Committee Reports: Iran & Qatar visit; National Coalition for Palestine; Pan African Parliament; Western Sahara & Foreign Service Bill Seminar

Meeting report

The Chairperson noted that the Committee had only four members present and four absentees and inquired whether the other members could be accounted for.

Mr B Radebe (ANC) informed the Committee that two other Members were on their way, but were temporarily held up in the Justice Portfolio Committee. Mr Molefe was with the Portfolio Committee on Economic Development. He suggested that the meeting proceed as they wait for the other Members to arrive since the Committee needed quorum during the adoption of the Report. The Committee may proceed by taking positions around the Report as they await the arrival of the others and subsequent formal adoption of the Report thereof.

The Chairperson inquired whether there was any opposition to proceed with the meeting. In the Last meeting, the Committee had deferred the adoption of the Reports, on the recommendation that there should be recommendations under each Report. The Committee would go through the recommendations forwarded by the ANC and those by the DA since they had similarities. The Committee would also go through the recommendations drafted by the Content Advisor for the Committee’s consideration.

Draft Report on public lecture on Western Sahara
The Chairperson gave a preliminary introduction on the topic by mentioning general observations and recommendations that the Committee received during a previous public lecture it had attended on the same issue. The Committee had noted that Western Sahara was still being colonised by the Kingdom of Morocco; that the United Nations (UN) should act on the situation and that Morocco had since then applied for admission to the African Union (AU) after having left the Organisation of the African Union (OAU) in 1984. The question was whether their readmission had any bearing on their self-determination and what was the position of the government of South Africa among other states in the world. He suggested that the Committee look at the recommendations on Morocco presented by Mr S Mokgalapa (DA) appearing at No 2 in the Report.

The Content Advisor said her proposals were similar to those presented by the ANC and those presented by the DA, the only exception being two additional recommendations. One of which was on the holding of an international solidarity conference, and the other, on the AU and the UN helping to speed up the process towards self-determination to avoid a resort to armed struggle by the Polisario front.

Mr Radebe suggested that, for convenience, the Committee should use the recommendations dated 2nd may as a point of reference. Any additional recommendations should be amended on that Report.

Mr Mokgalapa thanked the Committee for agreeing to the DA’s request for another meeting to provide inputs and more comments. The comments from the Content Advisor and the ANC were similar and that the Committee should take note and consider the new United Nations Security Council (UNSC) Resolution dated 27 April which was accepted by the AU Commission Chair in terms of the extension of UNESCO Mandate up until 28 April for the referendum. He expressed his concern in the proposal for calling for punitive sanctions against Morocco as they were still trying to broker a peace deal. There was already withdrawal of Moroccan soldiers and those of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR) from the disputed territory, which was a progress indicator towards a peaceful resolution. He advised the Committee to put forward their recommendations, as a Committee of Parliament, on the way forward. They should try not to put any partisan views, for example the views they had received from the Ambassador of SADR. He agreed to the calling upon of the AU and UN in speeding up the granting of independence, the government of Morocco being called up to stop the violations on human rights and the call for an international solidarity conference.

Mr Radebe stated that the issue about punitive sanctions was still relevant since the only institutions that could initiate the sanctioning process was the government. Parliament should articulate the urgency of the matter and pressure the government into action. The situation in Morocco should be settled and resolved as soon as possible. It has been 26 years since arms were put down in 1991, but the situation is yet to be resolved. South Africa cannot afford to be laissez-fair and needs to take action. The European Court of Justice (ECJ) held the determination that companies incorporated within the European Union (EU) shall not deal with any goods coming from the Western Sahara. We, as Africa, should be more emphatic than the EU on the issue of sanctions. The issue of the sports centre and the provision of water should also be covered in those discussions.  The Government of south Africa should raise the issue of conditional admission when dealing with the issue of the resolution of Western Saharan dispute.  Earlier this year in the AU Summit, the Kingdom of Morocco was admitted into the AU without any conditions. Despite this, Morocco should still be held accountable through conditional admission, and not allowed to get away with it.

Mr Mokgalapa stated that the issue of conditionality was covered under the proposal that the AU should intervene in speeding up peaceful resolutions in Morocco to resolve the situation. Morocco’s re-admission into the AU therefore did not mean the end of the issue in Morocco. It only meant that it was up to the AU to persistently raise this issue and push for Morocco to resolve the situation. On the issue of sanctions, we should try and mediate between the parties since sanctions could be counter-productive as Morocco may be in earnest effort in trying to resolve the conflict. The Kingdom of Morocco had agreed to the UNSC resolution. He agreed that the Parliament should add pressure on our government but we should be mindful on how it was done.

