Committee Strategic Plan

Meeting report

INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS AD HOC COMMITTEE
28 May 2004
COMMITTEE STRATEGIC PLAN

Chairperson: Prof K Asmal (ANC)

Documents handed out : None

SUMMARY
The Chair noted that the Committee intended meeting with civil society, universities and non-government organisations to hear their input on issues that the Committee needed to address. It was agreed that the Committee was already well versed on the Department's views and would like to hear other voices.

The Deputy Minister and Director General were questioned on various issues such as:
- the extradition of the South Africans detained in Zimbabwe for alleged mercenary activities;
- the Department's increased obligations in Africa that included opening South African missions in every African country, building South Sudan's governance infrastructure and heading the AU Reconstruction Committee there;
- the strain that this expanding role placed on the Department's human resource capacity
- developing a larger skills pool for a smooth succession of a younger generation of diplomats and officials;
- the under-utilisation of the previous departmental budget.
The Committee also discussed the importance of a multilateral, rule-based approach to international relations. The Department was asked to furnish the Committee with a list of all the treaties and international instruments that had not yet been ratified.

MINUTES
The Chair noted he had received only one letter of apology while there were clearly fewer members than the previous meeting.

Mr L Labuschagne (DA) said that there had been some misunderstanding whether the meeting would proceed or not.

The Chair said that only the Committee Chairperson could cancel a meeting but these were possibly just teething problem that should be resolved soon.

Ms Sue van der Merwe (Second Deputy Minister, Department of Foreign Affairs) said as President Mbeki had explained recently the functions of the Department of Foreign Affairs had grown over the last few years and this created a need to increase its capacity to accommodate these new challenges. The creation of a second Deputy Minister position was intended to establish a more permanent presence in South Africa while the Minister and Deputy Minister Pahad were representing the nation internationally. She hoped the Committee would allow her to meet with them on many more occasions throughout the coming years.

The Chair said the Committee had met the Department 30 times the previous year. These visits cost senior officials of the Department much of their valuable time therefore the Committee would rather receive documents from the Department on a regular basis and then meet with the Department only when necessary. The Committee would develop a multiparty program before February 2005, which would be more informative on such matters. The Committee would prefer to meet with civil society, universities and non-government organisations to hear their input on the various legal, strategic and economic issues that the Committee needed to address. The Committee was already well versed with the Department's views and would like to hear other voices to gain a better understanding on various issues.

The Chair noted that Mr Nielsen, the EU Commissioner, would be visiting South Africa in July and he asked the Committee to ensure their presence at that meeting although it was during parliamentary recess. Mr Nielsen had been instrumental in insuring millions of Euros were donated to assist peace-keeping operations in Africa. It was also important to make a lasting impression on the outgoing Commissioner to ensure a good relationship when the new Commissioner takes office.

Mr Labuschagne (DA) agreed that input from civil society and the receipt of regular informative documents from the Department would be useful to the Committee.

Dr Ayanda Ntsabula, Director-General: Department of Foreign Affairs, responded to the Chair's question on multilateralism that had been raised in a previous meeting. South Africa had a predictable foreign policy and was involved in many international fora in spite of the fact that decisions taken at these fora were not always in South Africa's interests. South Africa believed that a multilateral approach and the advocacy of a more rules-based international system were in the interest of the country as it created fairer and more equitable international relations. Without such a system, the more powerful nations could simply act as they pleased. He added that global challenges such as poor states affect even the more established ones through migration, security concerns and other manifestations.

The Chair said he believed a rules-based international system only works if there is a willingness amongst states to make it work. The Geneva Convention creates reciprocity on the treatment of prisoners of war, weapons used in war and other aspects of war. This reciprocity encourages states to comply with the Convention to protect their own soldiers in times of war. The World Trade Organisation similarly displays effective mechanisms to ensure reciprocity. A rules-based system limits the more powerful nations from acting with impunity towards weaker nations.

Bigger countries could put their national interests first, however developing nations needed to act in alliance to ensure their voices were heard, as was the case at the recent Doha trade talks. The concept of a rules-based system is an important one and needs to be fully explored.

Dr Ntsabula said one needed to distinguish between binding and non binding international instruments, South Africa was largely in compliance with most binding international instruments. In the recent pharmaceutical case, South Africa had passed a law that some powerful nations were not to happy with. South Africa would most probably not have been able to proceed with this had they not been confident that South Africa was fully in compliance with its international obligations.

Mr L Greyling (Independent Democrats) said nations generally protected their sovereignty jealously and only grudgingly surrendered part of that sovereignty, when it was in their interests. When international instruments were not in the interests of the big powers, they were often dead in the water as was the case of the Kyoto protocol. He suggested that developing nations should perhaps negotiate across issues - supporting issues important to powerful nations for reciprocal support on issues important to developing nations.

Dr Ntsabula said that negotiating across issues was already taking place in the international arena.

The Chair commented that he did not like the term 'failed states' as it was often used by powerful nations to intervene in the affairs of developing states. As a result of the US War on Terrorism, the US had stationed its 'special forces' in many poorer states resulting in the improvement of the infrastructure in such states to accommodate these troops' requirements. In effect the rule of power had now to interact with the rule of necessity. He referred to Chad, one of the world most inaccessible states as an example of this phenomenon. It was in the interest of wealthy nations to assist in the development of poorer states as this was the only effective way to reduce issues such as migration and terrorism. He asked for list of the all the treaties and international instruments that had not yet been ratified or acceded to. The Committee could also regularly publish a list of the treaties and international instruments that had been ratified.

