Durban - South Africa finds itself in an unfortunate position despite declaring that it has an independent foreign policy and a non-aligned policy, say experts in international affairs.
They were reacting to the criticism aimed at minister in the Presidency Khumbudzo Ntshavheni after she had announced plans to attend the international meeting of high-level officials responsible for security matters in Russia from May 23.
A statement issued by the department of state security said Ntshavheni would engage the relevant authorities on “matters material to the initiatives announced by President Cyril Ramaphosa of the African leaders’ peace mission to Russia and Ukraine”.
“In addition, the minister has sent a team of high-level officials to the Ukraine in preparation of the peace mission,” the statement read.
Six African leaders from the Republic of Congo, Uganda, Senegal, Zambia, Egypt and South Africa are planning to travel to Moscow and Kyiv to lead and facilitate peace talks aimed at resolving the conflict.
The DA said it condemned Ntshavheni’s attendance of the meeting in Russia.
“Given the recent claims made by the US ambassador in South Africa regarding alleged ammunition supply to Russia by South Africa, this visit is yet another diplomatic blunder that could cost South Africa dearly,” DA MP Dianne Kohler-Barnard said.
US ambassador Reuben Brigety publicly announced he had evidence that South Africa had sold arms and ammunition to Russia when a vessel, Lady R, docked at a naval base in Cape Town last year.
However the Russian embassy, in a statement on its website, said Brigety should explain why Russia would need South African-manufactured arms and ammunition that did not match either the types or calibres of the systems in service with Russia’s armed forces.
Monyae said South Africa did not have to explain itself every time it had a relationship with Russia.
“It is unfortunate that SA finds itself in this circumstance where it has to justify its movement and relations based on the fact that a third party is unhappy. No country should have to face that.”
Monyae said Russia had not been sanctioned by the UN and that South Africa’s foreign policy was to influence circumstances towards peace and not destruction.
Another expert, Dr Noluthando Phungula, said the point of contention centred on the country’s “questionable stance on neutrality”.
“Pretoria has, on the one hand, heralded its role as a neutral stance as a possible mediator in the conflict. On the other hand, Pretoria has acted in a way that suggests it is pro-Russia and this has been the case since the beginning of the war in Ukraine.
“This includes Pretoria’s participation in the joint military exercise with Russia and China, among many other questionable acts. This reality stands, regardless of the allegations or lack thereof,” Phungula said.
She said South Africa, as a sovereign state, had the right to participate and engage with other players in the international arena.
“South Africa is a member of BRICS and will continue engaging with its other BRICS counterparts. Due to the fact that Russia is a member of the BRICS, this is bound to invite public scrutiny.
“The bigger and possibly more important question is how SA deals with (Russian President Vladimir) Putin as soon as he lands for the summit. The world is eagerly waiting to see how SA waggles itself out of the conundrum.”