Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Categories
UFS News Media Release Research
Years
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
Months
January February March April May June July August September October November December
Previous Archive
04 June 2020 | Story Prof Hussein Solomon. | Photo Sonia Small
Prof Hussein Solomon.
As young Political Science undergraduate student, phrases such as ‘national security’ made sense. It was the 1980s and the machinations of the Cold War rivals fascinated me. In the national context of apartheid South Africa, the national security management system of former President PW Botha drew my attention. The realpolitik of the time, both global and national, resulted in me avidly reading countless tomes of first-strike capabilities of the nuclear powers and regional destabilisation strategies of the apartheid pariah. 

National security considerations vs lived experiences of ordinary people
With the passing of time, I grew increasingly disillusioned with national security as a suitable fit for contemporary times on account of two reasons. First, national security considerations were far removed from the lived experiences of ordinary people. A US factory worker in Michigan is more concerned about the closure of his local automotive plant than the machinations of Beijing in the South China Sea. National security always reflected the concerns of the elites in their respective societies, as opposed to the bread-and-butter considerations of the vast majority of humanity. In the African context, such elite-driven state security was often purchased at the expense of the human security of ordinary citizens. Here, the guns of the military were often directed at marginalised and hapless citizens, as opposed to being directed at keeping borders safe from a possible foreign invading force. National security therefore needs to be expanded to incorporate the concerns of ordinary citizens. Second, in this rapidly globalising world, insecurity anywhere is a threat to security everywhere. The COVID-19 pandemic illustrates the point well, whether one resides in Wuhan, Milan, Moscow, New York, Sao Paolo or Cape Town. The world is one, and national security needs to be jettisoned in favour of more integrated conceptions of security.

Regional mobilisation
The current locust plague sweeping across East Africa vividly highlights the need for more expanded definitions of security. This locust plague has been labelled by the UN as an “extremely alarming and unprecedented threat”. Currently, Sudan and South Sudan, Ethiopia, Kenya, Somalia, and Uganda are all affected by swarms of locusts travelling at 90 miles per day and eating their own body weight in crops. To put matters into perspective, a swarm of locusts of only one-third of a square mile can eat the same amount of food as 35 000 adults. This undermines food security across the region. To exacerbate matters, the lockdowns as a result of the coronavirus has hampered efforts to eradicate the swarms. Regional governments are overwhelmed, as Helen Adoa, Uganda’s Minister of Agriculture, admitted. This admission highlights the fallacy of national security in a globalising world. Regional governments need effective regional organisations to support their efforts and should partner with international organisations, including the UN Food and Agricultural Organization, civil society, and business, to holistically respond to the threat. I write this paper on Africa Day, 25 May – a day celebrating African solidarity. 

This African solidarity stands in sharp contrast to the realpolitik and insular politics embraced by the concept of national security and its corollary national interest. Sovereignty in defined areas needs to be ceded to regional organisations and global institutions in an effort to craft truly regional and global solutions. No one country can deal with either COVID-19 or swarms of marauding locusts.

An integrated understanding of security 
The origins of the current locust infestation currently overwhelming East Africa also points to the imperative for integrated understandings of security. Climate change has created the ideal breeding ground for the locust population in the Arabian Peninsula to increase by 8 000 percent. A phenomenon known as the Indian Ocean Dipole created unusually dry weather in the east, which resulted in wildfires ravaging Australia. The same phenomenon, however, also created cyclones and flooding in parts of the Arabian Peninsula and Somalia. The resultant moist sand and vegetation proved the ideal conditions in which desert locusts could thrive. Aiding the burgeoning locust populations is the collapsed state authorities in both Yemen and Somalia, ravaged by civil war and fighting Al Shabaab insurgents. As the writ of the ‘governments’ in both Sanaa and Mogadishu hardly goes beyond the capital, neither country can even launch a national response to the locust plague. 

The origins of the swarms of locusts devastating east Africa link climate change, civil war, state authority and capacity, and the COVID-19 pandemic. This stresses the need for holistic solutions which are rooted in expanded and integrated conceptions of security. We cannot afford to work in silos at national, regional, or international level.

