https://iframe.iono.fm/e/1687662?layout=modern” width=”100%” height=”170″ frameborder=”0
You can also listen to this podcast on iono.fm here.
JEREMY MAGGS: The South African National Defence Force (SANDF) is responsible for guarding borders, protecting maritime interests, assisting the police, responding to domestic emergencies, and maintaining a strong defense capability. However, as you might be aware, its budget is decreasing in real terms. Personnel costs are taking up operational funds, and much of its essential equipment is more theoretical than pragmatic. Is South Africa, then, subtly establishing a hollow force while pretending to have full military capability?
Joining me now is Kobus Marais, an independent defense commentator and analyst. Welcome, Kobus. In your opinion, is the SANDF being tasked with fulfilling a constitutional mandate it can no longer support financially?
KOBUS MARAIS: Indeed, this has evolved over many years. We’ve witnessed a decline in the defense force’s capabilities alongside a stagnation of the defense budget in real terms. There once was a clear defense policy outlining objectives and funding goals.
However, this has drastically fallen off. The defense budget for South Africa should ideally hover around 1.5% of GDP, in line with the global standard of 2%. Currently, we are below 0.7% of GDP, which is evidently unsustainable.
It’s essential to note that personnel costs currently account for more than 70% of the authorized defense budget, signifying a fixed cost, as these personnel have long-term contracts. This marks a shift from the former model of conscription. Therefore, if the budget declines in real terms, that percentage will inevitably increase.
This indicates that the SANDF’s primary duty to safeguard our nation’s sovereignty and ensure the well-being of our citizens is becoming increasingly unfeasible.
ADVERTISEMENT
CONTINUE READING BELOW
With a growing demand for ad hoc deployments, whenever state departments—like those for water affairs, the police, or border security—require help, they turn to the defense force, resulting in additional costs that are not sustainable.
Indeed, while the constitutional mandate remains intact, the demand for deployments is escalating, yet resources and funding have significantly declined. This situation is unsustainable.
JEREMY MAGGS: Kobus, let’s delve into that 70% of the budget allocated for personnel. Can you shed some light? Do you think the SANDF is overstaffed, or are the salaries misaligned?
KOBUS MARAIS: I believe neither assertion is entirely true. There isn’t necessarily an excess of personnel. Yes, the defense force’s staffing numbers could be optimized. However, scaling isn’t the main concern, as a professional defense force is crucial. With a defense budget of 1% of GDP, we could potentially allocate an additional R30 billion to the SANDF, bringing employee costs down to below 50% of the budget.
Restructuring is, indeed, imperative; the current personnel are generally older and more costly, and there are an excessive number of senior officers. The rejuvenation initiative has proven ineffective. Moreover, it’s unsustainable—one cannot engage in conflict with an aging force. Restructuring and prioritizing technology over sheer personnel are essential. Thus, the situation is complex; it isn’t simply one problem or the other.
JEREMY MAGGS: You indicated that an aging force cannot engage in warfare, suggesting that our border security has weakened due to the military being stretched too thin in terms of manpower and resources?
KOBUS MARAIS: Absolutely, no doubt about it. Years ago, over 30 defense companies were stationed along South Africa’s land borders. Presently, we need between 25 and 27 companies, yet we only have five available for patrolling.
This limited physical presence is insufficient. Lacking modern technology, such as radars and sensors, we cannot adequately monitor and respond to breaches.
Numerous crossing incidents occur unnoticed due to the absence of technology and proper reconnaissance capabilities.
ADVERTISEMENT:
CONTINUE READING BELOW
I’ve observed test screens from one of our reputable private sector tech companies that clearly demonstrate that after a soldier passes a point, a stream of individuals crosses the border unnoticed. The SANDF remains unaware of this activity.
JEREMY MAGGS: Kobus, let me ask you one last question: If funding is the core issue, does increasing the SANDF’s budget risk perpetuating the same shortcomings unless significant reforms are implemented, as you’ve pointed out?
KOBUS MARAIS: To clarify, simply boosting funding does not tackle the root issues. Cutting employee costs alone won’t solve it either. Without substantial reform, reprioritization, and addressing both current and future threats, any additional funds would be wasted.
Merely allocating 1% or 1.5% of GDP will not rectify the challenges we face. We must address management, oversight, and technology-related concerns.
The defense force relies on outdated primary mission equipment; without a robust defense industry to support it—like Denel and Armscor—just restructuring will not suffice.
All these components must function in unison. Otherwise, adding funds is futile. Nonetheless, more funding is indeed necessary; without it, even the most dedicated restructuring and reprioritization cannot succeed due to a lack of resources.
JEREMY MAGGS: I’ll leave it there. Thank you for your insights. It’s a troubling situation. Kobus Marais, independent defense analyst, I appreciate your time.
