Barbara Hogan may have been wrong not to protest within Cabinet before making her comments on the refusal to grant the Dalai Lama a visa to this country. Membership of Cabinet does include a constitutional practice of acceptance of decisions or resignation. But that aside, Hogan spoke with courage and principle, encapsulating the best traditions of the ANC.
With her brave commitment to principle she reminded us of the time when the struggle for democracy in South Africa represented the very best of humankind. Under the shadow of the Freedom Charter political contest was directed at the attainment of substantive human rights for all. The bravery of South Africans inspired the world; the struggle became the gold standard for political combat designed to produce a more democratic and humane world.
With the advent of democracy our Constitution became the lodestar of the country and there was an expectation that South Africa would be a leader of a new form of foreign policy — based on a commitment to democracy and rights for all. Nelson Mandela spoke with the supreme moral authority of an iconic figure. When the Constitutional Court held, in the case of Mohamed, that a person could be extradited to the United States to stand trial on condition that the US could not impose the death penalty, we took pride in the superior moral light we cast upon the world.
Within a decade and a half this has been replaced by a grubby combination of amorality, pragmatism and, at times, sheer stupidity. Apart from its support for a viable, independent Palestine and its condemnation of Israeli acts of clear disproportionality, there is not one political controversy on which South Africa has been on the side of democracy and rights.
Perhaps the first signs came with Thabo Mbeki’s approach to institutional murder in Nigeria and his pathetic attempt to distance himself from Mandela’s principled stance regarding the execution in 1995 of Ken Saro-Wiwa. Then came Zimbabwe and tenacious support for an ageing dictator. Once we obtained a seat on the Security Council we really hit our straps with support for the brutal regime in Myanmar and further attempts to extend the political life of Robert Mugabe being the most notable of our achievements.
It was thus no surprise that we joined the chorus against the International Criminal Court and the charge brought against Omar al-Basheer. Whereas the justification for Myanmar was Chinese pressure and Zimbabwe was a distrust of the MDC, here the excuse was a combination of “there are more violent people than Basheer — like members of the Bush administration”. A trade-off between peace in Darfur and justice is required and colonialism is ultimately to blame.
In short, under the Mbeki-Mugabe foreign policy doctrine, all that was required was to develop a strong political hold, invoke a history of colonial rule and there was a freebie to suppress the citizenry with maximum violence and defraud the popular vote. Now we support a refinement — rights are but Western constructs and there are even more vicious leaders, hence there can be no support for a charge against a dictator who has allegedly killed, raped and tortured a few hundred thousand, even a million, of his citizens.
Then the Dalai Lama was refused a visa. Of course, officialdom could not be honest and own up to a preference for Chinese trade to human rights. No, the shame was compounded by the absurd argument that the Dalai Lama would deflect attention from the World Cup — which was the eventual result.
Even more disgraceful was Finance Minister Trevor Manuel’s attempt to condemn the Dalai Lama. The Chinese, who are rapidly becoming the new colonial power in Africa, are afforded deference no matter what pernicious influence they may have on the potential for a democratic African renaissance.
Foreign policy can never be aligned entirely with human rights and democracy. As a leading player in the global south surely South Africa needs to be contributing to a new form of global governance. In the present global crisis this country should have been a leader of a new vision. But that cannot be when our default position is the rejection of rights claims at every turn.
Hogan has reminded us of what we once promised to be and, sadly, what we have become.