Latest news with #KennethMokgatlhe
The Star
3 days ago
- Politics
- The Star
Bumpy road lies ahead for the nation
Kenneth Mokgatlhe | Published 5 hours ago President Cyril Ramaphosa and his US counterpart, Donald Trump, met in the While House recently. The US has been very critical of South Africa's foreign policy stance, which, on many occasions, went against the American national interests, according to the writer. Image: AFP September, a month synonymous with renewal and new beginnings, will be the most challenging period in South Africa's political and economic landscape due to actions likely to be taken by the US against the country. The first is the end of the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), which is set to expire in September. However, the new 30% tariffs introduced by the US for SA will likely override the existing AGOA conventions when they take effect at the beginning of August 2025. The second biggest conundrum will be the possibility of the US Senate's decision on the US-South Africa Bilateral Relations Review Act of 2025. The ground is fertile in the US to act against the South African government, which is believed to have acted against the US's national interests. The US has been very critical of South Africa's foreign policy stance, which, on many occasions, went against the American national interests. This has been evident in their divergent voting patterns on various United Nations (UN) platforms, where South Africa and the US have often taken opposing positions. The relations between the US - SA did not break during the Trump administration, and Joe Biden also raised similar concerns about South Africa. The ANC should be told, 'You made your bed, now lie in it.' They have chosen to strengthen their alliances with the geopolitical rivals to the West at the expense of decades of working partnerships with the Western powers. It was very shortsighted of the ANC to believe that there would not be actions or reactions from the side of the US on how it is being undermined by Africa's powerful regional bloc. The escalating tensions between the US and South Africa took an uphill path in 2022 when South Africa was alleged by the US to have loaded the Lady R with armaments that would be used in the Russia-Ukraine conflict. The South African government dismissed this allegation. In 2023, in the aftermath of Israeli attacks by Hamas on the 7th October 2023, we saw South Africa continuing with its support for Hamas, a designated terror organisation by countries such as the US and European Union (EU) countries. Dr. Naledi Pandor kicked off a diplomatic storm when she agreed that she had a telephonic conversation with the same Hamas and offered them humanitarian support, a vicious group that invaded Israel and killed more than 1 200 innocent civilians and kidnapped more than 250 people, some are still held under the tunnels in Gaza to date. Just when we thought that the ANC would tone down its anti-US messaging, it did the unexpected by dragging the State of Israel into the UN's International Court of Justice (ICJ). Their legal basis was that Israel was committing genocidal acts in Gaza. This act by the South African government would be seen as heroic by some, while others criticised the move because it would not be a viable solution to the longstanding Israel-Palestine conflict. It is possible that the ANC's thinking at the time was to maximise its electoral fortunes, which drastically dropped to below 50%. Their energy on the issue is draining because it is not yielding them the political capital they had planned. If indeed South Africa was genuine about fighting for the rights of the vulnerable people around the world, they could have started with their population, wherein 14 million people are living in dire poverty, not knowing what they would eat the following day. A country where quite a sizable youth are unemployed. The country that experiences 62 murders per day for the whole year, a number that is unmatched throughout the world, we are the murder capital. Still, the political leadership ignores what is affecting their people. Mokgatlhe is a political analyst and consultant.
The Star
12-07-2025
- Politics
- The Star
There is no link between the name ‘Azania' and the indigenous people of South Africa
Kenneth Mokgatlhe | Published 22 minutes ago We should be asking ourselves where the word 'Azania' originates from, which language, and how it is related to the people of South Africa. There are no cultural, historical, linguistic, or political connections to the name, says the writer. Image: Picture: Henk Kruger/ Independent Newspapers The proposal of constitutional amendment by the African Transformation Movement (ATM) to change the name of South Africa to the 'Republic of Azania' is nonsensical, unnecessary, and irrelevant to the inhabitants of this place. We should be asking ourselves where the word 'Azania' originates from, which language, and how it is related to the people of South Africa. There are no cultural, historical, linguistic, or political connections to the name. It was during my time as a young and vibrant activist within the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC) that I was firmly convinced that South Africa should be renamed 'Azania'. I had been persuaded by the existing argument that 'South' was merely a geographical direction and therefore did not have substantive cultural and historical connections befitting a nation's identity. However, I later realised that my comprehension of the term 'Azania' was very limited to its use within Pan Africanist and Black Consciousness discourses. Never mind my strong ideological conviction and commitment, I was unable to intellectually express a clear historical or cultural justification for the adoption of the name, nor could I trace its relevance in juxtaposition to the people, history, and identity of the country. It is important to note that the name 'Azania' has no historical or cultural connection to my people. It was never part of our vocabulary or identity. The term did not exist in our oral traditions or historical records, and my community had never encountered it before modern political movements began to invoke it. It is important to note that the pre-colonial South African society was home to various independent kingdoms and queendoms, each governed by its rulers. I descend from the Bahurutshe, one of the largest sub-groups of the Batswana people, who previously occupied the area now known as the Marico region or Zeerust. Our ancestors referred to their kingdom as Kaditshwene (a place of baboons) and Tshwenyane (a little baboon), an ancient twin-city settlement that thrived between 1300 to 1884. Like many other indigenous polities, it functioned as a sovereign polity, free from foreign or external domination. There was a dramatic shift in the geopolitical landscape after the Berlin Conference of 1884, where European powers gathered to partition Africa among themselves, which laid the foundation for the modern nation-states we recognise today. As a result, we — descendants of various kingdoms — were forced to adapt to these new political realities and form countries under Western-imposed frameworks. A country known as the Union of South Africa was established in 1910, led and governed by white minority rule. A referendum was held in 1960, where white South Africans decided to leave the Commonwealth, became independent, and referred to themselves as the Republic of South Africa on 31 May 1961. While the name 'South Africa' is descriptive of a geographic location, the name gives a strong cultural, political, and historical connection. It reminds us of different epochs in our history and how we interacted with other countries. The name South Africa is not unique in the world, as other countries have historically adopted names which are geographically descriptive of their land, such as South Sudan, Central African Republic (CAR), North and South Korea, North Macedonia, and East Timor. My discomfort at the term Azania was vindicated after I came across one of the compelling writings of South African freedom fighter and journalist Paul Trewhela, who is now based in the United Kingdom. Through his sharp historical analysis, he provides a well-substantiated account of the origins of the name 'Azania', demonstrating that it was a term imposed by slave traders/masters to demean the Black Africans in some parts of East Africa. Trewhela contends that the name 'Azania' does not bear any link to the indigenous peoples of South Africa and carries connotations or implications of oppression rather than liberation. His esteemed scholarship helped clarify that the name 'Azania' lacks authentic historical, cultural, political, or linguistic connections to South Africa and its people, reinforcing my earlier doubts about its relevance and appropriateness as a national name. 'The name 'Azania' celebrates the centuries of enslavement of black Africans by Islamist Arab imperialism down the east coast of Africa. It is a disgrace for reactionary ideologists to be using this concocted name to replace the name South Africa,' he remarked. This name, 'Azania,' is primarily used by individuals who identify themselves as revolutionaries or radicals within South Africa's academic, political, and social spheres. It is largely preferred by black radicals in academia and by political formations considered to be on the far left, such as the PAC, the Azanian People's Organisation (AZAPO), the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), and trade unions affiliated with the National Council of Trade Union (NACTU), among others. Like I once did in the past, many of these individuals adopt the term 'Azania' as a symbolic rejection of apartheid and white supremacy. Their chief motivation emanates from a desire to eliminate any association with the apartheid regime, including the name 'South Africa', which they regard as a legacy of colonialism and racial oppression. Mokgatlhe is a political analyst and consultant.
The Citizen
05-07-2025
- Politics
- The Citizen
Refreshed proposal for South Africa name change sparks debate
A YEARS-old proposal to change South Africa's name is back in the spotlight as political parties plan to approach Parliament on the matter. According to media reports, the African Transformation Movement (ATM) is spearheading the proposal, supported by other political parties. ALSO READ: uMhlathuze workers' strike suspended pending negotiations The Republic of Azania is the proposed name change. As quoted in Business Tech, ATM argues that the name South Africa is deeply tied to the country's colonial and oppressive past. 'Before 1652, we were not South Africans. The name 'South Africa' came as a result of the British and the Boers coming together to form what was called the Union of South Africa, a structure designed to further the oppression of indigenous people,' said ATM parliamentary leader Vuyo Zungula, as quoted by Business Tech. ALSO READ: Join Zululand's own Survivor star and donate blood this Mandela Day 'All formerly colonised nations, like South West Africa, have changed their names. We now know it to be Namibia,' he explained. Not everyone agrees, however, with political analyst Kenneth Mokgatlhe saying 'South Africa' is merely a geographical description. 'Other countries like South Sudan, Central African Republic, North Macedonia, East Timor, and North and South Korea also use geographical identifiers. It's nothing out of the ordinary,' Mokgatlhe told Business Tech. He went so far as to say the name 'Azania' 'lacks authentic historical, cultural, political or linguistic connections to South Africa and its people, reinforcing doubts about its relevance and appropriateness as a national name'. Don't have the ZO app? Download it to your Android or Apple device here: HAVE YOUR SAY Like our Facebook page and follow us on Twitter. For news straight to your phone invite us: WhatsApp – 060 784 2695 Instagram – zululand_observer At Caxton, we employ humans to generate daily fresh news, not AI intervention. Happy reading!
