crossfire
Evidence wa ka Ngobeni
Sipho Seepe’s No Blows Barred column (September 21 to 27) lacked focus and was difficult to follow. Most of the issues raised amounted to his usual tirade against President Thabo Mbeki and the African National Congress.
The most interesting point to come out of it was, perhaps, that the Mbeki government is little different from that of Mobutu Sese Seko. I have, however, without success, spent the past few days trying very hard to grasp how he justifies this claim.
I have solicited the wisdom of friends and colleagues. But none backed Seepe’s argument. I have also taken a close look at the systems of government of both Mbeki and Sese Seko.
Seepe’s argument is basically that both Mobutu and Mbeki selected their government appointees (Cabinet ministers, director generals and premiers), who in turn selected their appointees (MECs and the like), giving the two presidents total control of their respective national and provincial administrations.
Seepe writes: “Driven by insecurity and obsession with control, Mobutu and Mbeki ensured that administrators and Cabinet members are kept on the move from post to post so that none could establish a firm power base. No one held a position in government other than through presidential grace.
“Having created a network of loyalists at all levels within the ANC a majority of whom have been deployed in strategic positions within state institutions, for example police, intelligence and the army Mbeki has virtually isolated himself from external challenges and pressures.”
Seepe adds: “Since most of the deployees are [Mbeki’s] creations, they have since come to identify their future and interests with him. They exist to serve him.”
But Seepe does not provide the patterned detail to back up these serious charges and to establish a basis for the comparison with Mobutu. It is as if he feels no need to do so.
Over the past few months, there have been strong objections to Mbeki’s stance on the HIV/Aids issue. Critics have, similarly, exhausted the issue of the alleged plot against him.
But Seepe is vexed that these and other major blunders by Mbeki did not attract public censure from ANC members.
Fair enough. But I have a problem with Seepe’s interpretation of this absence of criticism and the conclusion he draws from it.
Seepe says the lack of criticism of Mbeki and of political engagement in the ANC and the government shows that “so-called tried and tested cadres have sold themselves for 30 pieces of silver”.
Seepe explains this behaviour thus: “The silence from the (dis)honourable members of the ANC is a reflection of either their intelligence or their moral integrity. Worse still, it could also be a reflection of the paralysing fear that Mbeki has managed to instil in the organisation”.
But this is all too easy. I am left feeling Seepe has made a number of rabble-rousing charges against Mbeki and his government without adequate thought and evidence.
The Constitution allows the president of South Africa to hire and fire Cabinet ministers. The same is true in other democracies. Mobutu’s government the unelected regime of Congo/Zaire for almost 32 years routinely helped itself to millions of American dollars from Zaire’s treasury and had little regard for human rights. The same cannot be said of the Mbeki administration.
There are, yes, attempts in the ANC to impose uniformity on policy issues among its members. But this is neither as serious as Seepe suggests, nor is it serious enough to justify the comparison with Mobutu. In a democracy, there is nothing autocratic about political parties insisting on policy uniformity. After all, anyone who does not like these strictures is free to join another party.
Like the political figures they seek to analyse, political commentators can also make unfortunate judgement calls. Seepe has done just that by comparing Mbeki to Mobutu.