December 17, 2007
Jacob Zuma and the ANC
Perhaps I am being a bit literal-minded, but I do not find it reassuring that Jacob Zuma’s "signature anthem" (as the FT describes it) translates as "Bring me my machine gun". As I write, Mr Zuma seems poised to wrest the presidency of the African National Congress from Thabo Mbeki. If he succeeds, he then becomes hot favourite to succeed Mbeki as the next president of South Africa in 2009.
With Zuma as president-in-waiting, South Africa will have a significant PR problem. South Africa’s big challenge - of course - has always been to convince the world that it is not going to be just another hopeless African country. It is bigger, richer, more sophisticated. It has a proper legal system, good infrastructure and world-class companies. To even suggest that there might be a risk that one day South Africa will go the way of Zimbabwe is to invite furious denunciation. How could you be so ignorant? The situations are totally different. The comparison simply demonstrates western ignorance and racism, etc etc
As a result, world leaders and the international press are likely to greet Mr Zuma’s rise cautiously and politely. And maybe he will turn out to be a responsible and effective leader. But his career so far plays into every western stereotype of the feckless African leader. He has been accused of corruption - indeed Thabo Mbeki hinted heavily at this in his speech to the ANC congress. Mr Zuma was also accused in court of rape. And although he was acquitted, his statement that he took a shower after sex to protect himself from HIV infection, made him look ridiculous.
Of course, any South African president is liable to be compared unfavourably to the saintly Nelson Mandela. But the decline from Mandela to Zuma looks pretty precipitous.
If South Africa follows the steps foresaw for other nations by Rachman it is evident the result will be about four different nations according to the ethno-linguistic groups:
a) Transkei: Zulu
b) Kapland (Western Cape and Northern Cape): Afrikaans
c) South Africa: Xhosa
But it is true after several liberation fights other groups like the tsongas will separate (and perhaps, tsongas will try to create a federation with Botswana)
The ANC movement is a preeminent force like the Fianna Fail in Ireland after Independence or the PRI in Mexico until ten years ago. So it is possible the ANC will give birth to two different parties according to their different ideological positions: one, more leftist, will continue calling itself ANC and the other, more liberal, will have another name….
And about Nelson Mandela remember that he is, and was, as much fan of Fidel Castro as Hugo Chavez as he repeated in his speeches, not less because for decades Cuba was the one who did more for the A.N.C. and, in general, for the black opposition in South Africa.
Posted by: Enrique Costas Mira | December 17th, 2007 at 5:37 pm | Report this commentInstead of tsongas, i should have written “tswanas”…tsongas will create a different nation.
Posted by: Enrique | December 17th, 2007 at 5:51 pm | Report this commentThe decline from Mandela to Zuma is almost unimaginably precipitous (a decline from M to Z) — think of what a big decline there already was from Mandela to Mbeki (which was only Ma to Mb)! All of which goes to show that the destiny of nations, like that of individuals, is predetermined: Putin’s Russia (sorry, meant Medvedev’s Russia) is the Soviet Union, is the Russia of the Tsars, is the Duchy of Muscovy reborn — fate as planted by Ivan the Terrible; similarly for Africa, they seem not to be able to escape the trap of destiny.
Posted by: RCS | December 17th, 2007 at 6:49 pm | Report this comment…similarly for Africa, they seem unable to escape the trap of destiny.
Posted by: RCS | December 17th, 2007 at 6:56 pm | Report this commentEnrique,
If such a neat territorial solution existed, modern post-apartheid South Africa would not have been born. Anyway, the Cape is less Afrikaaner than British. The heart of Afrikaaner-land is the former Transvaal and Orange Free State.
Posted by: RCS | December 17th, 2007 at 7:08 pm | Report this commentRCS,
In Kaapland (Northern and Western Cape) the overwhelming majority of the population are Afrikaans-speakers. I am talking about Afrikaan-speakers not about white Afrikaners (who are just a third of Afrikaan speakers)
In Northern Cape over 80% of the population is Afrikaan-speaker and over 60% in Western Cape. As happened with Montreal (Quebec) where there is an important english-speaking minority, the same happens in Capetown/Kaapstadt (Kaapland) where there is an important english-speaking minority (27% of the population according to Wikipedia) while 41% of the population speaks Afrikaans…but out of Kaapstadt (as happens in Quebec out of Montreal) the overwhelming majority of the population (over 80%) is Afrikaans-speaker.
