More perspectives on Jacob Zuma
Posted on Wednesday 19 December, 2007
Filed Under International
Jacob Zuma has been confirmed as the leader of the African National Congress, and so seems set to become president of South Africa in 2009. Given that he enjoys majority support of the South African Communist Party and the main union federation Cosatu, this will be seen by some sections of the left as unalloyed good news.
But as I argued a couple of days ago, there are serious question marks over the man. Let’s leave aside the recent acquittal on rape charges and the corruption accusations he still faces. It ultimately comes down to a question of politics.
For a start, it is already clear that a Zuma presidency would represent no challenge to capital. Consider, for instance, this direct quote to an audience of potential investors in Los Angeles recently:
“Some have said that if Zuma is in charge of the administration, it will move left because of his support from the trade unions, which is very left, and those from SA Communist Party and therefore that the economic policies of the government will change.
“I had thought this was not a big issue, but I am grateful that I have opportunity to explain and would love to tell you brothers and sisters that nothing is going to change.”
Mind you, some sensible-sounding people combine Zuma scepticism with a slightly more upbeat take on the situation. Since my earlier post, I’ve had email correspondence with a democratic leftist with firsthand experience of South African politics and trade union organisation.
As his observations will obviously be worth more than anything I can write from London, let me quote some of his analysis at length. First, there were some positives about the conference process, he insists:
The campaign was rotten, with threats and vote bribery playing a big role, mainly with Mbeki loyalists trying to sway Zuma-aligned delegates coming out of provincial meetings that showed a Zuma lead. It is a victory for the ANC as an organisation that it can come through this, have a clean vote and ‘regime change’, and then have the rivals embrace and shake hands in front of the delegates.
The role of deputy president of the ANC went to Kgalema Motlanthe, a former leader of the Mineworkers’ union and until today ANC secretary general, who has received high marks for fairness, honesty, and organisation building. That is good for the ANC, for the movement, and for the country in general …
He agrees that Zuma has not been upfront about his intentions if elected, but argues:
That is not entirely the result of his political slipperiness. Zuma has always maintained that it would be inappropriate for an ANC candidate to campaign in contradiction to standing ANC policy …
One key will be who is elected to the national executive committee. The Zuma slate, if elected, could usher in a more pro-labour, pro-social investment, AIDS-rational, Mugabe-pressuring ANC political platform. This will not necessarily affect government, however, until there is another national election.
The ANC will almost certainly win that contest, so the issue is who gets into the cabinet at the top a re-drawn ANC list. Already we see ANC spokesmen like Motlanthe reassuring the media that there will be basic continuity in economic policy, so I’m looking for incremental changes, not revolutionary ones.
The other big question mark is liberation movement culture. Will Zuma unite the movement and reach out to social partners, or will he replay and deepen the ugly, conspiratorial politics of Mbekiism? Will he keep up his gross populism around women, gays, and the death penalty? We don’t know.
Finally, he adds that a split in the ANC is not excluded:
I think this outcome makes a split in the ANC less likely, at least for now. If Mbeki had won, it would have looked very bad. Zuma came out of the round of pre-conference provincial meetings with the lead, so an Mbeki triumph would have looked like vote buying had won the day.
The left (SACP and COSATU) and some regional groups (especially the KwaZulu-Natal ANC organization, Zuma’s home team) would have exploded in rage. It’s possible that had the vote gone the other way, the ANC would have split by the end of the conference. Then there might have been an ‘Official ANC’ (led by Mbeki) and an ‘ANC/Workers Party/Zulu Impi’ (led by Zuma) fighting it out in future elections.
As it is, the left and the Zulu nationalists of the ANC are partying, and at least as far as I can tell Mbeki and his people are being disciplined and accepting the outcome. The ANC survives intact with the most likely splitters now in the driver’s seat.
In the long run, the unity of the ANC depends on whether Zuma can reunite the whole organization and win the respect of most ANC cadre. If he appears to be punishing Mbeki supporters there could be a split.
One out of four ANC members lives in the Eastern Cape province, the ethnic home of Mbeki’s (and Mandela’s) Xhosa ethnic group. If nasty internal politics continue, the worst case scenario is still possible: instead of breaking along economic or ideological lines, the ANC could divide over ethnicity. That is the way to the end of democracy and a really ugly future.
Thanks for this useful information. Other informed contributions welcome, particularly from South African comrades.
[Picture shows Mbeki, left, and Zuma, right]
<<Go back
Comments
15 Responses to “More perspectives on Jacob Zuma”
It certainly has got trouble written all it.
Personally (an old codger writes) I’ve never indulged in much romanticism about the ANC. That’s because I became acquainted with some of them, at a tender age. A prominent group were helpers in my Woodcraft Group in Muswell Hill. Obviously one had sympathy with them as exiles, and their offspring were okay, but I must say that there was something about them…Narrow-minded Stalinism doesn’t even go enough to cover it.
