Director General, Dr A Ntsaluba, Cape Town
11 February 2009
Thank very much colleagues.
We will basically talk about three areas. The first one is basically to talk
about the 12th Assembly of the African Union (AU) held in Addis [Ababa]. And
probably a few things about our neighbour, Zimbabwe and some of the more urgent
commitments that the Minster and the department will be focusing on in the
years ahead and probably one or two issues that are topical in the media
now.
The African Union meeting which was in Addis, as you know the Summit was
from 1 to 3 February 2009, and there were a number of discussions. The first
part was the reflection by the Heads of Sate and Implementation Committee on
the issues of Nepad. And as you know South Africa was supposed to present its
progress on the Peer Review process and that was done. I don't think there is
anything significant in that except just to say that the Heads of State
appointed the new Executive Director of the Nepad, who is the former Prime
Minister of Niger.
The second day which was essentially the Sunday, 1 February 2009, was
devoted to a discussion on the Union Government and this was a carry though of
the discussion that took place in Sharma Sheik and of course we can say that in
the discussion the two major trends in this debate were evident. The people
wanted a rapid establishment of the Union Government and rapid movement towards
what is seen as the United States of Africa.
On the other side there were people who were arguing that the end objective
of the continental integration is to advance the continental agenda. And
therefore the integration must be carried out in a manner that ensures that at
every step it facilitates attainment of developmental objectives.
South Africa belongs to that group that essentially says the route that we
have to follow is to understand that this is not going to be achieved in one
giant leap and that the direction that we have to follow is via the
establishment of the Regional Economic Communities (RECs) and strengthening of
those RECs, greater interaction around those RECs. You know for example that
there was a Southern African Development Community (SADC), Common Market for
Eastern and Southern Africa (Comesa) and East African Community (EAC) meeting
last year to discuss the establishment of a Free Trade Area (FTA) and finally
that would lead to the continental integration.
So both trends were there. At the end of a very long robust debate there was
an agreement that the currently Commission as structured required strengthening
and part of that strengthening people spoke about resources and also the
content of what they do. There was also an identification of the cross -
cutting issues like poverty alleviation, HIV and AIDS but we had to feature
much more prominently on the agenda of the Commission.
Therefore that resulted in the agreement that the Commission should be
renamed the Union Authority and with the Commissioners designated as
Secretaries and with the Chairperson of the Commission now designated as the
President of the Commission. There was then an agreement that those changes
must be sent to the Ministers for them to come back with a very clear detailed
framework of how these can be actualised and what the content of this is going
to be.
When the Ministers met it became clear that they ere working on, because it
was produced with some degree of speed, had major implications for the
Constitutive Act and there would have to be amendments of the Constitutive Act.
And there were some issues that would contradict previous decisions that were
taken like for example the role and the relationship between the AU Commission
and the RECs. Hence the decision to say maybe our ambition to reach an
agreement in this Summit was not realistic. So then the Ministers should step
back, meet within three months and work out the detail of the work and next
Summit will take this process forward.
So that was the discussion really around the issue of the Union Government.
In our own assessment we have seen the (inaudible). Quietly clearly it's a
debate that raises the levels of passion in the continent largely because many
people feel that given the sizes of our nation states and the sizes of our
economies some of the people in the continent don't stand the slightest chance
of ever feeling the impact of benefiting from the waive of globalisation
because their states are two small and therefore you find some of these
individuals really feeling strongly that we have to move with speed.
But the counter side to that is to say if we are going to form this
continental government there must be some underlying and forming principles
around the issues of governance, governance around issues of our core
understanding of the values around democracy. These are things that we have to
systematically work on because once you move to a union government then it must
deal with something much more solid especially if it were to take us to the
objectives we are talking about.
Another important thing, you will recall that we postponed the African
Diaspora Summit which we were due to hold in September last year due to the
political changes that had taken place in the country. Basically South Africa
was urged by the European Union (EU) to continue preparing for that and that we
should try to hold that Diaspora Summit soonest. That is something that the new
administration in South Africa will have to apply its mind to.
As you would expect there was a report that I will integrate to what was
discussed there with the latest developments on Zimbabwe. The SADC team under
the guidance of the Chair, our President, had to give a progress report on the
task that was given to SADC in Sharma Sheik with regards to Zimbabwe.
Fortunately, of course as you know, we had just hosted a very important Summit
on Zimbabwe. There was a commitment of the different parties to Zimbabwe to
proceed on at the time when this discussion took place in Addis.
The MDC leader, Mr Tsvangirai had just announced the decision of the
National Executive to participate in the inclusive government. So the focus
really was on how to make this work, and therefore call on the leaders to do
everything possible to make sure that this agreement works. A full endorsement
of the timeframes were agreed upon in the Summit and as you know we will have
meetings tomorrow for the swearing in of the Prime Minister designate and the
Deputy Prime Minister in Harare and the Ministers on the 13th.
An important element that I think we need to reflect on the discussions at
the AU Summit was the expectation and the call that was made to the
international community to lift whatever forms of sanctions in order to
encourage the process of forward movement in Zimbabwe. And I think here people
are very conscious of the fact that we need to have the parties and the leaders
of Zimbabwe deliver in the interest of the people of Zimbabwe, but also the
view that let us not put too many impediments, our posture should be the far
more of encouraging so that we give the best possible chance for the people of
Zimbabwe to succeed.
We also hold the view that the leaders would be sustained in what they were
trying to do if the feel the support of the population for the new dispensation
and working and supporting the framework that is there and for the people of
Zimbabwe to do that it is important for them to see positive spin offs from the
implementation of the framework. So we are calling for the sanctions to be
lifted particularly with respect some of the humanitarian challenges I think we
have to move with some degree of speed and a degree of urgency.
Of course that does not mean in anyway not to put pressure on the leaders to
do what is correct essentially to focus on issues of economic reconstruction
for an acceptable government to deal with the issue of humanitarian challenges
and also to make sure that all these issues around violations of rights of
individuals are attended to.
The other issue that the Summit had to deal with relates to concerns around
worrying trends about the resurgence of the unconstitutional seizure of power
as evidenced by what happened in Guinea and Mauritania and at the time that the
Summit was meeting closer home in Madagascar we were seeing all these
unfortunate events.
What the Summit did was to express itself very strongly in favour of
upholding the principles that had been agreed which is essentially about non
recognition of those leaders who assume power through unconstitutional means.
And therefore the continued endorsement of the functions against Guinea Conakry
as well as Mauritania and the re-affirmation of the correctness of the position
that they should not attend the meetings of the AU until the issue has been
resolved and of course at the same time expressing the commitment of the AU to
assist those countries to speedily move to a stage of the restoration of
democracy. That would have been the same spirit that would have shaped the
preliminary assessment of the situation that was unfolding in Madagascar, a
strong expression of the view that the legality has to be respected.
There was obviously also a discussion around the issues of Sudan as you
would expect and with respect to Sudan that was essentially about the welcoming
of the progress registered with respect to the programmes and peace agreement.
Secondly also recognition of the progress that has been registered with respect
to the peacekeeping forces, the UN, EU forces in Darfur, reaffirmation of the
strong view that the continent has around the issues of impunity and the need
for justice to be respected.
But also the reaffirmation of the position that the continent had expressed
before of the reservation of the continent about the usefulness of the current
intervention by the ICC against the President of Sudan, As you will recall the
view of the AU is not so much that it should not take place but they was a call
to invoke the relevant provisions of the ICC statutes in particular the issue
of deferring by at least twelve months so as to make sure that the Government
of Sudan can participate in the processes that would help restore peace and
stability in Darfur.
Now the Summit took place against the backdrop of the progress registered in
Somalia. Last year we had the Djibouti processes and we saw the election of the
Somali President, Sheik Ahmed who participated in the deliberations of the
Assembly and I say there was some sense of the optimism especially against the
backdrop of the UN resolution of 15 January and the probability of UN
involvement and the support of a peace keeping mission in Somalia.
