South Africa’s “diplomacy of ubuntu”: an African approach to coexistence?

Abstract

South Africa’s minister of international relations and cooperation, Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, recently argued that one of the purposes of South African foreign policy is to help establish a multipolar world order, dominated and directed by commonly agreed rules and regulations.1 Statements like this are in line with pronouncements made by the BRICS, with the idea of peaceful coexistence, based upon internationally agreed norms and rules, arguably one of the binding elements of the otherwise somewhat disparate grouping. The BRICS grouping has been called many things and is said torepresent a variety of discourses around what could be called an alternative to a perceived unipolar world order dominated by the United States. In light of the dominant academic discourse which characterizes emerging powers as status quo powers attempting to increase their relative power and influence vis-a-vis the North, this chapter focuses on the South African case to explore the extent to which the BRICS grouping challenges the legitimacy of the present international order, and presents an alternative. This will be done by first asking whether South Africa promotes “coexistence” or policies resembling coexistence in its stated foreign policy. The Chapter then goes on to assess to what extent South Africa adheres to the principles of coexistence highlighted in the Introduction in its foreign policy practice. Next, the chapterexplores the ways in which South Africa is attempting to revise the current global order and promote a rules-based system through its foreign policy. Finally, before concluding, the chapter briefly outlines some of the domestic constraints that may pose an obstacle to South Africa’s future international role. Before continuing, it is important briefly to discuss South Africa’ssomewhat unique position in the BRICS.While it can be argued that South Africa is, in a political and strategic sense, a good fit for the grouping, its membership continues to be contested, with many commentators pointing out that the SouthAfrican economy cannot be compared to that of the other four members.2 In fact, many-especially those writing mainly from an economic perspective-prefer to use BRIC, rather than BRICS, thus leaving South Africa out of the equation altogether. While it is obvious that South Africa does not have the same material resources as the other members of the grouping,3 its inclusion is justified on the basis that in order to be representative and legitimate, the grouping needed a member from the African continent. South Africa was the obvious choice. For South Africa the advantages of membership of the grouping include status and prestige, potential economic benefit through increased bilateral trade, strengthening its position as the gateway to Africa and as a regional power on the continent. Many critics have, however, warned that the promised economic benefits that BRICS membership will bring to South Africa are not guaranteed.4