The DA’s response to the furore surrounding City of Tshwane mayor Solly Msimanga’s visit to Taiwan has been predictable, disingenuous and troubling. It has been predictable in that the DA tried to divert attention from the controversy by pointing to the ANC government’s longstanding trade relations with Taiwan as somehow evidence of a double standard at play. Screen grabs from the website of SA’s liaison office in Taipei and press releases of Department of Trade and Industry outbound trade missions were circulated as "evidence", even though such information is freely available and hardly a secret.
It has been disingenuous in that this colossal diplomatic gaffe has been dressed in the pious language of "job creation", "promoting investment" and "picking up some opportunities" (Msimanga’s words).
It has been troubling in that, with Msimanga’s rogue visit to Taipei, the DA has wilfully imperilled SA’s foreign relations, particularly with a major trading partner. Msimanga took an oath of office that obliges him to abide by the laws of this country. Every law emerges from policy. Our laws and policies must be respected by the mayor, who must abide by them.
It is, of course, possible the DA is ignorant of the way in which our country does business and conducts its diplomacy, but the party ignored the advice of the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (Dirco) regarding the visit.
If one considers that the foreign office is the first port of call of any government entity wanting to undertake official foreign visits, this disregard is remarkable.
It is Dirco’s role to advise all spheres of government to ensure that such engagements advance SA’s foreign policy and national interest, and not endanger it. This is irrespective of the sphere of government or political party to which officials belong.
SA is not unique in expressing concern when politicians act out of sync with our country’s foreign policy. US president-elect Donald Trump was similarly criticised by foreign policy experts in the US when he made a highly publicised call to Taiwan’s leaders late last year.
It has also become necessary to outline the interconnected but vastly differing issues of trade relations versus diplomatic relations, and trade/economic sanctions versus diplomatic sanctions. In attempting to explain away this unfortunate blunder, the DA has conflated all manner of distinctly different issues.
In the field of international diplomacy, permutations exist within which countries pursue their foreign and trade relations. One, for instance, is having trade relations without any sanctions in place, but with no diplomatic relations. This is the situation between SA and Morocco, owing to SA’s recognition of the Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic.
For this reason, government departments always work with Dirco and set up delegations with different capabilities and capacities. The Department of Environmental Affairs, for example, did so ahead of the 22nd Conference of the Parties (COP22) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change in Morocco.
A second scenario is having diplomatic relations but trade sanctions, such as SA had with the Islamic Republic of Iran during the period of the UN-enforced economic sanctions against that country.
A third is having diplomatic and trade relations but some limited trade sanctions in place, such as SA has with Israel — namely, no trade with the settlements in the occupied territories. This is in line with SA’s position on Israeli settlements in Palestinian territories, including east Jerusalem — positions that are in accordance with international law.
Another is no diplomatic relations but no trade sanctions, such as SA has with Taiwan. The US has the same level of relations with Taiwan, maintaining a trade office without formal diplomatic relations.
This is "diplomacy 101". Anyone who understands diplomatic relations should not confuse trade missions to establish new markets for South African goods and services by nonpolitical staff and the business community with furthering diplomatic ties, the latter being what Msimanga did. It is worth noting the People’s Republic of China also has direct product market access to Taiwan, although it does not have diplomatic relations.
For countries such as ours that trade with Taiwan and seek reciprocity and single trade routes for our goods and services, we do not conflate the travel of business delegations with visits by high-level political principals, as the DA has done. Although we may trade with Taiwan, Morocco and Israel, our municipal, provincial and national political principals have clear directives regarding official visits; and in the case of Israel, not to trade with the occupied territories in particular.
That the mayor of Tshwane and other DA political principals should then regard it as their prerogative to travel to Taiwan "to establish city-to-city diplomatic relations", or to conduct visits to and participate in funded "study tours" to the other two countries, is problematic.
The DA is the political opposition, and that it should take policy positions contrary to those of the South African government is to be expected. However, that they should pursue an independent and rogue foreign policy while in the same South African government is quite a different matter.
SA’s Taipei liaison office exists to expand bilateral economic, trade and other relations with Taiwan. Our trade missions across the world aim to leverage market opportunities and ensure SA’s exports to high-growth markets are facilitated. Going forward, one hopes any structures of the government in which the DA holds influence should work within our existing economic diplomacy structures, and not seek to replace them.
• Molewa chairs the government’s international co-operation, trade and security cluster, as well as the ANC’s international relations subcommittee
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.