There was a recognition of the effort played by South Africa during the
chairship of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) in particular the role
that we played during our Presidencies of putting the theme of the relationship
between the African Union Peace and Security Council and the UNSC, recognition
of the Annual Dialogue that is taking place and calling upon the members of the
African Union that are seating in the UNSC to build up on what South Africa had
achieved and to make sure that we inject some momentum on this work of the
partnership between the two Security Councils.
There was also an appointment of the Advisory Board on Corruption within the
AU and the important thing here is that the 11 member Board one of those who
was elected was our former Speaker of Parliament, Ms Frene Ginwala.
Some important thing is that looking ahead the Assembly took a decision to
declare the coming decade a 'Decade for African Women '2010-2020', and also
finalise themes for the oncoming meetings. This particular Assembly focused on
issues of infrastructure and I don't think there was any thing that was earth
shattering we can took about except the reaffirmation really and collective
reflection on what the challenges are and the importance of infrastructure in
the continent. And to identify the types of investments that need to be made to
bring about greater connectivity.
Building on the 13th session which is going to be in July 2009 will be
looking at investing in agriculture for economic growth and food security in
the continent. The 14th session which will be in January next year will look at
the issues of information communication technology (ICT) in Africa and
challenges and prospects for development and the one thereafter will look at
maternal, infant and child health development in Africa. So those will be the
themes that will guide the next sessions.
So as you would expect, there was a report that was tabled sometime early in
January. There was a group of five Finance Ministers and Governors who were
hosted here by Minister Trevor Manuel in Cape Town, looking at the financial
crisis together with some of the financial institutions. They tabled their
report which is essentially the report that is supposed to guide African input
particularly in discussion that is going to take place on 2 April, the G20
meeting in London as a follow up to Washington meeting. An important element
that is key in those recommendations is the call on developed countries in
particular not to advocate their responsibility and their commitment with
respect to support for development in the African continent as a result of the
current financial challenges.
Having spoken about these there are a few important incoming meetings. On
the margins of the AU there was a Summit of the Greats Lakes which obviously
received a lot of reports on the interaction between Democratic Republic of
Congo (DRC) and Rwanda in particular with respect to the eastern DRC, reflected
on the latest developments with regards to this and on Nkunda. Generally we
spoke about this in our last briefing the general sense is that things are
moving in the right direction.
The dialogue between Rwanda and DRC is very important. Especially because it
is beginning to address the core issues to the conflict mainly the issue of the
genocidaires who are present in the DRC as well as the alleged support of the
rebel forces by Rwanda. There is also general co-operation between Uganda and
the DRC with respect to dealing with the problems of the LRA and again some
progress seems to have been registered.
With respect to the incoming meetings, there is an important meeting
tomorrow in Harare and South Africa will be represented. Of course as you know
that tomorrow will also be our budget vote so it is possible that our Minister
will represent South Africa tomorrow and the President will go on Friday, It's
really possible with respect to that.
The Minister will also be receiving the Bulgarian Foreign Minister in
Pretoria on Friday, 13 February. Also the Minister will be receiving the
Foreign Minister of Mexico on 19 February, all aimed at pursuing bilateral
relations.
Then during the week starting on 23rd there is conference of the Gulf and
Investment in the Gulf region which is taking place at the ICC, a number of
Gulf Ministers will be here so our Minister will have occasion during that time
to meet the Foreign Minister of United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Bahrain.
Also during that time there will be a Council of SADC meeting which will be
hosted and chaired by the RSA Foreign Minister. The Deputy Minster, Sue van der
Merwe will also be visiting Spain again for bilateral consultations but also as
part of 2010 assignments she will be meeting the Spanish Football
Association.
Of course the final point I would like to talk about is that the Minister of
Home Affairs yesterday did talk about the visa waiver in terms of the decision
of the UK government. It was indicated that this was the sovereign decision of
the UK government but will introduce and element of inconvenience for South
African travelling to the UK.
We continue to engage the UK authorities to look at how to make sure that
inconvenience is minimised as much as possible building on the fact that we do
have good bilateral relations and those relations are important for us to
preserve and I think both countries are anxious that those bilateral relations
are not affected as a result of these new developments. On our side we will
continue to work with the Department of Home Affairs and continue to make the
necessary representations and will handle the issue with the UK High Commission
here to try and make sure the inconvenience of South African travelling abroad
is minimised as much as possible.
