Hon Speaker and hon Members of Parliament, Kofi Annan, the former United Nations Secretary-General, declared that "good governance is perhaps the single most important factor in eradicating poverty and promoting development".
According to the United Nations Development Programme, the generic principles that enshrine good governance are democracy, effective public sector institutions, the rule of law, a strong and popular people's participation in decision-making and management of public resources for the benefit of all.
The uprisings in what was later to be dubbed the Arab Spring echoed the absence of all these factors in the Middle East and North African states. Many of these states lacked popular democratic participation of the people in electing their leaders into powerful political positions, the role being taken by army generals or the royal elite.
In some instances, the role of the public sector was relegated to servicing the ruling and middle classes of the concerned countries rather than working for the collective development of all the people.
Many of the countries opened their doors to imperial plunder by their former colonies because of their precolonial history. The result of this, given this scramble for survival and human development, were foreign financed civil wars or stage-managed elections in order to remove the unelected and corrupt classes throughout the region, every decade, since the 1930s.
The absence of strong popular participation by the people through their own mass formations resulted in the silent crushing of any political dissent and the exile of agitators of democracy, as was the case in Egypt and Algeria.
The political conservatism in this region was also supported by a regional block of the Arab League, which offered inter-regional solidarity as it relates to their class interests, economic and political needs and isolation, which was in most instances at the whim and demand of the United States and the European Union countries. Most of these economies, with an abundance of oil reserves, became the outposts of energy. Hungry Western and Northern economies also served as protectorates for Israel against all those who sought to create a collective Arab state and liberate, in particular, the people of Palestine from its occupation. They, like thirsty nomads, swallowed every neoliberal prescription from the International Monetary Fund, IMF, and the World Bank as they privatised key sectors of industry and opened their markets to foreign plunder.
The region will forever remain the jewel of the North and the West as long as its location allows both powers the will to continue with their global domination.
Who would have known that what was initially a random killing of a young educated vendor, Khaled Said, by hired thugs on the payroll of Egyptian police mid last year, would have triggered public protests and ultimately the overthrow of long-serving dictators in Egypt and Tunisia, and sustained mass pressure in Syria, Jordan, Morocco and Bahrain?
The opening of the Facebook account, aptly titled, "We are all Khaled Said", by Wael Ghonim, a Google executive based in Dubai, suddenly erupted into massive political interests and action in both Tunisia and Egypt, and ultimately the entire Middle East and North Africa were covered with unrest. This reaction was not merely a revenge for Said's death or adventure to realise what many had professed on the social network. Many of the protestors were responding to the failure of economic policies and the global economic crisis. There were also collective victims of unrepentant power mongers who sought to hand over power from generation to generation.
Although they identified themselves with Khaled, they also borrowed the past civil and anticolonial war battle cries for change. They were also determined in their calls for democracy, liberty and economic freedom.
Although we have seen three heads of state being crushed, two by popular uprisings and one through intervention by the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, Nato, forces in Libya, others such as Morocco, Jordan and Bahrain are holding on for dear life to power, assisted openly by the United States, France and Britain.
It is well known that the three countries' foreign policies are aimed at defending any government that seeks to protect its own political and economic interests. That is why, for instance, Mubarak and Ben Ali were not removed five or ten years earlier, when they assumed office, but stayed in office because they were protected by those who protected their economic and political interests.
Unlike governments whose economic and political power are threatened, such as in Chile with Allende, Guatemala's with Arbeniz, Haiti's Aristide and several others, including Cuba's Castro and Venezuela's Chavez, many people from the Western and Northern powers insisted on removing all these people when they threatened economic or political stability in those regions.
We saw, for instance, the rise of Suharto in Indonesia, the rise of Pinochet in Chile, army generals in Argentina and various other dictatorships that were facilitated by Western and Northern powers. This became the case even in the intervention of Nato forces with regard to the Middle East and North Africa.
Whilst police killed thousands of protesters in Egypt, Morocco or Bahrain, in Libya the so-called armed rebels or so-called armed civil protestors were assisted by Nato forces in order to find Gaddafi dead or alive. This is consistent, in our view, with the foreign policies of both the North and the West in ensuring that they only protect those who are willing and able to protect their economic hold in those particular regions.
US President, Barack Obama, issued various statements, including a declaration of war against Gaddafi and an ultimatum for his removal or resignation. The International Criminal Court, ICC, pronounced that they would prosecute him. Whereas in the case, for instance, of Mubarak, there is no mention of the ICC or expropriation of his wealth, which was in Britain, and of any external intervention in terms of his prosecution. These are the inconsistencies which we are talking about with regard to interventions and impositions of good governance in that particular area of the world.
One of the most interesting and striking examples is how the multinationals intervened actively to aid the rebels in Libya, whereas some of the formalised powers such as France openly assisted countries such as Egypt, Bahrain and Morocco to ensure that they quell the protests which were there in their particular countries.
Of course, people rose up because they were tired of dictators who stayed in office for 40 years, used the resources of their economies for their own personal accumulation, elected their own predecessors, quashed or crushed any popular movements, disrespected the law and ensured that no public institutions served the will of the people. Unlike in many instances in countries where civil societies are allowed to be heard, where NGOs can freely express themselves, where trade unions go to the streets and protest for wage demands or formal worker rights, where the bourgeoisie or the business people are allowed to go on investment strikes and where all these rights are enshrined, as in South Africa, these particular rights were not accorded. We applaud the revolts by people in those areas for having removed all those dictators.
We should completely condemn any external intervention, particularly by imperialist forces whose intentions are to protect their own interests, as was the case in Libya. South Africa's policy of nonintervention includes and encourages discussions or a discourse whereby all parties involved, in all those countries, engage and shape the future of their own countries.
What we see now, unfortunately, may be a case in which the forces that united behind Khaled Said may not be the actual benefactors of the democratic dispensation in Egypt, Tunisia and the entire Middle East. Those are some of the things in which we believe our government needs to play a role in ensuring that the actual people, such as the workers, the poor and the general populace in those countries, become the benefactors of a democratic dispensation, that those countries do not remain the outposts for Northern and Western powers as they continue with their global dominance.
Therefore, in our view, calls against authoritarianism and dictatorship, including calls for democracy and good governance, will become nothing for the peoples of that region if all these things that we said are still continuing.
What are the lessons for us? Firstly, there is a lesson in terms of our South African foreign policy. We have maintained a policy of nonintervention where there are conflicts and we have sought to export the Convention for a Democratic South Africa, Codesa, model of discussions amongst warring parties. When Britain's finger was itching to pull the trigger on Zimbabwe and that of France on Ivory Coast, we offered to mediate and negotiate and even presented a platform for democratic prosperity.
Where these were not ignored, years of facilitation ultimately yielded fruits, as was the case in Sudan. But in instances where the former colonisers lost their patience, they deployed skilled military interventions, as was the case with Ivory Coast and Libya.
Secondly, as a country we have to protect the institutions that insulate our sustained democracy. We have just held successful local government elections, wherein all citizens have the right to vote for their local representatives and institutions such as the Constitutional Court whose intentions are to protect and advance the interests of our democracy.
What we have seen in the past were portunistic attacks, for instance, on the ANC or any of its allies when they expressed politically objective objections to some of the rulings, for instance, of the courts. But today we hear people standing on the pulpits of the moral high ground, wanting to declare themselves as the sole criticisers of, for instance, Judge Mogoeng Mogoeng, whatever his strengths or weaknesses are. [Applause.] We are not afforded the opportunity and right to say what we think as it relates, for instance, to judges and magistrates and their judgement. Many of them have made far worse judgements compared to Judge Mogoeng Mogoeng. [Applause.] But here in South Africa, we have the right to do that.
As we have seen in all those Middle Eastern countries, and as the editorial of the New Left Review declared, and I quote:
Everything began with the death in despair of a pauperised vegetable vendor, in a small provincial town in the hinterland of Tunisia. Beneath the commotion now shaking the Arab world have been volcanic social pressures: polarisation of incomes, rising food prices, lack of dwellings, massive unemployment of educated and uneducated youth, amid a demographic pyramid without parallel in the world.
If we do not deal with the unemployment crisis amongst young people, we may see what is happening in the Middle East erupting in our own country. If young people remain without jobs, if the economic ownership and control of our country is untransformed, if the majority continues to be excluded - 6% of white males are still at the helm of our economy - we will see what is happening in the Middle East. Thank you very much. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Mr Speaker, hon members, today's debate on the topic of "Promoting and practising good governance as a means of advancing peace and security: Drawing lessons from recent events in the Middle East and North Africa" comes at a time when we, the citizens of this continent, should actually be hanging our heads in shame, because the events of the past months have been about nothing but poor governance.
From the events in Tunisia, Algeria, Ivory Coast, Zimbabwe and, most recently, Malawi, Swaziland and Libya, the operative word or underlying factor has been good governance having been compromised by those who have been entrusted with the responsibility of promoting and practising good governance.
Mr Speaker, according to the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, good governance is described as "the process of decision-making and a process by which the decisions are implemented or not implemented". On the other hand, bad governance is regarded as one of the root causes of evil within our societies. For example, today major donors and international financial institutions are basing their aid and loans on the condition that reforms that ensure good governance are undertaken by recipients of such aid.
Perhaps the question that we should be asking ourselves is what constitutes good governance. Mr Speaker, there are so many definitions of what makes good governance, but for the purposes of this short speech, I would like to say good governance involves the following: It is when elected officials perform effectively through clearly defined roles or when those who are entrusted with governing promote acceptable and ethical norms and values. Secondly, good governance is when leaders take informed and transparent decisions affecting the masses of the people. That is good governance. Thirdly, good governance is when public officials engage stakeholders, and I want to emphasise stakeholders, and make accountability real and not a joke. Mr Speaker, a joke is told of President Mugabe when he was advised that he should involve stakeholders in the process of discussing political reforms in Zimbabwe. He said that the problem with involving stakeholders is that they take the stake and leave us with the bombs. [Laughter.]
Mr Speaker, the debate around good governance in Africa has never really been a major topic of discussion, in my view, until probably recently when the upheavals in the Middle East and North Africa erupted. I also believe that in the early years of Africa's independence good governance was never a serious issue for majority debate, because the avenues and platforms for such discussions either never existed or were brutally suppressed by those in positions of authority. This probably explains why many African dictators and tyrants such as Idi Amin, Macias Nguema, Kamuzu Banda, Jean- Bdel Bokassa, Mobuto Sese Seko, Skou Tour, Sani Abacha and many others managed to hold onto power for so long. This is because they were not accountable to anyone but themselves, their cronies and their families.
The dawn of democracy on our continent, as witnessed by the second revolution of the 1990s, awakened many of us Africans to a new reality that the founding fathers of our independence were not necessarily correct by undermining good governance. The 1990s therefore proved that the one-party state system and dictatorship in general had reached their sell-by dates. In some countries, such as Zambia, the one-party system was used as an excuse for uniting people of various tribes, but it was evil in many ways.
Today young, charismatic and educated Africans want to see a new Africa emerge from the postcolonial era of the Big Man. Democracy was experiencing its rebirth in Africa once again. The recent events in North Africa and in the Middle East, in my view, Mr Speaker, signify the third revolution, or as they say in the Shona language of Zimbabwe, "the Third Chimurenga". It has shown that Africans can no longer tolerate or allow dictators to run roughshod over or amok in our countries. President Barack Obama once said that Africa needs strong institutions of democracy and good governance and not strong men. There is no place for strong men in Africa.
The now defunct Organisation of African Unity and its successor, the African Union, AU, have been a major disappointment to the people of this continent. For example, in the Libyan debacle, not to mention Zimbabwe or the Ivory Coast, the AU has proved again that it is a shambles. Instead of blaming itself for mishandling the situation in Libya, the AU set out blaming the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, Nato, for intervening militarily in that country. As far as I am concerned, that is very hypocritical. While Gaddafi was killing his people, the AU was busy constructing what I will call a gravel road map for a so-called political resolution of the conflict.
Former President Thabo Mbeki, in my view, seems to have suddenly gathered enough courage to condemn the so-called North African despots, and he was reported in last Sunday's newspaper as saying:
Both of them, Ben Ali of Tunisia and Mubarak, held on to these positions through what were described as democratic elections. The reality however is that these elections were not democratic by any stretch of the imagination, and therefore both presidents and the groups they had led clung to power by resorting to other means, which deliberately sought to frustrate the will of the people.
Mr Speaker, if I were to meet former President Mbeki today, I would ask him the following questions: Where was he when these dictators were committing these atrocities? What did he do to ensure that they did not cling to power unnecessarily, as he reportedly said? Wasn't he attending the AU summits and other heads of state meetings where these dictators were present? Why didn't he voice his displeasure at the time? Has he now found enough courage from the safety of the political wilderness to speak so eloquently against these dictators? [Interjections.] As a former President of this country, I think Mr Mbeki toasted some of these leaders whom he now condemns, but at the time, he never raised a finger against what he now calls illegitimate and corrupt governments. [Applause.]
What lessons can we learn from these recent events? Firstly, opposition cohesion is very important and, at the same time, having a capable leader or leaders who can unify various elements is important in winning people's support. The second lesson is that the disposition of the military is crucial. In Africa, and particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, we know that the military has been a wild card in the game of political transition. Whether army officers remained loyal to the incumbent or defected to the opposition had a decisive impact on the course of political events. Zimbabwe is a very good example. The military can either prop up an illegitimate regime or help to remove it.
Authoritarian regimes are most susceptible to reform when domestic pressure and international pressure converge, as in the case of Libya and Egypt. Also, protest movements usually originate within civil society. As we have seen in North Africa and in the Middle East, civil society is a very important and powerful tool for political reforms. We should therefore never underestimate the role of civil society in the life of our nations on this continent.
Finally, Mr Speaker, the biggest lesson I think we can draw from these events is that the people of Africa and the Middle East are fed up with dictators and tyrants. The time for change is now. Leaders can no longer take the people's will for granted. It is time for dictators to shape up or ship out. I thank you. [Applause.]
Speaker, hon members, I rise to offer some views in this debate that I consider very important. As members of the South African democratic Parliament we have the collective responsibility to speak loudly on these matters to the world and on behalf of our continent.
Allow me to digress a moment to talk about a critical matter. The weaknesses that we are experiencing in Parliament as a focus group is that there is little effort that is being put in place for co-ordination and making sure that international matters are co-ordinated and engaged. Those who are entrusted with this job are dropping the ball big time and urgent measures are required on this particular front.
In 2009 President Barack Obama said in Egypt:
I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn't steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose.
Good governance includes accountability, transparency, efficiency, effectiveness, responsiveness, forward vision and the rule of law. These elements form the guiding compass which the nations of the world are losing and striving for. The practice of good governance is the only way to sustain peace and security in the world.
The lesson drawn from the recent events demonstrates beyond the shadow of a doubt that the wave of democratisation is sweeping through the world. People of affected nations have therefore chosen democracy and not autocracy.
The matter of good governance should always ensure that government strives to produce quality product output, including service delivery, to citizens at the best cost and to ensure that outputs meet the original intention of the policy-makers.
Forward vision is the government's direct ability to anticipate future problems based on the current data and trends. Policy must therefore take into account future course and therefore anticipate economic, environmental and demographic changes.
For the national Parliament it is critical that we continuously engage in this debate, determining the direction against all things that undermine good governance nationally and internationally. It must be understood that the requirements of basic needs of the citizens, if not fulfilled, lead to discontent. No amount of suppression can last forever.
We must realise that food prices, everyday living and the increasing inequality gap remain a breeding ground for revolts. However, it is important to note that we must guard and protect the interests of our nations against the underlying interests of external forces that do not serve our collective nation state.
In pursuit of natural resources such as oil, some nations show a complete disregard for good governance and democracy. The popular uprisings in the Middle East and North Africa have alarmed and reminded many governments around the world that accountability - good and proper governance - is of the utmost importance.
Autocracy, poverty, underdevelopment, unemployment and corrupt rule have contributed to the social uprisings in the Middle East and North Africa. We should learn from these events. It has shown us that the citizens of the world need full participation in the affairs of their respective countries. We must always be the advocates of democracy across the nation states.
This brings me to the initiative that was driven and championed by our country on the continent in the form of the New Partnership for Africa's Development, Nepad. We must show that this Nepad process was of course a foresight, designed to ensure that the policies and practices of countries conform to the political, economic and corporate governance values, codes and standards, as contained in the Nepad declaration.
I conclude by saying, as Parliament we must drive the agenda so that we become the prime mover of the centrepiece of the Nepad process for the socioeconomic development of Africa. We must ensure that Parliament's voice is always heard on the side of the people, the citizens and the voiceless poor of all the countries in the world and on our continent. [Time expired.]
Mr Speaker and hon members, the big question of the day is: Will the revolutions in the Middle East and North Africa eventually translate into peace, security and democracy for the people of this region?
Maximilien Robespierre said the following about the revolution, "A revolution is just a crime destroying another crime." Bear that in mind.
The manner in which events in Libya eventually turned out should have taught South Africa and the African Union that Africa tried in vain to play in the rough league, where might is right and national interests are paramount, eternal and perpetual - just to paraphrase British foreign secretary, Lord Palmerston.
In particular, where the powerful nations of the world sense that they will be adversely affected, the option of the African Union, AU, calling for an inter-Libyan political dialogue became a lost cause the minute the United States, US, France and Britain called for regime change in Libya.
Effective representative democracy and strong co-operation among parliaments and parliamentarians of the world cannot happen freely in the atmosphere of regional and international conflicts.
The causation of the international conflicts is invariably connected with the national and regional geopolitical dynamics where parliamentarians operate and where most of the world conflicts have their roots and are anchored.
The Inter-Parliamentary Union, IPU, must therefore encourage regional and national parliaments to forsake the umbrage of innocence and change the paradigm that holds the view that conflict resolution is the monopoly of the head of the state and the executive, with the exclusion of the role parliament and parliamentarians must play.
In the end, it is the constituencies of the parliamentarians that are turned into theatres of conflict where men, women and children die and many more are displaced.
Parliament is where good governance, a true multiparty system, democratic elections, lasting peace and sustainable social and economic justice must be promoted.
It is therefore rational within the context of the IPU mandate to call upon the Pan-African Parliament to establish a standing parliamentary peace organ to engage the parliament of Israel, the Palestinian Legislative Council, the parliament of Zimbabwe, and the parliament of Swaziland, among other parliaments on the African continent where conflict and political instability have become the order of the day, to assist in bringing about peace, security, political stability, democracy and development. I thank you. [Applause.]
Speaker, hon members, as the topic suggests, the practice of good governance can and should be a catalyst for advancing peace and security, without which the world will descend into perpetual chaos. This also implies, therefore, that good governance can, indeed, effectively be used as an instrument for achieving the developmental and poverty eradication challenges faced by countries.
