SA and Nigeria, stop the petty point-scoring

President Jacob Zuma welcomes Nigeria's then-president, Goodluck Jonathan, to Tuynhuys in 2013. The writer says the leaders of Nigeria and South Africa could have offered olive branches after the Lagos church disaster and the xenophobic violence. Picture: GCIS

President Jacob Zuma welcomes Nigeria's then-president, Goodluck Jonathan, to Tuynhuys in 2013. The writer says the leaders of Nigeria and South Africa could have offered olive branches after the Lagos church disaster and the xenophobic violence. Picture: GCIS

Published May 3, 2015

Share

The biggest players owe it to the rest of Africa to set the tone to safeguard stability and progress, writes Victor Kgomoeswana.

Johannesburg - I read with relief that “South Africa and Nigeria have pledged to continue to work together for the good of their people and the continent as a whole”. Before seeing this article on SANews.gov.za, my blood pressure was soaring at the sight of Africa’s two biggest economies fussing and fighting like delinquent spouses.

Before saying too much, I have to put it out there: South Africa must stop taking on Nigeria, because it cannot; and Nigeria has to learn to be more measured in asserting its status as the No 1 economy by size of gross domestic product and population. Here is why I say so.

Last weekend ended with the news that Nigeria had recalled its Acting High Commissioner to South Africa, Martin Cobham, and the Deputy High Commissioner, Uche Ajulu-Okeke. Explanations included claims by the federal government of Nigeria that the recall was standard practice.

The two representatives had been summoned, the federal government explained, to brief parliament on the violence against African immigrants in South Africa.

This action was bad diplomacy on the part of Nigeria, if we consider that diplomacy is defined as “the art and practice of conducting international relations, as in negotiating alliances, treaties, and agreements”.

Which part of diplomacy requires a country to recall its representatives because seven immigrants have been killed in xenophobic attacks? But South Africa seemed to believe that one bad act of diplomacy deserved another.

On April 26, the response by the Department of International Relations left much to be desired.

Nothing wrong with the opening paragraph of the response, which said, “a government resorts to such an extraordinary diplomatic step to express outrage at actions or behaviour of another government”.

But I knew the response was headed the wrong way when the statement went on: “We are not sure which actions or behaviour of the South African government the Nigerian government is protesting.”

We are not sure? In diplomacy, when you are not sure, do not comment. It got worse when it opened old wounds about how, “when 84 of our citizens perished on Nigerian soil, we did not blame the Nigerian government for the deaths and more than nine months’ delay in the repatriation of the bodies of our fallen compatriots, or for the fact that when these bodies eventually returned, they were in a state that they could not be touched or viewed as required by our burial practice”.

Well, why did South Africa not act more assertively back then? Explanations ranged from sensitivities around religion and death and difficulty in identifying the bodies to allegations of arms being exchanged between the two countries. Granted, the delay was unwarranted and inconsiderate of the needs of the bereaved families.

However, did South Africa not respond in the hopes of a tit for tat when something similar happened here in South Africa? After all, no Nigerian was killed in April’s episode of Afrophobia.

Respectfully, the statement by the department should have restricted itself to what was officially communicated by Nigeria.

Nigeria for its part showed a lack of restraint. Why rush to recall without a thorough calculation of what the implications were likely to be?

Why not send a fact-finding team to South Africa to indicate a serious intent to act as the biggest member of the African family? Why not get our minister’s counterpart to call, or the president to call President Jacob Zuma? The two leaders finally spoke to resolve the matter.

It is a sad miscalculation that Nigeria did not explore the many other options before recalling or “summoning for a briefing” its representatives in South Africa. There is a symbolic impact of such a move if a country wants to be the real leader of a continent.

Here is a simple illustration of my frustration with how Nigeria and South Africa keep going at each other. When a husband and wife are fighting, exchanging blows in full view of the children, they cause panic in the home and destabilise the neighbourhood.

