With Zuma out of the ANC, and a minor Stalingrad coming, MK offers little beyond spectacle

29 Jul 2024

The decision by the ANC’s National Disciplinary Committee to expel former president Jacob Zuma was never in doubt. The reaction by the MK party was not a surprise either: that, and Zuma’s likely appeal, illustrate the party’s real strategy – to rely on the politics of spectacle in the shorter term to cause more waves, while successfully obscuring an apparent lack of policy consistency in the longer term.

On Monday morning, the first reports that the ANC’s national disciplinary committee had decided to expel Zuma were published.

Considering that Zuma has been recognised as the leader of MK by the Electoral Commission and that he had openly campaigned for them, there was no doubt he was going to be expelled.

No party can afford to have its own members campaigning against it, and in direct competition.

That said, the fact that NDC member Faith Muthambi voted to expel him may have come as a surprise.

Displays of her moral rectitude have been few and far between.

When in government she presided over the appointment of Hlaudi Mostoeneng as Chief Operations Officer at the SABC, and all that that led to.

Read more: Out, Hlaudi & Proud: ‘I perform miracles wherever I am’

She was even prepared to rebel against an ANC decision in a way that had huge negative ramifications for our television industry.

All these moves could only have been because Zuma wanted it – it was through Muthambi that he controlled aspects of the Communications Ministry and government policy. And it was because of Zuma that she went against ANC policy.

Despite that, Muthambi was happy to vote to expel Zuma in this meeting.

Meanwhile, before 9am on Monday, MK had rushed out a bizarre statement denouncing the “ANC kangaroo court” and its decision.

The party also claimed the way that this decision was leaked was the “climax of a series of repressive actions that disturbingly echo tactics once used during Apartheid”. And, as always with MK, they blamed President Cyril Ramaphosa for the outcome.

The party also claimed that it would not “passively watch as these grave injustices” against its leader unfolded.

While this may appear to be a call to action to some who may support Zuma, it is also a reminder of the absurd situation Zuma has created.

MK is now campaigning that its leader should be treated fairly by another party.

Personal political vehicle

This is more proof, were it ever necessary, that MK is Zuma’s personal political vehicle. But this is also another example of Zuma’s real strategy.

One of the more important questions in our politics for several years has been who will former ANC voters support?

Zuma and MK appear to be trying to create almost an overlap of identity, to invite these people to choose them. This is why MK’s public identity, involving similar colours and logos, and a former leader, so closely mirrors that of the ANC. It is a deliberate attempt to entice those voters into MK.

Still, to even try to claim that the media leak of the outcome of a process, which was widely expected, to be reminiscent of apartheid is just a part of the usual comms strategy chosen by the new party of Zuma.

The fact is, it may well have been in the interests of Zuma that this leaked, adding another one to his list of victimhood claims.

Throughout these proceedings, Zuma, and his representative in the disciplinary, Tony Yengeni, have said they want them to be held in person, and in public. The ANC has decided on a virtual hearing behind closed doors.

Again, the tension between the two sides is obvious: Zuma wanted to use this process as part of his politics of spectacle, while the ANC wanted to downplay the entire process and be done with it fast.

Zuma himself was the leader of the ANC when Julius Malema was expelled from the ANC through a process that took place entirely behind closed doors. He did not complain about the process then.

Zuma obviously wants, even needs, to squeeze every droplet of attention that this process can possibly give him. It is for this reason that Zuma is bound to appeal, and then take the outcome of the appeals process to court – Stalingrad tactics have served him well over the years.

It is the court process that would finally get him the publicity he craves. And while managing a political disciplinary process can pose obstacles, surely no court can disagree with the disciplinary committee’s finding.

However, there may be limits to how much ground Zuma can make using publicity.

The sheer absurdity of one party complaining that its leader has been badly treated by another party makes it hard for MK to argue successfully against the ANC.

Also, the ANC has now formally confirmed, through a press conference by its secretary-general Fikile Mbalula, the reasons for his expulsion – it is now the ANC who’s driving the story, rather than MK’s reaction to it.

Mbalula was careful to include the findings that, “He has been running a dangerous platform that casts doubt on our entire constitutional edifice, meted out a host of unrevolutionary outbursts, including attacking the electoral process. His platform is dangerous, appeals to extremist instincts in our body politic…”

This allows the ANC to attack Zuma across a broader political front and may help the party’s rank and file to accept the outcome.

It also allows the party to play the role of defending the Constitution against a threat, thus aligning its interests with those who agree with the Constitution (considering the outcome of the election, they appear to be a great majority).

MK spectacle — a cloak for weaknesses?

It may be worth asking at this point why MK is so determined to attract so much attention. Certainly, as the EFF has shown over several years, the politics of spectacle can win votes.

But, as the DA has also shown, there is no substitute for building a solid constituency with a consistent policy platform.

While there was much attention given to the decision by the MK to make John Hlophe its parliamentary leader, this might have obscured the fact that it had nobody else for the job.

Also, the “boycott” of the first National Assembly sitting after the elections may now appear to have just been a ploy to hide the fact the party was not ready to decide who would represent it.

The fact it has so many changes in its position of secretary-general could be proof that it has serious problems in its administration (the party’s first acting secretary-general, Sihle Ngubane, resigned, then was replaced by Arthur Zwane, who was fired and replaced by Sifiso Maseko who was then reassigned to Human Resources while Zwane was reinstated).

At the same time, while its policy platform may contain promises designed to attract attention and outrage, there is no public proof yet that all of its members are aware or believe in it.

For example, would Hlophe accept the authority of a traditional leader over himself?

This may get to the heart of one of the problems that Zuma now faces – that while he can take every opportunity to attract attention, there is very little else he can offer beyond the spectacle.

The other big problem he now has, as Muthambi has reminded him, is finding people he can trust. DM

Categories:

Maverick News

Tags:

DM is much better if you are signed in...

Maverick News

Personal political vehicle

MK spectacle — a cloak for weaknesses?