Our friend kortbroek Malema, leader of the ANC Youth League, is quoted this morning as having said that the majority of ANC national executive committee members agree that President Thabo Mbeki must be removed from office. According to News24:
“We have approached individual members of the ANC NEC to ensure that the removal of Thabo Mbeki becomes an ANC NEC resolution this weekend, and the majority of them are agreeing with us on this issue,” said ANCYL president Julius Malema at a media briefing in Johannesburg. “We will have Mbeki removed. We don’t fight to lose. He is going. It doesn’t matter who said what, Mbeki won’t be president when we go to the election.
If this is true and if Malema is not just talking through his nose, the question is how the ANC will legally be able to get rid of President Mbeki and what would happen if it does. The President is not a member of the National Assembly and holds his office independent of any membership of a political party. Unlike with any ANC member of Parliament, the ANC will therefore not be able to get rid of Mbeki merely by expelling him from the party or by “redeploying” him to an ambassadorship to outer Mongolia.
The ANC may, of course, ask President Mbeki to resign. If he agrees (but will this stubborn man agree to such a humiliation?) the Constitution determines that a new President must be chosen within 30 days from among the members of the National Assembly. In the meantime the Deputy President will act as President or if she also resigns, a Minister designated by the other members of the cabinet will act as President until a new President is chosen.
If President Mbeki refuses to resign, the National Assembly can pass a vote of no confidence in the President and his cabinet with a simple majority vote and then the President and the cabinet must resign. If a new President is not chosen within 30 days after a vacancy occurred, a new election must be held within 90 days.
If a vote of no confidence is passed in the President and his cabinet and they resign, the Speaker will be sworn in as the acting President until a new President is elected (within 30 days) from among the members of the National Assembly or until an election is held 90 days later later.
At the moment Mr Zuma is not a member of the National Assembly. As I read the Electoral Act, it is impossible for Mr Zuma to become a member of the National Assembly before the next election. It has been argued that Mr Zuma can become a member of the National Assembly if one of the ANC MPs resigns. But if there is such a resignation the vacancy must be filled from the existing list of candidates prepared by the ANC, which they can only review once a year. At the moment this list can only be reviewed and supplemented each April and if Mr Zuma is not now on top of one of these lists he cannot be placed on top of such a list at this time.
If the ANC therefore removes President Mbeki in the next week or two, but chooses not to have an election immediately, Mr Zuma will not be able to become President before an election is held. One of the present members of the National Assembly (Baleka Mbete or Kgalema Motlanthe?) will then have to be elected President until an election is held before the end of June next year.
So if Mr Malema is correct, we might either have an early election or we will have a caretaker President elected from among the existing ANC members of the National Assembly. If the latter rout is taken, it will be interesting to see who the ANC chooses in this role. Will it be the Speaker or will it be the Deputy President of the ANC? If it is the former, it might well indicate that there are already tensions between various Zuma factions elected at Polokwane and that some in the Zuma camp do not trust Motlanthe.
I am holding my breath to see what will happen. Whatever happens though, we are in for an interesting ride.
AFTERTHOUGHT: There is of course a very good reason why Mr Zuma chose not to become a member of Parliament along with Kgalema Motlanthe in April when the ANC had the opportunity to supplement its lists of candidates. The Court found in the Shaik case that the money given by Shaik to Zuma was not a loan as Mr Zuma and Mr Shaik had claimed. This money was a gift and Mr Zuma was obliged to declare this gift to Parlaiment which he failed to do. If he became an MP the ethics committee of Parliament would have to deal with this breach of ethics and with the fact that Mr Zuma had lied to Parliament.
This has been planned all along – ‘n Paleisrevolusie! And I think Shaik will be pardoned by the new President (acting or semi-permanent) even before the next election, and even if it is not Zuma.
I do not believe it Prof though I saw it this morning in the news for the following reasons;
One – Malema will say anything in support of Zuma.
Two – There has been a growing tendency of polititians saying they have been quoted out of context and explain away, albeit unsuccessfully, their initial statements.
I must ask though, is Malema really a polititian? What criteria must be applied to determine a polititian? Does Malema fit all that criteria? Which public office can Malema run effectively and effeciently?
Pierre, what is this “Provincial List” the ANC has been mentioning?
And don’t you think that Mbeki’s new found success as the Peace Maker in Zim makes him far more of a moving target? Of course young kortbroeke won’t appreciate that.
Mpho, MPs can be nominated to the NA from a national list (200 names) and provincial lists (200 names proportionally allocated between provinces according to the number of voters) or a party can choose only to use provincial lists. The ANC uses both lists. Both lists can in terms of Schedule 1A of the Electoral Act be supplemented and reshuffled once a year (in April). But April has come and gone so unless Zuma was placed on top of one of the provincial lists in April, the ANC cannot get him to Parliament via these lists….
