Parliament handbook on Foreign Policy launch

Meeting report

Ms Sanusha Naidu, Senior Research Associate: IGD, stated that her organisation has been engaging with the Committee for a very long time. The main thing has been to look at the foreign policy of SA and to recognise the role of oversight that Parliament plays. The handbook seeks to help parliamentary committee members to understand how the SA foreign policy is premised, its aims and objectives, its principles, and it unpacks developments in the SA diplomacy. The handbook further highlights concepts and acronyms in foreign diplomacy. She concluded that this was the beginning of strengthening partnership with the Committee.

The Chairperson stated that the book the IGD compiled is a 20-year reflection. It is going to be a useful document for Members to understand complex concepts and policies – internally and externally. Role actors should always make the public aware of the impact the diplomats have on their lives.

Elected public representatives are expected to interpret for the masses complex policies. The Parliament is there to complement and enrich policies. Members of Parliament have the ability to bring experience to bilateral and multilateral conflict prevention. The IPU 2014 survey shows that most Members of Parliament have roles to play in ratifying international agreements. But it is difficult for the Committee to attend meetings of international organisations like the AU and other international missions though it tries to do that at least once in three or six months. It is a good idea that public representatives make the general SA public understands what foreign policy is all about.

Dr Lesley Masters, Senior Researcher/Lecturer, SARChl Chair for African Diplomacy and Foreign Policy: University of Johannesburg, indicated that literature on the SA foreign policy is aplenty and there are many different versions and inputs. The idea behind the book was to put together all the literature available in an easy language to understand, to put the information in a simple form, and to provide the explanation of acronyms. The book has a map and graphics about the countries of the world. The purpose is to build engagement with Parliament. It shows we have a vibrant parliament; and we are alive and evolving. Parliament is a huge asset for the SA public with regard to oversight and international relations. It provides a voice for the people.

Dr Philani Mthembu, Senior Researcher: IGD, informed the attendees that foreign policy was not a domain of parliament but it is the responsibility of the executive. Now there have been a growing number of role actors in the area of oversight. There have been demonstrations in some other countries where people wanted to engage with their governments so as to know how global things were going to affect their lives.

A book like the Parliamentary Handbook on Foreign Policy tries to ensure that not all of us are expending energies on domestic affairs but with what the government is negotiating globally and how this is going to affect them. The challenge is on when the government has to keep sensitive information on what it is doing in order to negotiate but at the same time it has to inform people about the negotiation process, its challenges and experiences.

Government has to find a way of keeping the public informed through private conversations with stakeholders, researchers, etc so as to avoid a negative backlash so that researchers and communicators could write informed analyses and to let people know where domestic and foreign policies start and end. Although it is difficult or impossible to do oversight on 106 missions, it is important to have regional meetings in order to report domestically about where our foreign policy is going and its challenges. As a country we would be able to navigate what the challenges are in those global negations.
Professor Scarlett Cornelissen, Lecturer in the Department of Political Science: University of Stellenbosch, wanted to know whether the national interest was overlapping with public interest and wondered who was taking the decision for this. She stated there have been two prevailing features in the SA foreign policy over the past 20/21 years concerned. One: the growing centralisation in the foreign policy making apparatus, centred specifically on the Executive leadership (the national presidents). This was in part Constitutionally mandated, but also meant that the personalities and public personas of each of the three main presidents had major impacts on the SA foreign policy pursuits over the years.
Two: there has been what foreign policy scholars of the SA foreign policy have identified as the growing democratic deficit. This deficit is defined in terms of the impact that other constituencies (such as civil society, Parliament, etc) can have in the making of foreign policy. These two features have been connected over the past two decades and she indicated that the role of Parliamentary oversight in foreign policy should be coupled by participatory representation and its role should be effective.
She mentioned that during the reign of President Zuma, engagement with other emerging powers became more central to our foreign policy goals and national interests. She asked whether we are engaging strategically with emerging powers, whether our engagement is largely responsive/reactive to the interests of other powers, or whether we are indeed proactively setting international agendas too.
The shift from the Millenium Development Goals (MDGs) to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) signals in terms of the international development landscape the role of new donors and the global governance architectures set up to operationalise the main goals of the SDGs. The point was made that appropriate global governance structures were required to accomplish the shift from the MDGs to the SDGs and she raised the question what this meant for SA's foreign policy in the years ahead.
Discussion
Mr S Mokgalapa (ANC) commented that the handbook is helping the country to move forward and it is for the fast and furious. The book mentioned nothing about trade and regionalism because the world is moving towards regionalism. He wanted to know about the national interest of South Africa in foreign policy.

