Category: Africa

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By André Wessels, Senior Professor (Emeritus) and Research Fellow, Department of History, University of the Free State

A naval exercise off the South African coast in January 2026, dubbed Will for Peace and involving the warships of South Africa, China, Russia, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Iran, elicited international and domestic controversy. It also contributed to a further souring of relations between South Africa and the US.

Under pressure at home, South Africa’s defence ministry appointed a board of inquiry to investigate whether an instruction by President Cyril Ramaphosa not to involve Iran had been defied.

The exercise and its controversies have placed the spotlight on the South African Navy’s diplomatic role. André Wessels, who has extensively studied the history of the navy, unpacks this role.

What is the Will for Peace 2026 exercise and what is the controversy around it?

Navies traditionally take part in training exercises with other navies. This enhances interoperability and builds mutual trust.

Over time, many foreign warships have visited South African ports, including 23 in 1961, 50 in 1968 and 41 in 1973.

However, in reaction to South Africa’s domestic policy of apartheid, foreign warship visits almost dried up between 1977 and 1989. Once South Africa became a democracy in 1994, foreign warships poured back into the country’s ports, for example 35 from 15 countries in 1997.

New alliances allowed the country’s navy to take part in exercises with the navies of Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay, Germany, India and Brazil, and Russia and China.

The January 2026 exercise was branded as one of navies belonging to the expanded Brics intergovernmental organisation. But, strictly speaking, Brics+ is not a military alliance. It is significant that India, Brazil, Indonesia and Egypt, which are members, did not send ships to participate, probably so as not to offend the US. But it was the first-ever visit by a UAE warship to South Africa.

Iranian “grey diplomats” (a term used to describe navy warships) had previously visited South African ports in 1970, 1972, 1974, 1975, and in 2016-2017.

The current geopolitical situation is challenging. There are tensions between the US and Iran (for, among other reasons, the latter’s nuclear arms ambitions); the Russia-Ukraine war continues; and diplomatic relations between the US and South Africa are strained (partly because of the Trump administration’s unproven allegations of a white genocide in South Africa). Given this situation, the naval exercise should not have taken place.

South Africa should as far as possible stay neutral in international affairs to, among other things, safeguard its economic interests. Furthermore, its navy had very little to gain and can ill afford negative publicity, especially when it transpired that the government had apparently asked that Iran not participate. The facts in this regard, however, must still be determined by a government-appointed board of inquiry.

What role can and should a navy play in a country’s foreign policy?

The traditional exchange of diplomats between friendly countries, reciprocal visits by heads of states and cabinet ministers, and the holding of summit meetings are not the only means of strengthening relations between countries.

It has been, for example, the practice of seafaring countries to send warships to one another from time to time. The South African Navy is no exception.

Since 1922, South African warships have undertaken numerous flag-showing cruises (meaning diplomatic visits) to many countries. These visits have nothing to do with “gun-boat diplomacy”, which is diplomacy backed by the threat of military force.

Warships play a very important role in diplomacy. The presence of a warship can be the most tangible and visible sign of bilateral and multilateral friendships. When ships of a navy take part in combined exercises or international humanitarian and peacekeeping missions, those ships can generate mutual trust. The warships become diplomatic tools of the highest national value.

It is indeed one of the stated aims of the South African Navy: to conduct, among other things, assistance operations, including diplomatic support.

What phases can be identified in the navy’s diplomatic role?

In 1946, the South African Naval Forces were reconstituted as a permanent part of the Union Defence Force. In 1951, it became the South African Navy.

The period 1946 to 1973 was a phase of normal relations with most countries in the west. There were 37 flag-showing cruises. This included 16 visits to European colonial possessions in Africa, six transoceanic deployments (to South America, Europe and Australia), and visits to many ports during the delivery voyages of 26 new vessels for the navy.

Then followed a phase of growing isolation (1974-1979) because of the internal political situation in South Africa over apartheid. In these years the SA Navy only undertook four flag-showing cruises.

The 1980-1987 period was a phase of total isolation as far as foreign visits by South African warships were concerned. The navy was from time to time (since 1975) deployed in a supporting role for the other arms of the South African Defence Force during the Namibian War of Independence (1966-1989), a conflict that spilled over into Angola.

Then followed a transitional phase (1988-1993), with political negotiations taking place from 1990 onwards. Gradually, ports opened up and no fewer than 19 flag-showing cruises took place.

With the birth of a democratic South Africa in April 1994, the country was officially welcomed back as a respected member of the international community. Over a period of three years (1994-1996), South African warships visited at least 29 ports in at least 23 countries during eight flag-showing cruises.

So, after years of isolation, the navy played a major role in establishing ties of friendship. It also established several new ties with African, Asian and South American countries.

Unfortunately, in the years 2018 to 2025, not a single tailor-made South African Navy flag-showing cruise took place, mainly because of budgetary constraints.

However, in February 2026, the warship SAS Amatola sailed to India for an international fleet review and to participate in Exercise Milan, involving the Indian and other visiting navies.

What does the future hold for the navy’s ‘grey diplomats’?

The primary role of the navy must always be to conduct operations in defence of South Africa. But in times of peace, it has an equally important role to play. This includes search and rescue, relief operations, assistance to state authorities, regional assistance operations and flag-showing cruises.

A warship is both a reflection and projection of the state it represents. It is, therefore, important that the ships are not undersized or under-equipped. A South African warship is South African territory afloat, and its presence in foreign waters sends a signal of support to the country’s allies.

Hopefully the navy will in future have at its disposal the necessary funds – and ships – to meet all the demands of its mission statement.

