Africa

South Africans are gearing up for many fights in 2009. It increasingly appears that one of these, sure to be among the most explosive, may be a serious reconsideration of the role, efficacy, and direction of affirmative action. The Congress of the People (COPE) has made clear its serious concerns over the nature of affirmative action as it plays out in South Africa. Recent COPE convert Allan Boesak has made clear his concerns, as have Trevor Tutu, son of Desmond Tutu, the Nobel Prize Laureate, the South African Institute of Race Relations (SAIRR), and so many others. This has inevitably created a defensive response in numerous circles, not the least being Jacob Zuma. Do not be surprised if the differences between the ANC and COPE on affirmative action frame the country’s political debate in the year to come. 

Is the African National Congress losing its best people to the newly formed rival Congress of the People? That is an argument being put forth in at least some circles. In response to another series of high-profile defections from the ANC to COPE Dirk Smit, Speaker of the City of Cape Town municipality, has asserted that not only the numb er of defections is disquieting, but the quality of those leaving the ANC raises concerns. The most compelling political question that will play out in South Africa, and arguably in all of Africa, in 2009, is whether or not COPE can provide a serious and legitimate challenge to the dominance of the ANC. Increasingly it appears that the upstarts will be able to do so.

It appears that the ANC is beginning to understand that the Congress of the People is not going away, its leaders and increasingly robust membership is serious, and that COPE will be a factor in the 2009 elections. The ANC believes that COPE might be able to draw about 10% of the popular vote, thus challenging seriously the ANC’s 2/3 majority. But those numbers seem low, the predictions of an organization finally acknowledging that there is a graveyard, but still whistling past it.

It is hard not to frame the war of words between the African National Congress and the Congress of the People as akin to the two toughest kids in school meeting up on the playground. The hints of threats pass from the lips of ANC spokesmen even as COPE’s people claim not to be at all afraid.

COPE continues to push forward, moving from dissident idea to full-fledged party in almost no time, fleshing out a power structure, drawing prominent supporters all along the way, and showing a remarkable knack for reaching out to a wide range of South Africans.  The most serious question before the new party, then, will be whether it can support itself financially. Presumably funding will begin to rill in as the organization moves from dissidence to legitimate party status, but money, or its absence, seems to be the only thing likely to derail COPE from at least becoming the main opposition party at this stage.

Kgalema Motlanthe has rejected as unnecessary calls for an investigation of the arms deal, which increasingly threatens to undermine the ANC even further at a time when the ruling party needs all the help it can get. It seems certain that between the work of the Scorpions, the investigations of the media, and probes from other parties, not to mention trials of the accused, the full story will eventually emerge. It might be best for Motlanthe, Jacob Zuma, and the ANC to champion openness and take what damage might be coming to it rather than to add a lack of transparency and attempts to obfuscate or cover up corruption.

If it is true that the Congress of the People (COPE) already has 40,000 members before it has even gotten off the ground (with the caveat being that these numbers come from COPE’s own people) , the ANC might need to start worrying at least a little bit. The ANC has name recognition, serious historical heft, and already controls government at nearly all levels, giving it tremendous sway. And so far, we have little idea what COPE stands for, though for years the divisions within the ANC have had little to do with what anyone represented in terms of policy or program. Nonetheless, the new party seems on the verge of becoming if not a juggernaut, at least a potentially legitimate opposition party, something South Africa has not seen for a long, long time.

The much-maligned Scorpions have uncovered what should prove to be pretty explosive details on the corruption surrounding the arms deals. Now that Pandora’s Box is open, one wonders just how damaging this could be to the ANC. Is this another Muldergate? Worse?

Under ordinary circumstances the ANC would seem likely, as the only game in town, to weather this storm. But these are not ordinary circumstances in South African politics, and the emergence of the Congress of the People (assuming that the power nexus in that organization’s hands are clean in this affair) changes the calculus significantly.

And, not to be cynical, but is it possible that so many in the ANC hated the Scorpions and wanted to disband the organization not because they truly believed the Scorpions to be ineffective, but rather because they feared that the organization might be too effective?

Recent polling data indicates that South Africans simply have no real sense of who Kgalema Motlanthe is or what he stands for. This is exactly as Jacob Zuma would like it, as a cipher as placeholder in the office of the president only strengthens Zuma’s claim on the position. The Congress of the People is poised to present enough of a challenge to the ANC that name recognition will be a huge factor in the 2009 election. The ANC is thus going to rely on both the brand name and emphasize the good elements of Zuma’s renown while at the same time planting the seed in the minds of voters that COPE is an unknown quantity.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu and former South African president FW de Klerk have written to President Kgalema Motlanthe requesting that he set up an independent commission of inquiry to investigate the arms deal that has so shaped and warped the current South African political climate. It is hard to imagine what rationale Motlanthe or the ANC might use to refuse such a request, which, of course, says nothing about whether or not the requested inquiry will happen.

Well, well, well — just when I posit that we have seen relatively few differences between COPE and the ANC here comes a potential whopper. Philip Dexter, a “senior member” (whatever that can possibly mean for a party that has not fully launched yet) of COPE has put forward a position on Zimbabwe and Robert Mugabe that departs significantly from that of the ANC in recent years. “From my point of view the only way to solve the Zimbabwe problem at this point is to put enough pressure on Mugabe for him to go. And he should either go voluntarily, or he should go by being forcibly removed. And I think we have to support the Zimbabwean people to achieve that objective.”

Dexter later clarified his position to say that it was his own and not COPE’s, and that use of the passive voice, “should go by being forcibly removed” does not necessarily commit COPE to South African-driven action. Still, it is hard not to see this as a potentially vast departure from the ANC’s policies toward Mugabe.