Episode Transcript
[00:00:00] Speaker A: I'm Afshin Ratan. You're watching New Order's season finale. We're broadcasting worldwide on RT International, including to an audience of nearly 1.5 billion on RT India, we're continuing to examine how global power is being rewritten and how India and its partners shape what comes after all, the dead are buried from the Trump Netanyahu wars that have affected billions, While genocides have continued here in West Asia and India. India's pink city, Jaipur. This week, BRICS ministers gathered just weeks before New Delhi hosts the Leaders Summit with India pushing themes of connectivity, technology and greater cooperation among emerging economies. Further south, Durban recently played Host to the SADC's head of state summit, placing Pretoria once again at the center of debates over African integration and development after decades of imf, World bank destruction, let alone NATO military wrecking of societies such as in Libya and Sudan. Behind these diplomatic gatherings is a much larger contest over who writes the rules of the next economic order. The global south, along with military and financial superpowers like the uae, Iran, Russia, China and India are pushing for a system where they are not simply suppliers of raw materials, but key partners in trade, finance and technology. With India leading brics, South Africa advocating a stronger African voice, and China deepening its oldest African partnerships, let alone Russia proving independence from US Unipolarity, the coming months will test whether these platforms can translate political political momentum into real influence. At the end of the show, we'll be joined by New Orders Zahra Khan to answer questions from you, the viewers. With me now is a scholar whose work has focused on one of the defining questions of this era, whether Africa and the wider global south can move from being participants in a system designed elsewhere to becoming architects of a new one. Professor David Monnier's research has examined brics, South Africa's foreign policy and the struggle for reform of global institutions. He joins me from Johannesburg. Professor Monnier, welcome to a new Order. I want to get to South Africa handing over the torch of the G20 to Trump for the Miami summit. Arguably more boring in December.
So many acronyms. Sco, bricks.
Just tell me about the sadc, because it won't been widely covered. The meeting in Durban, what is it? And how critical is the SADC going to be in future years for the kind of context your work is firmly rooted in?
[00:02:37] Speaker B: Thank you. Thank you for having me. Sadc, it's Southern Africa Development Corporation. I think it's the combination of 15 countries in southern Africa in which South Africa is the most dominant power.
It came about as far back as 1980. And it has been working in its early phase and the struggle against then apartheid and now with South Africa's 1994 democratic dispensation as South Africa joined in really boosting that region. But as an SADC is part of the regional economic communities as part of the African Union broadly that deals with issues of cooperation only key issues of development, conflict resolution and a number of other issues pertaining to global environment in which Africa should and must speak with one voice. And therefore, I think these groupings do consolidate that a collective approach to global issues.
[00:03:52] Speaker A: I mean, I was looking through WikiLeaks to find out whether there was evidence of United States meddling in the sadc. I think there were some cables about how the United States tried to use it. Certainly people will be wondering about the role of these African groups. The African Union, for instance. I mean, Trump has threatened to damage all the SADC economies. I think there are actually 16 members. He's threatened tariffs on Madagascar 47%, 40% of Mauritius minerals, Botswana 38% Angola 32%, Namibia 21%. We all know how he treats your leaders there in South Africa. All the while China has zero percent tariffs on these countries.
Why do you think these African groupings haven't been more angry and voluble about the threats of tariffs to wreck and destroy their economies?
[00:04:46] Speaker B: I think it is to do with the nature and the kind of economies that they have. These countries are much more small other than South Africa and notably Mauritius and Botswana.
A majority of them are agriculture based and they do face a lot of challenges. And therefore the weaker you are, as you understand in global politics, the smaller your voice is.
And they don't really trade with the United States or any of the bigger countries on the volumes of trade, I mean, are much more smaller other than South Africa that has much more bigger industry. And therefore it's a power relation. And therefore United States, especially under Donald Trump, I think he hasn't taken Africa quite serious in his first administration. And in the second he has called Africa all sorts of names.
And his approach to black people all over the world, it's well known, tend to be racist in a way. And therefore you then see Africa really looking to other powers, emerging powers such as India, China, Brazil, they work with quite a number of, including your Japan to really get assistance in a number of areas.
[00:06:21] Speaker A: Is it just that or is it actually fear? I mean, clearly Trump, I mean it's not just Trump, successive US Administrations. We know what Obama did to Libya when it wanted some kind of African unity. Is it Actually fear that is the guiding principle here. I don't know what you think of Cyril Ramaphosa's performance when he was sitting next to Donald Trump trying to replace pair some kind of relations with.
After all, a country that South Africa calls its strategic partner is what your country calls the United States. Even after the genocides in say this region.
[00:07:01] Speaker B: South Africa's approach to foreign policy is one of engaging and try to mend fences with all powers.
I think it moves from a position that United States remains an important power globally.
