State capture in South Africa
FOR those Pakistanis who think we have a monopoly on corruption, here’s some news: there are 60 countries with higher levels of venality than Pakistan in Transparency International’s rankings for 2016. Lest we feel smug about this, let me add that Pakistan stands 116th in a list of 176 countries. Needless to say that white, Christian states head the list, with Muslim nations faring poorly. So much, then, for all our piety and public show of religiosity. Had there been a prize for hypocrisy, we would have won hands down.
However, this column will focus on the steep decline of standards under the South African president, Jacob Zuma, and demonstrate how a single individual can subvert the entire system. When Nelson Mandela led South Africa away from the iniquitous system of apartheid a quarter century ago, there was universal euphoria over the prospects of the rainbow nation — a term Mandela coined to described his multi-racial country. As the most industrialised state in Africa, and one endowed with great natural beauty, abundant wildlife and massive mineral deposits, it was widely expected that South Africa would lead the continent in wealth-creation.
But sadly, the dream withered on the vine. In a bid to lift black South Africans out of poverty, a law was passed to force white-owned business enterprises to take on black partners. Those fortunate enough to join the boards of highly profitable companies had deep connections with the African National Congress (ANC) that had led the freedom struggle and has been in power ever since the country’s first post-apartheid election. Obviously, they contributed nothing to the firms in terms of ideas, work or capital.
Now, the party is electing its next president, and, in all probability, the future president of South Africa. Some 5,000 delegates will decide the party’s — and the country’s — future at the ANC conference. In fact, by the time you read this, results of the poll will have come in.
The favourites are the deputy president Cyril Ramaphosa, and Jacob Zuma’s ex-wife, Nkoszana Dlamini-Zuma. As I write this, the former has a lead, but the latter has strong support among hard-core ANC supporters. While Ramaphosa offers sensible economic policies to restore the country’s standing (it is currently rated in ‘junk bond’ territory), Dlamini-Zuma is tempting voters with the promise of greater redistribution of wealth. While poor black South Africans naturally find this path attractive, the business community is alarmed, and prefer Ramaphosa’s pragmatic approach.
The entire campaign has been about corruption, with Zuma being the target of several investigative reports. ‘State capture’ is a term that has gained wide currency to describe Zuma’s practice of handing over state enterprises to his cronies to run. Assets are flogged, and pliant ministers are put in place to do Zuma’s bidding.
A prime example was the removal of the respected finance minister, Pravin Gordhan, in 2015, and his deputy, Mcebisi Jonas, was offered the top slot by the Gupta brothers, Zuma’s long-time cronies. When he refused, he was offered a 600 million rand bribe. Over the next two days, the rand’s value fell by 9 per cent, and there was a public outcry. A couple of days later, Gordhan was back in the saddle. His estimate of the extent of the loot and plunder the state is victim of — as cited by The Economist — is between $11billion and $15bn.
Zuma is personally facing corruption charges in over 780 cases, and has thus far been protected by the indemnity provided by the presidency. He is backing his ex-wife Dlamini-Zuma in the expectation that she will shield him from prosecution once he steps down. But given his increasing unpopularity within the ANC, he can expect a large dose of accountability.
Even by Pakistani standards, stories of Zuma’s corruption have reached epic levels. While many Africans expect their leaders to dip into the exchequer, few have done it with Zuma’s complete disregard for the law, or the public’s well-being. One reason he has got away with it so far is that for years, he headed the ANC’s intelligence wing, and thus has plenty of dirt on his opponents.
Even for a survivor like Zuma, the time of reckoning is approaching fast. However, even with the odds stacked against him, Zuma still has some cards left to play. In a tribal society like South Africa, Zuma has assiduously cultivated chiefs, and allocated government jobs in exchange for political support. In the country’s rapidly growing urban areas and township ghettoes, the ANC has distributed patronage on a wide scale. It remains to be seen how many of these supporters will prevail on their delegates to vote for Dmalini-Zuma.
But despite being South Africa’s largest party, the ANC’s popularity is sliding rapidly. Its share of votes fell from 62pc in the national election in 2014 to 54pc in the local elections held in 2016. The Democratic Alliance, on the other hand, gained 27pc in 2016, thereby winning control of a number of crucial towns and cities. It already had formed Cape Town’s local government.
The next presidential election is due in 2019, and if Zuma clings to power till then, his unpopularity is bound to rub off on the ANC. Some have suggested that the party could gain votes by putting Zuma on trial after unseating him as the party leader. But thus far, Zuma has displayed great skill in clinging to power. His tentacles run deep into the state apparatus, and many of his supporters occupy key positions. His departure will give the country an opportunity to rebuild an economy that has been devastated by years of state capture. This is why the ANC party conference is key to the country’s future.
Published in Dawn, December 18th, 2017
Dear visitor, the comments section is undergoing an overhaul and will return soon.