South Africa's former president Jacob Zuma is backing the ruling African National Congress (ANC)'s latest rival, the Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK) party, in the upcoming national elections. In doing so, he will not only challenge his ANC politically, but also assert its legacy.
Media reports say the new party is Zuma's brainchild and uses the name of the ANC's former military wing. The party's launch coincided with the 62nd anniversary of the real Umkhonto we Sizwe (MK), which was formed on December 16, 1961 to fight the apartheid government.
Mr Zuma could not have been more bold. But the ANC remains vague, criticizing him and expelling him without taking decisive action. In the meantime, he is actively campaigning to unseat him. why?
I have researched and written extensively about the politics of the ANC and its alliance partners, the Congress of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu) and the South African Communist Party (SACP). I was also one of the editors of the book 'The Zuma Government: A Critical Challenge'.
In my opinion, the reason the ANC is wary of confronting Mr Zuma is because the party is tied to having defended Mr Zuma's bad behavior in the past. The ANC created the Zuma problem. The party and its alliance partners aided and abetted his kleptocracy and facilitated his state capture. They constructed Zuma as a populist with a penchant for inciting mobs. Now they are paralyzed and unable to act against him.
The ANC is also concerned that expelling him could portray him as a victim.
Taking decisive action against him will require the party to confront its own demons. It will be exposed as enabling him.
The ANC's reluctance to hire or fire Zuma has its roots in the events of 2005. Thabo Mbeki, South Africa's president at the time, sacked Zuma as vice president after he became embroiled in corruption allegations. That Zuma used this to build his case that he was the victim still bothers the ANC. With the 2024 elections just around the corner, I am worried that the same thing will happen again.
Mr Zuma's political career currently relies on a new party whose electoral strength has not yet been tested. That pales in comparison to the support he's gotten in the past.
My argument is that the political cost (in terms of lost votes) of not ousting him is greater than the cost of ousting him. By not acting against him, the ANC is failing to “regenerate” itself as promised. This could make the party look weak and lose electoral support.
Zuma and the ANC
The ANC has known since early 1997 that Zuma was likely to do this, selecting him as Thabo Mbeki's vice-president, paving the way for the country's top job.
South African author and journalist Mark Jevisser writes:
Mbeki and those around him began to worry that Zuma had a dangerous combination of unhealthy ambition and poor judgment.
they were right.
Because of this fear, he was not initially considered for the post of vice president. Instead, Mbeki offered the job to Inkatha Freedom Party leader Mangosuthu Buthelezi. However, due to Zuma's machinations, this failed. He eventually became vice president. However, he was initially bitter about the fact that he was ignored in that position.
During Mbeki's presidency, relations between the ANC and its alliance partners became frosty.
While the dispute was over Mbeki's free-market economic policies, Cosatu and the SACP agreed that the ANC's aims of socio-economic transformation and the empowerment of previously marginalized peoples when it came to power in 1994. It was criticized as a neoliberal policy that deviated from the United States.
Zuma used this to position himself as a center around which those allegedly injured by Mbeki could unite.
The rise of populist Zuma
In Zuma, the Alliance had found someone who could represent its ideological position in the country's policy choices. However, he was part of the ANC leadership that adopted Mbeki's economic strategy and was not known for espousing left-wing politics. Unfortunately for them, he turned out not to be their ideological ally during his tenure.
Later that year, Zuma was accused of raping a friend's daughter. Although he was acquitted, his actions were stigmatized as immoral.
This alone should have disqualified him from any leadership position. But that didn't matter to his allies, who ensured that he became president of the ANC in 2007 and president of the nation in 2009. To the Alliance, he was an unstoppable tsunami.
The ANC accused the judiciary of being counter-revolutionary for ruling against Zuma. The party claimed his prosecution was political persecution ordered by Mbeki. ANC Youth League leader Julius Malema then declared that he was prepared to kill and die for Zuma.
take control without being punished
Mr Zuma's eventual ascension to the presidency in 2009 was praised by his left-wing allies Cosatu and the SACP.
It is a victory for Mbeki against neoliberal orthodoxy.
Mr Zuma did not live up to these expectations. Yet he continued to enjoy the support of the Tripartite Alliance.
He continued to subvert the criminal justice system to avoid prosecution on corruption charges.
The judiciary resisted, angering the ANC and its coalition partners.
They always kept the ranks closed to protect Zuma from liability. He cited “dangerously flawed judgment” in connection with the appointment of Menzi Simelani as head of the National Prosecuting Authority, despite evidence that he lied to the Presidential Commission of Inquiry. It survived numerous no-confidence motions in parliament.
Among the notable no-confidence motions against Mr Zuma by the ANC-dominated parliament is over the use of public money to renovate private property in Nkandla.
The stage is set for Zuma to wreak havoc with impunity. When it became clear that he had entrusted the running of the country to his friends, the Gupta family, his leftist allies began to distance themselves from him. It was too late.
In 2015, he sacked Finance Minister Nhlanhla Nene, but replaced him with an unknown appointee approved by President Gupta, with his sights set on the national treasury.
The market crashed and the rand plummeted. However, the ANC still defended him in parliament.
Towards the end of 2016, the public protector released a damning report showing how the province had been captured on Zuma's orders. Once again, the ANC thwarted attempts to remove him.
He just resigned on February 14, 2018. This was not due to his misdemeanors, but because he was no longer the president of the ANC.
what needs to happen
The ANC's indecision is of no use. The party's claim that he is no longer a member because he has “departed” from the party is wishful thinking. He has vowed to remain an ANC member.
The only way to revoke his membership is to expel him. This should have happened sooner, at least before the ANC's 112th anniversary celebrations earlier this month. They could have used the platform to explain their decision to purge the party of its detractors.