Question (Group):
There are reports that the R300 million given to Zimbabwe has gone astray and
taken by ZANU PF, any comment?
Comments by the President that Zimbabwe may possibly use the rand as one of
its currencies do you also want to comment on that?
What are the implications for the Global Political agreement if MDC's Tendai
Biti not given a Cabinet post?
Answer:
Let me start with the last one. With respect to Tendai Biti we know only as
much as has been released by the MDC. We have noted the latest reports. Either
way for us in terms of acceptance of the cabinet position we will continue
(inaudible). You know in the case of South Africa we have got a tradition here
with the ruling parties that Secretaries General remains running parties. It
may also be that the MDC may feel that it wants to strengthen the party within
Government and Tendai Biti is a very senior member in the party and we do know
that the portfolio speculated upon is a portfolio allocated to the MDC namely
Finance.
So I think all of us we will probably know the truth on the 13th [February]
which is on Friday. To us whatever decisions are taken as long as they are
driven by the desire of each of the parties to make sure that the agreement
works and MDC can exercise its rights to decide what is the best way of giving
expression to that and to us that is their decision as long as whatever
decision is aimed at ensuring that there is forward movement in this
process.
With respect to the issue of the rand let's treat all these as possibilities
simply because we all know that the issue about using the rand has been raised
before. It is an option that is available and obviously like any other option
if that is the direction that gets taken all sorts of necessary precautionary
measures will have to be added to it. It is not the only option available but I
think it is one of the options spoken about by the people, some far more
familiar with monetary policy than we could be.
But it's aimed at trying to look at what is the type of intervention that
would help speedily to, in a sense, stabilise the fiscal and monetary situation
in Zimbabwe. I think it has to be looked against that background that there is
a variety of measures that can be taken but certainly if we were to move that
way the South African authorities would have to enter into a reasonable
dialogue with the Zimbabwe authorities.
We have received reports and we still need to gather a bit of information
around the issue of the reports (R300 million). Perhaps let me just give the
first preliminary observation of this. The first thing is that it is not
correct to suggest that some of the small grains as reported like sorghum and
things like those the end point should have been November for their use. It is
not correct. Agricultural experts would know that it could continue right
through the end until the later part of January. That was basically the
technical information. So I don't think it's correct. So to that extent
therefore, because it side of the argument I don't think it's a correct
argument. We do know that except for the short varieties of maize the time of
the intervention for the main stream of seeds of maize indeed around December
at the time of these interventions it was a bit late. Hence the focus was on
the short season variety of maize as well as the small grains.
As to the issues around that disproportionately more people are ZANU-PF
supporters I think that is an issue that we do not have that information on but
we will get details around the issue. But it would be very important for us as
we deal with this issue to also be a bit careful about being dramatic about it
largely because we do know that the patterns of support in Zimbabwe by and
large the MDC draws its support from the urban areas while ZANU-PF draws a lot
of support from the rural areas and therefore if you talk about communal
support for agricultural purposes you are talking about a rural intervention.
So if you are about to say more ZANU-PF you just have a far much more
comprehensive approach. That is why our approach to this issue is to get as
much support as possible, bearing in mind that the South African Government
intervention of the humanitarian and development assistance framework in
Zimbabwe was aimed at minimising the prospects of partisan distribution. That
was the guiding principle. And we believe that our intervention was aimed at
trying to do that.
Question (Group):
I want to know Republic of South Africa (RSA) government response to the UK
reports that there is a terrorist activity in South Africa that led to the UK
decision
Answer:
I think we can really work for now on the basis of the statement that the UK
government has given to us. As you would expect they have formally written to
us giving us their reasons and we would have to respect the reasons they have
given. Other reasons that have indeed informed the decision and in those
reasons I don't think there has been any dramatic claim about South Africa as a
terrorist space. So we don't want to be hysterical about that. If we were to
confirm that the UK government indeed said that we will have to discuss with
them so that we can understand the evidence and the basis to that allegation
but for now in terms of what they said to us initially they have not made that
allegation.
