John Stremlau : A Second Look
Democratic gains in this month’s congressional elections should enhance South Africa’s leverage in dealing with the United States on issues of importance to Africa.
The unexpected defeat of Republican conservatives has given moderates in both political parties a stronger hand in foreign policy. And this new majority is likely to be more responsive to South Africa’s concerns.
President Bill Clinton owes his renewed job security primarily to African American voters whose unusually large turnout was the key ingredient in halting the Republican advance. They are also increasingly outspoken and influential on African issues.
More pointedly, South Africa should not be bashful in reminding Clinton that in his moment of greatest political peril President Nelson Mandela gave him a resounding public vote of confidence. In dealing with Washington, the recent elections also allow Pretoria to more easily hedge its bets with a more moderate Republican Congress.
Impeachment hearings could produce new embarrassments for Clinton. Public opinion surveys suggest large majorities remain unhappy with his abuse of office. Voters knew Clinton could not run again and apparently sensed real danger in strengthening the hands of those determined to force him from office. Their negative reaction to the excesses of special prosecutor Kenneth Starr should not, however, be seen as an endorsement of Clinton.
South African diplomacy should allow for the likelihood that political retribution for Clinton’s sordid behaviour will unfairly hurt US Vice-President Al Gore’s chances of becoming his chosen successor. Presidential preference polls, while highly unreliable at this stage, show Texas Governor George Bush Jnr is 20 points ahead of Gore.
Keeping lines open to moderate Republicans over the next two years is essential. So what can South Africa reasonably expect from Clinton and a somewhat chastened Republican Congress?
First, Pretoria should press Clinton to secure full and prompt payment of US dues to the United Nations. It currently owes about R7,3-billion, which is equivalent to the UN’s annual operating budget.
The US has hamstrung UN Secretary General Kofi Annan in his efforts to transform the UN into a more effective instrument for conflict prevention and resolution, particularly in Africa.
Continued US failure to pay its arrears could result in the loss of voting rights in the General Assembly under Article 19 of the UN Charter early next year. This would further damage an institution vital to the advancement of South Africa’s interests.
According to a recent poll by Wirthlin Worldwide, 72% of Americans have a positive view of the UN, up from 54% three years ago. Yet Clinton has thus far been unwilling to seriously challenge the Congress on this issue.
Now is a good time for South Africa, as chair of the Non-Aligned Movement and a friend of the US, to mount a strenuous lobby for the US to pay all of its legal obligations to the UN. This is a campaign that will also gain the support of the new breed of Republican internationalists, such as Bush Jnr.
Second, Pretoria should seek new and more substantial assurances that the US will provide whatever logistical and financial support South Africa and its partners deem necessary to conclude a successful peace offensive in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
Ever since the Clinton administration’s precipitous withdrawal from Somalia four years ago, Washington has been a slow, indecisive and difficult player in African multilateral peace operations. Despite a defence budget of R1,5- trillion, Washington repeatedly claims financial constraints preclude effective support of African peace operations.
It also tends to place so many conditions on its co-operation that for many in Africa dealing with the US on issues of peace and security is no longer worth the price.
Yet, only the US has the heavy lift, communications and other capabilities required to mount and sustain peacekeeping appropriate for Congo. And among African nations, only South Africa has a chance of finally persuading Washington to commit the necessary resources.
Finally, South Africa should make a fresh assessment of the stalled African Growth and Opportunity Act. The Bill passed through the House of Representatives earlier this year but was blocked in the Senate by textile interests who were opposed to opening US markets to African producers.
Although South Africa and many leading African Americans have voiced reservations about the Bill, now is the time to seek new bipartisan support for a Bill that would be more responsive to African concerns.
Co-operation with the US always risks criticism, domestically and from other African countries. Yet, just as the twin processes of globalisation and liberalisation have become irreversible realities, dealing with the US is also unavoidable.
Influencing US behaviour is the real challenge. Since 1994 South Africa has enjoyed a special relationship with the Clinton administration. Recent changes in the US political landscape open possibilities for shifting the balance in ways that could better serve South Africa as well as the rest of Africa.
John Stremlau is the Jan Smuts Professor of International Relations at the University of the Witwatersrand.