South Africa

At H-SAfrica, the scholarly listserv on southern Africa, editor Peter Limb notes that there appears to be traction on the part of regional leaders becoming more vocal in their criticism of Robert Mugabe and his regime:

There certainly are signs of stronger views from Africa leaders:

In Kenya, PM Raila Odinga says the run-off is a sham and called for Mugabe to stand down.

Paul Kagame attacked Mugabe: “For me the question that it raises is why do you even call for elections?” Mr Kagame said.

ANC President-General Jacob Zuma says: “I think we’ll be lucky if we have a
free election,”; would it be fair: “I don’t think so.”

As John Leaver notes, the problem is more than Mugabe: namely, the military.

One wonders if this criticism will accelerate leading up to the runoff and if it will result in action in the very likely event that Mugabe simply seizes the election.

In a debate at the University of the Witwatersrand on Tuesday night Western Cape Premier Ebrahim Rasool drew a link between the recent wave of xenophobic violence and larger currents of intolerance in the country. “Xenophobia, racism, sexism, in fact all fundamentalism, all acts of intolerance belong to one family and if you are to deal with one member of the family, you have got to be consistent in dealing with all members of that family,” he said.

In a sense Rasool’s arguments most reminded me of the larger debates about transformation that characterized South African politics in the second half of the 1990s. That the country has already moved away from these fundamental tenets of the process embodied in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission process is dispiriting and Rasool is right to encourage South Africans to revive those principles and to remember the linkages of various forms of intolerance.

When inflation skyrockets, business confidence plummets. Economics do not work quite that simply, but the correlation is pretty clear in South Africa right now.

Dave Zirin of The Nation has a fascinating take on the intersections of xenophobia, violence, ubuntu, and sport in South Africa today. Here is a taste:

Criticism has been widespread about the lack of response by South African, not to mention Western, leaders. But there is an important, overlooked and–we can only pray–decisive tide of condemnation coming from that most global of sports, soccer. Soccer players in the African leagues often move from country to country in search of new challenges and better salaries. They are heroes on the continent, and many aren’t willing to be silent.

Gilbert Mushangazike, a star striker from Zimbabwe who plays for South Africa’s Orlando Pirates, said recently, “We are heroes when we score goals but we are people’s enemies on the streets. Although I’m here legally, I’m so scared that I’m even afraid to walk on the streets or go visit my friends. This whole thing has affected me and many of my teammates. We are simply not taking this whole thing very well. We are all human beings and people must treat [us] with respect and dignity. There are many white foreigners out there but they are not attacked. It’s a good thing that I’m flying out to Zimbabwe for national team duty because I don’t know how I would survive, because I’m even scared to go shopping.”

Although I believe that Zirin, who writes about the intersections of sport and society, is fundamentally right, the problem with asking athletes to speak up is that when we ask them to do so, the implicit message is that we want to hear them when they agree with us. Otherwise, we want them to remain silent. The same can be said of Hollywood stars and other famous folks. Generally speaking, I do not care what an athlete or an actor or a rock star thinks about politics unless it is clear that they have done their homework and really know what they are talking about. Still, in this case, if African soccer stars can speak up and make a difference, I hope that they will do so.

It was a good weekend to be a South African sports fan as both Bafana Bafana and the Springboks won big international matches. Bafana Bafana defeated Equatorial Guinea 4-1 in a game that serves as a qualifying match for the African Cup of Nations. It also was part of the World Cup Qualifying process, but of course South Africa, as hosts, receive an exemption. The Springboks, meanwhile, handled a good Wales team handily, 43-17, in Peter De Villiers’ debut as the national rugby team’s head coach. 

It was easy for upper-middle-class South Africans to wring their hands over the xenophobic violence that seized townships in recent week. But now that some of those victims are being treated as internal refugees and are being settled near leafy suburbs? Not in my back yard.

Thabo Mbeki is receiving criticism from just about all sides these days. His reactions to the xenophobic violence are being called “too little, too late.” The country’s manufacturers fear that rising costs will cut into competitiveness, and heads of state always suffer when their economies falter. Morgan Tsvangirai has asserted that Mbeki is unfit to broker the Zim crisis for SADC. The utterly disillusioned South African Communist Party believes that Mbeki should face a recall and the country should hold elections early to replace him. And then there are the columnists. Increasingly it is difficult to believe that Mbeki will last one more year with the way his critics all around are sharpening their knives.  

Amidst Thabo Mbeki’s very bad few weeks let us not forget that Jacob Zuma has troubles of his own. The latest? Zuma’s presumed choice for the country’s chief justice slot, Cape Judge President John Hlophe, faces accusations that he lobbied at least two Constitutional Court judges for a pro-Zuma ruling.  Hlophe now faces possible impeachment. He also categorically denies the charges as “utter rubbish.” Of course from a career-saving perspective he’d almost have to.

It seems that the various issues that Mbeki and Zuma face tend to break down rather differently. Mbeki’s critics paint him either as incompetent, indifferent, or power-hungry. His are problems of leadership. Zuma, meanwhile, always seems to be in the soup for matters related to ethics or crime or nefariousness. His are problems of integrity. It is hard to determine which is worse, though for the sake or argument I’d maintain that in a democratic system it is easier to rectify incompetence than corruption among leaders. I would further argue that the Big Man syndrome that so haunts Africa tends to stem more from personal malfeasance than from political shortcomings. That said, neither is especially appealing in a leader and one would hope that someone with both governing savviness and personal probity would emerge from within the ANC.   
 

From Zapiro, The Mail & Guardian 29 May, 2008:

The United States Congress is finally undertaking to remove the African National Congress from various terrorism watch lists in the United States — a status the ANC, or even Mkhonto we Sizwe, never should have suffered in the first place.