Justice and restitution as themes of South African foreign relations: The search for ontological security

ABSTRACT

The South African state considers its foreign relations as a means to an end. That end – the national interest – is articulated as developing the economy to address issues of poverty and underdevelopment inherited from years of oppressive and exploitative ‘foreign’ rule, and eventually to ‘build a better South Africa, in a better and safer world’. This article draws on IR theories of ontological security to explore how the South African state arrived at articulating this national interest by first looking at the ways in which historic relationships with states of the Global North have shaped the South African identity, and then asking to what extent South Africa expects states of the North to contribute toward the achievement of this goal as a form of restitution for the perceived injustices of the age of European imperialism.

KEYWORDS:

• North–South relations
• anti-coloniality
• conflict
• cooperation
• ontological security
• social justice

Acknowledgements

This article is a revised version of a section from a doctoral thesis prepared at the University of Cape Town between 2016 and 2019. I wish to thank the editor of SAJIA and anonymous peer reviewers for helpful suggestions on improving the article. I am also very grateful to Karen Smith, Daniel Nexon and participants at the annual conference of the Centre for Engagement on African Peace and Security (CEAPS), held on 13 and 14 February 2017 in Bloemfontein, South Africa, for their guidance, insightful comments and critiques on earlier versions of this article.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Note on contributor

Bianca Naude is a lecturer in politics and international relations at the Qwaqwa campus of the University of the Free State. Her research interests include international relations theory, the applications of psychoanalysis in international relations, and research methodology.

ORCID

Bianca Naude http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8870-1690

Notes

1 South Africa, Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA), ‘Foreign Policy for South Africa’, Green Paper on South Africa’s Foreign Policy. Pretoria: DFA, 1996. Available online from <https://www.gov.za/documents/foreign-policy-south-africa-discussion-document-0>, retrieved on 12/01/2018.

2 South Africa, Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO), ‘Building a Better World: The Diplomacy of Ubuntu’, White Paper on South African Foreign Policy. Pretoria: DIRCO, 2011, p. 3. Hereafter referred to as ‘the white paper’.

3 South Africa, National Planning Commission (NPC), ‘National Development Plan 2030: Our Future – Make it Work’. Pretoria: The Presidency of South Africa, 2012, p. 21. Hereafter referred to as ‘the NDP’.

4 DIRCO, ‘Building a Better World: The Diplomacy of Ubuntu’, White Paper on South African Foreign Policy. Pretoria: DIRCO, 2011, p. 31.

5 Ibid., p. 33.

6 Ibid., p. 12.

7 Wendt A, Social Theory of International Politics. London: Cambridge University Press, 1999, p. 92.

8 Ibid., p. 122.

9 In keeping with the philosophical tradition of Husserlian phenomenology, on which this research draws significantly, I will maintain the use of the capitalised ‘Self’ and ‘Other’ to refer to the emergent philosophical entity who comes into existence through a process of production of difference from a Constitutive Other.

10 See Naude B, ‘Regionalism as Resistance? South Africa’s Utopia of Souths’, in Féron É, J Käkönen & G Rached (eds), Revisiting Regionalism in the Contemporary World Order. Leverkusen-Opladen: Barbara Budrich. Forthcoming, 2019, pp. 1–18.

11 Ringmar E, ‘On the Ontological Status of the State’, European Journal of International Relations, 2, 1996, pp. 439–66.

12 See notably, Wendt A, ‘The Agent-Structure Problem in International Relations Theory’, International Organization, 41, 3, 1987, pp. 335–70; Jackson PT, ‘Hegel’s House or “People are States Too”’, Review of International Studies, 30, 2, 2004, pp. 281–7; Oprisko RL & Kaliher K, ‘State as person? Anthropomorphic Personification vs. Concrete Durational Being’, Journal of International and Global Studies, 6, 1, 2014, pp. 30–49.

13 Jackson PT, ‘Forum Introduction: Is the State a Person? Why Should We Care?’ Review of International Studies, 30, 2, 2004, p. 255 (one reference omitted).

14 Ibid., pp. 255–6.

15 Ibid., p. 256 (two references omitted).

16 See Wendt A, ‘The State as Person in International Theory’, Review of International Studies, 30, 2, 2004, pp. 289–316; Wight C, ‘State Agency: Social Action without Human Activity?’, Review of International Studies, 30, 2, 2004, pp. 269–80; Lomas P, ‘Anthropomorphism, Personification and Ethics: A Reply to Alexander Wendt’, Review of International Studies, 31, 2, 2005, pp. 349–55; Ringmar E, ‘The International Politics of Recognition’, in Ringmar E & T Lindemann (eds), The International Politics of Recognition. Boulder: Paradigm, 2010, pp. 3–23.

