Civil authority over the military is deeply entrenched in most democracies, legally and by custom. It has a long tradition in South Africa, which is why the confusion over the failure last week to prevent Iranian participation in joint naval exercises off the Western Cape coast is so astonishing.
What seems clear is that President Cyril Ramaphosa ordered the withdrawal of Iran, and that the order was not obeyed. After that it gets murky. Did defence minister Angie Motshekga fail to pass on the order? Who did she pass it to? Was the order conveyed but not understood? Was it written down? Did someone in the chain of command choose to ignore it?
Intentional insubordination, by an individual or a group, seems highly unlikely, because in this case it would be so obvious and easy to detect. Disobedience of a lawful command is a criminal offence, and wilful disobedience can result in imprisonment, fines and dismissal from the force. Active rebellion would be extremely stupid.
Yet Motshekga has said that the president’s instructions were “clearly communicated to all parties concerned, agreed upon and to be implemented and adhered to as such”. Do these “parties” include the other navies, and not the senior defence force admirals and generals?
A panel was appointed to report in seven days what happened. It should not take even that long to discover where the order ran aground after it left the presidency.
Whatever the reason, one suspects gross incompetence somewhere.
Whatever emerges from the inquiry into the Iran naval embarrassment, somebody must take political responsibility
No less disturbing is the impression that the department of defence has been working independently of its international relations counterpart when it plans such exercises. Such an arrangement might almost have been designed to undermine the national interest, raising the spectre of a rogue military.
All this speaks again to a government that is not joined up. There appears to be no co-ordination between ministries, yet this is a fundamental principle of how cabinet government should work. Administration of a country is an endless option of difficulties, where priorities have to be identified and compromises hammered out. Yet the style of all ANC presidents has mainly been to appoint ministers and let them do their own thing.
Motor industry policy is undermined by inappropriate taxes. British American Tobacco is considering closing its manufacturing operation because the government has failed to deal with the scourge of illicit cigarettes. Smelters and steel plants close because protectionist measures are not thought through and electricity tariffs are a blunt instrument. Transnet closes branch railway lines when the country is crying out for revenue from rail tourism. Amid the confusing thickets of often conflicting legislation and regulation, it is the law of unintended consequences that reigns supreme.
Whatever emerges from the inquiry into the Iran naval embarrassment, somebody must take political responsibility — that is the minister. And one or more of the top defence bureaucrats, generals and admirals must take professional responsibility.
The president has to fire people. If he does not, he will have revealed he is not in command.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.