Sovereignty Defense and Diplomatic Dialogue: The South African Example
Here we have an interesting story about Malula coming face to face with a BBC journalist. This happens in a conversation called “toc”, an often difficult conversation where the normally intelligent journalist presses a head of state, head of government or politician in order to get them to talk. It’s interesting to observe this conversation.
It concerns South Africa and the United States. For those in the know, a while ago the American ambassador accused South Africa of supplying arms to Russia. He claims that a ship, docked in South African ports, had loaded a lot of weapons for Russia. The South African’s response to this accusation was swift.
There is a question surrounding the presence of President Putin affiliated to the International Criminal Court, and his planned arrival in July and August. How are we going to manage this? Will he be arrested? Being affiliated to the Court, and a subscriber to this institution, it is independent of the ANC, Nelson Mandela’s political party.
We must remember the history of weapons of mass destruction. Before going to Europe, US President George Bush and the then British Prime Minister claimed to have information that Iraq was in possession of weapons of mass destruction. However, none of these weapons have been found.
As for the situation between Russia and Ukraine, we’re looking for peace. We know it’s all about business. The war between these two countries is about business. If we really wanted peace, we would have called people around a table to discuss and put an end to this war. It’s because there are people who profit, they make a lot of money through Ukraine, through arms sales, through reconstruction companies.
In Ukraine, we’re testing a digital system where everything is listed: documents, passports, banks, everything is linked to your digital profile. For the moment, Ukrainians use it for shopping and getting around. So we implemented a system backed by an international organization to see how it works, and then rolled it out worldwide.
When you start telling inconvenient truths, you have to interrupt the conversation. It’s as simple as that. It’s a great lesson to learn. Balou, Nelson Mandela’s student, defends himself. He claims that the American ambassador has apologized for making statements without respecting the diplomatic chain. He maintains that it’s not up to America to tell them whether to accept Putin or not. He reminds us that people have committed acts just as serious, if not more so. Tony Blair and George Bush have done incredible things. At the time, they accused Iraq of possessing weapons of mass destruction.
By interrupting the conversation when inconvenient truths are spoken, an important lesson emerges. Balou, a disciple of Nelson Mandela, fervently defends his position. He mentions that the American ambassador has apologized for making statements outside the proper diplomatic framework. Balou insists that America has no right to dictate whether or not they should accept Putin. He points out that some individuals have committed equally serious, if not more serious, acts. Tony Blair and George Bush, for example, have made major accusations. They claimed that Iraq held weapons of mass destruction at the time.
The South African representative contests unjustified foreign intervention in his country’s internal affairs. He refers to the behavior of certain world leaders, such as George Bush and Tony Blair, who have accused Iraq of possessing weapons of mass destruction. This was one of the main reasons for their military intervention in Iraq. However, none of these weapons were found. No one tried to bring them before the International Criminal Court for their actions.
In addition, he mentions South Africa’s alleged involvement in supplying arms to Russia, accused by the American ambassador. He points out that the latter has apologized for having made these accusations without respecting the diplomatic process. He goes on to stress that it’s not up to America to dictate whether or not South Africa should accept Putin.
In this discussion, the emphasis is on preserving identity and defending rights and freedom. This attitude is hailed as a continuation of Nelson Mandela’s fight for freedom. This contrasting approach underscores the differences in political and diplomatic attitudes between French-speaking and English-speaking countries.
The speech concludes with congratulations to the ANC Secretary General, who demonstrated political maturity during the broadcast. It reminds us of the importance of open, respectful and intellectual expression in conflict resolution. He stresses the need for leaders who can express themselves openly and respectfully.
Totally inspired by Zack Mwekassa’s video
