Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
11 July 2023 | Story Dr Sunday Paul C Onwuegbuchulam | Photo Supplied
Dr Sunday Onwuegbuchulam
Dr Sunday Paul C Onwuegbuchulam is from the Centre for Gender and Africa Studies, University of the Free State.


Opinion article by Dr Sunday Paul C Onwuegbuchulam, Centre for Gender and Africa Studies, University of the Free State.


It has been more than a year since Putin declared his pogrom in Ukraine, which he termed a ‘special military operation’. The war – which Putin envisaged to last a few weeks – is now going into the second year, with lots of people killed on both sides, including civilians. It is also notable that the war has seen the destruction of several key civilian infrastructures in Ukraine, and different human rights abuses carried out by Russian soldiers and their Wagner Mercenary Group. It suffices to say that the bloodletting and destruction in Ukraine have been great, and up until now, there seems to be no solution at hand to stop this war. As the war drags on, with Ukraine engaging in counter-offensives to reclaim its stolen lands, the question on the mind of many is when and how this is going to end. Several countries, including China and South Africa, are making efforts to broker peace in Ukraine. China, for example, proposed a twelve-point political settlement framework, which, among other things, suggested that the Western countries relax their sanctions against Russia and called for a cease-fire and peace talks. In more recent times, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa led an African group to Ukraine on a peace mission in yet another effort to broker peace between Russia and Ukraine.

Brokering peace in Ukraine and Russia while their backyard is burning

My issue in the article concerns this move by African countries, especially South Africa. Firstly, I am wondering how these so-called African leaders can jet off to Ukraine and Russia to broker peace while their backyard here in Africa is burning with conflicts. One wonders why this delegation considers the Ukrainian conflict more serious than, for example, the ongoing war in Sudan. Secondly, I have a gripe against South Africa’s efforts to broker peace in Ukraine, when some of its leaders, politicians, and educated elites have come out categorically to enunciate the phrase, ‘We stand with Russia’. It is the same thing as China (which has clearly stated its alignment with Russia) now proposing a peace plan for stopping a war that Russia is complicit in starting. I am okay with countries aligning themselves with other countries. It is a norm in international relations and is good for cordial relationships among nations of the world.  My issue is with the double standards being played out by nations and that exist in the contemporary international relations arena.

The double standards being exhibited by countries around the world regarding Putin’s war against Ukraine will be an albatross that will ultimately lead to the failure of the peace talks and peace proposals. Notably, both China and South Africa have not been frugal with words against the West and have come short of blaming the whole war on the West and NATO, arguing that NATO’s expansionism agenda in Eastern Europe has led to the war. They further argue that Russia has the right to protect its territorial integrity (against the perceived NATO threat), hence the reason for Putin’s war. But these leaders also fail to condemn the fact that Putin invaded a sovereign country at peace, thereby going against the UN Charter (Article 2, 4) on sovereignty and the maintenance of territorial integrity of nations. They have not condemned Putin’s war, which is a threat to global peace and world order. Furthermore, the hypocrisy is evident in the condemnation of America and the West for the atrocities committed in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere in the world (rightly so), but these countries have not been vociferous in condemning Putin for doing the same in Ukraine. South Africa, for example, has been vocal against the plight of Palestinians under Israel’s ‘apartheid repression’, but the country and its leaders have been indolent in calling Putin out regarding the war crimes going on in Ukraine, in which he has been implicated personally. Hence, in my view, this war has revealed the double standards by different countries of the world when it comes to the issue of maintaining the values enshrined in international humanitarian law and the fundamental principles of human rights as encapsulated in different UN documents. In more recent times, there have been denied reports that South Africa is supplying Russia with arms to aid its war in Ukraine; if true, this is the highest form of hypocrisy from a nation that trumpets respect for human rights and the need to maintain international order.

War in Ukraine is a war of choice

Rather than telling Putin to get out of Ukraine as a way of ensuring a genuine cease-fire, China and South Africa, for example, are going around in circles using some diplomatic approaches such as peace talks that propose peace plans, which they know Ukraine will reject. It should not be forgotten that this war in Ukraine is a war of choice, and it was Putin’s choice to invade a nation he saw as helpless and thought he could conquer within weeks. One wonders whether Putin did not foresee that America and NATO – which supported Ukraine even before this war – would come to Ukraine’s aid. On this, I think it is rather disingenuous that some argue that America and NATO could stop the war by ending the supply of arms to Ukraine to defend itself. The insincerity in this proposal is that these people are saying – just fold your arms and allow Putin to have what he wants and grab as much land as he wants in Ukraine. The hypocrisy also plays out here; they assert that Russia has the right to engage in this war to protect its territorial integrity against NATO’s expansionism, but it is not right for Ukraine to engage in the war to defend its territorial integrity. This kind of thinking is what ultimately led to WWII, because world leaders at the time turned a blind eye to Hitler's first land grabs (Czechoslovakia and Austria for example) until it was too late.

It may sound rather simplistic, but there is truth in the proposal that those who want true peace in Ukraine and Eastern Europe should just advise Putin to withdraw from Ukraine and stop this NAZI-style land grab he has engaged in since the annexation of Crimea in 2014. In my view, this war in Ukraine is going on today because some countries did not condemn that first flaunting of the stipulation of international law on the sovereignty of nations. This, in my view, emboldened Putin, hence his engagement in this war against Ukraine. Putin started this war. He can easily stop it, and the nations that have aligned themselves with Russia (including China and South Africa, and other African countries) can genuinely assist in stopping the war by jettisoning the double standards that are rife in the international relations arena, advising Putin to withdraw from Ukraine. We must not forget that if they keep quiet and Putin’s expansionist move is allowed to stand, it is open season for such a scenario to replicate itself elsewhere in the world. The big elephant in the room remains China, with its eye on Taiwan.

News Archive

Council concerned over health crisis
2009-06-08

The Council of the University of the Free State (UFS) has come out in support of doctors and health professionals attached to its Faculty of Health Sciences who expressed their concerns about the health crisis in the Free State.

At its meeting on Friday, 5 June 2009 the Council said it shared the concerns of health professionals that the quality of patient care and the quality of training being provided at the health faculties across the country are being compromised.

Earlier last week doctors and other health professionals of the UFS Faculty of Health Sciences issued a statement highlighting the seriousness of the crisis in health care provision in the Free State Province, warning that the system was on the verge of collapse.

According to the Council of the UFS, a petition will be addressed to the Minister of Health and the Minister of Education calling for urgent steps to be taken to correct the deteriorating situation in the province’s health care system.

In other decisions, the UFS Council also decided to confer an honorary doctorate on Judge Louis Harms, the Deputy President of the Supreme Court of Appeal in Bloemfontein.

Judge Harms is an international specialist in the field of Intellectual Property Law and has been actively involved in legislation and international agreements on intellectual property law, including the Designs Act, Trademarks Act and Patents and Copyrights Acts.

The motivation quotes one of his fellow jurists as saying that: “Harms is one of the greatest South African lawyers of the last 50 years. He is an intellectual giant who has made an impressive and profound contribution to the development of South African law: He is erudite, visionary, astute and principled.”

An honorary doctorate will also be conferred on geologist and expert on the geology of the Karoo Supergroup, Mr Johan Loock, for his distinguished efforts towards promoting the earth sciences and specifically geology, particularly in the context of the Free State.

Mr Loock has had two Karoo fossils named after him, which is a particular honour in the scientific world of palaeontology. He was employed by the UFS for 32 years and has close ties with the Free State in terms of his wide field of research interests.

The motivation further states that “the man affectionately and respectfully known as Oom Loock, or Malome, has selflessly given of his vast knowledge, expertise and insights into the physical and cultural heritage of the Free State to all who would learn from, and with, him”.

A Council Medal will be awarded to Prof. Johan Grobbelaar from the Department of Plant Sciences at the UFS. During his time at the UFS he has been a pioneer in many areas, including the first research expedition to Marion Island, the first PhD about research on Marion Island, the establishment of the Institute of Environmental Sciences as well as the establishment of the Centre for Environmental Management.

Council also decided to refer a report from the iGubu consultants regarding aspects of diversity in student residences to the Executive Committee of the Council so that the benefit of the participation of the rector-designate Prof Jonathan Jansen could be obtained and for further participation and consultation with relevant stakeholders.

In another decision the Council also extended the term of appointment of Prof. Tienie Crous as Dean: Economic and Management Sciences for an additional term of five years.

The Council furthermore appointed Prof. Hugh Patterton as the director of the strategic academic cluster dealing with advanced biomolecular research and Prof. Wijnand Swart as Director of the strategic academic cluster dealing with technologies for sustainable crop industries in semi-arid regions.

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