Thank you for the
invitation to share my views on why Jacob Zuma is popular in the Tripartite Alliance.
Firstly, Zuma has been popular in the ANC and its associate structures long before the
current fracas and succession campaign. Secondly, Zuma has been popular with the ANC
leadership; for instance he was long known to be close to Mbeki during the exile years,
and many people in the ANC viewed them as close friends.
Thirdly, it must be remembered that Zuma is highly regarded in the security structures of
the country, because of his previous role as senior member of MK and Head of ANC
Intelligence in exile. He was directly responsible for deploying cadres to fight the
Apartheid regime. His job required him to spend much time with grassroots structures,
either deploying them or receiving their report-backs on missions and operations. He was
also responsible, by virtue of position, for the protection and safety of senior leaders
and commanders. It was also he that had to make the decision on whether the ANC could
trust the NP Government when the first approaches were made to usher in negotiations, and
later had to make the call on whether it was safe to return to South Africa.
His regular and widespread contact with ANC structures during the exile years and directly
afterwards required Zuma to act as a sort of welfare officer, and also compelled him to
deal with many different people and situations. He often saw to the security and other
physical and emotional needs of cadres under his command during a very uncertain time in
our history. This is the reason why he is often referred to as having the "common
touch".
Zuma was in this sense never a populist, but a trusted and popular leader for many people.
Any person who thinks that he is a mere populist is making a big mistake and seriously
underestimating him.
Nor should people make the mistake of thinking that it is only COSATU, SACP and the ANC
Youth League that are campaigning for Zuma. There are heavyweights within the ANC who are
also involved and many more who are considering on which side their bread is - and will be
- buttered. Most of Zuma's former Cabinet colleagues know that Mbeki is on the way
out and they are surely thinking of their own futures. The question of loyalty to one
particular leader becomes flexible. The influence of Mbeki is on the wane as the end of
his term approaches, and with that his ability to reward people or secure their futures
also declines.
Many people in the Tripartite Alliance dismissed the Arms Deal allegations when they first
emerged, in the process they stuck their heads in sand and went into a state of denial.
Gradually however the media exposed the names of senior ANC leaders who received illicit
benefits or were involved in questionable dealings. The Daimler Chrysler was discovered as
having given discounted vehicles to more than 30 VIPs, of course thus far only one of them
has been punished by a court of law.
Following these events, the then Head of Public Prosecutions Bulelani Ngcuka was alleged
to have given off-the-record briefings to certain editors which called into question
Zuma's leadership qualities. This later emerged after Ngcuka's infamous "prima
facie" public comments that Zuma had a corruption case to answer but that it was not
a winnable case.
This raised questions about why Zuma was not being prosecuted; was he being protected? Was
he being persecuted? The style of the ANC and Government made matters worse. Whereas in
previous years Mandela would have commented quickly and resolved such a crisis and remove
any uncertainty, the silence from Mbeki's Government was deafening. The Office of the
Presidency was conspicuous in its silence when the allegations against Zuma first emerged.
This left a vacuum which the SACP, COSATU and the ANC Youth League saw as an opportunity
to rescue a leader who was being persecuted by the technocrats in Government.
Perhaps if the Presidency had taken ownership of the matter at the outset, then matters
would have turned out differently because they left the distinct impression that Zuma was
no longer wanted by his own boss.
Then the Shaik trial judgement seemed to indirectly find Zuma guilty of the very thing
that Ngcuka had previously said could not be proved beyond reasonable doubt in court. This
further heightened the suspicion of many that Zuma was being persecuted.
To make matters worse, President Mbeki then fired Zuma from his Government position, and
contrary to previous Government claims Zuma was promptly charged with corruption. The
COSATU leadership and other Alliance structures were angry, arguing that Mbeki was wrong
in removing Zuma. They tended to equate the position of Zuma with that of an ordinary
civil servant or union member, where you wait for a trial and guilty verdict before firing
somebody. Unfortunately they forgot - chose to ignore - that Zuma was a political
appointee and it is quite correctly the President's prerogative to hire and fire political
appointees. That is why COSATU and others to this day continue to call for the
reinstatement of Zuma in his position as if he was an ordinary worker wrongfully
dismissed.
Whilst Zuma himself may be no mere populist many of those who now support him - for their
own ends - are populists and use populist tactics. The frustrations of these people and
structures, in particular COSATU and the SACP, are well-documented. They have been at
loggerheads with the ANC Government on policy issues, particularly economic policy. Vavi
and Madisha - who are now reportedly in conflict amongst themselves - had even been
insulted when they campaigned against GEAR and their struggle credentials and patriotism
was questioned. This is not a hidden campaign; it is no secret that many people in the ANC
and broader Alliance are unhappy with the policy direction taken under Mbeki's leadership.
What is being kept hidden is that the motivation for this internal conflict runs deeper
than simple policy issues; this is because the ANC and the Alliance are desperate to
protect the myth of themselves as a "broad church" that provides a home for
disparate and even contradictory political movements. We have said before that the
changing socio-political order in South Africa indicates that there will be discernible
political shifts along interest group divides distinguished by common concerns and
aspirations and not along racial lines as we witnessed before. This process will move
towards the crystallisation of two major political streams, which express the ethos of the
beneficiaries of the established order on the one hand, and the aspirations of the
emerging major social groupings that are marginalised on the other hand. These divisions
can only be resolved if the voters were allowed a say. The ANC and the Alliance cannot
avoid being affected by - and reflecting - this emergence in society of two major and
essentially opposing political streams.
When allegations such as "zulu-boy won't be President" arose, certain structures
broke away from the well-known ANC tradition of anointed leaders being chosen and then
sold to the public. They have since campaigned openly for Zuma and against the standard
ANC approach in defiance of the ANC leadership. The architects of this campaign have
seized the initiative and forced the ANC leadership for the first time in its history to
publish a document (authored by Joel Netshitenze and others) on how the succession process
will proceed.
The effect of this campaign and Zuma's popularity within the ANC as possible successor to
Mbeki, will only be measured when the ANC opens its mouth on the issue. The last word will
be said by the ANC structures, and only then will it be known whether they agree with the
leadership of COSATU, SACP and the ANC Youth League.
However in the meantime there are signs that the people opposing Zuma have not been
sitting by idly. Already there are definite indications of a dirty tricks campaign sowing
division among the leaders of COSATU and calls from certain unions that COSATU must not
lose focus of the needs of the workers.
The important question is thus not about Zuma's popularity, but about the expectations of
his supporters and why no other ANC leader has come forward to address these same
expectations and concerns. Indeed, it highlights the need for the electoral laws to be
amended to give all South African voters an opportunity to directly elect the leader of
their choice instead of being at the mercy of the whims and factional contests of the
ruling party.
|