In the landscape of international relations, where the principles of justice and human rights are often proclaimed as guiding lights, the Republic of South Africa actions in eastern DR Congo obfuscates hope for a just world. From the ashes of apartheid, South Africa has risen, championing the causes of the oppressed and the marginalised. Yet, a closer look at its foreign policy reveals a troubling dichotomy that casts a long shadow over its commendable stance on global issues, particularly its support for Palestine juxtaposed against its involvement in the Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. This contrast not only highlights a perplexing inconsistency but also raises accusations of hypocrisy at a time when the Tutsi in DR Congo face a crisis that mirrors, in its intensity and gravity, the genocide of their kin in Rwanda in 1994. South Africa’s vocal and unwavering support for the Palestinian cause is rooted in a deep ideological and historical solidarity. Drawing parallels with its own struggle against apartheid, South Africa sees in Palestine a reflection of its past battles. Ironically, the Tutsi too both in and outside Rwanda were subjected to not only discrimination but state sanctioned systematic extermination. Some, while in exile, fought alongside the sons and daughters of South Africa for the justice cause, giving their lives for freedom. Indeed, South Africa has not shied away, nor hesitated in implementing diplomatic and economic measures against Israel, championing the rights of Palestinians with fervour and commitment. This stance is emblematic of a nation that, having overcome its own chains of oppression, seeks to uplift others facing similar plights. The human rights and justice narrative advanced by South Africa takes a stark turn when we shift our gaze to the Eastern DR Congo, a region marred by conflict and humanitarian crises for decades. Here, the Tutsi population, significant in number and bearing the scars of past atrocities, finds itself in a maelstrom of violence and insecurity. South Africa’s military engagement in this region, under the banner of United Nations peacekeeping missions or bilateral agreements, ostensibly aims at “stabilising the area and protecting” civilians. Yet, the reality on the ground and the outcomes of these interventions tell a different story. Accusations surface of a military strategy that, far from being neutral, exacerbates tensions and contributes to the very violence it purports to quell. Critics argue that South Africa’s actions, rather than offering protection, have inadvertently sided with forces complicit in the ongoing marginalisation and targeted aggression against the Tutsi community; a community for whom the term genocide is not a chapter from history books but a continuing palaver of systematic and well orchestrated annihilation of a people. The juxtaposition of South Africa’s actions in these two regions is not merely a matter of foreign policy choices but a reflection of deeper ethical and moral quandaries. How does a country that positions itself as a champion of human rights reconcile its commendable stance in one conflict with its questionable involvement in another? The accusations of hypocrisy that arise from this dichotomy are not unfounded. They stem from a genuine concern for the consistency and integrity of South Africa’s foreign policy and its implications for the nation's image on the global stage. The international community, while largely supportive of South Africa’s stance on Palestine, has viewed its role in DR Congo with increasing scepticism. Human rights organisations and the United Nations have voiced concerns, highlighting the paradox in South Africa’s approach to international diplomacy and peacekeeping. This inconsistency does not only tarnish South Africa’s reputation, undermining its ability to act as a mediator and advocate for justice in other conflicts. In essence, it reveals the side of South Africa leadership only known to those who live it and with it! The situation in DR Congo, where the Tutsi face threats that echo the horrors of the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, demands urgent and nuanced attention. The parallels between the two crises are stark and disturbing, underscoring the need for a foreign policy that transcends mere geopolitical interests and is firmly rooted in the principles of human rights and justice. The continuation of violence and marginalisation against the Tutsi in DR Congo is not just a regional issue but a test of the international community’s resolve to prevent history from repeating itself. For South Africa, the path forward requires a deep introspection and a willingness to align its foreign policy more closely with its laudable domestic principles of equality, justice, and human dignity. This involves not only a reassessment of its engagement in DR Congo but also a broader recalibration of its approach to international relations. The goal should not be to diminish its support for Palestine but to ensure that its actions across all arenas are consistent with the values it so passionately espouses. As we reflect on the complexities of South Africa’s foreign policy, it becomes evident that the nation stands at a crossroads. The choices it makes and the actions it takes in the coming years will not only define its role on the international stage but also determine the legacy of its post-apartheid era. In championing the causes of the oppressed, South Africa must not lose sight of the universal applicability of the principles it holds dear. The world watches and waits, hopeful that South Africa will embrace a foreign policy that is not only coherent and consistent but also truly reflective of its commitment to justice and human rights for all. In the final analysis, the tale of South Africa’s foreign policy is a cautionary one, reminding us that the pursuit of justice, both at home and abroad, requires not just vocal support for the right causes but actions that are in harmony with those voices. The struggle against hypocrisy and inconsistency is not unique to South Africa; it is a challenge that most nations face. Yet, in addressing these contradictions and striving for a more equitable and just world, South Africa has the opportunity to lead by example, turning the page on a chapter marked by dichotomy and ushering in an era defined by integrity in its foreign policy endeavours. The writer is a commentator on economic and political affairs.
