Recent events, notably the Russia/Ukraine and Hamas/Israel wars, have raised serious questions about the wisdom and efficacy of the ANC government’s anti-Western foreign policy. Particularly: how it aligns with our critical national interests and the implications of its naïve interpretation of the future directions of change in international geopolitics.

No doubt, the government’s double-speak and denialism have landed in a minefield of contradiction and mistrust. As a result, South Africa’s foreign policy has been degraded into a veritable exposition of smoke and mirrors.

True to his ambivalent best, in his latest newsletter President Cyril Ramaphosa proclaims that our relations with the US are hunky-dory… “the potential is great to develop relations further between the two states”. But this is not what we see in practice.

Ramaphosa and his ANC government are staunchly anti-West, ideologically in the same camp as Presidents Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping of Russia and China, respectively. Yet, SA brands its foreign policy as being non-aligned!

Read more in Daily Maverick: South Africa’s foreign policy has gone rogue and needs an urgent reset

The Secretary-General of the ANC, Fikile Mbalula, heartily proclaimed in Moscow (where he was attending a conference in February at the invitation of Putin) that South Africa was “ready to sacrifice its relationships with other friends for the sake of its friendship with Russia”. He was not repudiated by the ANC, the President included.

Mbalula was in Moscow the same day that Alexei Navalny was murdered but remained silent about it. On 21 March 2024, Ramaphosa sent his warm congratulations to Putin for his phony re-election as Russian president. Indeed, these cozy affiliations with the Kremlin have lately developed in a pattern of special relations as Moscow became a preferred destination of ANC cadres. Ramaphosa’s bromance with Putin has no consequence other than being a useful propaganda tool for the latter… Lenin’s “useful idiot”.

The President should put his money where his mouth is. The signs from Washington are all but encouraging. His prevarications ignored the fact that the US mood has changed, and relations with South Africa are bound to suffer. The House of Representatives is presently working on a bill envisaging a comprehensive analysis of bilateral relations between the US and SA. What particularly irks the US is the way their strenuous sanctions against the Kremlin are daringly circumvented by the ANC, acting as Putin’s lapdog.

Read more in Daily Maverick: To see how a non-aligned foreign policy works, South Africa should look at BRICS partner India

Therefore, based on the ANC’s rhetoric and actions, the government’s traditional, non-aligned foreign policy has been replaced by an overt alliance with Russia, China and their minions. This shift in direction has been caused by serious miscalculations and misperceptions by the ANC. As the saying goes, “foreign policy starts at home”. Such misperceptions are inevitably and inextricably tied to the neglect of pressing domestic challenges, particularly in the fields of economy and development.

Robert Jervis (Perception and Misperception in International Politics, revised, Harvard University Press, 2017) applied cognitive psychology to foreign policy making. Perception is basically the ability of decision-makers to learn from history, while misperception is the inability to do so.

Misperception is commonly influenced by factors such as bias, incomplete information, misinformation, aversion, ideological myopia, intellectual inability, and the like. Particularly striking about South Africa’s diplomacy is its intellectual isolation and dearth of knowledge of contemporary thinking by noted experts in the field of foreign relations. They simply follow the Putin and Xi dictates as their holy script.

Some persistent misperceptions about the West have become, over time, the cornerstone of the ANC government’s foreign policy. Following are a few illustrative examples:

Misperception 1

The West was indifferent to the ANC’s liberation Struggle. However, an uncomfortable reality that the ANC has failed to comprehend is that their ascension to power was largely due to Western initiatives and pressure on the apartheid regime for change.

The notion that an armed struggle and revolution would topple apartheid did not happen. Change via violent revolution was a manifestation of Marxist ideology propagated by the USSR and the ANC. Instead, the apartheid regime realised its hold on political power was tenuous and that a negotiated settlement was preferable to a destructive Marxist-inspired armed struggle.

Two factors sped up dramatic regime change in South Africa: first, concerted pressure by the American government, notably the Reagan Administration’s sanction package (the Anti-Apartheid Act), and second, the fall of the Berlin Wall which signalled the Soviet Union’s collapse as a superpower and the end of mischief-making by its surrogates, Cuba and East Germany, in southern Africa.

