By Madibeng Kgwete: posted on 27 November 2007
African National Congress (ANC) Secretary-General Kgalema Motlanthe is reported to have expressed concern that factional voting in the run-up to the ruling party’s December conference might exclude talented leaders.
Motlanthe’s concern is perfectly legitimate, particularly given the outcomes of the weekend’s provincial nomination conferences.
The Kwa-Zulu Natal province, with its overwhelming support for ANC deputy president Jacob Zuma, is said to have purged suspected supporters of President Thabo Mbeki, replacing them with the likes of ex-deputy minister of health, Nosizwe Madlala-Routledge.
So far, several talented ANC leaders such as Trevor Manuel and Joel Netshitenzhe have been omitted from most of the provincial nominations.
The result would be loss of organisational memory at government level and, as always, “the masses” for which the government exist will be robbed of several skilled and hardworking politicians.
ANC members with voting powers at the December conference still have time to correct this and other mistakes. Vengeful voting will only work against the party and the country.
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
ANC power struggle good for our democracy
There is no reason to believe that ANC members do not understand what is good for South Africa
By Madibeng Kgwete: posted on 20 November 2007
Just last week, The Star newspaper reported that Foreign Affairs Minister Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma said she would accept nomination as ANC president at the party’s December conference in Turfloop, about 30km north-east of Polokwane.
According to the Sowetan of Tuesday, 20 November 2007, former First Lady and erstwhile ANC Women’s League President Winnie Madikizela-Madela would also “not say not” if nominated to one of the positions in the ANC’s top six positions.
It is also public knowledge that other individuals such as ANC National Chairperson Mosioa Lekota, Secretary-General Kgalema Motlanthe, businessman Tokyo Sexwale and NEC member and state deputy president Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka are eying President Thabo Mbeki’s shoes.
Over and above all these names, the one potential candidate generally favoured by South Africans of all races and classes is businessman Cyril Ramaphosa, the former unionist who earned a name for himself by the central role he played in crafting South Africa’s widely-celebrated constitution.
In analysing the ANC’s internal jostling for power and positions, the media has constantly been one-sided, only reflecting the divisive nature of the ruling party’s succession battle.
There is very little commentary on the fact that, for the first time in a long time, the ANC is going to a national conference without having resolved the leadership issue behind closed doors. This may sound like a stalemate, but it is actually good for democracy. After all, South Africa is not a monarchy, where leaders inherit positions regardless of what people think about them.
The current leadership competition in the ANC may not be reflective of what we are told are “party traditions and cultures,” but it is good. Instead of holding our breaths in anticipation of the outcomes of next month’s ANC conference, we must be celebrating the competitive nature of the battle.
I may not be an ANC member, but I have no reason to believe that ANC members do not understand what is good for South Africa. After all, ANC members are South Africans too. If they elect a weak leadership collective that will bring South Africa to its knees, they too will feel the pinch.
So, let us stop worrying about Mbeki’s so-called third-term ambitions, Zuma’s and Sexwale’s campaign for leadership. Let’s sit back and enjoy the competition.
By Madibeng Kgwete: posted on 20 November 2007
Just last week, The Star newspaper reported that Foreign Affairs Minister Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma said she would accept nomination as ANC president at the party’s December conference in Turfloop, about 30km north-east of Polokwane.
According to the Sowetan of Tuesday, 20 November 2007, former First Lady and erstwhile ANC Women’s League President Winnie Madikizela-Madela would also “not say not” if nominated to one of the positions in the ANC’s top six positions.
It is also public knowledge that other individuals such as ANC National Chairperson Mosioa Lekota, Secretary-General Kgalema Motlanthe, businessman Tokyo Sexwale and NEC member and state deputy president Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka are eying President Thabo Mbeki’s shoes.
Over and above all these names, the one potential candidate generally favoured by South Africans of all races and classes is businessman Cyril Ramaphosa, the former unionist who earned a name for himself by the central role he played in crafting South Africa’s widely-celebrated constitution.
In analysing the ANC’s internal jostling for power and positions, the media has constantly been one-sided, only reflecting the divisive nature of the ruling party’s succession battle.
There is very little commentary on the fact that, for the first time in a long time, the ANC is going to a national conference without having resolved the leadership issue behind closed doors. This may sound like a stalemate, but it is actually good for democracy. After all, South Africa is not a monarchy, where leaders inherit positions regardless of what people think about them.
The current leadership competition in the ANC may not be reflective of what we are told are “party traditions and cultures,” but it is good. Instead of holding our breaths in anticipation of the outcomes of next month’s ANC conference, we must be celebrating the competitive nature of the battle.
I may not be an ANC member, but I have no reason to believe that ANC members do not understand what is good for South Africa. After all, ANC members are South Africans too. If they elect a weak leadership collective that will bring South Africa to its knees, they too will feel the pinch.
So, let us stop worrying about Mbeki’s so-called third-term ambitions, Zuma’s and Sexwale’s campaign for leadership. Let’s sit back and enjoy the competition.
Monday, November 5, 2007
US and Pakistan: partners in crime
Washington's siding with a big dictator such as Musharraf whilst campaigning against tyranny is purely hypocritic
By Madibeng Kgwete: posted on 05 November 2007
Amidst claims of human rights abuses and accusations of dictatorship directed at Pakistani leader Pervez Musharraf, the New York Times reported on Monday, 05 Novemver 2007: “The Bush administration signaled Sunday that it would probably keep billions of dollars flowing to Pakistan’s military, despite the detention of human rights advocates and leaders of the political opposition by Gen. Pervez Musharraf, the country’s president.” (1)
The US government continues to support Musharraf’s government despite the fact that the dictator has suspended the constitution and fired most of the Supreme Court judges, including Chief Justice Iftikar Chaudhry. “Private television news channels, foreign and Pakistani, have been hauled off-air,” according to The Economist magazine. (2)
The manner in which the US deals with the Pakistani situation exposes the hypocrisy of the world’s biggest imperialist regime, headed by President George Bush. Washington preaches democracy in countries such as Zimbabwe and then ignores such ideals when dealing with what is clearly an undemocratic state, Pakistan.
Washington’s bias towards Pakistan must not be misunderstood: the US hopes that by taking sides in favour of Musharraf, the miliraty dictator will help them defeat Ismalic militants in countries such as Afghanistan and, more specifically, Iran.
The US foreign policy (if they still have one) towards countries in and around the Middle East suggest that the world superpower is preparing for another war – this time against Iran. And that will signal the end of the US hegemony, thanks to Bush and his country’s hegemony-at-all-cost stance.
1. US is likely to continue aid, New York Times, 05 November 2007.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/05/world/asia/06diplo.html
2. Coup number two, The Economist, 05 November 2007.
http://economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10088419&top_story=1
By Madibeng Kgwete: posted on 05 November 2007
Amidst claims of human rights abuses and accusations of dictatorship directed at Pakistani leader Pervez Musharraf, the New York Times reported on Monday, 05 Novemver 2007: “The Bush administration signaled Sunday that it would probably keep billions of dollars flowing to Pakistan’s military, despite the detention of human rights advocates and leaders of the political opposition by Gen. Pervez Musharraf, the country’s president.” (1)
The US government continues to support Musharraf’s government despite the fact that the dictator has suspended the constitution and fired most of the Supreme Court judges, including Chief Justice Iftikar Chaudhry. “Private television news channels, foreign and Pakistani, have been hauled off-air,” according to The Economist magazine. (2)
The manner in which the US deals with the Pakistani situation exposes the hypocrisy of the world’s biggest imperialist regime, headed by President George Bush. Washington preaches democracy in countries such as Zimbabwe and then ignores such ideals when dealing with what is clearly an undemocratic state, Pakistan.
Washington’s bias towards Pakistan must not be misunderstood: the US hopes that by taking sides in favour of Musharraf, the miliraty dictator will help them defeat Ismalic militants in countries such as Afghanistan and, more specifically, Iran.
The US foreign policy (if they still have one) towards countries in and around the Middle East suggest that the world superpower is preparing for another war – this time against Iran. And that will signal the end of the US hegemony, thanks to Bush and his country’s hegemony-at-all-cost stance.
1. US is likely to continue aid, New York Times, 05 November 2007.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/05/world/asia/06diplo.html
2. Coup number two, The Economist, 05 November 2007.
http://economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10088419&top_story=1
- A copy of this article was published on the News24 website under the headline, “Partners in crime.”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
