Cyril’s game of patience
Amid the euphoria caused by the sudden resignation of Jacob Zuma — did anyone really want him to stay? — Cyril Ramaphosa’s ascent to power and the swooning over his masterful delivery of his maiden state of the nation address, a little detail has been forgotten or simply buried in the excitement.
The inconvenient truth is that David Mabuza made it all possible. That hoodlum saved us from a fate worse than death.
Were it not for Mabuza, or — put it the other way — had he carried out the original mandate, it would have been Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma who emerged victorious at Nasrec. She would not have insisted on being named president, would not have taken the oath of office, delivered the state of the nation address or hosted the presidential golf day this week.
Zuma would not only still be in charge, he would have become even more dominant and assertive. It would have guaranteed Zuma’s rule almost into perpetuity because Dlamini-Zuma would merely have been an extension of his kleptocracy.
With Zuma still in power Bathabile Dlamini, Faith Muthambi, Mosebenzi Zwane et al would be strutting around like peacocks. Incompetence would have a new lease of life. The Hawks and the NPA would still be in cloud-cuckoo-land, the Vrede dairy scandal the furthest thing from their minds.
The Guptas would not be on run; they would in fact be contemplating another cabinet reshuffle. Ramaphosa would be out, most certainly to be replaced by Dlamini-Zuma so that she could be taught the tricks of the trade by the master and his minders.
This is not to suggest that we’re out of the woods yet. But the flicker of light, that glimmer of hope at the end of this dim and dingy tunnel, would not have materialised. We would still be in a prohibitively dark place, with no hope or prospect of salvation. In fact, had Dlamini-Zuma triumphed, it would now be full steam ahead to perdition. We would be about to make Venezuela look like a picnic. That pleasant sound is the nation’s collective sigh of relief. It was a close shave.
Mabuza has not been in the public eye much to receive his accolades. Camerashy probably, or maybe just unused to the limelight that comes with being a kingmaker. The Zuma crowd simply regard him as a Judas. They voted for him as ANC deputy president, only for him to betray them. The cheek of it.
But Mabuza has made one important intervention since Nasrec, expressing his full and unqualified support for Ramaphosa at a time when key Zuma loyalists such as Ace Magashule and Jessie Duarte seemed emboldened to launch a public counterattack against the ANC president. And it is doubtful whether, without Mabuza in his corner, Ramaphosa would have been able to move so early against Zuma.
Ramaphosa has made great play of wanting to pursue what he terms ethical leadership. That is laudable. But surely it can’t sit too well with the unscrupulous manner in which Mabuza helped him to secure his own leadership of the party.
Mabuza has a cupboard teeming with skeletons, and given Ramaphosa’s undertaking to crack down on rampant corruption, how would he justify having such a compromised character as his deputy in the government? And will he move against Mabuza when the skeletons start tumbling out of the closet?
Speculation is rife that Ramaphosa may pick a woman as his deputy, though it’s difficult to believe Mabuza would let such an opportunity pass him by. But a woman deputy president would be a good thing. It’s about time the country matched its stated desire for gender equality with real action.
The two women in pole position had mixed fortunes this week. The money was always on Lindiwe Sisulu, but her performance in parliament may have put a damper on her chances. She was uncharacteristically incoherent and absentminded, although this alone should not be enough to disqualify her.
Naledi Pandor’s performance, on the other hand, was polished and assured. She owned the house. She’s the real deal.
Ultimately Ramaphosa will choose whoever he’s comfortable with. It will also depend on what role he wants his deputy to play. Some, for instance, prefer a deputy who plays no role at all, an empty suit who just follows orders.
But Mabuza is not Ramaphosa’s only headache. Zuma has left him a cabinet crawling with corrupt and incompetent individuals. It turns out they have no scruples about telling lies as well.
Ramaphosa got the biggest applause during his state of the nation address when he promised to crack down on corruption and reduce the size of the cabinet. But this week he seemed to backtrack a bit, warning against targeting certain ministers. Is he getting cold feet? Or have the comrades succeeded in sowing some doubts in his mind?
The contract he seems to have struck with the public is one of clean government. If such a yardstick is to be applied, the majority of the cabinet will have to go. People such as Malusi Gigaba and Lynne Brown are not only deeply implicated in state capture, they have now been shown to be liars. For Ramaphosa to fail to act against them would be to tarnish his own reputation.
He will need to cleanse the Augean stables, as it were, if the country is to emerge from this moral quagmire. Our leaders should be the beacon on the hill.