Dr Mthembu said ‘national interest’ should be discussed broadly and if it is not discussed broadly, it is going to be a term that is going to be abused and not give citizens information. It is only in platforms like these that it needs to be discussed and defined. The national interests of South Africa, he believes, are in peace, security and development. It is important to have an ongoing discussion on national interest with stakeholders like political parties, civil society, etc because most people in SA are inward looking as they do not know what is happening outside and what the president is doing abroad.

The Chairperson added there is a need to make a broad definition for ‘national interest’. It is an evolving phenomenon. It could be argued that policymakers during the past two world wars were pursuing foreign policies under the pretext of national interest like the unseating of a president of another country. ‘National interest’ depends on whom the president of the country is and what the president wants to pursue. For example, the leader of the former National Party saw the African frontline states as enemies because the leader believed those countries were gagging up against South Africa.

Mr L Mpumlwana (ANC) said there would always be different views on ‘national interest’. This issue has opened floodgates. In SA the most difficult thing is to have one mission. For a long time we have been having many missions and to pretend there is one, it is a dream. For instance, there is funding that is coming into the country to pursue the interests of the funders. When we talk of ‘national interest’ it is important to ask what the ‘national interest’ of SA is and that of those that pump money into the country. We should first define ourselves and what our interests are as Africans.

Dr Masters said when it comes to funding it is bit tricky because when you are funded by the government, you seem to be too close to it. And if you were funded externally, you would be associated with the external agent.

A member of the public asked what the potential is of democratising the foreign policy when the ANC is the dominant party in the National Assembly.

The Chairperson indicated that every citizen would never understand ‘national interest’, because of its secretive nature. In some instances the citizens do not have to know if their country wants to improve its defence capabilities. That would remain a secret and never be democratised. Political, economic and military consequences were going to be dire for SA had she arrested President Omar al-Bashir. Not arresting him was in the national interest because South Africa would have done what the National Party had done done to the SADEC and African countries. The ICC wanted SA to implement its own law.

Ms D Raphuti (ANC) stated that the book demonstrates the input of South Africa globally. South Africa is an eagle and owl in helping other countries to be on their feet when it comes to foreign policies.

Ms V Kalyan (DA) remarked that the Committee has spent the better part of the year on strategic plans and never discussed the crisis in the Middle East. There is a lack of communication from the Department to the Committee about what is happening in the Middle East. You only know about what is happening in the Middle East through the media. This is frustrating the Committee. The Committee has been requesting information about the Middle East crisis but nothing has been forthcoming.

Dr Mthembu explained that parliamentary committees are struggling to monitor the foreign policy of the country. There must be a central body that is created to monitor it and then feeds back to the committees.

Dr Masters added that DIRCO has signed treaties with foreign countries but the impact of that across sectors is not explained.

A member from the public wanted to know about avenues that are available for citizens to influence foreign policy decisions.

Dr Masters said influence is not the best way but citizens need to support what is done in terms of decision-making and they need to be allowed to engage with policy-makers.

Professor Cornelissen further mentioned there is a need to strike a balance between interest and values. Citizens want an ethical foreign policy.

The Chairperson stated that different parties have expressed different views regarding the ICC. For instance, the ANC took a decision to withdraw from the ICC. There is going to be an engagement with those in government. If African states have a harmonised view, they would also withdraw. It appears that the ICC is the court of the colonialists for Africans. But he cautioned that if the position of the ANC stays, does that mean SA is condoning the genocides that have happened in other African countries. And there is a view of an African Court of Justice for presidents who committed genocides.

A member of the public remarked that influence is important but manipulation always presents itself where money is involved. The power of funding always distorts the power of thinking of the people.

Ms V Kalyan wanted to find out that if peace and security are important in our foreign policy, what is SA doing for people of Western Sahara who have been living in the desert for too long; and what is being done about African countries that are not permanently represented in the Security Council of the UN.

Dr Masters, regarding the Western Sahara people, indicated there must be a discussion about that. Those people have representation in Pretoria but SA does not have representation in Western Sahara. There is a need to know if there is a SA position that could be put forward.

The Chairperson, on the issue of the UN Security Council, stated that the Security Council must be transformed so that developmental states could have permanent seats and be able to express their views. Very few countries that are there represent the views of many countries yet there have been many independent African states since 1945. Africa only wants two seats to represent the African continent and South Africa wants a seat as well.

Dr Mthembu commented that we would never have a consensus on many things. Platforms like these inform us why certain decisions were taken and why others were not. People appreciate engagement with public representatives so as to understand the issues and be able to explain these issues to other people so that they are able to explain their views. He also stated that power is critical in global politics. If countries were able to do things without the multilaterals, that would be a demonstration of power. How to influence another country in terms of practicalities is very difficult. The decisions that leaders make are complex but people appreciate it when leaders inform them.

The meeting was adjourned.