There are lessons to be learnt from the seismic shifts in the political environment in the North and in parts of the Middle East. These developments are cause for concern and demand visionary and selfless leadership, able to manage the fluid situation and transform it into a lasting peace. These uprisings, hon members, offer important lessons which we must seriously reflect upon and devise appropriate responses to, in tandem with the African Union's twinned mission of promoting peace and security and fostering democracy across the continent.
There are striking similarities across the Middle East and North Africa. Though this region is not homogenous, it has religious and cultural commonalities. Glaringly, in all these states facing popular uprising, there has been a tradition of, amongst others, authoritarian and extended leadership terms; emergency laws or police states which prohibited political activity and had no constitutions; strong military support for presidents and leaders who enjoyed support from the West in the fight against terrorism and the West's pursuit of other geopolitical and strategic interest; the tendency towards hereditary succession; appallingly poor human rights records; restricted political participation and brutal repression of political activities; media censorship; dire economic situations characterised by high youth unemployment, which in turn resulted in a lack of resource distribution at the lower levels of society; a high level of unemployed graduates; widespread corruption amongst the ruling elite; and high food and fuel prices. Popular participation in economic recovery and development has been increasingly recognised by the AU, including the United Nations system. The Economic Commission for Africa, ECA, in one such effort has been at the forefront of the good governance debate, repeatedly pointing out the centrality of governance factors underlying the contemporary African predicament and stressing the interrelationship between good governance and sustained economic development. The ECA has maintained that reconstituted, proactive, democratised developmental states hold the best prospects for the region's recovery and development.
Good governance has also been a topic of discussion in the international arena since the 1980s, particularly following the adverse results of the International Monetary Fund's structural adjustment programmes.
Recently in Africa the issue of good governance has been recognised and articulated to have an intrinsic link with human development, including poverty reduction. In the New Partnership for Africa's Development, Nepad, African leaders recognised that the process of achieving economic growth and development is heavily influenced by a considerable number of political factors, including economic, corporate and political governance as a prerequisite for sustained development. The Nepad framework also recognises that for African public institutions to function effectively, considerable reform and capacity-building are necessary. The AU has adopted a number of instruments on human rights, governance, democracy, disarmament, terrorism and good neighbourliness, which put forward a consolidated framework of norms and principles, whose observance would considerably reduce the risk of conflict and violence on the continent.
The slow implementation of the provisions in the relevant AU instruments, particularly those relating to the promotion of democracy, good governance, free and fair elections, human rights and justice remain a major challenge. Adherence to these instruments will contribute towards creating conditions conducive to socioeconomic development.
The uprisings in the Middle East and North Africa, Mena, region prove that institutional reforms are indeed necessary, and that focus needs to be placed on strengthening parliamentary oversight, administrative and civil service capacities, promoting participatory democracy and decision-making, and adopting effective measures to combat corruption and funds embezzlement and to push for judicial reforms.
This Parliament has ratified the AU Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance, signalling a clear commitment from South Africa to subject itself to these values. It is incumbent upon our country to engage our Southern African Development Community, SADC, sister countries to also ratify this critical instrument. The newly created state of South Sudan faces the enormous challenges of the nonexistence of institutions to support its new-found democracy and deliver much-needed services to its people. This is a prerequisite for the creation and consolidation of a strong, democratic and viable state that is able to deliver to its citizens.
In this context, we salute South Africa for her role in helping the people of South Sudan with, amongst other things, the tedious task of capacitating its civil service to create viable, effective and efficient institutions of governance. The same holds true for South Africa's efforts in doing the same in other countries such as Burundi and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
I want to caution, though, that, while good governance is a crucial element of the democratic and developmental character of the state, it is, by and in itself, not a universal remedy that will cure the deep-seated inequalities, poverty and underdevelopment so pervasive on the African continent. It is an unassailable fact that a self-perpetuating and parasitic relationship exists between poverty and conflict. Where armed conflict is widespread, poverty is entrenched and sustainable development becomes impossible. Conversely, in countries where poverty increases, the risk of instability and violence grows comparatively. Our analysis, therefore, is that poverty and underdevelopment are threats to stability, democracy and peace.
To this end, civil society has an important role to play as well by building a broad coalition of forces against poverty and underdevelopment, by nurturing democracy and by pursuing good governance. Parliamentarians and their relevant committees should actively exercise their oversight role over executive action through periodic investigations, reviews, hearings, etc. Particular attention should be paid to assessing government effectiveness and efficiency against agreed goals such as the Millennium Development Goals.
Africa must work hard to enhance the culture of free and fair elections in Africa and the Middle East. The people's faith and confidence in public institutions must be enhanced through regular elections, transparent, free and fair electoral processes, and credible institutions that support democracy and the rule of law, such as parliaments, electoral commissions, the police, impartial judicial institutions and others.
Countries must tackle potential and raging conflicts in a timely and peaceful manner through established national, regional or continental frameworks for conflict management and reconciliation.
