch well above its weight in the world and to achieve successes, some of them now belonging to President Jacob Zuma and his International Relations and Co-operation Minister, Maite Nkoana-Mashabane.
While punching above its weight in the international sphere, SA has consistently maintained a lower profile in Africa, as Mr Qobo states. He says, in effect, that this gives one influence greater than positional leadership does. I beg to differ. It is all very well being an influential factor on the sidelines but there is no substitute for power in determining outcomes.
One of the frustrations endured by South African diplomats and policy makers over the past number of years was the failure of the AU to live up to its promise of a new beginning as an effective body, able and willing to play a role in the world that would raise the voice of Africa and win the respect and recognition that a continent-wide body should have.
SA’s quiet role and its untiring efforts to promote Africa while never breaking ranks or endangering African solidarity failed to nudge the AU in the desired direction and were in some respects counterproductive. Some countries seemed to feel that they could ignore us when it suited them, but come running to Daddy when they needed a bail-out. SA’s soft voice was sometimes interpreted as a sign of weakness or unwillingness to be anything other than a charming and helpful source of advice, troops, money and effort.
We read constantly that SA’s economy is falling behind some of our larger competitors; that we are no longer the gateway to Africa; that others speak as authentic voices for and on behalf of the continent.
Our country has already pursued the role that Mr Qobo wants it to follow now. What we need is a new engagement with Africa by a confident SA that does not apologise for being a leader. If the AU needed new leadership, as it clearly did, SA was absolutely right in coming forward, in the absence of other credible candidates, with Dr Dlamini-Zuma. The commission which she will chair acts as a secretariat for the AU and it runs major and crucial programmes like trade integration, infrastructure development, agriculture, peace, security and political affairs. She is a gifted and highly experienced politician, foreign affairs practitioner and administrator. If she cannot put the AU on a better footing, then no one can.
SA needs to stride out in Africa doing what we can to promote peace and good government at home, at the AU itself and everywhere on this continent. We need to be looking for markets for our goods and doing everything possible to improve interAfrican trade dramatically. We need to be bringing in tourists and students; seeking opportunities for investment and development, and giving value for money to those who do business with us. In that way, our foreign policy will complement and underpin our national priority of providing work for our people. A shy reticence will not help us achieve this.