Is Taiwan on the brink of being Colonized for the Seventh Time?
Featured

Is Taiwan on the brink of being Colonized for the Seventh Time?

Taiwan, formally known as the Republic of China, is an island located to the southeast of mainland China, separated by the Taiwan Strait. It is about an eighth the size of Poland and is home to 23 million people. It has also, in recent years and amid escalating global geo-political tensions, been subjected to sometimes damaging political and military interest from Beijing.

The island has a long history of colonisation: the Dutch (1624-1662), the Spanish (1626-1642), the Zheng family (1662-1683), the Manchus (1683-1895), the Japanese (1895-1945) and finally, the authoritarian Chinese Nationalist regime (1945-1988) (1) have all colonised Taiwan.

The Dutch brought large numbers of Han Chinese to the island as labour for deer and agricultural exports. Following the defeat of the Han Ming dynasty by the Manchu Qing dynasty in 1644, Taiwan became a base for the Ming dynasty's recovery. The Dutch were driven out of Taiwan in 1662 with the aid of Zheng Cheng-gong, the son of a revered pirate and Ming Chinese official. Cheng-gong thereafter became Taiwan’s ruler. Subsequently, Zheng Cheng-gong made the first Han-backed regime and introduced Chinese administration to Taiwan;  Tainan, now Tainan City, was an administrative centre (2). Zheng Cheng-gong’s rule expanded the Chinese population and Chinese culture became dominant in most parts of the island.

The Spanish were not as successful during their Taiwanese rein as the Spanish had been. They were forced to retreat in 1642 due to Dutch and aboriginal pressures. The Dutch, during this time, supported the Chinese colonialists with military and administrative structures. Zheng Cheng-gong continued to support the Ming and opposed the Manchus until he died in 1662. However, Zheng’s support of the Ming dynasty was mostly for show: Zheng and the Ming administration, the Yung-li court, rarely spoke, leaving Zheng free to do as he pleased in his kingdom. The Ming’s absence from Taiwan gave Zheng ample flexibility and independence to pursue his interests.

The question of Taiwan’s sovereignty - and China’s claims that it certainly was not an independent state - stems in part from the Manchu period. The Manchu kingdom was twice the size of the Ming. Mainland China, in essence, was a colony itself, quite similar to India for the British Empire (3). The Manchu ruled Taiwan differently from China. Taiwan’s rule was loose, minimal and partial (4); for example, the American consul to Amoy, Charles LeGrendre, signed a treaty in 1867 with the Taiwan aboriginal Chief, not the Manchu government (5). Taiwan was Manchu, not Chinese.

Following Japan’s defeat in World War Two, in 1945 the Republic of China took over Taiwan on behalf of the allied forces and established the Taiwan Provincial Governor’s Office (6). The story of the inseparable link from Taiwan to China stemmed from the colonial Kuomintang (KMT) government based in Nanjing (1945-1949). Neither the KMT government nor the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) claimed Taiwan until 1942 (7). Then, in 1949, assertions of Taiwan’s link to mainland China emerged loudly from both Taipei and Beijing.

In more recent years, Beijing has labelled Taiwan a renegade province (8). Beijing asserts that there is only “one China” (9). The People’s Republic of China (PRC), declares itself to be the sole legitimate government of China, based on the “one-China principle” (10). The KMT-drafted constitution describes China, Mongolia, Taiwan, Tibet and the South China Sea as part of the Republic of China. Furthermore, Beijing claims that democratic Taiwan is bound by a 1992 consensus. The consensus, noted by the KMT and the ruling CCP, states that Taiwan agreed to be ruled by China. However, Taiwan disputes the contents of the consensus and says that it was never designed to question Taiwan’s legitimacy or legal status (11).

The current leaders of Taiwan, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), also refute the consensus. Since the induction of Taiwan’s democratically elected President Tsai Ing-wen in 2016, China has displayed escalating aggression towards Taiwan, including flying fighter jets close to the island. Still, President Tsai has refused the formula of her predecessor, Ma Ying-jeou, which endorsed cross-strait ties with China (12). In a 2019 speech by Chinese President Xi Jinping, China reiterated its long-standing proposal for Taiwan to be incorporated into China under its “one country, two systems” formula (13). Quite similar to Hong Kong, the formula provides the ability for a territory to preserve its political and economic systems, with a high degree of autonomy (14). However, the formula is grossly unpopular in Taiwan – especially given Chinese crackdowns on Hong Kong’s freedoms. Both Tsai and the MKT have rejected the “one country, two systems” formula.

Globally, meanwhile, Taiwan has drawn praise for its peaceful and successful transition from authoritarian rule to a democracy. Taiwan is a poster child for the “third wave” of democracy which occurred in the 1980s and 90s; it receives regular praise from the US (15). In electing to force the “one country, two governments model” (16), China would ultimately destroy a democratic government.

There is major economic pressure at play, too. Taiwan’s economy is highly dependent on its trade with mainland China. Due to Beijing’s pressures on the island and Taiwanese officials’ growing concern about the nation’s over-reliance on China (17), Taiwan has been branching out and decreasing its trade with China. During President Ma’s tenure (2008-2016), Taiwan signed 20 pacts with the PRC, including, in 2010, the Cross-Straits Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (18). The agreement lifted a decade long trade barriers between the two nations. Subsequently, direct sea, air and mail links resumed. Tsai and the DPP have attempted to diversify Taiwan’s trade relations, with varied results. Tsai experienced success with boosting trade and investment with countries in Southeast Asia and the Indo-Pacific through systematic initiatives, particularly the New Southbound Policy. Trade and investment between Taiwan and its designated countries increased by $15 billion between 2016 and 2019 (19). Additionally, in 2019, Tsai revealed a three-year plan to incentivise Taiwanese manufacturers to move from the mainland back to Taiwan.

Inversely, however, Taiwan’s trade with China in 2020 hit an all-time high. Beijing has pressured nations not to sign free trade agreements with Taiwan. Only a handful of nations have, with New Zealand and Singapore the only countries in the developed world to do so. Furthermore, Beijing has pushed for the exclusion of Taiwan from multilateral trading blocs such as the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) (20).

Taiwan is not part of the United Nations (UN) because China rejects its participation. Given China’s increasing military capabilities and assertiveness, it is rumoured that China will do anything to “reunite” the mainland. Taiwan is highly unlikely to stave off a Chinese attack without external support, and so enters the United State of America (21). The US formally initiated diplomatic ties with the ROC in 1999, while simultaneously cutting diplomatic ties with the PRC. Amid mounting tensions between the PRC and the US and Taiwan and China, it is unknown whether the US would come to Taiwan’s aid. The US has adopted an ambiguous stance on the matter; it has, however, been selling defensive weapons to Taiwan against China’s wishes. Taiwan, in 2020, purchased $5.1 billion worth of arms from the US (22).

Since 1994, China has launched a series of military exercises. These exercises have a dual purpose: to demonstrate China’s resolve in maintaining the territorial integrity of the nation and to intimidate Taiwan into conforming to the “one-China principle” (23). Escalating tensions between China and the US may not necessarily be observed on the ground but can be seen in the US’s shifting opinion of China. China’s military might and enhanced capabilities have increased tension in the Strait, including for nations in Taiwan’s general vicinity - South Korea, Japan, The Philippines and Australia.

In closing, tensions are high. What can Taiwan do, and will the escalating tension result in war between China, Taiwan and the USA? Only time will tell.

Reference list

About the Author

Qhawezo Ayesha Fakude is a Junior Research Fellow at Africa Asia Dialogues (Afrasid).  She holds a Bachelor of Social Science from the University of Cape Town, South Africa. She majored in politics and governance, anthropology and sociology.

Featured

COP26 must deliver a transformative agenda for financing climate action across developing countries

Climate change is one of the biggest challenges of our time. The cumulative effect of anthropogenic activity over the last 200 years is a main contributor to a rapidly changing climate. 

Climate change is a pattern of long-term change in the temperature and weather patterns globally or regionally which occur naturally. However due to the rapid increase in anthropogenic activity the change in weather patterns and temperature is being accelerated. 

The contribution of greenhouse gas emissions to climate change are too evident to ignore. Average global temperatures are increasing, extreme weather events are becoming more severe, ocean levels are rising, and acidification is occurring. 

All of these ecological threats are a result of human activity. Although the impacts of a rapidly changing climate cannot be prevented its intensity can be minimised through changing business as usual and adopting greener ways of operating as a society.

The Paris Agreement, which is a comprehensive framework that guides international efforts to limit greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and to meet all the associated challenges posed by climate change, was reached in 2015. 

The Paris Agreement sets out a global framework to avoid dangerous climate change by limiting global warming to well below 2°C and pursuing efforts to limit it to 1.5°C. It also aims to strengthen countries’ ability to deal with the impacts of climate change and support them in their efforts. To reach these goals, it is important that countries (especially developed countries) adhere to the commitments of the Paris Agreement. 

South Africa is a signatory to the Paris Agreement and has committed (in the updated Nationally Determined Contribution) that its GHG emissions will be between 398 – 510 mt co2 eq and 350 – 420 mt co2 for the periods 2021 – 2025 and 2026 – 2030 respectively. 

The Gauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Development has been mandated by Gauteng Executive Council to provide climate leadership in the Gauteng City Region (GCR). 

To this extent, the Department had to develop a Gauteng climate action roadmap and clarify roles and responsibilities for various stakeholders, including Gauteng Provincial Government Departments and the private sector. 

The Gauteng City Region Over-Arching Climate Change Response Strategy and Action Plan has been completed and approved by the Gauteng Executive Council on 26 August 2020. Through the implementation of this Strategy, Gauteng Province is contributing its fair of South Africa’s commitment made in the National Determined Contribution (NDC) document. 

The Gauteng Department of Infrastructure Development has a Green Technology Programme with sub-programmes on solar rooftop, gas conversion and supply in hospitals, installation of smart meters to track the average consumption, water conservation, waste water recycling, and waste to energy. The solar roof top sub-programme is estimated to install 10MWp across all 11 Health Care Facilities for phase 1. 

The amount saved as a result of the installation of smart metres amounts to over R300 million on electricity bills. 

Transport is the second most greenhouse gas emitting sector after energy in Gauteng City Region. The Gauteng City Region is therefore pursuing investment in public transport systems, especially mass transit (commuter rail, Gautrain and Bus Rapid Transit) along major corridors in urban areas and their integration e.g. Rea Vaya BRT, Harambee BRT, Areyeng BRT. Implementation of green infrastructure for the construction of roads and non-motorised transport systems has also been prioritized.

A new report released by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) shows that the increasing frequency and intensity of extreme weather disasters such as floods, droughts and megafires as a result of climate change is having a devastating effect on food security and livelihoods. 

In Gauteng, crop and livestock production are expected to reduce due to lower soil fertility, short rains, extreme weather events such as hail and flooding, loss of feed caused by loss of grasslands and heat stress. 

In response to these threats, the Gauteng Department of Agriculture and Rural Development is implementing conservation agriculture, urban agriculture and climate resilient programmes. 

Metropolitan Municipalities have developed the Cities’ Climate Action Plans whose implementation is putting the cities in the low carbon path and ensure climate resilience. 

The City of Johannesburg’s Climate Action Plan has been approved by Council whilst the City of Tshwane Climate Action Plan and City of Ekurhuleni’s Green Cities Action Plan are at advanced stages of approval. 

Whilst the provincial and local governments are responsible for development of policy framework and implementation of certain flagship programmes, most of climate change response work lie within the private sector. 

The Gauteng Provincial Government, therefore, commends the climate change response initiatives undertaken by different institutions within the private sector and also encourages other institutions to commission similar programmes. 

The Gauteng Provincial Government supports South Africa’s position on COP 26 which will be held on 31 October to 12 November 2021 in Glasgow, Scotland and the commitments in the Nationally Determined Contribution Document through its continued implementation of the programmes highlighted above. 

The Province further commit to allocate more resources for the expansion of these programmes and commission of new ones to ensure a low carbon footpath and climate resilience within the Gauteng City Region.

This article was first published in the African Mirror by Parks Tau.

