Illustration by Charles Owen / THE REPUBLIC.
THE MINISTRY OF GENDER X SEXUALITY
Illustration by Charles Owen / THE REPUBLIC.
THE MINISTRY OF GENDER X SEXUALITY
By design of our colonial history and capitalist logic, leadership has been regarded as the preserve of straight, cis-gender, able-bodied, white men. Not any individual white men, but the fantasy of an elite masculinity marked by individualism, assertiveness and competitiveness directed towards command and control.
—Helena Liu, Senior Lecturer at the University of Technology Sydney
I found it appropriate to start with the above quote because this essay is about gender and leadership in global affairs. It is about the leadership of an African woman, Dr Naledi Pandor, who does not fit the colonial ideal in appearance or in praxis. I am interested in her leadership as a deviation of the standard, a glitch in the (coloniality) matrix. Pandor was South Africa’s minister of international relations and cooperation from 2019 to 2024 and was a member of the South African ministerial team that initiated the genocide case against Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). Overall, Dr Pandor’s leadership in South Africa’s foreign policy and diplomacy offers a compelling case through which to draw insights that can be applied to Africa’s engagement with multiple global powers.
From BRICS negotiations to United Nations summits, Pandor has shaped South Africa’s global engagements with a sharp intellect, a steady hand and an unshakable commitment to justice. But beyond her well-documented role as an anti-colonial and anti-apartheid stateswoman, her leadership is deeply feminist—challenging traditional power structures, amplifying marginalized voices and insisting on ‘justice, self-determination and autonomy’.
BY THE COLONIAL SCRIPT, WE WERE WRITTEN
The story of Africa and African women has long been told by others, forced down resisting throats, scripted without consent. It has never afforded Africa main character energy; instead, the continent is cast as ‘the wretched’, the needy, the perpetual ‘other’. In the 1988 book, The Invention of Africa, philosopher and scholar Valentin-Yves Mudimbe argues that colonial conquest surpassed the seizure of physical objects such as land, property and people; it also erased histories and traditions, robbing Africa the ability to define itself.
Africa emerged as a European-imposed governance structure, forged through the monopolization of violence, imposed arbitrary borders and institutionalized imperial control. This process entrenched the West’s hegemony in global politics but also shaped the very foundations of international relations. Sovereignty, legitimacy and diplomacy then, were defined through Eurocentric narratives of statehood, forcing African nations to operate within a framework that was never designed for them. Africa, once a space of diverse political structures—matriarchal, gerontocratic and communal—was forcibly re-modelled in the image of the empire. This epistemic occupation ensured that African sovereignty would always be tethered to colonial paradigms. Through generations, these narratives have been passed down. Colonialism morphed into neo-colonialism—a remixed track with the same rhythm of domination—and the ‘colonized’ continue to dance to its familiar tune.
Just as the African state was stripped of its precolonial complexity, so too were African women, who were reconstructed to fit Western patriarchal ideals. A rigid gender order was established alongside colonial rule that subsumed African women under a coherent group identity, denying their social, economic and political rights. Notable feminist scholars such as Oyèrónkẹ́ Oyěwùmí, Nkiru Nzegwu, Chandra Talpade Mohanty, Lila Abu-Lughod, Ifi Amadiume, Lyn Ossome and Sylvia Tamale have argued that the universalism of gender in this way, functions to disregard the agency of non-Western women. Through this ‘single story’, alternative cultural frames of understanding gender roles are overlooked. Consequently, ‘third world women’ are muted and made invisible, unknowable.
African women were infantilized to justify that they needed to be ruled over. This echoed the marginalization of African states, which were constructed as dependent entities within the Eurocentric geopolitical framework.
BY THE COLONIAL SCRIPT, WE WERE WRITTENDR NALEDI PANDOR: DISRUPTING COLONIAL AND PATRIARCHAL LOGICS
There are definite parallels between the experiences of African states and African women’s experience in global affairs. Both are relegated within an inherently paternalistic framework. According to colonial and patriarchal logics, Dr Pandor is misplaced in the realm of leadership. Her career and robust engagement in global diplomacy defies the colonial, liberal, patriarchal logic that African women, due to their race and gender, are inferior and do not have the capacity to engage in high-stakes political negotiation.
Dr Pandor, as her title suggests, is a highly educated woman. She earned a PhD from the University of Pretoria, South Africa, in 2019 and has three honorary doctorates from the University of Stellenbosch, South Africa, the University of Lisbon, Portugal and the University College Dublin, Ireland. This is in addition to two master’s degrees, a bachelor’s degree, a certificate for continuing education and diplomas in education, higher education, administration and leadership and in leadership in development.
