Ramaphosa’s peace mission was misplaced in the first place

Read More

The initiative of seven heads of states and governments to have direct discussions with Ukraine and Russia about the war is to be applauded, but is also worrying. This is nothing but an attempt by President Cyril Ramaphosa and his counterparts in Zambia, Uganda, Senegal, the Republic of Congo, Egypt and the Comoros to “shine” in the absence of a serious settlement or end to the conflict by Western powers. 

It is true that Africa has had a long-standing tradition of speaking out for peace and reconciliation when it mattered the most. But the spirit and manner in which Ramaphosa has decided to recruit his fellow presidents across the continent is questionable. What will an African delegation really achieve in ending this war? Is Ramaphosa desperate for some kind of positive legacy at home, because everything seems to be working against him, from the poor performing economy, to Phala Phala and load-shedding? The peace mission to Moscow and Kyiv was misplaced. 

To understand the urgency of this peace mission it is perhaps important to look at recent events in South Africa. In February,South Africa, China and Russia held a joint military exercise off the port cities of Durban and Richards Bay. The timing of this operation — named Mosi, which means “smoke” in Tswana — attracted much condemnation from the United States and other global powers who accused South Africa of supporting the Kremlin’s invasion of Ukraine. 

But Ramaphosa did not seem moved by such criticism, justifying it through the international relations and cooperation department, which said: “South Africa routinely hosts similar drills with other countries, including France and the US.” This was no surprise to anyone, because South Africa has taken a clear position of non-alignment on Russia’s war in Ukraine, which is reflected by the country’s voting pattern in the United Nations on any resolution concerning the war.   

The US and Nato have put pressure on everyone and are hoping for outright global support for Ukraine in this conflict. To have South Africa and other few African countries abstain or vote against the condemnation of Russia at the UN is unforgivable. This is why, on 11 May, US ambassador to South Africa Reuben Brigety publicly announced that South Africa had loaded weapons and ammunition onto a Russian vessel at Simon’s Town naval base. In essence, he was accusing this government of supplying arms to Russia. It is safe to say that all these events have put pressure on Ramaphosa and his government to show the world that he is not complacent about the war and that his government is committed to neutrality. 

Given the state of South Africa’s economy and the view that the ruling ANC is dysfunctional and that elections will be held next year, Ramaphosa has to think outside the box and hope that he can do something significant between now and next year to win the hearts of the South African people. 

The embarrassment suffered by the South African presidential delegation when it was detained at the Warsaw airport could have been avoided. The security staff did not have the necessary permits for their weapons. Such incompetence on the part of the South African organising team for this peace mission was shocking.

The leaders of the named African countries have seen it fit to travel thousands of kilometres to Moscow and Kyiv at a time when the continent has its own conflicts. Today Sudan is burning, and we have not seen a delegation of heads of states flock to Khartoum in an attempt to arrest the situation. The instability in Somalia demonstrates that African leaders have continued to ignore yet another serious problem at home. Another conflict is the civil war in eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo between the government forces and the M23 rebels. The East African Community has done a remarkable job to negotiate a settlement, laying the groundwork for a possible solution, and now the African Union needs to make this permanent.

Meanwhile, these African countries have taken different positions on the Ukraine war; South Africa, Uganda and the Republic of Congo abstained from a UN resolution this year that condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Zambia and Egypt voted in favour of the resolution, while Senegal did not participate. 

The chairperson of the AU, Senegal’s President Macky Sall, met Russia’s President Vladimir Putin just a few months after the war began, but to no avail. So, what kind of magic will this new delegation bring to Moscow and Kyiv, which will deliver tangible results such as a ceasefire or the initiation of peace talks? 

This peace mission will achieve little or no results at all in terms of ending the Russia-Ukraine war. Moreover, it appears as though this is just an international relations scheme or a geopolitical gimmick by the president of South Africa, to divert attention from the many problems he faces at home. 

Aaron Ng’ambi is a geopolitical analyst and newspaper columnist, leadership instructor and a social entrepreneur. 

The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Mail & Guardian.