The South African government tried to breathe new life into its moribund defence business, Denel, last year by selling R6-billion-worth of major weapons systems to Libya.
The deal may have been unconsummated, perhaps because the uprising in Libya made it impossible to proceed, but the planned sale of G6-52 artillery systems, missiles, grenade launchers and anti-materiel rifles will raise fresh questions about the enforcement of the National Conventional Arms Control Act, and the close relationship between President Jacob Zuma and Libya’s Muammar Gaddafi.
An internal Denel memo obtained by the M&G outlines a successful trip to Libya in April 2010 and represents the sale as close to a done-deal following discussions with Gaddafi and the Libyan army about a proposed memorandum of understanding (MOU).
“The MOU is initiated and will be signed in due course. The trip received the blessing from both the presidencies. The Brother Leader also stressed the importance of having Africans trading within the continent,” the document says. “The president of Libya and his South African counterpart will sign the [MOU] within the coming year,” it adds.
According to Section 15 of South Africa’s National Conventional Arms Control Act, the national conventional arms control committee may not approve “transfers of conventional arms to governments that systematically violate or suppress human rights and fundamental freedoms”. Zuma, meanwhile, has vacillated in his response to the Libyan uprising. South Africa voted for the United Nations Security Council resolution imposing a no-fly zone on Libya, but Zuma subsequently criticised coalition airstrikes on pro-Gaddafi forces.
‘High advantage’
The memo makes much of South Africa’s warm political relationship with Libya, describing it as “a fairly good high advantage”. It also cements the brokerage role of one Prosper Ladisias Agbesi and his company, Basic Commodities SA, citing links to both Gaddafi and Zuma. “Basic Commodities is well positioned in both countries on the Presidential level, with great influence as demonstrated in the level of professionalism in organizing the trip within [a] short space of time.” So keen were the Libyans on the deal, states the memo, and so well resourced, that they were prepared to “pay 50% of the contract in advance”.
“Libya has made it clear that they have a need to purchase new 72xG6-52 artillery systems, missile business solutions and other defence solutions from RSA and they are deliberately looking for Denel’s support for these requirements.” It is clear that the South African team had access at the very highest level and included both Denel and defence department representatives. “Denel was approached by the Director of [the department of defence’s] Defence Industries, Colonel Trevor Mketi, and Basic Commodities SA CEO, Prosper Ladisias Agbesi, to visit the Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Armed Forces,” the memo explains.
The sales team was hosted by the Libyan government from April 9 to 12 and was allocated “protocol status”. Thabo Skosana, marketing executive at Denel, said he had gone on the trip, but declined to confirm he had written the memo, although the letterhead suggests it came from his desk.
The memo describes how the team stayed at the Sirte Gulf Hotel, where they held meetings in the presidential suite. “On Saturday, the day was spent in preparatory meetings with stakeholders. I did the Denel overview presentation to the stakeholders with the emphasis on the G6-52 artillery systems and other Denel products. On Sunday in the morning we met the brother Leader, the President M Gaddafi in the Sirte.”
Business opportunities for Denel in Libya amounted to R6 289-million, the memo says, and included potential sales of its high mobility G6-52 artillery systems, Mechem’s deÂmining equipment, and Denel Dynamics missiles, as well as aircraft maintenance services, automatic grenade launchers, and high-powered rifles.
It appears that at least one deal had been concluded at the time of the visit: “Mechem (a Denel subsidiary) had already performed the contract and they are still awaiting the payment,” the memo states. But Denel acting group communications manager Pamela Malinda claimed that Denel had not concluded any sales on the trip. “Denel can confirm that representatives of the company visited Libya in April last year to explore the opportunities for the marketing of defence products,” she said. “During this period there were meetings with representatives from the Libyan government but no contracts and deals were concluded.”
Memorandum of understanding
Asked for comment on his involvement in the trip to Libya, Agbesi said he was not an arms dealer. He claimed that as chairperson of the Pan-African Business forum he fosters bilateral economic relationships between countries. “Gaddafi is a great man, and I have respect for him. But everybody has his weaknesses, and I condemn the atrocities on civilians,” he said.
“What I did on that trip was put in motion a memorandum of understanding between both countries and to encourage Gaddafi to invest money in the South African defence industry. That transaction would have been a couple of billion dollars, so my aim was to bring investment to Denel, which was struggling, and to create more jobs.”
