South Africa 2009

2009 is a year of big elections. In the coming months, there will be presidential elections in Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, and India.

On April 22nd, South Africans will vote for their next president. What makes this election particularly interesting is that it will be the most competitive election in post-Apartheid South African history. Although the ANC will past the torch to its new leader (from Kgalema Motlanthe to Jacob Zuma), this election reflects the first big schism in the ANC party.

A long time coming
Jacob Zuma will be elected South Africa's fourth president. In many ways, this is a long time coming. In December 2007, at Polokwane (the ANC national convention), Zuma was elected as the leader of the ANC, despite the fact that his ANC peer and political rival, Thabo Mbeki, was still serving as president. This effectively made Zuma the President-elect, and left Mbeki a lame duck. Further signaling Zuma's rise was the ANC national executive committee's decision in September 2008 to no longer support Mbeki. Without the full support of his own party, Mbeki resigned days later.

Throughout the past year, the schism in the ANC has grown wider. Following Mbeki's resignation, Mbeki-loyalists within the ANC formed the Congress of the People Party (COPE).

And in recent weeks the ill will between these two parties has only grown. Along the campagin trail, there has been an intensifying tit-for-tat between COPE and ANC. COPE-leaning media outlets have accused ANC leaders of attempting to bribe COPE members to return to the ANC, and in response the ANC has accused these media outlets of creating fake news stories to discredit the ANC. Additionally, Cosatu (the labor wing of the ANC), has begun distributing anti-COPE pamphlets that portray COPE members as corrupt, ultra-capitalist, fat cats and accuses them of passing self-serving anti-labor, neoliberal reforms during their time as ANC members. (which makes you wonder, why the ANC didn't do anything at the time, if they really believe these MPs to be so awful and corrupt)

Even Archbishop Desmond Tutu has been thrown into the political tussle. Last week, he stirred ANC anger by saying that "In the year of [US President Barack] Obama, can you imagine what it is like when you are walking in New York and they ask you who will be the next president?...At the present time, I can't pretend to be looking forward to having [Zuma] as my president." The ANC Youth League flung more dirt by offering some immature "advice" to the Nobel laureate.

The big issue
Looming over all of this partisan bickering, is the National Prosectutions Authority's (NPA) decision on Monday to drop corruption charges against Zuma. Zuma faced charges that he had accepted bribes from his financial adviser, Schabir Shaik. Among the accusations, was a claim that Zuma had accepted bribes to help pave the way for a $4.8 billion national arms purchase.

So with a corruption controversy, the formation of a new party of ANC dissidents, and intense partisan fighting, South Africa will have its most competitive election ever. The ANC will almost certainly lose the two-thirds majority (needed to rubber stamp legislation) that it now enjoys, but the party will retain the presidency.

What does all this mean
It's hard to tell the difference between a "healthy" democracy and one that is dangerously fractured. Intense campaigning can be indicative of either. In the US intense campaigning is often lauded as reflective of our democratic culture; in other nations it is interpreted as indicating imminent collapse.

When I was in South Africa, I was surprised that the ANC enjoyed such wide and unquestioned support. Coming from the US, and its two-party system, I couldn't understand how any political party could be so intensely popular. A classmate at UCT explained to me that the ANC enjoyed such wide support because it was still greatly associated with the liberation movement. It was the party of Mandela and other freedom fighters, and most South Africans believed that political unity of the post-Apartheid nation was integral to success. My friend knew that the ANC would eventually split; a party composed of free-market capitalists and communist party members could only last for so long. But even so, my friend predicted that the ANC had another decade or two of unity ahead of it.

Now, the schism between two immense figures--Zuma and Mbeki--has caused this split.

I think that this election will reflect the first awkward, fledging attempts at competitive, multiparty elections. I think the ANC will still receive resounding support and show its electoral power. And I think that COPE will need to regroup, talk with other minority parties, and provide a platform that is wider than its disgruntlement with the ANC if it wants to eventually challenge ANC dominance.

I am, however, concerned that the Zuma investigation will loom over South African politics. The NPA's choice to not investigate Zuma leaves the charges against him still unresolved. If Zuma is guilty, he will remain unpunished for corruption, and if he is innocent, Zuma will not be absolved of the charges against him. What's more Mbeki is implicated as tainting the investigation, so he too remains unpunished or unabsolved. It's a less-than-ideal situation to move forward from.

It's a political decision, not a judicial decision. And it's realism, not idealism. But maybe idealism is for one-party unity governments of the past, and realism is for competitive, healthy elections of the future.