[DEBATE] : (Fwd) Economist weighs in

[Patrick Bond]

(Note that no objection is raised to the tweeldes' economic policies.)

http://www.economist.com/opinion/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=10286418

The ANC leadership election in South Africa

Flawed characters, flawed choice
Dec 13th 2007
 From The Economist print edition

The former liberation movement is stunting what was Africa's most 
promising democracy

IN THEORY, these are hopeful times in South African politics. After 
50-odd years of backroom stitch-ups, the ruling African National 
Congress (ANC) holds a competitive leadership election next week. It is 
a dramatic face-off between the incumbent, President Thabo Mbeki 
(pictured on the right), and an iconoclastic challenger, 
ex-Vice-President Jacob Zuma (left). For those who say the country needs 
democracy in its nearly one-party politics, mustn't this be good? If Mr 
Zuma wins he is almost certain to be the ANC's candidate, and thus the 
favourite, to be president after the general election in 2009. If Mr 
Mbeki wins, though he cannot serve a third term as president, he will 
anoint his successor—and it won't be Mr Zuma.

Yet this is no model election. It is a contest between two deeply flawed 
candidates, neither of whom should be running the ANC or the country 
after next year. That the succession race has come to this reveals more 
about the limits than the advances of democracy in South Africa (see 
article).

Mr Zuma should have been ruled out on several counts. His dreadful views 
on sex were revealed during his trial for rape last year. He was 
acquitted, but claimed that he could tell by the way a woman sat whether 
she wanted to have sex with him and that his Zulu culture demanded he 
should oblige her; also that he could avoid contracting HIV by taking a 
shower. He may soon be charged again with corruption. Mr Mbeki is 
standing just to stop Mr Zuma. But Mr Mbeki has shown by his own 
autocratic ways and weird views on AIDS—which he seems to think is not 
caused by HIV—that he too should no longer be leading the ANC.

The country should now be starting a second phase of political 
transition. The first, presided over by Nelson Mandela, was to dismantle 
apartheid, reconcile the races and establish democracy. As the 
pre-eminent movement in the long struggle against white minority rule, 
the ANC, however organised, was inevitably going to take charge during 
this period. On the whole, it has done a good job. Now, however, the 
country should be moving to a new era of pluralist democracy, where 
criticism and dissent are welcomed for their own sake.

Sadly, Mr Mbeki has shown no inclination to rid the movement of its 
authoritarian traditions. If anything, it has become even more 
illiberal. Other possible candidates, such as Tokyo Sexwale or Cyril 
Ramaphosa, would probably do a better job as leader. But none has got a 
look-in.

A perilous fusion

This restriction of choice and debate within the ANC would not be so bad 
if it faced some competition. The electorate could just vote in another 
lot. But no group can challenge a movement that encompasses former 
freedom fighters, the trade unions and the South African Communist 
Party. And almost 14 years of unbroken power have given way to 
corruption, factionalism, paranoia and arrogance. Without a spell in 
opposition, the movement will be unable to purge or renew itself. 
Meanwhile, anyone who wants to get on knows it may be unwise to speak 
out. As criticism is bitten back, the ANC and the state risk fusing into 
a single entity.

Worryingly, the constitutional checks on the power of the ANC government 
are being slowly eroded. Parliament has become a rubber stamp; the 
public broadcaster has become a government mouthpiece; the intelligence 
and police services are sometimes partisan. A split in the movement 
might be welcome. Unfortunately, there is no sign that Mr Mbeki's 
increasing autocracy is regarded as sinister by many in the ANC. South 
Africa, so recently the moral giant of the continent, deserves a lot 
better.