Notwithstanding the by-now legendary weaknesses of the African National Congress (ANC), its leader, Cyril Ramaphosa, was by far the best man – among the motley crew of competitors – available in the May 8 election to lead South Africa. Not only has he got the requisite presidential gravitas, which is a bonus, but so far he has shown himself to be just what the country needs as it tackles head on the excesses of our recent past and ultimately seeks to rid itself of corruption.

He has a presence and most of the time he commands attention when he talks. During the year when he was finishing his predecessor’s term of office as Head of State, he did a commendable job, despite being hemmed in by all sorts of constraints within his own organisation.

Thanks to him, the ANC has managed to hold onto a wafer-thin national majority in our sixth democratic elections. Were it not for the Ramaphosa factor, there is a good chance that the ANC – which is so riven with ugly internal divisions and has become a repulsive hotchpotch of conflicting ideologies and interests – would have struggled to obtain a simple majority in these elections. Over the past few months, it became patently clear that while Jacob Zuma was certainly the high priest of moral degeneration and a symbol of the rot to which our country had sunk, he was merely the most visible manifestation of the malaise which had come to consume the ANC.

As various opinion surveys pointed out over the past few months in the run-up to the election, Ramaphosa – whose popularity eclipsed that of his party – was by far the most potent weapon in the ANC’s arsenal. By all accounts, had he stood for the position of president on his own, outside of the stench-drenched ANC, Ramaphosa would have won by a much bigger margin, were it possible in our electoral system for individuals to run for president directly. This means that more South Africans would have been happy to cast their votes for Ramaphosa, as an individual, rather than to indicate support – by default – for men and women of questionable integrity on the ANC’s election lists by placing an “x” next to Ramaphosa’s picture on the ballot paper on 8 May.

To our utter dismay, the party of our liberation has become an arrogant, soulless, self-absorbed entity without a cohesive organising philosophy. Various interests – most of which are personal in nature – and ideologies co-exist within it. Finding two people within that organisation who hold the same views on the most pressing challenges confronting the country is a rarity – and that is before one even broadens the tent to include traditional allies Cosatu and the South African Communist Party.

As the post-election euphoria subsides, we will all do well to remember that even Ramaphosa is not a messiah. He is a fallible human being like anyone of us. And while he may aspire to Mandela’s values – and that is commendable – at the end of the day he is just another politician.

As he prepares to be sworn in as the fifth president (Kgalema Motlanthe was the third) of a democratic South Africa, there are some things that Ramaphosa will do well to keep in mind. This, then, is gratuitous advice to him.

While it is very early days yet, Ramaphosa has the potential to go down in our history as the second most popular – and, hopefully – successful president, after Madiba, should he surround himself with the right calibre of people and be humble enough to heed constructive advice from any well-meaning quarters. While doing so is certain to lead to the sharpening of daggers against him by some within his organisation, it is of paramount importance that he remembers that, from the moment that he is sworn in by the Chief Justice as the fifth President of our Republic, he is accountable to all South Africans, and not only to his organisation or those who voted for it or him. That fact alone should oblige him to act in the best interests of the country as a whole, and not only a part of it.

Yes, he will continue to have battles to fight within the ANC-led alliance, but he will have to bear in mind that leadership is not a popularity contest, hence no leader worthy of that appellation has ever sought – let alone managed – to please all the people all the time. Since he has risen to his political ne plus ultra through the ANC, naturally he will have to work hard to sell his vision and values to the organisation and to take as many of his comrades along with him as possible on this journey to a new, corruption-free dispensation. However, he also has a duty to offer leadership, rather than always to seek consensus. He will have to guard against being prisoner to a mob.

Ramaphosa’s evocative Thuma Mina in his State of the Nation Address last year was so powerful that it had the potential to be a potent rallying cry for South Africa. It reminded some of us of President John F Kennedy’s seminal speech wherein he exhorted Americans to “ask not what your country can do for you, but ask what you can do for your country”.

Regrettably, that call was soon sullied as it was appropriated by the ANC to become the organisation’s slogan, instead of the rallying national call that it was meant to be to the country from the Head of State. Ramaphosa himself was not without blame in this regard. As a result, Thuma Mina lost some of its evocative power as it became yet another partisan slogan.

While much euphoria and optimism greeted Ramaphosa’s election as stand-in president last year during the early months of his presidency, by the end of the year much of that uplifting mood had evaporated or waned considerably. Although the poor state of our economy, rising fuel costs and Eskom’s parlous state were among the factors responsible for that situation, by no means were they the only ones.

Ramaphosa himself must take responsibility for at least one important factor. Responding extemporaneously to a Parliamentary question from Democratic Alliance Leader Mmusi Maimane about payment made by Bosasa to his son, Ramaphosa chose to give the first answer that came to mind: the money, he said, was for services rendered by his son, who had a valid contract with Bosasa and he had had occasion to peruse it. Barely a few days later, his office issued a statement to amend and qualify that initial reply.

Whether rightly or wrongly, that incident began to raise some uncomfortable questions about Ramaphosa. Although some of us thought the clarification made sense and were willing to give him benefit of the doubt, nevertheless it left a bad taste in the mouth.

The truth of the matter is that Ramaphosa did not have to respond to that question at the time when he did. Unsure of the facts, he should have undertaken to verify the facts and get back to Maimane with a written response once he had established the facts. He will do well to have learned his lesson.

Also, while he is well within his right to say things like “whether they like it or not”, when referring to the ANC’s planned course of action on the land question, when on the stumps or talking to the party faithful, it is hardly appropriate for him to use such language when speaking in his capacity of president of South Africa. It will be imperative, therefore, that he minds his language as Head of State.

Finally, playing a populist hardly suits Ramaphosa. While one understands that the ANC was fighting for its life during the recent elections, it was inappropriate for a man who aspires to be “a new Mandela” to claim, as he did, that elections are not an opportunity for the electorate to punish the governing party. As he must know, that statement was downright misleading.

Elections are occasions for the electorate to express its happiness, displeasure or disgust with a party in power. They are precisely the moment when the electorate has an opportunity to reward or punish an incumbent individual or party, as they see fit.

A more honest approach by Ramaphosa, then, would have been identical to the one that he took when he delivered his final speech at the ANC’s Siyanqoba rally in Johannesburg on 5 May: to acknowledge the egregious wrongs done by his party and people associated with it over the past nine years, to apologise profusely for them and to undertake or promise that such situations would not be allowed to recur in future. Nothing, after all, is as powerful as an apology sincerely proffered by someone who acknowledges the errors of his ways, with a firm undertaking not to repeat them.

So far, there would appear to be absolutely no comparison between Ramaphosa and his immediate predecessor. He seems to know what is required to dig the country out of its current ditch and to place it on a sustainable growth trajectory, and he appears likely to lead with integrity and to make us proud again as a nation. We should wish him well and hope that our faith in him will not later be found to have been misplaced.

Mandela believed that Ramaphosa was worthy of succeeding him as South Africa’s president. Having worked with him closely from the time of his release from Victor Verster Prison in 1990, Mandela would have noticed qualities in Ramaphosa that convinced him that South Africa would be in good hands with the latter at the helm. He must be smiling with contentment from heaven, as he looks down at South Africa today, now that his wish has finally come true.

Therefore, Ramaphosa – who was co-midwife to our prized Constitution – would do well not to let Madiba and us down.

Kaizer M. Nyatsumba is a senior business executive in Johannesburg. He writes in his personal capacity.

Posted on: 14 May 2019 | Author: Kaizer Nyatsumba