It is unclear why US ambassador Leo Brent Bozell III has not yet been given his marching orders out of this country.
His actions seem aimed at aggravating the relationship between SA and the US.
There is nothing ambassadorial about that, unless of course we consider that he is probably representing his president more than his country.
At the end of September, Bozell was issued with a third formal diplomatic reprimand by SA's government since he took up his post in February this year.
This unfortunately tells the story of the deteriorating diplomatic relations between SA and the US.
However, this historic event reflects far more than the diplomatic relations between the two countries but touches on the very culture of global diplomacy.
While it is generally understood that conflict is part of life, and that perhaps conflict between states is expected, after the last two world wars humanity realised something.
When the scale of conflict reaches global proportions, it ceases to be something that can simply be “understood” as inevitable human conduct.
With the advent of powerful weapons such as nuclear weapons, unmitigated conflict becomes a real existential threat for humanity.
However, great wars start from smaller conflicts, which themselves are failures of diplomacy and the observation of international law.
The challenge faced by the international order right now is the erosion of that established understanding, that diplomacy, supported by international law — and agreed rules are far better than military action or outright conflict.
This includes the recognition that diplomacy mitigates against the smaller conflicts, which ultimately results in full-scale military conflict.
We have seen that failure resulting in numerous conflicts around the globe in Gaza, Ukraine, Sudan, Iran, Yemen and other conflict areas around the globe.
The cost of these conflicts is real, and is measured in blood, currency and massive lost opportunities affecting the entire globe.
UN secretary-general António Guterres recently delivered a sombre warning at the 81st UN General Assembly.
His plea that the “power of law must prevail over the law of power” captures the current global environment.
Unfortunately, the US, led by Donald Trump is right at the centre of this very erosion of the primacy of law over might.
Formations such as the Solidarity Movement seem oblivious to the dangers of lobbying the Trump administration to interfere in SA policy matters.
Bozell’s recent public criticism of SA government policies and his attendance at a Solidarity Movement event in July represent a breach of diplomatic protocols.
Yet former ambassador Ebrahim Rasool was expelled from the US for criticising Trump and his administration.
Non-involvement in the political affairs of a host nation is a pillar of global diplomacy, and signals respect for national sovereignty.
Though the Solidarity Movement stated that it chooses SA, it cannot control what the US administration does nor the fallout from its lobbying activities on the SA economy and its people.
The Solidarity Movement equally distances itself from the widely spread idea of “white genocide”, something that has rallied ultra-right formations around the world.
However, the fact that this concept was even entertained at the White House has created an unnecessarily mucky environment which blurs the line between the truth and lies.
It does nothing to normalise relations between SA and the US.
Instead, it results in immeasurable damage not only to SA’s global standing but to global diplomacy, risking legitimising the use of lies and generated narratives to apply political pressure.
With tools such as artificial intelligence and social media platforms, misinformation has become a serious political problem.
World states, particularly superpowers, should be intentional in mitigating the use of technology for misinformation.
However, this cannot be done if lies are legitimised elsewhere, particularly from the podiums of power.
The failure to realise that the truth and facts must be treated as the non-negotiable infrastructure of global architecture will result in global disaster.
Without it, the speed at which states can be brought down, including the mightiest, is frightening.
However, none of this is possible if we operate in a global environment that has lost respect for international law and diplomacy.
While the US campaign against SA can be understood to be an attempt to put pressure on the country, the chosen tactics are seriously concerning.
If the US does not value diplomacy enough, then SA must take the lead.
Perhaps, rightly, that’s why the SA government chose a softer response to Bozell, to give diplomacy another chance.