Dealing with 'Deviants': Testing South Africa's Good International Citizenship

ABSTRACT Informed by the country's apartheid past, its negotiated transition to a non-racial democracy, and the expectations of the world community, the 'new' South Africa from the outset assumed the role of a good international citizen. The global promotion of democracy and human and the accompanying notion of state sovereignty as responsibility and accountability--key elements of good global citizenship--have indeed been central tenets of South Africa's foreign policy since the advent of majority rule in 1994. However, the high hopes that many foreigners and South Africans too have entertained of the Republic acting as a force for good in the world, have been disappointed. A major reason has been South Africa's close relations with countries manifestly guilty of violating international human standards. This inquiry investigates South Africa's ties with five such 'deviant' states, namely Zimbabwe, Sudan, Libya, Cuba and Myanmar. While South Africa initially tended to ignore the gross human violations in these authoritarian countries, it has lately adopted a more critical approach to several of them and so began playing a role more consistent with the demands of good international citizenship. 1. INTRODUCTION Following its democratic 'rebirth' in 1994, South Africa entered the international stage as a paragon among states. Countries far and wide expected the 'new' South Africa to be a force for good not only in Africa but globally. Such expectations were reinforced by South Africa's self-declared commitment to a highly moralistic and hugely ambitious foreign policy to make the world a better place for all. Through a combination of own intention and foreign expectation, democratic South Africa assumed the role of a good global citizen. This refers to a law-abiding member of the world community, meeting its international obligations and promoting universal norms of human as a logical extension of its fundamental national values (Brown 2001: 30; Vickers 2003: 31-32; Schoeman 2003: 349-367). Before long, however, South Africa encountered criticism at home and abroad over its close ties with countries committing gross human abuses. The censure became fiercer towards the end of President Thabo Mbeki's tenure. The Economist (15 November 2008) denounced South Africa's 'see-no-evil foreign policy' that tarnished its record as 'a shining beacon of human rights'. A senior officer of Human Rights Watch commented in sorrow rather than anger that South Africa's foreign policy often aligns with global enemies of human rights (Bogert 2008: 1). Two American analysts' wry observation was that democratic South Africa's friendliness toward odious dictatorships' increasingly resembled that of its 'infamous predecessor (Tupy & Kirchick 2008: 2). Other critics branded the Republic a 'rogue democracy' (Washington Post 28 May 2008; Baker & Lyman 2008) for aligning with states that patently violated the political values so eloquently and loudly proclaimed by the Republic. The present article investigates South Africa's relations with five such 'deviant' countries to determine whether the Republic has indeed compromised its good international citizenship. The inquiry will cover the successive presidencies of Nelson Mandela (1994-1999), Thabo Mbeki (1999-2008) and Jacob Zuma (since 2009). First, though, it is necessary to identify the main tenets shaping South Africa's foreign policy, highlighting those critical to its exemplary global citizenship. 2. TENETS OF SOUTH AFRICA'S FOREIGN POLICY 'Tenets' refer to beliefs or opinions that a person (or a government, for that matter) holds as true and are supposed to guide their actual conduct. Included under this rubric are what South African policymakers have variously called foreign policy objectives, principles, pillars, and roles. A few have not been proclaimed explicitly, but can be inferred from the words and deeds of policy-formulators. …