South Africa-Political Science | Blogs

One of the most significant developments in South Africa’s economic rise under the National Party (NP)’s apartheid regime, both politically and economically was the establishment of the Atomic Energy Board (AEB).  The international socio-political climate that was emerging shortly after the NP’s electoral victory led to the AEB being designated as solely responsible for the production, processing and disposing of uranium (Cho, 2006:6).    In the culmination of the Cold War in the mid 1980’s, South Africa had secretly built six nuclear weapons.

While South Africa officially denuclearised in the early nineties, the World Nuclear Association (2010: Internet source) has pointed that like in most parts of the worlds, electricity consumption in South Africa has been increasingly growing since the 1980s.  To this end, in October of 2010, the Department of Energy in South Africa released its draft integrated Electricity Resource Plan (IRP) for 2010-2030.  In early 2007, South Africa’s biggest electricity producer, Eskom approved a plan to double generating capacity by 2025, which will include construction of new nuclear capacity in order to increase the nuclear contribution to the overall electricity output from five per cent to about twenty-five per cent.  More recently, in March this year, the Minister of Energy declared for six new reactors as part of the Integrated Resource Plan for electricity production.  This was however met with some criticism.  The Coalition Against Nuclear Energy (CANE) made took a strong stance against this announcement that received wide support through submissions that were made by members of Civil Society Energy Caucus, including affected communities, the labour movement, faith-based organisations and other NGOs.

Sokolov (2008: Internet source) pointed out in his 2008 address of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), that nature of the challenges facing the world today, ranging from the increased energy demand, climate change and energy security have emphasised the enormous opportunities for the nuclear industry.  According to the International Energy Agency (IEA) energy consumption will continue to increase by about 50 per cent in the next fifty years. This projection has amplified the concern of energy security the whole world over, but more specifically in countries that are already experiencing energy shortages. It is clear that the uses of nuclear technology have indeed since the end of the Cold War diversified.  The IAEA projected that nuclear electricity will grow by between fifteen and forty-five percent by 2020.  Therefore it had been widely asserted that increased exploration of uranium mines and nuclear plants is needed. 

Yet the catastrophic explosion at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant early this year has created major concern around the issue of expanding nuclear stations in the country and progress made by the nuclear industry in terms energy security has not entirely done away with the concerns at national and international level.  In addition it has not done away with the general anxiety that seems to escalate in societies when it comes to matters regarding the development of nuclear power (Nye, 2003: 144). 

Although the financial constraints that governments is facing are severe, governments commitment to nuclear is strong.  In the 2011 budget speech, the Minister of the Department of Energy affirmed that 22 per cent of new electricity production capacity would be nuclear and 14 per cent would be coal-based.  The Minister also highlighted that R586 million would be provided for the Nuclear Energy Corporation of South Africa (NECSA) “to continue its role as the centre for nuclear energy research and development and innovation” (Chalmers, 2011: Internet source). According to the World Nuclear Association (2011: Internet source) the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) that was launched in 2006 confirmed the selection of three potential sites for the next nuclear power units: Thyspunt, Bentamsklip and Duyensfontein, all of which are located in the Cape region.  

The exploration of renewable energy sources and more pertinently, nuclear power has been an ongoing debate here in Africa. With South Africa at the forefront of this debate as the only country in the Continent that has a nuclear power plant, the question that has emerged is; without experience can Africa really benefit from this?  The argument opposing the expansion of nuclear power plants in South Africa  and the rest of Africa has been that these states may not have the capacity to respond to the terrorist threat that it may be inviting, and although the potential of earthquakes and tsunamis is low in this part of the world, the emergency preparedness of African countries becomes questionable in the event of nuclear security uncertainty.  While the debate presents various compelling arguments in terms of the power supply and the environmental long-term effects of nuclear energy, South Africa’s energy future boils down to the fact that although nuclear power is cleaner than coal power, it is not renewable since uranium fuel is not by any measure unlimited.  

Article by Refiloe Joala

References
Cho, S., 2004. “A diversionary compliance hypothesis of nuclear renunciation, the case of South Africa”. Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association. Chicago

Chalmers, V. 2011. “South African National Budget 2011: Download budget speech and  people’s guide to the budget”. Vernon Chalmers SEO. Internet source, accessed 14 July, 2011. http//www.national-budget-2011-download-budget-speech-and-people guide-to-the budget

Nye, J.S., 2003. Understanding International Conflict.  Pearson,New York

Solokov, Y., 2008. “Opportunities and challenges for world nuclear industry in 21st century”, International Atomic Energy Agency, Internet source, accessed 11 April, 2011. http://www.iaea.org/newcwntre/statemnet/ddgs/2008//sokolov090608.html  

World Nuclear Association, 2010. “South Africa’sNuclear Program”, World Nuclear Agency, Internet sources, accessed 11 April, 2011. http://www.world-nuclera.org/info/inf88.html

Yet despite remarkable changes in the new government’s economic policies and positive economic growth path, the South African economy still faces severe challenges that are mostly typical of an emerging economy.  Louw (2003: 6) highlights some of these challenges.  The level of job creation in South Africa demonstrates a disappointing ratio against its economic growth rates across the various industries and sectors. This can be further observed in the weakening mining industry as more people get retrenched due to dropping exports.

This failure to meet the needs of the majority of its population, the Zuma administration has received a lot of criticism both nationally and internationally for its inability to address the widening gap between rich and poor and moreover that of the distribution of resources has been the source of a great deal of the labour strikes that have been occurring all around the country since mid 2009.  In this highly unionised economy, South Africa’s private and public sectors alike are feeling the heat as workers down tools and bring production in these various industries to a complete halt.  However in the aftermath of the global economic down-turn the issue of economic inequality and unemployment is not unique to South Africa.  The recent waves of political revolts by the nations of the Arab world against their leaders are only a tip the iceberg.

 Most recently, prominent public figure Julius Malema, President of African National Congress’ Youth League (ANCYL) has with the support of the league made an official call for the nationalisation of 60 per cent of South Africa’s new mining companies in February of 2010. While the senior ANC faction has been cautioned against this, the issue of nationalising the mining sector was again brought up by the controversial leader.  In the early 2010, the ANCYL committee had compiled a detailed paper advocating the nationalisation of mines, requesting the government to amend the mineral act to ass a clause that would obligate new mining companies to enter a partnership with state before it can be issued with a mining licence in South Africa.  Since the development of this national debate, contentious arguments expressing the detriment of this is prospect on the economy let alone the effect it will have should it be successful have surfaced from various actors within the South African corporate landscape and more so from oversees investors and potential investors as well.  
Striking while the iron is hot, the ANCYL established the slogan of ‘economic freedom in our lifetime’ at the 24th Congress in January of this year.  The emergence of this widely supported sentiment by presents a continuation of the policy changes the time the league has proposed.  Although the reality of youth marginalisation and economic equality comes second to none in South Africa’s current political discourse, it appears the understanding of ‘economic freedom’ remains to be settled.

According to Nietshezhe (2011: 4) South Africa needs a comprehensive plan that details how it intends to attain the goals it has set out and the time framework for addressing the root causes of the problem including the issue of structural unemployment, quality education and the overall structure of the economy. The question that remains nonetheless is what would it mean for South Africa’s economy if Malema’s call for the nationalisation of mines were to succeed?  While experts have expressed nuanced perspectives on the matter, the outcome is all very much the same and presents a disconcerting picture of the future of this country.  Hlongwane (2011: Internet source) cites Azar Jammine, director and chief economist at Econometrix, who made a daunting projection stating that “the very first thing that would happen is that there would be a big outflow of capital out of the country, which would lead to a rapid depreciation of the rand” and although this may result in positive returns for manufactures in the short to medium term interest rates will rise and the inflation rate”. Perhaps the question to ask is whether the nationalisation of any sector in the South Africa’s economy will translate into the equal distribution of the gains made.

References:
1. Hlongwane, S. 2011. “Analysis: what would happen to SA if mines were nationalised”. The Daily Maverick, Internet source.
Htpp://www.thedailymaverick.co.za/article/2011-06-23-analysis-what-would-happen-if-mines-were-nationalised.htm
2. Kirsten, M.  2003 “Financing Africa’s Development: Enhancing the role of finance”. Development Report 2003.
3. Louw, L, 2006. Habits of highly effective countries: Lessons for South Africa”. 
4. Nietshezhe, J., 2011 “Economic freedom in our lifetime: we have a proper debate this time”. Mapungubwe Institute

In November of 2009 the United Nations declared that 18 July will be known as Nelson Mandela International Day to coincide with Madiba’s birthday. In the spirit of Madiba, who said in 2009: “We can change the world and make of it a better place. It is in your hands to make a difference”, the day’s theme is: Change.

Just like Madiba spent 67 years fighting injustice, serving his community, country and the world, so too we ask you to serve 67 minutes helping your community, and tell us about it!
 
We'd like to know how you, or your organisation or company  spent 67 minutes contributing to the community or the environment, whether it be on Monday 18 July or the weekend. Comment on this blog, or join the Sa-Polsci Facebook group and tell us about your experience, upload some photo’s from your camera or even your phone!
 
You can  write a short summary of your service or  a piece of poetry and send it to info@sa-polsci.com to publish on our website! Please keep it shorter than 500 words, we want to give everyone a chance to read, reply and post something!
 
For more information on ideas to improve the lives of so many on just one day visit http://www.nelsonmandela.org/mandeladay/67_ways.html. today!
 
“Take action. Inspire change. Make every day a Mandela Day!!”