Should South Africa host the BRICS Summit without inviting Vladimir Putin?

On the 17th of March 2023, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an arrest warrant for Russia's President Vladimir Putin for unlawful deportation of children to Russia. This was quickly dismissed by Russia as illegal in that the country itself was not a signatory to the International Criminal Courts and that the said children were transferred from the war zone to safer locations so that they could be reunited with their parents later. Russia, instead, went further to declare the ICC judges and the prosecutors wanted.

Unfortunately, the arrest warrant, which many people around the world dismissed as another irrelevant Western bluff as far as Russia was concerned, has now taken a centre stage right on our own African soil and is about to wreck the greatest BRICS" summit which, for the first time in its history, is drawing not less than 25 aspiring members, world financial analysts, world economists, world leaders, special guests, and also, observers from around the world to the Republic of South Africa. It has also generated heated debates as many people see it as a different type of "Cold War" being fought in Africa between the East and the West.

South Africa, which is the 5th member of The BRICS Emerging Economies, is supposed to host the bloc's 15th annual summit in August this year. The "BRICS" is an acronym (abbreviation) of the first letters of the names of the countries made up of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, in that order. Heads of state and governments of these countries are expected to attend the summit, and notable among them is Russia's President Vladimir Putin.

In our practical lives, it is absolutely normal for people to join multiple societies or groups as and when they wish. But what do you do when your membership in one organisation disrupts or threatens your activities in the other? Do you give up one for the sake of the other? And, if so, what are the factors which could potentially affect your decision to choose one above the other? This is the predicament in which the Republic of South Africa finds itself.

South Africa, whose turn it is to host the BRICS Summit in August this year, happens to be one of the countries which have signed up to the International Criminal Court (ICC), and according to the ICC's rules, President Putin could be arrested if he attends the summit. This has raised serious questions such as:

(1) Should South Africa put the interest of one above the other? And, if so, which one? For example, should it ignore the ICC's arrest warrant and go ahead to invite Putin to the summit? And, if so, to what extent is the country able to protect him if he does show up?

(2) Would South Africa face expulsion from the ICC and tough economic sanctions from the West if Putin attends the summit and returns triumphantly to Russia unarrested to the embarrassment of the West?

(3) Should South Africa leave the ICC and stick to the African Courts of Justice and Human Rights, which is our own continental Justice System?

(4) Should Russia send another person to South Africa in place of Putin? Or, should the summit be switched to either China or Russia to ensure Putin's attendance?

(5) And finally, what will be the public reaction of South Africans if they learn that the Bloc has chosen an alternative country for the summit because their country holds the ICC "membership card" that obliges it to arrest Putin?

These are only few of many pertinent questions which have arisen from such a complex situation that only a few people saw coming.

In fact, ever since it was formed, this was the first time the BRICS is faced with a situation such as this, and whatever decision South Africa takes could affect their chances of hosting the summit. The situation, therefore, must now be used:

(1) To reassess the structure of the bloc itself

(2) As a case study for the existing members as to what amendments they have to make to the existing rules in order to minimize threats and other challenges,

(3) As a test case for the aspiring members as to the criteria they will now have to meet in order to be admitted into the bloc because the BRICS cannot admit a large number of applicants only to realise that it has accepted a herd of "Trojan Horses" with ICC memberships, some of whom could potentially create conflicts of interest within the bloc and eventually bring it down. "Experience", they say, "is the best teacher."

It wasn't a surprise that there was anger across the Southern African nation the very moment news went round about the impact which the ICC's rules could have on the country should Putin step his feet there.

The South African Communist Party was one of the organisations which expressed their anger and frustration about the news

According to a local outlet "News24", the SACP wrote, "Unfortunately, imperialist powers continue to manipulate this multilateral institution (the ICC) and use it for judicial imperialism." (Source: Azerbaycan24, 11th April 2023)

The party added that "despite many calls, and ample evidence, the ICC has consistently refused to charge the likes of Netanyahu, Bush, Clinton, Blair and Obama who have destroyed countries and killed thousands of people."

