In recent months, the international legal architecture has been shaken, reshaping trade relations and leaving nations at risk. With the ongoing conflict in the Middle East exacerbating the situation, what does this mean for South Africa and its foreign policy?
This was the pressing issue unpacked in the latest PSG Think Big webinar, where Zane Dangor, Director-General at the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO), joined journalist Mandy Weiner to explore how global conflict, trade pressures and shifting power dynamics are shaping South Africa’s international positioning.
Addressing the recent statement made by US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, Dangor noted early indications of renewed engagement between the two countries. “I think we should see that as a signal that the US is open to engagement.”
However, he pointed out that tensions in the relationship have not been driven primarily by geopolitical issues. “They had three baskets of issues historically that they wanted to negotiate with us: geopolitical issues, trade issues, and then what they call the ‘basket of domestic issues.’ On the geopolitical issues, even when we met last May with the President, it was secondary to the domestic issues.”
Encouragingly, Dangor believes that Roelf Meyer’s appointment as US ambassador could help stabilise ties. “With him and a good team around him, I think that we are ready to open those negotiations as indicated by the Secretary of State.”
This renewed engagement comes at a critical time, given tensions within multilateral platforms such as the G20. Yet Dangor was clear in his assessment of South Africa’s exclusion from certain G20 processes: “We are a permanent member of the G20.”
Trade remains another key pressure point, particularly in light of ongoing tariff discussions and uncertainty around future agreements with the US. Despite this, Dangor said negotiations are progressing. He added that there is a clear timeline in mind. “We hope to conclude a trade deal by the end of this year.”
Beyond bilateral relations, the broader global context is also shaping South Africa’s policy approach. The ongoing Middle East conflict has highlighted vulnerabilities in global supply chains, particularly in relation to energy security.
In response, South Africa is exploring ways to reduce its exposure to external shocks. “Security of supply is of critical concern to us,” said Dangor. “So, we are ensuring that we do get the resources domestically, whether it’s oil or gas or renewables.”
At the same time, relationships with major global partners remain essential. “Relationships with key countries that we trade with – China, the US, and the EU as a whole – are major considerations.” This balancing act – maintaining key relationships while reducing over-reliance – sits at the heart of South Africa’s foreign policy approach.
Dangor also pointed to a more profound shift in the global order, with increasing disregard for international norms and legal frameworks. This erosion of established rules, he warned, poses significant risks for global stability, particularly for smaller and middle powers that rely on predictable systems of governance.
In this context, South Africa is advocating for a renewed commitment to international law. “What we do have is the certainty and predictability of international law that protects all of us,” said Dangor, stressing that cooperation among middle powers will be critical in preserving this framework.
Looking ahead, he believes that a return to multilateralism is the only viable path forward. “The only recourse we have to a more stable globe; stable Africa; stable South Africa – and a stable South Africa in which business can thrive – is a global order that’s based on international law, that’s predictable, and where everybody is held equally accountable.”
Finally, Dangor underscored the importance of consistency in South Africa’s foreign policy, particularly in its application of international law. “Our approach is to ensure that we can both promote the human rights of all, and at the same time deal with regimes that act in imperialist ways. We have to be able to do both – it’s not one or the other,” he concludes.