South Africa differed the United States on a number of key areas when it comes to United nation reforms of the UN itself differs on position whether it comes to Israel and Gaza and a whole list of issues that emerging such climate and the like. However, the trade between South Africa and the United States is still quite big.
American companies are so many in South Africa and they employ a number of people. And therefore it is not in South Africa's interest to go head on with such a powerful country. And therefore the thinking is that South Africa will then work with BRICS and other formation to really try to bring United States and behave in a manner that is not threatening its security, its standing in the world and therefore the usage of diplomacy. Supremacy has been the hallmark of South Africa's foreign policy since 1994.
[00:08:20] Speaker A: Genocide versus economic trade. I mean, in a sense is it just the same then as India? It's very similar to the perspective of India India in the quad, but India in brics.
South Africa a strategic partner with the United States but also wanting to be very much a full member of brics.
[00:08:41] Speaker B: South Africa might not be. I think South Africa has made its voice quite clear. I think you will agree with me when it comes to taking Israel to icc.
It made the entire international community fully understand that human rights remain important and therefore challenge global powers.
It's foreign policy of non aligned. I mean it doesn't differ indeed from India.
However, unlike India, its position is quite clear. It does not have relationship with the United States and the BRICS countries. And in a manner that in itself one would fully understand where it stands.
It tries to have relation with all countries but its position is quite clear that is prominently a global south country and it stands with global south agenda. I think that has been clear since 1960, 1994 and it has tried to deal with analysis of Donald Trump.
Its relationship with other administration was different compared to on the surface I suppose
[00:09:57] Speaker A: one would say because the policies themselves haven't changed that much. So. But is this a problem of class conflict within South Africa then, because it's elite South African society that views this as the geopolitical norm for where South Africa should place itself in the world, as opposed to the majority of ordinary South Africans or certainly the underclass in South Africa who want a very different type of policy.
[00:10:21] Speaker B: I think it's both.
South Africa, like India, like in Europe or United States. I think you have seen a shift as the economy is not doing quite well. There's a rise of unemployment and the youth and therefore I think they express their views quite differently. But, but the elite and the governing party, I think it has been consistent that global peace and security can only be resolved through negotiations.
And while others are just saying we really do not need to engage and then you always have to get this tension domestically. But my own view is that's a global phenomena. It's not just South Africa.
But is the economy just one expects
[00:11:13] Speaker A: more from South Africa, arguably. Because of course, I mean, I've interviewed Nelson Mandela. I mean you expect the anc, apparently founded on political violence, to act differently. Perhaps that's the reason.
What does South Africa think of itself as not being invited to the G20? Does it matter in Miami?
[00:11:33] Speaker B: The African National Congress was never founded on violence. I think since its formation it has been arguing for a peaceful resolution to conflict.
[00:11:43] Speaker A: It was founded on violence. I tell you, Mandela told me that himself. I can't, I can't. No, no, no, no.
[00:11:50] Speaker B: I, I default on that because I think our own transition has through negotiations, mediation and there wasn't any storming of the palace as other countries and, and, and therefore it's very peaceful country where negotiation, the peace, the trc, truth and reconciliation. Yeah, it changed and it's a more globally, It's a model globally. And one would even argue that as democracy erodes all over the world, South Africa still maintain and holds up to norms and values of democracy more than most emerging powers in the world.
[00:12:32] Speaker A: But so it's through this type of negotiating lens that they'll go to Delhi. I mean we'll pursue this more in part two. But it's a negotiated settlement with the existing big powers that South Africa is going to be coming with as its perspective in Delhi in September, South Africa
[00:12:55] Speaker B: positions are quite clear. It has shared BRICS and as you know, it chaired G20.
Very successful. It strongly believes that it holds the views of emerging powers.
And since the non alignment move in 1955 with Nehru and other leaders, South Africa believes in that belief that the developing countries need to negotiate with the developed world to deal with issues of underdevelopment and find ways of ensuring that there's technological transfer, there's fairness in terms of how poorer countries are treated in international arena. And it has been consistent in advancing and therefore forums such as BRICS are quite critical.
But far beyond BRICS, South Africa is a member of G20 and South Africa and India share quite a lot in common. And that's my position.
[00:14:01] Speaker A: We'll continue after the break. Keep watching New Order.
[00:14:08] Speaker C: Foreign.
[00:14:15] Speaker A: You're watching New Order. Professor Money, I interrupted you in part one when you were talking about the South African perspective that will be brought to bear at the Delhi summit, the BRICS summit. I mean, before I get on to the kind of levels of political violence that will be brought to bear against countries trying to seek some kind of autonomy, let alone groupings like brics. I mean, does South Africa have a strategy? India is having to contend with this as well, with the tariffs. So there's going to be a 12 and a half percent tax. Clearly there's going to be threatened taxes on BRICS members by the Trump government. And also there's something called the Africa Growth and Opportunity act in the United States which gives us lower import fees for certain South African goods. I mean, is there a strategy or is South Africa playing it by ear as the US Administration ramps up what you know is not just Trump's racism is a concerted attempt by Washington's hegemonic power elites to understand that BRICS poses a grave threat to US Power.
