South African defence since 1994 : a study of policy-making

[摘要] ENGLISH ABSTRACT: As South Africa entered the transitional period towards establishing a multi-party democracy,its defence policy changed fundamentally. The African National Congress (ANC) as theupcoming governing party established the Military Research Group (MRG), to help formulateits defence policy positions, which subsequently largely determined South African defencepolicy. Through this think-tank the ANC leadership became interested in and supported theidea of non-offensive defence (NOD). NOD is a European idea of the Cold War era, whichwas aimed at preventing the security dilemma, arms races and accidental war between states.The aim of this study is to describe the nature of defence policy-making in South Africa since1994, by describing how NOD became prominent.Non-offensive defence ideas influenced South African defence policy significantly andappeared in all legislation and policies pertaining to defence. NOD complemented the ANC'sdomestic policy goals with the new security paradigm, which like NOD, originate from thePeace Research school of thought. As a defensive idea, NOD emphasised South Africa'sintention to improve relations with Southern African states, as well as its strategicdefensiveness, which determined the military doctrine of the South African National DefenceForce (SANDF). The ANC used NOD to transform the SANDF, especially to scale down itspower projection capabilities. Two arguments are made in this study to describe the nature ofdefence policy-making in South Africa when the prominence of NOD is considered. Firstly,that South African defence policy-makers are open to ideas and models from industrialisedstates, despite the limited applicability and shortcomings of such models. Secondly, modelscan be used in various ways by interest groups to influence policy. NOD was used as atheoretical tool by the MRG and the military to influence defence policy according to theirinterests.Several characteristics of South African defence policy-making were also identified. Firstly,that the Constitution does not prioritise state or individual security as more important. Thismakes conflicting world-views of realism and idealism about defence possible. Defence policytherefore often has to involve a compromise between these views. Secondly, although theConstitution makes provision for public participation in defence policy-making, there is noequal distribution of power for interest groups to influence policy. In this regard the legislatureand parliamentary defence committees are also weak compared to the executive authority.Thirdly, the use of non-governmental organisations in defence policy-making has created aform of direct and unrestricted lobbying, as well as the privatisation of policy-making.

[发布机构] Stellenbosch University