New South African ambassador to US will be ‘fit and proper'
Minister of International Relations and Cooperation, Ronald Lamola said the person replacing expelled South African ambassador to the US, Ebrahim Rasool, would be a capable South African who is fit and proper for the position, regardless of race.
'As for whether the ambassador to the US should be white or black, the ANC is a non-racial organisation,'
Lamola said during a media briefing following the ANC NEC meeting in Boksburg over the weekend.
Lamola, who is a member of the ANC National Executive Committee, added:
'We are going to look for a capable South African—someone we believe is fit and proper and meets the requirements to serve as ambassador to the United States or any other country to which we wish to deploy them.'
Rasool returned to Cape Town last week after US Secretary of State Marco Rubio expelled him from the USA, declaring him
'persona non grata'
.
This was after comments he made during a webinar, in which he criticised the Trump administration for cosying up to white supremacy.
ANC deputy secretary-general Nomvula Mokonyane confirmed that Rasool's report on his expulsion had been received but did not indicate whether any action would be taken against him.
'We have received reports of the work that he had actually done and it was an unfortunate situation at what had occurred and I think where we are now is to move forward,'
Mokonyane said.
'The government processes have been utilised, where he was called to account, and we are satisfied as the ANC that it is time for us to move forward and work harder and more united to find a better mechanism of protecting and representing the South Africa that we want,'
Mokonyane added.
IOL News previously reported that former South African Ambassador Tony Leon called for a
're-evaluation and strategic engagement'
with the US government following the ongoing diplomatic fallout between South Africa and the US.
READ MORE:
US expulsion a 'badge of dignity' – South African envoy
Leon criticised the conduct of former ambassador Rasool, suggesting that personal opinions should not overshadow the responsibilities of diplomatic representation.
'For an ambassador to express personal opinions is problematic,'
he said.
'An ambassador's role is to represent their country's interests, and if Rasool was instructed to attack the US administration, he was deviating from his primary duty. Diplomats must adhere strictly to government policy, regardless of personal beliefs.'
READ MORE:
Are white farmers really persecuted? What's behind the US-South Africa spat
Leon said the issues extend beyond individual conduct and emphasised that South Africa's foreign policy has failed to adapt to the shifting dynamics of international relations.
'Even if we had a diplomatic superstar, that person would still face challenges due to our current policies. We need to justify these policies to align with out national interests,'
he said.
When asked about the potential for diplomacy to mend relations following South Africa's legal action against Israel, Leon was sceptical.
'At the moment, South Africa has chosen a particular alignment that complicates our relations with the US,'
he said.
He pointed to the successful diplomatic engagement of South African labour leaders with the US as a contrasting example of effective diplomacy.
Leon advocated for a more nuanced approach to diplomacy, avoiding confrontational tactics.
'There are ways to engage that don't resort to megaphone diplomacy. We must explore the root causes of our differences and seek solutions,'
he added.
First published by
IOL
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
a day ago
- Russia Today
South Africa's vice president talks AI risks with Russian youth
Young people should be cautious about how they adopt artificial intelligence to ensure it does not diminish their creativity or cultural identity, South African Vice President Paul Mashatile told Russian students on Friday. Mashatile spoke at a youth workshop 'The SPIEF Academy' organized by Russia's Roscongress Foundation on the sidelines of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum. He described South Africa's investment in youth development programs as a strategy to spur innovation and generate future employment. 'The youth can come up with a lot of new ideas,' Mashatile said. 'Often you find the youth struggling with employment, but we are seeing the youth themselves can become employers,' provided they have access to seed funding. Mashatile cautioned that AI could have negative effects on a young person's development. 'Artificial intelligence can have a negative impact if it stifles creativity, because it's easy for people to get lazy. You know, these days artificial intelligence can write an essay for you. And that's what we must avoid, particularly for the youth,' he said. 'We must use artificial intelligence as something that is supportive to our own creativity rather than it taking over.' The vice president added that people using AI for creative purposes should remain rooted in their cultural identities and not be sidetracked by what models generate. Mashatile praised Russia's history of providing higher education opportunities for African students and said South Africa is also eager to learn from Russia's advances in application of AI technology. 'We are also here to learn from the youth of Russia about what you are doing,' he told the audience. The SPIEF Academy's main goal is to engage students and young professionals in the current agenda of the global economy, technological development, and social change. Its participants are students and young professionals aged 18 to 23 who are enrolled at leading Russian universities.