Something logical as Kaapland is the region where Dutch colonists arrived first during the XVII Century while Orange and Transvaal are just XIX Century foundations by those boers who were drived out by the British forces…but on those new lands Afrikaan-speaker never reached the majority of the population, composed basically of Xhosas, Tsongas and Tswanas.
So the drive towards Independence of Kaapland is something inevitable. In fact thousands of Afrikaan-speakers (mainly Afrikaners) from Pretoria are moving to Kaapland where they feel much more at home than in Gauteng.
a) Transkei (Zulu)
b) Kaapland (Afrikaans)
c) South Africa (Xhosa)
d) Botwana (Tswanas)
Posted by: Enrique | December 18th, 2007 at 7:59 am | Report this commentIn fact, Xhariep (Free State) and the Western part of Eastern Cape should be also included in Kaapland.
Posted by: Enrique | December 18th, 2007 at 8:57 am | Report this commentCry, the beloved country. Gideon my very best friend is like you a South African now resident in the UK. His sadness is his cry about his beloved country, as a zoutpiel perhaps he never fully was a part of it but with the election of Zuma what South Africa is becoming is ever further away from what we had all hoped it could become after Mr. de Klerk and Mr. Mandela’s historical shift. I so hope Zimbabwe should not be a model for any other nation but I am afraid now that our dear friend Bishop Tutu’s nightmare has been realized we might have to suffer through this, too. Such irony, sometimes I think this world can’t be real, because reality shouldn’t be this epic.
Posted by: Felix Drost | December 19th, 2007 at 1:58 am | Report this commentThis power struggle in South Africa is nothing new. It is part of maturity of a nation, that after a while Mandelas fade away, and politicians take over.From George Washington to George Bush……
Personalities have to be less important than processes. We should be concerned only when Zuma starts playing around with the sound legal & democratic framework of South Africa. Then it will be the road downhill ……………
Posted by: Sandeep Chowdhury | December 19th, 2007 at 5:45 am | Report this commentGentlemen most of the comments are focused on the personalities and the assumptions is that all events are driven by complex personality flaws and related cultural issues.
In fact what we have(just like in Latin America) is the struggle to ensure that market economics delivers socially meaningful change. This seems a difficult objective when the society starts from a position of exteme inequality. The introduction of competition where education and wealth are hevaily skewed mean that the rewards(at least for the first 30 years) are heavily biased in the direction of those who started out ahead. For those who read other sections of this excellent paper please refer to John Kay and Martin Wolf……
It is that underlying dynamic that can unravel the system. That is not to say that bad rulers and their colorful personalities dont play their part. But it is the existance of this percieved failure that provides a platform for a contender to escape the scutiny that we like.
The message, to me, is that unless we(I count myself as a practical rather than “religious” one)the proponents of market economics can find a way to make the rewards apparent to the wider population we inevitably face a crisis of legitimacy where the system is semi-democratic. In China they of course have less need to justify the rewards that different players get and so have more room to motor on confident that 40 years down the line the masses will indeed be better off.
I think that is the message from a Zuma victory. Now I completely understand Gideon Rachman’s concerns. But some of the other comments are not not well grounded in the events leading to this situ. The reality is that whatever the problems of Zuma his support cut across all black ethnic groups in SA. What is clear is that the new black elite does not feel comfortable with him. He had a high level of support in the heart of the Xhosa’s; Transkei despite being Zulu.
Gentlemen we need to be tough and honest without resorting to cultural stereotypes.
Posted by: Onchera G. Maiko(Onchi) | December 19th, 2007 at 7:31 am | Report this commentWhile Africa and South Africa does indeed have ethnic divisions quickly resorting to ethnic intepretations fails to appreciate that this is really about a feeling by many ordinary South Africans that we the new black elite of all ethnic backgrounds no longer represent their interests.
I do not claim to know very much about Zuma, and I am no expert on South African politics. But the case against Zuma, as outlined by Gideon Rachman, is hardly persuasive for the proposition that he is another potential Mugabe. Zuma, it seems, has been accused of corruption and rape, but convicted of nothing at all. These accusations could well have been for political reasons. I know nothing about the details. Other than that, Mr. Rachman doesn’t like the lyrics of Mr. Zuma’s theme anthem. Hardly enough to show that a democratically elected leader has “wrested power” from his opponent.
Mbeki, on the other hand, has betrayed the legacy of Nelson Mandela, and all of the people of South Africa, by his insane denial of the AIDS-HIV connection, which he has never fully disavowed. He has also betrayed the entire African continent by his failure to speak out or take action against Mugabe. Zuma would have to try hard in order to achieve a worse record than this.
Posted by: Roger Algase | December 19th, 2007 at 8:08 am | Report this commentIt’s hard not to feel that this is the thin end of the wedge. All South Africans that have returned to the homeland in recent years on a wave of new-found optimism may have cause to re-think the wisdom of their move in the not-too-distant future. As someone who was born and grew up there, has Africa in their blood, I feel particularly depressed about the country’s future as I watch these events unfold. Friends never tire of telling me how bullet-proof SA’s constitution is, but only the naive would believe this couldn’t be dismantled over time, while the cancer of rampant corruption will cause terminal damage to the institution of government.
Posted by: Dom Smyth | December 19th, 2007 at 8:47 am | Report this commentA friend of mine will return to South Africa in a year or so’s time with his wife, to settle for good and they are ploughing all their savings into property over there ahead of their return, but I can’t help thinking that all those contemplating a similar move should be taking out “insurance” against a Zimbabwe-like scenario. My sincere hope is that this doomsday scenario does not unfold and that I and my family will be able to return frequently to visit all the fantastic places I had the privilege of experiencing during my childhood.
It is true to say that although the Democratic Alliance is the official opposition party in South Africa, the real opposition is the global investor. South Africa’s economy is very small in world terms and its huge deficit on current account is funded by foreign capital markets taking avantage of the difference in interest rates and comparatively high dividend flows. Once this confidence dissipates the money will disappear like melting ice. Capital markets do not like uncertainty and least of all left wing economic policies. I hate to say it but in reality after 13 years of economic stability, we are now on he slippery slope.
Posted by: Neil, Cape Town | December 19th, 2007 at 9:32 am | Report this commentDoes Zuma’s election mean that another component of BRICS will become more assertive against America?
P
Posted by: Pacifist | December 19th, 2007 at 10:06 am | Report this commentWhat will, the supposedly left wing, Mr.Zuma’s foreign policy stance be? Would he ally himself with those, like Iran and Venezuela, who challenge the US hegemony? In some ways, resource-rich S Africa has similarities to oil-rich Iran and Venezuela too.
Could another member of BRICS become more assertive against the USA? After all, S Africa has a legitimate claim to being a regional major power which would bring her into head on collision with the global hegemon in the same way that Russia, China and Iran have.
Thanks for your thoughts.
P
Posted by: Pacifist | December 19th, 2007 at 10:32 am | Report this commentThe African National Congress is close to 100 years old (founded 1912). Throughout its history, this exceptional institution has advocated a non-racial democracy. Its Freedom Charter was based on the American Bill of Rights and, subsequently, the government Constitution is resoundingly democratic. From the mid-Thirties to mid-Nineties black and coloured South Africans were oppressed by one inhuman new white government Act after another, yet the ANC has always campaigned for a multiracial South Africa. Jacob Zuma, a ANC stalwart throughout his life, and imprisonment, would be a brave, and foolhardy, man if he betrayed this ideology, fought for with such wisdom and intelligence by his comrades and himself. Western countries could learn a lot about racial tolerance from the annals of the ANC, lets hope that Zuma doesn’t forget what he has learnt.
Posted by: nicola mitchell | December 19th, 2007 at 10:41 am | Report this commentI think Gideon’s comments are pretty harsh and I feel slightly ill informed. But if you look at the leader in the Economist this week - the Economist takes a very similar view, which is that Mbeki was aweful but Zuma is going to be terrifying.
