South Africa’s foreign policy has traditionally rested on three pillars: human rights advocacy, multilateralism, and solidarity with the Global South. Post-apartheid, Pretoria positioned itself as a mediator in global conflicts, a champion of African interests, and a voice against imperialism. However, under Ramaphosa’s administration, this identity appears blurred. The guiding principles remain on paper, but in practice, foreign policy decisions often seem reactive, inconsistent, and vulnerable to internal political pressures. This disconnect between ideals and implementation is where the cracks begin to show.
South Africa’s foreign policy under President Cyril Ramaphosa presents a contradictory and increasingly incoherent landscape. While the country once proudly stood on the global stage as a principled voice of moral authority, particularly in the post-apartheid era, recent trends reveal a foreign policy marred by inconsistency, political improvisation, and a diminishing institutional role for the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO). These developments expose both the fine cracks and widening chasms in South Africa’s diplomatic posture.
South Africa’s position on the Israel-Palestine conflict has been one of its most vocal and consistent foreign policy markers in recent years. Ramaphosa’s government has taken a firm stance in condemning Israeli actions in Gaza, even leading the charge at the International Court of Justice to accuse Israel of genocide. This has resonated with domestic constituencies, particularly those with historical sympathies for the Palestinian cause. However, critics argue that this moral clarity is selectively applied. South Africa’s silence or caution on atrocities in other regions, such as Xinjiang and the Tigray conflict, undermines the moral authority it seeks to project to the world.
Another troubling issue has been South Africa’s muted and inconsistent response to international propaganda regarding so-called “white genocide” or the “murder of white farmers.” This narrative, often amplified by far-right groups abroad, misrepresents rural crime in South Africa and distorts complex socio-economic realities for political gain. Yet, Ramaphosa’s administration has not proactively countered these claims with a sustained international communication strategy. The absence of a clear and robust rebuttal not only damages the country’s image but also allows disinformation to fester in influential circles abroad.
A more subtle but revealing fault line lies in how foreign policy is shaped to accommodate powerful economic actors. South Africa’s reported willingness to bend B-BBEE (Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment) rules to allow Elon Musk’s Starlink to operate raises deeper questions. On the one hand, there is an understandable desire to expand connectivity and embrace digital innovation. On the other, such decisions appear to signal that policy can be suspended or softened when big business is involved. This flexibility undermines the credibility of domestic policy frameworks and opens South Africa up to accusations of inconsistency or even opportunism.
The Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO), once a hub of strategic thinking and diplomacy, now seems increasingly peripheral. Under Ramaphosa, DIRCO has struggled to assert itself as the authoritative voice on foreign policy. The lack of clarity in positions, delays in diplomatic appointments, and an overall sense of drift reflect a department in decline. This vacuum has created space for a troubling trend: the proliferation of unofficial and undisciplined commentary on foreign policy matters by ANC leaders such as Fikile Mbalula, whose portfolio is far-fetched from foreign policy.
In recent years, it has become common for various ANC figures, some holding no official position in international affairs, to make bold and, at times, incendiary statements on global matters. Whether it’s views on BRICS, Russia’s war in Ukraine, or Israel-Palestine, these statements often contradict each other or official government policy. This free-for-all has consequences. It undermines diplomatic coherence, confuses international partners, and erodes confidence in Pretoria’s reliability as a global actor.
At best, South Africa’s current foreign policy could be described as fragmented realism wrapped in rhetorical idealism. At worst, it is ad hoc, domestically driven, and lacking a unifying vision. It is unclear whether Ramaphosa’s government is intentionally pursuing a flexible and pragmatic foreign policy or whether it is simply reacting to events without a strong guiding compass. The blurred lines between party, government, and department make it difficult to distinguish strategic priorities from political expediency.
If South Africa hopes to retain its voice on the international stage, it must begin by consolidating its foreign policy machinery. DIRCO must be empowered, not sidelined. Policy statements must be consistent, not contradictory. Foreign engagement must be principled, not selectively moralistic or economically opportunistic. The world is watching South Africa’s foreign policy circles with keen interest; it is confused by what it sees. The time to fix these cracks, both fine and foundational, is now.
South Africa cannot afford to be a bystander amid the seismic shifts shaping global politics. In an era marked by rising geopolitical tensions, great power rivalries, and contested norms, a passive or ambiguous foreign policy amounts to self-marginalization. South Africa’s historical legacy as a nation that transitioned from apartheid through global solidarity and principled diplomacy demands that it play a more assertive role in international affairs.
A firm, values-based stance in global politics not only reaffirms South Africa’s own agency but also sets a precedent for the African continent. Africa, often treated as a passive recipient of global outcomes, needs bold leadership among its middle powers. By taking principled and consistent positions on international issues from human rights to economic justice, South Africa can embolden its neighbors to speak with greater unity and confidence on the global stage.
In this context, South Africa’s role is not just national—it is continental. A coherent and courageous foreign policy can catalyze a broader African voice in global governance, helping to redefine Africa’s place not as a bargaining chip in great power politics, but as a serious actor in shaping a fairer, more multipolar world order.
