OPINION: ‘One China’ policy is sacrosanct

Executive mayor of Tshwane Solly Msimanga. Picture: Thobile Mathonsi/Pretoria News

Executive mayor of Tshwane Solly Msimanga. Picture: Thobile Mathonsi/Pretoria News

Published Jan 7, 2017

Share

Tshwane mayor Solly Msimanga was perhaps trying to emulate Madiba's bravado with his visit to Taiwan, writes Lebogang Seale.

I am tempted to enter the fray over Tshwane mayor Solly Msimanga’s visit to Taiwan, but my heart seems at odds with my head.

My gut tells me I must steer away from the diplomatic controversies and explore the furore over the politics of booze that has been brewing since Monday. This follows Gauteng Economic Development MEC Lebogang Maile’s seemingly spur-of-the-moment announcement that the provincial liquor board had relaxed the trading hours for licensed in-house liquor traders to coincide with the ANC’s 105th anniversary bash this weekend.

So I will leave the Msimanga matter to the experts in the politics of international relations. I suppose they are better placed to explain how the mayor’s sojourn to Taipei has highlighted the diplomatic and moral dilemma that individual states often face in maintaining bilateral relations with their trading partners without compromising their sovereignty.

The expert opinion-makers in that specific area are best qualified to explain that it is almost an inevitability, in the delicate international relations chess game, that the less powerful countries often become so vulnerable that they are more likely to pander to the demands of their more powerful counterparts.

Those who might view the condemnation of Msimanga’s escapades to the Far East as a storm in a teacup, the specialists would say, must be reminded of Pretoria’s decision to declare the Dalai Lama persona non grata on our shores.

That case study will show just how sacrosanct Pretoria’s “One China” policy is, that allowing “rebellious subjects” like Msimanga to visit a breakaway state could be viewed as treason, as the ANC has argued.

Msimanga might have shot to political prominence recently with the municipal polls, but he appeals to many as an astute politician good enough to understand what’s at stake in these diplomatic ties. The experts might therefore point out that it’s hard to imagine any business motivation for Msimanga’s trip, except, of course, to expose Pretoria’s diplomatic frailties and embarrass the ANC-led government. In that context, visiting Taipei could have been more a case of political grandstanding than his claim of exploring investment opportunities.

And by defying local protocols, some might argue, Msimanga might have been trying to emulate the bravado of Nelson Mandela who, almost two decades ago, placed his personal friendship with the likes of Fidel Castro and Muammar Gaddafi above economic ties by visiting Cuba and Libya respectively. Castro and Gaddafi were two of the Western powers’ most vilified of leaders, so Mandela would have expected some backlash.

Msimanga must have, while attempting to sail the choppy seas of global trade, thought about Mandela’s defiance when he told the US off for showing irritation with his visit to Libya. “How can they have the arrogance to dictate to us who our friends should be?” Mandela asked.

But Msimanga is not a Mandela. He should, like me perhaps, stay clear of the incontestable SA-China diplomatic relations.

Now, as Pretoria mulls over the best possible way to tame any of its public officials intent on causing further damage to its relations with Beijing or any of its trading partners, let me rather delve into the issue of extending the in-house liquor trading hours.

It has caused the ANC public embarrassment as it gave the suggestion that the governing party’s event was also a drinking fest, given that Maile is one of the party’s public representatives in Gauteng. It’s a spectacular gaffe that the ANC could not afford at this stage, given that it is still smarting from a disastrous municipal election and fractured by factionalism.

Unsurprisingly, the party was quick to get on to a public relations damage control overdrive.

This mortification of booze and binge drinking came against the backdrop of the #WeAreANC, a disastrous public relations exercise that blew up in its face.

“Ours is a people-centred government. Because we are a caring government, we always take inputs of the public at large seriously and respond accordingly,” said Maile.

So why didn’t they in the first place? And if the first statement is true, how does the next quote fit in?

“Even if we believed in the correctness of our decisions we have a moral obligation to listen carefully to the reaction of the public that we serve and align our decisions accordingly.” How can a decision by a representative body be correct if the people it represents think otherwise? It’s a perfectly apologetic non-apology.

It would appear that the MEC would do well to remember English writer Samuel Johnson’s words: “This is one of the disadvantages of wine. It makes a man mistake words for thoughts.”

Maile’s remarks show the tendency to conflate party and government and just how politics and booze mix in the corridors of power. It also exposes government’s ambivalent policy on liquor trading and its lackadaisical attitude in curbing the deleterious effects of alcohol.

As Will Crooks observed: “If you chloroform men day by day with drink they care not for the conditions under which they live”.

Saturday Star

Related Topics: