Terror warnings: The fault lines of fear

In a joint statement on Wednesday, the Department of International Relations and Co-operation (Dirco) and the State Security Agency (SSA) scathingly dismissed terrorism warnings in SA and how they were were handled by the foreign embassies.

“The information provided as a basis for the latest terror alerts on South Africa has been found to be very sketchy,” they said.

Over the weekend, the US embassy said it had received intelligence that terrorist groups were planning attacks on places its citizens frequent, such as malls in Johannesburg and Cape Town, following the Islamic State’s call for global attacks during Ramadaan. The UK and Australia followed the warning by issuing new travel advisories.

Dirco and the SSA slammed the warnings, saying they were based on unreliable information. On Tuesday, News24 reported that “a source with access to South African intelligence” said the information for the US warning came from a discredited East African businessman living in South Africa.

“On closer examination, we have found the information to be dubious, unsubstantiated and provided by a “walk-in” source, based on questionable conclusions. It is within this context that the South African government rejects attempts by foreign countries to influence, manipulate or control our country’s counterterrorism work,” Dirco and the SSA said on Wednesday. “We reject attempts to generate perceptions of government ineptitude, alarmist impressions and public hysteria on the basis of a questionable single source.”

Dirco spokesperson Clayson Monyela said the foreign embassies were démarched. For the US and UK embassies, the démarche, where the foreign representatives were summoned and told about SA’s displeasure, took place on Wednesday, with Dirco expecting to meet Australia on Thursday. “We had good meetings with them,” said Monyela. “In fact there’s an appreciation where we’re coming from.”

Monyela denied the issue had strained relations between the governments and both the Dirco and SSA statements, and a later statement from the presidency, stressed co-operation and international solidarity. The security cluster was scheduled to meet on Wednesday to discuss the matter, with a view to ensuring the continued safety of all in the country.

“The security cluster is scheduled to meet today to discuss the matter further, with a view to ensuring the continued safety of all in the country. In addition, the South African government will continue to discuss the matter with the United States government as part of on-going co-operation on security issues between the two countries,” said the presidency on Wednesday. “South Africa and the United States continue to enjoy strong and cordial relations in various areas of co-operation including political, economic, social and security matters.”

The Dirco and SSA statement, however, expressed clear grievances. After mentioning what the SSA said was unreliable information for the terror warning, they said, “It is within this context that the South African government rejects attempts by foreign countries to influence, manipulate or control our country’s counterterrorism work. We reject attempts to generate perceptions of government ineptitude, alarmist impressions and public hysteria on the basis of a questionable single source.”

Repeated attempts to get comment from SSA spokesman Brian Dube, who could speak further on issues of intelligence and security, were unsuccessful on Wednesday, but Monyela said “the fault line” developed when US authorities informed their South African counterparts of the intelligence. The SSA looked into it but didn’t find it credible, the US issueing the warning regardless.

“The minute you issue an alert it triggers all sorts of things – you’ve seen from how serious people react,” said Monyela, noting the fear it created, including increased security measures, and potential threats to SA’s economy and tourism.

Despite the strong stance from South Africa, the US embassy has maintained its warning, which it says is based on credible information. Cynthia Harvey, spokeswoman at the US embassy in Pretoria, on Wednesday said, “The US Embassy in Pretoria confirms that there is no change in status of the security message issued on June 4, 2016. It was based on specific, credible, and noncounterable threat information.”

Harvey continued, “We have been and continue to be impressed with the high level of professionalism and transparent co-operation with the government of South Africa throughout this period. We cannot comment on the internal communications process within the South African government, and we will continue to work with our counterparts in the South African government going forward.”

Despite the diplomats’ assurances that the US and SA continue to enjoy positive relations, the latest spat comes after repeated allegations from ANC leaders that the US is sponsoring attempts at “regime change”. A number of ANC leaders have suggested unrest in South Africa is due to foreign forces plotting a change of government, but Secretary-General Gwede Mantashe this year made specific claims that the US was training students to overthrow the ruling party.

The 2015 ANC discussion document at its national general council also made allegations against the US. “Washington’s sponsored destabilisation is not limited to Russia and China,” it read. “We see it unfolding in the streets of Latin America including in Venezuela which the US has strangely declared a threat to its ‘national security’, in the Middle East and in African countries, with the sole intention of toppling progressive democratically-elected governments. This has a bearing on the nature of conflict and the scourge of terrorism we see in the world today.”

US ambassador to South Africa Patrick Gaspard has dismissed claims that his country is trying to destabilise SA. In a recent interview, he said, “Given how much more mature our trade relationship is right now, and given that there are jobs in the United States of America that are dependent on successful political and economic outcomes here in South Africa, I want my friends here to understand that there’s no benefit for the US in any turmoil, any turbulence here in South Africa.”

He continued, “There’s no benefit for our presidency, there’s no benefit for our legislature, there’s no benefit for the 600 US companies that are based here in South Africa who represent 10 percent of the GDP of this country, and there’s no benefit for young people on both sides of the Atlantic who are finding really clever, creative ways to partner up.”

Official communication from the South African government, especially while it is trying to save and improve the economy, generally agrees. And despite the accusations, the two countries maintain strong trade relations, with the courting and celebration of US investments seemingly contradicting the allegations.

But there is a prominent strand in both society and the ANC that either questions the intentions of states like the US and UK or outright believes they want to bypass democratic decisions to impose pliable leaders (although the current leadership, despite its leanings towards China and Russia, has hardly been hostile to the US or the UK in its policies). The disagreement over the latest terror threat will only deepen such suspicion.

For South Africa’s foreign policy, it adds confusion to the already confused trend of often talking East but walking West.

But the more immediate issue is safety and the dispute makes it hard for South African residents to know what to believe. Malls have reportedly increased security. Dirco and the SSA have assured residents of SA that they take any threat seriously, are in constant communication with foreign intelligence services, and have the capability to deal with any risk posed. In a country depleted of trust, that’s little comfort. Until Dirco, the SSA and US embassy agree, the result continues to be fear and uncertainty. DM

Photo: AK47 (Wikimedia Commons)