[00:15:23] Speaker B: I think South Africa has been developing a very clear strategy. I think its strategy is to ensure that it diversify its trade.
Instead of depending solely on the United States, it's increasing its trade with new partners.
I think volumes of trade with China, for instance, is on the increase. And there's zero tariff at the moment for African countries excluding Eswatini. With China, for instance, it's getting into Latin America in areas that it traditionally used not to be there when it comes to trade.
At the same time, it also believes that it can negotiate with the United States and pursue and ride this wave of Trump, it's a matter of two, three years, the men will be out of White House.
[00:16:14] Speaker A: Yeah, but I'm not sure it is just about Trump. You see. I mean, for years, I mean take for instance one question I have for you is India, for instance, is used to bad press in so called Western mainstream media.
As soon as it tries to pursue some sort of independent policy, whether it be importing Russian energy in defiance of NATO countries, you'll expect that immediately. There'll be a news story about some sort of human rights catastrophe in India. It's the same actually with South Africa.
As soon as South Africa tries to pursue an independent policy, you'll watch CNN and there'll be some story about how your country is doing some horrible thing as regards human rights.
Is South Africa prepared for the kind of onslaught of media attention? And I mean, I don't know whether USAID's destruction by Trump will help that and will mitigate against that. But does South Africa understand that soft power is also going to play a part here?
[00:17:14] Speaker B: It fully understands and it has been sending envoys all over the world.
It's playing in the media space. Yes. It's reaching out to United States itself far beyond the White House, working with progressive forces within the United States as well as other friends within BRICS and other formation to ensure that South Africa the reality in South Africa are viewed in a way which is fair, that it has challenges. There is violence, no doubt about it, like most countries.
But there is no genocide in South Africa.
G20 was.
[00:17:54] Speaker A: Yeah, I mean come on.
Most people in Western Europe are not going to say that the city of London is so much more corrupt than South Africa.
Every city in South Africa put together. Why is it South Africa's failed so miserably in educating the world about corruption sake? Why are these global south countries that were meeting in the SADC so unable to to make the world realize that corruption is in the city of London and in Wall street far more than obviously there is corruption than there is corruption in South Africa.
[00:18:32] Speaker B: As I said earlier on, it's a power relation.
Most of what we consume in terms of news is driven from the west and as you know, the main debate and one expects India to play a leadership role as it shares BRICS with Global South. Countries within BRICS in particular could lead in terms of advancing issues from the global south where this unfair coverage. There's so much violence in the United States, in Chicago for instance south it's more murders taking place than in most capitals in the global south. But the manner in which it is portrayed.
The west has an upper hand in this for now. But I think one would want to see BRICS television, more collaboration among BRICS countries, scholars programs like yours bringing in issues perspectives coming from the global South. I think the more we do that at times we are our own enemies. We tend to submit ourselves as scholars, as leaders, politicians and business people more to the global north than fellow south south cooperation. And I think more needs to be done and one is expecting the communique coming from India to be much more stronger and providing solution with South Africa also raising its voice more than it is doing at the moment.
[00:20:10] Speaker A: If we put China and Russia and the UAE and Iran to one side. Do you think one advantage India and South Africa have is they have no IMF debt? South Africa paid off its IMF debt. Do you think that gives an added power to South Africa? And as I said, India has no IMF debt either. Do you think that makes these countries powerful?
[00:20:37] Speaker B: Indeed it will assist. I think it's a question of dealing with cooperation among Global south countries on these issues. New institutions are changing the rules of the game. For instance, out of G20 which South Africa chaired last year and the bulk of issues that should be discussed within brics, it should be a continuation of some of the core issues registered and outcome of G20 and therefore I think what we need to see is consistent. The Global south has been so lucky. You had China chairing G20, Indonesia, India, Brazil, then South Africa and now it is going to the Global north and you're going to see dampening and watering down of Global south agenda. And therefore there is therefore a need for South Africa and fellow BRICS countries to raise and increase their cooperation on key issues and try to transform the world as we see it.
[00:21:44] Speaker A: Yeah, I mean I actually, I think it was when South Africa paid its last dollar of IMF debt that we started to get the stories about how terrible the place South Africa was arguably.
What sort of violence though do you think is going to be meted out as BRICS increases in its power after the Delhi Summit? Say, I mean do you think the Shanghai Cooperation Organization is where the military cooperation resides? Or do you think BRICS plus is going to have to have meeting about some element of defensive mechanisms in the face of the scale of violence that a dying empire will inevitably respond with?