Dr Pandor has served the South African government in various capacities including most recently as minister of international relations and cooperation (2019-2024). Prior to this, she served as the minister of higher education and training (2018-2019), minister of science and technology (2014-2018), minister of home affairs (2012-2014), minister of science and technology (2009-2012), minister of education (2004-2009) and has been a member of Parliament since 1994. Dr Pandor has held positions in male-dominated spaces, both nationally and globally, where she negotiated with global actors and multilateral organizations that are in their very design, hierarchical, transactional and often unfavourable in their engagement with former colonies. However, her rise to prominence and diplomatic leadership occurs against the backdrop of contemporary shifts in global power dynamics, where the century-long Western dominance is giving way to a more complex multipolar reality.
shop the republic
shop the republic
TURBULENCE IN THE WORLD ORDER
The century of Great Britain’s enforced hegemony is often referred to as Pax Britannica (1815–1914). In Africa, this dominance manifested in the extraction and exploitation of land, labour and resources. After the Second World War, the United States emerged as the superior economic, military and political state, ushering in the era of Pax Americana. This era saw an increase in multinational corporations and the establishment of a global multilateral system encompassing the United Nations and the Bretton Woods institutions: the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. Several African states gained independence in this era but often found themselves entangled in the ideological struggles of the Cold War.
While the United States has enjoyed a long-standing hegemonic reign, the unipolar moment seems to be lapsing. Emerging powers such as Brazil, China, the Gulf States, India and Turkey have been asserting their economic strength and Russia has been experiencing a military-political renaissance. The increasing influence of these powers has also manifested in geo-political alliances such as with the BRICS nations comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, further signalling a shift towards a multipolar global order.
The unsettling of the multipolar system requires liminal leadership to navigate this ‘unprecedented disequilibrium’. I refer to liminal leadership as the form of leadership necessary to navigate the transition from the old world order that is no more, and the new one that is yet to fully materialize. Globally, states have been struggling with the cascading impact of the international(ized) wars in Ukraine and Palestine. On the African continent, increased security threats in the Sahel from violent extremist groups, bandits and the proliferation of armed groups have instigated unconstitutional changes of government by military juntas who are backed by non-Western states.
The ongoing conflicts in the Horn of Africa are causing severe humanitarian crises in Somalia, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Sudan and South Sudan. The operations of private mercenary groups, such as the Wagner Group, in Mali, the Central African Republic, Sudan and Libya reflect further complexities of geopolitical competition.
Furthermore, an economic turbulence is also evident in African states who are grappling with low standards of living, incoming inequality and mounting debt burdens, exacerbated by inflation and exchange depreciation in global financial markets. This could attract austerity measures and externally dictated economic conditionalities, undermining national sovereignty. The compounded challenges from economic hardship, political instability and proliferated security threats call for a reimagined approach to global affairs.
RESISTING THE HEGEMONY: A CALL FOR SOUTH-SOUTH COOPERATION, COLLECTIVE LIBERATION & MULTILATERAL REFORM
Dr Pandor’s work fundamentally prompts us toward a refusal of African isolation and exceptionalism in dealing with the above-mentioned compounded challenges. Thinking of the African condition as a global South condition allows for a re-imagined approach for South-South affinity. For Dr Pandor, representing South Africa as a member of BRICS presented a pathway for collaboration among countries in the global South to advance the development of their trade, investment and digital technology industries, as a means to establish fairer and more equitable partnerships. In so doing, she positions global diplomacy as a site of resistance to ‘power-over’, pushing instead for a more balanced distribution of power within the international system.
In her tenure as minister of international relations and cooperation, Dr Pandor challenged global powers through various engagements. Most notable is her involvement in the case South Africa brought before the ICJ, accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza—an example that demonstrates how her leadership transcends rhetoric: she walks the talk. Certainly, reminiscent of South Africa’s anti-apartheid struggles, Dr Pandor often stands in solidarity with the oppressed, grounded in her belief of liberation for all. When asked in an interview about the core principles that drive her work, she stated,
I believe in the equality of all persons and my highest prize in terms of human relations is respect for human dignity… I think our role as fellow human beings is to make the other person feel that they matter and if we have the opportunity as I did, to exercise power, I think we should, as powerful individuals, use power for the good!
