South African foreign policy at 30 years: Non-alignment in a volatile world

Global environmental politics is emerging as a key field for South African diplomacy and foreign policy, in which Pretoria is endeavouring to lead by example. Environmental summits and conferences such as Johannesburg (2002) and Copenhagen (2009) have been crucial stages for the performance of this role as an environmental leader, and in December 2011 Durban will host the seventeenth Conference of the Parties (COP17) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. There are also signs from within policy-making circles that ‘the environment’ is seen as a field in which some of the lustre of South Africa’s post-1994 international high moral standing could be recovered. However, tensions remain between South Africa’s performance and rhetoric on the global stage, and domestic development paths which continue to be environmentally unsustainable. The article concludes by suggesting that while the visibility and prominence of South Africa as an actor in global environmental politics is likely to grow, it remains doubtful whether this represents a sustained and committed new direction in South African foreign policy.

Although most observers have focused on the domestic impacts of South Africa's transition to democracy, most notably the dismantlement of its apartheid political system, this process has also entailed the transformation of South African foreign policy. As former President Nelson Mandela aptly explained in Foreign Affairs several months prior to victory in the presidential and legislative elections of 1994, he considered the charting of a new foreign policy as a 'key element' in the creation of a 'peaceful and prosperous' South Africa. The primary purpose of this article is to offer an assessment of the foreign policy adaptation strategies adopted by the Mandela and Mbeki administrations in their quest to further strengthen South Africa's ongoing transformation from an isolated international pariah to leader of the African renaissance. An initial section outlines five strategies designed to adapt South African foreign policy to the new realities of the post-apartheid era: restoring civilian control over the security apparatus; restructuring the foreign policy establishment; self promotion as the leader of the 'African renaissance'; adherence to the foreign policy principle of 'universality'; and assuming a leadership rôle in international organizations. Section two explores how the process of democratization has favoured the reemergence and strengthening of the rôles played by a wide variety of state and non-state actors within the foreign policymaking process. A final section sets out five issues that will continue to set the tone of debates over South African foreign policy well into the first decade of the new millennium. An important conclusion of the article is that although the case study of South Africa in many respects constitutes a microcosm of the foreign policy challenges confronting other African countries, it also offers insights into the foreign policy adaptation strategies pursued by emerging powers in other regions of the world.

This fortieth anniversary edition of Politikon is an opportune moment to examine one of the abiding themes of South African foreign policy since the end of apartheid, that of the tension between moral foreign policy and state interests. This article, situated within the literature on norm diffusion and norm localisation, seeks to examine the influence of South African leftist academics and the establishment of the ‘moral’ route in South African foreign policy after the ending of apartheid in 1994. It is suggested that the rise of an epistemic community, along with the liberation struggle history of the African National Congress (ANC), facilitated the internalisation of certain global human rights norms, but it is less clear the extent to which these norms were inhibited from becoming ‘settled’ norms or solidified in the wake of national liberation in South Africa. Many commentators have questioned the ‘loss of moral compass’ of South Africa's foreign policy after Mandela. This article seeks to analyse which norms academics were able to build, and how these norms encountered domestic and international opposition in the process of their becoming entrenched. This will go some way to resolving the puzzle of South Africa's ‘switch’ from principled state to pragmatic actor that has accompanied the country's profile in recent years.

Research on South Africa’s post-apartheid foreign policy decision-making has stagnated. For more than a quarter century analysts have generally drawn on secondary material from other scholars, newspaper reporting, and the speeches of government officials to elucidate how South Africa crafts and carries out its foreign policy. The accessibility of previously classified archival documents and the availability of policy makers for research interviews holds the potential to advance scholarship on South African foreign policy along two fronts. First, these primary sources offer insight into foreign policy decision-making processes. And second, they encourage a critical re-evaluation of many of the traditional understandings and tropes that have dominated the study of South African foreign policy. This paper outlines the state of foreign policy studies in South Africa and then demonstrates the power of primary research to alter key ideas about the conduct and content of South African foreign policy through three case studies.

Foreign policy and decision-making approaches in international relations are closely related issues. Decision-making approaches serve as an important lens in understanding the background of foreign policy decisions. This study explains the foreign policy of the Republic of South Africa after the apartheid regime, which was officially overthrown in 1994, and South Africa’s relations with Türkiye through leaders, state and non-state institutions, using Graham Allison’s decision-making models. For South Africa, Türkiye has the largest trade volume among Central and Eastern European countries. Türkiye did not establish diplomatic relations with South Africa until the end of apartheid practices based on racial discrimination. However, after the collapse of the apartheid-based regime in South Africa, relations between the two countries could not be brought to the desired level. This article analyses the factors that have affected post-Apartheid South African policy, and more specifically, how these factors affected the post-Apartheid South Africa-Türkiye relations, in the context of Allison’s foreign policy decision-making models. The study adopted a qualitative research method and utilized the statements of official institutions as well as published documents, reports and news articles. The main research question of this study is how South African decision-makers make decisions regarding foreign policy and how these decisions are reflected in relations with Türkiye. In addition, this research examines the active actors in South African foreign policy and the impact of these actors on relations with Türkiye.

THE 'NEW' SOUTH AFRICA PROVIDES AN INTERESTING CASE STUDY of the interaction between international and domestic politics. What Robert Putnam describes as the 'puzzling tangles'(f.1) between external and domestic factors seem especially salient here because of the transformational component in South Africa. Externally, the end of the apartheid regime has widened the range of available options. The challenge is to gauge more precisely the nature of choice in terms of both a significant recalibration of international affairs and a fundamental redefinition of domestic needs and interests. Since its election in May 1994, the African National Congress (ANC) has been pre-occupied with economic and social reconstruction, which it has pursued with a high degree of sensitivity to the constraints imposed by the global system. Internally, reforms have been shaped to fit with many of the orthodoxies set by the external environment, often when these are at odds with proposals put forward during ANC's long period of liberation struggle. Only through an appreciation of the mix of competing international and domestic pressures may the complexity of South African foreign policy be appreciated. Far from combining to produce inertia, these sharp tensions provide South African foreign policy with multiple faces. Although they often diverge, each serves as a key explanation and point of navigation not only for descriptive but also for conceptual exploration.Examining South African in a diffuse fashion allows a break from the rigidity of the traditionally dominant interpretations of its foreign policy. The long shadow of structural realism still hangs over much of the discussion,(f.2) but it presents a disembodied portrait of foreign policy in which international conditions are privileged at the expense of domestic factors. Moreover, the search for national economic well-being remains overshadowed by the traditional search for security within the international system. Amidst all of the dramatic evidence of change, little or no attempt has been made to direct attention to the study of the location (or re-location) of South Africa in the international political economy. This is not to suggest that the domestic determinants of international behaviour have been completely neglected in the scholarship. Nonetheless, the use of this dualistic lens in the treatment of South African foreign policy has been restricted for the most part to the paradigm of bureaucratic politics and the 'management' of foreign policy.(f.3) Larger questions about the evolution of state-societal relationships or the configuration of domestic political and economic institutions still get short shrift.(f.4)This article is intended not so much as an extended critique of the literature(f.5) as a way in which some of the puzzling tangles between the international and the domestic can be teased out and made more coherent. To capture the essence of the multiple faces of South African foreign policy, I have applied a framework of foreign policy behaviour developed by Michael Mastanduno, David Lake, and John Ikenberry which centres on a matrix of state action based on the interconnection and overlap between international and domestic strategies and goals.(f.6) While its high degree of state-centrism may cut into its ability to incorporate divergent interpretations of the rising influence of civil society, it has considerable merit for capturing the range of South African experience in a parsimonious fashion.At the domestic level, maintaining legitimacy is accorded considerable weight in the Mastanduno, Lake, and Ikenberry framework. The more legitimacy a state possesses, so the argument goes, the more flexibility and/or room for manoeuver it has in other strategies and preferences. In building legitimacy at the domestic level, much effort is directed through the political process. At the same time, this approach is an important signaling device at the international level, where a primary goal is to mark the state's changing (and enhanced) position as a member of the global community. …

President Thabo Mbeki's resignation in September 2008 six months before the expected end of his term was triggered by the recall issued by the ANC National Executive Committee. It is highly unlikely that any major changes in foreign policy will be made by the caretaker government of President Kgalema Motlanthe before the 2009 elections. However, the significant changes in the domestic political environment signal the start of a new era in South Africa's transformation — what might be called the ‘post post-apartheid period’. This paper explores what those changes might entail, especially in the realm of foreign policy. After reflecting on the legacy of Mbeki's foreign policy, the paper considers the potential implications of the relevant resolutions agreed at the December 2007 ANC National Conference in Polokwane. Constraints on South African foreign policy towards the African continent are considered, especially with regard to perception versus reality of its economic and political hegemony as well as its complex identity as a nation. In light of this analysis and the inevitable impact of the current global economic crisis, the paper concludes with a series of recommendations for a new vision and agenda for South Africa's foreign policy under the government to be elected in 2009.

This article introduces the special issue on ‘South African Foreign Policy: identity, directions, and intentions’. Here we seek to summarize key insights from the contributions to this special issue to deepen understanding of South Africa’s evolving post-apartheid foreign policy through an exploration of the nature and trajectory of key bilateral relationships from both the global ‘South’ (Brazil, China, Iran, the AU) and ‘North’ (Japan and the UK). This window on the country’s international relations enriches understanding of the normative and structural factors that influence not only South African foreign policy, but those of what Edouard Jordaan calls emerging middle powers as they seek to position themselves as influential actors in international affairs. We sketch the contours of these key South African relationships in four areas where the tendencies and tensions of emerging middle power foreign policies are apparent: regionalism, multilateralism, reform of global governance, and approach to moral leadership.

Introduction: South African foreign policy in context - PART 1 PERSPECTIVES - The Impact of Afrikaner Experience - Perception of South Africa's International Role - PART 2 THE MAKING OF FOREIGN POLICY - Decision-Making and the Foreign Policy Process - Foreign Policy in Defence of Apartheid - PART 3 SHIFTING FOREIGN POLICY STRATEGIES - Deteriorating Security and Policy Reappraisal (1974-78) - Growing Militancy and Isolation under P.W.Botha - Namibia Policy and the War in Angola - Regional Destabilisation: the New Outward Policy? - PART DETERIORATING RELATIONS WITH THE WEST - Foreign Policy Responses to the West - Pretoria's Nuclear Diplomacy - Epilogue - Index

South African foreign policy is premised on the African Renaissance concept of good governance. The country’s good governance objectives are to strive for world peace and the settlement of all international disputes by negotiation – not war. Furthermore, South Africa's foreign policy is informed by its domestic policy which is guided by the vision of a democratic South Africa that promotes best practices with regard to good governance regionally and globally. Given its vision of effective global governance, South African foreign policy faces many challenges due to the various continental demands that include global food shortages, low intensity conflict, and low employment levels. This article argues that South Africa cannot accomplish its foreign policy objectives by itself and advocates the use of civic interest groups as a strategic tool of implementing soft power. In demonstrating the impact of civic interest groups as a foreign policy instrument, the article illustrates how globalisation has changed the world of international diplomacy, requiring non-state actors to become more active in transforming the economic and political playing field. Throughout the discussion, the South African Dialogue for Women is used as a case study that demonstrates how South Africa could further achieve its objectives of African Renaissance by supporting civil society initiatives in promoting good governance on the ground.

