Editorial: SA is paying for non-aligned stand on war

Opinion|Published 1 year ago

Egypt's Prime Minister Mustafa Madbuly, Senegal's President Macky Sall, President of the Union of Comoros Azali Assoumani, Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa and Zambia's President Hakainde Hichilema walk to attend a joint press conference, amid Russia's attack on Ukraine, in Kyiv, Ukraine on Friday. Picture: Reuters/Valentyn Ogirenko

Cape Town - The diplomatic fallout involving South Africa and Poland is the latest indication that Africa’s most industrialised economy is being ostracised for its non-aligned stance in the Ukraine/Russian war.

On Friday, the government announced that a plane carrying the security personnel accompanying President Cyril Ramaphosa on a peace mission to Ukraine was held up in Poland, in an incident that sparked a diplomatic squabble.

A charter flight carrying security forces and journalists was blocked on landing at Warsaw Airport, with the Polish authorities not allowing those on board to disembark.

According to media reports the Polish authorities had raised concerns over the weapons and ammunition of the Presidential Protection Unit on board the charter aeroplane as these were deemed illegal in that country.

The incident has served as a disruptive side-show to the important mission by African leaders to broker a peace deal between the warring countries.

The SA plane stuck at Warsaw’s Chopin Airport over the weapons carried by President Cyril Ramaphosa’s security detail.

While the details of the Warsaw airport stand-off are still sketchy, it is clear South Africa is beginning to pay the price for its non-aligned stance to the war. It is well known that countries like Poland don’t appreciate South Africa’s position, and they regard it as being pro-Russia.

There have been attempts by Western countries to pressure South Africa to take a pro-Ukraine stance. In May the government of Japan invited the AU to the G7 summit and excluded regular attendee, South Africa.

Japan was sending a message that Pretoria’s stance to the war will not be without political and economic consequences.

There has been talk, even in the US Congress, that the American government was considering pulling out of important preferential trade and funding partnerships involving South Africa such as Agoa (African Growth and Opportunity Act) and Pepfar (President’s Emergency Plan for Aids Relief).

Agoa is a trade programme that allows countries in sub-Saharan Africa, including South Africa, to export products to the US tariff-free. Pepfar is a US government initiative to address the HIV/Aids epidemic.

It is clear that if Western countries are unable to persuade South Africa with regard to its neutral position to the Ukraine war, other measures, including economic and political isolation, might be engaged to elicit a change in stance.

Cape Times