– Warships as diplomats: how the South African Navy is tasked with building ties with other nations
– https://theconversation.com/warships-as-diplomats-how-the-south-african-navy-is-tasked-with-building-ties-with-other-nations-275830

Source: The Conversation – Africa – By Anné H. Verhoef, Professor in Philosophy, North-West University

When we seek happiness, what exactly are we searching for? And when we wish happiness on someone else, what is it that we truly desire for them?

Can happiness even be defined or is it an illusion, an impossible desire to fulfil? So then why are there so many happiness self-help books? What do they promise and can they be attained? Is it possible to measure happiness? If so, how do ordinary people and scientists do that?

To answer these questions, I explored different definitions of happiness in my book Happiness, Unhappiness, and Chance. The book is based on my PhD study in philosophy.

Happiness today is narrowly defined by some positive psychologists as a joyous state of mind or well-being.

The happiness sciences see it as something you can calculate and quantify. They developed a Happiness Index and the World Happiness Report. These basically measure happiness as satisfaction, with criteria like gross domestic product per capita (money) and life expectancy (health) as some of the factors considered.

But happiness is also defined by our capitalist, consumer-driven society as certain aspirational products, brands and lifestyles. These consumerist definitions are often exaggerated by influencers on social media, but also through the manipulation of consumers by the online algorithms behind the digital tools we use. Increasingly, this also happens through artificial intelligence.

All these different definitions of happiness create their own problem for happiness. In fact they can lead to more unhappiness than happiness.

Joy and pleasure are often short-lived and unsustainable; well-being can quickly be ruined by illness and fate; owning certain brands, products and lifestyles exposes us to the trap of the “hedonistic treadmill,” which causes one “to rapidly and inevitably adapt to good things by taking them for granted”.

---

Read more: How much money do you need to be happy? Here’s what the research says

---

Happiness that’s reduced to a single and simple definition does not consider the complexity of being human, of the societies we live in, and the fragile relationship we have with the environment.

My book searches for a more inclusive and encompassing definition of happiness. A happiness that is more than just joy or well-being, more than an ethical or good life. More than just good and meaningful human relationships. More than just luck, the absence of pain or a by-product of consumption. More than just a meaningful, fulfilled and content life.

I wanted to find out if a better understanding of happiness can be formed and actually achieved. One that considers all cultures and also factors like justice and caring for each other and the environment.

Can this kind of understanding of happiness, I wondered, not be a powerful motivation to live and work for a better future for all?

Consumerism

To explore the potential of such a philosophical understanding of happiness, we first need to understand why the current dominant definitions of happiness don’t work anymore.

Today, consumerism and capitalism are the forces behind the digital technologies that manipulate our understanding of happiness. Consumerism, with its “you-must-have-this-or-that-to-be-happy” approach, became so powerfully enforced through today’s digital platforms that it became a question of whether we can still envision, hope, and live for something more than what the algorithmic ecologies we live in present to us.

Happiness sciences

Happiness sciences, as the power behind happiness within our contemporary global happiness culture, proclaim that happiness is something one must work for and must achieve. Happiness itself is becoming so all-consuming that it is like a new religion. US historian Darrin McMahon describes the situation thus:

At the dawn of the modern age, God was happiness; happiness has since become our God.

Consequently, happiness becomes and remains an exhausting and impossible task which paradoxically makes one more unhappy. In this process people give up on happiness and may even become cynical due to this impossible pressure to be happy in a certain way.

Religion

Globally, the strongest power behind certain forms of happiness, especially as “true and eternal” happiness, is religion.

The type of happiness some religions offer is one where the ideal is that unhappiness should be overcome or will be in an afterlife. Some religions teach that true happiness can only be achieved in the afterlife, in heaven or nirvana, for example. They proclaim it is impossible to find true happiness in this world, or in the here and now.

---

Read more: Why leisure matters for a good life, according to Aristotle

---

It is a happiness where this life is not fully affirmed because happiness can’t be attained. It is still to come. In effect it is not only giving up on the possibility of happiness, but on “true” goodness and beauty in daily life.

Philosophy

As alternative to these problematic understandings of happiness, and the different driving forces behind them, I used well-known French philosopher Paul Ricoeur’s thinking to guide me. He argued that happiness should and could not be defined as the overcoming of unhappiness. Such an attempt will always be futile. It denies unhappiness as part of the fundamental reality and fullness of life, and leaves us with an impossible and unhappy task. Happiness and unhappiness are always in relation to each other, and the one does not mean the annihilation of the other.

---

Read more: Lifetime trends in happiness change as misery peaks among the young – new research

---

Secondly, the relationship between happiness and unhappiness is situated within our fragile ability to work for happiness. Yet, at the same time, to be aware that receiving happiness is not just hard work but can be a result of chance. Unhappiness can be in the form of unexpected tragedy.

The tension between striving for happiness and receiving happiness unexpectedly should remain. We should continue to work at contributing to our own and others’ happiness. But if we try to always be in control we will become exhausted. So we should also keep on allowing space for chance – as luck and tragedy – in our lives.

Why this matters

The ability to think and dream again about a different kind of happiness, one that is connected to our lives (not the technological world of the present), our desires (not those manipulated by consumerism), and the needs of the world – which includes unhappiness and injustice – has become increasingly important today.

We need better definitions of happiness in a world where the term is constantly corrupted and used by consumerism, politicians, prosperity evangelicals, the self-help industry, and in algorithmic technologies.

Such happiness should be able to affirm our lives, here and now. Such affirmation will become more important as our lives are more manipulated and controlled by technology and consumerism.

I argue in my study that this affirmation of life allows for a happiness that can include and respond to unhappiness and chance. Life itself is one thing we should not give up on; otherwise, happiness will also become irrelevant.

– What is happiness? A philosopher looks for answers
– https://theconversation.com/what-is-happiness-a-philosopher-looks-for-answers-276091