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

Premiere of the documentary on King Moshoeshoe - Address by the Rector
2004-10-14

Address by the rector and vice-chancellor of the University of the Free State, prof Frederick Fourie, at the premiere of the documentary on King Moshoeshoe, Wednesday 13 October 2004

It is indeed a privilege to welcome you at this key event in the Centenary celebrations of the University of the Free State.

We are simultaneously celebrating 100 years of scholarship with 10 years of democracy

Today is a very important day with great significance for the University. This Centenary is not merely a celebration of an institution of a certain age. It is a key event in this particular phase of our history, in our transformation as an institution of higher learning, in taking the creation of a high-quality, equitable, non-racial, non-sexist, multicultural and multilingual university seriously.

This is about building something new out of the old, of creating new institutional cultures and values from diverse traditions.

It is about learning together - as an higher education institution - about who we are where we come from – to decide where we are going.

It is about merging the age-old tradition of the university, of the academic gown, with the Basotho blanket, the symbol of community engagement.

Then why is it important that we remember Moshoeshoe, where does he fit into our history?

In the Free State province, where large numbers of Basotho and Afrikaners (and others) now live together, a new post-apartheid society is being built in the 21st century.

The challenge is similar to that faced by Moshoeshoe 150 years ago. As you will see tonight, he did a remarkable thing in forging a new nation out of a fragmented society. He also created a remarkable spirit of reconciliation and a remarkable style of leadership.

Not all people in South Africa know the history of Moshoeshoe. Many Basotho – but not all – are well versed in the history of Moshoeshoe, and his name is honoured in many a street, town and township. Many white people know very little of him, or have a very constrained or even biased view of his role and legacy. In Africa and the world, he his much less known than, for instance, Shaka. (In Lesotho, obviously, he is widely recognised and praised.)

We already benefit from his legacy: the people of the Free State share a tradition of moderation and reconciliation rather than one of aggression and domination.

With Moshoeshoe, together with Afrikaner leaders and reconciliators such as President MT Steyn and Christiaan de Wet, we have much to be thankful for.

Our challenge is take this legacy further: to forge a new society in which different cultural, language and racial groups – Basotho, Afrikaners and others – will all feel truly at home.

Bit by bit, on school grounds, on university campuses, in each town and city, people must shape the values and principles that will mould this new non-racial, multicultural and multilingual society.

A shared sense of history, shared stories and shared heroes are important elements in such a process.

Through this documentary film about King Moshoeshoe, the UFS commits itself to developing a shared appreciation of the history of this country and to the establishment of the Free State Province as a model of reconciliation and nation-building.

Moshoeshoe is also a strong common element, and binding factor, in the relationship between South Africa / the Free State, and its neighbour, Lesotho.

For the University of the Free State this also is an integral part of real transformation – of creating a new unity amidst our diversity.

Transformation has so many aspects: whilst the composition of our student and staff populations have been changing, many other things change at the same time: new curricula, new research, new community service learning projects.

In also includes creation of new values, new (shared) histories, new (shared) heroes.

It includes the incorporation of the Qwaqwa campus, which serves a region where so many of the children of Moshoeshoe live, including her majesty Queen Mopeli.

We see in Moshoeshoe a model of African leadership – of reconciliation and nation-building – that can have a significant impact in South Africa and Africa as a whole.

We also find in the legacy of King Moshoeshoe the possibility of an “founding philosophy”, or “defining philosophy”, for the African renaissance.

To develop this philosophy, we must gain a deeper understanding of what really happened there, of his role, of his leadership.

Therefore the University of the Free State will encourage and support further research into the history, politics and sociology of the Moshoeshoe period, including his leadership style.

We hope to do this in partnership with National University of Lesotho.

The Moshoeshoe documentary is one element of a long-term project of the UFS. The other elements of the project that we are investigating are possible PhD-level research; a possible annual Moshoeshoe memorial lecture on African leadership; and then possible schools projects and other ways and symbols of honouring him.

It is my sincere wish that all communities of the Free State and of South Africa will be able to identify with the central themes of this documentary, and develop a shared appreciation for leaders such as King Moshoeshoe and the legacy of peace, reconciliation and nation-building that they have left us.

Prof. Frederick Fourie
Rector and Vice-Chancellor
University of the Free State
13 October 2004.

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