Russia Today
2 days ago
- Russia Today
Prosecutors to present final arguments in first African Nobel Peace Prize winner's murder case
South African National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) advocates have been given four months to give Judge Nompumelelo Radebe a convincing argument that Inkosi Albert Luthuli was killed by apartheid operatives, not a goods train as was officially found soon after he died in 1967. Advocates Ncedile Dunywa, Annah Chuene, Siyabonga Ngcobo, and Xolani Msimango concluded, leading several people with evidence on June 11. Since the beginning of the inquest at the Pietermaritzburg High Court on April 14, the advocates have led an array of witnesses with evidence. Those who testified included South African Police (SAPS) members, Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (DPCI) officials, scene reconstruction and simulation experts, forensic analysts, medical evidence, family members of Chief Luthuli, anti-apartheid activists, and friends of Luthuli. Former justice minister Jeff Radebe also testified. The matter was postponed from June 11 to October 13, where the advocates would be given until October 16 to give closing arguments. The same court also postponed on June 17 the inquest on the death of another struggle stalwart, Griffiths Mxenge, who was killed by stabbing in Umlazi on November 19, 1981, to October 9. The Mxenge matter was first postponed on 14 April to give those who felt they might be implicated in his death, who were apartheid police officers at the time, a chance to apply for the government to provide them with legal representatives, as they were employed by the state when Mxenge was killed. The court first postponed Mxenge's matter to June 17, which was the holding date to establish if the officers had succeeded in finding lawyers. On their return on June 17, the court heard that their applications to have the state-provided lawyers were still pending. Since the beginning of Luthuli's inquiry, scores of Luthuli's family members, ANC leaders and supporters have been frequenting the court to hear what caused the death of the president-general of Africa's biggest liberation movement and the Nobel Peace Prize winner. Luthuli died at the age of 69 at the Stanger Hospital on July 21, 1967, hours after he was found with multiple head and upper-body injuries at the railway line Mvoti River bridge. The inquest heard that even his death at the hospital was questionable because he was not afforded proper medical attention that could have saved his life. The NPA instituted an inquiry as there were beliefs that the initial inquest conducted in September 1969 misled the public about the cause of his death. Magistrate C.I. Boswell, who presided over the inquest at the Stanger Magistrate's Court, had concluded that Luthuli had been hit by the goods steam train that was traveling to Durban as he was crossing the bridge to his sugarcane farm. The report indicated that Luthuli might not have heard the train hooting or seen it coming, despite that it was approaching him from the front. Another theory was that Luthuli deliberately ignored the train to kill himself. However, experts who testified before Judge Radebe indicated that Luthuli was likely attacked. The experts were backed by the National Archives Advisory Council chairperson, Sibongile Mnyandu-Nzimande, who testified that her family member witnessed white men assaulting Luthuli with a shovel near the bridge where the train was stationed. Mnyandu-Nzimande told the judge that her relative, who was a messenger transporting documents between Luthuli and her grandfather, was few days later taken away by police to state what he witnessed, but was never found again. At the beginning of the inquest, Dunywa said the outcome of the inquest, held the same year Luthuli died, was not based on fact and evidence, 'but rather on the suppression of justice aimed at ensuring that the perpetrators remained hidden and protected'. He said Boswell wrote correspondence on August 4, 1967, preempting the outcome even before the evidence was presented before him. Dunywa stated that Boswell communicated his written opinion to the Secretary of Justice that 'I had to report that an inquest in connection with the death of Albert John Luthuli will be held at Stanger by me on 19 September 1967 at 10 am. 'From the report available at present, I do not expect the finding to be anything other than accidental. The cause of death furnished by the district sergeant might be questioned by the relatives, but I can not anticipate on what grounds the dispute is raised.'First published by IOL
Russia Today
2 days ago
- Russia Today
The end of Israeli exceptionalism
Israel has now been at war with its neighbours for nearly two years. The latest round began with the Hamas-led terrorist attack on 7 October 2023. In response, West Jerusalem launched an aggressive military campaign that has since expanded to touch nearly every country in the region. The escalation has placed the Jewish state at the centre of Middle Eastern geopolitics once again – this time, dragging in Iran, a state that had long avoided direct confrontation through strategic caution. Now, even Tehran finds itself under fire, with US backing making the stakes far higher. Iran is left facing a grim choice between the bad and the very bad. But this isn't about Iran. It's about Israel, a country that has for decades functioned as the West's forward operating base in the Middle East. Since the mid-20th century, Israel has enjoyed a privileged position – a bridgehead of Western power in a volatile region, while also deeply enmeshed in its politics and rivalries. Its success has rested on two pillars: the unshakable support of the United States, and its own internal capacity for innovation, military strength, and a unique social model. That second pillar, however, has weakened. The clearest sign is in demographics: Israel is facing rising negative migration. In 2024, some 82,700 people are expected to leave the country – a 50% increase from the year before. It is not the unskilled or disengaged who are leaving, but the young and educated. The people who are needed to sustain a modern state are choosing to go. Of course, Israel's troubles are not unique. Like many developed nations, it is struggling under the weight of a decaying neoliberal economic system. The pandemic made things worse, exposing the fragility of the model and encouraging a shift toward a 'mobilisation' mode of governance – rule through emergency and constant readiness for conflict. In the West more broadly, war and geopolitical confrontation have become a way to delay or disguise necessary systemic reform. In this regard, Israel has become a laboratory for the West's emerging logic: permanent war as a method of governance. In the autumn of 2023, the Israeli establishment embraced this fully. Conflict became not just a tactic, but a way of life. Its leaders no longer see peace as the goal, but war as the mechanism for national unity and political survival. In this, Israel mirrors the broader Western embrace of conflict with Russia and China – proxy wars chosen when actual reform is off the table. At the global level, nuclear deterrence limits how far such wars can go. But in the Middle East, where Israel wages war directly, those constraints don't apply. This allows war to serve as a pressure valve – politically useful, even as it becomes self-destructive. But even war has limits. It cannot indefinitely mask economic decay or social unrest. And while conflict tends to cement elite power – even among incompetent leadership – it also drains national strength. Israel is now consuming more and more of its own resources to sustain this permanent state of war. Its social cohesion is fraying. Its once-vaunted model of technological and civic progress is no longer functioning as it did. Some in West Jerusalem may dream of 'reformatting' the Middle East – reshaping the region through force and fear. If successful, it could buy Israel a few decades of security and breathing room. But such outcomes are far from guaranteed. Crushing a neighbour doesn't eliminate the threat; it merely brings distant enemies closer. Most importantly, Israel's deepest problems aren't external – they are internal, rooted in its political and social structures. War can define a state, yes. But such states – Sparta, North Korea – tend to be 'peculiar,' to put it mildly. And even for them, war cannot substitute for real diplomacy, policy, or growth. So has Israel, always at war, truly developed? Or has it simply been sustained – politically, militarily, and financially – as a subdivision of American foreign policy? If it continues down this path of permanent conflict and right-wing nationalism, it risks losing even that status. It may cease to be the West's bridge in the Middle East – and become something else entirely: a militarised garrison state, isolated, brittle, and increasingly article was first published by the magazine Profile and was translated and edited by the RT team.
