Lack of trust, policy coherence and alignment between government and business have emerged as key weaknesses confronting South Africa’s political economy, with former president Kgalema Motlanthe warning that a credibility gap could undermine the country’s ability to articulate and pursue a common national interest.
Unlike fast-growing economies such as Singapore, China and Vietnam, South Africa’s mismatch between government and business on policy has created uncertainty among potential investors, hampering efforts to attract greater economic investment.
Speaking frankly about the country’s challenges at the inaugural Nucleus Institute seminar in Johannesburg, Motlanthe was unequivocal in his assessment of the need for greater trust and a common national purpose.
“In what we are trying to achieve as a strategic goal, we should be mindful of the fact that business in this country has a very powerful voice when it comes to matters economic.
Sometimes, business preface the expression of their views very clearly that they are not politicians.
“There is a certain category of South Africans who are accepted as politicians — a category which is not trustworthy across the board. This is because they [politicians] say one thing and act differently.
“Leadership sets the tone for the political organisation and the country. If there is a mistrust and a credibility gap, then you will have a Tower of Babylon, with people speaking in tongues, instead of having one way of articulating national interest.
“The question we have to answer is: What is our South Africanness?,” Motlanthe asked.
It was important for people to communicate with the same language, he added, and the logic of pursuing national interest could translate into a common language only. “But if it is abstract, people will interpret it in various ways.”
The Nucleus Institute, the brainchild of President Cyril Ramaphosa’s special envoy Mcebisi Jonas, is a think tank modelled on the Kgalema Motlanthe Foundation’s dialogue sessions. It aims to promote and foster inclusive, level-headed discourse on local and global challenges and help unlock creative solutions.
In his keynote address, titled “Global Dynamics, Rapid Change and New Opportunities: How Canada Will Navigate the Way Forward”, Jonas said geostrategic issues should not be the preserve of the political and economic elites.
Jonas cautioned: “We are living through an era in which history is being remade daily, not just as the tragedy and farce that Karl Marx referred to an age ago, but to the extent that the reshaping of the world now creates somewhat of an existential crisis.
“We must increase the currency and discourse around these issues — and seek to widen participation, reflection and responses to these major global shifts.”
He said that was the reason behind the establishment of Nucleus as a network of thinkers to galvanise the momentum of change.“We hope dialogues such as this serve that purpose.”
Jonas said the “middle powers” label should not be used as a slogan — “a means to assert our own importance or enjoy the flattery that comes by association with the efforts of others”.
“We should ask what kind of agency do middle powers actually have in a world where the old order is giving way to something new and undefined? Unlike superpowers, middle powers cannot set the rules of the international system.
“They cannot impose global stability by the deployment of force. They remain painfully exposed to the consequences of war, financial crises, disruptions to trade routes, technological fragmentation and climate shocks.”
But middle powers, by definition, must have the capacity to deploy “some kind of power or leverage”, Jonas said.
“They are not condemned to the fate of the truly powerless, to suffer what they must. They can build consent to global rules and influence the trajectory of change. They can construct new alliances and convene, mediate and build coalitions.
“They can build new systems of global law or new monetary and economic institutions. Acting together, they might broker an end to global conflicts or reach agreements that help stabilise financial markets, bring order to economic relations and protect their commerce where it counts most.”
Jonas said South Africa was among a group of new “emerging” middle powers, including India, Brazil, Egypt, Indonesia, Nigeria, Türkiye and Vietnam. Many had long been on the “semi-periphery” of global affairs, “forced to navigate between capricious superpowers ready to meddle in their domestic affairs”.
“Like other middle powers in the Global South, South Africa’s interest is not only to stabilise the global order but to transform it profoundly in a manner that makes our national development possible.
“South Africa’s influence has often rested on the moral capital of the democratic transition, constitutional order, financial and institutional capabilities and the ability to connect South Africa’s national position to a wider African and Global South agenda.”
But that form of influence was fragile.
“It depends on credibility and trust, what others believe is South Africa’s agenda in light of our official policy of non-alignment.
“Our case before the International Court of Justice on the Palestinian genocide is an example of where our agenda is questioned. But we must also recognise the limits of our own position.”
South Africa, Jonas said, was important in Africa, “but it is not Africa”.
“We have capabilities and constitutional legitimacy but also domestic failures that weaken our authority.”
He described Canada as “an important interlocutor”, noting that it was not the same kind of middle power but that was precisely why the dialogue was useful.
“Canada brings governance capabilities, investment institutions, energy and critical minerals capacity, security relationships and a tradition of middle-power diplomacy. South
Africa brings an African location experience in Global South coalition-building and a direct stake in reforming institutions that often fail developing countries.”
The opportunity was not to pretend that the interests of the two countries were identical.
“It is to ask where they overlap: human rights, development finance, climate resilience, critical minerals, food and energy security, democratic institutions, peace, security, digital infrastructure, taxation and reform of multilateral institutions,” he said.
South Africa and Canada “should appreciate each other’s strengths and the increased trade potential”.
“There should also be more strategic alignment among like-minded nations on principles and values we believe are fundamental to the human condition,” Jonas said.
James Christoff, the Canadian high commissioner to South Africa, said multilateralism was a cornerstone of its foreign policy, “rooted in our emphasis on cooperation through shared rules, international law and global institutions like the United Nations to manage security, trade and global challenges”.
Christoff said Canada’s diplomacy and leadership at the United Nations and in other multilateral institutions such as the G7 and G20 gave “a strong voice to Canadian principles and values on the world stage”.
“Canada greatly valued the close coordination with South Africa last year where we supported one another to advance a number of initiatives, as Canada hosted the G7 and South Africa hosted the G20,” he said.
“Although already blessed with a very good bilateral relationship, the prevailing winds of the day have had both countries looking at where we can take our relationship to another level.”
Canada invited Ramaphosa to attend the G7 Leaders’ Summit in Kananaskis, while Prime Minister Mark Carney attended the G20 Leaders’ Summit in Johannesburg.
More broadly, although not holding identical views, Canada and South Africa also share an interest in multilateral reform and institutional strengthening, said Christoff.
“Canada’s increased emphasis on sovereignty, solidarity and sustainable development, resonates with South Africa’s long-standing calls for UN and global-financial-system reform.
“In that vein, the opportunity is there for both countries to work together to serve as a bridge between the Global North and South within the G20, the Commonwealth and on global governance reform writ large.”
Canada and South Africa “are resource-rich countries and key players in the mining sector, would be an understatement”.
“We sit together at the crossroads of one of the most important issues confronting governments today: critical mineral supply chains. Canada has expertise across the mining lifecycle — from exploration and geological surveying to financing, engineering and environmental management.
“One area where Canada has developed considerable experience is mining governance and the systems that support responsible conduct and investment.
“Clear, transparent and accessible information about mineral rights, helps governments manage resources effectively and additionally provides investors with confidence and predictability,” Christoff said.
On September 14, Canada will hold its first Canada Investment Summit in Toronto, bringing together some of the world’s largest investors with the aim of unlocking $1 trillion in investment across mining, energy, defence and infrastructure projects.