Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
14 June 2022 | Story Dr Nitha Ramnath | Photo Francois van Vuuren (iflair photography)
Prof Anil Sooklal, Ambassador-at-Large for Asia and BRICS
Prof Anil Sooklal, Ambassador-at-Large for Asia and BRICS in the Department of International Relations and Cooperation, Republic of South Africa

“The Global South is no longer weak. Nor will we continue to perpetuate suffering imposed upon us. BRICS has an important role to play in shaping the emerging international order at this critical juncture in human history.” These were the sentiments of Prof Anil Sooklal, Ambassador-at-Large for Asia and BRICS, Department of International Relations and Cooperation, Republic of South Africa, who presented a guest lecture titled: The Role of BRICS in Shaping the Emerging International Order. The lecture, hosted by the University of the Free State (UFS), was followed by a panel discussion facilitated by Prof Francis Petersen, the Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the UFS, with panel members comprising Prof Philippe Burger, Dean of the Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences, UFS; Prof Hussein Solomon, Senior Professor, Political Studies and Governance, UFS; and Ms Mosibudi Motimele, Lecturer, Political Studies and Governance, UFS. 

While the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine war has prompted questions about the future of BRICS, Ambassador Sooklal’s position is clear – there is a future for BRICS. “It is paramount that the Global South is no longer an outlier or merely a witness to an evolving global architecture,” says Ambassador Sooklal. He emphasised that “BRICS is a powerful voice of countries of the South. The BRICS Outreach and BRICS Plus have been embraced by the countries of the South, which have been interacting with BRICS over the past decade, including the AU and other regional organisations of the South”.  

BRICS was founded on the core principle of shaping an international order that is fair, just, inclusive, equitable, and representative. It is also focused on strengthening and reforming multilateral systems, with the UN at its centre. “It is important that BRICS remains true to its founding principles and continues, now more than ever, to champion the core interests of the Global South, especially overcoming political, economic, and financial marginalisation. Furthermore, BRICS must continue to address the key developmental challenges of poverty, underdevelopment, and inequality, which have been relegated to the margins by most in the international community. BRICS must become a force multiplier in addressing the key challenges of the developing world,” added Ambassador Sooklal. 

The ambassador cautioned South Africa against being drawn into a major power contestation and encouraged that those who seek to perpetuate their hegemonic ambitions on the global stage be challenged. 

“BRICS must continue to champion the interests of the South while also working in partnership and co-operation with the global community, including countries of the North that share a common vision of creating a global order that is underpinned by multi-polarity, a rule-based international order, international law, and a reinvigorated, reformed, and strengthened multilateral system with the UN at its centre,” said Ambassador Sooklal. 

He added that we must return to the ideals of the UN Charter and build a people-centred world order, as so succinctly stated in the preamble of the charter. 

Prof Burger reflected on the nature of BRICS and expressed that the nature of BRICS is not all that clear because of the political developments in BRICS and the US over the past eight years. “In spite of all the business and academic interaction, BRICS today is ideologically weaker than a decade ago, as its members are less united in purpose,” said Prof Burger. 

Prof Burger added that politics in four of the five BRICS countries turned nationalist. “For two of the four, this means a new Cold War with the US. 

For the other two, however, this means closer ties with the US.” 

Where does this leave South Africa, the fifth country? According to Prof Burger, we should not burn our bridges. “We need Chinese and US investments, and we should also learn the nature of the regimes in all four of the other BRICS countries.” 
Prof Anil Sooklal with Prof Francis PetersenProf Anil Sooklal with Prof Francis Petersen, UFS Rector and Vice-Chancellor. Photo: Francois van Vuuren.

“As a country that really needs to get its economy growing, we will certainly need to tread very carefully,” said Prof Burger. 

Prof Solomon was not convinced that BRICS had a role to play in shaping the international order, taking a rather pessimistic view of the BRICS grouping, which he felt made no sense, sharing no common values nor strategic interests. 

“China’s economic relationship with Africa, as with many of its other so-called partners, is one of neo-colonialism,” said Prof Solomon. He added that China and Russia have anti-West rhetoric and a narrative of decolonisation in common, while expanding their own national interests across the continent. 

“More worrying is the militarisation of China’s presence in Africa – this does not represent a new emancipatory order, but an old order based on national interests and power. Moreover, it constitutes a clear and present danger to South Africa’s own national interests,” added Prof Solomon. 

Click to view documentAmbassador Sooklal’s paper can here.

News Archive

Reaction by the Rector of the UFS after a meeting with student leaders
2008-02-25

Reaction by the Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the UFS, Prof. Frederick Fourie, on the agreement reached at a meeting with student leaders held on Friday, 22 February 2008

Note: This is meant to be used together with the full joint statement that was issued by the UFS management and student leaders on 22 February 2008.

The memorandum of the primes of the University of the Free State’s (UFS) residences was handed to top management on Wednesday, 20 February 2008. In the memorandum they asked for a meeting with the UFS management by Friday, 22 February 2008. Such a meeting was arranged and took place.

The UFS top management, all the residence primes as well as the house committee member for first years, the executive of the Main Campus Student Representative Council (SRC) and residence heads were present.

In contrast to what is suggested in the Volksblad report of Saturday, the discussion went off very well. There was no consternation or shouting or “emotions that ran high”. It was a civilised, decent meeting as it should be at a good university. Of course, now and again individuals spoke out strongly and very enthusiastically, but it was all decent and orderly. The contribution of the primes was insightful and well formulated.

Because the top management and I wanted to listen very carefully what the problems and frustrations were, we spent nearly five hours in the meeting. The issues in the memorandum were discussed one by one. In some cases I could take a decision immediately and finalise the matter, in other cases, the management provided information that could largely finalise a matter. A number of other matters must be investigated further.

The management undertook to respond comprehensively and in writing to all the issues raised in the memorandum by Monday, 25 February 2008. This will be handed to the primes but will not be handed to the media beforehand.
It is obvious that there are matters at the university that can be better managed and that there are problems with communication within the Student Affairs division. A major change such as the new policy on diversity places huge demands on management and the administration, and problems were to be expected. However, we understand the frustration of the students in residences.

On the other hand, students don’t always make matters easier. The strong opposition of white student leaders last year, and their unwillingness to co-operate in preparation for 2008 is well known. This year it is going better. But often student leaders take positions that are very inflexible. They also see no room for adapting old habits and simply want their own way. Their contributions are then full of statements such as “It cannot be done”. This delays measures such as the full implementation of expert interpreting services, which, for the management, is a very important measure (and which is functioning very well in certain residences). Communication from student leaders to management is also not always what it should be.

At the end of the meeting student leaders and management reached an important agreement and issued a joint statement in which they committed themselves to the integration process and to good co-operation and communication. This was an important step which is a sign of rebuilding trust. Naturally everyone will still have to work hard to build on this and to strengthen mutual trust.

The course and outcome of Friday’s discussions, as requested by the student leaders, show that issues can be addressed and resolved by means of us talking to one another. This is why it is so sad that primes and house committee members went on strike on Wednesday already and stayed in tents in front of the Main Building – leaving their residences without its leadership. This created an opening for what appears to have been well planned and co-ordinated acts of vandalism by inhabitants of residences on the campus on Wednesday.

Such vandalism is unacceptable and no one can justify it.

Fortunately, order could be restored quickly during the night and all academic activities could resume without any disruption on Thursday and Friday.

FCvN Fourie

Media Release
Issued by: Lacea Loader
Assistant Director: Media Liaison
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: loaderl.stg@ufs.ac.za   
24 February 2008

 

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