Unrelated to energy but equally significant in the field of international relations, I cannot ignore the recent debate on Newzroom Afrika featuring the Democratic Alliance (DA)’s MP Emma Louise Powell, the Shadow Minister for International Relations and Cooperation.
It's worth noting that Miss Louise Powell holds the titles of Mandela Washington Fellow 2023 and Munich Young Leader 2024. Historically, both these institutions have been associated with initiatives that the United States has employed to influence political changes, in particular in what it regards as its “enemy states”.
Miss Louise Powell continues to echo the same narratives regarding Russia in South Africa, specifically the claim that South Africa entered into a $1 trillion Russian Nuclear Deal. As I wrote previously in my Biznews article, South Africa actually signed a joint-cooperative agreement with Russia, which was mistakenly labeled as a 'nuclear deal.'
This characterization appears to be more aligned with propaganda, as a simple cross-multiplication reveals the implausibility of the stated financial figure that was closer to R650 billion at the time. Moreover, even if President Zuma expressed agreement in principle with Russia, a formal deal would not have been possible due to the legal requirements of South Africa, which mandate a competitive bidding process. In fact Eskom’s 2016 Request for Information did exactly that.
Miss Louise Powell suggests that the recently established MK Party, led by the disgruntled former President Jacob Zuma, may indicate speculations of 'Russian infiltration.' However, it is important to note that there is currently no concrete evidence supporting such claims. While Jacob Zuma did maintain close ties with Russia, his dissatisfaction with the ANC Government could stem from various factors, including the loss of his faction’s power to Cyril Ramaphosa, who received substantial support from the banking and business elite. Zuma hails from the Zulu ethnic group, and his support base is likely to be strongest in the Kwazulu Natal province. Due to Zulu Nationalism, not even Nelson Mandela could secure a victory in the Natal Province during the 1994 elections. Ramaphosa in contrast comes from a much smaller Venda tribe. Miss Powell has not yet provided any evidence that Zuma is funded by Vladimir Putin. There is some evidence of Russian involvement in the PetroSA deals, but equally so there is evidence of Total in the exploration of offshore gas in South Africa and neighbouring Namibia and Mozambique.
Why isn’t this also a concern for the DA?
Additionally, there is cause for concern regarding Miss Powell's attendance at a NATO Security Conference in 2024, where she purportedly mourned the death of Alexei Navalny. Is it appropriate for the official opposition's shadow minister of international relations to be involved in such an event? South Africans, known for their skepticism towards NATO involvement on the continent, especially concerning the USA's role in various regime changes, may find this attendance perplexing.
Powell's actions raise doubts about her understanding of the sentiments within the South African population regarding NATO and its influence in the region. She appears furthermore oblivious to the fact that black South Africans, in particular, harbor deep sympathy for the Palestinians and view NATO and the USA as, rightfully, enablers of oppression. Initiating or attempting to instigate a regime change will not alter this prevailing reality.
The DA's plea for "international observers" to participate in our elections, appears, at best, naif.
Are they cognizant of the fact that the CIA has historically employed NGOs to instigate regime changes? Are they uninformed about the questionable activities of the National Endowment for Democracy?
Could she genuinely be this clueless?
Good observation. You've highlighted many good points.
The DA seems to be courting NATO/EU countries and repeating the same talking points and propoganda, regarding Russia.
Soon they'll be repeating the US talking points on China.
It's quite embarrassing and too predictable.
They should focus on issues at home.
Definitely off the radar of most Canadians and Americans. And an excellent headline to get readers to explore your timely commentary. Thanks.