There is no doubt that Zuma has done nothing to prevent the press taking this view, and although as an eternal SA optimist and investor in SA I too am a little unnerved.
Someone once said to me South Africa has always outperformed its expectations
- when De Klerk handed over to Mandela everyone thought it was going to be a blood bath
- Then the popular opinion was that with Mandela gone that SA would go quickly downhill. Although there is a lot wrong with Mbeki, he and Trevor Manuel have run the economy extremely well. Its hard to argue that the last 10 years in terms of the economy has not been extremely successful
- Now we have got a potential switch to Zuma, who the press is keen to remind us had no formal education; was in Court for Rape (although cleared); and has a corruption case outstanding. All this is true …. but
1. Zuma educated himself as a young inmate at Robben Island in what were somewhat hard conditions (I would suggest that is probably a far greater academic achievement than most very well educated readers of the FT)
2. He got off the rape case - with the white judge suggesting the case should never have been brought. Zuma did show some very poor judgement - perhaps just in the same manner as Bill Clinton did!
3. and the bribe charge has not been proven - but if it is proven the rule of law (please God) will prevent him being an MP let alone President. This probably is the most crucial thing - will the judiciary be strongly independent. Also do not forget - the companies giving the bribes are all european and very large (so should have proper corporate governance). So its hard to stomach the suggestion that its just an African thing. In this case if proven corrupt, both the European and Africans involved have behaved illegally.
That said - there have got to be huge concerns about Zuma - just as there were with Mandela and then Mbeki.
We need to find out a lot more about Zuma and his policies before we conclude.
One last thought its a real shame that Tokyo Sexwhale is not in the front running. He would be fantastic for all the peoples of SA.
Posted by: Doug MacDonald | December 19th, 2007 at 12:56 pm | Report this commentThe Irish experience does seem to have some relevance. The split in the national liberation into (civil war) factions eventually ensured that the new state had competing alternative parties each capable of both winning and ceding power. In independent Ireland no pre-liberation party competed against the heirs of the nat lib movt as succesfully or with the legitimacy that the two main descendant parties could (and do) command. No newer political movement has successfully organised on the scale of pre 1922 Sinn Fein or its two main descendants Fianna Fail and Fine Gael. The historic mission of the ANC was the creation of a majority rule state. As competing visions emerge for the future of the state emerge it seems only right that competing parties should emerge. Partisans of parties in the Republic of Ireland have learned that in the long term a good election with a ‘bad result’ is a far better outcome than the alternative. While SA will hopefully be spared the early bitterness of the Irish split, it will do well to avoid an alternative of factions competing within a monolithic ANC.
Posted by: donal | December 19th, 2007 at 2:40 pm | Report this commentA quick survey of the media coverage of the corruption and fraud case involving Zuma’s financial advisor, Schabir Shaik, reveals: “The high court’s view of the symbiosis between Zuma and Shaik was confirmed by the Supreme Court of Appeal in various parts of its judgment, which ultimately conveyed that, on the evidence in this case, an overall corrupt relationship existed.” Perhaps these accusations were not policitally motivated as suggested elsewhere here, but the fact that Zuma was never formally charged was.
Posted by: Robert | December 19th, 2007 at 2:54 pm | Report this commentMr Smith i feel sorry for you, but i’m glad you have the right to your opinion. it is persemistic types like youself that mis-inform and are mis-informed. As a south african have you ever been to a township and who do you know beside your domestic and gardner who live in a township? you are utterly confused about the situation in South Africa because you never lived in the South Africa that is plunged in poverty, you Sir, lived in some leafy surbub with some private security company protecting you. You have no clue of the divisions and battles within the A.N.C or knowledge of the organisation itself. The election of Mr Zuma does not signal the end of the country but the end of your country as you know it. a word of advise, read up on the Morogoro conference in Tanzania and find out what happened after that conference. It would help if you took some time to learn about the left (trade unions and the communists ) in the tri-partide alliance with the A.N.C this. Then maybe an informed opinion could be formed about the politics within the A.N.C.
