ANC cliques may decide who will succeed Zuma

Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, President Jacob Zuma and Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa Montage by Bethuel Mangena/Independent Media

Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, President Jacob Zuma and Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa Montage by Bethuel Mangena/Independent Media

Published Jan 22, 2017

Share

But the character of the camps and cliques as they are right now may actually change as December approaches, writes Dumisani Hlophe.

The balance of forces within the ANC will determine who becomes the president of the party from December, rather than the capacities and abilities of the presidential candidates.

There are two main dominant cliques contending for power in the ANC. One is campaigning for Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma to ascend to the presidency of the ANC, and possibly that of the country.

The other is campaigning for Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa.

However, these cliques are not entirely homogeneous. There are sub-cliques within the broader cliques, or political camps.

Thus, these political camps are not stable.

They are fickle and susceptible to realignment, and disintegration. This is partly because cliques, and sub-cliques only owe allegiance to themselves, based on their own particular interests.

Thus, they will, if the situation demands so, realign themselves to individuals whose ascendency to leadership is highly likely to meet their interests. Therefore, the character of the camps and cliques as they are right now may actually change as December approaches.

The camp that is purportedly aligned to President Jacob Zuma, and thereby expected to campaign for Dlamini-Zuma for the Presidency, seems very fragmented. While Dlamini-Zuma should not be seen as an extension of Zuma, in political contestation, such an umbilical cord will be cemented by her foes.

Zuma’s assertion that a woman was ready to lead the ANC, made within an elective season, is politically translated as an endorsement of Dlamini-Zuma.

This makes it difficult to separate Dlamini-Zuma from the broader political support base of Zuma.

In this regard, the political conclusion is that Zuma’s support base is, inherently, Dlamini-Zuma’s support base. In recent times, those in this particular political base, included Cosatu, the ANC Youth League (ANCYL), the ANC Women’s League (ANCWL), and some provinces such as KwaZulu-Natal.

As it stands, Cosatu has endorsed Ramaphosa as the next ANC president. The ANCYL seems divided on who to endorse. Part of the Youth League in KZN has expressed its support for Dlamini-Zuma, but the national leadership has not made a similar endorsement.

In fact, it appears not to be endorsing either Dlamini-Zuma, or Ramaphosa. It still has to pronounce on the matter. While the ANCWL has endorsed Dlamini-Zuma, there is no unanimity on this endorsement. ANC chairperson, Baleka Mbete, is on record saying that Dlamini-Zuma’s endorsement does not preclude other members of the ANCWL from being nominated for the position of the presidency.

KZN, the traditional support base of President Zuma, is highly divided on the presidential candidate. The generic assumption is that KZN would have been campaigning for Dlamini-Zuma. Yet former KZN premier Senzo Mchunu publicly endorsed Ramaphosa this past week.

Now, in this political-clique contested environment, what individuals say is very telling. They do not necessarily speak for themselves as individuals, but express a view of a particular clique or sub-clique.

Thus, the succession comments of Mbete and Mchunu are not necessarily individual assertions, but a reflection of a position taken by some within the ANC. Those supporting Ramaphosa are an interesting concoction. They include Nehawu, the largest Cosatu affiliate, and Cosatu itself, and the Young Communist League (YCL). Ironically, this camp also includes liberal capitalists.

Liberals prefer Ramaphosa because he understands and appreciates capitalism.

He is a practising capitalist. Presumably, he is likely to maximise the workings of domestic capital, and align it with its international partners.

Thus, while the cliques that dismiss Dlamini-Zuma for her family ties, the anti-Ramaphosa clique dismiss him on the threat that he will deliver the country to the highest capital bidder.

Comparatively, the camp behind Ramaphosa, on the face value, is not as fractured as the Zuma camp is.

But that’s not because Ramaphosa commands authority and control over the camp, but that he has not been in competitive ANC politics for a long time. So, this camp, cliques and sub-cliques behind him, have not brewed substantively to generate deeper contradictions and tensions. Should this camp be able to make Ramaphosa ANC and state president, it will also generate its own internal contradictions and tensions.

It will, eventually, degenerate to the challenges faced by the camp behind Zuma. What works for the Ramaphosa camp, for now, is that it can present Ramaphosa as a new broom. That he will regenerate the ANC, and government. Regardless of the limitations of this argument, the fact that there is very little to hold him accountable for in terms of government accountability over time, gives the camp behind him ammunition.

Meanwhile, the Zuma camp carries the burden of Dlamini-Zuma having been in government for a very long time. She has a lengthy record to be criticised against. In competitive politics, she inherits the flaws of President Zuma of Nkandla, Guptas, and state capture. Yet, in the politics of collective leadership responsibility and accountability, Ramaphosa equally has to account to the same issues - Nkandla saga, Gupta influence, and state capture. In fact, it is highly possible that, subjected to questioning on these very issues, both are likely to give similar responses.

When December approaches, and the picture begins to solidify in terms of which camp is likely to win, expect sub-cliques to cross the floor to the winning camp. This could be one reason that the December conference may actually end up with a single presidential candidate.

Either, if one camp fares so badly, such that a withdrawal of a candidate becomes the plausible thing to do. Or, the second possibility is if both camps reach a power-sharing consensus. This could entail both camps agreeing on the top six positions and, thus, avoid contestation.

This possible elite consensus could project the ANC post-December conference as united until another elective conference is due.

While this internal political elite contestation rages on, all camps could be mindful that the ANC needs to contest the general elections with an ANC president with the aura and charisma to inspire confidence in the ANC. If such consciousness grows in the ANC, the contending forces may realise that weakening a presidential candidate from the opposing camp, is counter-productive for themselves as well. This is the challenge of leadership, even at the political clique level!

* Hlophe is Governance Specialist at the Unisa School of Governance. He writes in his personal capacity.

** The views expressed here are not necessarily those of Independent Media.

The Sunday Independent

Related Topics: