Amid politicking over South Africa’s nuclear energy policymaking and diplomatic tensions, will the South African government put its nuclear plans to a referendum?

Recent higher levels of electoral choice might reflect deeper trends that could harm South Africa’s democracy in future.

Barely two months after President Trump unexpectedly announced that he plans to withdraw US troops from Syria, his decision continues to attract media attention and commentary. While commentary was initially directed toward speculation on the reasons why he decided to withdraw from Syria so abruptly, speculation nowadays seems to be fixed on what exactly is meant by a “rapid withdrawal” and what this decision means for American interests. 

Judging by media and popular accounts, with all the inherent limitations therein and biases attached thereto, President Putin’s recent visit to South Africa for the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) Summit was an overwhelming success. Based on the tone of commentary and analysis prepared thereon, President Putin is widely admired in South Africa and across the African continent for his strong leadership qualities, although not everybody agrees with his country’s policies. 

Outlining a number of reasons, the author explains that the government of South Africa  is still planning to expand its nuclear energy generating capabilities. 

Social media has been abuzz of late with responses to comments that rapper Kanye West made during a radio interview in which he opined that slavery was a “choice” for slaves. The vast majority of social media users, who weighed in on this topic, including a host of celebrities, came out strongly against West and either sought to dismiss these comments by attributing them to his allegedly unbalanced mental state or to educate him on how horrible the system of slavery was. Ergo, it was not a choice.

President Trump’s late night Twitter rants and the seemingly arbitrary manner in which he hires and fires high-ranking bureaucrats have led many commentators and members of the public alike, including prominent members of his own party, to question his fitness to hold office. According to his detractors, his actions hint at mental instability, cast doubt on his mettle and thus his ability to steer the ship of state.

The government’s nuclear policy was approved by a full sitting of the cabinet back in 2015. There are a number of reasons behind this commitment to nuclear power and the haste with which the government appears to be acting at the moment.

It is not clear what genre the movie unfolding in the South African landscape falls under. Is it a thriller whose plot revolves around the heist of the political system? Or a horror movie, filled with macabre scenes of zombies feasting on the flesh of a dying state? No matter the genre, this is one movie guaranteed to keep South Africans glued to their screens.

The President of the United States of America has forcefully asserted the idea that only rich people can save society, a message that, till now, has been conveyed all too subtly. Society needed such a message in order to convince everyone of the great benevolence and moral uprightness of rich people.

The notion of state capture is currently very topical in South Africa, in both popular and academic circles. According to the popular view, President Jacob Zuma, along with a number of senior civil servants, has been captured and is doing the bidding of a well-heeled expatriate Indian family, the Guptas. A more plausible explanation of the nature of this relationship is required.

With America’s unilateral attack on Syria, a Russian ally, there are reasonable fears that the worsening relations between Washington and Moscow could escalate. Africans should not imagine that these events are too far away to affect them. The US and Russia are nuclear powers. War between them endangers the whole world. Africans should explore creative ways of putting the issue of nuclear disarmament firmly back on the global agenda.

South Africans who agree that government policies must enjoy popular support, who believe that peace is a desirable value which society ought to collectively and actively aspire towards and who admit the possibility that nuclear technology could be incompatible with the genuine pursuit of peace, should object to the government proceeding with its current nuclear plans without comprehensive public consultation.

The prospect of South Africa joining the UN Security Council as a permanent member could explain President Zuma’s reported enthusiasm for the nuclear project. Being remembered as the president who gave Africa a greater voice on the global stage and secured South Africa’s role as the continent’s megaphone is probably too tantalizing for Zuma and his administration to forego.

South Africa’s nuclear programme will be a disaster. Besides the fallouts being witnessed in the jostling for gains by greedy politicians, the project is likely to gobble up huge amounts of public funds that will be difficult to account for as the government will cite national security concerns of nuclear power, thereby curtailing citizens’ right to accountability.

Seventy years after commencement of the Manhattan project that developed the atomic bomb, a conscious debate on its socio-political consequences is missing when decisions are reached to adopt nuclear energy, most recently by a number of African countries. Until today, the costly projects draw on the legacy of demonstrating power, couched in language of necessity and accompanied by secrecy.

A project that could potentially meet a number of national priorities would be if the government incorporated a new capital district somewhere in the centre of the country and moved Parliament there. Geography dictates that a site somewhere in the Free State would probably be most suitable for this purpose.