Posted by: thulubheke Mahlobo | December 19th, 2007 at 7:47 pm | Report this commentThere is no doubt in my mind that the international community has an interest in the future of SA and the majority of them wish us luck. We as South Africans are very thankful for that. As much as I dislike Zuma, I have accepted the results of the ANC elections. I respect that the majority of the ANC delegates wants a new leader, even though I do not agree with their choice. That is democracy. just because I do not agree with a choice it does not mean that the those who made the choice are fools. If we elect Zuma as executive president, we will be letting ourselves down…I believe.
I do not believe that this will happen. Watch out for the dark horse…honourable Kgalema Motlanthe. the most wise and selfless ANC leader after OR Thambo.
Posted by: Otsile | December 20th, 2007 at 5:43 am | Report this commentI would just like to thank all the Great powers(CIA,MI6) in this world for their help and support for the ANC. The decline of a once great country is owed to you liberal know-it-all thinkers. May your own countries one day live with the fear and uncertainty of a banana republic like we have seen in the last 15 years. If Zuma is not good for the country in a significant way, you will probably witness a bloody civil war. Please remeber that Brittain helped Mugarbage into power and look at that beautifull thriving country today. The families of the 60 people being murdered every day as well as the 300 women being raped every day really enjoy your help and incredible influence. South Africa today will surely be your future if you are governed by these same people.
Posted by: ANON | December 20th, 2007 at 8:10 am | Report this commentDoug MacDonald makes a good point comparing to Ireland.
The ANC once had a single goal, but now that this is achieved, internal differences start to matter. It would be a good thing for democracy if the ANC split up into parties which must compete in the open air, instead of within the party. This seems more likely than a strong opposition growing up outside them.
I worry though that the fight leading up to such a split could be very damaging. There isn’t a great deal of economic freeboard.
Posted by: improbable | December 20th, 2007 at 3:31 pm | Report this commentI am a Scotsman living in a democratic South Africa and to hear all the idle chat of “war Athems” is nothing short of a lack of education on the “real” South Africa I have known and loved for the past 10 years.
Posted by: Gordon Parkin | December 21st, 2007 at 1:39 pm | Report this commentLet me start by saying that as a Scots man we too have a National Athem that reminds English people that we are a nation who were not averse to fighting. Indeed the full English (UK) National Athem also talks about puting the “Rebelious Scots down”! So, for people to condem a “freedom” anthem of a recent struggle lacks the understaning of emotion that exists in a free and democratic South Africa.
Jacob Zuma is a man of the people, for the people and I am sure he is very clear about what needs to be done to make investing in South Africa an attractive prospect both on a business and social level. I am pleased that our current President did not win re election as this would have worried me in light of the circumstances that led Zimbabwe to it’s present sorry state.
I will not be thinking of doing a “chicken run” as many uninformed people did when the ANC first came to power. I believe in South Africa and will do my best to play my part in its success.
Dear all,
Over the holiday season the comments posted to the blog will be pre-moderated by FT staff. This may result in a delay in your comment appearing, but we will keep these delays to a minimum. We will return to post-moderating comments at the start of 2008.
Many thanks for all your contributions, and best wishes for the season.
Posted by: Damian Carrington, Interactive Editor, FT.com | December 21st, 2007 at 2:16 pm | Report this commentThe negative overseas coverage of the ANC conference in South Africa requires balancing.
http://www.thoughtleader.co.za/traps/2007/12/21/if-zuma-equals-zimbabwe-then-winnie-must-be-my-cousin/
Unfortunately there is a tendency for whites (of which I am one) to see any failure of democracy in Africa as confirmation of the need for whites to dominate blacks (for their own good).
This party conference was as democratic as anything you’ll find the world over and an example to African countries of what can be achieved.
Pity the media are only concerned in sales through sensationalim.
Posted by: traps | December 22nd, 2007 at 12:09 pm | Report this commentA “precipitous” decline it may be, but perhaps no more so than from George Washington to Andrew Jackson. Yes a “machine gun” is a far cry from a hickory stick, but Mr. Zuma’s populous credentials may yet serve South Africa well. He could take the draconian measures necessary to get crime under control and perhaps persuade the unions to relax dysfunctional labour laws in exchange for a large public works program. Reportedly, Mr. Zuma has travelled extensively attempting to reassure the world that he is not another Mugabe. If that PR campaign was a charade, the first sign will be an precipitous increase in the civil service. Let’s hope that is not the case, and the spirit of Mandela will prevail.
