Vladimir Putin’s shadow will not turn into a silhouette. In mid-July, the Russian president gave up his visit to the summit of the Brics (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) which opens on Tuesday. “By mutual agreement, President Vladimir Putin will not attend the summit,” the South African presidency announced in a statement. This declaration came after months of speculation, while Pretoria has so far refused to close the door to the Russian head of state, yet targeted by an international arrest warrant following the invasion of Ukraine.
But why is South Africa so close to Russia? This link, which seems difficult to cut, is it historical? Or is it lodged more in domestic political considerations? 20 minutes takes stock for you thanks to the insight of Camille Martinerie, specialist in South Africa and doctor of English studies at Aix-Marseille University.
How to explain the South African “non-alignment”?
South Africa’s delays in bringing Vladimir Putin to the “Brics and Africa” summit, in which several African countries will take part, have been particularly noticed on the international scene. The arrival of the Russian president, under an arrest warrant from the International Criminal Court (ICC) of which South Africa is a party, would theoretically oblige Pretoria to arrest him if he went to its territory. However, the South African government has long blown hot and cold, ensuring “consider all options”. Pretoria has refused to position itself since the start of the war in Ukraine, assuming a position of non-alignment to the chagrin of its Western allies. A posture that finds, in part, its roots in the history of the southern African country.
“The history of colonialist Russia is very intertwined with that of African nationalism”, confirms Camille Martinerie. “From the beginning of the 20th century, the antenna of the South African Communist Party allied itself with the African National Congress (ANC), in power since 1994 and the end of apartheid, explains the specialist in South Africa and Doctor of English Studies at Aix-Marseille University. In this sense, the USSR can be said to have been a great supporter of the anti-apartheid struggle in South Africa. ” End of June, Branko Brkic, the editor of the South African investigative media Daily Maverick, however, felt that the ANC was making a “historical error”, relativizing the USSR’s support for Nelson Mandela’s ANC, which was fighting against apartheid. Still, it is likely that a “form of loyalty has been put in place”, notes Camille Martinerie.
Is this a choice that makes sense on the domestic political scene?
The ANC is accused of appeasement of the Moscow regime in exchange for money. “The leader of the South African opposition is making these accusations,” confirms Camille Martinerie. Last year, the historic party received more than $800,000 from a manganese mining company owned by a sanctioned Russian tycoon. One of the ANC officials in Johannesburg, however, recalled that the party also received donations from “American businessmen”. “These controversies are difficult to verify. On the other hand, we must take into account the current South African context”, clarifies the specialist in South Africa.
Indeed, the next presidential election will take place in 2024 in South Africa. However, “while there is little chance that the ANC will not be re-elected, there are weaknesses. They could push the party to create a coalition, either with the opposition party or with the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) which has a communist and non-aligned position,” she analyses. The EFF sometimes provokes controversy, its president having thus launched in 2018: “after a white man… we cut the throat of whiteness”. The prospect of a coalition “could explain why the ANC does not want to have a too clear-cut position”, underlines Camille Martinerie who adds that the party “is caught in a vice at the domestic level”.
Why is the choice surprising economically?
“South Africa has long tried to build a leadership role on the African continent. The “non-aligned” position has as much to do with South Africa’s ambition to preserve its interests as that of trying to build an African renaissance,” deciphers Camille Martinerie. However, South Africa is accused, on the contrary, of not preserving its economic interests by refusing to oppose Russia diplomatically. “Economic ties with Russia are weak,” she recalls, while Pretoria’s main trading partner is China, followed by the United States. In the first half of the year, $4.2 billion in exports were traded with Washington, compared to $132 million for Russia, which appears to act as a commercial dwarf for the southern African country.
In his post, the editor of the South African investigative media Daily Maverick was also worried that the South African government would go against his side. “The continued obvious, if tacit, support for Russia will cost South Africa billions of dollars in trade and millions of jobs once some of our largest trading partners reach the point of no return. , which is fast approaching, ”he wrote then. Pretoria’s position, in favor of its 51st trading partner, is also “the subject of controversy in South Africa”, emphasizes Camille Martinerie who adds that within the ANC itself the question of Russia is ” subject of discussion”. It remains to be seen which path Pretoria will take, as the country seems to be trying to preserve its interests as much as possible, tightrope walker between the Western world and African renaissance.