Much of the commentary that appears on these pages involves criticism, richly deserved, of government policy that simply does not follow common sense. However, large corporates are not immune to this problem and can likewise undercut the South African national interest through their overseas dealings.

A prime example is the case of MTN. In search of profits abroad, the company has invested in cellular infrastructure in countries across the continent, many of which are not democratic, including eSwatini, Guinea, Rwanda, and others.

The problem for a cellular company is that investment of this type is large in scale and closely tied to government regulators. In undemocratic societies, the state’s ability to control the flow of information is crucial to remaining in power. The agreements that a telecoms company such as MTN makes with a given state are highly opaque, and contract terms often include provisions giving governments the right to shut down the internet.

This power is used by authoritarian states to shut down the internet before elections, thereby neutralising the opposition’s ability to organise and limiting the exposure of vote rigging.

MTN itself reports on these internet blackouts, which can last for hundreds of days each year and cost poor African economies hundreds of millions of dollars annually. MTN and others like it are strongly associated with South Africa and help to blacken the country’s image on the continent, despite its constitutional commitments to free speech and freedom of association at home.

The organisation Open Secrets has reported incidents of MTN switching off the internet in countries such as Sudan and Cameroon and on the frequent use of internet shutdowns during elections in Uganda, the most recent occurring in the last few weeks. The Ugandan elections are widely seen as not credible, in part because of the information blackout, and opposition figures have reportedly had to go into hiding.

Strategic Liability

But MTN and internet blackouts are not just a public relations problem for Brand South Africa. They are turning into a strategic liability for the country’s international relations. It is one thing for a South African corporate to be complicit in the denial of rights in a small, undemocratic African state. It is quite another to become a key part of the architecture of an international terror state.

In 2004, MTN, looking for new markets, entered into an agreement as a minority shareholder with the Islamic Republic of Iran to create Irancell, a joint venture with organisations in Iran with ties to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), the key ideological group tasked with promoting the Iranian revolution at home and abroad. The agreement was not without controversy.

Turkcell, MTN’s competitor for the licence, cried foul, alleging that the contract had been awarded illegally and involved bribery, including the use of monetary incentives, South African arms sales to Iran, and promises of foreign policy assistance to shield Iran’s nuclear weapons programme.

These remain allegations, and the case has bounced around the globe for more than a decade as courts have debated which jurisdiction has authority to hear it. This year the Constitutional Court in South Africa is set to rule on whether South Africa could be that jurisdiction. If so, a great deal may come to light about MTN’s engagement with Iran and the role that the ANC and the South African government played in securing the contract. It is worth noting that the chairperson of MTN at the time was Cyril Ramaphosa, now the president of South Africa.

In the meantime, as the United States (US) ratchets up pressure on South Africa over its ties to Iran, Hamas, and Hezbollah, MTN is taking centre stage in the discussion. The US Department of Justice has convened a grand jury investigation into MTN’s involvement in Iran, and the company is also facing private lawsuits over the deaths of US service personnel in Afghanistan.

All this is unfolding as the Islamic Republic faces yet another wave of protests over its collapsing economy and repressive social agenda against women and minorities. As the protests grew, the government promptly shut down the internet and began to murder protesters in numbers claimed to run into the tens of thousands.

Brutality

MTN is once again connected to this brutality, while its current chair, Mcebisi Jonas, is supposedly South Africa’s special envoy tasked with improving relations with the United States. At the same time, the South African government appears to have very little to say on the matter of Iranians dying on the streets for democracy.

What began as a corporate strategy of “getting along to go along” with authoritarian states in Africa has turned into a major foreign policy disaster for South Africa. Should upcoming court cases confirm ANC ties to Iran through MTN, much of South Africa’s foreign policy posture, including its very public but economically paltry Iranian ties, its close relationships with Hamas, and its decision to bring a case against Israel at the International Court of Justice, South African credibility in foreign policy will be shredded.