In this context, South Africa remains committed to the advancement of the African agenda as the central pillar of her foreign policy outlook, with it constituting the basis of her engagement with the rest of the world. We do this, recognising that South Africa is an integral part of the African continent and that South Africa's national interest is inextricably linked to and best served through Africa's stability, unity, peace and prosperity.
Now, hon members, let me quickly respond to what hon Mubu has raised. The hon member made the point that Africa should hang its head in shame. I cannot strongly disagree with you, hon member. It is those who deceived the world, who broke the trust that the community of nations put in them by pursuing a regime-change policy, instead of pursuing the protection of civilians, which, in fact, was the mandate of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, Nato, forces in Libya.
Our engagement with the matter in Libya has always been on the issue of the protection of civilians. You see, civilians cannot be protected by being bombed. Through Nato bombings in Libya, more damage has been done. [Applause.] [Interjections.]
Order, hon members! Order! Order!
The AU proposed a road map which sought to deal with the conflict in that country through peaceful means. The fact of the matter is that you perhaps may not agree with how the AU wanted to approach the matter, but you cannot substitute a peaceful resolution for war. That you cannot do. [Applause.]
There lies a greater danger in countries abusing UN resolutions to pursue a war against heads of state which threaten their own geopolitical and strategic interests ... [Applause.] ... as opposed to finding a comprehensive political solution to the problems facing that country. In fact, as we speak, the AU has made the point very clear that, after bombing Gaddafi into submission, the problems of Libya have not been solved. You still need the political solution that will bring all the warring parties together. It is short-sighted to think that you can resolve the problems of a country by sending warplanes to kill people en masse. I thank you so much. [Applause.]
Hon Speaker, it's interesting to listen to the hon Magama and his concern about civilians, but I did not hear the ANC being concerned about the civilians when they were brutalised by Mugabe in Zimbabwe. [Interjections.]
Speaker, I think we all agree that the promotion and practise of good governance is definitely a means of advancing peace and security. But, surely, that can't be the full reply or full answer to the question, because if that was the case, we should look at which government in the world has the best governance and then ask them to rule the world - it doesn't work that way.
The hon Manamela spent some time talking about the Western and the Northern powers, but, once again, he also didn't say a single word about Zimbabwe and what's happening there - no concern, nothing. Protecting Zimbabwe once again. The problem is that maybe we differ in terms of what democracy means and, at some stage, we should talk about it.
The other problem is that if one person governs like Gaddafi over 99 others, then it is dictatorship and the world says it's wrong. If 10 people govern over 90 people, that is hypocrisy. That is also wrong. [Interjections.] Oh, please keep quiet!
Order! Order, hon members!
But, if 51 govern over 49, then you say that's democracy. Then it is perfect, no problem, nothing wrong. I'm telling you that the 51 may be the best government ever. But, just maybe, the 49 doesn't want to be governed by the 51. That's an outdated concept of democracy and we have to look again at what democracy really means. In the last couple of seconds, I want to caution the hon member to stop blaming the minority.
Order, order, hon JJ!
Hon Speaker, could you please ask Mr Jeffery to behave himself?
In the last seconds, I want to caution the member that it is a very dangerous thing to blame the minorities in this country for the failures of this government. It's not minorities that are responsible for corruption in South Africa. [Interjections.] It's not minorities that are responsible for the fact that 95% ...
Order, hon members! Let the speaker be heard! [Interjections.]
It's not the fault of commercial farmers or minorities that 95% of all transferred successful commercial farms have failed. It's not the fault of big business or minorities or anybody else that this government has failed to create jobs and that we've got a large number of people out there who are jobless. You've got to take responsibility for your own failures, and then, maybe, one day you will be able to say that you are trying to work towards good governance. [Interjections.]
Speaker, the desire for more freedom, dignity and decent employment has been growing steadily in the Middle East and North African region. Now that existing power relationships have been shredded, the need for mechanisms for good governance and the resolution of remaining tensions are critical.
In Libya there are no mechanisms in place at all to even begin to address ongoing tensions or the increasingly desperate humanitarian situation. The ACDP calls on the African Union, AU, and African leaders to focus on supporting the Libyan people in rebuilding their country and their lives, and we support offers by South Africa to assist in the drafting of a constitution to put such mechanisms in place.
We are also encouraged by the release of funds, facilitated by the United Nations Security Council, which we hope will significantly ease the hardships currently being endured by the people of Libya. An all-inclusive transition to peace, unity and democracy is likely to be a long and very hard road.
While the ACDP supports legitimate aspirations of the people in North Africa and the Middle East for democracy, justice, peace and security, we are aware that many forces are at work in what has been dubbed the Arab Spring. Commentators say that the budding of democracy may not be the full story or even a significant part of the story. The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation's, Nato, intervention in Libya, for example, is believed by many to have had more to do with Gaddafi's plan to launch a gold dinar and sink the United States dollar than the protection of people under attack from their own leader.
Others like Dr Walid Phares have cautioned that true secular reformers could be outmanoeuvred and marginalised by the Muslim Brotherhood throughout the region. While masses, and particularly real revolutionary youth, were exploding against dictators from Egypt to Libya and Yemen to Syria, Islamist networks were said to be systematically climbing the ladder of each national revolt.
Regardless of the complexities, promoting and practising good governance as a means of advancing peace and security is key in the Middle East and North Africa, just as it is anywhere else in the world. It is also imperative that the people in any country assume full ownership of their own future and resist becoming dependent on others. Thank you.
Motlotlegi Mmusakgotla [Hon Speaker], there are many inferences and lessons that a person or a government can draw from what has happened in the Middle East and North Africa. I'm of the opinion that we need not intellectualise this debate, but, rather, break it down to basics of governance in a democratic state. Although there may well have been the influence of third parties, or the West to be exact, as alleged by some, it is important for any entity to sweep its own side of the floor before it starts allocating blame.
Governance is a manner and style in which government relates and interacts with the society it governs. There are four suggested pillars that can be used as a measure of whether governance is good or bad: the degree of trust in government, the degree of responsiveness in the relationship between government and civil society, the government's degree of accountability to its voters, and the nature of the authority that the government exercises over its society.
We, as Parliament, have a role to play in terms of ensuring that proper legislation and policies that articulate the four stated pillars are in place. I dare say that we have, thus far, played that role well. However, we are lagging behind in our oversight role as it has not translated into more accountable government.
The state has a responsibility to protect, regulate, develop, maintain and sustain its citizens, bearing in mind the availability of resources. On paper and in theory, Parliament holds government accountable. We purport to do that through various committees. If we do this effectively and efficiently, then the million dollar questions are as follows: Why do we continue to see service delivery protests in each and every province? Why do we continue to read of senior public officials entangled in corrupt activities? Why has violence by our police force against civilians and vice versa increased?
If we are to maintain peace and security, and seek to avoid a repeat of what happened in North Africa, we, as Parliament, need to ensure and strengthen our oversight role and hold government truly accountable to us and to the electorate. I thank you.
Hon Speaker, hon members, let us reiterate that today, when the visitors leave North Africa, when the visitors leave the Middle East, it will be the Africans that will still have to solve the problems of the African continent.
In 1986 a Kenyan scholar, Ali Mazrui, called for a metaphorical bridge across the Red Sea that would reintegrate Africa with Arabia several million years after a natural cataclysm tore the Arabian peninsula from the rest of Africa. He noted that, just as in the view of continental Pan- Africanists, the Sahara Desert is a sea of communication linking states below it with their neighbours above it. So, the Red Sea could become a similar bridge. Mazrui also noted that, until the 1950s, Emperor Haile Selassie had officially located Ethiopia as part of the Middle East rather than Africa, before re-Africanising the country, like Egypt's Nasser.
How can South Africa, with a developmental South African foreign policy, build bridges between North Africa, the Horn of Africa and the rest of the continent? It is maybe important to reiterate - for those, again, who do not understand the premise that we move from - what we said before 1994 and what we continue to say: The essence of the ANC-led government in South Africa's foreign policy is to promote and protect the interests and values of its citizens. We pride ourselves on a commitment to peace and to human dignity in the far corners of the globe. We recognise, however, that the security of our people and their yearning for a nonracial, nonsexist democracy also lies close to the foreign policy of a democratic South Africa. Furthermore, it will actively promote the objectives of democracy, peace, stability, development and mutually beneficial relations amongst the people of Africa, as a whole, as well as Pan-African solidarity.
South Africa's viewpoints reflect our domestic character - a constitutional state bound by the rule of law. Why does it have to be different when it comes to the other parts of Africa? The events described in a recent editorial in The Guardian, "Ten days that shook the world", spread from Tunisia to Egypt, Bahrain, Libya, Yemen, Djibouti and Morocco. It was a revolution sparked by the self-immolation of a heroic street vendor in Tunisia. It has erupted throughout the Middle East and affected the international community.
It has strengthened our resolve and belief, as the ANC, to continue to reiterate the following: a belief in and a preoccupation with human rights which extend beyond the political, embracing the economic, social and environmental; a belief that just and lasting solutions to the problems of humankind can only come through the promotion of democracy worldwide; and a belief that justice and international law should guide the relations between nations. Why must it be different in other countries if we believe it here in South Africa? It is a belief that international peace is the goal to which all nations should strive. Where this breaks down, internationally agreed peaceful mechanisms to solve conflicts should be resorted to, and not bombing - as the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, Nato, is still continuing with up till today, even during the month of Ramadan.
Furthermore, we believe that our foreign policy should reflect the interests of the continent of Africa; that South Africa's economic development depends on growing regional and international economic co- operation in an independent world; and that our foreign relations must mirror our deep commitment to the consolidation of a democratic South Africa.
