
South Africa's environment minister elevates Antarctica as a ‘national priority'
Dion George says he is taking a big, bold step — putting the wild, frigid seventh continent at the heart of the country's agenda: 'It would be extremely short-sighted if we did not pay attention to it.'
South Africa has maintained a presence on Earth's southern frontier since becoming the second country to ratify the Antarctic Treaty — symbolically, it did so during the 1960 winter solstice.
This year, the country celebrates seven decades since the South African meteorologist Hannes la Grange became the first African to set a snow boot on Antarctic ice as part of the seminal Commonwealth Trans-Antarctic Expedition.
In 2028, another date beckons: Seventy years since South Africa, through La Grange, reached the South Pole.
Political leadership has rarely afforded the region more than nominal attention.
That will change under his tenure, says Minister Dion George of the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment.
'I am the head of the South African National Antarctic Programme,' George told Daily Maverick on a ministerial demonstration cruise aboard the SA Agulhas II from Durban to Cape Town in May.
That is a statement no previous DFFE minister has made.
'I set the tone, I set the direction, I lead the charge,' he says.
Antarctica has been promoted to one of three special projects within his office, alongside carbon credits and anti-poaching. '[Antarctica] has fallen a bit behind, so I thought we need to speed up there,' he says. 'It would be extremely, extremely short-sighted of South Africa if we did not pay attention to it.'
Pretoria's envoy scoops leadership role at treaty talks
In recent years, South Africa's Antarctic diplomatic performance has lacked imagination and leadership.
The Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting (ATCM) typically receives hundreds of discussion papers submitted by the 29 consultative (decision-making) states, which are tasked with governing Antarctica for peaceful activities like tourism and science.
Under George's predecessor, Barbara Creecy, the taxpayer-funded South African delegation submitted no independent discussion papers to the 2023 ATCM in Helsinki, Finland, or the 2024 ATCM in Kochi, India.
George received the baton in June 2024 and acknowledges these failures but promises change at the ATCM now underway in Milan, Italy.
The South African delegation already seems to have done something right at the 10-day meeting which ends Thursday, 3 July. Last week, Romi Brammer, a legal adviser in the Department of International Relations and Cooperation, was elected to chair the ATCM's legal negotiations.
The treaty is a benchmark diplomatic and scientific achievement. But this year, the ATCM faces an anniversary it is not likely to mark too publicly: 20 years since adopting an annex to assign responsibility for environmental disasters, which has yet to enter into force.
It is now up to the likes of Brammer to negotiate progress on this matter and others retarded by the glacially turning wheels of Antarctic consensus (everyone must agree before anything becomes policy).
Quick! The office is melting
The DFFE and Birdlife South Africa have spent several years raising funds to tackle what they bill as history's largest mouse-eradication effort on any island — they need to raise at least $30-million to save Marion's albatrosses and other seabirds from all being eaten alive by the invasive rodents.
Donors include South African billionaire Mark Shuttleworth, but anyone can still pitch in.
'Climate change is a sensitive biosecurity issue,' says George, citing deadly avian flu and mouse infestations at Marion Island, South Africa's sub-Antarctic research station, as bellwethers.
Scientists told Daily Maverick that George and his staff had to streamline fragmented Antarctic management across several government departments — a project that Ashley Johnson, South Africa's lead negotiator in Milan, says he has taken on.
And then there are the infrastructure humdingers uncovered by Daily Maverick in April, such as Marion's failed generators, which have since been replaced.
Antarctica is, basically, a giant melting office.
For that reason, George says the fleet of polar tracked vehicles must be replaced and supported by up-to-date scanning technology to avoid 'a whole piece of ice that's going to collapse underneath you'.
But wait — how about the eructing elephant seal in the room?
South Africa may want multilateral cooperation in Antarctica — but not everyone seems to be playing nice.
Russia has been looking for oil and gas at least since the Antarctic mining ban entered into force in 1998 — and it uses Cape Town for logistics.
In February 2020, for instance, it issued a bombshell statement from Table Bay harbour saying that it had found '70 billion tons' of Southern Ocean fossil fuels — enough to power the planet for 15 years.
Russia calls it 'science'. Some experts call it 'prospecting'.
And London might call it shopping.
