What does Zelensky's visit mean for South Africa's foreign policy?

WHAT is the essence of a foreign policy that does not rally the nation around a common goal, and instead divides the populace right down the middle, leaving a bitter taste and uncertainty?

The visit by the Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to our capital this week has caused much greater harm to the national spirit than any semblance of good the government has attempted to project.

I have attempted to look for any hidden logic since the announcement and confirmation that Zelensky was set to pay a state visit to South Africa. If truth be told, and with unfettered honesty, I could find no sound basis for President Cyril Ramaphosa’s administration to engage in an act so folly.

And now that Zelensky has come and gone — having been treated with pomp and ceremony akin to Brussels — what tangible benefits can the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (Dirco) or the Presidency show as some kind of a return on a geopolitical investment? I bet none. Instead, the entire ill-advised episode has left the ANC’s key alliance partners, the SA Communist Party (SACP), seething with anger. The EFF took to the street, protesting outside the embassy of Ukraine in the capital.

Elsewhere, on social media as well as the mainstream media, there is no iota of any sense of convergence on Ramaphosa’s inexplicable act. Instead, and this is the saddest part, Ramaphosa has increased the wedge within the alliance to an extent that the repercussions from the certain fallout will be felt brutally by the ANC when elections are held next year.

This is the area that worries me a lot, and should worry comrades who are no Johnny-come-lately to political activism.

It is quite easy, even expedient, to dismiss the EFF’s stance against Zelensky’s visit as a gimmick. I’d argue, however, that the same cannot be said of the SACP, and Cosatu. Worse still, the concerns of ordinary South Africans and our brethren throughout the continent surely cannot be dismissed as mere misplacement.

Africa is riddled with violent conflict, especially Sudan and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) where not so long ago we lost more than a dozen members of the SA National Defence Force who were mowed down by the Rwanda-backed rebel group, M23, while on a peace mission.

Noble as the objective to contribute personnel to the Sadc mission to the DRC could be, the ineptitude in the government’s public relations effort did not go down well. Again, the elephant in the room is who advised Ramaphosa to host such a divisive figure as Ukraine’s leader?

The government has attempted to present its rationale behind hosting a man the United States no longer wants as a partner through media statements before and after the controversial visit. In short, Pretoria wants to contribute towards the ultimate truce in the Ukraine conflict with South Africa’s BRICS partner, that is, Russia.

Now, there is absolutely nothing wrong with the pursuit for peace, and thereby saving lives, as US President Donald Trump has argued in his endeavour to broker a peace deal in Ukraine.

But our President could have done better, starting on the continent. I do not want to touch on our porous borders that are a cause of great difficulty and hardship for millions of South Africans who are increasingly crying out for the return of the death penalty. That would complicate issues.

Ringing questions include why Ramaphosa would return to the Zelensky saga from where he flew to the conflict zone, landing in the nearby Poland, and taking a rail trip to Kyiv in a mission many still feel displayed blatant disregard for African leadership by Zelensky himself and Western backers?

Methinks it is acts such as these that cause the rest of the continent to view Pretoria with jaundiced eyes, for we stand accused of playing more European than African.

We need a foreign policy that unites our people, regardless of their political affiliation. Our foreign policy needs to be articulated eloquently, with objectives clearly spelt out. It must be seen to serve the interests of South Africa as a whole, and not a self-serving vehicle with sectarian goals.

It is political miscalculations such as these that provide ammunition to Ramaphosa’s adversaries. The nature of the formation of the GNU has divided the Mass Democratic Movement, the revolution, as the SACP says.

The SACP continues to show its seriousness to contest next year’s local government elections independently of their traditional ally, the ANC. A growing number of Cosatu affiliates are indicating that they would rather vote with the SACP than the ANC if the fallout within the alliance goes the full monty.

The Zelensky fracas is such an unnecessary addition to the avalanche of challenges the Tripartite Alliance faces. Again, who benefits? I shudder to fathom what the story behind Zelensky really looks like. I’m sure it will be so toxic it can crumble Africa’s oldest former liberation movement. God forbid.

* Abbey Makoe is the founder and editor-in-chief of Global South Media Network. The views are personal.

** The views expressed here do not reflect those of the Sunday Independent, Independent Media, or IOL.