Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
05 September 2020 | Story Khiba Aubrey Teboho | Photo Supplied
Khiba Aubrey Teboho.

Transformation at the university must be reflected in all dimensions of the institution, such as leadership, governance, and management, student backgrounds such as practical access and academic excellence, equity in staffing, institutional cultures, and inclusive teaching and learning. I acknowledge that this is not an easy task for universities, and that is why I would urge the student population to exercise patience on some of the matters they bring to the institution. However, they should also not be used by the university as a crutch in undertaking its obligation to transform and promote integration, non-discrimination, and inclusivity across all levels –  not only within the university, but also within the local space where the university finds itself, as we know the history of the institution. We have come a long way and there is still more to do, things to change, but we have to give credit where it is due. I still appeal to the institution to do more, because for some students it is the place that will give them the capability to fight poverty, to prosper, to influence change in society, and to change their lives as well as the lives of their families.

The redress of historical inequalities between historically white and historically black universities – it is a challenge for all universities, and we have come a long way to resolve this. With a new culture of students comes a new challenge, such as the funding challenges that poor and middle-income students are constantly facing. These are some of the recurring issues faced by students continually, requiring a solution that does not impoverish the poor even more. Universities must become spaces for transformation, rather than merely being transformed spaces. It is the transformative development through which students come to understand social justice properly, which certifies that students will go on to promote social justice in the wider society. While universities have long been sites of personal growth and transformation for their students, the impact of the transformative power of these places and the important transformational goal of generating graduates who are engaged citizens working for social justice must not be overlooked, particularly in the literature of transformation at the university.

Similarly, what is questioned by the students themselves is the relevance of what is taught at universities, how students are prepared through the knowledge and skills 'transmitted' to them for life in a South African context, and in what sense graduates are prepared to contribute to the advancement of society after the completion of their degrees. It cannot be that in this era we produce graduates who are job seekers, especially considering the status our country is in. This should be carefully considered in the development of the university’s curriculum and in its strategies.

It is only through an epistemic revolution in institutional culture that universities can become spaces that foster the development of civic-minded graduates. We cannot be relegated to just being students when it comes to the issues raised above if transformation is to take place effectively. Students must also understand that we cannot continue to do things as if it were 1976; we need to find other alternative mechanisms to voice our concerns and make an impact. At times change is not easy and it is not comfortable, but we are ready!
God bless South Afrika. Morena boloka setjhaba sa heso.

News Archive

Academic delivers inaugural lecture on South African foreign policy
2007-08-06

 

In her inaugural lecture Prof. Heidi Hudson from the Department of Political Sciences, focused on the impact that Pan-Africanist sentiments have had on South Africa’s foreign policy. She also put the resulting contradictions and ambiguities into context. At her inaugural lecture were, from the left: Proff. Frederick Fourie (Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the UFS), Heidi Hudson, Engela Pretorius (Vice-Dean: Faculty of The Humanities) and Daan Wessels (Research Associate in the Department of Political Science).
Photo: Stephen Collett

Academic delivers inaugural lecture on South African foreign policy

“We are committed to full participation as an equal partner … opposed to any efforts which might seek to project South Africa as some kind of superpower on our continent. … the people of Africa share a common destiny and must therefore … address their challenges … as a united force...” (Mbeki 1998:198-199).

Prof. Heidi Hudson from the Department of Political Science referred to this statement made by president Mbeki (made at the opening of the OAU Conference of Ministers of Information in 1995) when she delivered her inaugural lecture on the topic: South African foreign policy: The politics of Pan-Africanism and pragmatism.

One of the questions she asked is: “Can the South African state deliver democracy and welfare at home while simultaneously creating a stable, rules-based African community?”

She answers: “South Africa needs to reflect more critically and honestly on the dualism inherent in its ideological assumptions regarding relations with Africa. South Africa will always be expected by some to play a leadership role in Africa. At the moment, South Africa’s desire to be liked is hampering its role as leader of the continent.”

In her lecture she highlighted the ideological underpinnings and manifestations of South Africa’s foreign policy. Throughout she alluded to the risks associated with single-mindedly following an ideologically driven foreign policy. She emphasised that domestic or national interests are the victims in this process.

Prof. Hudson offers three broad options for South Africa to consider:

  • The Predator – the selfish bully promoting South African economic interest.
  • Mr Nice Guy – the non-hegemonic partner of the African boys club, multilaterally pursuing a pivotal but not dominant role.
  • The Hegemon - South Africa driving regional integration according to its values and favouring some African countries over others, and with checks and balances by civil society.

She chooses option three of hegemony. “Politically correct research views hegemony as bad and partnership as good. This is a romanticised notion – the two are not mutually exclusive,” she said.

However, she states that there have to be prerequisites to control the exercise of power. “The promotion of a counter-hegemon, such as Nigeria, is necessary. Nigeria has been more effective in some respects than South Africa in establishing its leadership, particularly in West Africa. Also needed is that government should be checked by civil society to avoid it sinking into authoritarianism. The case of business and labour coming to an agreement over the HIV/Aids issue is a positive example which illustrates that government cannot ignore civil society. But much more needs to be done in this regard. South Africa must also be very careful in how it uses its aid and should focus potential aid and development projects more explicitly in terms of promoting political stability,” she said.

Prof. Hudson said: “It is also questionable whether Mbeki’s Afro-centrism has in fact promoted the interests of ordinary citizens across Africa. Instead, elite interests in some countries have benefited. But ultimately, the single most important cost is the damage done to the moral code and ethical principles on which the South African Constitution and democracy is founded.

“In the end we all lose out. More pragmatism and less ideology in our relations within Africa may just be what are needed,” she said.

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