In fact, it was the April Shuffle (that sounds like a dance!) that put Nomaindia Mfeko and dear old Motlanthe up at the top I seem to remember.
Now please, what do you make of the Admin Action issue?
Sne, as for Malema’s capability as a politician, your exact same questions were probably part of the reason why Afriforum Youth gave him the “Politics for Dummies” book – let’s hope he uses it…
Anonymouse // Sep 17, 2008 at 2:00 pm
This has been planned all along
I don’t understand your statement Anonymouse..What do you mean? You mean Zuma and his allies planned this ?You are insane my brother, there’s NO such thing. What do you know about the ANC? You know nothing about the ANC, what you must do is that you must try to concentrate on your programme of action, as the AWB member, for the year 2009, so that next year you will be able to be on the boer candidate list. I”m told that the AWB will be contesting the national election next year, WHAT A JOKE!!!!!!!
Mbeki must go, infact he is on his way out of the Union building! He is a reactionary, who takes orders from the West, so we cannot afford to have such a leader like him….Mbeki bye..bye!!!
I’ve just heard from a reliable source that Thabo is, in fact, going to be removed. Can someone rush to Durban to make sure Khosi is ok! LOL
Mpho…I’m in the Durban, I don’t believe that Khosi is okay…..where is Khosi?
Oh Victor, thanks for the offer, but I think you might be the last person he’d want to see right now LOL!
hehehehehehe….. You people love me so much.
Victor & Mpho,
Sorry, I am not in Durban at the moment. I have been living in a boat, in Valencia, for the past month or so. I must say my Spanish has improved. But I am speaking, in Zulu, to many of my friends in SA, so the mood is not totally lost. So, I do not believe there is enough cool head, in the ANC for TM to survive an attempt at his dismissal. I think the opposition will, however, come to his rescue. To them he is a yesterday man and if they are smart enough, the would be looking to do damage to whoever is going to succeed him. And he has been smart enough to reconcile with most in the opposition in the past 18 months or so, with exception of Patricia the patriot.
Khosi.. I can see the way you feel about Mbeki’s departure in the government, as well( maybe) in the ANC…unfortunately there is NO next time 4 him…Hope u a okay!!
Of course, old Zillie the Terrier had her botox injections and coiffured hair for her last date with him! But Khosi, all the opposition together make up 1/3rd not 1/2.
Thanks Mpho for your clarification..I full agree with you my brother, that the opposition only make up 1/3rd of the majority…!
Victor,
Dude, have you even seen a picture of Valencia? Why would you even question if I am okay? OF COURSE, I AM OKAY. I am living the life that TM and his policies provided for me.
Of course you guys are assuming that all in the ANC will choose to vote him out. That is not guaranteed.
Khosi, I think it will be if they want to keep themselves in the lifestyle they’ve become accustomed to… I can just see Nel, with pen poised to strike a name off the party list, of anyone who doesn’t say Aye!
Mpho,
But lets not pre-empt their choices.
Another thing missed is that a lot of people passionately believe in what TM has done for the country and the continent. They might not be loud but still they might be peeved by such a humiliation on him. I guess that ANC will also need to factor that one in.
Removing Mbeki will be a huge mistake. He won’t go alone. He will take Zuma with him.
I read the Shaik judgement like a novel and many times over. I am not a judge so I am entitled to say: “Zuma is very guilty.”
Judges can’t say what I can say. These are the perks of being next to Valencia far away from the “kill for Zuma brigade”.
Anyone who reads the Shaik judgment, and anyone who reads the part about bilateral offence in the recent Nicholson judgment (unless intellectually challenged) will know Zuma is guilty as hell.
His only chance is a technical acquital or a total avoidance of his day in court.
See Khosi, that was my line just before my friend called me to say his fate was well and truly sealed.
If we were to guage by Polokwane, then TM has the potential support of 40% of the ANC and if it is combined with support from opposition parties he might make it.
That said it is a long shot since if one were to gauge by Zille’s recent (past few months) calls for Mbeki to step down and in regards to her statements regarding Nicholson’s judgment that he explain himself, then he probably would not have DA votes.
But that would be a very sad day when a president is removed a few months before end of term, on the basis of the (out of place?) obiter comments of a judge, with no evidence. Because surely this is the needed public credence they wanted to support such a move?
Once something like this happens, there is no turning back, it will always be seen as a viable option and respect for the office of the presidency will be dealt a blow. This is why I think Zuma did not support it his recent dead snake statements.
This is a dark road, and I hope sanity prevails in the ANC. I truly think it would be in their own best interests as well if they do not follow this route.
Why does Tony and Khosi refer to Valencia, am I missing something?
z, Khosi has skipped the country!
I think Mbeki should remember –
One should die proudly when it is no longer possible to live proudly – Nietzsche
(of course I’m not really talking about real live death! Oh but then Malema has already cleared that all up for me)
Mpho
hehe, yeah I caught the fact that Khosi mentioned he is in Valencia but look at the post entitled:
Tony in Virginia // Sep 17, 2008 at 4:04 pm
“Judges can’t say what I can say. These are the perks of being next to Valencia far away from the “kill for Zuma brigade”.”
Who is Tony and why does he also mention Valencia?
And while I’m thinking, perhaps Nicholson J was rather more deliberate than we give him credit for –
The most perfidious way of harming a cause consists of defending it deliberately with faulty arguments.
Nietzsche
Aha! Linda in disguise?
Thank God the NPA are appealling ! I was really getting worried that there was going to nothing interesting for me to read on this site !
Mpho,
hahahahahaha. I am not with Linda.
Khosi..is it true that you skipped the country?
Victor – Why are you calling me ‘brother’ (“You are insane my brother, there’s NO such thing.”) and AWB in the same breath?
I am an insignificant South African who is currently on a business trip to Richmond, Virginia in the USA for a few months. I am not in Valencia, Spain – except that Spain is also in the northern hemisphere.
South Africans in these parts take an active interest in what is going on in South Africa. I have been asked many questions that seldom get asked at home. Questions such as: “What will happen if Zuma does not become President?”, “What will happen if he does become President?”, “Why don’t we have at least one effective opposition party?”, “Why did Mbeki want a third term?”, “Why did Zuma stab Mbeki in the back?”
They become disappointed when I mumble some incoherent answers. But almost all of them agree that they would prefer to hear a judge pronounce the words: “I find the defendant not guilty” to “the procedure is unlawful”.
Why can’t Zuma have his day in court so that we can at least have a chance of hearing those words?
Tony – Because he is shit scared!
Zuma as i said in other blogs he can not rely merely on the technical irregularities but on the merits of his case. The man is guilt though i`m not a judge .
Ntanjana – He has not yet been convicted, but, from his actions, all the ducking and diving and scrambling to become President before he is actually charged and tried, he surely looks guilty as Hell.
The DA and the ID will vote with those in the ANC who want to remove Mbeki. But I think the ANC will go down this route: not unless they are completely crazy. This would be bad for their party, very bad.
Pierre: under “Removal of President”, the Constitution doesn’t mention anything about a vote of no confidence. The president can only be removed by the National Assembly (by at least two thirds of its members). And they need grounds, such as a serious violation of the Constitution or the law (which I don’t think they can prove); serious misconduct (ditto); or inability to perform the functions of office. In the case of the first two, he might lose his pension (?) and may not serve in any public office (oh dear). Am I missing something here?
Look, anybody with a passing acquaintance with the ANC member’s behaviour of late and in particularly the ANC caucus in parliament knows that they have consistently chosen loyalty to the party and careers over principle.
I therefore don’t think that there is much chance of the ANC not voting en masse against Mbeki if it came to a no confidence vote.
Having said that, Mbeki does not deserve to survive a no confidence vote if it came to that. If ever there was a leader who deserves to be kicked out it is him.
Z, I am struck by your loyalty to Mbeki and his office. Care to explain?
I agree with Anonymouse that Zuma appears to be guilty.
But Anonymouse if we look at the reasons and size of bribes Zuma took, and compare it to the moral degenerate Mbeki administration: the cover up of child deaths, the thousands of preventable aids deaths, the foot dragging on Zimbabwe, the blocked UN votes in respect of Burma, Sudan then Zuma’s crimes pales in moral insignificance.
That’s even before we know the extent of the arms deal corruption.
Mpho
I also wish some of the eagles will comment on your administrative question.
Wessel – You know? Stealing is stealing. And corruption is corruption. (Just like ‘date rape’ is ‘rape’, and ‘marital rape’ is ‘rape’. Just like a ‘shebeen murder’ is ‘murder’.) One guy deserves 5, 10 or 15 years, the other, perhaps 20, life, or even death. Fact is, crime remains immoral, never insignificant, especially when they are being committed by people in charge. Really now, we do not need clowns like these to run even a lowly, insignificant, island or piece of rock sticking out somewhere in the Pacific – let alone South South Africa.
Mpho et Z – Of course a decision to prosecute or not to prosecute someone can never be administrative action. If it is, well, every petty traffic offender will have cause to, before going to court or requesting a prosecutor to reduce his/her traffic fine, will have the remedy to go to court (or an administrative tribunal) and scream, “I have been the victim of unfair administrative action! Therefore, before I do anything else, I want reasons for the action and a hearing so that I can tell my side of the story.” Preposterous, I’d say.
On the face of it stealing is stealing. Law is law. But Law and morality is not always the same thing.
If a desperately poor person steals bread in a supermarket, I certainly don’t hold it in equivalence to a stock broker raiding an pensioner’s trust fund.
In isolation Zuma is a powerful politician and there is an extra responsibility on him to set an example.
And unlike Max du Preez, I don’t think we should let Zuma off the hook. I would prefer him have his day in court.
But I do think we need a sense of moral perspective. Mbeki get’s off way too lightly. Compared to Mbeki, Zuma in an angel.
Zuma might be uneducated. But he is less of a clown than Mbeki. He is street smart. He certainly was proven to be strategically superior to Mbeki in their MK days and he has proven it again now.
He is a lot more savvy than George Bush (I admit that its not very hard, but stil) who ruled the world’s most powerful country.
Having said that I am disappointed in his lack of statesmanship. He should be calling for a Commission of Inquiry into the arms deal and condemning the likes of motor mouth Malema.
I hope the ANC finds a leader we all can respect.
Problem is, Jacob Zuma could, according to Shaik, not even pay the interest on his debts with the salary of Deputy President (of the ANC and the state) and the interest free loans that he gave him. He is definitely not a desperately poor ‘man of straw’, even if equated to Mbeki. Note that I have left out the degree of education – ‘n Skelm is ‘n skelm, is ‘n skelm. Neither Zuma, nor Mbeki deserves to rule a country, let alone this one. And, as for his strategically superiority in the ol’ MK days – well I still think he is a clown that does not even know how to properly hold the machine gun he laments for every now and then. But then again, I also do not like Mbeki at all. I do not think that between the two of them there exists a ‘lesser of two evils’.
I’m not saying Zuma is a man of straw.
But there’s a difference between funding a few wives and kids through relatively small amounts obtained corruptly and what Mbeki’s been up to.
That’s all I am saying.
Yeah well – Zuma is the fat clown, and Mbeki the thin one.
Die een ou spook was vet, en die ander ou spook was maer! Goeienag Kameraad Mhambi
Wessel
I have mixed emotions about Mbeki, some aspects I respect, some I disrespect, some I am neutral towards and some ambivalent. But if I absolutely had to choose I would choose him. That said I hope we find someone better than the current options.
I wasn’t defending Mbeki above, but feel that ousting a president in this manner without clear evidence is dangerous.
I am also mostly about reason, and don’t necessarily have fixed ideas, meaning I am mostly open to a good argument.
“Having said that I am disappointed in his lack of statesmanship. He should be calling for a Commission of Inquiry into the arms deal and condemning the likes of motor mouth Malema.”
He sits next to Malema while he is motoring. I think you underestimate the case that can be made for his complicity, which would mean that it does not have anything to do with lack of statesmanship.
He was not head of intelligence in the ANC for nothing. He surely learnt a few things in that office. (Although the same did not seem to be true of his presidency of the National Aids Council, which weakens my argument (: )
In that vein, I have already stated this before, but I still remain amused by the discredited browse mole report on two aspects. (1) Street level revolution and (2) Angola funding. In terms of (1) I see a lot of “revolution” talk and lots of people on the streets. In terms of (2) I saw Zuma flown to Angola in the Angolan president’s private jet along with fired spy chief Billy Masetlha.
Extremely circumstantial, but my eye brow rises. And some of the company he keeps does nothing to allay my suspicions. That said suspicions are all they are, I would not put my head on a block.
Well said Z!
So what exactly about the Mbeki presidency do you respect Z?
Wessel
Why do I have a feeling, you’re going to know more, and be able to shoot down anything I mention? Was it the latent cynicism in your question? (:
I have a feeling this won’t be a good debate, but due to time constraints I’ll mention just some aspects where things have improved or not done too badly in the face of the enormity of our problems: Gender, economics, 12 million social grants, political stability.
I have also noticed a lot of false media reports which discredit the Mbeki administration, it’s worth following the repudiating statements from the presidency’s website, which don’t get as much “airtime”. Quite a number of media reports the last couple of months were clearly not based on any real facts and remember that papers publish retractions in the dark corners. This has generated some sympathy from my side, and I try to not be influenced by media sensationalism.
Though there were enormous problems with service delivery, lots of corruption, it statistically did increase with more people gaining access to the basics.
Here are two links about the development indicators released in July:
http://www.thepresidency.gov.za/showc.asp?include=hpcas/pr/2008/pr07171047.htm&type=pr&ID=1341
Also look at his comments regarding the run-up to Polokwane:
http://www.thoughtleader.co.za/vusigumede/2008/07/20/south-africa-progress-and-challenges%e2%80%a6/
I also have some, not necessarily complete, sympathy for some of his views regarding racism in this country. In Cape Town it’s even more pronounced, the two nations thing (or rather many, even Afrikaners and English are segregated here). There are white people who still think they are “die baas”.
I also have sympathy for some, not necessarily all, of his anti-western sentiment. Quick example: In Ghana local fisherman have lost their livelihood due to EU fishing trawlers, but if the gov does not allow the EU to fish, then they threaten to impose tariffs on goods exported from Ghana, which would leave thousands jobless. Blocking western interference in Africa has a history, a history of disastrous attempts at regime change and and…
Of course AIDS and ZIM and Manto are pretty bad and those have had a lot of VALID airtime, but you asked what I respected. Side note: I did find it interesting that Mugabe in his speech said that Mbeki does not take no for an answer. Which just murky’s the zim water’s slightly as to how Mbeki’s motives are analysed (which is what a lot of critique against him is based on, people’s psychological analysis of what they think his true motives are).
Of course the good things under an administration such as the success of SARS (major improvements) people attribute to Manuel, but failures of any minister is attributed to the president.
So these are just some random thoughts, not well researched or thought through. Much of what I said is about some things having become more grey for me, as time goes on. I would not have predicted having this much sympathy for his administration a couple of years back, but I have been trying hard to climb into the world view’s of those who see things differently from me.
Oi, I have to get back to work. I’m sure we could have lots of debate, but in the end, there are at least some good things you can say, although some will dispute whether some “good” things are truly good.
z
I so enjoy your comments. You are always so logical and fair in your commentary and refrain from getting hooked into the emotional aspects of arguments. You also, from what I have observed, do not get personal, which so many of the people who comment, do.
You have raised some very valid points here. The one I really thought was interesting was the one regarding how Manuel gets the credit for the success of SARS and yet when other Ministers fail, Mbeki is blamed. Leadership can really suck sometimes!!!
I am not a huge fan of Mbeki and I feel that some of his actions and decisions have been diabolical (you mentioned AIDS, Zim and Manto), but I do feel that Mbeki is consistent. He has maintained the same stance on various policies since he took over, and while many may feel that this is just stubborness, I find that his consistency is quite admirable.
On the other hand, I find that Zuma is inclined to say the things that people want to hear. His attitudes APPEAR to be influenced by the company he is keeping at any given time. I find this a little disconcerting in that it appears to me that he is driven by populist sentiment.
Samantha
Thanks. I try to not get emotional but it does happen. Generally ad hominem attacks do nothing for a debate, which is why I avoid those. (though ridicule sometimes brings a laugh)
“His attitudes APPEAR to be influenced by the company he is keeping at any given time”
There is another element to this aside from just telling people what they want to hear. He exhibits views similar to some of the guys who believed in single-party states in Africa. He wants everyone to join the ANC and has said things like:
- “Unity is the most powerful weapon of the ANC. That is why it was established – to unite the people of this country.”
- “There is no other political party”
- “Even God expects us to rule this country because we are the only organisation which was blessed by pastors when it was formed. It is even blessed in Heaven. That is why we will rule until Jesus comes back. We should not allow anyone to govern our city (Cape Town) when we are ruling the country”
The divine mandate is also nothing knew in terms of the history of African independence leaders.
In this context he seems to believe he can forever unite all the different ideologies around him, hence giving everyone a place within the ANC and talk solving all conflicts. It’s almost like a country within a party where all minority groups are protected, but the matter of control is different. Thus you have a tug of war between socialists/communists/capitalists all under the auspices of one organisation. Which is like having multiple parties within one party. Maybe some day ideologies will dominate, but currently people’s identities are strongly linked to their parties (some parties at least), meaning a shift from party is not a simple ideological matter.
Ad hominem:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
OK Z let me deal with your pro Mbeki arguments.
First you talk about SA’s development indicators. The amount of South Africans living in povery has doubled. To be fair, since 2002, when social grants were introduced this trend has been halted, but not reversed.
http://www.int.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=13&art_id=nw20071112125210805C921709
Mbeki was at the helm of our economic policy since 1994 and his adoption of social grants came rather late. This is about as positive as I can be about Mbeki. He stopped inequality spreading after helping it on its way for years.
Not only that, he has encouraged a shallow materialism under the rich.
I have no sympathy for his views on racism. Mbeki is one eyed and racist. His ‘I’m an African’ speech was a deceit like the many others that came later. He believes in a racial Africanism. Under his influence the ANC took a nasty racial turn, first he tried to oust Joe Slovo from the Communist party because he was white and later he preferred apartheid supporting ex-homeland leaders before whites with impeccable pro-democracy credentials.
Mbeki managed to undo in months all the painstakingly careful work Mandela did to heal racial rifts in our society. He reracialised our political doscource instead of attacking poverty and inequality.
He is an authoritarian and does not believe in human liberty or human rights. He supported the Russian invasion of Checkslovakia in 1968, he discouraged Mandela from intervening to save Ken Sarwo Wiwa from Nigerian dictator Sani Abacha. Who was then executed. His (and our) government has voted against gay organisations in the UN and for Belarus, Sudan, and the Burmese military dictatorship, even as thousands of Burmese were dying.
His treacherous behavior in previous Zimbabwe elections is well known. Long ago, during the Matabele land massacre, Mbeki knew of it. Chris Hani and other ANC leaders were agast. Mbeki persuaded them to accept the reality.
After the 2005 elections, Mugabe launched Operation Murambatsvina, which saw the devastation of the homes and shacks of some 700000 urban dwellers, Pretoria maintained its infamous silence.
In 2002 two judges gave a report to Mbeki saying that Zimbabwe elections were not free and fair. What did he do? He sat on it and his government declared it free and fair.
In the meantime thousands of Zimbabweans fleed their country looking for a better life. Many came to our country.
Here they have been treated despicably by the police and citizens.
Partly because the police have become so weak, corrupt under Mbeki’s government. Corruption has spread to all levels of government under his administration. The arms deal has paralyzed our government and he was the chairperson of it.
We need a strong state, never have we had such a week one. Education is in crisis, and it’s now commonly accepted that our educational system is worse than apartheid’s bantu education. Public hospitals are collapsing.
As bad is the culture of impunity in government. Thabo Mbeki will go down in history as someone who fired only one person from his cabinet. We know who that is.
Mbeki has been ruthless in using the organs of the state for the purposes of the ANC and when this longer suited him, for his own faction in the ANC.
He has sowed distrust when our country needed healing. I can not think of a worse leader.
Please note that I have not said a thing about Frere, HIV or Manto.
Wessel
A lot of harsh statements in there. What bothers me about your discourse is that it is emotionally loaded. I concede it is not that easy to separate emotions when you believe people are being hurt, but the problem is that it makes it more difficult to objectively analyse events. And that in that emotional state you might err about the cause of that hurt or what other options might have been better solutions.
The following statements of yours are emotionally loaded. Many of them put motive on someone with an absoluteness:
“social grants came rather late”, “after helping it on its way for years.”,
“Mbeki is one eyed and racist.”, “His ‘I’m an African’ speech was a deceit”,
“because he was white”, “managed to undo”, “He is an authoritarian and does not believe in human liberty or human rights.”, “Mbeki has been ruthless in using the organs of the state”
I am sure you can think of many independence era African leaders who are better described as ruthless in using state organs. This is just to highlight how disproportionate the emotional content of that statement is.
Even just a little psychological background is enough to know that people often have difficulty understanding their own motives. This should make one careful when discussing motive (and I’m reminding myself again here), and to make sure you have analysed alternative explanations with some dedication.
Another example about the social grants:
“came rather late” : – very subjective, no context. No mention of balancing of budgets and SARS having successfully increased government income over the years. How was it late and which budget cuts would have hastened us getting to the place of spending 3.2% of our GDP on it?
So, regarding the development indicators and the SAIRR report:
The following link discusses the difficulty of the subject and that there was a lot of arguments going to and fro:
http://www.mg.co.za/article/2008-08-21-unpacking-the-poverty-of-journalism
There’s the presidency’s reponse and the SAIRR’s response to the response. And then the link I gave you was the latest government indicators, which also has bearing on the link you posted.
The link I gave above from the mail and guardian touches on some of the complexity of issues involved in determining poverty. The SAIRR report seems to have only taken income into account or focused on what they call absolute poverty, there is lots of space for debate on the value of such an index. I was listening to a conference held some months ago on determining poverty lines, it was clear that there were still lots of debate and growth needed in determining poverty.
In Rwanda for example about 90% of the people do subsistence farming, can you imagine how out of balance their dollar a day would look?
Saying that X% more households got access to basic free electricity or water is not something that can just be lightly brushed off, as it is a useful indicator and is unrelated to income.
“Here they have been treated despicably by the police and citizens.”
How does that support your statement regarding his africanism?
“Partly because the police have become so weak, corrupt under Mbeki’s government.”
