A FORTNIGHT ago, I wrote about what I termed the second-term syndrome in South African politics. I wrote that article when President Jacob Zuma had just survived an impeachment attempt following the court ruling on Nkandla.
Tapiwa Gomo
I raised two key points in that discussion. The first point was that the independent South Africa is yet to allow a leader to stay in power for two terms and that if Zuma survives the current waves of political turbulence, he is on the verge of making history.
My second point, which attracted negative responses from some readers, was that the courts in South Africa have become part of the political change machinery. I highlighted how the courts made former President Thabo Mbeki look like he was disorganised, a scenario which empowered the African National Congress (ANC) to recall Mbeki before the end of his term. His sin then was to attempt to pursue a third term in the ANC. The courts then manufactured the “political meddling” narrative to oust Mbeki.
Today, when Zuma thought he had survived the impeachment prompted by the Nkandla court ruling, the courts had other ideas. They have just ruled that the decision to drop the corruption charges over a 1999 arms deal was “irrational” and, therefore, should be reinstated. The charges were dropped weeks before the 2009 elections which ushered Zuma to the throne. Then, Mbeki was wrong and Zuma was right because he was a victim of political power.
It was the same courts that cleared Zuma and blemished Mbeki, which are doing the same on Zuma, that seem to be the most vocal in sounding political change.
Keep Reading
- Chamisa under fire over US$120K donation
- Mavhunga puts DeMbare into Chibuku quarterfinals
- Pension funds bet on Cabora Bassa oilfields
- Councils defy govt fire tender directive
The same Mbeki who the courts found to be on the wrong side of the law, has today found his voice and that voice is now being treated by South Africans as the voice of reason. When Mbeki speaks, these days, everyone pays attention.
However, there is an interesting dynamic. Perhaps the ANC has learnt its lessons. The court cases are coming from the opposition parties and the ANC has been speaking and stand by their leader as a solid unit, despite varying choruses coming from its rank and file.
Handling the dissenting members has never been a challenge for the ANC. The Mbeki exit gave birth to Congress of the People (Cope), which, Mbeki himself, never fostered up to now. The same bubble gum scenario can still happen today and the ANC will continue to survive without those vocal members.
While change, especially in Africa, is a good thing, there is huge gap that is fertile for manipulation in the way the South African political, economic and social system is structured. Striking a balance between saving the goose the lay the golden eggs and addressing the historical imbalances will continue to haunt whoever takes over power. There is a no doubt that South Africa is a great country because of the strength of its economy. It is remains the biggest economy in the continent.
It is the same economy born out of an apartheid system which created the historical imbalances. Addressing these historical imbalances is an impossible venture without disrupting their well-functioning economy.
Adding to this challenge is that there are now strong voices at both ends of this equation. South Africa has the rare privilege of drawing lessons from the other African countries who have followed the same populist route of addressing historical imbalances and ended up being begging baskets.
Zimbabwe is the closest example. While their Constitution says hands off the economy, the likes of Julius Malema and his Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) is promising the 1970 models of redistributive approaches influenced by the likes of Ernesto “Che” Guevara.
Despite such an approach being archaic, it is one of the biggest crowd pullers for any politician in Africa and Malema is aware of that. If you want votes promise people free land. Africans have shown that they have a humongous appetite for free donations and the Zimbabwe land reform is an example of how it saved Zanu PF from its demise. But it is an approach that has historically destroyed functioning economies, leaving countries poorer than before. South Africa is not ready to follow the Zimbabwe route, if it is a route at all.
It is a context which makes it easy to be opposition, but tough to be the ruling party. The ANC finds itself in this conundrum.
The ANC is not ready to disrupt a functioning economy despite that it remains in the hands of the white minority. It is also not ready to disappoint its supporters who sacrificed their lives fighting for equality and equitable distribution of the means of production.
The Democratic Alliance (DA) and the EFF are aware of this space. Notwithstanding their varying ideologies, they have found common ground in fighting Zuma and the ANC. The Nkandla case was filed by EFF, while the corruption case was filed by the DA. The DA stands on the South African oligarch corner where the economy must not be touched.
On the other hand, the EFF is in the redistributive corner, but the two parties are united by a common enemy in Zuma and his ANC.
Finding a common ground in such a politically charged environment tends to be blurred by political interests rather than appropriate approaches to addressing the challenges facing South Africa today. This is time a sitting President wishes time could be fast-tracked to the end of his term.
●Tapiwa Gomo is a development consultant based in Pretoria, South Africa