South Africa’s coalition government, unexpectedly stable to date, is facing a significant foreign policy challenge due to disagreements between its two largest parties. Recent conflicts over major issues involving Russia, China, and Israel have highlighted deep ideological differences between the African National Congress (ANC) and the Democratic Alliance (DA), raising concerns about the coalition’s ability to last the full five-year term.
During a BRICS summit in Kazan, President Cyril Ramaphosa referred to Russian President Vladimir Putin as a “valued ally” and “friend,” prompting criticism from John Steenhuisen, the leader of the DA and the Minister of Agriculture in Ramaphosa’s cabinet. Steenhuisen described Putin as leading an “authoritarian regime” that violates international law through aggressive acts against sovereign states, a friendship which he argues is not shared by South Africa.
Vincent Magwenya, President Ramaphosa’s spokesperson, accused Steenhuisen of attempting to control the President’s actions, which he attributed to long-standing historical ties between the ANC and Soviet Russia during the apartheid era. South Africa’s foreign policy, perceived as inconsistent by some, has drawn claims of double standards due to its refusal to condemn Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine while pursuing a case of genocide against Israel at the International Court of Justice this year over the invasion of Gaza.
Greg Mills from the Brenthurst Foundation suggested that South Africa has historically ignored even-handedness in foreign policy, prioritizing revolutionary ideals over democratic principles. He pointed out that at the BRICS forum, Ramaphosa spoke about the Gaza conflict but omitted any reference to Ukraine. The DA’s international relations spokesperson, Emma Powell, emphasized the need for cabinet consensus on foreign policy to maintain a consistent non-aligned stance.
The coalition discord was further evidenced by a decision to move Taiwan’s de facto embassy from Pretoria to Johannesburg, seen by the DA as a nod to China, another key ANC ally. The Department of International Affairs defended this as routine diplomatic practice.
Adam Habib, director at SOAS University of London, warned that these disputes could exacerbate existing tensions within the coalition. He also highlighted the potential influence of forces within the ANC aiming to dissolve the coalition, who might use ideological differences as justification.
Furthermore, a fresh debate over Israel arose, as South Africa’s parliament was informed of ongoing plans to sever diplomatic ties with Israel, opposed by the DA. The DA opposed a parliamentary resolution to close the Tel Aviv embassy and questioned the ANC’s move to lodge a genocide case against Israel. However, Powell noted that while the DA disagreed with cutting diplomatic ties, both parties shared similar views on broader issues, such as advocating for a ceasefire in Gaza and rejecting illegal Israeli settlements.
Powell suggested that closing the Tel Aviv embassy might not be practical, implying it would likely remain operational to serve the region. Habib concluded that maintaining the coalition would require careful and inclusive crafting of foreign policy to accommodate diverse ideological perspectives without resulting in absolute outcomes.
