Published in TimesLive on 30 July 2025 as South Africa, are we informed?
South Africa faces a difficult decision due to a series of demands from US President Donald Trump to restore RSA-US trade relations. The conditions set by the US challenge the core principles of the dominant post-apartheid transformation paradigm, which considers them essential to the liberation struggle. Black economic empowerment and land restitution as national grievances are high on the agenda of post-liberation political commitments.
Failure
or capitulation by the ANC to meet these two core demands essentially
redefines it as a liberation movement. It would be hard to imagine ANC
political rhetoric without referencing land and economic empowerment. The ANC's
history is characterised by pursuing land restitution and economic
inclusion. Its most threatening political opponents lie in wait to push these
two issues as a programme.
Among
the US demands, what has proven to be the most emotive and arguably the easiest
to address to open avenues for engagement with the USA is the ANC distancing
itself from the 'Kill the Boer song' and declaring farm killings a priority
crime. The concept of 'kill the Boer' and its unfortunate association with farm
killings can no longer be argued away from its hate crime vortex of
criminality. For whatever reason, the farm killing numbers demand unconditional
attention to the crime.
The
demand for the ANC to be unequivocal about the Kill the Boer song is considered
in Afrikaner circles as the point of departure in acknowledging them as having
a legitimate stake to be considered indigenous. There is an understanding of
land claims where evidence of untoward dispossession resulting from an already globally
criminalised public policy process, apartheid. The demand calls for expropriation,
for public interest or otherwise, to be the last step of any process after
compensation at fair market value has been fully exhausted. If it does not
respond to these demands, South Africa faces a general 30% tariff increase, a
zero rate on raw minerals, and a potential 10% if it does not meet the
BRICS-related conditions. This will have dire consequences on an economy that
is in intensive care.
The
US demands can arguably be characterised as 'colonial centering', which refers
to prioritising or uplifting colonialism's gains over the imperatives of
decolonisation. This recent stance permeates US foreign policy and
international trade relations. It is a reality that stands toe-to-toe with
South Africa's transformation resolve. The sovereign interpretation of its
Constitution is under pressure from how the US interprets it based on its
international trade interests in the context of Donald Trump.
The
South African constitutional and democratic order, which has essentially been
about decentering colonialism and apartheid, is forced to recognise how the
international systems perpetuate colonialism and apartheid. There are glaring
signs of the global international system and order being undermined to
underscore this new reality. Land restitution will not be allowed to thrive
when a new dispossession drive is being consolidated, including by allies of
the democratic order.
To
the extent that centering colonialism applies to South Africa, and considering
that a political settlement and accord have taken place, decentering would
require serious and legally enforceable measures. Beyond the technical
correctness of what the constitutional order provides, there should be
compassionate listening to each other on straightforward issues, such as
unconditionally stopping the singing of the 'kill-the-Boer' song and declaring
farm murders a national priority crime. Decentering colonialism and apartheid starts
with a Madiba-type humility. It is not enough to push for wholesale
transformation that does not recognise the need to carry everyone along.
It
should not be assumed that South Africans share a common understanding of the past
'injustices'; the country must recognise and heal the divisions it must heal.
The recognise-admit-take responsibility continuum that characterises most
decentering endeavours would have resolved a stalemate if followed to the end. A
national dialogue facilitates a common understanding and appreciation of recognising
past injustices.
As
the 1st of August 2025 approaches and the reality of US tariffs hits the South
African economy, it would be prudent to ask if this could have been
avoided. Without the benefit of a post 1st August 2025
experience, whose impact might reach the man in the street six or ten months
later, 'we-the-people' are grossly less informed about what is happening. As
citizens, we are tethered to a political rhetoric of a divided government of
national unity expected to drive national and international relations and
cooperation policy. National interest in South Africa is still a party
political matter; we might still be a nation-state without a nation.
The fierce succession
battles within the majority party of the governing coalition make us, as a
society, fastened to the words of emotionally overwrought, mercurial and
unpredictable dominant political leadership. We might be dealing with a context
where everything about US-RSA relations is seen regarding the impact this will
have on individual political parties, and never about RSA.
Comments
Post a Comment