Eyewitness News
04-07-2025
- Politics
- Eyewitness News
There's no link between the name ‘Azania' and the indigenous people of South Africa
Kenneth Mokgatlhe 1 July 2025 | 9:59 The proposal of constitutional amendment by the African Transformation Movement (ATM) to change the name of South Africa to the 'Republic of Azania' is nonsensical, unnecessary, and irrelevant to the inhabitants of this place. We should be asking ourselves where the word 'Azania' originates from, which language, and how it is related to the people of South Africa. There are no cultural, historical, linguistic, or political connections to the name. It was during my time as a young and vibrant activist within the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC) that I was firmly convinced that South Africa should be renamed "Azania". I had been persuaded by the existing argument that South was merely a geographical direction and, therefore, did not have substantive cultural and historical connections befitting a nation's identity. However, I later realised that my comprehension of the term "Azania" was very limited to its use within Pan Africanist and Black Consciousness discourses. Never mind my strong ideological conviction and commitment, I was unable to intellectually express a clear historical or cultural justification for the adoption of the name, nor could I trace its relevance in juxtaposition to the people, history, and identity of the country. It is important to note that the name 'Azania' has no historical or cultural connection to my people. It was never part of our vocabulary or identity. The term did not exist in our oral traditions or historical records, and my community had never encountered it before modern political movements began to invoke it. It is important to note that the pre-colonial South African society was home to various independent kingdoms and queendoms, each governed by its rulers. I descend from the Bahurutshe, one of the largest sub-groups of the Batswana people, who previously occupied the area now known as the Marico region or Zeerust. Our ancestors referred to their kingdom as Kaditshwene (a place of baboons) and Tshwenyane (a little baboon), an ancient twin-city settlement that thrived between 1300 to 1884. Like many other indigenous polities, it functioned as a sovereign polity, free from foreign or external domination. There was a dramatic shift in the geopolitical landscape after the Berlin Conference of 1884, where European powers gathered to partition Africa among themselves, which laid the foundation for the modern nation-states we recognise today. As a result, we, descendants of various kingdoms, were forced to adapt to these new political realities and form countries under Western-imposed frameworks. A country known as the Union of South Africa was established in 1910, led and governed by white minority rule. A referendum was held in 1960, where white South Africans decided to leave the Commonwealth, became independent, and referred to themselves as the Republic of South Africa on 31 May 1961. While the name 'South Africa' is descriptive of a geographic location, the name gives a strong cultural, political, and historical connection. It reminds us of different epochs in our history and how we interacted with other countries. The name South Africa is not unique in the world, as other countries have historically adopted names which are geographically descriptive of their land, such as South Sudan, Central African Republic (CAR), North and South Korea, North Macedonia, and East Timor. My discomfort at the term Azania was vindicated after I came across one of the compelling writings of South African freedom fighter and journalist Paul Trewhela, who is now based in the United Kingdom. Through his sharp historical analysis, he provides a well-substantiated account of the origins of the name 'Azania', demonstrating that it was a term imposed by slave traders/masters to demean the Black Africans in some parts of East Africa. Trewhela contends that the name 'Azania' does not bear any link to the indigenous peoples of South Africa and carries connotations or implications of oppression rather than liberation. His esteemed scholarship helped clarify that the name 'Azania' lacks authentic historical, cultural, political, or linguistic connections to South Africa and its people, reinforcing my earlier doubts about its relevance and appropriateness as a national name. 'The name 'Azania' celebrates the centuries of enslavement of black Africans by Islamist Arab imperialism down the east coast of Africa. It is a disgrace for reactionary ideologists to be using this concocted name to replace the name South Africa,' he remarked. This name, 'Azania,' is primarily used by individuals who identify themselves as revolutionaries or radicals within South Africa's academic, political, and social spheres. It is largely preferred by black radicals in academia and by political formations considered to be on the far left, such as the PAC, the Azanian People's Organisation (AZAPO), the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), and trade unions affiliated with the National Council of Trade Union (NACTU), among others. Like I once did in the past, many of these individuals adopt the term 'Azania' as a symbolic rejection of apartheid and white supremacy. Their chief motivation emanates from a desire to eliminate any association with the apartheid regime, including the name 'South Africa', which they regard as a legacy of colonialism and racial oppression. Mokgatlhe is a political analyst and consultant.
