Thabo Mbeki’s recent contributions to public politics have been broadly welcomed. However, by reentering public politics he will become fair game to those who disagree with him – nothing new there. And the bitterness about him and his time in power, which has been kept submerged for many years, may rise up above the surface. If this results in unpleasant issues emerging in public, it could damage the ANC in unexpected ways.

At the weekend Mbeki delivered the Walter Sisulu Memorial Lecture at the Walter Sisulu University. During his presentation, he made several important points, some of which were deeply critical of the ANC.

Mbeki quoted extensively from ANC policy documents detailing how important it was that the party renew itself, before saying: 

“Our political reality of the continued primacy of the ANC, which our electorate regularly elects as the national governing party, means that that very threat to the survival of the ANC simultaneously threatens our country and all 60 million citizens with a virtually intractable general political-socioeconomic crisis.”

He went on to say: 

“It cannot and must not be that if we, the ANC leadership, are trapped in an organisational death wish, South Africa at large acts in a manner which allows that the macabre within the ANC visits immense disaster on our already suffering population and millions of others elsewhere in our region and continent.”

Mbeki is making two vitally important points here: the first is that the same thing that threatens the ANC threatens the people of South Africa – probably referring to corruption and incompetence within the ruling party.

And then he appears to be saying that if the ANC leadership is unable to stop this, South Africa should not allow “the macabre within the ANC” to visit “immense disaster” on the country.

So, he may well be saying that the ANC’s factional battles should not affect South Africa in the way they do, and if the party does not change its course it should be voted out of power.

The depth of Mbeki’s concern cannot be underestimated. During his presentation, he quoted (at length) from the ANC’s Nasrec resolution, and the National Executive Committee’s (NEC’s) January 8th Statement, before saying:

“But here is the deeply worrying reality in this regard – the ANC NEC has done nothing to honour both the 2017 Conference directive and its own 2021 commitment.”

The question arises – is the ANC National Executive Committee willing and able to discharge its responsibilities with regard to the “absolute and urgent priority” of the renewal of the ANC?

Earlier last week, Mbeki published a 15-page submission on the land reform process under way in Parliament to decide whether to change the Constitution to allow expropriation of land without compensation.

After explaining that access to capital is vital to investment and future development, he says that “owners of capital would obviously see the Constitutional Amendment in 6.1.1. as opening the door to any government to expropriate any property without compensation. This would be a very serious disincentive to investment, which our country cannot afford.” He goes on to say that the constitutional amendment should not go through.

Intriguingly, in his statement, he also quotes former Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping saying that, “Poverty is not socialism. To be rich is glorious.” He also quotes Deng saying: “Let some people get rich first” (there is some debate about whether Deng actually did say “to be rich is glorious”). 

Mbeki also makes the point that some at the Nasrec conference were prepared to collapse the conference to get their way on the land question.

“The statement, ‘We must return the land to the people’ meant that the ANC was repudiating the demand contained in the Freedom Charter: ‘We must return the land to those who work it!’ Strange to say, this meant that the ANC had now adopted positions advanced by the PAC many decades earlier.”

With both of these interventions, Mbeki is stating views that will not come as a surprise.

Mbeki was president when the ANC had a two-thirds majority in Parliament, and made no move to change the Constitution over the land issue then. 

And his public opposition to corruption has not wavered. He removed Jacob Zuma from his position as deputy president in 2005 based not on the National Prosecuting Authority’s decision to charge Zuma with corruption, but on the conviction of Schabir Shaik for making corrupt payments to Zuma.

And he paid a very heavy political price for that decision.

Thus, he could be expected to support renewal in the ANC now.

The next question is, what political impact will his stance have?

Those that agree with him on land and on the need for the ANC to renew itself are likely to argue that he should be respected as an elder statesman. They will say that it is right and proper that he makes his views known on issues facing South Africa, particularly these two vital issues.

They will believe that he has a duty to intervene in public in these issues.

But those who disagree with him will make other arguments.

They will say that he is still angry at being recalled as president in 2008. They will refer to his government during the height of the HIV/Aids crisis, and how it refused to allow government hospitals to give patients antiretroviral drugs.

There are other risks, which could have a longer-term impact on the party.

Several weeks ago Mbeki made public comments criticising suspended ANC Secretary-General Ace Magashule for challenging his suspension in court. Magashule then penned a response.

Magashule’s letter reveals a deep bitterness over their relationship. He refers to Mbeki as being “singularly responsible for the notion of an ANC denialism on the existence of HIV and its linkages to Aids. This denialism, better understood in the luxury of apparent elitist independent thinking, came at a high price, losing in excess of 300,000 mostly black lives.”

Magashule also referred to Mbeki’s father, Govan Mbeki, as having misgivings about his son achieving a higher leadership position in the ANC, and suggested that not everyone in the party was happy when Mbeki was involved in preliminary talks with some members of white South African society in 1987.

The Mbeki/Magashule exchange reveals some of the risks a former leader takes when getting involved in current politics. They will always be accused of trying to rewrite their own histories, of continuing historic battles. 

But there is a greater risk.

Some of the relationships in the ANC are so long and involved that there is a deep distrust and anger over battles that have been fought and won and lost over many years.

It is well-known that Mbeki refused to allow Magashule to be Free State premier despite the fact Magashule was the leader of the Free State ANC (at Polokwane a decision was taken that provincial ANC leaders should generally be appointed premier, partially as a result of this). It is also known that this frustrated Magashule.

But these dynamics were usually kept under wraps within the ANC.

There is a risk that when a former leader speaks out as Mbeki has done, there will be a reaction, and bitterness will seep through. While the bitterness may itself not matter, what will matter is when certain facts are revealed as part of these disputes.

There is a risk that when the cupboard is rattled too hard, certain smallanyana skeletons may come tumbling out. Particularly when one person in such a dispute has nothing to lose, arguably the position Magashule is in now.

This, in turn, could damage the ANC by reopening old wounds at a time when the party is already divided.

That said, Mbeki has every right to speak, and to speak loudly. He is one of the few people who know what it is like to govern democratic South Africa. Even though his views will not always be welcomed by all, it cannot be denied that he has unique experience. At the very least, he might spark useful debates; at best he could help secure solutions to the huge problems we face. DM