ANC Shakeup: Mbeki Out – Zuma In
Jacob Zuma, from what I have read about this guy, he has faced multiple corruption and a rape charges but never convicted; he is left of Mbeki; he is very homophobic; but also an ”old school” ANC man, that goes way back and has battle s…
I suspect that if people were ever romantic about the ANC it concerned its brave and epic leadership of a titanic mass democratic struggle against a racist tyranny in one of the world’s most significant countries, rather than its role in the leadership of Muswell Hill Woodcraft Folk, Perhaps, like Andrew, we should have been paying more attention to the latter. In nay case, romanticism about the ANC was never a sin the British far left can be accused of, since they preferred to ignore it/slander it while promoting the likes of the PAC/Azapo/various utterly irrelevant Trotskyist fringe groupings.
I cannot, nor will not, dare to comment on politics in South Africa, since I am ignorant of the political situation.
Bringing things closer to home, the British left had little of value to contribute to the situation in the six counties. Surely a matter of major significance?
Some people, on current blogs, despair of the left in Britain. My early ‘political awakening’ was the civil rights struggles in ‘Northern Ireland’.
I am not aware that the left in Britain ever got that situation right, nor its consequences.
I don’t expect any comment from the British left re the ANC to be anything other than abstract. Maybe correct in the abstract. But it will not contribute to the struggle in any worthwhile way.
The left in Britain has been fucked for a long time. You learn to live with it.
That Hugo Chavez – what a fucking loser, eh?
I imagine something will appear very soon on this, but here’s an older article from the CWI website, which looks at the prospects of a Zuma presidency, among other things:
htt\p//www.socialistworld.net/eng/2007/12/06southa.html
A twit wrote “In any case, romanticism about the ANC was never a sin the British far left can be accused of, since they preferred to ignore it/slander it while promoting the likes of the PAC/Azapo/various utterly irrelevant Trotskyist fringe groupings.”
Sadly most of the above is not true. In fact when they did have an opportunity to denounce the ANC and MK they sat on the story. I refer to the mutinies of MK fighters detailed in Baruch Hirson’s publication Searchlight South Africa.
As for promoting the Trotskyist movement in South Africa here for the most part the comrades failed the test again and even called for an ANC vote after that party was in power rather then seeking to build a workers movement against capitalism in South Africa. So much for proletarian internationalism…
The fruits of the failure of the Brtish far left to encourage an independent workers movement in South Africa can now be seen with the populist shyster jacob Zuma attaining leadership of the ANC. A leadership that will remain firmly allied to the priorities f the IMF just alike Mbeki.
The Chinese are investing in Africa. The IMF faces competition from the Bank of the South.
Zuma can afford to make some risks, and that’s why I think he can be pushed. Note that the outrage at his homophobic comments resulted in an apology rather than stubborn bigotry…
Mike, I can appreciate that they may not have met your own lofty standards of sectarianism, but any glance through the backfiles of, say, Labour Briefing/ISG, WRP Workers’ Press, Socialist Organier, the SLG etc etc will provide bountiful evidence for my assertion.
And all of the above backed the disastrous Workers’ List Party campaign in the 1994 elecions, running against the ANC when it needed evey vote it could get to stand a chance of changing the constitution. Fortunately the masses showed utter contempt for this stunt and the few thousand votes the List got didn’t affect things too much.
“The fruits of the failure of the Brtish far left to encourage an independent workers movement in South Africa can now be seen”
This is how you see things isn’t it? The word goes out from a London telephone box and the whole world should fall into line. Sorry, it doesn’t work like that and black South Africans can recognise racist and colonialist mindsets even if they adopt a “Trotskyist” phraseology.
My efforts to bring sectarian cheer to leftist trainspotters of all lands – sub-group, the Struggle in Muswell Hill Woodcraft Folk – seems to have mightily vexed Eck.
Still, it certainly beats discussing Dave’s original point. That there are serious grounds for considering Zuma dodgy, politically and personally.
BTW: I don’t recall Briefing launching a campaign to back the Workers’ List.
Andrew, you are probably right re Briefing – by 1994 the ISG/SLG component who were behind the ultra-left line on SA had left so they could well have taken a more sensible position.
It would seem that Eck prefers a populist pro-capitalist and pro-imperialist govenment, which is exactly the class nature of the ANC administration, to a workers movement independent of all fractions of capital.
Yes, Mike, whatever. I don’t necessarily prefer realiy to fantasy, it’s just that I prefer to build my approach to politics around the former.
Eck – “Black Trotskyists are reactionaries too” as the famous Sechaba put it
I love the idea of Muswell Hill trendy lefties dismissing the ANC – perhaps even the Tambo family – for their discipline when those people lived, every day with the threat of assassination by the racist regime.
And no wonder the racists wanted to kill them.
Read this article and ask youself who were the real revolutionaries of N10?
By the way, Dave, excellent article. Another reminder why I need to visit this site more often. Not my politics, but cool and rational and informative.
Yes, Eck, whatever. I necessarily prefer socialist principle to bourgeois opportunism, I prefer to build my approach to politics around the former.
Good article by Dave and excellent comments by Eck and LOTB (and I never thought I’d be saying that). I still can’t get over how Mike could have posted that line “The fruits of the failure of the Brtish far left to encourage an independent workers movement in South Africa can now be seen with the populist shyster jacob Zuma attaining leadership of the ANC.”