Why can’t politicians see corruption’s link with violent crime?

The correctional services commissioner’s article, “How we can reduce our soaring prison population” (March 10), pointed to lots of steps that his department should undertake to reduce the challenges of overcrowding.

He correctly pointed out that to arrest rampant criminality economic opportunities have to be created for young men. But he fails to address the issue of political corruption, which has led to an unholy alliance between government officials and corrupt people in the private sector — including the privatisation of the kitchen system in his department in favour of the Watsons.

Why is it so difficult for politicians to realise the undeniable link between corruption and violent crime? Most of the young people in our jails are not hardcore criminals but people criminalised by a system that has excluded them from economic activities; hence a sociological approach to crime is imperative rather than the arrest and “throw away the key” approach preferred by Bheki Cele, himself a tainted fellow. The commissioner is correct to ask for greater collaboration in the criminal justice system, because a person arrested for stealing a loaf of bread cannot be kept in remand with unaffordable bail.

Mishack Junior Nthane, Pretoria

People in glass houses

Ben Levitas (Sunday Times, March 10) complains about attacks on Zionism, which he deems to be “incendiary, inflammatory, and hurtful to Jews”.

Whether criticism of a political ideology advocating for a homeland for a particular ethnic or religious group necessarily implies bigotry or racism against that group is debatable. Be that as it may, attacks on individuals or groups based purely on their ethnic identity or religious affiliation can never be justified, and should be condemned in the strongest terms. However, people in glass houses should not throw stones.

Some years ago, Levitas, wearing the hat of chair of the South African Zionist Federation, penned a series of articles, published in the Cape Times and Cape Argus, supposedly elucidating the complexities of the Middle East. These articles were, in fact, little more than propaganda pieces espousing the cause of his organisation. Unfortunately, in propagating his cause, Levitas deemed it appropriate and acceptable to describe Islam as a “backward” religion.

“Incendiary and inflammatory”, no?

A Cariem, Crawford

Blinded by the green and gold

I have huge admiration for your columnist Mark Keohane’s rugby nous and general knowledge of the game. But his sycophantic lauding of the Springboks is at odds with their actual performances in the four World Cups they have won.

In 1995 the Boks were borne on an irresistible tidal wave of euphoria and emotion surrounding Nelson Mandela when they (just) beat New Zealand with that magical Stransky drop goal. Can anyone seriously doubt that if that match had been played in Auckland the result would have been reversed? New Zealand were clearly the best team in the tournament.

In 2007 the Boks deservedly won. They were plodding, workmanlike and determined and reaped the reward. In 2019 they were comfortably beaten by New Zealand in their opening group game. Remember that? Had England not upset the New Zealand applecart with that astonishing victory in the semis, there is scant doubt that New Zealand would have beaten the Boks once again. They knew how to beat the Boks and did it regularly.

Finally we come to the French edition. The Boks were comfortably beaten by Ireland in their opening game. And this defeat by a team that Keohane contemptuously dismissed last week as no more than an average team. Does he even remember what he writes? They then proceeded to ride their luck by staggering to the final by one-point margins. Games that could have gone either way — especially the one against England.

And then the final against the old foe. Reduced to 14 men for vast chunks of the game, New Zealand more than held their own. Indeed that disallowed try — which, had it been given, as many believe it should have — would have handed New Zealand the trophy. And they would have been celebrating their fourth World Cup.

I really believe Keohane should remove his green and gold-coloured spectacles before attempting another column about the four-time world champions.

Ian Hughes, Orchards

Radical shifts in KZN

Three of the big five political parties, the ANC, EFF and IFP launched their manifestos at Moses Mabhida Stadium.

The decision to use this venue is for two reasons. One is that filling up a stadium to capacity will win you the elections. The other is that the party that wins KwaZuluNatal will play a critical role in shaping national politics.

KwaZulu-Natal has played a significant role in shaping South African history and politics. The politics of the province has shifted from being about two dominant parties. The new kid on the block, the MK Party, poses a threat to both the ANC and IFP. There is also the possibility of a coalition government in the province.

Will the IFP be willing to work with the ANC or will it ditch it for the popular MK Party? Will the EFF play a role as kingmaker, a role they have played well in the last few elections? Only May will give us the real picture as our political landscape shifts radically.

Khanya Ndabankulu, Auckland Park

Write to PO Box 1742, Saxonwold 2132; SMS 33662; e-mail: tellus@sundaytimes.co.za.

All mail should be accompanied by a street address and daytime telephone number. The Editor reserves the right to cut letters