Lessons Beyond ANC Polokwane Conference

SOME of the oldest liberation movements in Southern Africa are at a sociological and political interregnum in their history.

Ruling parties in the region in recent weeks concluded pertinent congresses: Swapo in Namibia two weeks ago ended a defining congress, which saw an intra-generational passing of power; Zanu-PF in Zimbabwe recently held a special congress, which worryingly confirmed the erratic Robert Mugabe as the party’s sole candidate for the 2008 presidential elections. Perhaps the most important in terms of electoral democracy is the ANC conference in Polokwane.The reasons why Polokwane is crucial for the region and Africa are not only economic because of the importance of South Africa as a regional and continental powerhouse.They are as much sociological and political in a region which, for the past few years, with the exception of Zimbabwe, has been moving a positive democratic trajectory.Life after Polokwane is that of sitting State and ANC President Thabo Mbeki losing an electoral contest to his deputy Jacob Zuma.As a political and economic reformer President Mbeki didn’t do an excellent job as ANC President.He alienated key leaders in the ANC in the pursuit of a hyper-obedient clan at the level of government.In fact, it is at this level where he compensated for his weaknesses as ANC president.South Africa has a well-managed economy; its standing and voice in multilateral organisations increased as a consequence of Mbeki’s intellectual prowess and engaging diplomacy with key global leaders.Yet it may go without saying that Zuma is a better coalition builder and consensus leader than Mbeki within the internal politics of the ANC.But his education and his moral judgment as evidenced by his recent past and imminent corruption charges suggest that he lacks the ethical wherewithal to lead the dynamic South Africa that Mbeki is leaving behind.What we may intone is that South Africa will have taken a step backward on quality leadership.But some of the worst-case scenarios about a Zuma presidency are without base: because of the very same fragmented democratic dynamics within the ANC that may deliver a Zuma presidency; external checks and grounded economic fundamentals which deterred the ANC from a policy of nationalisation at its un-banning would deter Zuma from veering off the positive political and economic governance trajectory.However, a Zuma presidency holds considerable implications for the smaller countries in the region.Polokwane raises two interrelated socio-political questions: first what does it mean for countries like Namibia when Jacob Zuma succeeds one of the most brilliant minds and African Presidents in recent times? Second, what is the lesson about democracy that we may draw from Polokwane as a region or as a continent? Here, some may be tempted to infer that what is happening in the ANC is democracy at best, and its chief principle of majority rule.But majorities are not always right and a Zuma presidency confirms this paradigm.In the main, it does suggest that the debate on who should lead an entrenched ruling party shouldn’t necessarily be reduced to a mass electoral contest.It should go beyond such basic analyses and processes.Within emerging political contexts the debate about who should lead may be decided by trivial issues such as personality and charm, instead of technical skills.Just note some of the banal adjectives used to describe Mbeki – ‘aloof’, ‘distant’, ‘Western’, too much of an intellectual and not accessible to the ordinary man etc.I have heard the same arguments about leaders in this country too.Oftentimes, it takes being a good singer/cheerleader or nice person to poll the highest votes at these congresses.I am not too sure if ‘aloofness’ or a leader being a ‘nice person’ is really of interest to us as cadres and citizens.How does that impact on the competency of a leader to serve the party with distinction or to deliver to citizens? I am afraid, it doesn’t.And the question that merits asking is whether we should frame debates about leadership in such sociologically rudimentary ways? Again, I am afraid we should not.I have heard and seen how temperamental French President Nicolas Sarkozy is; how demandingly nasty he can be with those who work with him.I have also read in Le Monde how the competent former French Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin speaks crudely to those who work with him.However, these are issues that are of less importance to the rank and file of De Villepin and Sarkozy’s Union pour un Mouvement Populaire.Politically speaking, cadres are interested in Sarkozy’s fresh modernising vision; his ethical character as a leader and the place of France in a competitive world.But for a majority of ANC cadres who descended on Polokwane, the place of South Africa in the world, and how the world looks at their leader is insignificant.They take an insular view: Jacob Zuma is a gifted cheerleader, JZ is a people’s person, a ‘100% Zulu boy’, irrespective of his ethical character and moral judgement.Similarly, I am not sure if Zanu-PF cadres or Swapo comrades were interested in the discussion as to how the leader they choose inject the qualitatively new or make their countries competitive.For cadres to think differently, Thabo Mbeki is right, albeit belatedly, when he says that the ANC failed on political education.I believe that what he has in mind is to educate cadres to make a distinction between trivial discussions about leadership and the more serious discussion about what we should demand and expect from leaders, both when we elect them at congresses or conferences; and what we should demand when they lead our nations.What Polokwane tells us is that as states, as a region and continent we should demand a new reflective philosophical discussion about leadership.* Alfredo Tjiurimo Hengari is a PhD fellow in political science at the University of Paris- Panthéon Sorbonne, FrancePerhaps the most important in terms of electoral democracy is the ANC conference in Polokwane.The reasons why Polokwane is crucial for the region and Africa are not only economic because of the importance of South Africa as a regional and continental powerhouse.They are as much sociological and political in a region which, for the past few years, with the exception of Zimbabwe, has been moving a positive democratic trajectory.Life after Polokwane is that of sitting State and ANC President Thabo Mbeki losing an electoral contest to his deputy Jacob Zuma.As a political and economic reformer President Mbeki didn’t do an excellent job as ANC President.He alienated key leaders in the ANC in the pursuit of a hyper-obedient clan at the level of government.In fact, it is at this level where he compensated for his weaknesses as ANC president.South Africa has a well-managed economy; its standing and voice in multilateral organisations increased as a consequence of Mbeki’s intellectual prowess and engaging diplomacy with key global leaders.Yet it may go without saying that Zuma is a better coalition builder and consensus leader than Mbeki within the internal politics of the ANC.But his education and his moral judgment as evidenced by his recent past and imminent corruption charges suggest that he lacks the ethical wherewithal to lead the dynamic South Africa that Mbeki is leaving behind.What we may intone is that South Africa will have taken a step backward on quality leadership.But some of the worst-case scenarios about a Zuma presidency are without base: because of the very same fragmented democratic dynamics within the ANC that may deliver a Zuma presidency; external checks and grounded economic fundamentals which deterred the ANC from a policy of nationalisation at its un-banning would deter Zuma from veering off the positive political and economic governance trajectory.However, a Zuma presidency holds considerable implications for the smaller countries in the region.Polokwane raises two interrelated socio-political questions: first what does it mean for countries like Namibia when Jacob Zuma succeeds one of the most brilliant minds and African Presidents in recent time
s? Second, what is the lesson about democracy that we may draw from Polokwane as a region or as a continent? Here, some may be tempted to infer that what is happening in the ANC is democracy at best, and its chief principle of majority rule.But majorities are not always right and a Zuma presidency confirms this paradigm.In the main, it does suggest that the debate on who should lead an entrenched ruling party shouldn’t necessarily be reduced to a mass electoral contest.It should go beyond such basic analyses and processes.Within emerging political contexts the debate about who should lead may be decided by trivial issues such as personality and charm, instead of technical skills.Just note some of the banal adjectives used to describe Mbeki – ‘aloof’, ‘distant’, ‘Western’, too much of an intellectual and not accessible to the ordinary man etc.I have heard the same arguments about leaders in this country too.Oftentimes, it takes being a good singer/cheerleader or nice person to poll the highest votes at these congresses.I am not too sure if ‘aloofness’ or a leader being a ‘nice person’ is really of interest to us as cadres and citizens.How does that impact on the competency of a leader to serve the party with distinction or to deliver to citizens? I am afraid, it doesn’t.And the question that merits asking is whether we should frame debates about leadership in such sociologically rudimentary ways? Again, I am afraid we should not.I have heard and seen how temperamental French President Nicolas Sarkozy is; how demandingly nasty he can be with those who work with him.I have also read in Le Monde how the competent former French Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin speaks crudely to those who work with him.However, these are issues that are of less importance to the rank and file of De Villepin and Sarkozy’s Union pour un Mouvement Populaire.Politically speaking, cadres are interested in Sarkozy’s fresh modernising vision; his ethical character as a leader and the place of France in a competitive world.But for a majority of ANC cadres who descended on Polokwane, the place of South Africa in the world, and how the world looks at their leader is insignificant.They take an insular view: Jacob Zuma is a gifted cheerleader, JZ is a people’s person, a ‘100% Zulu boy’, irrespective of his ethical character and moral judgement.Similarly, I am not sure if Zanu-PF cadres or Swapo comrades were interested in the discussion as to how the leader they choose inject the qualitatively new or make their countries competitive.For cadres to think differently, Thabo Mbeki is right, albeit belatedly, when he says that the ANC failed on political education.I believe that what he has in mind is to educate cadres to make a distinction between trivial discussions about leadership and the more serious discussion about what we should demand and expect from leaders, both when we elect them at congresses or conferences; and what we should demand when they lead our nations.What Polokwane tells us is that as states, as a region and continent we should demand a new reflective philosophical discussion about leadership.* Alfredo Tjiurimo Hengari is a PhD fellow in political science at the University of Paris- Panthéon Sorbonne, France