About the author

Parks Tau is the Member of the Executive Council (MEC) of the Provincial Government of Gauteng in South Africa 

 

Featured

Part 2 - Calls for Democratic Reforms in Eswatini puts King Mswati III Under Pressure

Part 2          

Calls for Democratic Reforms in Eswatini puts King Mswati III Under Pressure

As the situation in Eswatini continues to deteriorate, questions are being asked about whether Africa’s last absolute monarchy could transition into a constitutional democracy that would see its king lose his iron grip on power.

Growing pressure on the Eswatini government and its violent reaction to protests calling for democratic reform, driven by young urbanites, suggests that the journey to dethroning the king would require international mediation.

The United Nations and the Southern African Development Community (SADC) have already been forced into action as the number of deaths, hospitalisations and imprisonments of civilians continues to rise in the country of just 1.7 million people.

Amnesty International says the Eswatini government’s reaction to dissent has been devastating, with more than 70 people, most of them university students, shot dead, allegedly by security forces; soldiers and police stand accused of firing live ammunition at protesters. Close to 200 people have been hospitalised.

The death in May of a University of Eswatini student, Thabani Nkomonye, allegedly at the hands of police officers, triggered the protests that have engulfed the country. Students led by the Swaziland National Union of Students (SNUS), alongside other young people, protested and demanded justice for the 25-year-old law student in what later became known as the #JusticeForThabani movement. Trade unions, political parties and other civil society organisations have since joined in.

Nkomonye has become a symbol of resistance against police brutality and activists have invoked his name in their calls for democracy, using his image on posters and banners during their protests.

Several Members of Parliament have taken advantage of the situation to demand something that has been a long coming: a constitutional change that would see citizens allowed to elect a Prime Minister of their choice. Currently the Prime Minister is appointed by the country’s powerful monarch, King Mswati III. Activists are also insisting that the ban on political parties be lifted.

Political analyst and academic Mancoba Mabuza, who is based in the country’s capital Mbabane, contextualised the protests: “Young people delivered petitions to Members of Parliament in various constituency centres (Tinkhundla) and what started as a #JusticeForThabani movement escalated into a popular demand for the people to be allowed to elect a Prime Minister of their choice.

As the protests grew, he said, so did the violent crackdown on protesters.

Mabuza said: “The Eswatini Police Commissioner was quoted by the local media to have declared ‘war’ on protesters. The acting Prime Minister at the time, Themba Masuku, stepped in to ban the ongoing protest action and peaceful delivery of petitions in the various constituency centres all over the country. He said this had been ‘hijacked by people with an ulterior motive’ and that the people delivering petitions ‘were not adhering to Covid-19 precautionary measures’. 

Masuku’s statement was greeted with anger by youth and those opposed to the monarch.

“Many decried the fact that they were being stopped from exercising their rights to deliver petitions and make their complaints known in a peaceful manner. Now, everything started escalating into uncontrollable levels,” said Mabuza.

A journalist based in Eswatini, Sambulo Dlamini, described the scenes on 25 June during one protest.

“Police were also beaten up and the protesters also beaten up by police in what became a war between the police and citizens. The situation got worse by 28 June and the protesters took to the country's industrial hub and burnt down trucks, shops, destroyed bank ATMs, among other things. The situation was out of control,” he said.

The popular demand at this point was for the King to assume a ceremonial role and be outside of politics. More recently, pro-democracy movement activists have demanded that the government release arrested MPs and all political prisoners, allow the safe return of those in exile, unban political parties, allow for a transitional government and a new constitution – and, ultimately, work towards a multi-party dispensation in which political parties will participate in a democratic election.

An overwhelming majority of MPs are backing this call for change and democratic reforms. This adds a new layer to recent protests: parliament itself has become a site of struggle.

Following the night protests of 28 June, the Eswatini army stepped in because the government increasingly believed that police were failing to control the situation. Protesters, meanwhile, turned to social media to spread the news of their struggle. Social media platforms continue to be used as vehicles to register complaints and bring international awareness to the civil unrest.

News that police and soldiers were firing live rounds of ammunition on protesters and had imprisoned over 400 people in addition to the rising death toll was widely shared on social media, as was the fact that school kids were being caught up in the crackdown. Bloody images of protesters are circulating, too.