Also, the party asserted that "the timing of the arrest warrant, issued just before Chinese President Xi Jinping's visit to Russia in March, indicated a political motivation and historical inconsistency."

The SACP's position here is quite understandable, especially if one considers two of the core Maxims of Equity which state:

(1) Those who seek Equity must do Equity.

(2) He who comes into Equity must come with clean hands.

We also know of a story from the Bible book of John 8: 1-11 in which a woman caught in the act of adultery was brought to Jesus by the teachers of the religious laws and the Pharisees who asked him for answers as to what to do to her. Jesus Christ did not object to the existing law of Moses under which the woman had to be stoned to death for committing the offence. Instead, he stood up and said, "All right, but let the one who has never sinned throw the first stone."

The Communist Party therefore has a valid point here, at least, from the quotes above. However, it should (already) know that the Western powers have two laws, one for themselves and one for the rest of the world. What the party should understand now is the complexity of the situation, especially, when the life of a president from a foreign country outside our continental borders is involved.

Russia is one of the Founding Members of the BRICS Emerging Economies, so as long as Putin remains the country's president, his presence in the bloc's summits automatically becomes mandatory and not negotiable. Therefore, to cut the long story short, BRICS countries which are also signatories to the ICC should not host the bloc's summits, at least, for now. And if it happens that South Africa cannot protect Russia's President Vladimir Putin, then, it should not host this year's BRICS summit until it has settled all issues with the ICC.

We all understand the dilemma in which South Africa and the other BRICS nations are, but the bitter truth is that if Russia's President Vladimir Putin has to be arrested under any circumstances, then such an arrest shouldn't take place on our African soil, and definitely, not in South Africa.

What sort of legacy will we bequeath to our future generations if we allow such an arrest which is driven only by those who want to pursue their imperialistic and unipolar agendas? Africa should not be used as the "Arena for such confrontations between the West and Russia, neither should the continent be drawn into any Western drama. We must always remain neutral, and that's all.

In an interview with BBC HARDtalk's host, Stephen Sackur on 25th May 2023, the ANC's General Secretary, Fikile Mbalula, said that "South Africa's ruling African National Congress was ready to greet Russian President Vladimir Putin in the country at any time." However, he admitted that his country was still "constrained" by the ICC. Constrained? By the ICC?

This, coupled with the accusation a week earlier by the US ambassador to South Africa that Pretoria had shipped ammunition to Russia, raised suspicion that all was not well between Pretoria and Washington and that the latter could use any means to slap sanctions on South Africa should it invite Putin to the summit.

On Tuesday the 30th of May, there was a publication in TASS that read, "South Africa guarantees immunity for participants in June meeting, August BRICS summit." But a closer look at the publication revealed that the immunity did not cover some specific individuals, so technically, Putin could still be arrested should he attend the summit.

This brought mixed feelings worldwide, and as people were trying to make meanings out of those contradictory scenarios, the largest opposition party dropped the bombshell that could potentially ruin the nation's chances of hosting the summit.

Few hours after the South African government had announced the immunity, the opposition Democratic Alliance Party said it had launched a court application to ensure the police detain the Russian leader and hands him over to the ICC "should President Putin set foot in South Africa." This was reported by Aljazeera News.

These latest developments are clear evidence of the problems South Africa could run into if it invites Putin to the summit. However, if South Africa still insists on inviting Putin, then, how best is the country going to ensure that he gets the maximum protection that he needs?

Will South Africa issue a written guarantee signed by the African Union and all the other BRICS members to ensure its protection? Will Pretoria yield to western pressure and hand him over to the ICC?

Africa, historically, has an unpleasant track record of being incapable of protecting its own leaders.

Firstly, the UN peacekeepers in whom Patrice Lumumba, the former Prime Minister of now Democratic Republic Congo, put his trust and invited into the country to maintain peace and order, could not protect him when he and two other colleagues were abducted and assassinated in cold blood somewhere in Katanga in January 1961 on the organisation's very watch.

Kwame Nkrumah's tributes to Patrice Lumumba and his two colleagues could be found in his book, "Challenge Of The Congo."