Extraordinary times call for more holistic conceptions of security. The Cold War is over, my undergraduate lectures on security are a poor fit to today’s realities. The world stands at a pivotal point, much as it stood following the Thirty Years’ War in Europe and the resultant 1648 Treaty of Westphalia, the 1815 Congress of Vienna following the Napoleonic Wars, and the aftermath of the Second World War. We need to be brave and refashion our security architecture to reflect integrated, global, and human security considerations. 

This article was written by Prof Hussein Solomon, Senior Lecturer in the Department of Political Studies and Governance, and first appeared on Muslims in Africa.

News Archive

UFS policies want to help all students
2005-03-09

The death of Hannes van Rensburg, a first-year student from the JBM Hertzog residence, this past weekend, placed various aspects of student life in the spotlight.  Dr Natie Luyt, Dean:  Student Affairs at the University of the Free State (UFS), and the Student Representative Council (SRC) of the UFS explain which policies are in place to counter these practices.

At all tertiary institutions there are rules and policies to guide students and provide direction for certain behaviour and practices.  The same applies to the University of the Free State (UFS).

“At the beginning of the year the UFS provides every residence committee with a manual to establish a framework for meaningful and orderly relations within and among residences on the campus,” said Dr Natie Luyt.

However, it is one thing to set rules, but it is an impossible task to enforce all aspects thereof.  Policies currently in place include an alcohol policy, a policy on the induction of first years and a policy on banned practices in residence orientation. 

“The alcohol policy was compiled in cooperation with students and their input was constantly asked,” said Dr Luyt.  We also liaise on a continuous basis with residences and senior students to encourage the responsible use of alcohol, especially around activities like intervarsities and Rag. 

In the policy, recognition is given to the right and voluntary and informed choice of every individual to use alcohol on the UFS campus in a responsible way. 

Guidelines for the use of alcohol on campus include among others the following: 

Only authorised points of sale will be permitted on campus.  In this case it is the various league halls in most of the male residences on campus.

Alcohol will only be made available during fixed times and is not permitted in residence rooms.    

All alcohol-related functions are regulated and an application for a temporary alcohol license must be obtained from the Dean:  Student Affairs.     

The UFS obtained a liquor license in March 2004 which must be administered by senior leagues in various residences on campus.   Normal liquor license conditions and the county’s liquor laws apply.  Liquor can only be sold to members of the senior league (or special guests) and also to persons over the age of 18 years.  Liquor may not be used in public (outside the senior league) or on campus.    

The senior leagues may only be open three nights per week and within prescribed times.  No liquor could be used in any other place than the senior league halls.  Senior leagues could buy liquor from club monies generated by themselves. 

The right of senior leagues to serve liquor was suspended by the Rector and Vice-Chancellor the UFS, Prof Frederick Fourie, on Monday 7 March 2005 – pending an investigation of the recent events on campus. 

The policy on banned practices include among others that no swearing and shouting at first-years may take place, no first-year student may be targeted individually, no senior may enter the room of a first-year student without an invitation or permission from that first-year student and no senior under the influence of alcohol may have contact with first-year students. 

The induction of first-year students takes place by means of three functions, namely an information function (the introduction to the various facets and possibilities of the university system), an induction function (the first-year student becomes involved in various campus and residence activities) and a development function (the first-year student is motivated to take charge of his development potential). 

No first-year induction activity may commence before the residence committee’s contracting with the senior students is not completed.  This meeting is attended by the residence head and all senior students.  The induction policy, residence induction policy of first-year students and first-year rules are discussed.

The senior students sign an attendance list to show that he/she was informed about the policies.  A senior who does not sign, may not be involved with any induction session with first-year students.  

No physical contact is allowed during the conclusion of the first-year students’ official induction period.  The induction of first-year students as full members of the residence is a prestige event, presented by the residence committee.  No physical or degrading activities may take place. 

The Dean:  Student Affairs also has a daily meeting with the primarii of all the residences during the induction period.  This helps to monitor the situation and counter any problem behaviour or tendencies.

“Enforced behaviour – where a senior student forces a first-year student to do something against his/her own free wil – is not allowed.  Where there is any sign of this, it is met wortel en tak uitgeroei,” said Dr Luyt.

“In any group of people – whether it is a group of students or people at a workplace – there will always be those who will break the rules or those who would like to see how far they could push it.

The SRC, the UFS management and myself are and will stay committed to make each student’s life on this campus a school of learning and an experience which would be remembered for ever,” said Dr Luyt.

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept