Modernise the system of traditional leadership or abolish it, argues William Gumede
John Magufuli, the Tanzanian president who died this week aged 61, and Muhammadu Buhari, Nigeria’s first citizen, have one thing in common: they became leaders of their nations in 2015. They rose on the ticket of good governance and political reform. They gave hope that this could herald a new era in African politics, almost like the Thabo Mbeki-Olusegun Obasanjo times.
Dubbed the “bulldozer”, Magufuli came across as an easy-going, tough-on-corruption leader. For SA, this had a lot of significance, especially as far as the reform of political parties was concerned.
Magufuli’s Chama Cha Mapinduzi (CCM) is a sister party to the ANC. Tanzania has a special place in the struggle history of the ANC and SA. It was in Julius Nyerere’s Tanzania that exiled ANC and Umkhonto weSizwe operatives were harboured for a considerable time when black opposition parties were banned by the apartheid government. That’s when the ANC and CCM formed strong ties, as liberation movements fighting colonialism.
Magufuli’s rise demonstrated, as the ANC was struggling in the grip of Jacob Zuma, that controversial leaders such as the prince of Nkandla and bad politics were not invincible. Magufuli was relatively scandal-free, and his presidency took off as Buhari stared down his own party.
So difficult were the times and tensions in Nigeria that it took Buhari several months to appoint his first cabinet. That created the suspicion that the delays were due to internal clashes over his power to appoint the team he wanted in the face of pressure from his party to impose its own “deployees”.
Considering the continent’s struggles with dictators, the contestation and resultant changes in West and East Africa offer glimmers of hope.
For context, Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe had 37 years in office, Uganda’s president-for-life Yoweri Museveni has served since 1986 and their counterpart in Equatorial Guinea, President Teodoro Obiang Nguema, has been in the job 41 years.
Hostility to foreign business
Buhari and Magufuli, at least initially, talked the good talk about economic development and reform. But it was not long before political gridlock began to re-emerge in government inertia and the new Nigeria went back to the old Nigeria.
For SA’s 100 or so companies doing business in Nigeria and the rest of West Africa, the situation was still tough. MTN was zapped with fines that demonstrated hostility towards foreign business.
Magufuli’s Tanzania had a similar attitude towards foreign trade. Enterprises from SA and their counterparts from other continents had to contend with inconsistent taxes and economic blackmail. By the time Magufuli died this week, he had strayed far from the proclaimed reform agenda. This is an agenda with few consistent friends.
Ethiopia’s Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed comes to mind when you look for progressives and reformers of our times. Alongside him is Sahle-Work Zewde, the president in Ethiopia. While the president’s role in Ethiopia is ceremonial, it remains significant that the incumbent is a woman, which is rare in Africa.
Ahmed’s first 100 days were seismic in terms of economic and political reforms, and he went on to win the Nobel Peace Prize.
The eye will rest on President Cyril Ramaphosa as one of the last hopes. However, inertia has become a symptom of his presidency. It suggests that the hopeful will have to wait far longer for tangible change. The lessons of Nigeria and especially of the Buhari era should frighten Ramaphosa. Buhari did not quickly paint a new picture that different from the corruption-riddled one of his predecessor, Goodluck Jonathan.
The Nigerian economy went into recession in 2016, adding to social tensions. In his own party, the All Progressives Congress, the kingmakers and other power brokers looked on and gave him lukewarm support, if any.
This is where Ramaphosa finds himself: stuck with the dream of the New Dawn, and he is pretty much the only one holding on to that dream. His erstwhile supporters, Paul Mashatile and David Mabuza, are watching in anguish.
The consequences of inertia will always be disastrous for Nigeria and Buhari because of the risks of terrorism and social unrest. Inertia also has economic consequences because governments and companies miss the booms in economic cycles when oil prices go up, as is often the case in Nigeria.
They pay a heavy price when the downturn comes.
Covid denialism
This applies to SA too, which is not in a position to significantly milk the opportunities associated with mineral price upswings, beyond the benefit that accrues mainly to the dominant players in the mining sector and the smart equity market speculator.
Magufuli’s legacy will include Covid denialism and his stubborn refusal to release data and adopt now common measures to fight the pandemic. In continental terms, he was just another guy (sadly among many) on the dark continent, whose actions led to significant ruin amid boundless opportunities.
Buhari easily goes abroad for treatment whenever ill health visits him. Strong rumours suggested Magufuli was hospitalised in Uganda, or possibly airlifted to India or SA.
Not very different from Mugabe, who was a regular in Singapore’s health facilities, just as Zuma was in Russian hospitals.
These leaders are not unique. Zambia’s Levy Mwanawasa and Michael Sata did not just die in office, both died abroad; they went for treatment in France and London, respectively. I guess the revolution is still on track. Where to, who knows? Pambiri! Viva!
Failure to effect intraparty reforms can be dangerous, as we can see in Zimbabwe. Mugabe was succeeded by Emmerson Mnangagwa, a man just as brutal in oppressing dissent.
The risk for Tanzania is more chaos in the wake of Magufuli. This carries a lot of lessons for SA as it grapples with Ramaphosa’s inertia and the stillborn New Dawn.