That is why we joined the Organisation for African Unity, OAU, as it was called then. The prime objective was to help the organisation realise its goals of deepening the unity of Africa's diverse peoples and cultures, and advancing their common wellbeing. It is disappointing to hear that no one spoke about the fact that we need to strengthen and continue to strengthen this organisation and not look on the other side of the Mediterranean.
Security is not only limited to military matters. It has important political, economic, social and environmental dimensions. In addition, the security of the state is dependent on meeting the social, cultural, political, economic and human rights needs of its people. Enduring security can be achieved through national and regional efforts to promote democracy, respect for human rights, sustainable development, social justice and environmental protection.
We believe that the threat or use of force by one state against another is an unacceptable instrument of foreign policy. This Parliament must condemn it as such and not try to find other means of defending it.
In 1994 we stated, as a democratic South Africa, that we will endorse international resolutions concerning the United Nations Charter. These are the Manila Declaration, the Declaration of the Principles of International Law and many others. Africa has the best possibility in this milieu of emerging from an era of political and social decline into a renaissance of hope and social progress. It can, on a massive scale, turn adversity into opportunity.
Good governance plays a key role in rebuilding postconflict countries. Since the human and institutional resources needed in that reconstruction have often fallen victim to the previous violence, we believe that countries in this transition phase require the assistance and co-operation of the international community. These are the things that we must talk about - not about how we must hang our heads in shame. The task is thus to build transparent, efficient and participative governance structures that can help to stabilise the volatile transformation of postconflict societies. You sort out these farm workers in the Western Cape. [Interjections.] Many people write off Africa as a hopeless place where rampant civil wars use children as cannon fodder and military coups keep people's aspirations for freedom at bay. It may be true that this is the only image we view daily on television news and read in the international press. Fortunately, however, there is a different image of Africa. It is an image that signifies a new wind of change blowing over Africa - a wind that started from the Republic of South Africa, the continent's youngest and healthiest nation, gathering momentum to sweep away all political, economic, social and environmental ills in Africa.
Africa saw its first winds of change in the 1960s with many of our great leaders. What we should be talking about is what the African Union, AU, has agreed upon in its African Charter. How do we learn the lessons of strengthening these noble ideas and decisions taken by these African leaders? How do we strengthen them against the diversity that we see coming from different worlds? Why do we have to compromise on the position that we have taken and say that it will be good to rather opt for war instead of opting for what, in South Africa, we were quite happy to go and do: find a peaceful solution? Why can we not defend that same one when it comes to all the other countries in Africa?
We should strengthen the African Charter and make sure that we implement the promotion of holding regular free and fair elections to institutionalise the legitimate authority of representative government, as well as the democratic change of governments. We should prohibit, reject and condemn unconstitutional change of government in any member state as a serious threat to stability, peace, security and development. Furthermore, we should make sure that, as in Article 23 in the African Charter that speaks of unconstitutional changes of government, we speak out more to strengthen such provisions and ensure that such changes do not happen.
We stated in there that parties agreed that the use of, inter alia, the following illegal means of accessing or maintaining power constitutes an unconstitutional change of government and shall draw appropriate sanctions by the Union. Countries have agreed in the African Charter that any coup d'tat against a democratically elected government should not be accepted; any intervention by mercenaries to replace a democratically elected government should not be accepted; any replacement of a democratically elected government by armed dissidents or rebels should not be accepted; any refusal by an incumbent government to relinquish power to a winning party or candidate after free, fair and regular elections ... [Interjections.] ... should not be accepted ...
HON MEMBERS: Zimbabwe!
... and any amendment or revision of the constitution or legal instruments, which is an infringement, should not be accepted.
The importance of peace in the Middle East is paramount - peace that includes the rights of the people of Palestine, too. We wish more parties could speak about the plight of the Palestinians also ... [Interjections.] ... instead of wanting to start in Zimbabwe and end in Zimbabwe. [Interjections.]
We believe that the United Nations must ensure that equality of sovereignty is the only determinant of power in its deliberating bodies. [Interjections.] There can therefore be no inequities generated by centres of privilege underpinned by the "special powers" that Kohler-Barnard wants. [Interjections.] Just to respond - yes, she has been shouting at me all the time. Now that I answer her, she is stunned! [Interjections.]
Chairperson, on a point of order, please: I would appreciate it, if someone is going to throw my name around, that they would use the term "honourable". Thank you. [Interjections.] That is what one does in this House. [Interjections.]
Thank you, hon member. Order, hon members!
Ag shame, she probably wanted ...
Just continue, hon member.
The hon member probably wanted to say something. [Interjections.] She is probably bored with herself. [Interjections.] [Laughter.]
As I complete my speech here today, let me just say very quickly to the hon Mubu, this is what was said about the stake, "You grab your stake and you come and see me with your stake to come and talk to me". That is what Mugabe said. Thank you very much. [Laughter.] [Applause.]
Debate concluded.