Colonel Mketi said there had been no restrictions on sales and no UN arms embargo when he introduced Agbesi to Denel. Agbesi was introduced to him by the government of Benin, which put him forward as its representative.
“I don’t know why nobody asks the British or the French how many arms they sold to Libya,” said Mketi, who did not go on the trip. “I am speaking in my own capacity, and not as a spokesperson for the department of defence or Denel. I feel this Libyan arms sale story has been blown out of all proportion. How can one country judge what human rights issues are going on in another country? People are just getting political mileage out of it. At the end of the day South Africa is guided by the United Nations.”
Mketi said people should also not forget Gaddafi had made “a contribution” on the continent by supplying military training, weapons and uniforms and, in doing so, had assisted with the liberation of Zimbabwe, South Africa and Namibia. Presidency spokesperson Zanele Mngadi said President Jacob Zuma would not have been involved in giving approval for a trip, which would be the responsibility of the department of defence.
The department of defence denied any “liaison, visits or deals” with Libya. The revelations of Denel’s sales push into Libya come after the public protector agreed last week to a request by Democratic Alliance MP David Maynier to investigate allegations that South Africa allowed the export of more than 100 sniper rifles and 50 000 rounds of ammunition to Libya in late 2010. A 2010 report by Amnesty International claims that human rights violations were widespread in Libya, and were targeted at certain groups.
‘Rogue committee’ accused of failing to do its job
In the wake of allegations that the government authorised the sale of heavy weapons to the Libyan dictatorship last year, experts have been scathingly critical of the parliamentary committee set up to ensure that the country’s arms sales meet human rights standards.
Some called the National Conventional Arms Control Committee a “rogue committee” that had failed dismally to implement South Africa’s legislation on arms sales. Veteran ANC MP Kader Asmal, the former chairperson of the committee, this week called for a commission of inquiry to establish its functionality.
He said the 11 Cabinet ministers who comprise the committee, under the chairmanship of Justice Minister Jeff Radebe, “have been getting away with murder. If we sold sniper bullets to Gaddafi, the committee should resign”.
“[The committee] is patently not complying with the legislation,” said Laurie Nathan, who drafted the National Conventional Arms Control Act of 2002. Section 15 of the Act states that South Africa must “avoid transfers of conventional arms that are likely to contribute to the escalation of regional military conflicts — or otherwise contribute to regional instability.”
Guy Lamb, an arms researcher at the Institute for Security Studies, said South Africa has sold arms to both India and Pakistan, which have been locked in conflict for decades.
The Act also stipulates that the committee must “adhere to international law — including United Nations Security Council arms embargoes”. But a report by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, a Swedish state-sponsored arms think-tank, which says that it gathers its information from the South African government, claims that South Africa sold arms worth R66-million to Sudan in 2007 and 2008 while that country was under a UN arms embargo.
The Act also states the committee must “avoid the export of conventional arms that may be used for purposes other than the legitimate defence and security needs of the government of the country of import”. South Africa sells arms to the United States, which invaded Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003. The committee also fails in reporting back to its watchdog, Parliament’s defence committee. “The committee consistently doesn’t fulfil its reporting requirements,” said Lamb. “It still does not provide the necessary quarterly requirements to Parliament and provides the annual reports too late.”
Democratic Alliance MP David Maynier complained that he had received the committee’s 2009 quarterly reports only last week from Speaker of Parliament Max Sisulu. The committee’s lack of transparency about its interactions with Parliament is also an issue — it often holds meetings in camera or classifies reports as secret, even though the legislation does not stipulate the need for secrecy.
Describing South Africa’s arms trade as “a paradox”, Lamb said it contradicted the country’s general foreign policy of mediation and promoting peace. “It’s a rogue committee,” says Rob Thomas of the Ceasefire Campaign. “It regards itself as a law unto itself, not adhering to the legislation, and even though Parliament has an oversight role it does not hold the committee accountable.”
Responding to questions, Radebe said the committee complies with its reporting obligations, including by presenting reports to Cabinet after the end of each quarter. “Our law strikes the necessary balance between the need to be transparent and accountable, whilst at the same time it recognises and caters for confidentiality which invariably attaches to all transactions — As we have said in the past, in making decisions the NCACC considers in aggregate all principles reflected in our legislation.”