ANC politics of compromise a dangerous game

We all understand that politics is often about compromise, trade offs, and appeasement. In the ANC’s case, the politics of compromise is happening around former president Jacob Zuma, and it is being done in the name of party unity. So, while Cyril Ramaphosa is de facto president, the party seems to be hellbent on ensuring that he toes the unity line and does nothing to rock the boat where Zuma is concerned.

There is much speculation about the role Zuma may still play in the ANC.

Ramaphosa himself last week stated that Zuma would not be sidelined and would be used to fulfill various roles in the party. He was not a model of clarity on what these roles might be. On the weekend, there was much speculation that Zuma may play a major role in an ANC elders’ council intended to advise the government and the president.

It seems inexplicable that the party wants to placate the man who brought it to its knees. It removed him as president because its supporters sent the clearest signal possible that they were heartily sick of the massive corruption and state capture that had become synonymous with the Zuma administration.

It was obvious the party would suffer in the polls if it did nothing.

The ANC decided it was not prudent to vote in the successor Zuma had handpicked.

It chose Ramaphosa because he was widely regarded as having some integrity, wisdom and vision and would, without doubt, improve the party’s electoral pull.

But now, in the name of unity, Ramaphosa cannot act decisively against those who brought the party into disrepute in the first place.

The president cannot in one breath speak of his reform agenda, undoing state capture and punishing its enablers and – in the next breath – speak about the role he envisages Zuma can play.

Zuma was the chief enabler. He is facing charges of fraud and corruption in court. Why would you want a man like that as advisor?

If the ANC wants the respect and the vote of the majority of this nation, it should cut Zuma and his cronies loose and let them face the consequences of their actions.

It seems inexplicable that the party wants to placate the man [Jacob Zuma] who brought it to its knees