The state again responded with violence during recent protests by public transport and public sector unions, comprising nurses, teachers and other civil servants. Teargas was allegedly fired inside buses; unarmed civilians in Mbabane and surrounds were beaten up and shot at.

“The country is now a military state as soldiers and police patrol the townships in Manzini and Mbabane and have been unleashing violence,” said Mabuza.

The state’s brutality has prompted an international outcry led by UN Secretary-General António Guterres. In October he issued a statement expressing his concern about the ongoing developments in Eswatini, particularly the recent deployment of armed security forces at various schools, reports of excessive use of force in response to student demonstrations and the indefinite closure of schools.

“This adversely affects children and young people. The Secretary-General reiterates the importance of enabling the people of Eswatini to exercise their civil and political rights peacefully. He urges the Government to ensure that security forces act in conformity with relevant international human rights standards, including the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child,” reads Guterres’ statement.

The popular uprising is emboldened and has scored some important victories, such as the recent march to the UN offices in Eswatini and another to the US Embassy, where an estimated to 20 000 were in attendance - a huge number by Swazi standards. 

South African President Cyril Ramaphosa in his capacity as chair of the SADC's politics organ, has also sent envoys from South Africa, Namibia and Botswana to visit Eswatini. The group met the king, the prime minister, civil society organisations, trade unions and others following heavy criticism that SADC has been too slow to act.

Still, Ramaphosa remains hopeful of a peaceful resolution; he announced after these consultations that King Mswati III had accepted the need for a national dialogue. 

"King Mswati III has accepted the need for national dialogue...I appeal for calm, restraint, the respect for the rule of law and human rights on all sides to enable the process to commence," said Ramaphosa.

This is a major climb down by Africa’s last absolute monarch, who has in the past defied calls for reform, and even labelled pro-democracy activists as “drunkards and dagga smokers”.

Wandile Dludlu, secretary-general of the opposition People's United Democratic Movement (Pudemo), like Mabuza, does not seem to place much faith in the SADC process.

“Let the people continue the noble fight for a free and democratic new country," Dludlu recently told Reuters.

This reluctance to trust SADC is driven by the regional bloc’s past “quiet diplomacy” in dealing with the Eswatini stalemate.

“The SADC team (Organ Troika) sent by Botswana President Mokgweetsi Masisi in his capacity as Troika Chair at the time, came after the June shooting and there was hope that they were going to meet the government and civil society players, but the exercise did not yield any positive result. The nation has now lost hope in SADC, and they see the organisation as being protective of King Mswati and the government. It is back again at the moment led by President Cyril Ramaphosa’s Envoy Jeff Radebe, and it remains to be seen if something different will happen this time around,” said Mabuza.

Sabelo Dlamini, the Eswatini government spokesperson, is on record saying government remains open to dialogue.  “Government will continue to avail the necessary information to the organisation (UN) and all relevant stakeholders about the current civil unrest in the Kingdom,” he stated.

About the author

Phathisani Moyo is a communication strategist at International Trade Centre (ITC).  He has worked for a number of media organisation and served at various levels including as the news editor for The Star newspaper in South Africa. He holds a Honours degree in political science and administration from the University of Zimbabwe. 

Featured

Part 1 - Eswatini: A History of Struggle

Part 1

Eswatini: A History of Struggle

Background

Political movements calling for change have long existed in Eswatini. British colonisers left the country in 1968; limited self-governance had been permitted since 1963. At the dawn of independence, a constitution was put in place and political parties were allowed to operate. The party belonging to the then-king, Sobhuza II, won the 1967 and 1972 elections. The Ngwane National Liberatory Congress, with three seats, was the official opposition.

This led King Sobhuza II, father of the current monarch, to ban political parties in 1973. He assumed all legislative, judicial and executive powers through decree that year. He then introduced the tinkhundla system of governance in 1978. From that time, political parties existed covertly with not much impact; this was the status quo until 1983, when the Peoples United Democratic Movement (Pudemo) was formed. Pudemo has been a series of protests, built trade union movements and became a big player on what was then Swaziland’s political scene. Its leaders have been jailed, exiled and even killed over the years – but its call for the country’s freedom and democratisation hasn’t wavered.