17 Wendt, ‘The State as Person in International Theory’, Review of International Studies, 30, 2, 2004, pp. 300–1.

18 Ibid., pp. 303–4.

19 Volkan V, ‘Large-Group Identity, International Relations and Psychoanalysis’, International Forum of Psychoanalysis, 18, 2009, p. 208.

20 Ibid., p. 211.

21 Wendt, ‘The State as Person in International Theory’, Review of International Studies, 30, 2, 2004, p. 289.

22 Schiff J, ‘“Real”? As if! Critical Reflections on State Personhood’, Review of International Studies, 34, 2, 2008, pp. 371–3.

23 Graesser AC et al., ‘Discourse Comprehension’, Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 1997, p. 164.

24 Ibid., p. 208.

25 See, for example, Volkan’s discussion of the activation of mythologised histories and emotions within the collective imagination by leaders during times of crisis in Volkan V, ‘Transgenerational Transmissions and Chosen Traumas: An Aspect of Large-Group Identity’, Group Analysis, 34, 1, 2002, pp. 79–97.

26 Discourses are more than mere utterances, of course. For this reason, I will maintain the use of the signifiers ‘discourses’ and ‘narratives’ as opposed to ‘speech acts’ and ‘utterances’ throughout the analysis.

27 Wodak, R, ‘Introduction: Discourse Studies – Important Concepts and Terms’, in Wodak R & M Krzyzanowski (eds), Qualitative Discourse Analysis in the Social Sciences. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008, p. 2 (original spelling and punctuation).

28 Brooks H, ‘The Dominant Party System: Challenges for South Africa’s Second Decade of Democracy’, EISA Occasional Paper, 25, 2004, pp. 7–9; Johnston A, South Africa: Inventing the Nation. London & New York: Bloomsbury, 2014, pp. 290–2; Booysen S, Dominance and Decline: The ANC in the Time of Zuma. Johannesburg: Wits University Press, 2016, pp. 28–32.

29 Netshitenzhe J, ‘A Continuing Search for Identity: Carrying the Burden of History’, in Lissoni A, J Soske, N Erlank, N Nieftagodien & O Badsha (eds), One Hundred Years of the ANC: Debating Liberation Histories Today. Johannesburg: Wits University Press, 2012, p. 14.

30 Nganje F, The Influence of the ANC on South Africa’s Foreign Policy. Proceedings report of a roundtable organised by the Institute for Global Dialogue. Pretoria: IGD, 2012, p. 13.

31 Ibid., pp. 10–1.

32 See Wendt A, ‘Anarchy is What States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics’, International Organization, 46, 2, 1992, pp. 412–5; Agné H, ‘The Politics of International Recognition: Symposium Introduction’, International Theory, 5, 1, 2013, pp. 94–104; Bartelson J, ‘Three Concepts of Recognition’, International Theory, 5, 1, 2013, pp. 111–3; Erman E, ‘The Recognitive Practices of Declaring and Constituting Statehood’, International Theory, 5, 1, 2013, pp. 129–50; Ringmar, ‘The International Politics of Recognition’, in Ringmar E & T Lindemann (eds), The International Politics of Recognition. Boulder: Paradigm, 2010, pp. 3–24.

33 Zehfuss M, ‘Critical Theory, Poststructuralism, and Postcolonialism’, In Carlsnaes W, T Risse & BA Simmons (eds), Sage Handbook of International Relations. London: SAGE, 2013, pp. 145–66; see also Crawford NC, Argument and Change in World Politics: Decolonisation and Humanitarian Intervention. London: Cambridge University Press, 2002, pp. 404–34.

34 Zehfuss, ‘Critical Theory, Poststructuralism, and Postcolonialism’, In Carlsnaes W, Risse T & BA Simmons (eds), Sage Handbook of International Relations. London: SAGE, 2013, pp. 156–65.

35 Jackson PT & DH Nexon, ‘Relations Before States: Substance, Process and the Study of World Politics’, European Journal of International Relations, 5, 1999, pp. 291–332.

36 Fischer KM, ‘Relationalism: Reflecting on One “How” of Navigating Substance and Process in IR’, E-IR.info, 2013, accessed 5 December 2018 https://www.e-ir.info/2013/05/25/relationalism-reflecting-on-one-how-of-navigating-substance-and-process-in-ir/.

37 Importantly, Jackson PT, ‘Relational Constructivism: A War of Words’, in Sterling-Folker J (ed), Making Sense of International Relations Theory. Boulder: Lynne Rienner, 2006, pp. 139–55; Go J, ‘For a Postcolonial Sociology’, Theory and Society, 42, 2013, pp. 25–55; Adler-Nissen R, ‘Relationalism: Why Diplomats Find IR Theory so Strange’, in Sending OJ, V Pouliot & IB Neumann (eds), Diplomacy and the Making of World Politics. London: Cambridge University Press. Cambridge Studies in International Relations No. 136, 2015, pp. 284–308; McCourt DN, ‘Practice Theory and Relationalism as the New Constructivism’, International Studies Quarterly, 60, 3, 2016, pp. 475–85; Qin Y, ‘A Relational Theory of World Politics’, Review of International Studies, 18, 2016, pp. 33–47.

38 In the general gist of process theory, entities are processes; they are never complete or achieved.

39 Hollway W, ‘Relationality: The Intersubjective Foundations of Identity’, in Mohanty CT & M Wetherell (eds), The SAGE Handbook of Identities. London: Sage, 2010, p. 220. A similar argument appears in Palan R, ‘A World of their Making: An Evaluation of the Constructivist Critique in International Relations’, Review of International Studies, 26, 4, 2000, pp. 575–98.

40 DIRCO, ‘Building a Better World: The Diplomacy of Ubuntu’, White Paper on South African Foreign Policy. Pretoria: DIRCO, 2011, pp. 3–4.

41 Ibid., p. 4.

42 Ibid.

43 Ibid., pp. 6, 9.

44 Ibid., p. 11.

45 Mbeki T, ‘Statement at the UN Millennium Summit’, New York, 7 September 2000. Accessed 18 November 2018. http://www.dirco.gov.za/docs/speeches/2000/mbek0907.htm.

46 Nkoane-Mashabane M, ‘A vision for South Africa’s foreign policy – now and beyond’, public lecture at the Department of Political Science, University of Pretoria, 12 September 2012. Accessed 23 August 2018. http://www.dirco.gov.za/docs/speeches/2012/mash0911.html.

47 African National Congress (ANC), ‘Strategy & Tactics of the ANC’, 2012 ANC NGC Discussion Documents, pp. 21–2. Accessed 2 June 2017. <http://www.anc.org.za/docs/pol/2013/strategyp.pdf>.

48 See, among others, Steele BJ, Ontological Security in International Relations: Self-identity and the IR State. London: Routledge, 2007; Browning CS & P Joenniemi, ‘Ontological Security, Self-Articulation and the Securitization of Identity’, Cooperation and Conflict, 52, 1, 2016, pp. 31–47; Chernobrov D, ‘Ontological Security and Public (mis)recognition of International Crises: Uncertainty, Political Imagining and the Self’, Political Psychology, 37, 5, 2016, pp. 581–96; Croft C & N Vaughn-Williams, ‘Fit for Purpose? Fitting Ontological Security Studies “Into” the Discipline of International Relations: Towards a Vernacular Turn’, Cooperation and Conflict, 52, 1, 2016, pp. 12–30; Subotic J, ‘Narrative, Ontological Security and Foreign Policy Change’, Foreign Policy Analysis, 12, 4, 2016, pp. 610–27; Zarakol A, ‘States and Ontological Security: A Historical Rethinking’, Cooperation and Conflict, 52, 1, 2016, pp. 48–68.

49 Kinnvall C & J Mitzen, ‘An Introduction to the Special Issue: Ontological Securities in World Politics’, Cooperation and Conflict, 52, 1, 2017, p. 4.

50 Mitzen J, ‘Ontological Security in World Politics: State Identity and the Security Dilemma’, European Journal of International Relations, 12, 3, 2006, p. 342.

51 While no scholar of South African foreign policy has adopted a theory of ontological security as framework for their analysis, many scholars have researched topics that speak to these observations. This include concerns with ‘status’ in Africa and globally, ‘recognition’ of its successes and capabilities by other states, ‘affirmation’ of its post-apartheid foreign policy identity, and its future ‘aspirations’ in global affairs. See, importantly, Alden C & G Le Pere, ‘South Africa in Africa: Bound to lead?’ Politikon, 36, 1, 2009, pp. 145–69; Habib A, ‘South Africa’s Foreign Policy: Hegemonic Aspirations, Neoliberal Orientations and Global Transformation, South African Journal of International Affairs, 16, 2, 2009, pp. 143–59; Bischoff PH, ‘External and Domestic Sources of Foreign Policy Ambiguity: South African Foreign Policy and the Projection of Pluralist Middle Power’, Politikon, 30, 1, 2003, pp. 183–201; Cornelissen S, ‘The Geopolitics of Global Aspiration: Sport Mega-events and the Emerging Powers’, The International Journal of History and Sport, 27, 16–18, 2010, pp. 3008–25; Alden C & M Schoeman, ‘South Africa in the Company of Giants: The Search for Leadership in a Transforming Global Order, International Affairs, 89, 1, 2013, pp. 111–29; ‘South Africa’s Symbolic Hegemony in Africa’, International Politics, 52, 2, 2015, pp. 239–54; Schoeman M, ‘South Africa as an Emerging Power: From Label to “Status Consistency”’, South African Journal of International Affairs, 22, 4, 2015, pp. 429–45.

52 Nel P, ‘Redistribution and Recognition: What Emerging Regional Powers Want’, Review of International Studies, 39, 2010, pp. 951–74.

53 Ibid., p. 963.

54 Pahad A, ‘Regional Intergration, Globalisation and Democratic Stability: A South-South Perspective’, address at the 2nd SADC-Mercosul Conference, Sao Paolo, 24 October 2004. Accessed 24 January 2018 <http://www.dirco.gov.za/docs/speeches/2000/paha1024.htm>.

55 Mbeki, ‘Inaugural Lecture of the Parliamentary Millennium Project’, Midrand, 1 April 2006. Accessed 25 January 2018 <http://www.dirco.gov.za/docs/speeches/2006/mbek0401.htm>.

56 DIRCO, ‘Building a Better World: The Diplomacy of Ubuntu’, White Paper on South African Foreign Policy. Pretoria: DIRCO, 2011, p. 7.

57 NPC, ‘National Development Plan 2030: Our Future – Make it Work’. Pretoria: The Presidency of South Africa, 2012, p. 14; emphasis added.

58 While I will not have the occasion to unpack the reasons and merits of this assimilation here, the reduction of colonialism to apartheid and vice-versa may be attributed to a tendency for the state to equate ‘white’ with ‘European’, and ‘European’ with ‘foreign’. Government documents routinely refer to apartheid as ‘white minority rule’, while these same documents blanket apartheid- and colonial administrations under the term ‘foreign rule’. ANC policy documents have, similarly, defined ‘Africans’ as ‘indigenous people’ or ‘black, Indian, and coloured people’, bracketing South Africans of European descent as ‘non-Africans’ or ‘European settlers’. See an in-depth discussion of this phenomenon in Naude B, State Personhood and World Politics: A Personology of the South African State, PhD thesis, University of Cape Town, 2019, pp. 84–91.

59 ANC, ‘Strategy & Tactics of the ANC’, 2012 ANC NGC Discussion Documents, p. 2; emphasis added.

60 Ibid., p. 20.

61 Ibid., p. 67.

62 Ibid., p. 6.

63 See Alden C & M Schoeman, ‘South Africa in the Company of Giants: The Search for Leadership in a Transforming Global Order’, International Affairs, 89, 1, 2013, pp. 127–128.

64 DIRCO, Revised Strategic Plan 2015–2020. Pretoria: DIRCO, p. 3.

65 Ibid. p. 4.

66 ANC, ‘The ANC in an Uncertain and Unpredictable World that is Characterised by Insecurity and the Rise of Populism: An ANC NEC International Relations Sub-Committee Discussion Document toward the 5th National Policy Conference’, 2017 ANC National Conference Discussion Documents. Johannesburg: ANC, 2017, p. 10.

67 ANC, ‘ANC International Relations: A better Africa in a Better and Just World’, 2015 ANC NGC Discussion Documents. Marshalltown: ANC, p. 160.

68 DIRCO, ‘Building a Better World: The Diplomacy of Ubuntu’, White Paper on South African Foreign Policy. Pretoria: DIRCO, 2011, p. 4.

69 Ibid., p. 7.

70 DIRCO, Revised Strategic Plan 2015–2020. Pretoria: DIRCO, p. 16.

71 Ibid., p. 16.

72 Ibid., p. 7.

73 ANC, ‘The ANC in an Uncertain and Unpredictable World that is Characterised by Insecurity and the Rise of Populism: An ANC NEC International Relations Sub-Committee Discussion Document toward the 5th National Policy Conference’, 2017 ANC National Conference Discussion Documents. Johannesburg: ANC, 2017, p. 11.