The Chairperson stated that the ANC’s position was that sanctions must be applied in Morocco in order to apply pressure on Morocco to agree to the self determination of Western Sahara. The Ambassador of Western Sahara had mobilised other regional ambassadors in support of withdrawing the armed struggle to give peaceful resolutions a chance. The most peaceful means, in place of the armed struggle, was sanctions. The reason why Morocco left the OAU was because it did not want the representatives of Sahrawi to sit in the OAU. This was seen previously in South Africa when the ANC used to sit in the UN as if it was a government representing the people of South Africa, along-side the officials of South Africa. Upon protest of South Africa, South Africa was expelled from the UN. Morocco seeks admission to the AU so to escape the economic liability brought about by the binding EU Resolution to stop all trade with the Moroccan government.

During a UN debate on the issue of sanctions against Morocco, they used the UN’s and League of Nations’ founding principles of the people’s right of self-determination. The people themselves should decide who wants independence and who wants to stay in Morocco. However, Morocco is blocking the referendum from being held since it knows the expected outcome. Therefore, failure to apply the sanctions will not lead to any positive result. The King of Morocco had made several diplomatic tours in the francophone countries in an effort to seek their support in the AU. By the time the application for their readmission was being considered by the AU, Africa was divided. Some countries were willing to admit them unconditionally while others advocated for conditional admission. SADC had raised concerns on the unconditional admission of Morocco as it may be difficult to begin discussions with Morocco once it was already admitted in the AU. The continued situation in the Kingdom of Morocco was brought about by the failure of the AU from being united and firm in not admitting Morocco. The Kingdom of Morocco, for its own economic survival, is only attempting to rejoin the AU in effort to ‘burst’ the EU imposed sanctions by attempting to trade its goods in Africa.

Mr Radebe said all goods coming from Western Sahara must be designated so to affect the sanctions on the companies operating in Western Sahara. Sanctions had worked before on South Africa during the apartheid period and will work also on applying pressure on Morocco. The EU has closed trade on their side, so Africa should as well be firm and impose sanctions not only on the country but also on the companies involved in exportation as well. He proposed the sanctions should extend to the minerals mined and even the marine resources.

The Chairperson proposed that the details of the sanctions should be reserved for debate in the National Assembly and the Committee should only limit itself to recommending sanctions in general.

Mr Mokgalapa disagreed. The issue of sanctions had the potential of destabilising the region or the AU since 31 countries had already voted for their readmission while only 16 voted against it. In light of this, Morocco could still avoid sanctions since it had 31 countries supporting it. Further, any proposed form of sanctions may not succeed since it was clear such a proposal would not get a continental support. Nonetheless, the return of the Kingdom of Morocco in the AU gave the AU itself, a chance to take up the matter and try to resolve it. There was no clear beneficial outcome in trying to effect sanctions as opposed to trying to resolve the issue under the auspices of the AU.

The Content Advisor clarified that only the UNSC could make resolutions on the maintenance of peace around the world. The UNSC had already made several resolutions on the Kingdom of Morocco and in the event of non-compliance by Morocco, the UNSC wouldl apply sanctions.

Mr L Mpumlwana (ANC) stated that sanctions will only hurt Africa more and that sanctions did not always work. However, we should try everything, including a push for sanctions.

Ms D Raphuti (ANC) said the imposition of sanctions should be a pre-requisite, since the invasion of land raised issues of gross criminal actions. Therefore, sanctions must be implemented

Mr M Maila (ANC) sought clarity on whether South Africa deciding on issuing sanctions would be jumping the gun, since the UNSC needs to issue the sanctions first then South Africa follows.

The Content Advisor clarified that a Parliament could call upon its government to call upon the UNSC to apply for punitive sanctions.

The Chairperson proposed a few grammatical corrections on the title of the Report to be included in the amendment and that the Committee should later have a lecture and a debate in Parliament on the same issue.

The report was adopted with the amendments.

Draft Report on visit to Iran and Qatar
The Chairperson introduced the next Draft Report on the Committee’s visit to Iran and Qatar. There was a dire need for a Department of Home Affairs official who would handle visas in Doha, and a need to verify, with the Department of Home Affairs, if some of the issues raised at the visit were addressed.

Content Advisor said that in Qatar, Doha, they had recommended that a Department of Home Affairs dealing with VISAs should be seconded in the embassy in Qatar East.

The Chairperson expressed concern that it was a very old report and noted that there were two recommendations.

Mr Maila inquired whether the previous issues raised had been addressed and how the Committee wouldl be notified of it.

Mr Radebe proposed the eport be adopted and allow the Committee Secretary to make an inquiry on the previous issues.

The Chairperson proposed that the Committee should move to adopt the Report.

The Report was adopted.

Draft Report on the White Paper on Foreign Policy
The Content Advisor remarked that the report on the white paper was an old report and the matters therein should also be reviewed in line with the new trends in South Africa’s foreign policy. On the issue of the consultative process, the Committee should reiterate that there should be consultation among the stakeholders.

The Chairperson inquired whether the consultative process should be by the Committee or whether it should be at Department level.

Mr Mokgalapa said there was need for further public participation and consultation on the recommendations concerning issues of national interest.

Mr Mokgalapa remarked that there should be public participation since it influenced the outcome of the white paper.

The Chairperson said the White Paper on Foreign Policy was drafted by the Department and then forwarded to the executive. It there upon, became the official document of the Executive. The Executive as engaged by various stakeholders, including the Committee itself, to incorporate their views on the White Paper. The Department said it was not advisable that the White Paper become a statute of Parliament since each governing party has its own national foreign interest policy. He cautioned Members of the Committee not to confuse the White Paper on foreign policy and the Foreign Service Bill. Considering the difference in opinion on what constitutes matters of national interest, parties should agree to disagree at this Committee level. The Department had forwarded the White Paper to Parliament so that Parliament could educate the public on South Africa’s national position by creating awareness of its contents.

Ms Raphuti proposed adoption of the Report with amendments.

The Content Advisor explained that the Committee would be limited in terms of dealing with the White Paper. This was because, when dealing with government policies, a green paper is brought to Parliament and the public for discussion then thereafter it became a white paper. It was therefore presumed that every white paper has undergone this process, however, in the case of foreign policy, there was not enough consultation of the public. She proposed that the Committee persuade the Department to create more consultations since there were issues in the White Paper.

The Chairperson said the issue was not the adequacy of certain issues in the white paper but on how public participation could be attained. The public should be invited to give their views on the White Paper.

Mr Mokgalapa inquired on the status of the White Paper since it did not go to public participation. the Committee could not shy away from recommending a review. He also inquired on how the Committee could open up public participation on the White Paper, moving forward.

Mr Radebe proposed the Committee adopt the Report as it is with its recommendations then later engage the Department further.

The Chairperson recommended that the white paper should be brought to the attention of the Department again for refinement so as to reflect the new changes in foreign policy.

Mr Radebe emphasised on the need for review of the white paper since while it was being drafted, it didn’t recognise the fourth industrial revolution which will affect South Africa’s economy.

The draft Report was adopted with amendments.

Draft Report on National Coalition for Palestine (NC4P)

The Chairperson introduced the Draft Report to the Committee by reading out the position and recommendations of the Draft Report. He noted that the Palestinians deserve their right to be free and that Parliament supported the government’s position on the two states ’peaceful resolution. It recommended that both disputing parties should be dedicated and not stifle the negotiating process so to enable the true realisation of the resolution. Lastly, there should be a motion in Parliament in support of the peaceful resolution of the conflict.

Mr M Paulsen (EFF) disagreed with the contents of the report and stated that all those who want a free Palestine would also disagree with the recommendations in the report. The South African government was out of touch with the desires of the majority of the people. There should be a debate in Parliament to expose government’s duplicity on the issue.

Mr Mokgalapa said a debate in Parliament was welcome on whether Israel should stop its occupation. The Report should refer to the UN Resolution in its final draft.

The Report was adopted with amendments.

Draft Report on Pan African Parliament
The Chairperson introduced the draft Report on the weaknesses sighted on their visit to the Pan African Parliament. The Committee had noted that it should come up with recommendations on how to strengthen it.

Mr Mokgalapa stated that the main issue in contention was the Draft Host Agreement Report. The issue of land, public works, who should build the permanent headquarters and the provision of security needed further clarification.

The Chairperson suggested that the Committee adopt the Draft Report as per their views on the last visit with the recommendation that they will return there.

Ms C Dudley (ACPD) suggested a grammatical correction on the same clause so to expressly mean that the Committee will have a return oversight visit to look at the current situation to find out if the issues raised previously had been addressed.

The draft Report, together with the recommendations, were adopted with the amendments.

Draft Report on Public Seminar on Foreign Service Bill
The Chairperson noted that the draft Report was a true reflection of what transpired in the public seminar. The Committee notes that the Report was part of the public submission on the Bill and that would take it into consideration when going through the Bill clause by clause.

Mr Mokgalapa highlighted a typographical error for correction.

Mr Paulsen inquired on National Treasury’s position and if the new foreign service bill will create a parallel regime as far as foreign service is concerned.

Mr Radebe clarified that the Committee was not committed to any Departmental position and that the relevant Departments would be called upon and have them note what the Committee has adopted.

The Chairperson explained further that the Committee was aware that Departments may have their own opinion and issues. The Committee may also not be able to engage all Departments, so the Committee would review the departmental submissions and have them sent back to the same departments for any further fine tuning. In this process, the political principles would be held to account on the submissions given to the Committee.

The Content Advisor explained that the Department did not yet have a comprehensive report on what had transpired in the foreign service bill.  For the moment only records are being kept which will be complied later.

The draft Report was adopted with amendments.

Committee business
The Committee Secretary said the only outstanding item was the minutes, which could be tied together with the meeting.

The Chairperson suggested that two debates should be factored in into the Committee programme so that the Members would be able to inform their parties.

The Committee Secretary informed the Committee of an application submitted for the approval of the Speaker, on the countries that were chosen during the previous meeting were Germany and China. A consent waiver will be disseminated to Members.

There being no other business, the Chairperson adjourned the meeting.