By Henry Srebrnik, [Saint John, NB] Telegraph-Journal
On Feb. 11, Cyril Ramaphosa, deputy
president of South Africa and head of the ruling African
National Congress (ANC), took advantage of the 28th
anniversary of Nelson Mandela’s release from prison by the
country’s apartheid government.
He called on the scandal-ridden president,
Jacob Zuma, in office since 2009, to step down as head of
state. Four days later, Zuma did so.
His own party had turned against him,
asking him to step down a full year and a half before the end
of his second term. Ramaphosa is now acting president, and
likely to be elected to that office in the next South African
election, which takes place next year.
Zuma had what we might call “street cred”:
the son of a widowed maid and a former member of the ANC’s
military wing in the days of apartheid, he had joined the
party in 1958 and was later imprisoned for a decade on Robben
Island along with Mandela.
Perhaps that’s why the ANC stood behind him
until the end of December, when Ramaphosa was chosen as party
leader in his place. Once that had happened, his days as
president were numbered.
He leaves office with South Africa’s
economy in dire straits. Unemployment in the country topped 25
per cent, and the nation has remained one of the world’s most
unequal societies.
Corruption under Zuma had become so blatant
that it was impossible to ignore. He has been linked to
various scandals, including his construction of a lavish
mansion in his rural home town.
He is already facing further charges
related to a 1999 arms deal and has been accused of 783
counts of corruption.
Zuma allowed state enterprises to be run by
family, friends and business associates, including the Guptas,
an Indian family with widespread business interests. They have
been implicated in the alleged looting of state resources.
It was reported that the family wielded
such influence over Zuma that they were able to decide who got
appointed to the cabinet. Zuma’s downfall has been followed by
police raids on their family residence.
Also, the police massacre of 34 miners
involved in a wildcat strike in Marikana in 2012, the worst
act of official violence since the end of apartheid,
intensified the widespread belief that the ANC no longer cared
about the people it claimed to be representing.
The ANC felt that it might lose so much
support in next year’s presidential election among the
country’s Black majority that the unthinkable might happen:
the loss of power it has held since the dismantling of
apartheid in 1994.
The call for Zuma to step down reached a
crescendo when the Nelson Mandela Foundation released a
statement calling for him to go immediately.
Ramaphosa, a onetime labor leader and
protégé of Mandela’s, is himself a former anti-apartheid
leader, who went on to made a fortune in business.
Clearly, South Africa’s increasingly
fragile economy was a major factor in ousting Zuma.
In January, Ramphosa had led a South
African delegation to the World Economic Forum in Davos. Those
attending were told that with him now in control of the party
apparatus, South Africa would provide a renewed sense of
political stability and economic prospects.
Implicit in his pitch was the importance of
deposing Zuma. “For the first time in many years, I see a
great deal of optimism” among investors and business leaders
in Davos, remarked Jeff Radebe, a senior government minister
and ANC veteran.
This “positive sentiment,” he claimed,
could be attributed to “the political situation now unfolding
in South Africa.”
No comments:
Post a Comment