In reality, this fight dates back to colonial and even pre-colonial days. The people have, for years, been involved in different forms of resistance against royal slavery, land dispossessions, denial of human rights and exploitation in their communities and workplaces. The real problem in Eswatini is an organised system of royal hegemony and monopoly on power founded on exploitative and parasitic forms of wealth accumulation. This system is known as tinkhundla, wherein all facets of society as organised by and in the narrow interests of the royal family.

Tinkhundla is a form of royal apartheid: it fosters discrimination based not on race, but on royal supremacy. It does this by creating bitter divisions between the royalty, who are first grade citizens with an unlimited sense of entitlement, and the rest of the people, who are mere subjects or fourth grade citizens and perpetual beggars in their own country.

In this sense, it is a royal dream for the ruling elite and a national nightmare for the people. Tinkhundla is the system of organised royal rule and oppression which sustains itself through a series of structures, values and institutions developed and reproduced to entrench the power of the royal minority. In other words, it is a means to guarantee and perpetuate royal hegemony and control of power in all spheres of the society.

Looking to the future

Political analyst and academic Mancoba Mabuza holds the view that there is still a chance for King Mswati III to lead a peaceful transition into a constitutional multiparty democracy.

“Without a doubt, the call for democracy is enjoyed by an overwhelming majority of the people, but their organisations are not strong enough to lead the people to decisive victory at the moment, largely because the state is using military force to clamp down on the liberation forces – there seems to be no plan on the part of the liberation forces regarding how to seize power beyond the marches and protest activities which are violently stopped by the regime.

“However, the tinkhundla regime is no longer able to effectively govern the country as the people daily refuse to be governed the tinkhundla way. It is consistently facing a deepening crisis. The system has lost any semblance of legitimacy it once enjoyed as everything comes to the open about its real content and what it is made of. It is facing deep-seated cracks within itself as the ruling bloc itself is no longer enjoying the cohesion of its key social base and forces allied to it, particularly the traditional aristocracy and its key supporters.”

The respected political commentator said the system cannot destroy the democratic forces that are growing in strength, and it does not enjoy support at the moment.

“But the system is still in power because they now rely on force (military) which the liberation forces do not have. This is the stalemate I am talking about,” he said.

Mabuza believes that if King Mswati calls for calm and engages with the leaders of the liberation forces with a view to coming up with a peaceful solution - and demonstrates a willingness to lose some power by leading a process that allows multiparty democracy - he can keep some power as head of state through a constitutional monarchy.

“I hold the view that the democratic forces are prepared to negotiate and that compromises can be made.”

The other option is for the international community to force the king into having an imposed dialogue with the civil society; Eswatini heavily relies on foreign aid. This approach is only possible if the major players in the region or continent, and the rest of the world, intervene decisively: the king will have no choice but to heed their advice.

About the Author

Phathisani Moyo is a communication strategist at International Trade Centre (ITC).  He has worked for a number of media organisation and served at various levels including as the news editor for The Star newspaper in South Africa. He holds a Honours degree in political science and administration from the University of Zimbabwe. 

Featured

Israel and Morocco nudge the AU closer to dissolution

Many African Union (AU) member states remain furious that AU Commission chairperson Moussa Faki Mahamat has unilaterally granted Israel observer status. Mahamat’s decision, announced in July 2021, has led some to accuse him of bringing “Israel through the back door into the AU”. Some countries have suggested that this move undermines AU procedures. Mahamat, in turn, argues that it’s within his rights as AU Commission chair to grant observer status to non-member states.

South Africa, Nigeria and Algeria have been the most vocal critics of the decision. Members of SADC announced their collective opposition in a letter addressed to Mahamat after the regional bloc’s August summit in Malawi.

Mahamat is planning to stand for Presidential elections in his home country, Chad, following the death of President Idris Derby in April 2021. It is believed that his controversial decision on Israel could be beneficial as he starts his campaign in earnest:  According to some observers, “Mahamat needs friends with deep pockets as he kicks starts his presidential campaign.” 

