Q: Did you learn any useful lessons from your Oval Office encounter?
A: Yes. Stick to the objective of your mission, don’t lose focus.
Q: Do you think if President Cyril Ramaphosa had been better briefed he would have been better prepared for Trump’s ambush?
A: I don’t think he could have been more prepared than he was. The preparation was excellent, but obviously when it comes to surprises and so forth, you will really not know.
Q: Given that the context of the encounter was the murder of white farmers ...
A: We had an idea this matter would be on the table, but ...
Q: You didn’t expect the Malema video?
A: No, we were not prepared for something like that.
Q: If you’d had a stronger, more connected diplomatic mission in Washington ...?
A: We have a senior person there who liaises with his counterparts in the US embassy, so information was flowing. But if they don’t tell you that they will play a video you won’t know. Even if there was an ambassador, they would not tell you.
Q: Will you be appointing an ambassador any time soon?
A: That is always a consideration, it’s always on the table. Assessing the relationship and the situation.
Q: Surely it’s important for South Africa to have an ambassador in Washington as soon as possible?
A: The reason we don’t is that our ambassador was expelled.
Q: Shouldn’t you have prioritised a replacement?
A: We are working on it.
Q: To what extent have diplomatic relations with the US been restored?
A: To the extent that now there is communication. That is a good sign. Including confirmation by President Trump that he will come to the G20. That is a good sign for us.
Q: To what extent will the success of trade talks with the US depend on South Africa having a more flexible foreign policy?
A: That was not raised with us because our foreign policy is a domestic sovereign issue. But trade talks are happening, and we want to give that line of engagement a chance to have a life of its own.
Q: Is BEE on the table?
A: We continue to underline that, given the history of our country, BEE is a constitutional imperative.
Q: Will our foreign policy be more pragmatic in future?
A: It has always been informed by our national interests, and that will continue to guide us.
Q: To what extent are our national interests tied up with addressing US concerns about our ties with Russia, China, Iran and Hamas?
A: With Iran, that’s just propaganda. We do have historic relations with Iran on the basis of the support they provided us in the fight against apartheid, but there’s no basis for accusations that we received money from Iran for our ICJ case
Q: Are you concerned that the US state secretary has told the US Senate that our ties with these countries are undermining US national security interests?
A: Yes, because there is no basis at all for that claim. We have no relationship with Hamas and no nuclear co-operation with Iran.
Q: Is a meaningful reset of our relations with the US possible if these concerns are not more effectively addressed?
A: Hence we continue to engage with them through various interlocutors.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.