Daily Maverick
Dailymaverick logo

Opinionistas

This is an opinion piece. The views expressed are not that of Daily Maverick.....

Putin digital presence at BRICS summit comes with risks, critical repercussions for South Africa

Mia Swart
By Mia Swart
2 Aug 2023
Facebook
6
If SA is serious about its commitments under the ICC Statute and its international reputation, it would not associate with Putin or with senior members of the Russian government — not even virtually.

President Cyril Ramaphosa’s decision to disinvite Russian president Vladimir Putin from physically attending the BRICS summit later in August has been widely met with praise and relief.

Some praised the South African government for deftly saving South Africa from a legal and diplomatic conundrum. Some have even praised Putin for not wanting to “jeopardise” the summit.

Not so fast. BRICS will still not be an entirely Putin-free summit. South Africa’s ambassador at large for Asia and BRICS, Anil Sooklal, confirmed that Putin would take part in the proceedings virtually. The Russian leader will participate in all discussions, said Sooklal.

It was further confirmed that Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov will attend in Putin’s stead.

Putin’s digital presence inevitably comes with consequences for South Africa as the hosting nation.

The fact that Putin will be welcomed at the summit, albeit in virtual form, and the fact that Lavrov will be attending means that South Africa is still closely associating with an indicted alleged war criminal as well as a member of the Russian government who could potentially be accused of war crimes.

Lavrov’s hands are unlikely to be clean. He has been a staunch supporter of the illegal invasion of Ukraine from the start. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba has accused Lavrov of being an accomplice to crimes occurring in Ukraine.

But, it may be asked, if Lavrov is complicit, why has the ICC not issued a warrant for his arrest? It is important to understand that the fact that the ICC has not (yet) issued an arrest warrant for a suspected war criminal does not mean that he or she may not be charged in the future.

The two arrest warrants issued by the ICC in the Ukrainian situation so far, against Putin and Maria Lvova-Belova, were specifically for the war crime of unlawful deportation of children and the unlawful transfer of population (children) from occupied areas of Ukraine to the Russian Federation.

These were merely the first two warrants issued by the ICC in an ongoing investigation. The Ukrainian situation has now been under investigation for eight months. By ICC standards, this is still a relatively fresh investigation.

Arrest warrant criteria


Depending on the situation under investigation, the ICC issues arrest warrants in different ways and in different stages. At times the court has issued all its arrest warrants in one go, and at other times it issued arrest warrants in a more staggered fashion.

In the case of Uganda, five arrest warrants were issued at the same time. For strategic considerations, in the cases of Sudan and Libya for example, the court issued warrants in a more staggered way.

The court has also issued arrest warrants against accused of various levels of seniority. In some cases, such as Mali, the court targeted mid-level perpetrators and in others, such as Sudan, high-level perpetrators.

One reason the ICC issued arrest warrants against Putin and Lvova-Belova is that the court already has sufficient evidence to prove the crime of the unlawful deportation of children. But as the Ukraine investigation continues, and investigations can take many years, it is very likely that the ICC will issue arrest warrants against other members of the Russian government as well.

The court can also amend an arrest warrant by adding more charges. In the case of Sudanese president Omar Al Bashir for example, Al Bashir was initially charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity. He was later charged with genocide as well.

In the same way, Putin can later be charged with additional crimes. It has been estimated that 80,000 war crimes have been committed since the start of the Russia-Ukraine war. It may take time to produce the evidence legally required to link Putin to these crimes, but as the ICC investigation progresses, it is highly likely that such links will be made.

Hosting Putin, virtually or in person, comes with reputational consequences for South Africa. If South Africa is serious about its commitments under the ICC Statute and its international reputation, it would not associate with Putin or with senior members of the Russian government.

In the debates and debacles of the last months in South Africa, the human toll of the war has been vastly underappreciated. The human lives include not only Ukrainian refugees and casualties, but also the Russian victims of Putin’s war.

If South Africa does not want even a drop of blood on its hands it should distance itself from the perpetrators. DM

Categories:

Tags: