Snap election could be a win-win move that breaks SA’s deadlock

The ANC would defeat an opposition in disarray and President Jacob Zuma could exit in a dignified manner

The political sands in SA are shifting, and shifting quickly. The ANC is moving from a position of weakness to strength, while the main opposition parties, the DA and EFF, are struggling. The big elephant now in the room is the future of President Jacob Zuma – will he survive, jump or be pushed before his term in office expires?

Contrary to popular belief, it may well be none of the above. This is why: a “push” would demonstrate ANC president Cyril Ramaphosa’s new-found strength and send a clear signal to financial markets that change is imminent – cementing a clear departure from the Zuma era.

However, considering Ramaphosa’s narrow victory margin in December, the fact that he still has a number of Zuma loyalists within his leadership team, as well as the unity narrative that has been put forward since his ascendancy, a messy exit would only serve to further fracture the ANC.

Ramaphosa himself has emphasised the need for a dignified and orderly exit for Zuma. Furthermore, the party’s brains trust remains wary of recalling a sitting president before his term is finished (as they did with Thabo Mbeki), noting that another such move would set a dangerous precedent for the country by institutionalising a “winner-takes-all culture” and undermine the concept of term limits.

Considering this, a “jump” seems the least likely option. While it would be the most painless solution, Zuma remains defiant and has made it clear he will not entertain such an offer. There are a number of reasons for this. First, he is aware the party is reluctant to recall him as they did with Mbeki, and can therefore “call their bluff”. Second, he remains the president with full executive powers, and as such has the power to reshuffle his cabinet and remove the likes of Ramaphosa from their official positions in the government.

Third, his loyalty and patronage networks will not be easily dismantled, and it is not entirely certain that fresh impeachment and no-confidence motions in Parliament would succeed against him.

Fourth, he maintains that he has done nothing wrong and resigning would be a tacit admission of guilt.

Zuma is aware he still has a number of aces up his sleeve, and is therefore unlikely to leave without a fight. Over and above the timing, the manner of Zuma’s departure is what really matters now. Here the ANC faces a conundrum. The party’s leadership needs to walk a delicate tightrope between unity, stability and accountability.

It is also acutely aware that historical precedent means the way it manages the two centres of power (with rival leaders of the ANC presiding over the party and governmental leadership) will have significant longer-term ramifications for the party and the country.

With this in mind, the high stakes game will continue, with both camps launching tactical counterstrikes. But with both of these solutions unpalatable, a more elegant, middle ground solution becomes increasingly plausible: an early election.

Certainly, the prospect of a snap election is creating some anxiety in opposition quarters, primarily because this option would have a number of benefits for the ANC: it would allow the party to capitalise on its more favourable image following the December conference, take advantage of the opposition’s weakness, and avoid the disruption and brand damage of a forced removal. It offers the dual benefits of offering Zuma a dignified exit, while allowing Ramaphosa to take the reins in a smooth manner.

For now, Ramaphosa is enjoying an impressive honeymoon period. By saying the right things and managing the optics around change, he has the investor community on board without having yet delivered anything tangible. He has also shrewdly targeted the low-hanging fruit – changes in the Eskom board, the reactivation of the Hawks and the creation of asset forfeiture units were “quick wins” that faced very little political resistance. Certainly, the Davos charm offensive and series of anticorruption moves have generated optimism and created a buoyant mood towards the country.

Meanwhile, the DA, preoccupied with internal wrangling and mudslinging, has mastered the art of scoring own goals. At a time when it has been handed the keys to SA’s metros, with an opportunity to leverage its self-styled brand of “good governance”, the DA is shooting itself in the foot. The blurring of state-party lines, the lack of transparency in its dealings with Cape Town mayor Patricia de Lille and the clumsy management of Cape Town’s water crisis have severely dented public trust in the party. Furthermore, former party leader Helen Zille’s prominent public role, despite being suspended from party activities, has created the impression that Mmusi Maimane is not in control. At the same time, allegations of corruption and jobs for pals have rocked Herman Mashaba’s Johannesburg government.

The EFF, too, is struggling for relevance. This is a party that is big on theatre but very light on substance. Its recent stunt in vandalising H&M stores is a prime example. In the wake of a controversial advert, the party trashed a number of the Swedish retailer’s flagship stores. While protesting against H&M’s insensitivity was certainly warranted, the use of violence ceded the moral high ground and alienated many sympathetic to the party’s antiracist position.

The move was cynically timed to deflect attention from the ANC birthday celebrations, but was criticised for being an opportunistic publicity stunt. Far more importantly though, the ANC has effectively neutered the EFF by stripping it of its raison-d’etre. In a tactical masterstroke, the party has absorbed the three issues that made the EFF relevant – Zuma, land reform and free education. Indeed, many disillusioned middle-class voters, historically aligned with the ANC and who fled to the EFF in protest, will now be tempted to return to their natural political home.

With this in mind, tactically an early election represents a win-win for all parties within the ANC and serves as an effective conflict-mitigation strategy. Legally, the Constitution allows an early poll under section 50 and the ANC would have the parliamentary numbers to ratify such a decision. Notably, the DA and EFF have in recent times suggested they are ready for an early election, so it would be difficult for them to suddenly oppose such a decision.

That is not to say the idea would be accepted without resistance. For starters, the ANC would need to clearly demonstrate why a snap election would be beneficial for the country, rather than for its narrow party interests.

Then there are the logistical and financial stresses associated with organising a snap election which, given the state of the Independent Electoral Commission, may be all but impossible. Lastly, an early election would likely produce a lower voter turnout than previous elections, which may create a legitimacy quandary for Ramaphosa. An ANC electoral win on the back of low participation is hardly the kind of outright endorsement he needs to stamp his authority on the party.

Although there are important financial and logistical considerations to navigate, on a costbenefit basis, the ANC could still deem it in its best interest to bring the election forward. Such a scenario would in effect mean the country would enter a holding period until the ballot — but it would remove uncertainty around Zuma’s future and may indicate sufficient directional change to catalyse the investment cycle.

The state of affairs is an indictment of the nature our politics – that a simple change in personnel is seemingly sufficient to dissociate Ramaphosa’s “new ANC” from years of mismanagement under Zuma is deeply concerning. However, it is a reality, and with the ANC showing signs of regeneration and the opposition in such a dismal state, an early election would see the ANC emerge as the big winner.