There’s a whole history to that which is hardly just easily linked to Mbeki. As it currently stands the ant-corruption unit is very poorly resourced, but it’s predecessor was quite successful, and that was also on his watch. Resources were diverted away when things improved, unfortunately. It’s definitely not a simple, let’s blame it on the president thing. It takes time to uncover statistical trends and then it takes a long time to get administrative procedures in place to deal with things.
“The arms deal has paralyzed our government”
Paralysed? In what way and to what extent? Very strong word.
“it’s now commonly accepted that our educational system is worse than apartheid’s bantu education”
How sure are you of that? Do you understand the full import of that statement? Commonly by whom? I’m not saying there isn’t difficulties in the education system, but a mere let’s heap that also onto Mbeki is once again oversimplifying complex matters.
The common trend in your post, is emotional oversimplification of complex issues and an attempt at climbing into Mbeki’s head, which may or may not be close to the truth. But you present it so forcefully that there seems to be no alternatives to your version.
In regards to international relations I have some sympathy for anit-interventionist attitudes, since we can have a long list of failed and dubiously motivated interventions. Many who are dead against the Iraq invasion even though Saddam had a very bad human rights history, shouted intervention for Zimbabwe. Local fears and criticism were often related to distrust of Mbeki’s motives, even though some commentators noted strained relations between the soviet backed ANC and the China backed Zanu at certain times. It is also unclear what you wanted Mbeki to do to stop the matabeleland massacres in Zim.
On health care I have not much good to say.
I really am open to hearing your side, but the way you present it, gives me little to work with. At the same time this is too big a topic for this forum.
Z, one can also hide horror behind a so called dispassionate analysis.
Besides, I think what I wrote is pretty calm considering what Mbeki did. In my opinion as time goes on, and history looks back on Mbeki it will judge him very harshly. In the same league or even worse than Mugabe.
You also don’t address many of the points I make. For example – when I say Mbeki has sidelined non racial democrats in favour of black apartheid leaders you simply don’t address the issue.
Even the much maligned World Bank estimated in 1994 that SA could maintain a budget deficit of 12%. There was ample room for social spending. Mbeki chose a target of 3%.
The police force was underfunded for years. Read ‘A country at war with itself’ for an analysis of how government policy has decimated the force by a member of Mbeki’s policy team.
In respect of his economic policies I did concede that recently his policies on social grants have made some progress. Also the building of houses and provision of water is impressive, until you look at how many municipalities that used to have water don’t anymore, due to lack of service delivery and maintenance of existing infrastructure.
SARS is an incredible success story, I doth my cap.
Once again I concede that this is about as good as it gets for Mbeki, and his record on bettering the lives of poor South Africans are patchy to terrible at best.
Part of the problem is of course is that in many respects wealthy South Africa never had it so good as under Mbeki.
He has opened the economy to competition, manufacturing has steadily declined. Look at the textile industry in Cape Town. Look at the engineering works in Vanderbijlpark. The Koreans and Japanese wont allow this to happen to their industry.
The Chinese at least have the courtesy to their poor to keep their currency low while they open their economy. Would the National party have allowed Old Mutual and Anglo to list offshore like Mbeki did?
Their is no way we will reduce equality without a manufacturing base. The whole country can not work in services and tourism.
Ferial Haffagee M & G editor said last year, while conceding that we now have extensive grants, “In real terms household incomes have come down. Our Gini coefficient, the measure of the wealth gap, is now the highest in the world, an ignominious honour that we spend far too little time understanding and fighting.”
And with regard to education:
“Our children are less bright in the freedom years, our schools possibly worse than they were under the dead hand of Bantustan administrators. Our public hospitals are so bad that not a single provincial minister of health uses them.”
Also with regard to the education system read this:
http://www.thetimes.co.za/PrintEdition/Article.aspx?id=823624
Note the Wendy Luhabe quote: “‘I’m a product of Bantu education and when I look back, it really seems much better than what education appears to be today.”
And Mamphela Ramphele agreed with her.
One point alone – that he is directly responsible for at least 340,000 preventable Aids deaths (See Nicoli Natrass’s conservative estimate) should have had the country outraged along time ago.
Yet in middleclass circles he is hailed as a good leader. No wonder the poor think there is some conspiracy.
I spent a lot of time in Sebokeng and Boipatong in circa 1997. They were desperate places then, just ater the township war ended. I spend more time there in 2007. It’s poorer, its more desperate.
What could Mbeki have done about the Matabele land massacres? He could have criticised Mugabe. It not that hard to do. Intervention is a final step in a long series of steps Mbeki could have taken at various times with respect to Mugabe. Like criticism – to start off with. Like accepting and publishing his own judges reports and not accepting elections as free and fair if they are not.
“For example – when I say Mbeki has sidelined non racial democrats in favour of black apartheid leaders you simply don’t address the issue.”
There’s nothing to say really. Motive is a matter of opinion unless you have him clearly expressing that motive. And even then motive can be disputed by claiming dishonesty. Though it might not have been clear, I grouped it under the emotionally loaded statements which go to motive.
I am not going to address all your statements in the previous post, unless you explicitly want to require that of me. I want to just touch on one or two and get back to the source of our discussion, since it would take a long time to discuss such a broad topic.
“In the same league or even worse than Mugabe.”
There is a big difference between accusing someone of making bad policy decisions and one who admits to having a degree in violence. I doubt you will have much support for that statement.
Regarding education, the “feelings” of two or three commentators, hardly can be construed as statistical evidence. People’s feeling are often wrong when dissected, that’s why research and statistics exist. Even then researchers disagree, on things much more thoroughly investigated than this issue.
Much in that link proves the point that the “experts” are divided on what is good and what is bad concerning policy, meaning there is much more grey than you seem to want to admit.
“What could Mbeki have done about the Matabele land massacres? He could have criticised Mugabe.”
The ANC needed Zim strategically, so you wanted them to fight with Mugabe and RSA? Because Mugabe doesn’t take criticism lying down.
Remember where we started:
Wessel: “Z, I am struck by your loyalty to Mbeki and his office. Care to explain?”
Z: “I have mixed emotions about Mbeki, some aspects I respect, some I disrespect, some I am neutral towards and some ambivalent. But if I absolutely had to choose I would choose him. That said I hope we find someone better than the current options.
I wasn’t defending Mbeki above, but feel that ousting a president in this manner without clear evidence is dangerous.”
Wessel: “So what exactly about the Mbeki presidency do you respect Z?”
I mentioned a few things, on some of them you conceded with reservation. Did that not answer your question?
What amazes me is that you are often mentioning the good things the national party government did. In spite of so much evil, you still have good things to say about them. I had sympathy for your views on those matters when others did not. So why do you seem unable to understand that the same can be applied to Mbeki?
I like reading your blog and listen attentively to your posts, and whether I agree or disagree, I still respect your commentary, since you are definitely widely read. This I say in the hope that the current discussion does not sour this. And it won’t from my side.
Why are people getting excited over nothing!!! Whatever is happening in the Southern African region has happened else where in Africa and it is what we exepcted to happen with time!! Mbeki has tried his best and every body mudt thank him fully! Every body has a bad side and a good one. However, this political immaturity depicted by many so called South African politicians may lead to far reaching implications!! It is a situation of go away so that i come in!! But rather the question is come in and do what??!!
I get very stressed when I here people say that mbeki takes orders from “the west”. So what if he did look at the west, they better than us so good for mbeki taking orders from them. When people start saying and rebeling against “the west” it makes me nervous. Look at Zimbabwe when they rejected “the west”. Mbeki did both good and bad things so im neither happy nor sad that he is gone.
Helen Ziller is so aniti anything to do with Jacob Zuma. I personally like Zuma as it seems like he has a plan. But I still feel Zuma must stand trail. It is only fair to get this case off once and for all. I aslo feel that how can he have become ANC president with charges against him???
[...] the Constitution determines that a new President must be chosen within 30 days from among the members of the National Assembly, according to the blog Constitutionally Speaking. [...]
In a matter of a week our country has been reduced to this. I like neither President Mbeki or ANC President Zuma but I don’t think that this is the right time to fire Mbeki. He has finally pulled through with the Zim crisis, he is about to end his term and it seems silly and pathetic to get rid of him now. I think it would have been best to wait the remaining time. SA has made great strides umder Mbeki’s leadership and I think that he should be thanked for that. The more important issue is HOW they get rid of him. I think that a vote of no confidence would be best. It would show that the ANC truly has no confidence in him, it would allow the opposition and any ANC MPs in disagreement to vote against his axing and it would be more fair.
I wouldn’t say he takes orders from the West, so much as funding and a few lessons. SA seems to be the USA of Africa, this allows for economic growth and development, the people who become very wealthy choose not to share their wealth. Upsetting the balance could have terrible consequences for SA. It would also be good to note that SA is not a welfare state and cannot be expected to fund people who are unemployed. What would be more reasonable is the development of those people who are unemployed or are short of marketable skills.
Mbeki has been ineffective in many respects and should have been asked to resign at a much earlier stage, for the good of the nation, not the ANC or JZ and his lack of morals. If there wasn’t enough reason to ask him to step down at the beginning of the Parliamentary year or in June then I see no real reason why he should do so now. The obiter of Jugde Nicholson are not nearly enough, as those form the Shaik judgement were not enough. And its obvious that JZ is NOT INNOCENT, just that the procedure followed to bring the case before court was wrong.