This year appears to be a watershed moment for African countries.
Pius Dunaiski recently wondered in this newspaper (‘On the Drama Surrounding Ukraine’) why South African president Cyril Ramaphosa invited president Volodymyr Zelenskyy for a state visit.
South Africa is the Trump administration’s main target on the continent.
The response to its coercive policy could be a litmus test for global realignment.
THE G20 SUMMIT AS A CATALYST?
As the host of the G20 Summit later this year, in November, South Africa provoked the United States (US) government’s anger (again) by announcing the theme as ’Solidarity, Equality, Sustainability’.
The G20 foreign ministers meeting in Johannesburg on 21-22 February was only attended by the US embassy’s chargé d’affaires.
In contrast, most other members of the G20 were represented at the highest level.
When opening the meeting, Ramaphosa stated: “Our modern-day challenges can only be resolved through collaboration, partnership and solidarity. That is why South Africa has placed solidarity, equality and sustainability at the centre of our G20 presidency … it is critical that the principles of the United Nations (UN) Charter, multilateralism and international law remain at the centre of all our endeavours.”
The G20 finance ministers met on 26 February in Cape Town.
As happened with foreign secretary Marco Rubio earlier in the month, US treasury secretary Scott Bessent boycotted the meeting.
At the gathering, Ramaphosa reiterated: “The pursuit of equality is an imperative for wealthy and poor countries alike. That is why South Africa has placed solidarity, equality and sustainability at the centre of its G20 presidency.”
FORUM FOR REALIGNMENT?
As an African middle power, South Africa must navigate more than ever between changing coalitions and relations. Brics+ could emerge as a suitable home base.
Brics+ accommodates members with differing ideologies and policies and is also limited by regional dissonances and conflicts.
It is largely shaped by China’s orientation towards multilateralism and free trade.
Brics+ lacks the foundation for a consolidated power bloc on its own.
Its attraction is as a basis for countries that prefer not to position themselves firmly on the side of one global actor or another.
Following the example of India, members could engage in changing coalitions and relations, facilitating ad hoc alliances.
Such shopping around takes the form of a marketplace.
A CONTESTED GLOBAL ORDER
The future of the UN is another contentious issue.
Dorothy Shea, the interim US permanent representative to the UN, declared in a UN Security Council debate on 18 February: “We will consider whether the actions of the organisation are serving American interests, and whether it can be reformed.”
The answer promptly followed. Alongside Malaysia’s prime minister Anwar Ibrahim, Colombia’s president Gustavo Petro and Varsha Gandikota-Nellutla as acting chair of the newly founded Hague Group (of which Namibia is one of seven members), Ramaphosa published an article in Foreign Policy on 25 February.
It ends: “The international system cannot endure if it is undermined by those who wield vetoes and sanctions to shield allies from scrutiny or use aid and trade as tools of coercion… We cannot remain passive and be forced to publish ‘calls’ and ‘demands’ while the principles of justice that underpin our international order are destroyed… Either we act together to enforce international law or we risk its collapse.”
A vote on two resolutions at the UN General Assembly on the third anniversary of the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine might be an indicator of the changing situation.
The Ukraine draft was adopted with South Africa abstaining and the US, as one of 18 countries (including Russia, Belarus, Israel and North Korea), voting against its adoption.
South Africa supported the initial US draft resolution, adopted in its amended version, while the US abstained (Namibia abstained on both).
Anyone predicting this a year ago would have risked being declared mentally confused.
WHO WITH WHOM AND FOR WHAT?
The Make America Great Again agenda draws new dividing lines.
The West could even regroup into an isolationist US with some vassal states and a more consolidated, separate Western alliance.
The Global South, as fictitious as the Global North, could align with one of the four centres of global power based in Beijing, Brussels, Moscow and Washington, or seek closer affiliation with the Brics+ to navigate between the sides.
The G20 Summit in November could see a reshuffling of the deck.
The question remains, who will be left holding the jokers and how will South Africa play its hand?
Namibia should pay attention. As André du Pisani (‘The Rise to Power of Donald Trump and its Aftermath’) suggested in The Namibian earlier this month: “Namibia should actively promote the universality of human rights and a return to idealism as a guiding philosophy.”
- Henning Melber is extraordinary professor at the University of Pretoria and the University of the Free State and is associated with the Nordic Africa Institute in Uppsala, Sweden. This is a modified short version of a blog post. For the full version, see: https://nai.uu.se/stories-and-events/news/2025-03-05-south-africa-and-the-global-disorder.html
Stay informed with The Namibian – your source for credible journalism. Get in-depth reporting and opinions for
only N$85 a month. Invest in journalism, invest in democracy –
Subscribe Now!
