AS THE public groundswell calling for
President Jacob Zuma to resign reached a crescendo on Friday, the
African National Congress (ANC) closed ranks around its president.
To
many observers, the ANC’s response looked irrational: holding on to Mr
Zuma at this point will continue to damage the organisation, its public
image and its electoral prospects.
But this was not an irrational decision. It was calculated both on necessity and risk.
On the point of necessity, no matter the disinformation swirling around over whether the ANC officials asked Mr Zuma to resign or not, the fact is that he is intent on remaining in power. Everybody in the ANC leadership and that of the South African Communist Party and the Congress of South African Trade Unions knows this.
And under the current balance of forces in the ANC, Mr Zuma cannot be dislodged as a majority of the ANC’s national executive committee remains solidly behind him.
ANC secretary-general Gwede Mantashe was indeed sincere, when explaining at a news briefing on Friday the ANC’s decision to close ranks. He said, "that call to fire president Zuma is a call for the ANC to tear itself apart".
Had a (smaller) faction pinned its entire strategy onto a call for Mr Zuma to quit, the ANC would have brought to bear what it most wants to avoid right now and that is a split into irreconcilable factions.
The decision was also based on a calculated assessment of the risks faced by the ANC in keeping Mr Zuma in office. As a mass party, with branches and regions in every dorp and village, the ANC has a vastly different vantage point on national politics to that of its intellectual and urban detractors.
SA, the ANC understands, has not only a dual economy in which a relatively small proportion of the population participate, while the majority exist on the margins, it also has a dual political reality. What happens in the courts, in taxis and on talk shows does not happen in the homes or the social grant queues of Ugu or uThukela.
So while urban black jazz lovers booed Arts and Culture Minister Nathi Mthethwa off the stage at the Cape Town International Jazz Festival on Saturday night, on Sunday the people of the townships and villages around Ladysmith, KwaZulu-Natal, welcomed Mr Zuma rapturously at a government event to discuss drought relief.
In this parallel world, where the incessant chatter of social media platforms clamouring against Mr Zuma is not heard and the elegant letters from ANC stalwarts are not seen, people are getting on with living. Much of this revolves around accessing their scant opportunities: social grants, housing, public works employment and basic municipal services, all of which come to them via the ANC.
To anyone who spends any time in these communities, it is plain to see that the ANC figures vary largely in daily existence.
But as with most political decisions, which are propelled by circumstances and reactive, there are significant downsides to the ANC’s Friday decision, which is almost certain to be echoed today when an extended meeting of the national working committee is held.
The first big problem is Julius Malema and the Economic Freedom Fighters. Mr Malema was the greatest beneficiary of the week’s events. Not only did he do the country a favour by bringing Mr Zuma to account, he emerged from it looking like the model constitutionalist, wielding his copy of the book, and declaring that he is ready to fight the ANC in the most legitimate way, at the ballot box.
It was a victory made sweeter by his graduation triumph the night before, in which the top officials of the EFF posed with him in their berets and academic gowns.
The EFF, which the DA’s market research recently showed has doubled its support from 6% to 12% since the 2014 election, will now enjoy a fresh surge of public support, particularly among urban voters as the political ground continues to tilt in its favour.
As the choice over Mr Zuma for the ANC was a choice between organisational unity and the moral high ground, the ANC could not hold on to both. By refusing to do the right thing, the moral high ground has again been handed over to opposition parties.
The second big problem is that despite having closed ranks, the ANC’s unity doesn’t run deep.
Mr Mantashe says the leadership will visit all 52 ANC regions in three days to convey the decision to back Mr Zuma. This could help defuse tensions on the ground, but the problem is the ANC has other difficult processes ahead of it.
Election candidates must be chosen and lists compiled. As a great deal hinges on who is chosen, this will be fraught, even violent.
Unity over Mr Zuma for now in order to avoid a split is one thing; reconfiguring the balance of forces at local level is another. The ANC has not yet held itself together.
 |
| Gwede Mantashe. Picture: REUTERS/SIPHIWE SIBEKO |
But this was not an irrational decision. It was calculated both on necessity and risk.
On the point of necessity, no matter the disinformation swirling around over whether the ANC officials asked Mr Zuma to resign or not, the fact is that he is intent on remaining in power. Everybody in the ANC leadership and that of the South African Communist Party and the Congress of South African Trade Unions knows this.
And under the current balance of forces in the ANC, Mr Zuma cannot be dislodged as a majority of the ANC’s national executive committee remains solidly behind him.
ANC secretary-general Gwede Mantashe was indeed sincere, when explaining at a news briefing on Friday the ANC’s decision to close ranks. He said, "that call to fire president Zuma is a call for the ANC to tear itself apart".
Had a (smaller) faction pinned its entire strategy onto a call for Mr Zuma to quit, the ANC would have brought to bear what it most wants to avoid right now and that is a split into irreconcilable factions.
The decision was also based on a calculated assessment of the risks faced by the ANC in keeping Mr Zuma in office. As a mass party, with branches and regions in every dorp and village, the ANC has a vastly different vantage point on national politics to that of its intellectual and urban detractors.
SA, the ANC understands, has not only a dual economy in which a relatively small proportion of the population participate, while the majority exist on the margins, it also has a dual political reality. What happens in the courts, in taxis and on talk shows does not happen in the homes or the social grant queues of Ugu or uThukela.
So while urban black jazz lovers booed Arts and Culture Minister Nathi Mthethwa off the stage at the Cape Town International Jazz Festival on Saturday night, on Sunday the people of the townships and villages around Ladysmith, KwaZulu-Natal, welcomed Mr Zuma rapturously at a government event to discuss drought relief.
In this parallel world, where the incessant chatter of social media platforms clamouring against Mr Zuma is not heard and the elegant letters from ANC stalwarts are not seen, people are getting on with living. Much of this revolves around accessing their scant opportunities: social grants, housing, public works employment and basic municipal services, all of which come to them via the ANC.
To anyone who spends any time in these communities, it is plain to see that the ANC figures vary largely in daily existence.
But as with most political decisions, which are propelled by circumstances and reactive, there are significant downsides to the ANC’s Friday decision, which is almost certain to be echoed today when an extended meeting of the national working committee is held.
The first big problem is Julius Malema and the Economic Freedom Fighters. Mr Malema was the greatest beneficiary of the week’s events. Not only did he do the country a favour by bringing Mr Zuma to account, he emerged from it looking like the model constitutionalist, wielding his copy of the book, and declaring that he is ready to fight the ANC in the most legitimate way, at the ballot box.
It was a victory made sweeter by his graduation triumph the night before, in which the top officials of the EFF posed with him in their berets and academic gowns.
The EFF, which the DA’s market research recently showed has doubled its support from 6% to 12% since the 2014 election, will now enjoy a fresh surge of public support, particularly among urban voters as the political ground continues to tilt in its favour.
As the choice over Mr Zuma for the ANC was a choice between organisational unity and the moral high ground, the ANC could not hold on to both. By refusing to do the right thing, the moral high ground has again been handed over to opposition parties.
The second big problem is that despite having closed ranks, the ANC’s unity doesn’t run deep.
Mr Mantashe says the leadership will visit all 52 ANC regions in three days to convey the decision to back Mr Zuma. This could help defuse tensions on the ground, but the problem is the ANC has other difficult processes ahead of it.
Election candidates must be chosen and lists compiled. As a great deal hinges on who is chosen, this will be fraught, even violent.
Unity over Mr Zuma for now in order to avoid a split is one thing; reconfiguring the balance of forces at local level is another. The ANC has not yet held itself together.
No comments:
Post a Comment