[00:22:27] Speaker B: My own take is that United States remains still powerful. And as you know, hegemons do not die overnight.
When you go back in the history of empires, whether it's the British or others, they take time to die. So we need to tamper with our expectation to see United States decline overnight.
However, I think it is losing power in a number of areas.
Its reputation when it comes to scholarly and as well as in trade, more of work within Global south needs to ensure that we tighten and work quite closely among ourselves as global boss off and they'll be resisting.
[00:23:15] Speaker A: Sorry to interrupt, but we're just coming to an end. And that doesn't mean that South Africa is going to be swayed over its relations with Russia. Just like India, South Africa is saying we'll retain our relations with Russia regardless of what NATO says.
[00:23:31] Speaker B: Recently, South African Defense Force generals have been discussing with their counterparts in Moscow to find ways of continued cooperation on a number of areas, including naval drills. I think what South Africa won't do is to form alliances. It believes in non aligned strategy in which it will cooperate with all countries whether in the Global south or in the north, but without a direct confrontation on any of the issues. However strong on global south position as advanced by BRICS and other Global south forums.
[00:24:19] Speaker A: Professor David Monyayi, thank you.
Now it's time for questions with Zahra Khan.
[00:24:31] Speaker C: Your questions, the audience has questions and I'm hoping you have the answers. And I apologize if I'm butchering this username Peachy has asked what even is brics? Political block trade or just to be anti NATO?
[00:24:43] Speaker A: Yeah, I mean, what is it? I mean, in a sense one could say that BRICS is for justice. That would be vague. I mean Professor Monnier was kind of talking about it as lots of people talking and talking about a new order. But it is for justice. In which case if it's for justice, does that mean it would have to be anti NATO? I think stats are the best way to understand it. Half the world's population, 40% of the global economy at BPP, 71% of global steel, half global oil production, 80% of global coal production. That means it can be political trade, it can be anti NATO at the same time, but no military clause. Yet as we were talking with Professor
[00:25:25] Speaker C: Monnier about, and Willow Young has asked, how do you square most powerful economy in Europe with the ruble being what it is right now, of course referring to Russia.
[00:25:34] Speaker A: Yeah, I mean Trump spent his entire times telling Jay Powell at the Fed to lower the price of the $$. Why? Because a lower ruble benefits Russia. That's why it's the most powerful economic power in Europe. I mean, think of it this way. If an exporter gets $100 at 80 rubles a dollar, that's 8,000 rubles. If you get 100 rubles per dollar, it's 10,000 rubles. It's good for Russia that the ruble is lower because it can export more. So they're not mutually exclusive.
So that's why Kevin Marsh is being told by who's the new head of the Fed? At least at the time of this recording, he's being told by Trump, lower the price of the dollar. Copy Russia, make the dollar lower. Like the ruble as well.
[00:26:22] Speaker C: Yeah, I'm terrible at math, so I'll have to take your word that all of that was right. Celia Stoxicles has asked, what do you think of worldwide geoengineering activities? Us, NATO, China and Russia, among many others, are into it.
[00:26:32] Speaker A: Geoengineering was at chemtrails?
[00:26:35] Speaker C: Gosh.
[00:26:35] Speaker A: No, it is a serious thing and it is space day. Indian space day. What better time? Well, there's biological engineering. We know all about that from the FAUCI evidence in Congress, clearly. US biowarfare labs in Ukraine and in China to create the COVID virus that killed so many tens of millions of people. But there's cloud seeding, definitely. That's geoengineering. And certainly the United States is accused of bioengineering because of mass murder in Vietnam. Project Popeye, maybe our viewers can look it up. But the USA is now involved in solar geoengineering and that's to impoverish. That's what its critics say. Global south countries using, they can weaken the African monsoon, the Asian monsoon, reduce rainfall, they can damage harvests. Maybe that is the United States best bet against brics geoengineering to change solar power. Of course, geoengineering is most notably being used in industrial scale slaughter in the Global south. In terms of crop failure engineering. Crop failure in Cuba, for instance.
[00:27:45] Speaker C: Thanks, Afshin. You get a bit of a break from me, but we'll be back soon with more questions.
[00:27:50] Speaker A: Yeah. Hope you're going to a place that doesn't have solar geoengineering.
[00:27:54] Speaker C: Fingers crossed.
[00:27:55] Speaker A: See you next time. Zahra Khan, and it's been me, Afshin Ratansi. Remember to follow us on xnewordertv and ask your questions. Maybe it'll be yours that gets answered when we come back for a new season on September 13th. In the meantime, we'll keep tracking how global power is reshaped in real time and what it means for India's position in this new order.
