Zuma, Ramaphosa and the DA are playing the politicians’ game

South Africa’s political landscape has been reshaped by President Cyril Ramaphosa’s formation of the government of national unity (GNU), which is in practice a grand coalition that has excluded almost 67% of the electorate. This exclusion represents what I term a “fall through the cracks”, which is a direct result of the “politicians’ game”.

The game is about how elite politicians prioritise personal and party interests over the broader public good. It involves a constant cycle of consolidation and opportunism, driven by a relentless desire to control power. Politicians in the game often set aside campaign promises and messages that initially brought them into power. Instead, their actions become focused on self-preservation and control, distorting policy and governance to fit their own agendas. Their established participation as public representatives allows for “manoeuvring” in the political system to become players. 

The game is exemplified by the interplay between the ANC’s Cyril Ramaphosa, uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) party leader Jacob Zuma and the Democratic Alliance (DA). A conflict of egos disguised as a “revolutionary principle” by Zuma, who is hell-bent on removing Ramaphosa. Zuma’s motivation includes securing his own “get-out-of-jail-free card” by diminishing Ramaphosa’s political standing. Zuma’s strategy involves creating political instability in the ANC to weaken Ramaphosa’s position, potentially allowing Zuma to avoid accountability for his role in state capture. His opportunistic interests are based on the hope that the minister of justice will apply minimal pressure on the national director of public prosecution and delay prosecution based on the state capture report. The MK party, in almost a single pursuit of ukugwaza iANC, seems to anticipate and remain hopeful that the DA will bully the ANC into submission, thus creating an opening in which to insert itself into government and achieve its primary “revolutionary objectives”. 

The ANC, once a dominant force, has faced a severe setback. The party suffered a 17% decline in electoral support, leaving it as a minority party for the first time since 1994, which has rendered Ramaphosa politically vulnerable. The situation was worsened by former head of the State Security Agency, Arthur Fraser’s, affidavit which resulted in an independent panel looking into the Phala Phala allegations. A legal frenzy headed by former chief justice Sandile Ngcobo informed the subsequent Phala Phala report. The report, which implicated Ramaphosa, further eroded his political credibility. Because of the nature of the allegations, Ramaphosa must push for his continued stay in political office.

In this context, Ramaphosa’s establishment of the GNU appears less as a noble act of unity and more as a strategic manoeuvre to secure his position. The DA, South Africa’s second-largest party, has shown a willingness to overlook the Phala Phala report’s findings. This shift in stance highlights how the DA is also playing the game, focusing on consolidating its own interests rather than upholding the rule of law. It also proved its loyalty by preferring Ramaphosa over deputy president Paul Mashatile. 

The DA’s approach to the GNU illustrates the broader nature of the game. Its primary concern has shifted from holding Ramaphosa accountable to ensuring its own position in the government. This shows how political party interests become central, rather than the broader needs of  their constituencies.

This scenario demonstrates that the game did not begin with the election results or Ramaphosa’s inauguration. Instead, it starts with the exclusion of significant political forces from the executive branch, resulting in a substantial portion of the electorate being marginalised. The ANC’s alliance with the South African Communist Party and labour federation Cosatu positioned it in the centre-left spectrum. But this coalition’s exclusion has left nearly 67% of voters, including those from other centre-left parties, without representation. The first-ever decisive action by Ramaphosa comes at the expense of 67% of the electorate.

The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), as the fourth largest party, offers a notable counterpoint. Despite its reservations about Ramaphosa and the GNU, the EFF has remained consistent in its critique of the game. Its position echoes the Black Consciousness Movement led by Steve Biko, which advocated for a unified response to the political difficulties facing South Africa. If the EFF can maintain its focus and unify the disaffected majority, it may play a crucial role in challenging the game.

As South Africa moves forward, the effect of the game on national governance remains uncertain. Will the country experience economic recovery and improved governance, or will exclusionary practices and corruption persist? The future of South Africa’s political landscape will largely depend on whether the game can be dismantled and replaced with a more inclusive and accountable approach to governance. A national dialogue, a robust parliament and any other initiative on the national political stage involving the main players in the game will be inconsequential to the objective reality of almost 67% of the electorate.

 I contend strongly that the players must be excluded from constructive discourses in  South Africa in an attempt to reconcile with the 67% of the electorate. 

The current state of South African politics reveals a troubling pattern where personal and party interests overshadow the broader needs of the electorate. The exclusion of significant political forces from the GNU represents a critical “fall through the cracks”, underscoring the urgent need for a shift away from the game. Only by addressing these dynamics can South Africa hope to achieve a more representative and effective governance structure.

Phumelelani Mshumi is a master’s student in the University of the Western Cape