Sisulu slams US envoy
Diplomatic protocols were not observed
SOUTH Africa has been called a “laughing stock” amid a diplomatic scramble to mitigate and take appropriate action after allegations by the United States of America (US) that the country supplied weapons and ammunition to Russia, despite having taken a non-aligned stance on its invasion of Ukraine.
At a media briefing on Thursday, US ambassador to South Africa Reuben Brigety alleged Russia was armed by South Africa with weapons and ammunition that had been loaded on to a Russian cargo ship, the Lady R, at Simon’s Town Naval Base in December last year.
Former minister of defence Lindiwe Sisulu slammed the US ambassador saying he had failed to go through the appropriate diplomatic channels to confirm his information with the appropriate senior government officials.
“It is absolutely wrong that an ambassador resident in our country should not have followed the due processes that are required if his station in our country,” Sisulu said.
Following the ambassador’s allegation, President Cyril Ramaphosa responded that no evidence was provided to support these claims and that an independent inquiry, to be led by a retired judge, would be instituted to investigate the matter. This response left much to be desired by the public and the international community, after Ramaphosa did not issue a clear denial of the allegations.
Department of International Relations and Co-operation (Dirco) spokesperson Clayson Monyela later sought to fill in some gaps, saying both the US Embassy in South Africa and the South African government were “keen to move on”.
Brigety was called to a meeting on Friday with International Relations Minister Naledi Pandor, after which Dirco claimed the US ambassador “apologised unreservedly” for saying SA supplied arms to Russia.
Monyela said, “In our meeting we reminded Brigety that government’s National Conventional Arms Control Committee is on record saying they’ve not approved any sale of arms to Russia, related to the period or incident in question. Therefore, any assertion that ‘South Africa’s (Government) sold arms or is arming Russia’ is factually incorrect.”
At the meeting, Monyela said it was also established that diplomatic protocols and channels were not observed. Brigety’s conduct has been heavily criticised, with calls for him to be recalled to Washington. Brigety then said: “I was grateful for the opportunity to speak with Foreign Minister Pandor this evening and correct any misimpressions left by my public remarks. In our conversation, I re-affirmed the strong partnership between our two countries and the important agenda our Presidents have given us.”
This still was not a direct apology or retraction and when clarity on this was requested, David Feldmann, mission spokesperson at US Embassy Pretoria, said: “We stand by the ambassador’s comments and have nothing more to add.”
Gustavo de Carvalho, a senior researcher on Russia-Africa ties in African Governance and Diplomacy Programme at the South African Institute of International Affairs (SAIIA), said regardless of the veracity of the ambassador’s allegations, the incident had put South Africa’s non-aligned stance regarding the Russia/Ukraine conflict under strain and this had forced the country to reflect on its global position. “It seems the US has factored the risk of this diplomatic fallout into their decision, and if intentional, it appears as a calculated move to elicit a response from South Africa,” he said.
Many believed this situation could significantly influence the upcoming African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) negotiations with the US, and while both SA and the US stood to gain from this act – albeit disproportionately – De Carvalho said the threat of South Africa’s exclusion loomed large, potentially impacting crucial sectors like chemicals, mining, and wine.