South Africa’s position on the African continent is widely seen to be one of dominance and leadership. No longer subject to the international opprobrium, post-apartheid South Africa launched a visionary campaign built around the notion of an ‘African Renaissance’ to restructure continental institutions in line with its interests. This state-led effort was complemented by an aggressive commercial expansion by well-financed South African corporations to break into previously inaccessible markets across the continent. This populist depiction of South Africa is largely echoed in the scholarly literature on South African foreign policy towards Africa. But careful analysis of the South African foreign policy experience both in Africa and more broadly, suggests that these images are only partially realised at best and that they ignore a host of structural problems and outcomes. In particular, the case for South African hegemonic dominance over the continent is challenged by its material weakness and uneven record of foreign policy successes. Despite this, Pretoria is continually ‘rewarded’ with leadership positions in international groupings, such as BRICS, G20 and nearly consecutive terms on the UN Security Council. We argue that this constitutes symbolic representivity and poses a continuing set of foreign policy dilemmas for South Africa and an international community as South Africa struggles to fulfil its hegemonic role in Africa.

The implementation of the United Nations Security Council vote (1973, 2011) in favour of a no-fly zone in Libya was met with mixed reactions by South African foreign policy observers and commentators in March 2011. Officially, South Africa had voted for Resolution 1973 as a non-permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, yet soon after the initial stage of implementation Pretoria made an appeal to international role-players to respect the unity and territorial integrity of Libya as well as Tripoli's rejection of any foreign military intervention. Critics asserted that South Africa had to be goaded into accepting a no-fly zone, based on ‘the responsibility to protect’, but that it soon backtracked, depriving itself of any shred of credibility it had left in international relations. Others noted that in some instances the normative objective of South Africa's foreign policy appears aimed at contributing to democracy, human rights, and justice in the international community, while in other instances, the South African government claims to uphold the principles of national sovereignty and non-interference — principles that often suit despots around the world. In examining South Africa's foreign policy and relations, the concept of norms subsidiarity (based on the work of Amitav Acharya) is helpful in explaining these apparent inconsistencies.

As a pluralist middle power, post-apartheid South Africa seeks to generate successful foreign policy initiatives at bilateral, multilateral and regional levels in order to shape international outcomes. In this endeavour, it has three important political resources - a recognition of its geo-political position and importance as a democratic yardstick and reformer; its acceptance of a transnational, neo-liberal elite alliance and finally, recognition of its leadership role from forces wishing to challenge African political establishments. However, the international and domestic political environment which in the mid-1990s was favourable towards middle-power initiative and reform has narrowed. South Africa's currently ambiguous foreign-policy responses therefore stem from a combination of the growing tendency towards unilateralism at the international level, from regional efforts to neutralize South Africa as a pluralist force - in and around NEPAD - as well as the absence of a national or domestic consensus on foreign policy. These constraints coupled with scarce foreign policy resources may, in the long term, necessitate a fundamental reorientation of South Africa's foreign policy.

This Adelphi Paper analyses and assesses South African foreign policy from the onset of the democratic transition to the contemporary period. The focus is on the question of South African leadership in the context of this transition; the challenges and opportunities South Africa faces within its immediate region and in Africa as a whole; and, more broadly, the country's aspirations to an international role in the South. It provides a comprehensive review of South African foreign policy over the past decade, including new material on key aspects of the transition and the consolidation of foreign policy under Mandela and Mbeki. It looks critically at the interplay between foreign-policy themes - human rights, development and security - at the regional and continental levels through an investigation of specific case studies in central and southern Africa. It also investigates the role of South Africa in promoting an economic and political revival of the African continent.

This Adelphi Paper analyses and assesses South African foreign policy from the onset of the democratic transition to the contemporary period. The focus is on the question of South African leadership in the context of this transition; the challenges and opportunities South Africa faces within its immediate region and in Africa as a whole; and, more broadly, the country's aspirations to an international role in the South. It provides a comprehensive review of South African foreign policy over the past decade, including new material on key aspects of the transition and the consolidation of foreign policy under Mandela and Mbeki. It looks critically at the interplay between foreign-policy themes - human rights, development and security - at the regional and continental levels through an investigation of specific case studies in central and southern Africa. It also investigates the role of South Africa in promoting an economic and political revival of the African continent.