Visitors will naturally suspend plans for visits or leave if they are in the house.

Africa needs investment: intra-African and from elsewhere.

In the same week as this diplomatic soap opera played out, the Fitch Ratings agency pronounced that Nigerian banks would withstand the fall in commodity prices.

This was meant to reassure the world that the country was increasingly becoming resilient and less dependent on commodities; a sign of economic diversification and stability.

The Nigerian Ports Authority announced a drop in cargo dwell time from 10 to three days, meaning the cost and time of exports and imports had fallen dramatically.

These are signs that the continent’s largest economy is modernising itself.

The US no longer buys Nigerian oil, implying that Nigeria needs to find African customers for its natural resource. Companies such as telecommunications giant MTN are what they are thanks to their forays into Nigeria.

Nigerian banks, such as Access and Zenith, are growing into the rest of the continent.

In brief, as Africa’s top two economies, Nigeria and South Africa must stop bickering over issues and learn to solve problems in a civil manner without temperamental interludes such as we saw this week or with the visa debacle months ago.

Germany, the EU’s largest economy, never goes on a needless stand-off with France; that is why it is taking a lead in resolving the Greek crisis. Reason? To keep the EU solid and sound as an economic bloc.

Why can Nigeria and South Africa not realise that they need each other more than the petty ego contests about which of them is Africa’s best or biggest? Because that is what is at the heart of all this.

South Africa stood to lose if MTN’s offices were targeted by anti-xenophobia demonstrators in Abuja. In Malawi, some South African shops were boycotted in retaliation for what was happening to African immigrants in South Africa.

The Southern African Development Community meeting tackled this issue, to its credit, without any members of the bloc resorting to recalling their ambassadors to South Africa.

The story of xenophobia will be resolved. For this to happen, Africans have to remember that the borders that divide us were imposed on us at the Berlin Conference in 1884-1885. There was no African interest served by the carving up of Africa among the colonial powers back then; just as there is nothing progressive about exaggerating the nation state mentality at the expense of African unity.

This unity is best served if the biggest members of the kraal, Nigeria and South Africa, start behaving like leaders. The alternative is to waste more time in advancing the cause of Africa’s economic rebirth and integration.

So, Nigeria and South Africa, stop it now – for good!

Lest we forget: this part focuses on snippets of African history and icons for inspiration

April 27 was a special day in Africa. It is the only day I know of on which three countries celebrate their freedom or independence. South Africa turned 21 on the same day as Sierra Leone and Togo in west Africa celebrated their independence days, turning 55 and 56.

For South Africa, it was the second Freedom Day celebration without our founding father, Madiba.

It was also symbolic that a few days after Freedom Day, a Pretoria court made a groundbreaking ruling in favour of an application by Robin Stransham-Ford to be helped legally to die – demonstrating the power of our constitution.

Condolences to the family of Stransham-Ford, who died shortly before the ruling.

Workers of the world also celebrated May Day this week.

These are the people who built the Taj Mahal, the pyramids of Egypt, the Suez Canal, the Statue of Liberty, the Union Buildings, the Gautrain and Parliament.

They drive our buses or trains. They wash our clothes and cook our food.

They sweep the streets we walk and drive on, raise our children, and drill the rock deep underground for us to enjoy the jewellery we take for granted.

They clean our toilets, walk our dogs, pack our groceries, milk our cows for us to enjoy ice cream and yoghurt; they work those cocoa and coffee plantations for the chocolate and cappuccino we relish.

When something is wrong, they sacrifice a share of their meagre wages to strike for change.

In our free South Africa, let us remember to thank a worker for our convenience, comfort, safety and freedom.

* Kgomoeswana is author of Africa is Open for Business, anchor of CNBC Africa’s weekly show Africa Business News, and anchor of the daily show Power Hour on PowerFM. He writes in his personal capacity.

** The views expressed here are not necessarily those of Independent Media.

The Sunday Independent

Related Topics: