Zuma’s call for unity a ploy to buy time
The unity ticket pushed for by President Jacob Zuma at the ANC’s national policy conference in Soweto this week is a facade.
It is a stealthy way to retain the rotten, patronage-ridden, rent-seeking faction on to whose coat-tails the Guptas continue to clutch in case they lose the elective conference in December. It would prevent any meaningful attempt by a new leadership to clean up the mess Zuma’s administration will undoubtedly leave behind.
The testing of the waters that the policy conference allows each faction that is set to square off at the party’s December elective gathering, did not quite go according to Zuma and his faction’s expectations. It was clear after this group failed to prevent secretary-general Gwede Mantashe from delivering a scathing diagnostic report on the state of the party that Zuma himself had, according to insiders, wanted to block.
The numerical advantage this group held for so long is beginning to slip and the balance of forces looks vastly different to what it did even a year ago. Signs of revolt have been bubbling beneath the surface for a long time and began manifesting when ANC national executive committee member Derek Hanekom first called on Zuma to step aside as the president late in 2016.
In typical Zuma fashion, he gleefully announced that there were no winners or losers at the conference as he closed the gathering on Wednesday.
Yet it is clear that the president and his allies were shown that their attempts to completely capture the party are set to come up against increasing resistance; the numbers are growing with each leaked Gupta e-mail or lost court case against his administration. Zuma then launched into a lengthy tirade in which he was at pains to explain why it was critical to unite the party and that to do so, it should amend its constitution to allow for a power-sharing deal in December, to accommodate both the winning and losing factions. He suggested that the losing candidate should automatically become the deputy president and the candidate for deputy president should be accommodated by adding an additional deputy president.
That would be chaotic, to put it mildly — particularly when choosing which deputy president goes to the Union Buildings and which one remains at Luthuli House.
And the current paralysis due to warring factions would continue, as the same two groups keep squaring off on critical issues due to their vastly different approaches to governance and the economy.
The suggestion first emerged from Zuma’s home province, KwaZulu-Natal, which is set to make up the largest delegation to the December conference. Zuma neatly articulated a factional position, which he argued would do away with factionalism and slates.
His comments took me back to an interview with former president of SA Kgalema Motlanthe, who described the ANC’s first elective conference after its unbanning. During this conference, it was critical to unite the ANC as 20% of the delegates were members of the party before it was banned and almost 80% came in after its unbanning.
The contest for deputy president was between Chris Hani and Thabo Mbeki at the time, he said. After discussions between the elders, it was decided that Walter Sisulu should make himself available to serve in the post and after his nomination, Mbeki and Hani withdrew from the contest. But Harry Gwala, who was part of the decision, decided to stand for the post.
“When I asked him why he was standing, he said to me, ‘No, the ANC constitution says every member in good standing has the right to nominate whosoever and be nominated for any position of leadership in the ANC’. And he said to me, ‘you know, 80% of these delegates at this conference don’t know how the legal ANC operated’ and ’if we do not teach them by example, here at this conference, by the time we reach the third conference following this one, leadership in the ANC will not be elected, it will be arranged.’ That’s what he said to me. And he said: ‘Look, that’s why I’m accepting nomination for deputy president, but I’m voting for Sisulu myself’.”
Cosatu’s 2012 national congress leadership election was decided by “consensus”, but shortly afterwards, the divide between the factions that had come to agreement deepened, and the bitter fight eventually led to the labour federation’s split.
Motlanthe used the historical account of Gwala’s decision to stand to explain why he had accepted nomination to compete against Zuma in 2012. He also explained why he did not accept a proposal to stay on in Zuma’s leadership corps after the election. “Well, you know, I was clear that if I continued serving in that leadership, it would be a constant battle just to get them to operate on the basis of the constitution.”
That is at the heart of why Zuma’s power-sharing proposal is so flawed. The ANC is in its crisis due to its leadership’s inability to hold the party together.
New leadership is intended to bring about change — depending on who wins. So, why would a group bucking the current trajectory of the party, as represented by Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa, want to share power with those who caused the malaise?
IF I CONTINUED SERVING… IT WOULD BE A BATTLE TO GET THEM TO OPERATE ON THE BASIS OF THE CONSTITUTION Kgalema Motlanthe Former president
● Marrian is political editor.