By Bayethe Msimang
South Africa has long positioned itself as a champion of diplomacy, neutrality, and human rights on the global stage. The country’s vocal support for the Palestinian cause and its non-aligned stance on international conflicts have solidified its image as a defender of oppressed peoples.
However, a significant contradiction emerges when examining South Africa’s role in the global arms trade. Through entities such as Rheinmetall Denel Munition (RDM), South Africa is implicated in exporting arms to conflict zones, raising questions about the alignment of its arms export practices with its stated values. This article delves into the complexities of South Africa’s arms export policies, focusing on the oversight provided by the National Committee for Conventional Arms Control (NCACC), the international implications, and the urgent need for reform.
Rheinmetall Denel Munition (RDM) and South Africa’s Arms Trade
Rheinmetall Denel Munition (RDM), a joint venture between Germany’s Rheinmetall AG and South Africa’s Denel, was established in 2008 to strengthen both companies’ positions in the global arms market. RDM produces a variety of munitions, including artillery shells and mortar ammunition, with 90% of its revenue coming from exports to regions in Asia, the Middle East, and other parts of the world. While RDM operates under the oversight of the NCACC, its role in fueling global conflicts raises critical concerns about the ethical alignment of South Africa’s arms export policies with its diplomatic rhetoric.
Loopholes in South Africa’s Arms Export Controls
The NCACC was established to ensure that arms exports align with South Africa’s foreign policy objectives, prioritising neutrality and human rights. However, the committee has faced criticism for allowing arms exports to countries involved in conflicts or with questionable human rights records. A notable example is the 2017 sale of R1.31 billion worth of weapons to Saudi Arabia and the UAE, both of which were involved in the Yemen conflict, a war condemned internationally for its devastating humanitarian impact.
This leniency highlights significant gaps in South Africa’s regulatory framework. Former ANC MP Andrew Feinstein, a prominent advocate for arms control, has stated that South Africa has become “one of the easiest places for exporting arms with minimal control.” This discrepancy between South Africa’s public stance on neutrality and its actual export practices exposes a governance gap. Although the NCACC was designed to safeguard ethical standards, economic considerations often take precedence over concerns about human rights.
A Case of Selective Neutrality: The Poland-Ukraine Scandal
In early 2024, South Africa blocked a proposed transfer of artillery shells to Poland, citing concerns that the weapons might eventually be used in Ukraine. This decision aligned with South Africa’s neutral stance on the Russia-Ukraine conflict and positioned the NCACC as an entity capable of upholding ethical standards under international pressure. President Cyril Ramaphosa reaffirmed South Africa’s commitment to neutrality in a high-profile meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at the UN General Assembly in New York. However, despite this decision, broader concerns remain about the consistency of South Africa’s arms export policies with its diplomatic principles.
South Africa’s International Reputation at Stake
The contradiction between South Africa’s vocal defence of human rights and its arms export practices poses a significant threat to its international reputation. For example, while South Africa has been an ardent supporter of the Palestinian cause, its arms exports to countries involved in human rights violations raise uncomfortable questions. In the case of Saudi Arabia and the UAE, weapons sold by South African entities have been implicated in the Yemen conflict, which has been criticized for violations of international humanitarian law. These contradictions risk tarnishing South Africa’s carefully cultivated image as a global advocate for justice and peace.
Arms Exports and the Perpetuation of Global Instability
RDM’s activities extend beyond the production and export of arms. Through partnerships with authoritarian regimes like Saudi Arabia, RDM indirectly contributes to sustaining oppressive governments and exacerbating regional instability. RDM’s export of artillery and mortar ammunition, particularly to countries engaged in conflicts, raises serious ethical concerns about South Africa’s role in perpetuating violence. By supporting military-industrial complexes in authoritarian regimes, South Africa risks undermining its commitment to global justice and peace.
The Urgent Need for Reform
South Africa is at a crossroads. If the country wishes to maintain its diplomatic integrity, significant reforms to its arms export policies are essential. The NCACC must enforce stricter controls to ensure that arms exports align with South Africa’s foreign policy objectives of neutrality and human rights protection. This will require closing regulatory loopholes, increasing transparency in decision-making processes, and ensuring that economic interests do not overshadow ethical considerations.
One immediate step toward reform would be implementing clear guidelines prohibiting arms exports to countries with poor human rights records or those engaged in ongoing conflicts. The NCACC should be empowered to reject arms deals that conflict with South Africa’s diplomatic goals, particularly in regions like the Middle East. These reforms are necessary to align South Africa’s actions with its values and preserve its global credibility.
A Time for Action
South Africa faces a pivotal moment in its foreign policy. The country’s arms export policies are at odds with its neutrality, peace, and human rights values. It is crucial that South Africa aligns its actions with its diplomatic ideals, as doing so is not just a matter of policy, but a moral imperative. By implementing meaningful reforms to its arms export regulations, South Africa can maintain its role as a respected leader in human rights and conflict resolution.
The time for change is now. South Africa must ensure that its arms export policies do not undermine its credibility and moral standing internationally.
* Bayethe Msimang is an independent writer, analyst and political commentator.
** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of or Independent Media.
