Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
10 February 2025 Photo Supplied
Prof Theo Neethling
Prof Theo Neethling is from the Department of Political Studies and Governance at the University of the Free State.

Opinion article by Prof Theo Neethling, Department of Political Studies and Governance, University of the Free State.


In recent days, 14 South African soldiers have died in clashes with the Rwandan-backed M23 rebels in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). Several analysts argue that this marks a low point for the South African National Defence Force (SANDF) and that it is almost too late to implement the reforms needed to restore the military to an institution South Africans can once again take pride in. The incident recalls the so-called Battle of Bangui in March 2013 during the Central African Republic civil war — a major defeat for the SANDF that led to the Séléka rebels seizing control of the country.

This article aims to shed light on the challenges facing the South African military.

Following the historic transition of 1994, South Africa’s foreign policy shifted from a stance of conflict with its neighbours to one centred on regional relations built on the principles of common destiny, friendship, cooperation, and conflict resolution. The South African government sought to take on a leadership role on the continent, creating new opportunities for the SANDF as a military instrument.

Towards the end of the Mandela presidency, South Africa’s involvement in peace and security operations became a defining feature of its post-1994 foreign policy. The government demonstrated its firm commitment to regional stability by deploying the SANDF in peacekeeping operations — first in Lesotho in 1998, followed by the DRC in 1999 and Burundi in 2001.

Dwindling defence budget

However, since 1998 it became evident that the SANDF found it increasingly difficult to conduct operations as a declining budget started to constrain the SANDF. This is linked to the fact that between 1995 and 1998, the defence budget was cut by 11.1%, which eventually resulted in a growing mismatch between policy intent and execution. As a percentage of gross domestic product (GDP) South African defence spending had been reduced to less than 3% in the mid-1990s, which boiled down to less than 10% of total government spending. The defence budget then further decreased to 1.54% of GDP in 2004/05 and levelled out in 2014/15 at around 1.2% to 1.1% of GDP.

Despite a dwindling defence budget, the government increasingly expected the SANDF to support the SAPS as murder and death rates rose to levels comparable to — or in some cases even exceeding — those in high-intensity war zones internationally. This has placed the SANDF in an almost impossible position, forced to balance its demanding regional deployments with ongoing appeals from politicians and the public to intervene in crime-ridden hotspots where the SAPS is unable to fulfil its constitutional duty to protect South Africans.

Given these constraints and the changing global and regional geopolitical landscape in which the SANDF operated, the government appointed a task team to draft a second defence review, following the South African Defence Review of 1998, which was finally published as the 2015 South African Defence Review. The task team made it clear that the decrease in funding levels was highly problematic, and that inadequate funding would eventually severely compromise the defence capabilities of the SANDF. They emphasised that the government had to decide on one of two options: approving a greater budget allocation to the SANDF or alternatively opting for a significantly scaled-down level of ambition and commitment which is aligned to the budget allocation. One thing was clear: South Africa’s spending was low in terms of comparative international military spending practice. Since 2015 defence spending in South Africa has declined even further to about 0.7% of GDP, which is way below the international norm of more or less 2% of GDP.

Despite its budgetary challenges, in 2023, the SANDF was the fifth largest troop-contributing nation in the UN’s operation in the eastern DRC and played a key role in the SADC operation against insurgents in northern Mozambique from 2021 to 2024. However, considering the history of SANDF operations, a major problem is that the SANDF’s deployments tend to be open-ended, resulting in protracted deployments with serious implications for the defence budget. Moreover, there is no plan to either opt for an adequate defence budget on the one hand, or to scale down the level of political ambition on the other.

It should also be noted that border protection and support for the South African Police Service (SAPS) in internal operations have become increasingly important and demanding in the SANDF’s activities and responsibilities and can even be regarded as among its primary functions. However, a major concern is that the SANDF is too often used as a stopgap in South Africa’s domestic security landscape — hindering its ability to function as a professional, well-equipped armed force with a clear mandate.

For instance, in 2023, politicians called on the SANDF to assist in combating violence linked to zama zamas after the government deployed soldiers in large numbers to curb illegal mining activities. Even local communities expect the government to utilise the SANDF internally, adding pressure on the state to consider such deployments. In this context, the SANDF has little choice but to respond to political calls to assist the SAPS in maintaining internal security. Another recent example of internal deployment was the government’s decision in 2023 to deploy the SANDF to safeguard the coal power plants of South Africa’s major power utility, Eskom.

In conclusion, it should be clear from the above that there is a significant mismatch between what is expected of the SANDF at the political level and its budget and capabilities. The challenge for the SANDF is that defence remains central to its raison d’être, yet it must also be ready to respond to political calls for assistance in peace and security operations across the continent. Additionally, the SANDF is expected to support the SAPS in providing security services in a crime-ridden and fragile South African society — all while operating on a budget of approximately 0.7% of the country’s GDP. It is therefore no surprise that the SANDF is often described as institutionally overstretched and has, in fact, been in a state of ongoing decline for some time.

Critics can rightly argue that the South African government has shown little to no political will to address the SANDF’s financial challenges over the past two decades, contributing to the difficulties its members face in defending themselves against the M23 rebels in the DRC. At the same time, growing fiscal pressures and severe socio-economic challenges leave the government in a weak position to significantly increase the defence budget. Be that as it may, the SANDF’s troubles in the DRC mark a low point for the institution. Perhaps now is the time to reassess both its mandate and funding, particularly in light of the persistent gap between political expectations and available resources.

News Archive

Prof Frederick Fourie to step down as UFS rector
2008-09-08

“It is with sadness that I hereby announce my intention to step down as rector and vice-chancellor of the University of the Free State (UFS) in the 4th quarter of this year.

Obviously this decision has not been taken lightly. After careful consideration I am, however, convinced that this is as far as I can take the UFS as vice-chancellor and rector. This flows primarily from the exhausting times that I have experienced during the past nine years, first as vice-rector (since 1999) and then as rector (since 2003), in managing and implementing several complex strategic projects.

The challenges and complexities of continuous change management at a higher education institution, and specifically the demands of further dynamic development and transformation at the UFS, demand enormous amounts of emotional energy and drive. For me the stress due to, especially, the political divisions and tensions in the UFS Council and the broader university community during the past year has been extremely draining. The broader institution and its people also show signs of trauma.

I think it is time for new and fresh leadership, especially in the light of the transformation challenges of the UFS.

I have thus decided to step down in the interest of transformation and the further dynamic development of the UFS.

Having been on sabbatical leave since May, I will not return to take up my post. I will remain on leave until my official date of retirement from office. (The exact date must still be determined.)

I am grateful for the opportunity to have been at the helm of the UFS and to help the institution cross several bridges. During the past nine years I have been privileged to lead large strategic projects together with many dedicated and talented UFS colleagues. It has been a wonderful experience of thinking and working together in order to elevate the functioning of the University to new levels in several key areas.

One of the most important projects was the financial turnaround strategy of 2000-2005, which took the UFS from a financial crisis to a situation where currently it annually has almost R100 million of discretionary funding available to spend on strategic projects, and where staff remuneration and promotion opportunities have increased dramatically since 2000. In this period the UFS has also grown from approximately 10 000 students to more than 27 000 in 2008.

A second was the strategy to invest strongly in the academic core and notably research, research capacity and research apparatus. Since 2003 research outputs have increased by approximately 50% - a significant accomplishment of our researchers and faculties. In conjunction with this, the launch of the six strategic academic clusters (focus areas) should create the basis for the continued growth in the national and international stature of the UFS in future. The development of the national leadership role of the UFS with regard to community service also was a special and successful project.

A third large strategic project was the progress with regard to diversity, the balanced multilingualism policy in the academe as well as the administration, the employment equity plan, the UFS transformation plan and especially the institutional charter – which could lay the foundation for a university where one and all can experience a true sense of belonging amidst diversity. These have been important steps that we can feel proud of (although much work obviously remains with regard to non-racialism and also non-sexism).

As far as residences are concerned, it was historically significant that this time, in contrast to 1997/8, the UFS succeeded in crossing the bridge of diversity and integration in residences – with due regard to the difficulties we faced. Hopefully this will considerably ease the task of my successor and her/his management team in managing diversity and in pursuing best practice transformation.

A fourth large project was the large-scale upgrading and development of infrastructure, academic buildings and facilities as well as support service facilities, student facilities and pedestrian walkways. The objective was a campus of the highest quality and aesthetics to effect a lasting improvement in their work- and living environment for staff and students. Indeed, the UFS Main Campus today is seen as an example of sensitive and high quality campus planning.

Other initiatives which haven’t borne fruit yet are, for example, those with regard to entrepreneurial activities, sport development and sport business development, and the possible establishment of an engineering programme or faculty at the UFS.

On the whole the most important thing for me has been the progress in establishing a deep commitment to quality and equity/fairness and in boosting the national and international profile of the UFS as a high quality progressive university. Of course, justice, equity and quality intrinsically are challenges which require daily dedication to make it an ingrained habit.

I wish to thank all those people with whom I could work during the past years in tackling large and complex challenges with mutual loyalty, shared wisdom and effort – from the Financial Turnaround Team to the Exco, the Executive Management, the Faculties, the Senate, support service divisions, the University Council and several committees and task teams”.

Frederick C.v.N. Fourie
Rector and Vice-Chancellor
University of the Free State

Prof Frederick Fourie has been with the UFS since 1976. After obtaining a PhD in Economics from Harvard he was appointed professor at the age of 29 in 1982, head of the Department of Economics in 1992, Distinguished Professor in 1998, Dean of the Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences in 1997, Vice-rector: Academic in 1999 and vice-chancellor in 2003.

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  
8 September 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