It is also highly unlikely that Mahamat made this decision without first discussing it with current AU Chairperson, President Felix Tshisekedi of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). Tshisekedi is a committed evangelical Christian and well-known supporter of Israel; in March 2020 he was granted the rare opportunity to speak at an AIPAC meeting. AIPAC is a powerful pro-Israel lobby in the US. At the March 2020 event, Tshisekedi called Israel an inspiration and thanks US evangelicals for supporting Israel.

Here, too, money may be at play: the DRC needs help to save its economy from absolute collapse. Israel has provided monetary support to African countries as part of its foreign policy before. As New Africa Daily reported in July 2020: “The Congolese president has been pushing for greater diplomatic ties with Israel, motivated in part by his evangelical faith and desire to bring in Israeli investment and expertise to help modernize the country.” 

Israeli observer status at the AU will grant the country proximity to member states and allow it sneak previews of the body’s agenda. It will also have a chance to use its deep pocket diplomacy to win support from other African countries.  Israel, like many countries, seeks to access Africa for its natural resources; the DRC is especially attractive given the massive hydroelectric potential of its Congo River – estimates suggest the river could produce close to a third of the continent’s total hydroelectric power.

Importantly, Israel seeks support and votes from AU member states as it continues to be defeated and embarrassed at various multilateral platforms for its atrocities against the Palestinian people.

Another vehement supporter of Israel’s observer status in the AU is Morocco.  When Morocco joined AU In 2017, I argued: “In truth, Morocco remains isolated and is beginning to feel the strain of that isolation. Like many North African countries, Morocco has been circumspect and often opportunistic in its dealings with Sub-Saharan Africa; it generally preferred the Arab League over the AU. That fact notwithstanding, the importance and influence of the Arab League has dwindled, especially since the 2013 coup in Egypt.”

The article argued that Morocco was feeling isolated and missing a number of photo opportunities at many international investment summits involving Africans across the globe.  Moreover, I argued that Morocco was missing out on the bloc politicking that benefits many African countries. Moroccan officials said that AU membership would make it easier to deal with the Western Sahara issue inside the AU. Morocco intended to use its membership to promote its political agenda, mainly to lobby more members to renounce their recognition of the Western Sahara.

There was no talk of plans to push Israel’s agenda in the AU - but we later discovered this was one of the main objective all along.

Morocco has been successful in achieving two major objectives since joining the AU. First, on the issue of Western Sahara, it has regained a chance to formally lobby inside the AU against the autonomy and recognition of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic.  Second, it has upped efforts for the support of Israel’s observer status in the AU – bringing it into conflict with South Africa, which supports Morocco on the Western Sahara issue but is also a strong supporter of Palestine.

Morocco has clearly not been happy with South Africa’s domineering role at the AU and is committed to reduce the apparent South African hegemony.  At what cost?  There is likely to be division moving forward; differences on foreign policy and what is good for Africa are likely to become more pronounced. 

Amongst other matters, the AU was meant to present a unified African foreign policy position often representing and benefiting weaker African states. The block politics of the AU have assisted weaker African states, which would ordinarily not be able to articulate independent positions at multilateral platforms. AU has also succeeded in pushing for trade treaties that benefited Africa as a whole using block politicking. Recently, the block negotiation and coordination of COVID-19 vaccinations strategies and donations from Western countries have been enabled by the AU. Dismantling that enabling environment and unity will certainly have a negative impact on AU’s future sociopolitical and economic agendas. The advent of Israel and creeping in of its deep pocket politics facilitated by countries such as Morocco is likely to further polarise the AU. It can also be argued that

Morocco’s advent or return to AU politics will certainly serve a negative agenda towards Africa’s unity. Morocco’s return has been mainly to push its own agenda inside the AU against SADR at the detriment of the cohesion of the AU. The AU will never function the same moving forward at least as long as Mousa Faki Mahamat remains the chairperson of the AU Commission and as long as Morocco continues to serve its own narrow political agenda and that of Israel. 

 About the author

Thembisa Fakude holds Masters degree in Politics. He is a columnist with the Middle East Monitor in London. He is a research fellow at Al Sharq Forum in Istanbul, Turkey. He also serves on the board of Common Action Forum in Madrid, Spain. He serves on the board of Mail and Guardian publication in South Africa. He is the former Bureau Chief of Al Jazeera Media Network for Arabic and English Channels in Southern Africa.