74 See, notably, Pieterse H, ‘In Search of a Nation: Nation Building in the New South Africa’, Safundi: Journal of African and American Studies, 3, 1, 2002, p. 4; Chipkin I, Do South Africans Exist? Nationalism, Democracy and the Identity of ‘The People’. Johannesburg: Wits University Press, 2007, pp. 17–26; Johnston A, South Africa: Inventing the Nation. London & New York: Bloomsbury, 2014, pp. 290–2. Most authors focus their work on the transgenerational transmission of apartheid trauma, again blurring the lines between apartheid and European colonialism. See, for example, Friedman M, ‘The Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa as an Attempt to Heal a Traumatised Society, in Shalev AY, R Yehuda & AC McFarlane (eds), International Handbook of Human Response to Trauma. Boston: Springer, 2000, pp. 399–411; Alexander N, An Ordinary Country: Issues in the Transition from Apartheid to Democracy in South Africa. New York and Oxford: Berghan, 2003, pp. 116–26; Gobodo-Madikizela P, ‘Transforming Trauma in the Aftermath of Gross Human Rights Abuses: Making Public Spaces Intimate Through the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission’, in Nadler A, TE Malloy & JD Fischer (eds), The Social Psychology of Intergroup Reconciliation. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008, pp. 65–7.

75 On the transgenerational transmission of trauma, see Erikson EH, ‘Ontogeny of Ritualization’, in Lowenstein RM, LM Newman, M Schur &AJ Solnit (eds), Psychoanalysis: A General Psychology. New York: International Universities Press, 1966, pp. 601–21; Vertzberger YYI, ‘The Antinomies of Collective Political Trauma: A Pre-Theory’, Political Psychology, 18, 4, 1997, pp. 863–76; Fromm G, Lost in Transmission: Studies of Trauma Across Generations. London: Karnac, 2012; Volkan VD, Psychoanalysis, International Relations and Diplomacy: A Sourcebook on Large-Group Psychology. London: Karnac, 2014, p. 23.

76 Naude B, ‘“States have Emotions too”: An Affect-Centered Approach to South African Foreign Relations’, South African Journal of International Affairs, 23, 4, 2016, pp. 484–8.

77 Mbeki, ‘Statement at the UN Millennium Summit’, New York, 7 September 2000. Accessed 18 November 2018. http://www.dirco.gov.za/docs/speeches/2000/mbek0907.htm.

78 Pahad A, ‘Rebirth of the African Continent’, address on the Occasion of Africa Day Celebrations, 25 May 2004. Accessed 24 January 2018 http://www.dirco.gov.za/docs/speeches/2004/paha0525.htm.

79 Pahad A. ‘Towards an African Identity Characterized by Peace, Democracy and Development Through Partnerships’, Address at the 9th KwaZulu-Natal African Renaissance Summit. Durban, 23 May 2007; emphasis added. Accessed 24 January 2018 <http://www.dirco.gov.za/docs/speeches/2007/paha0524.htm>.

80 Mohanty CT, ‘Social Justice and the Politics of Identity’, in Mohnaty CT & M Wetherell (eds), The SAGE Handbook of Identities. London: Sage, 2010, p. 536.

81 Ibid., p. 538.

82 Mandela N, ‘Address Before a Joint Meeting of the United States Congress. Washington, 6 October 1994’. The African Studies Center, University of Pennsylvania Congressional Record Collection 140. http://www.africa.upenn.edu/Govern_Political/Mand_Congr.html.

83 Pahad, ‘Rebirth of the African Continent’, address on the Occasion of Africa Day Celebrations, 25 May 2004. Accessed 24 January 2018 http://www.dirco.gov.za/docs/speeches/2004/paha0525.htm.

84 DIRCO, ‘Building a Better World: The Diplomacy of Ubuntu’, White Paper on South African Foreign Policy. Pretoria: DIRCO, 2011, pp. 4, 10.

85 Mbeki, ‘Inaugural Lecture of the Parliamentary Millennium Project’, Midrand, 1 April 2006. Accessed 25 January 2018 <http://www.dirco.gov.za/docs/speeches/2006/mbek0401.htm>.

86 Ibid.; emphasis added.

87 Zuma JG, Statement at the General Debate of the XV Summit of the Heads of State and Government of the Non-Aligned Movement, Sharm-El-Sheikh, 15 July 2009. Accessed 24 January 2018 <http://www.dirco.gov.za/docs/speeches/2009/jzum0715.html>

88 Ibid.

89 DIRCO, ‘Building a Better World: The Diplomacy of Ubuntu’, White Paper on South African Foreign Policy. Pretoria: DIRCO, 2011, p. 24.

90 Mohanty, ‘Social Justice and the Politics of Identity’, in Mohnaty CT & M Wetherell (eds), The SAGE Handbook of Identities. London: Sage, 2010, p. 538.