Question:
What kind of government do you anticipate in the Union Government given that Mr
Qadhaffi has made it clear in the African Union that he does not believe in
opposition?
What will be Africa's approach to the G20 meeting in April given that a call
has been made for the developed world not to abdicate their
responsibilities?
Answer:
As you know the AU first of all tries to work on the basis of a rotational
system with respect to the identification of people who assume the chairship.
And it so happened that this particular time, following that system of
rotation, the chair of the AU had to come from the North. You will recall that
the Chair came from East African in the form of President Kikwete, before that
it came from Central Africa in the person of the President of Congo Brazzaville
and before that it came from the West in the form of President Obasanjo, before
that it came from the South in the form of President Chissano and before that
it was in the form of South Africa and now it will be turn for the North.
Mauritania is suspended and Algeria was the last country in the North to
hold the Chair and therefore did not make themselves available and both Tunisia
and Egypt for a variety of their own internal situations did not make
themselves available which therefore left the candidature of Libya and of
course the rest of the Assembly accepted that was the country available from
the North.
Quite clearly the President of Libya has strong views on a number of things
and he expresses those views. It does not mean that there is general agreement
with all the views he expresses I already indicated for example one such view
that he holds very strongly about the rapid movement to the United States of
Africa which some countries have got disagreements on.
I think about models of governments these people have different views about
and I think it is the sort of contestation that will continue to take place
within the AU and what I was alluding to when I said countries like South
Africa are partly arguing that as we move to this notion of a United State of
Africa it is important for us to clarify some of the underlying values and
principles that will guide us but for now we will have to accept that we have
different views and the important thing is that whoever is in charge at any
particular moment respects the protocols that exist, the procedures, the
decision making procedures that are established, whatever their own views
whatever the system of government they pursue in their own country. I think
that is what we are focusing on.
On Africa's input on the G20 I really don't think this was elaborated in
greater detail except some of the broad principles because it was understood
that the African Finance Ministers reflected on this and Trevor Manuel chaired
this meeting and as you correctly pointed out South Africa has been the member
of the G20 and therefore it is some sort of guaranteed to participate, we will
convey some of these positions which are not different from some of the
positions South Africa has been advancing like the imperative to move with some
semblance of speed with respect to the reform of the Brettonwoods institutions
for example which is something as you know both the Director General and the
Finance Minister are participating in quite actively.
The other issue that is of course on the cards is how to broaden African
participation I think there is a search for all ways of doing that and South
Africa supports that view and one of the modes, though not finalised, is that
perhaps a representative of the AU whether it's the commission of the
chairperson at a particular point in time and backed up with some of the
finance institutions within the continent might be an appropriate
representation for the continent but these debates are continuing and we will
know closer to the that meeting what approach we are taking with respect to the
invitations to be extended.
Question:
What is your view on the status of political prisoners in Zimbabwe?
What is South Africa government response to the Peer Review process which was
discussed in this recent Summit?
And would you agree with the UK government that the issuing of passports is
faulty and can't be relied upon by other countries? Have we done any
investigation into all this?
Answer:
With respect to the release of the political activists in Zimbabwe like
â¦(inaudible) of course our view would be that we are urging the authorities to
move with speed to try and resolve those in a manner that is acceptable to all
the parties but as you that our stance has always been that some of those
should not necessarily be obstacles to the government but probably would be a
measure of the extent to which the inclusive government is working together in
unison to try and address a myriad of these difficulties that they are faced
with. So much as we would wish for the speedy release we would hope that would
not become an obstacle to the formation of an inclusive government.
I would be fair now to you (Peter) because in all fairness I did not sit
necessarily (in he meeting) and I think the sort of response that would be fair
to you it would require somebody who would have sat through the entire
discussion of the peer review report of South Africa and the DG of Department
of Public Service and Administration (DPSA) would probably be the right person,
so my apologies I did not sit through the report to know all the details of
what was raised.
Now with respect to the issue of the passport situation lets accept the fact
that we ourselves as the country and I think the Department of Home Affairs
would be the first to admit that they have been some problems in our identity
card authorisation system essentially and hence we have been talking about turn
around strategies and all the interventions. Secondly the report that the UK
authorities have released to us, the letter does recognise the fact that during
the period of this interaction a lot of positive things and some progress has
been registered. Yes it might not have reached the sort benchmark that they
have set. I think we should accept the fact that indeed there are certain
challenges we have and we are working on those challenges and I don't that that
should be a secret in anyway. So South Africa is working on those, the
Department of Home Affairs has got the details of that obviously and they would
be in a better position to provide those details. So our approach to this issue
is that yes it's a reflection of the challenge that we have, to some extent,
been aware of but we may have different views about whether it warrants the
action taken but we respect that this is the sovereign decision of the UK and
whatever engagement we would have would certainly not be through the media but
would be in the context of our strong existing bilateral relations.
Question:
My question is related to Somalia which has called for the extension of the
peacekeeping force in Somalia from 3 500, I believe to 5 000. Is South Africa
prepared to contribute to this peace keeping contingency? Do you think 5000
would be enough?
Answer:
First of all I think we cannot comment on whether 5 000 or 6 000 would be the
adequate force. The principle we do support which was discussed in AU which
South Africa fully subscribes to is that the current strand that we are working
on is inadequate to the task and therefore there has been an urging for
especially in those countries who might have made pledges before to come true
to those pledges especially in the light of the fact that many countries were
worried that, while in principle they supported the issue of sending the
African peacekeeping force, they were also keen to see visible progress on the
political side because peacekeeping would in a sense give us the desired result
if it is associated with the desired progress on the political side.
And secondly given the resolution of the UN which obviously gives a high
level of commitment and I must say that that commitment was conveyed in person
by the UN Secretary General to the AU Assembly about the UN to support the
Africa forces in Somalia. So yes we agree with the increase of forces and I
think there has been an appeal made in that respect. Now with respect to South
Africa I don't think South Africa's position has necessarily changed because it
was based on very objective factors and these factors are that were are
overcommitted at this point in time.
If any thing we are sitting with an additional request for reinforcement on
the eastern side of the DRC from the UN. It would seem to us that even if we
had some room to manoeuvre it would be appropriate for us to look at
strengthening the area where we are already involved but even that is not
a given because we are already stretched. So I don't think South Africa
position with respect to contribution of peacekeeping has changed in anyway to
Somalia.
Question:
On the DRC do we know how many more troops we are contributing?
Answer:
No we don't have the details. There is a discussion currently taking place
between the UNDPK of the UN and the Defence Ministry but we really don't have
all the details. But we are being asked to give some sort of support and
reinforcement to the work in the eastern part of the DRC.
Question:
Are the ICC actions against African leaders in particular, which is becoming a
trend, a subject of debate and legitimacy?
Answer:
Well I think as you would imagine there would be all sorts of strands to this
debate and I think it would be fare actually to say that general focus on
African leadership does factor in the debate. However I should stress that the
element of the argument that underpins the current AU position which is
certainly South Africa's position has less to do with angle of the debate while
recognising that debate is part of what other people are raising but ours is
far more to do with the delicate balance we need to tread on these issues
between justice and peace so to say yes we don't want to promote impunity. We
are the full signatories to the ICC. We support the ICC.
We are a country that respects international legality and the rule of law
and we want to remain true to that and therefore we would like to see the ICC
do its work. But we also understand, given our own history, that there are
times when the issues around justice has to be delicately balanced with the
issue of pursuing peace, peace that with more enduring benefits. And I think
its that delicate balance that the majority of countries are trying to put
across hence even the African Union position is not so much to say it must
never happen but to say the timing of it, at time when we are trying to
encourage Sudan to co-operate with the UN and the AU to put the forces in
Darfur, seems to be a bit of difficult time to expect that full cooperation
while pursuing this and hence wanting to invoke article 16 which allows for the
possibility of deferment of arrest for the period of 12 months. But that's a
reality.
Issued by: Department of Foreign Affairs
11 February 2009
