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

Reclassification of giraffe status pivotal in public action, says UFS researcher
2016-12-08

Description: Reclassification of giraffe status  Tags: Reclassification of giraffe status  

Dr Francois Deacon, specialised researcher
in the Department of Animal, Wildlife, and
Grassland Sciences at the University of the Free State.
Photo: Supplied

Great news for those who care about the conservation of giraffes is today’s (8 December 2016) announcement by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) that giraffes are now classified as ‘Vulnerable’. The species, formerly classified as ‘Least Concern’ on the IUCN Red List — an index on the likelihood of extinction of animals worldwide — is threatened with extinction.

“Until recently, few people were aware of the situation facing giraffes. It is time to show the world giraffe numbers are in danger. This reclassification by the IUCN is pivotal to get the public to stand up and take action for giraffes,” said Dr Francois Deacon, specialised researcher in the Department of Animal, Wildlife, and Grassland Sciences at the University of the Free State (UFS).

Research is essential to develop effective conservation plans for a species

Key to this announcement was the status report submitted by Dr Deacon. He was the lead author responsible for the submission of the Southern African Giraffe subspecies (Giraffa camelopardalis giraffa) status report that was part of the larger species report submitted for review by the (IUCN). The UFS has been doing many research projects in the past couple of years on giraffe-related issues and topics to address this problem.

The UFS is one of only a few universities in Africa that is committed to studying giraffes to ensure the conservation of this species for generations to come.

“The reclassification of giraffes to ‘Vulnerable’
status, by the IUCN, is pivotal to get the public
to stand up and take action for giraffes.”

A 40% decline in the giraffe population over the past two decades is proof that the longnecks are officially in trouble. According to Dr Deacon, this rate of decline is faster than that of the elephant or rhino. The main reasons for the devastating decline are habitat loss, civil unrest and illegal hunting.

Dr Deacon, pioneer in the use of GPS technology to study giraffes and their natural habitat, said “This vulnerability clearly stipulates we are quickly losing grip on our last few natural populations”. He and a team of researchers at the UFS in South Africa are leading various research and conservation projects to help save the last remaining giraffes in Africa.

Giraffes moved from ‘least concern’ to ‘vulnerable’ on the Red List

The IUCN, a health check for our planet, is the highest level at which decision-makers can prove how many species (fauna or flora) are surviving or not. The update from ‘Least Concern’ to ‘Vulnerable’ on the Red List was released at the 13th Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity in Cancun, Mexico.

A wildlife documentary, Last of the Longnecks clearly shows how the number of giraffes has plummeted in the past two decades from 154 000 to fewer than 98 000 today — with numbers of some giraffes, such as Kenya’s reticulated giraffe, declining by as much as 80%.  

Any individual or institution that wants to make a contribution relating to giraffe research can contact Dr Deacon at the UFS on deaconf@ufs.ac.za.

 

In other media:

Announcement on BBC news: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-38240760
Time: http://time.com/3622344/giraffe-extinction/
The Telegraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2016/12/08/giraffes-now-facing-extinction-warn-conservationists/
ABC News: http://abcnews.go.com/International/giraffes-danger-extinction-numbers-dropped/story?id=27334959
theguardian: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/dec/08/giraffe-red-list-vulnerable-species-extinction
Aol: http://www.aol.co.uk/news/2016/12/07/giraffes-in-danger-of-extinction-as-population-plunges-by-up-to/  

 

Former articles:

18 November 2016: Studies to reveal correlation between terrain, energy use, and giraffe locomotion
23 August 2016:
Research on locomotion of giraffes valuable for conservation of this species
9 March 2016:
Giraffe research broadcast on National Geographic channel
18 September 2015:
Researchers reach out across continents in giraffe research
29 May 2015:
Researchers international leaders in satellite tracking in the wildlife environment

 



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