By Oupa Ngwenya.
First, let me declare my bias. Naledi Pandor was my star performing force in these geopolitical, trying, crying times.
That she is most missed is not even a realisation for a country at sixes and sevens with what should be an articulation of crisp national interests and a clear stance in showing off the big lie of international law applicability, double standards, bias and liberties that the US has allowed to Israel to continue abetting and aiding a genocide founded and powered on the notion ‘a land without people, for a people without land’.
Taking a stand on this issue is mostly probably met with bias by all else that errs on the side of the occupier. Pandor, as South Africa’s leading representative voice on the international front against a world that is roundly a crime scene, was unwavering in these trying, crying times where common humanity is denied a fighting chance of principled steadfastness.
That she is missing without awareness by a South Africa that exhibited no vacillation under her tenure as International minister is an indication of a country that did not know what it had.
This is no suggestion of Pandor’s irreplaceability, but the contention that any changes to be appreciated should either match or exceed the established record of success.
In Pandor’s replacement, nothing convinces that either holds, matching or excelling her tenure. Internationally, demonstrated a philosophic position and political stand of principled steadfastness.
Regarding the current Russia/America/Ukraine situation, it should be recalled that this was a US/UK/EU/NATO proxy war on Russia. The pawn on the geopolitical chessboard was Volodymyr Zelensky, with Ukraine being a useful deployment at NATO’s disposal.
NATO’s mission was to weaken Russia, while Ukraine’s mission impossible was to defeat Russia. The banality of evil is that Zelensky, as an actor, believed this possibility a la life imitating art.
Adding to this political abracadabra is that Zelensky and those who love to use him have short memories and are dunderhead students of history. The Russia/Ukraine conflict did not start on February 20, 2022. It started in 2014 with a US-backed coup against Viktor Yanukovych to pave the way for Zelensky.
The restart of the war in February 2022 could probably have ended within a month for signature by warring parties in April 2022. Two key developments occurred. One was AU Africa’s Peace Mission to Ukraine/Russia, headed by SA President Cyril Ramaphosa, part of whose plan was to meet both Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky.
Ramaphosa’s meeting with Zelensky was torpedoed by UK’s Boris Johnson not to sign an already initialised peace agreement. Ramaphosa proceeded to meet Putin after rigmarole in Poland. Ramaphosa was stunned when Putin brandished an initialised agreement ready for signing that rendered his AU peace mission obsolete by that draft peace agreement disclosure.
Given Vladimir’s inexhaustible memory bag, which is not susceptible to forgetfulness, it is uncertain when the last news was heard of that AU peace mission.
With Trump now US president, the EU is left unsure of its initial united wish to weaken Russia with the leading back of US under Joe Biden. Cracks within EU are evidently playing themselves out. In the words of Trump, America says it ploughed $350bn grant into Ukraine compared to EU $100bn in the form of a loan. For this quoted amount, America wants concessions in the firm of Ukraine mineral resources. The audit that Trump has ordered Elon
Musk conduct of USAID funding to Ukraine is an additional tricky poser for accountability of Biden’s administration.
From the face of it, America under Trump has left the divided EU in the lurch. EU is even proving to be a non-factor to have a sit on the peace table as this was not its war but Ukraine’s. Zelensky eliminated himself by listening to Johnson with no more standing in UK or EU politics.
With SA currently president of the G20, SA part of BRICS with Russia, and Russia normalising relations with America, Zelensky’s confused vulnerability is too obvious to be missed. Putin says Zelensky would only be involved ‘if necessary’.
The same Zelensky had a low opinion of Ramaphosa’s led AU-led Africa peace mission, charging that Ramaphosa had no grasp of the complicated nature of a conflict he was assigned to preside over.
In the midst of this comes a consideration by Ramaphosa to invite Zelensky for a state visit tagged with view that Zelensky should have a seat at the peace table.
With Putin’s unforgetfulness and given Zelensky’s banality in useability stakes, it is not a good place for Zelensky to be.
The wisdom or advisability of Ramaphosa to invite Zelensky to SA for a State visit would most likely not impress Putin. It is with this in mind that Pandor stands revealed as being missed the most.
Oupa Ngwenya is a journalist and communications strategist based in Johannesburg.
The views expressed here are not necessarily those of Fullview.