Just because Pretoria is over 7,000 miles away from the battlefields of Ukraine doesn’t mean the 17-month-long war hasn’t impacted South Africa. Those effects aren’t measured in bombs, bullets, and refugees, but rather by the increasingly precarious diplomatic juggling act South African President Cyril Ramaphosa has had to maintain ever since the first Russian missiles landed in Mariupol, Kyiv, and Kharkiv.
On the one hand, South Africa certainly isn’t thrilled about Russia running rampant in Ukraine. The African powerhouse doesn’t want to damage its strategic relations with the United States and Europe by running interference for the Russians, the deep post-colonial history with the former Soviet Union notwithstanding. The West, after all, continues to demonstrate impressive unity on the Ukraine question and eyes so-called “neutral” countries with suspicion. The South African government is cognizant that its position on the war is unpopular in Western capitals, even if South African leaders have also been on record condemning the violence in Ukraine as a violation of international law.
On the other hand, some of the messages out of Pretoria have certainly given the impression that South Africa is, if not an active supporter of Russia, then at least unsympathetic to Ukraine’s plight. In March 2022, a month into the conflict, Ramaphosa alleged that NATO’s eastern expansion was ultimately responsible for the conflict breaking out — a remark that seemed to let Russian President Vladimir Putin off the hook for his decision to use force in Ukraine.
The South Africans have abstained at the United Nations on resolutions dealing with the war, even those such as the October 2022 General Assembly resolution that are relatively uncontroversial for the vast majority of the body’s membership. Ramaphosa has refused to call out Russia unequivocally as the aggressor state and has consistently described the ongoing conflict there as an armed dispute between the world’s major powers that South Africa shouldn’t get involved with. Reports that a Russian vessel picked up weapons last December at South Africa’s Simon’s Town naval base, which created a diplomatic dust-up between Pretoria and the U.S. ambassador there, continue to hang over the U.S.-South Africa relationship seven months later.
A potential visit by Putin to South Africa for next month's BRICS summit would have only caused more trouble for Ramaphosa. While the South African president didn’t come out and bluntly tell Putin to stay home and save himself the trouble, he didn’t have to. Every South African government official, journalist, and pundit appreciated the gravity of a Putin visit and what it would mean for the country as a whole. The entire thing would be a massive diplomatic headache, putting South Africa in an unenviable position: Either comply with its International Criminal Court obligations and arrest Putin, or ignore those obligations and allow the indicted Russian head of state to bask in the glow of diplomatic immunity.
The first scenario would be loudly applauded by the West yet also puncture Ramaphosa’s neutral stance on the war, breaking Pretoria’s relations with Russia in the process. Indeed, Ramaphosa even claimed that Russia could declare war against the South African state if Putin were shipped off to the Hague. The second option, ignoring South Africa’s ICC duties, would turn the African power into a de facto adversary and a borderline outlaw in the world of international law. The South Africans already went through this experience in 2015, when former Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, wanted by the ICC for crimes against humanity in Darfur, was able to freely jet out of South Africa after a conference.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Ramaphosa spent the last months trying to get the BRICS summit assigned to another capital, to no avail. Fortunately, Putin threw him a bone this week, notifying the South African authorities that he wouldn’t be participating in the summit in person after all. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, the veteran diplomat known for his long-winded and boring speeches, will take Putin’s place at the table. Putin himself will make an appearance via video.
Whether Putin’s absence was a result of South African cajoling or worries about how Russia’s domestic political situation would hold up in his absence (the aborted Wager coup only happened last month, after all), nobody can know for sure. For the South African government, the details don’t matter. The important thing is that the country has averted another showdown with the Americans, some of whom have already begun to sour on the relationship.
Daniel DePetris (@DanDePetris) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner's Beltway Confidential blog. His opinions are his own.