Posted by: Christian VanSchayk | December 25th, 2007 at 4:21 pm | Report this commentDear blog readers
First of all, happy new year to you all.
Following the holiday season, comments are now back to being post-moderated, as before.
I look forward to reading your valued contributions in 2008.
Posted by: Damian Carrington, Interactive Editor, FT.com | January 2nd, 2008 at 11:36 am | Report this commentI am a proud South African who believes in the potential of this country. It is very sad that international observers view Jacob Zuma as some strange animal from some unknown zoo. This is the man who will take the world by storm when he becomes the president of South Africa in 2009. His win is a sure case because South Africans view him differently than people who read about him and therefore the masses are going to vote for him like they voted for him to win the ANC presidency. My plea is for the ANC to seek amnesty from the National Prosecuting Authority regarding charges against him. This is the only man who is fit to lead the coutry for the next term.
Posted by: Rendani Ramabulana | January 8th, 2008 at 2:28 pm | Report this commentEnrique,
Afrikaans may be dominant in certain provinces but it has the stigma of being the language of the appartheid at least since South African students rejected compulsory learning of the language of the oppresing system.
Afrikaan was also the preferred language of the party in power during the XX century´s instituionalisation of the centuries-long seggregating system (i.e. the National Party.)
Hence no province in South Africa would ever seek independence on the basis of the Afrikaans language.
Allowing the Afrikaners to do so in such provinces as the Free State or Limpopo would imply a re-colonisation based on race, something the people of South Africa has successfully fought against all along until the conquering of interracial democracy with the fantastic efforts of the likes of Biko, Agett, Mandela, Tambo, Slovo, Nokwe, Sisulu, Fischer (an inspiring example for freedom-loving Afrikaners), Bizos, Gluckman and every single South African family who, regardless of something so pointless as its race, resisted, reacted and battled the racist regime that was just too long supported by so-called liberal democracies in Europe and America.
By contrast, English is more widely spoken, it is a global language and, importantly, it has no (or at least less) racist connotations.
Posted by: Goico | January 8th, 2008 at 9:45 pm | Report this commentFor many years the African National Congress has been preaching ethics and high moral ethics to the world. An now with the election of the New President of the party, the party finds itself at the cross roads with some within the party against the election and some in favour. The truth is that sometimes we see things from our own perspective and then want other to comply with our views. We are definately in a new era within the ANC and it make sense for all to support the new party President. The man was aquitted for rape and he apologised on national and international TV. The most important issue to remember is that JZ still works within the ANC and all his decisions are part of the collective. All people have their own believes, but at this stage, uniting behind the ANC no matter who leads, is very important. Such backing is not for an individual but for the success of the party. Come 2009, the ANC as it did during the times of Mandela and Mbeki, will score an overwhelming victory and once again the people entrsting it to lead the national democratic revolution that would lead to the realisation of a totally developed state.
Posted by: Legadima | February 1st, 2008 at 2:01 pm | Report this commentGoico,
Afrikaans was the way coloreds spoke Dutch and is still much more spoken by coloreds than by whites.
And I am talking just about the Kaapland area where Afrikaans is spoken by the overwhelming majority of the population in a very similar way to French Quebecois in Eastern Canada.
The situation of Kaaplanders is very similar to that of Quebecois, very, very similar and it is logical Kaapland will be an independent nation with Afrikaans as the official language.
Both in the island of Montreal and in Kaapstadt (Capetwon) just over 40% of the population speak the official language of the province but in the rest of the province over 80% of the population speak it. And it is logical Afrikaan speakers (coloreds, blacks and whites) from the rest of South Africa are moving to Kaapland where they feel more at home.
So that´s the future for Kaapland (5.6 million people and over 50% colored)as a sovereign nation.
Posted by: Enrique | February 1st, 2008 at 2:53 pm | Report this comment