ANC ventures on to shaky ground of rural state capture

Are the people living in former Bantustans set to become the real losers as the ANC changes? The pattern that began last week has become far clearer. President Jacob Zuma may use negotiations with the ANC top six to prolong his stay in office for a while, but he knows he is on his way out — he reportedly told supporters on the ANC national executive not to resist his removal.

One reason may be that they were reduced to a rump who know they have no political future without him. So a leadership with only a small Cyril Ramaphosa majority is now largely happy to see Zuma’s back.

Evidence grows that the Zuma era is over: the most recent and dramatic was the new Eskom board. Yes, the utility’s financial crisis was a tipping point, but Zuma would have found a way to kick the can down the road for a while if he was still in charge. So despite that small majority, ANC leaders are happy to push through commissions on state capture, support using the law against its alleged perpetrators, and of course, choosing parastatal boards for their ability, not their connections.

All of which sounds more than a little odd. Only weeks ago, about half this leadership were part of a faction that wanted nothing to do with cleaning up government. So what has changed? Were many of the members of the ANC patronage faction simply pretending? Were they really selfless public servants who were misunderstood? That seems even more unlikely.

Of course, some of those who have changed sides were sticking with Zuma’s faction because he was in power. They will stick with Ramaphosa if he offers them the posts Zuma had offered. But far more were deeply embroiled in the patronage politics that is now under pressure. Why should they allow this?

The answer is surely that the state capture that is now under attack is not the only version.

Public enterprises are obvious cash cows but, if they are drying up, there is another form of capture that may keep patronage politicians going.

As this column has pointed out before, this is using alliances between provincial governments, traditional leaders and companies (usually mines) to use rural people’s land for their own benefit.

There is no sign that this is under pressure — we have heard not a word about an ANC conference resolution that had challenged it, urging that rural communities rather than chiefs control the land.

And as long as this is so, the rural state captors are free to continue, particularly in the rural provinces that were, by no coincidence, united in the Premier League not long ago.

The conference resolution suggests most ANC members want this stopped. But does Ramaphosa agree? The only evidence is his priority visit to Zulu King Goodwill Zwelithini, which suggests far more interest in making peace with rural elites than challenging their land claims.

Ramaphosa is, of course, famed as a compromiser and conciliator and he could have decided that if the price of stabilising the ANC is giving traditional leaders what they want, it is worth paying.

If this is what is afoot, up to 12-million citizens will pay a terrible price. And the patronage faction and its opponents may have found a way of living with each other for years: the patronage group will let the new leadership clean up the mainstream economy, as long as its opponents don’t interfere with its power to carry on state capture in the countryside.

Will this work? Rural people have shown over the past few years that they don’t take abuse lying down. Could they become the new ANC’s most troublesome opposition?