ITSHOKENG KEKANA | When Washington calls for Mbeki during Ramaphosa’s tenure

There is something about the US calling former president Thabo Mbeki ’s name in the middle of President Cyril Ramaphosa’s presidency that deserves more scrutiny than simply treating it as praise for a former head of state.

It is not that Mbeki lacks diplomatic credentials, nor is it unreasonable for an American diplomat to recognise his experience, stature and negotiating ability. Mbeki was a president who operated extensively in international diplomacy and understood the mechanics of negotiating with powerful countries. The issue is the context in which his name has been invoked.

For some time, South Africa’s relationship with the US has been deteriorating.

What began, particularly under President Donald Trump’s administration, with claims about the persecution and alleged “genocide” of Afrikaners has evolved into disputes over land reform, expropriation without compensation, BEE, South Africa’s geopolitical positioning and, most recently, American visa restrictions targeting South Africans who Washington said are connected to certain policies.

This sequence matters because through much of this, South Africa has not simply walked away from the relationship. In response, Ramaphosa went to Washington. He sat in the Oval Office while Trump confronted him with claims of a “genocide” of white South Africans, including material Ramaphosa challenged.

Rather than allowing the meeting to collapse into a confrontation, he redirected the conversation towards trade and economic co-operation. His government described the visit as an attempt to reset and revitalise bilateral relations. All that indicates diplomacy and interest in keeping it as.

Pretoria’s position has also been that it has engaged Washington repeatedly and the expectations being placed on South Africa have not remained entirely static

In the same respect, diplomacy does not mean agreeing with the other country’s interpretation of your domestic affairs. It does not mean surrendering your government’s policies because another government disapproves of them. It means remaining at the table while defending your country’s interests.

South Africa has remained at the table. The minister of international relations and co-operation has continued engaging Washington. South Africa has deployed diplomatic representatives and presidential envoys to manage the relationship. Officials have continued discussing active and potential trade, economic co-operation and the contentious policy questions that have increasingly defined the relationship.

Pretoria’s position has also been that it has engaged Washington repeatedly and the expectations being placed on South Africa have not remained entirely static.

This is where the phrase “America has run out of patience” becomes interesting.