Within the broader context of declining Western dominance, Professor Tim Murithi in a 2024 article referred to the ICJ case as a ‘stress test’ on the capacity of the multilateral system to deliver on its claim to uphold ‘…the fundamental human rights, and the dignity and worth of the human person’, as articulated in the UN Charter. The concept of acknowledging the humanity of people may seem like a low bar to assess whether the international justice system is fit for purpose. However, history reveals that dehumanization was used as a tool to dominate over ‘the other’, and owing to the continuities of colonialism, regrettably human dignity remains debatable in contemporary international affairs. On a more positive note, South Africa’s judicial intervention on behalf of Palestinians offers a template for geopolitical mobilization towards the cessation of hostilities—an unexplored, alternative pathway to peace.
The need for this redistribution of power is further reflected in Dr Pandor’s calls to restructure the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). In February 2025, speaking at an international panel discussion titled ‘A Fairer World is Possible’ in London, Dr Pandor stated that UN reform should encompass ‘…. a fundamental alteration of the composition, the functions, and the decision-making of the UN Security Council’—a necessary step to ensure that African states can better represent their interests in global affairs.
shop the republic
shop the republic
(RE)WRITING AFRICA USING A DECOLONIAL, FEMINIST FRAME OF ANALYSIS
Central to Dr Pandor’s leadership is the (re)distribution of power. Considering that the invention of Africa was part of the colonial project, the re-writing Africa will require a decolonial frame. Decoloniality is appropriate here because first, it acknowledges the falsity of universalist discourse. Secondly, it derives from indigenous knowledge(s), which Walter D. Mignolo states in his article, ‘Delinking: The rhetoric of modernity, the logic of coloniality and the grammar of de-coloniality (2007)’, disproves ‘the hegemonic ideas of what knowledge and understanding are and, consequently, what economy and politics, ethics and philosophy, technology and the organization of society are and should be.’
Additionally, I suggest combining decoloniality with a feminist lens which is critical in the study of power relations. Drawing from the standpoint of the marginalized within the international system, it strives to dismantle hierarchies, rejecting the ‘top-down’ for the ‘bottom up’. Feminist analysis recognizes that the personal is political and international. Moreover, recognizing that the international is also personal provides insight into the relationship between gender and foreign affairs, a connection that is otherwise not apparent.
Feminist discourse challenges traditional conceptualizations of power as domination over the ‘other’, recasting it as ‘the ability to act in concert.’ It emphasizes principles of collaboration, empathy and interdependence over consumerism, individualism and competition. Furthermore, it asserts that the overall well-being of human beings is dependent on the fulfilment of their interconnected economic, ecological, political, security and social needs.
A decolonial, feminist theory enables the ‘native’ to deconstruct colonial interpretations of their social world. This process involves rejecting Western colonial epistemology and returning to historical archives of indigenous knowledge(s) to situate themselves in their own episteme. Both reflexive and emancipatory, it not only unveils exclusions, but it also redresses them through novel discourses. It holds an expansive space to accommodate diverse histories, lived experiences and aspirations, a reclamation of humanity. This is a critical consciousness that rejects abstract universality, in pursuit of a pluri-versality that (re)imagines a future that is not conceptualized at the centre, but by those who have in various ways been marginalized.
DIPLOMACY AS A SITE OF FEMINIST RESISTANCE
In striving to challenge intersecting structures of domination, Dr Pandor’s leadership is both decolonial and feminist. Her very existence as a highly educated, political figure and ascension within the ranks of global diplomacy appears as blasphemous under colonial doctrine. Yet, it supports the notion that there are other ways of knowing and being, beyond universalist paradigms.
In Western discourse, the logic of biological determinism argues that bodies are ‘hierarchically ordered, differentially placed in relation to power, and spatially distanced one from the other.’ Using this lens, the bodies of African women are read as mindless, passive, submissive, domesticated and apolitical. This positions them at the bottom of racial and gendered hierarchies.
Within this background, Dr Pandor’s leadership emerges as disruptive in a myriad of ways. First, her academic achievements including a doctorate degree contradicts the colonial, patriarchal narrative that African women lack intellectual aptitude. Second, her various roles in politics and decision-making distorts the Eurocentric, masculinized ideation of leaders and leadership. Third, her active engagement in shaping international political discourse unsettles the low-ranking of African women in racial, gendered and geopolitical hierarchies.
