The South African Army has ordered a substantial amount of long-range 60mm mortar ammunition worth about R29 million. This takes recent mortar bomb orders of various types and calibres to R318 883 314.78.

The orders are in addition to a May 6 order worth R214.1 million for the acquisition of the Project Acrobat 60mm long-range mortar (LRM) system and ammunition. The latest order placed on Rheinmetall Denel Munitions (Pty) Ltd of Potchefstroom on Wednesday is for 60 mm long range high explosive mortar bombs (R14 532 712.02) and long range mortar smoke burst bombs (R14 531 143.20).

The Army has in addition ordered other ammunition and pyrotechnics worth around R194 million since August last year to replenish stocks that have not been significantly augmented since the advent of democracy in 1994. The Armscor tender awards website shows the contracts have principally been placed with state arsenal Denel subsidiaries Pretoria Metal Pressings (PMP) and Rheinmetall Denel Munitions (RDM).

The SA Army uses three mortar systems – the M1/M4 60mm, M3 81mm and M5 120mm mortar systems in addition to the still to-be-introduced Acrobat weapons that will likely be type-classified the M6.

The Ministry of Defence in September 2006 told Parliament that the SA Army had in the middle of that year placed an order for 102 Project Acrobat LRM for R101 million, with delivery then expected from 2009 to 2010. It is not clear if these deliveries have taken place.

The number ordered in 2006 was sufficient to equip 12 infantry battalions at a scale of eight tube per unit and leaving six tubes for training. The LRM, with its long-range ammunition, can fire to 6180m and has the lethality range and lethal area substantially better than the M3 81mm mortar, regarded by many as no mean feat.

The Army acquired the type for its airborne (parachute and air assault) as well as motorised infantry, who will likely use it in place of the older M3 81mm mortar as it is lighter at 34kg (compared to the M3’s 42.8kg) to a greater range and effect. The LRM is, however, much heavier than the M1 60mm mortar with bipod (18.7kg) or the M4 patrol mortar (“patmor”) variant at 7.8kg. This, however, has a maximum range of just 2100m.

Originally published by defenceWeb  

An amendment to the South African Citizenship Act will allow government to strip any South African serving in a foreign military of his or her citizenship under what could be vague or arbitrary conditions.
The South African Citizenship Amendment Bill [B17-2010] contains a clause that extends the grounds for loss of citizenship to include cases where “he or she engages in a war under the flag of a country that the Government of South Africa does not support.”

The existing Section 6 of the existing Act, 88 of 195, allows for loss of citizenship under two sets of circumstances, namely, where “he or she, whilst not being a minor, by some voluntary and formal act other than marriage, acquires the citizenship or nationality of a country other than the Republic; or (b) he or she in terms of the laws of any other country also has the citizenship or nationality of that country, and serves in the armed forces of such country while that country is at war with the Republic.”

Acccording to the South African Press Association (SAPA) Department of Home Affairs director general Mkuseli Apleni told the Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs this week that there “is currently no provision for the loss of citizenship by a naturalised citizen for engaging in a war that the republic does not support. The amendment of section 6 of the Act will provide that a naturalised citizen may not apply for retention of citizenship if he or she wishes to engage in a war that the government of the republic does not support, under the flag of another country.” However nothing in the principal Act or the amendment Bill seems to restrict the new clause to naturalised citizens (immigrants) only.

The South African government will in coming days consider whether to deploy military and naval forces to Somalia to reinforce a troubled peacekeeping mission in that wartorn country.

Minister of Defence and Military Veterans Lindiwe Sisulu yesterday said the matter was with President Jacob Zuma and added that she expected him to deal with it "pretty soon". Sisulu added rejecting a request by the African Union (AU) to deploy in Somalia could compromise South Africa's respect and standing on the continent but recognised that such a mission would come with high risks. "As we sit here now, there has not been a specific request to us from the AU to send troops but we did commit ourselves to assisting," she told reporters in Cape Town. Not to deploy will be an issue...if we are not able to provide a cogent argument why we are not able to."

French news agency AFP reported earlier this week AU leaders in Kampala decided to do more to stamp out lawlessness in the country that last had recognised national government in 1991 – now 19 years ago. The wire service said the AU asked South Africa to deploy warships to prevent al-Qaeda franchise al-Shabaab from importing weapons via Kismayo port for use against the United Nations-recognised Transitional Federal Government (TFG) and some 6000 AU troops. AFP added SA had said it is ready to do “everything it is asked from it” by the AU.

Inspector General of Intelligence Faith Radebe has declined to investigate how controversial lawyer Paul Ngobeni — allegedly a fugitive from justice in the US — managed to get security clearance to allow him to serve as a special adviser in the Ministry of Defence ad Military Veterans.

Business day reports today Ngobeni shot to prominence when, as a staff member of the University of Cape Town’s law department, he became publicly involved in the controversy surrounding Western Cape Judge President John Hlophe and his possible candidacy for a place on the Constitutional Court. Defence minister Lindiwe Sisulu has since appointed him as a part-time special adviser.

In December Democratic Alliance defence spokesman David Maynier requested the IGI to probe how Ngobeni had got a security clearance, as required, when he “was reportedly permanently prohibited from practising law, is facing a series of criminal charges and is a fugitive from justice in … the US”.

Radebe, in her response to Maynier, appeared to use a technicality in her refusal to investigate the matter, Business Day says.In correspondence republished on politicsweb, she noted that Maynier had not lodged a complaint in terms of the Intelligence Services Oversight Act [40 of 1994] and that his “request resembles a tasking, namely to conduct an investigation into the decision of a Minister to hire a security advisor and whether the person so appointed has a valid security clearance from the concerned Services.