In a rare public rebuke, both the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO) and the Department of Defence and Military Veterans have clarified that the general’s remarks expressing political solidarity with Iran do not reflect the official stance of the South African government.
The comments have ignited a firestorm of criticism, coming at a time of already strained relations between South Africa and the United States.
The controversy stems from General Rudzani Maphwanya’s meeting on Tuesday with his Iranian counterparts, including Iran’s army commander, Major General Amir Khatami. According to Iranian state media, Maphwanya conveyed greetings from President Cyril Ramaphosa and Defence Minister Angie Motshekga, affirming that South Africa and Iran share “common goals” and will “always stand alongside the oppressed and defenceless people of the world”. He also condemned Israel’s actions in Gaza and reiterated South Africa’s support for Palestine.
SMread: Vigil to condemn targeted killing of Palestinian journalists
Government scrambles to clarify foreign policy mandate
The South African government’s response was swift, emphasising a clear separation of duties. In a statement, DIRCO asserted that the implementation of foreign policy is a function of the Presidency, supported by DIRCO.
“Consequently, any statements made by an individual, or a department other than those responsible for foreign policy, should not be misinterpreted as the official position of the South African Government,” the statement read. “The remarks attributed to General Maphwanya, therefore, do not represent the government’s official foreign-policy stance.”
The Ministry of Defence echoed this sentiment, with spokesperson Onicca Kwakwa stating, “It is unfortunate that political and policy statements were reportedly made during the meeting… The Department of Defence reiterates that only the President and Dirco determine South Africa’s national policy on international relations.” Defence Minister Angie Motshekga is expected to engage with General Maphwanya upon his return.
International Relations expert Donovan Williams noted the unusual nature of the general’s conduct. “The chief of the National Defense Force is not responsible for diplomatic relations,” Williams stated. “An objective of a trip of deepening or building diplomatic relations is not the responsibility of the head of the National Defense Force.”
He added that while military cooperation is not unusual, the political nature of the discussions went “over and above the mandate of the chief of the National Defense Force.” Williams acknowledged that the general’s actions put the South African government in a “very difficult position.”
The incident has drawn sharp criticism from opposition parties. The Democratic Alliance’s (DA) defence spokesperson, Chris Hattingh, accused Maphwanya of “reckless grandstanding” and acting like an “unsanctioned political envoy.” Hattingh argued that such actions risk deepening South Africa’s “diplomatic isolation, risk retaliatory measures, and worsen our economic vulnerabilities.”
SMread: DA’s economic redress plan sparks debate
Remarks made amid tense US-South Africa relations
The timing of General Maphwanya’s visit and his remarks is particularly sensitive. Relations between Pretoria and Washington have deteriorated, marked by the recent imposition of a 30% tariff on certain South African exports to the US.
Furthermore, a bill proposing a full review of the bilateral relationship and potential sanctions against South African officials recently advanced in the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee. The bill explicitly cites South Africa’s relationships with Russia, China and Iran as points of concern.
Foreign Minister Ronald Lamola recently described relations with the US as having “reached a low,” citing American “interference on a domestic issue.” The government is actively engaged in diplomatic efforts to navigate these “choppy waters” and avoid further economic repercussions.
Despite the official distancing from the general’s comments, the visit underscores South Africa’s historically strong and independent foreign policy.
As Williams explained, “Democratic South Africa has on a political basis in international multilateral forums always not hidden its friendship or its strong relations with Iran.” This approach dates back to Nelson Mandela’s presidency, who famously asserted that “the mistake that some of the political analysts and politicians in the West… commonly make is to think and assume that their enemies are the enemies of South Africa.”
While the government works to control the diplomatic fallout from the general’s statements, the incident highlights the delicate balance South Africa must strike between its foreign policy and the realities of its economic and political relationships on the global stage.
Image via News24.
