BDay+Editorial,+05-06-09,+Mandela+nauseating

Business Day Editorial, 09 June 2005, headed “Mandela’s deadly kiss”
IN what must rank as one of the worst calls of his long political life, Nelson Mandela has come to the defence of Deputy President Jacob Zuma. In failing to press Zuma to do the honourable thing and resign in the wake of the Schabir Shaik judgment, Mandela has hung his successor, President Thabo Mbeki, out to dry. If Mbeki wants Zuma to go then he will have to fire him.

Mandela’s helping hand to Zuma came after the latter visited him on Monday, for what Mandela’s staff laughably called a ‘courtesy call’. Some courtesy. Zuma went there to beg for help. Mandela could have gently eased him out of office but, judging by a word Mandela was later to have with ANC headquarters, Zuma got what he wanted. Mandela told the party to leave Zuma alone.

Why would Mandela sacrifice this country’s reputation as an honest place in order to save Zuma’s patently corrupted skin? Three possibilities suggest themselves.

First, Mandela might see ANC unity as the paramount requirement. But this starry-eyed view fails to appreciate that the party is already split over Zuma — some care about the effect of sending a tainted man around the world to represent us and to lead us as president. And some don’t.

Second, Mandela may have been open to the argument that Zuma has been let down by a close (financial) adviser just as he, Mandela, has recently by a close (legal) adviser.

Third, Mandela may have just wanted to stick one to Mbeki, who has not treated him with the utmost respect in recent years.

Whatever the reasons, Mandela has done the country a great disservice. We may all live to regret it.

Why should Zuma go? He wasn’t found guilty in the Shaik trial and he has never been charged. Indeed, he makes much of both those points and they ring true, understandably, to many sympathisers in government and party. But both points miss the essential point.

The reason Zuma should no longer be deputy president of SA (his party positions being a separate issue) is that for many years he was deeply and deliberately involved in a relationship — in which he, Zuma, benefited financially — with a fraud and a corrupt man called Schabir Shaik.

If he didn’t know this he is an unfit leader and if he did he is unfit again. Surely, in Africa, the ability of SA to stand for clean government, good judgment and political responsibility means something?

No? Then leave Zuma where he is and let the cameras follow Mbeki to the Group of Eight conference in Scotland in two weeks’ time to press the great powers for more money for Africa, arguing that we are so diligently cleaning up our act. He will be laughed out of the conference.

Zuma cannot see the problem but someone who cares for him should tell him. Sir, you must step down. For now, you cannot stay. That is not to say Zuma can never again contest high office. But only from a position of humility.

And then there is Mbeki, dropped in the deep end by Mandela in a mawkish and nauseating little manoeuvre that will not easily be forgotten. Whether or not Zuma is charged or whether or not Shaik appeals, Mbeki simply has to fire Zuma from the deputy presidency of the country, even though he cannot remove him from the deputy leadership of the party.

Mbeki should follow that by immediately announcing the name of a successor to Zuma acceptable to all wings of the party. Mbeki has cabinet selection skills similar to those of former Springbok coach Rudolf Straeuli but he could do much worse, for the rest of his term, than ANC secretary-general Kgalema Motlanthe or government spokesman Joel Netshitenzhe.

If Mbeki does not remove Zuma on his return from Chile today his remaining years in office will be a nightmare. He will lose all authority and his government will lose all legitimacy.


 * From: http://www.businessday.co.za/articles/opinion.aspx?ID=BD4A54753