Fortuitously, the ANC’s succession debacle has stimulated debate on the selection of presidential aspirants, and the type of people desired. This has now become an urgent necessity in the context of the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM), to which South Africa was subjected last year. The APRM is a key component of the African renaissance — the continent’s vision and quest for self-respect in matters of governance and development. This is the challenge facing the rank and file of the ANC as they discuss documents distributed in recent weeks in preparation for the definitive December ANC conference in Limpopo.
Although the debate relates to the leadership race in the ANC, it is much more than a contestation between specific camps. The big questions are what South Africa will look like 10 years from now, who best can take it there, and how. This includes the type of person required and the attributes he or she must have in light of debates on governance and the road to be travelled.
Examining the big picture is essential, because the job requirements are awesome. A look at these challenges can help citizens, and conference delegates, to assess who is up to the task.
The next president of South Africa must manage a country with a GDP of $600billion (about R4trillion) and a budget of R500billion. This is the biggest economy on the continent, nearly double the size of Africa’s second- largest economy, Egypt ($350 billion).
Whoever becomes president must also manage the relationship between South Africa, India and Brazil — three leading actors in the interaction between the developed world, represented by the G8, and the developing world. This is a historic terrain of struggle, and one in which the developed world uses might and stealth, while manipulating resources and development aid, to secure its position. The World Trade Organisation talks are an example.
Presidential aspirants must realise that South Africans will expect the White House, Downing Street and the Elysee Palace to continue to consult the Union Buildings on Africa and its relations with the rest of the world, and other global hot spots. This consultation rubber stamps the country’s prestige. It does not, however, come with the office but develops as a result of the intellectual chemistry between leaders.
At another level, the South African president must deal with London, Washington and Paris on global and bilateral issues pertaining to South Africa. This is a ruthless give-and-take process in which national interest takes precedence, and where the sentimental noises made to the developed nations concerning the poor and hungry in the developing world take a distant second place.
Today, because of the respect that has grown for South Africa thanks to the excellent stewardship of the Mbeki government, and that of Nelson Mandela, no international forum is complete without South Africa’s presence. This must continue.
Finally, the next leader will have to grapple with the local transformation agenda and the alleviation of the endemic poverty, both of which move in fits and starts because of resistance from various quarters and the lingering effects of the deliberately defective education system under apartheid.
Given these considerations, and in the wake of the visionary leadership and solid track records provided by Mandela and Mbeki, the question uppermost in South African minds is: who will fit the bill?
A reference to seniority in the ANC to determine succession is ludicrous, to say the least. South Africa is not a fiefdom. What if the next person in line is limited?
Returning to my opening point, it must be noted that the African Union, Nepad and now the APRM are the African renaissance in action. Thus principles of the APRM in terms of governance will naturally filter down to the day-to-day business of politics, including political parties.
The African renaissance and the APRM are about restoring black dignity and pride in matters of governance. Africans swear by this. They will not tolerate anything less than modern and clean democracy; they expect the highest standards of political and economic governance. This is not a sentiment from Afro-pessimists, but a deeply felt passion in communities.
The challenge facing the ANC when it meets in Polokwane is to elect a president who may become the next state president — the type of person required to pilot the country in the context of the African vision. If Mbeki, who cannot serve another term as president of the republic, is elected ANC president, delegates must contemplate a president-in-waiting.
For a better understanding of Africa’s leadership experience, the past holds reference. The first wave of post-liberation politics — beginning in Ghana 50 years ago and followed by a host of other states — ushered in the rule of the liberator. The liberator was the messiah who, after leading the people out of bondage, was naturally the appropriate ruler. No differentiation was made between running a liberation movement and ruling a country. In some instances, even the civil service was new.
To make matters worse, some of the leaders hung on to power and the generals, driven by their own agendas, would intervene — only to become the new despots.
Unfortunately — and here is the rub — election to high office, and matters of succession, were driven by allegiance to the party, patronage and popularity. A dogmatic adherence to the prevailing ”isms” was also a major factor in electing people to leadership positions. This was at a time when global alliances were premised on allegiance to one or another Cold War ideology, and overseas development aid, which many countries needed, was dependent on where a government stood on such matters. These ”isms”, coupled with the poor governance systems referred to earlier, devastated Africa.
For this reason, the rhetoric from Cosatu and the SACP on some of these ”isms” to be part of the governance package is terrifying. How does one consider nationalisation in this age and at this level of economic sophistication? Thankfully, the government has stood its ground and not strayed into dangerous adventurism that would put the country at risk.
The view that people with the appropriate attributes must constitute the new leadership is gaining ground. These attributes or leadership qualities are numerous, but a few can be singled out.
Vision is regarded as the most important attribute. Mbeki had the African renaissance as his vision and the courage of his convictions to steer the country. There is no questioning the miracles this has achieved. Not only for South Africa but, in partnering with other African leaders, it has led to the birth of the AU, Nepad and the APRM.
Moral integrity and astuteness comes a close second to vision. None other than Archbishop Desmond Tutu has extolled the virtues of a leadership based on moral values. Moral astuteness gives a leader the type of authority very few can question; coupled with courage of convictions, it enables a leader to stand up to his or her detractors. Above all, it enables people to talk about their leader with pride.
The third attribute is intellectual acumen, enabling a leader to hold his or her own among peers in issues of global diplomacy and governance. Professor John Kotter, the Harvard University leadership guru, says intellectual acumen is an important contributor to the reverence and respect people must have for an individual. Although he was referring to business leadership, this also applies to leadership in general.
Most South Africans are confident the ANC will make the correct choices. The days of the populist are fading, and in his or her place must come the visionary, the shepherd and the pragmatist. Finding this person — an OR Tambo, a Nelson Mandela, a Robert Sobukwe, a Steve Biko or a Thabo Mbeki — will be the mountain to climb. The ANC owes South Africa the best it can offer from its ranks.
Thami Mazwai is the chairperson of the South African chapter of the African renaissance