A recent Westminster inquiry, which released its findings in June, stopped just short of dropping the P-word, but politely raised an eyebrow: Moscow's surveys 'cast doubt on compliance with the Protocol's prohibition and risk undermining its authority', the findings say.
'You're not supposed to go and mine in Antarctica — so why are you looking for oil and gas?' George volunteered. 'When it's cold and you can't go there, it's very easy to say, 'Oh no, we're not going to mine, we're not going to do anything there; we're just going to leave it alone.'
'But when it becomes a commodity, when it becomes a valuable piece of land, for example, the behaviour may well start to change.'
At the Copenhagen-hosted ministerial climate meeting in May, George held discussions with Greenland and was struck by the changes in polar currents and ice caps. The more they melt, the more accessible they become.
'Maybe there will be a mad scramble for Antarctica,' he says, 'but I think there has to be some kind of order. You can't just have absolute chaos … Antarctica is a rich asset. The agreement must hold — that we all agree you don't go mining; the region must remain a non-militarised zone, even when it is accessible.'
What does South Africa actually stand for?
Even cautious commentators have started to fear that the US under Donald Trump may withdraw from the treaty to claim and mine Antarctica.
Russia, like the US, has historically maintained a basis to claim parts or all of Antarctica. They cannot do so as long as the treaty lasts (or if they remain signatories).
In the period between the world wars, the Union of South Africa did attempt to make some sort of half-hearted claim but botched it in a diplomatic comedy of errors.
However, South Africa's 2021 Antarctic strategy rejects the idea of territorial claims — a marked contrast to seven of the treaty's 12 consultative founding parties. Argentina, Australia, Chile, France, New Zealand, Norway and the UK have staked vast territorial claims that are frozen by the treaty and that most of the world does not recognise.
'We did not make a claim because we don't believe you can,' George says. 'That's the position we take…
'South Africa's position is that we're non-aligned,' he says. 'We have South African interests that we must look after — and we don't get told who we befriend. We're friends with everyone.'
This balancing act between BRICS states and the West is what gives South Africa its moral authority in Antarctic diplomacy, he argues.
'When I became a new minister and travelled a lot for the climate, every single country we came across wanted to have a bilateral. The reason is that the voice of South Africa matters…
'When you're looking for the voice of reason, often it's us.'
That may be so, but George's Democratic Alliance opposition party is on record as vocally condemning Russia's full-scale illegal invasion of Ukraine as well as ' Russian energy prospecting in Antarctica '. Now it is walking a tightrope of tenuous moral ambiguity in a coalition government that has taken Israel to court over atrocities in Gaza, but has hardly squared up to Moscow in a similar fashion.
Still, President Cyril Ramaphosa received President Volodymyr Zelensky in April. Both the Russian and Ukrainian fleets use Cape Town as their logistical transit to Antarctica.
In George's view, a collaborative ethos defines the Antarctic community. 'It's harsh, it is cold — and if somebody got into difficulty, of course we're going to help.'
George says he has also opened diplomatic conversations with China about establishing a marine protected area to the north of South Africa's East Antarctic base — an initiative that has stalled for years due to Beijing and Moscow's opposition.
'I have disagreed with China on a number of things,' he reveals. 'We want the marine reserve. We know what we want and we are clear.'
George's Antarctic coup
While Pretoria has maintained an unbroken commitment to its treaty obligations throughout the country's political turmoil, its focus has been operational rather than diplomatic.
If George actually succeeds in shaping a revitalised Antarctic policy — one that reflects both science and statecraft — South Africa may finally claim a seat as a leading voice for the Global South on the coldest continent.
'Antarctica was not on the radar when I stepped into the department. It is now,' says the minister, who inserted Antarctica into the 2024-29 national medium-term development plan during a Cabinet lekgotla in January.
Because we are jaded journalists, we asked his department for proof.
Scrutinising the document sent to us, we found George's coup: there, on page 138, sandwiched between sections called 'Increased feelings of safety of women and children in communities' and 'secured cyber space', we spotted the actual frozen continent.
Together with wildlife trafficking, George had struck a coup for a place that, to many, seems very far from the national agenda. Here, he had managed to nudge 'strengthened protection and sustainable management of Antarctica' as a priority into the section dedicated to 'effective border security'.
In a country of immense social need, South Africa's Antarctic investments may be questioned by some, says George.
'They say, 'Let's rather spend the money on something else. In my opinion, it makes no sense to do that.'
'We are the only African country in Antarctica,' he says.
As geopolitical posturing rises, South Africa has to be ready, he adds — singling out China's plans to build a sixth station, as well as Iran, which last year suggested a desire to join the treaty.
'If you drew the line down from Iran, you would actually bump into Antarctica. There's nothing in between.
'Yup,' he smiles. 'I read up about that.'
George had planned to travel to Sanae IV earlier this year, but scheduling conflicts intervened. 'I do intend to do that as soon as the weather permits.' DM
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Daily Maverick
7 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Peace after genocide? Ori Goldberg, leading Israeli dissident, on Iran, SA and the uncharted terrain
Ori Goldberg, a native of central Israel, has been a singular Jewish voice of compassion and restraint since October 2023. He is also an international expert on Iranian policy, quoted and published from Al Jazeera and The Nation to Haaretz and +972 Magazine. In a wide-ranging interview, Daily Maverick speaks to Goldberg about Iranian missiles, Israel's denial of the genocide and the potential role for the Global South — and South Africa — in the politics of the years ahead. In the context of what went down on 13 June 2025, the title of Dr Ori Goldberg's PhD dissertation — submitted to Tel Aviv University in 2008 — could hardly have been more relevant: The role of religious experience in the creation and praxis of Iranian Shi'i revolutionary discourse during the second half of the 20th century. Goldberg, whose CV attests to a 'proficiency' in spoken and written Arabic and Persian, a deep expertise in nationalism and Islam across the Middle East, and a two-year stint at Israel's foremost military college, had long been a go-to mainstream voice on the inner workings of the Iranian regime. After 7 October 2023, however, when he began to unsparingly call out what he would come to view as a genocide in Gaza, the invitations from conventional media in Israel dried up. Locally, it was only the most progressive outlets that would have him, and his views were increasingly — and perhaps even systematically — marginalised. Still, for those Israelis who could stomach his heterodox position, Goldberg's stance wasn't hard to find. In September 2024, in an interview with +972 Magazine titled ' What Israelis don't want to hear about Iran and Hezbollah,' he persuasively laid out why the Islamic Republic did not have a 'grand plan' backed up by regional proxies — 'not for destroying Israel, not for exporting its Islamic revolution, and not for taking over the Middle East.' And so, when Israel attacked Iran on 13 June, it was clear that Goldberg's views would remain unwelcome at home. By then, though, he had already built a large following abroad. '[Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's pre-emptive strike] is a desperate attempt to rally the world behind Israel,' Goldberg wrote in a widely shared piece for Al Jazeera, 'just as preparations are made to deny it the absolute impunity it has enjoyed since its creation'. For Goldberg, as echoed in a live TV interview with Al Jazeera, the timing of the attack had everything to do with the fact that 'Israel had exhausted its options with respect to its genocidal campaign in Gaza'. Two weeks later, less than 36 hours after the bombing stopped, Daily Maverick caught up with Goldberg for a no-holds-barred discussion — on the new status quo, on likely next steps, and on the potential role for South Africa and the Global South in the uncharted geopolitical terrain. Kevin Bloom (KB): So, it seems that the ceasefire is holding, which is a relief for the whole world but mostly, of course, for the citizens of Israel and Iran. As someone who was in the direct line of ballistic missile fire for 12 days, your comment on three issues would be instructive. First, your experience of Israeli society during these unprecedented attacks. Was there more or less social cohesion? What was the mood in the bomb shelters? Second, with the skies now silent, do you think Israelis have emerged with a sense of what the Palestinians in Gaza have endured for the last 20 months? Finally, although Netanyahu and his cohort are claiming victory, the counter-narrative is that Israel called for the ceasefire out of sheer desperation, because the Iron Dome was failing and Iran's bombs were threatening to flatten entire cities. Would you agree with that assessment? Ori Goldberg (OG): So, let me do them in reverse order. Yes, I think there was an element of desperation, or at least a reckoning with the fact that Israel had exhausted its options with this attack on Iran, and that things could only get worse. The missile stocks for the Iron Dome and Arrow interceptors were very rapidly depleted, which is why I think that Israel asked for the ceasefire. Add to that the fact that American strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities were apparently less than optimal, and you have a situation where even with its stated war goal — of trying to set back Iran's nuclear programme — Israel was not entirely successful. In short, Israel did what Israel does best. It achieved tactical superiority very quickly. It assassinated a large number of senior Iranian leaders in the first few hours of its attack. But there was nothing after that, there was no strategic vision, no ability to open up a broader horizon, even though Israel is now talking up the idea of having changed the Middle East. To be clear, Israel hasn't changed the Middle East; Israel has once again gone head-to-head with an inferior enemy, has won the tactical battle, but has absolutely no idea what to do about the strategic part. As for your second question, the one about Israeli empathy for Gazans after this ceasefire, unfortunately the answer would be an emphatic 'no'. As soon as the carpet-bombing of Gaza began, back in October 2023, there was a hardening of the collective Israeli heart. A lot of Israelis wrote about the phenomenon a month or two later, but it began in early October, at the very beginning. Perhaps the most unshakeable point in the official Israeli narrative, the one that has been thoroughly internalised by a great majority of Jewish Israelis, is that whatever happens in Gaza — whatever happens — is not Israel's fault. Every and all deaths in Gaza are not Israel's responsibility; they are the result of a conscious Palestinian choice, which is why, by the way, there are 'no innocents in Gaza' — because, according to this narrative, even the ones that did not actively participate in killing Israelis, they supported 7 October. And Israelis are, as we say in Hebrew, 'like the camel that's blind to its own hump.' You know, Israelis are not able to take what they are thinking and turn it, even for a second, against themselves. As another example, you all saw that when the first Iranian missiles began to land, Israelis were aghast that 'those fanatics' were shooting into civilian areas, whereas 'we' were only targeting military installations. The fact that more than a thousand Iranians were killed, and at the same time more than a thousand Palestinians were killed in Gaza, did not seem to register. And so to your opening question, the one about the mood in the bomb shelters — it was clear that there was a dissonance of sorts, a kind of schizophrenia. As a collective, Israelis are very proud of their ability to take one for the team, to suffer for the national cause. Of course, it's always defined as, 'living through this war because this will be the last war'. Because that's all we want, right? We want the last war to be fought, and then we want peace. Added to that, we had all grown up with the notion that going to war with Iran was not only inevitable, it was also somehow 'blessed'. But Israelis at the same time are confused — and so what we did was completely detach ourselves from the situation and go into personal survival mode. The lines to stock up on supplies stretched around the block. Both of those situations were going on at once. KB: You were outspoken at the outset that Netanyahu attacked Iran, on 13 June, to divert attention from Gaza. The world had reached boiling point with the live-streamed genocide, you noted, and more and more countries were calling for the recognition of a Palestinian state. But now, with Netanyahu having played what we all assumed was his ace card, can there be any more hiding? OG: No, the lies have surfaced. As you said, Netanyahu gambled with everything he had. But it was a stupid gamble, because Trump doesn't really care. I don't remember any American president ever forcing Israeli bombers to turn around in the air, like Trump did on Tuesday [24 March]. Trump doesn't like losers, he's in it to leverage it and not to demonstrate his commitment to 'shared values,' as was the case with previous US presidents. So, I am pretty sure that we will soon see a ceasefire deal in Gaza as well. Israel is out of options. Netanyahu will try to spin the deal as the consequence of a historic victory in Iran, but as far as I see it, it's completely the other way around. KB: In the medium term, then, can we expect to see some sort of geopolitical or even moral reckoning? Outside of the case at the International Court of Justice, do you foresee a role for the Global South in general and South Africa in particular? Would something like the Truth and Reconciliation Commission ever be exportable to Israel/Palestine? OG: I think a model like the Truth and Reconciliation Commission is the only one that can work here. But right now, there is absolutely nothing to talk about. Israelis are not prepared to do anything of the sort, and I don't know if Palestinians are either. If I was a Palestinian, I don't know how much I would be into that sort of work. Time has to pass, things have to quieten down, and new ways of using the old words have to be generated. You know, what the hell does 'peace' even mean after a genocide? This wasn't a 'war,' after all. The effect of it has been profound, on everyone, including Israeli society. Even though Israelis have been constantly trying to downplay it, to present it as a necessity — what would you do, what would you suggest? — it has changed us completely. And we need to be able to do something about that, or at least try to do something. At the moment, of course, we are not trying, but we are going to have to, and we won't until it all sinks in, until we are chastised by the world loudly enough. The impetus will only come from the outside, because Israeli society right now is completely incapable of even considering the possibility of change. But yes, I think South Africa has a tremendous role to play as far as the Global South goes. Look, at the moment, the situation is such that all the interested parties, all the relevant players, can do whatever they choose to do. If the Global South chooses to play an organised role in this, if BRICS comes together, if South Africa is joined by Brazil, for example — there is a lot that can be done, because there is a lot that must be done. There is a lot to be done in terms of providing Marshall Plan-style aid. There is a lot to be done in terms of providing the political backing for any attempt to create a sustainable resolution. But the Global South has to decide on a course of action, it should not passively allow itself to be swallowed up by Chinese interests, which are all about doing very little and then leveraging the economic benefits. This is a time for politics, not economics; a time for articulating a politics of solidarity and sustainability. Just look to Zohran Mamdani's historic victory in New York, it's earth-shattering. Even without knowing how the victory can be replicated in the national or international arena, it's just mind-blowing that he won. And he won because he did politics, he persuaded young voters that politics presents a real option for the way forward. If there's a role for the Global South, if there's a role for South Africa, it's there, in being political. Because the Global North will do everything in its power to depoliticise the situation. The Global North will continue to talk about the same 'middle' that has been taken hostage by extremists on both sides; it will continue to demand fealty to a 'good stable life' and the same capitalist system; it will continue to appeal to notions like the 'Judeo-Christian morals' of the West. These are all notions that need to be resisted, in my opinion. And I am hopeful. I don't know if my optimism is warranted, but it feels like the lines have been drawn — perhaps more sharply than ever. KB: So I am pretty hopeful too, and I believe that South Africa is going to insist on an expanded role. I can't help thinking here about our DNA as a country, about how — after we incorporated the Bantustans at the dawn of the democratic era — we effectively instituted our own one-state solution. And from my perspective, at least, that's the only way forward for Israel/Palestine. Would you agree with that assessment? OG: The only word that I might take issue with here, from all the words that you use, is 'solution'. I don't know if it's useful to define this as a 'problem and solution' situation. Part of what enabled Israel to do what it did was talk of the 'Palestinian problem'. I don't know that there are solutions, but I do know that politics is not only the way forward, it is also the foundation. The political space, after all, is the only space that allows human beings to live with one another. For instance, I get a lot of responses that say: 'You're a good man, but you should provide a personal example and give your stolen land to a Palestinian — and then move back to Europe where you're from.' So, that's not going to happen. What is going to happen is something along the lines of the one-state or two-state 'solution'. I grew up a 'two-stater' because that was the legitimate position of the Israeli left, the Zionist left. The more removed I became from the official Zionist narrative, the more the one-state option appealed to me. I can't really say anything concrete about it, except that it will have to be equitable and just, and it will have to devote itself to fighting the toxic remnants of Jewish supremacy. In that sense, I think it's the only option. But I don't know if this is the time to be talking about whether you're a one-stater or a two-stater. To do that is to deny, to some extent, the effects of the last two years. I mean, I think it's mainly just people holding on to 'what was'. Right now, we should talk about how Gaza is going to be put on life support. And then slowly and gradually healed, if it can be healed.


Daily Maverick
7 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
South Africa's environment minister elevates Antarctica as a ‘national priority'
Dion George says he is taking a big, bold step — putting the wild, frigid seventh continent at the heart of the country's agenda: 'It would be extremely short-sighted if we did not pay attention to it.' South Africa has maintained a presence on Earth's southern frontier since becoming the second country to ratify the Antarctic Treaty — symbolically, it did so during the 1960 winter solstice. This year, the country celebrates seven decades since the South African meteorologist Hannes la Grange became the first African to set a snow boot on Antarctic ice as part of the seminal Commonwealth Trans-Antarctic Expedition. In 2028, another date beckons: Seventy years since South Africa, through La Grange, reached the South Pole. Political leadership has rarely afforded the region more than nominal attention. That will change under his tenure, says Minister Dion George of the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment. 'I am the head of the South African National Antarctic Programme,' George told Daily Maverick on a ministerial demonstration cruise aboard the SA Agulhas II from Durban to Cape Town in May. That is a statement no previous DFFE minister has made. 'I set the tone, I set the direction, I lead the charge,' he says. Antarctica has been promoted to one of three special projects within his office, alongside carbon credits and anti-poaching. '[Antarctica] has fallen a bit behind, so I thought we need to speed up there,' he says. 'It would be extremely, extremely short-sighted of South Africa if we did not pay attention to it.' Pretoria's envoy scoops leadership role at treaty talks In recent years, South Africa's Antarctic diplomatic performance has lacked imagination and leadership. The Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting (ATCM) typically receives hundreds of discussion papers submitted by the 29 consultative (decision-making) states, which are tasked with governing Antarctica for peaceful activities like tourism and science. Under George's predecessor, Barbara Creecy, the taxpayer-funded South African delegation submitted no independent discussion papers to the 2023 ATCM in Helsinki, Finland, or the 2024 ATCM in Kochi, India. George received the baton in June 2024 and acknowledges these failures but promises change at the ATCM now underway in Milan, Italy. The South African delegation already seems to have done something right at the 10-day meeting which ends Thursday, 3 July. Last week, Romi Brammer, a legal adviser in the Department of International Relations and Cooperation, was elected to chair the ATCM's legal negotiations. The treaty is a benchmark diplomatic and scientific achievement. But this year, the ATCM faces an anniversary it is not likely to mark too publicly: 20 years since adopting an annex to assign responsibility for environmental disasters, which has yet to enter into force. It is now up to the likes of Brammer to negotiate progress on this matter and others retarded by the glacially turning wheels of Antarctic consensus (everyone must agree before anything becomes policy). Quick! The office is melting The DFFE and Birdlife South Africa have spent several years raising funds to tackle what they bill as history's largest mouse-eradication effort on any island — they need to raise at least $30-million to save Marion's albatrosses and other seabirds from all being eaten alive by the invasive rodents. Donors include South African billionaire Mark Shuttleworth, but anyone can still pitch in. 'Climate change is a sensitive biosecurity issue,' says George, citing deadly avian flu and mouse infestations at Marion Island, South Africa's sub-Antarctic research station, as bellwethers. Scientists told Daily Maverick that George and his staff had to streamline fragmented Antarctic management across several government departments — a project that Ashley Johnson, South Africa's lead negotiator in Milan, says he has taken on. And then there are the infrastructure humdingers uncovered by Daily Maverick in April, such as Marion's failed generators, which have since been replaced. Antarctica is, basically, a giant melting office. For that reason, George says the fleet of polar tracked vehicles must be replaced and supported by up-to-date scanning technology to avoid 'a whole piece of ice that's going to collapse underneath you'. But wait — how about the eructing elephant seal in the room? South Africa may want multilateral cooperation in Antarctica — but not everyone seems to be playing nice. Russia has been looking for oil and gas at least since the Antarctic mining ban entered into force in 1998 — and it uses Cape Town for logistics. In February 2020, for instance, it issued a bombshell statement from Table Bay harbour saying that it had found '70 billion tons' of Southern Ocean fossil fuels — enough to power the planet for 15 years. Russia calls it 'science'. Some experts call it 'prospecting'. And London might call it shopping. A recent Westminster inquiry, which released its findings in June, stopped just short of dropping the P-word, but politely raised an eyebrow: Moscow's surveys 'cast doubt on compliance with the Protocol's prohibition and risk undermining its authority', the findings say. 'You're not supposed to go and mine in Antarctica — so why are you looking for oil and gas?' George volunteered. 'When it's cold and you can't go there, it's very easy to say, 'Oh no, we're not going to mine, we're not going to do anything there; we're just going to leave it alone.' 'But when it becomes a commodity, when it becomes a valuable piece of land, for example, the behaviour may well start to change.' At the Copenhagen-hosted ministerial climate meeting in May, George held discussions with Greenland and was struck by the changes in polar currents and ice caps. The more they melt, the more accessible they become. 'Maybe there will be a mad scramble for Antarctica,' he says, 'but I think there has to be some kind of order. You can't just have absolute chaos … Antarctica is a rich asset. The agreement must hold — that we all agree you don't go mining; the region must remain a non-militarised zone, even when it is accessible.' What does South Africa actually stand for? Even cautious commentators have started to fear that the US under Donald Trump may withdraw from the treaty to claim and mine Antarctica. Russia, like the US, has historically maintained a basis to claim parts or all of Antarctica. They cannot do so as long as the treaty lasts (or if they remain signatories). In the period between the world wars, the Union of South Africa did attempt to make some sort of half-hearted claim but botched it in a diplomatic comedy of errors. However, South Africa's 2021 Antarctic strategy rejects the idea of territorial claims — a marked contrast to seven of the treaty's 12 consultative founding parties. Argentina, Australia, Chile, France, New Zealand, Norway and the UK have staked vast territorial claims that are frozen by the treaty and that most of the world does not recognise. 'We did not make a claim because we don't believe you can,' George says. 'That's the position we take… 'South Africa's position is that we're non-aligned,' he says. 'We have South African interests that we must look after — and we don't get told who we befriend. We're friends with everyone.' This balancing act between BRICS states and the West is what gives South Africa its moral authority in Antarctic diplomacy, he argues. 'When I became a new minister and travelled a lot for the climate, every single country we came across wanted to have a bilateral. The reason is that the voice of South Africa matters… 'When you're looking for the voice of reason, often it's us.' That may be so, but George's Democratic Alliance opposition party is on record as vocally condemning Russia's full-scale illegal invasion of Ukraine as well as ' Russian energy prospecting in Antarctica '. Now it is walking a tightrope of tenuous moral ambiguity in a coalition government that has taken Israel to court over atrocities in Gaza, but has hardly squared up to Moscow in a similar fashion. Still, President Cyril Ramaphosa received President Volodymyr Zelensky in April. Both the Russian and Ukrainian fleets use Cape Town as their logistical transit to Antarctica. In George's view, a collaborative ethos defines the Antarctic community. 'It's harsh, it is cold — and if somebody got into difficulty, of course we're going to help.' George says he has also opened diplomatic conversations with China about establishing a marine protected area to the north of South Africa's East Antarctic base — an initiative that has stalled for years due to Beijing and Moscow's opposition. 'I have disagreed with China on a number of things,' he reveals. 'We want the marine reserve. We know what we want and we are clear.' George's Antarctic coup While Pretoria has maintained an unbroken commitment to its treaty obligations throughout the country's political turmoil, its focus has been operational rather than diplomatic. If George actually succeeds in shaping a revitalised Antarctic policy — one that reflects both science and statecraft — South Africa may finally claim a seat as a leading voice for the Global South on the coldest continent. 'Antarctica was not on the radar when I stepped into the department. It is now,' says the minister, who inserted Antarctica into the 2024-29 national medium-term development plan during a Cabinet lekgotla in January. Because we are jaded journalists, we asked his department for proof. Scrutinising the document sent to us, we found George's coup: there, on page 138, sandwiched between sections called 'Increased feelings of safety of women and children in communities' and 'secured cyber space', we spotted the actual frozen continent. Together with wildlife trafficking, George had struck a coup for a place that, to many, seems very far from the national agenda. Here, he had managed to nudge 'strengthened protection and sustainable management of Antarctica' as a priority into the section dedicated to 'effective border security'. In a country of immense social need, South Africa's Antarctic investments may be questioned by some, says George. 'They say, 'Let's rather spend the money on something else. In my opinion, it makes no sense to do that.' 'We are the only African country in Antarctica,' he says. As geopolitical posturing rises, South Africa has to be ready, he adds — singling out China's plans to build a sixth station, as well as Iran, which last year suggested a desire to join the treaty. 'If you drew the line down from Iran, you would actually bump into Antarctica. There's nothing in between. 'Yup,' he smiles. 'I read up about that.' George had planned to travel to Sanae IV earlier this year, but scheduling conflicts intervened. 'I do intend to do that as soon as the weather permits.' DM

IOL News
14 hours ago
- IOL News
Calls for government to create its own tech platforms
GovChat founder Professor Eldrid Jordaan speaking at the Social Media Summit for Government at the University of Johannesburg, in conversation with DeCode Communications CEO Lorato Tshenkeng. Image: Supplied GovChat founder Professor Eldrid Jordaan has implored the South African government to start, own and run its own technology platforms for the benefit of all South Africans. Jordaan has slammed big tech, particularly Meta - which owns the likes of Facebook, WhatsApp and Instagram, saying they posed a threat to the digital sovereignty of countries like South Africa. Jordaan, who was a key figure during the Mxit days and who later founded GovChat, which aims to enhance governance transparency and accountability through the provision of tools for citizens to measure service levels, was the keynote speaker at the Social Media Summit for Government, which is being hosted by the University of Johannesburg. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad loading His speech was on the topic of Technology, Trust, and Transformation: Bridging the Digital Divide in Citizen Engagement. He said big tech, particularly Meta, wanted to be the player and the referee. This comes after a long standing dispute between GovChat and Meta, which stems from 2020, where the civic organisation was accused of violating the terms of service of the WhatsApp Business API, despite the fact that GovChat had signed agreements with the SA government, allowing it to communicate on the governments behalf. 'The government needs to beware of public private partnerships that profit from public infrastructure,' Jordaan warned. 'Public goods should serve our people, not the private sector. GovChat was built to serve South Africans, it was not built to serve algorithms and shareholders. 'We can no longer afford to be digital tenants. We must use these tools, but not lose the power. We need to partner with big tech, do not depend on them,' said Jordaan. Jordaan said South Africa had 1.5 million public servants who needed to be upskilled to navigate a changing world driven by artificial intelligence. 'We don't need to go to the private sector, we are seeing too many people hand over their responsibilities to the private sector, the private sector should strengthen government, it should not replace the work that is done by the government, there should be a big difference between mandate, scope of work,' he said. Jordaan said it was important that big tech treats Africa with the same respect that it treated countries in the West, including how it harvested data of people on the continent. He said recently, authorities in Nigeria had issued a $200 million fine for the use of people's data without consent. 'We are not saying that the private sector should not profit because that's their model, just like how you have a business model in the government. The private sector is important, we need the private sector, but we must guard against the dependency. 'When you are dependent on something they hold the stick, they hold the power - I'm nervous about that, we need to be careful around what the intentions are,' said Jordaan. Sassa own platform Jordaan said a state institution like Sassa, should have its own platform to administer the millions of social welfare payments it administers monthly. 'The private sector is lucky there is so much inefficiency in government,' he remarked. 'Look at Sassa, if the South African government wanted to own a platform, I would start there. You have more than half population on Sassa, but you choose to use platforms that exist. If I were the government, I would use my own platform and make it mandatory. 'I say it again, the private sector is lucky there are inefficiencies in the government,' said Jordaan. IOL editor Lance Witten speaking at the Social Media Summit for Government. Image: Supplied Earlier, IOL's editor-in-chief Lance Witten urged government communicators to listen to the people in developing narratives and content around their government departments. Witten made the comments during a fireside chat with SABC journalist Bongiwe Zwane at the summit. 'There is a steady decline in audiences engaging with platforms like news websites, which are now seen as legacy media. You can build the best content, but if you are not where your audience is, there is no point in creating that content,' he said. Witten said tailored and platform specific content and messaging was key for audiences. 'What we have discovered is that we need to be where the audiences are… you need to create specific native for the platform you are on, if it is all tailored for the platform, that is where and how the audience will engage with it,' he said. With shrinking revenues, Witten said it was important for communications teams to be clear about their identity, their narrative and to be unequivocal about a political stance. He also said the impact of the changing consumption habits and technology such as AI, had a big impact on news publishers, and content teams needed to be aware of AI optimization, as the AI and search engines like Google became more of answer engines rather than search engines. 'Am I creating the content on my platform? Is it good for the crawler? Is it good for ChatGpt? Are you creating content helping the answer engine? How am I answering the audience needs? 'From a news content provider perspective, it has impacted our concept of how we create content and the credibility, our audiences are on social media, they are good at spotting authenticity, they are less likely to trust a brand,' said Witten. IOL