The reality is that Western pressure, via a negotiated settlement, delivered credible change as well as an intact economy and infrastructure as the ANC took power in 1994. Economic growth quickly followed once Western sanctions against South Africa were lifted and international relations restored.

Unfortunately, 30 years of escalating misery followed. As Barney Mthombothi wrote pithily in the Sunday Times on 24 March 2024, this was followed by the wrecking ball of ANC looting and destruction. He concluded, “we never had a democracy in SA, just a blank cheque for a clique”.

Misperception 2

The unipolar balance of power, dominated by the US, has been replaced by a multipolar system with the rise of China as a superpower. In a previous article (“SA’s Potemkin foreign policy needs fundamental overhaul”, Business Day, 16 May 2023) we argued that the unipolar system remains in place in defiance of rhetoric to the contrary.

Despite the misperception that the world has shifted to multipolarity in international relations, the military and economic power of the US, which constitutes the fundamentals within the balance of power standings, continue to be superior to the power of China, Russia and other states. (See Stephen G Brooks and William C Wohlforth, The Myth of Multipolarity, Foreign Affairs May|June 2023).

It appears that the ANC government simplistically believes that if you utter an untruth repeatedly, it will eventually be regarded as a fact. For those pundits of a multipolar world order, it may be instructive to read the analysis of Kenneth Waltz (The Theory of International Politics, Cambridge University Press online, 2014) about the inherent instability of multipolarity.

Misperception 3

The ANC government is committed to the long-term maintenance of democracy in South Africa. The ANC’s ideological commitment to the National Democratic Revolution (NDR) rather than the South African Constitution of 1994 has received scant attention in the media.

The NDR is a series of ANC policy documents over the past 30 years which outline the ANC’s intention to transform South Africa. The thrust is to change the South African political system, economy and society into a socialist system dominated by an omnipotent government that will control all aspects of public life.

Despite the NDR’s pretension as a democratic document, it is in terms of ideology and terminology a Marxist document harkening back to the ANC and its partner, the South African Communist Party, which called for a Soviet-style system in South Africa.

The work of Anthea Jeffery (Countdown to Socialism, 2023, Jonathan Ball; Research and Policy Brief: The National Democratic Revolution (NDR), IRR) spells out in detail the ANC’s contempt for democratic principles such as individual rights, transparency, and accountability. According to Jeffery “the ANC sees itself not as an ordinary political party bound by the rules of the political game but as a national liberation movement responsible for the implementation of the NDR and thus uniquely entitled to rule. This makes it contemptuous of Parliament, opposition parties, a free press, an autonomous SABC, independent civil society, and adverse electoral outcomes, as in the Western Cape”.

Furthermore, “the ANC does not regard itself as bound by the Constitution. It sees this not as a solemn pact but simply as a tactical compromise which can readily be changed as the balance of power shifts in the ANC’s favour”.

Internationally, it is therefore not a surprise that the ANC government feels more comfortable dealing with governments such as Russia and China, with a subservient and suppressed populace, tolerance for corruption, and more authoritarian and unchallenged control of public life.

Misperception 4

International rankings/indexes have a built-in bias against South Africa as a non-Western country and therefore are suspect. In examining international indexes, Western democracies’ rankings and scores tend to be superior to non-Western countries, particularly African countries.

Given South Africa’s status as a high middle-income country, the nation is an observable under-performer regarding numerous political/economic, business, and social rankings, including such areas as transparency, governance, competitiveness, risk management, employment and logistics.

The crux of the matter is that a country’s domestic performance regarding political, economic and social matters is a crucial foundation for these international rankings. The failure of ANC government policies in providing basic services and advancing public welfare have been well documented and are reflected in various rankings.

Despite the proliferation of international rankings in recent years, such rankings do provide a valuable benchmark for success and improvements. It is useful for South Africa to compare its performance vis-à-vis peer countries among emerging and developing countries.

Indexes also provide a tool for interest groups, the media and opposition parties in South Africa to hold the ANC government accountable for the effect of their policies and their numerous failures.

The misperception involving rankings/indexes may have a more deeply seated prejudice. From the perspective of political psychology, the ANC government’s persistent underperformance on international indexes may facilitate a sense of low self-esteem. Low rankings on such indexes may further a sense of competitive disadvantage, a sense of lower status and worthiness.

Psychologists caution that low self-esteem could encourage a sense of extreme insecurity, over-sensitivity to criticism, attention-seeking, unexplained or extreme attachments, inability to carry out responsibilities, and aggressiveness when disrespected by others.

The ANC’s blind loyalty to Russia may be an example of “extreme attachments”. Perhaps the ANC’s insistence that they are best suited to run everything in South Africa is an exaggeration of their ability that shields the reality of the “inability to carry out responsibilities”. The foreign policy behaviour of the ANC government obviously raises many interesting questions which require further investigation by political psychologists.

Misperception 5

The ANC’s ability to influence international issues is substantial. According to Robert Jervis, a common misperception in foreign policy is that countries overestimate their capability to play an effective problem-solving role in international politics.

The ANC government has been the beneficiary of the Mandela syndrome for the first decade of its rule in South Africa. Mandela was universally hailed as a great statesman and, as a consequence, South Africa was elevated to the status of a credible actor regarding moral issues pertaining to human rights, racism and national aspirations of countries in Africa and the global South.

Sadly, subsequent ANC administrations have badly tarnished that once-promising start. South Africa’s actions as a good international player regarding human rights and national aspirations of the oppressed reveal a serious case of cognitive dissonance.

The ANC’s poor record regarding human rights abuse in many developing countries, the overt alignment with authoritarian regimes such as Russia and China on power politics, and the serious existence of domestic mismanagement and corruption, have soured the international community’s view of South Africa as an important voice for morality.

South Africa’s concern about the rights of Palestinians is driven by its anti-Western view of Israel. At the same time, the ANC government is unconcerned about human rights abuses in states it regards as friends, notably Sudan, Zimbabwe, China, Myanmar and Russia’s war in the Ukraine.

On a number of international issues, perhaps in an attempt to deflect from its own domestic failures, the ANC government is attempting to play in a league above its capabilities and has “poked the bear” of powerful actors such as the US, European Union and UK.

The ANC’s cosy relationship with Russia (Ukraine; Lady R; Putin’s invitation to the BRICS summit in South Africa; joint military exercises with Russia and China etc), is a manifestation of an anti-Western foreign policy and a serious deviation from its traditional non-aligned orientation.

Points to ponder for a revised foreign policy

South Africa needs to pursue a foreign policy that is primarily in the best interests of the country and its people. A consistent and honest re-embracement of professed non-alignment may be the best course of action for a number of reasons.

First, South Africa should not openly side with blocs competing for control of the global political order. Siding with Russia and China in an anti-Western strategy will come at a potentially high cost for the country.

Straining the nation’s extensive economic ties with the US, EU, and UK may not be a prudent choice. Instead, South Africa should follow a neutral, non-ideological “transactional” foreign policy, pursuing national wealth creation, diversify its economic relations with not only the West but also China, India, Africa, Latin America and other Asian countries.

Any trade, foreign direct investment, government-private or inter-governmental partnerships beneficial for the country should be pursued with vigour, regardless of the source of the relationship. Pragmatism instead of ideology should be the guideline for all foreign policy decisions.

Second, the interests of the public should always trump the interests of the ruling ANC elite. The ANC government’s predatory self-interest (corruption) and ideological prejudices (fealty to Russia and China) serve the inflated self-important, attention-seeking politicos and do nothing to improve the lives of ordinary citizens.

The myriad of domestic problems should always be prioritised over the pursuit of esoteric goals such as an ideology, the interest of Africa or the posturing as the saviour of the human rights and political aspirations of international groups.

Third, flowing from the previous point, the prime focus of all ANC policies, domestic and foreign, should be to address arguably South Africa’s biggest problem — finding jobs for the unemployed. It is appropriate to remind our leaders that South Africa has the highest unemployment rate in the world.

All foreign policy decisions should start with the question: will it create more jobs for South Africans? Employed citizens will start a virtuous cycle in South Africa by improving standards of living, reduce poverty, promote economic growth, and reduce demeaning dependence on the government for meagre subsidies. DM

Jay van Wyk is Professor Emeritus in International Business at Pittsburg State University, Kansas, USA and former Professor and Director of the International Studies Unit at Rhodes University.

Gerrit Olivier is Professor Emeritus at the University of Pretoria and former South African ambassador to the Soviet Union/Russia and Kazakhstan.