However, digging deeper, it is worth examining whether Dr Pandor’s leadership transcends the superficial, liberal feminist directive to ‘just add women and stir’. Did Dr Pandor’s position within the multilateral system challenge or reinforce racial and gender marginalization? Has her leadership triggered an underlying shift in dominant structures, or did it merely demonstrate her ability to navigate and assimilate within existing imperial conditions?
On one hand, Dr Pandor’s track record of championing social justice, self- determination and equality indicates a shift from top-down governance models. On the other hand, the extent to which the diplomatic commitments she has brokered in high-level geopolitical negotiations translate to improvements in the lives of local populations remains open to discussion.
Nonetheless, Dr Pandor’s leadership should not be dismissed too quickly. Beyond the optics of an African woman securing ‘a seat at the table’, through her engagement, she actively injected decolonial, African and feminist perspectives into global diplomacy. Moreover, she defied the prescribed rules of engagement expected of her as both an African and a woman, while simultaneously expanding the boundaries of who a leader is conceptualized to be. This act of epistemic disobedience embodies a two-pronged approach to transformation—rejecting dominant paradigms while simultaneously advancing alternative frameworks of understanding and engaging in the world we live in.
Similarly, her leadership style does not fit neatly into binary boxes of ‘either, or’, rather, it assumes the multiplicity of ‘both, and’. Both confrontational and collegial, strategic and adaptable, considerate and unapologetic. Rather than a feminist success story or a failed attempt at transformation, Dr Pandor’s leadership reflects a negotiation within the epistemic and geopolitical boundaries of gender, power and global politics; of the assumptions that underpin them, the realities that exist within them and the expanding potential of what more they could become.
shop the republic
shop the republic
A FEMINIST REIMAGINING OF AFRICA’S GLOBAL ENGAGEMENT
So, what can we learn about Dr Pandor’s leadership that can inform Africa’s global engagement? First, her work in centred on challenging masculinized, capitalist ideations of global politics. The realm of politics has often been the ‘business of men’. Yet, Dr Pandor emerges in contrast to the expectation of who does politics and how politics is done. In advocating for social justice, equity and self-determination, emphasizing collaboration over competition, she demonstrates that politics need not be predatory and exploitative. This is a crucial lesson for African states, who in this global power transition have the opportunity to not only redefine their position but also the terms in which they engage both nationally and internationally. Adopting Dr Pandor’s leadership style that seeks to redress exclusion and inequalities and prioritizes improved social welfare and enhanced human security in the stead of ‘big belly politics’ would promote a culture of just and sustainable peace in the governance system.
Secondly, I had earlier raised a question on whether Dr Pandor’s diplomatic engagements translate to improvements in the lived realities of local populations. While I can neither confirm nor deny this assertion, the question itself holds value. Applying this line of inquiry unveils that just as the African state is far removed from the centre of power in global politics, so are African people from national politics. A decolonial frame tells us that many of the challenges witnessed in African governance and global engagement today stem from the fact that the idea of the ‘modern state’ was introduced to Africa through colonial rule. When colonial powers drew borders and imposed centralized governments, they brought with them a rigid version of the state—one that did not grow organically from African indigenous ways of organizing society. This imported version of governance was imposed and therefore, often does not align with how power and leadership actually function in many African societies. This mismatch has created gaps in how African creativity, expression and engagement is perceived and understood. Whether it is youth movements, women’s peace coalitions, or traditional authorities mediating conflicts—these are articulations of African agency that either go unacknowledged or are engaged by rehashing stereotypes on the global stage. While I am not proposing an entire overhaul of the state, there must be connectors that link African agency(ies) to broader national and international conversations. These connectors should be dynamic and responsive, not one-size-fits-all. As Dr Pandor has previously stated, ‘international partnerships should be co-owned and co-determined by all partners… Strategic transnational partnerships should be possible, provided they are constructed on an equitable and transparent basis.’ This pushes us to think about diversifying partnerships in a manner that considers and mitigates unequal power relations across communities, regions and continents.
Universalist paradigms are limiting, inappropriate and often incorrect in their conceptions of the colonized ‘other’. This deliberate limitation serves an exclusionary function that uses difference as the basis of marginalization. However, as global power increasingly becomes less concentrated around a singular ‘centre’, so must our epistemologies expand. That means that African countries can draw from various historical traditions to rejuvenate governance systems. The shortcomings of liberal peace, liberal democracy and liberal capitalism are overwhelmingly evident. Perhaps this transitional moment is the opportune time to integrate more intently African philosophies such as ubuntu, ujamaa and institutions like the gacaca courts as alternatives that are better aligned with the lived realities of African people⎈