Secondly, former Nigerian President, General Olusegun Obasanjo could not protect Charles Taylor, former leader of Liberia, when he handed him over to the ICC for fear of Western sanctions.

Lastly, the African Union could not protect the former Libyan Leader Muammar Gaddafi when in 2010, it allowed the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) to enter the continent and execute him, also in cold blood.

Readers could remember that Gaddafi was one of the few African leaders who resisted imperialism of all forms and at all levels. In fact, Africans were aware of this before the bombing of his country in 1986 which was ordered by former US president Donald Reagan.

The bombing triggered condemnation and mass anti-US demonstrations across Africa, so one begs to understand why, with all this wealth of knowledge, the African Union succumbed to the US-led NATO's demands to implement the so-called "no-fly zone" which they used as an opportunity to kill him.

Former US Secretary of State, Mrs. Hillary Clinton's cynical statement, "We went, we saw and he died", was clear evidence that the West purposely planned to kill Gaddafi when they had the opportunity, just as they did to Saddam Hussein in Iraq.

These are only few examples of Africa's inability to protect its own leaders, let alone foreign leaders. And as the summit is only a few weeks away, the earlier South Africa makes its mind the better.

Experts believe that the "sudden expansion" of the BRICS, which poses a serious challenge to the Western-dominated World Economic Order, could be one of the reasons behind the Putin Arrest Warrant and other actions being taken by the West in general and the USA in particular.

The economic activities of the BRICS in conjunction with those of its friendly organisations such as the Eurasian Economic Union, Shanghai Cooperation Organisation and China's Belt and Road Initiative, have all been under the focus of the Western powers who see them as potential threats to their own World Economic/Financial Order, though they did not expect that any of these organisations could be strong enough to overtake theirs anytime soon.

However, everything suddenly changed (from) the very moment the western powers and their allies responded swiftly to Russia's Special Military Operations in Ukraine which began on Thursday the 24th of February 2022.

The West's seizure of Russia's Foreign assets including its $350 Billion International Reserve, the freezing of its bank accounts and confiscation of assets belonging to Russian citizens abroad, the extreme economic sanctions imposed on Moscow and Russian citizens, the disconnection of Russian banks from the SWIFT Transfers and Payment system, the weaponisation of the dollar against Russia in its foreign transactions, vandalisation of property belonging to both Russia and Russian citizens abroad, and other anti-Russian activities, left many countries running helter-skelter for shelter. And the only safe haven where they felt their International Reserves and other financial assets could be protected was the BRICS.

The West's crippling sanctions against Moscow also made it almost impossible for many countries to conduct their normal business transactions with Russia, so they had to switch from the Western system of Transfers and Payment to alternative systems. They also had to switch from the use of the dollar to the use of local currencies.

The West's greatest agony was the unprecedented mass rush by countries with over 80 percent of the world's population to join the BRICS and adopt its soon-to-be-introduced currency. This rush, coupled with the refusal to join the anti-Russian sanctions, could potentially signal the imminent end of western hegemony and dominance over the following:

(1) The dollar as the sole global reserve currency
(2) The western dominated world economic/financial order
(3) The Petro-dollar system
(4) The US-led Rules-Based World Order (Unipolar World)

On Thursday the 15th of June, Russia's President Vladimir Putin announced at the plenary session of the St Petersberg International Economic Forum that, "The Unipolar World has ceased to exist."

Readers can therefore vividly understand why the Western powers are struggling to save their various "SYSTEMS" which are collapsing before their very eyes.

"Champions," they say, "die-hard", so the western powers will do everything within their powers to defend their "Titles" which they have held for decades if not centuries. They definitely won't surrender those titles without a fight.

Therefore the Putin Arrest Warrant, which could disrupt the BRICS activities, not only in South Africa but elsewhere too, is not the end of the West's "Disruptive Wars" against the Bloc. Far from it. The West could bring more disruptions into the activities of the BRICS and its partners just to defend their titles. So it's simply not the end. "It Has Just Begun."

May the Almighty God bless us all till we meet here again.