A member of the Mpumalanga legislature asked whether SA intended to request the extradition of the South Africans detained in Zimbabwe in terms of mercenary accusations.

The Chair replied that extraditions could only be effected if there was an existing extradition treaty between the states in question, and there was no such treaty with Zimbabwe. It was not always in South Africa's interests to have such agreements as it would confer reciprocal obligations on South Africa.

The Chair mentioned that the Sudanese Peoples Liberation Army (SPLA) and the Sudanese government had recently signed a remarkable peace agreement that is similar to an inter state agreement allowing Southern Sudan to receive 45% of the nation's oil revenue. The interim agreement would last until the referendum on the South's secession in a few years time. The SPLA had requested SA assist them in building governmental infrastructure in Southern Sudan. This, combined the President's statement that South African missions would be opened in every African country, would place onerous obligations on the Department. Were they ready to meet these challenges?

Dr Ntsabula replied that during the 2001/2002 financial year the Department had presented a detailed plan reflecting the past growth in the Department as well as the forecasted growth. This document was subsequently submitted and approved by Cabinet. According to the forecast, the Department staff complement should be 2 900 by 2007. That reflected an increase of 800 new positions, notwithstanding the many vacancies that existed in the Department since 1994 until the present day. Many of the vacancies were highly technical in nature and could not be filled easily. The Department also had to guard against the destabilising affects of a large influx of new recruits. Hundreds of posts had recently been advertised and another large intake was expected in February 2005. This reflected the ongoing recruitment the Department was engaged in to fill the existing and projected vacancies. The AU had decided that SA should head the Committee to assist the peace process in Sudan. The only way this challenge could be met was for SA to establish a presence in Sudan. This process would naturally need to be fast tracked to ensure they keep pace with the unfolding developments in the area. The Department had requested other institutions to assist in the work required in Southern Sudan. In this vein Unisa has become active along with other institutions to address the training requirements in the territory. He said it was inappropriate for the current financial year but he would work to convince the Committee of the inconsistency between the Department's responsibilities and its budgetary allocation.

Ms van der Merwe remarked that the Foreign Service Institute had not been able to meet all its training provision obligations, but a study had recently been completed to ensure improved performance.

Mr N Habedi (Azapo) asked what the Department was doing to ensure a smooth succession of a younger generation of diplomats and officials within its ranks.

Dr Ntsabula replied that the Minster of Foreign Affairs and other senior officials had recently undertaken a study tour to various countries to investigate international practice in this regard. The Department would like to ensure that young people were introduced into the various structures of the Department at an early stage to ensure they gained the necessary experience in the field. The Department was fortunate that highly qualified people were keen to work in Foreign Affairs. However they wanted to build a stronger relationship with tertiary institutions to benefit from a larger skills pool.

Mr M Sibande (ANC) asked whether the Department had prioritised the recruitment of women and rural people.

Mr Greyling noted in a number of developed nations students had been placed at multilateral institutions such as the United Nations to gain experience. He asked whether SA had contemplated a similar approach.

Dr Ntsabula replied that no special focus had been placed on recruiting in rural areas but the Department was very sensitive to gender equality in its recruitment. More than 50% of recent recruits are women.
He pointed out that SA was not the only country committed to serve on the AU Committee on the Sudan peace process, a number of other African states shared this responsibility, although SA had been requested to head the committee. There were currently two parallel processes on Sudan a) the SPLA request to build the South's governance infrastructure and b) the AU Reconstruction Committee headed by SA. The Department wanted to link these two processes in order maximise efficiency.

Adv Z Madasa (ACDP) said it may be strategic to establish regional offices, as the sovereignty of African states would anyway concede to the intended regionalisation and African unity of the continent

Dr Ntsabula replied that establishing SA embassies in African states would be advantageous to both parties. A united Africa could only be effected through the actions of constituent African states.

Mr L Joubert (IFP) asked why the last departmental budget had not been fully utilised.

Dr Ntsabula replied that there were mainly two reasons for this. Money allocated for the employment of more personnel had to be returned as suitable persons had not been found, and the Department was not permitted to divert money allocated for personnel salaries to other activities. Secondly, since many of the Department dealings were in US dollars the Treasury annually forecast the amount required by the Department in US dollars. During the period in question the Rand performed strongly against the Dollar thus reducing the number of Rands required.

Mr Joubert asked for clarity on the circumstances surrounding the South African ambassador to Indonesia.

Dr Ntsabula said according to Indonesian law foreign diplomats were allowed to own two cars, which could be imported without paying import duties. Some officials were involved in a scheme where diplomats imported cars and then sold them to Indonesians who benefited by avoiding expensive import levies. Indonesian law allowed diplomats to dispose of their imported vehicles in any manner they chose after a period of two years.

The SA ambassador was implicated in this matter. However he stated in his appeal that he had been framed and SA thus had to investigate this car scheme. The SA investigative team that went over to investigate these allegations, were unfortunately hampered by some Indonesian officials who benefited from this scheme. Two Indonesian nationals involved in the case signed affidavits alleging they were coerced into providing information thereby delaying the investigation further. Interpol had been requested to assist in the investigation, which finally bore fruit and put the matter to rest. It was established that SA officials were involved in the scheme but the findings did not display the high level of proof that was generally required to warrant the termination of any contract.

In reply to Mr Labuschagne asking when the ambassador's term of office expired, Dr Ntsabula said in December 2004

The meeting was adjourned.