The Vice President of the Republic of Namibia and president-elect, Her Excellency Comrade Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah, at the 2024 Chiefs’ Forum emphasised how global conflicts between Russia and Ukraine, and Israel and Palestine, can be obstacles to the ongoing genocide negotiations between Namibia and Germany. She also drew parallels with the situation in Gaza, describing it as genocide being committed by Israel against Palestinians while the international community remains ineffective. This was indeed intended to highlight the nature and complexities of negotiations, and the geopolitical risks involved to avert an impasse and negative consequences.
Geopolitical risks
Originally coined by the Swedish political scientist Rudolf Kjellén, geopolitics focuses on political power linked to geographic space, and is usually another way of defining events in international political relations.
Put simply, geopolitics refers to political factors that are between countries and regions causing favourable or unfavourable conditions, such as cooperation, tension or unrest.
These causalities can stem from several factors such as the exercise of power, military activities, trade, climate change or other significant events.
It is no surprise that geopolitical tensions cause uncertainty, both in international relations and the economy. In an increasingly more connected world, what happens anywhere has an impact everywhere, not only in international or geopolitical terms, but also at local and regional levels.
In other words, geopolitical risks can have far-reaching implications for both the country originating the risk, and the global community at large.
Globalisation has also played a role in exacerbating these risks by increasing the interconnectedness of economies and societies. Hence, it is important to know that the presence of a risk does not automatically mean that the worst case will happen, or that the resulting event will even be negative at all.
On one hand, a risk can potentially lead to economic and political instability, which can, in turn, lead to violence and conflict. On the other hand, a risk can also spur peace, stability, security, innovation and creativity as countries attempt to mitigate the risks and continue to work in harmony. Geopolitical risks can often be difficult to predict because they depend completely on how a government and its people respond to these risks. But being analytical, sensitive, fair-minded and forward-thinking can mitigate the risks.
Examples of current geopolitical risks abound. Russia’s special military operation in Ukraine, for instance, which began in February 2022, has had major implications on energy and food prices, and on logistics and supply chain management. The ending of that war will be key to global economic recovery, in the absence of new risks.
According to Takahashi Sugio of the International Institute for Defence Studies, “a new international order will be created with the end of the war. How the war ends will be critical”.
Similarly, the turmoil in the Middle East, caused by the ongoing genocide in Gaza, has serious implications on international relations.
These and other power relations have an impact on the current negotiations between Namibia and Germany on the 1904-1908 genocide dialogue. The United States and its allies, including Germany, as a powerhouse, are aiding and abetting the Palestinian genocide, while surreptitiously attempting to avoid responsibility, blame, attention or notice. Therefore, Germany’s inherently bad intention and intransigence towards genocide negotiations in Namibia have created a “pie in the sky”.
Geopolitics on decolonisation
During the Cold War (1947-1990), a period of global geopolitical tension and a struggle for ideological dominance and economic influence prevailed between the United States and the Soviet Union (USSR) and their respective allies, the Western Bloc and the Eastern Bloc.
The strenuous efforts by the Western imperialist forces enforcing brutality to crush African colonies’ quest for independence created geopolitical and international tensions.
In summary, geopolitical tensions are not a new phenomenon.
They have existed across millennia. Governments must take lessons from history, and understand the dynamics of specific regions to make strategic decisions about how to manage geopolitical risks.
There is a need to effectively leverage knowledge and other resources to position themselves for long-term success in an increasingly complex and competitive global environment.
There are several ways helpful to decision-makers to stay ahead of (avoid) or effectively manage potential geopolitical risks.
In the context of 1904-1908 genocide “dialogue”, to better understand the principles behind the relationship between the two countries, both governments need to recognise and understand the dynamics, the grievances, the aspirations, and the emotions of the affected communities so that they can make better decisions.
In fact, this should have been a tripartite dialogue by effectively including the affected communities.
As the world becomes more complex and interconnected, the importance of understanding and leveraging geopolitics increases.
On this score, our government should develop a strategic contingency plan for each scenario, outlining specific actions the negotiating teams must undertake in collaboration with the affected communities to minimise potential risks. Let us go back to the drawing board to redress our blameworthiness. The fight for reparations and restorative justice must continue.