Despite major political shifts in all corners of the globe, the international order itself has not changed much over the last 70 years. In large part, the global powers resemble the post-World War II victors, and they remain the dominant players shaping international politics. The decision by America to rescind visas for personnel of the ICC is, however, one indicator that a number of the global powers choose to operate out of doors of the norms and regulations outlined in International law.
Some South African analysts have criticized South Africa’s diplomatic stance on Palestine, Venezuela, and Western Sahara. One of the reviews of the South African stance on Western Sahara was penned shortly after a few think-tanks traveled to Morocco and met with key individuals linked to the Moroccan government. An analyst also recommended that South Africa is ‘siding with satan’ on its stance on Venezuela.
Amid this clear mobilization of bias in opposition to the positions taken by South Africa, it is worth reiterating what informs South Africa’s positions in those conditions. Regarding Western Sahara and Palestine, South Africa’s positions are guided by the truth that both Palestine and Western Sahara are occupied territories in terms of international law. The equal worldwide felony framework also classifies Palestine and Morocco as occupying powers on the subject to these occupied territories.
With regards to the situation in Venezuela, South Africa is likewise guided by global regulation. As indicated in South Africa’s Explanation of Vote on the United Nations Security Council (UNSC), South Africa is not detached from the humanitarian scenario in Venezuela. It could work with all stakeholders to make sure that humanitarian resource reaches those most in need. South Africa is cautioning in opposition to the overt attempt by way of the United States, a few European and Latin American international locations to use the humanitarian crisis to effect an unconstitutional change of government that is illegal under international law. The use of force and the danger of force are likewise illegal below global regulation outdoor of the provisions in Chapter VII of the UN Charter. Any use of force inside the situation in Venezuela might no longer meet the thresholds for legality.
Those vital stances of South Africa when it comes to the 3 conditions cited above are important in steering the supply of goods by using worldwide regulation. A foreign coverage role guided with the aid of international regulation affords a level of truth on the way to interact in volatile and complex situations. Hegemony-centered overseas policy stances that aspect-step global regulation frameworks make the pacific resolution of conflicts more difficult.
State action by way of powerful countries, inclusive of the USA, has arguably constantly foregrounded the use of difficult power to obtain its foreign policy goals. This is frequently done via unlawful use of pressure and unilateral sanctions. Both are commissioned with impunity and brushed aside for global regulation.
To illustrate the intersection of power, global regulation, and international accountability, it’s useful to observe the US stance on widespread jurisdiction. In an editorial entitled, “The Pitfalls of Universal Jurisdiction” written in 2001, Henry Kissinger, a former US Secretary of State, suggested that measures that are looking to make Heads of State and senior public officers chargeable for potential crook movements turned into akin to lowering heads of state to the extent of common outlaws.
