South African political waters were fairly placid over the holiday period. There were only the slightest of ripples caused by the Democratic Alliance (DA), which responded with mild to minging criticism of people who suggested that there was a need to vote for President Cyril Ramaphosa in order to strengthen his hand.

The ripples recently swelled gradually, when a prominent former DA politician was mildly miffed that a friend had admitted that he would vote for Ramaphosa.

“For the first time since 1994, I am voting ANC — we need to strengthen Cyril,” the friend reportedly said.

The general drift of the criticism was that a vote for Ramaphosa was a vote for the ANC, and by extension for all the corpulent and corrupt cadres who populate departments and agencies of the state — and of the executive, for that matter. A secondary concern is that a vote for the ANC would be a vote for the EFF. And so there is a cartoon doing the rounds depicting Ramaphosa as leader of the ANC, and Malema as head of policy. Cheeky, but not wildly inaccurate.

What is surprising is that the DA would focus their derision on journalists, most notably on Peter Bruce. So much, then, for liberal values of free speech. The danger, of course, is that it increases the intensity of the spotlight that the EFF placed on journalists late in 2018, and whom they described as the “Ramaphosa Defence Force”.

The Ramaphosa Defence Force has a nice ring to it. It is similar to other rhyming rhetorical devices employed by the EFF, most notably “Zuma Must Fall” and “Zupta”. Alas, the EFF is a typical plebeian force funded by wealthy capitalists. As a smart Russian said of fascists, they are a mass movement whose leaders employ socialist demagoguery, deemed necessary for mass mobilisation. They thrive on slogans. For what it’s worth, EFF proclamations of their own “superior logic” is reminiscent of Italian fascism’s rallying cry, Il Duce ha sempre ragione (Mussolini is always right).

This discussion is, however, not about the EFF’s tendencies. It is about the perceived need to strengthen Ramaphosa’s hand to effect the changes necessary to place South Africa on a path to growth, prosperity, greater equity, stability and cohesion.

Strengthening Cyril’s hand

The hand Ramaphosa was dealt at Nasrec, where he was elected as leader of the ANC, was dreadful. The decks were stacked against him. When compared to other candidates, Ramaphosa was the more reputable, urbane, and generally more savoir-faire of the candidates for the ANC presidency in 2017. He won the race for the movement’s leadership against all odds.

To most observers outside the ANC, Ramaphosa’s main challenger, Nkosazana Dlamini Zuma, represented more of the politics of the previous decade, mutatis mutandis. There was a general sense that his victory and leadership of the ANC, and the consequent presidency of South Africa was a poisoned chalice, and that he would struggle to reform the party and the state.

Hard as it may be to understand, Ramaphosa’s biggest challenge is not getting the economy on a stable growth path through increased productivity, expansion, inclusion, and with more equitable distribution of employment opportunities and income. It is also not about keeping the cost of basic foodstuffs down or improving early childhood development, securing access to healthcare, education, infrastructure or reliable sources of energy and food security for all.

His biggest challenge is, well, much bigger than all that. He has to crowd his party members into the same tent (with no one pissing out); restore trust in the state, professionalise the public service and break the interface between administration and politics; flush corrupt elements out of the public sector; lead a cleansing of public administration (tenders, procurement, cronyism and prebendalism, among others, need to be either re-evaluated or stripped from the state entirely); cadre deployment needs to be re-evaluated (carrying a membership card of the ruling party does not qualify anyone to be a town planner, engineer, accounting officer or an ICT manager); convince domestic and foreign investors that their investments are safe, and that there is no bribe required for investment opportunities and — this is the big one — he has to get rid of all the Cabinet appointments of his predecessors without sending them into the arms of the EFF. This is key.

There are already ANC members who feed the EFF information. Two ANC parliamentary caucus members confirmed that there is increased tension in meetings because of fear that whatever is being discussed would go “directly to Juju”. These leaks go as high as the ANC’s National Executive Committee. Some ANC members are “hedging their bets” in case they don’t make it to the backbenches. “An ANC backbench is an EFF frontbench,” one caucus member said.

Using the Lice Comb and the Law

As leader of the ANC and of the government, Ramaphosa has to use the equivalent of lice comb to get rid of the infestation in the state and party, while allowing the law to take its course. He has to do both, without raising the spectre of mass purges. This would either lead people to the EFF or could open a can of worms — Bathabile Dlamini’s “smalanyana skeletons”. Over the past 11 months, Ramaphosa has used the lice comb carefully, but steadily, while the courts and the Zondo Commission carried out some of the hearings.

Of the things he was able to, Ramaphosa dealt with swiftly. At least 10 Cabinet ministers associated in some way with the Gupta family were removed: Lynne Brown, Mosebenzi Zwane, Des van Rooyen, Fikile Mbalula, David Mahlobo, Bongani Bongo, Nathi Nhleko, Faith Muthambi, Joe Maswanganyi and Hlengiwe Mkhize. Most recently Nhlanhla Nene stepped down for his association with the Gupta family. Malusi Gigaba left his post as Minister of Home Affairs, reportedly to start a bespoke suit-making business, although that has yet to be confirmed.

Along the way a number of officials associated with State Capture have received pink slips. Among the more high-profile ones were Tom Moyane (South African Revenue Service), Siyabonga Gama (Transnet), Anoj Singh (Eskom), Shaun Abrahams (National Prosecuting Authority), Berning Ntlemeza (Hawks), Dudu Myeni (SAA), Lucky Montana (Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa), and Dan Matjila (Public Investment Corporation). And, of course, the enabler-in-chief, Jacob Zuma left the presidency. There is speculation that he may return as The Artist Formerly Known as JZ.

This is what Ramaphosa has achieved in the first 11 months of his presidency. The point of it all is that this project is not complete. Because State Capture has been identified, or the rot in departments and agencies of the state has been identified, does not mean that things have changed. The subtext here is that only if Ramaphosa receives a strong mandate from the electorate would he be able to continue with the task of cleaning up the state. Giving himself a hand would have no effect.

What, then, is the problem? Well, the DA believes that it can do a better job at all the challenges listed above. And it may be right. Although I would bet a fiver that by the time Mmusi Maimane’s swearing in as president is complete, the EFF would be marching to “cut the throat of whiteness” and ANC cadres would raise the spectre of apartheid’s return.

The point that stands out from the claims that Ramaphosa needs a strong hand is that he has the vision, insight, capabilities, the power of conviction, and the will to change things. As deputy chairperson of the National Planning Commission, he is all too aware of the problems that beset the country, and has worked with some of the best minds available to lead the country.

The argument against that is that voting for Ramaphosa is a vote for the ANC, which has brought us precisely to where we are, today.

This is a country that has lost its moral authority in the world; the economy is sputtering like the engine of a rusty old Trabant; the flight of skills and money (legally and illegally) threaten to cripple the country; the country’s reliance on its mineral wealth has to contend with declines in global demand, low investment and productivity, illegal mining and a lack of reliable sources of energy. It is bedevilled with high unemployment and restless youth, to which the EFF is making promises it knows are impossible to keep; unresolved issues about land; problems with community safety, early childhood development, xenophobia and just about every social ill conceivable.

It’s a small wonder that the DA thinks it can do a better job at addressing all these problems. DM