Online , 20/05/2025
South Africa has long framed its foreign policy as principled and value-driven. A recent illustration is its 2023 case against Israel at the International Court of Justice, which reflects the country’s post-apartheid legacy and enduring solidarity with Palestine. Yet, while its position on Gaza fits neatly within this historical narrative, South Africa’s approach to other global issues often departs from this moral framing, revealing a more complex and pragmatic diplomatic posture.
A key element of South African foreign policy has been its commitment to non-alignment—a principle rooted in the 1955 Bandung Conference. In today’s non-bipolar global order, however, this notion has evolved, increasingly reflecting the effort of Global South countries to position themselves as an alternative to a Western-led international order. One prominent example is the war in Ukraine. Like more than half of African nations, South Africa has adopted a so-called “non-aligned” position in response to the Russia’s invasion: abstaining from UN votes condemning the invasion and refraining from sanctioning Russia, with which it shares deep historical ties stemming from the anti-apartheid era. Despite internal and external criticism of double standards in applying principles of territorial integrity and aggression differently to Ukraine and Gaza, the South African government has defended its stance as “active non-alignment.”
While this position has remained consistent for nearly two years, recent developments suggest a subtle shift. Now holding the G20 presidency in 2025, South Africa appears to be recalibrating aspects of its foreign policy—most notably with President Zelenskyy’s official visit to Pretoria on April 24.
Against this backdrop, this episode of the “Africa Talks” series will explore some key questions:
• What does “active non-alignment” truly mean in today’s global context, and how does it differ from “non-alignment” or “multi-alignment”?
• How should South Africa’s evolution towards the Russo-Ukrainian conflict be interpreted?
• What role could South Africa’s foreign policy play during its G20 presidency, and how might it shape global perceptions of its international engagement?
Moderator
Intervenants