FEEDS |

Mantashe must pick a side

Dual leadership roles in ANC and SACP self-defeating

Nov 17, 2009 10:43 PM | By S'Thembiso Msomi

S'Thembiso Msomi: Moments before the start of a meeting two Mondays ago between the ANC and its alliance partner, the SA Communist Party, a colleague of mine asked Gwede Mantashe: "Whom will you be representing at the meeting?"


Current Font Size:
quote As long as he serves two masters, he can't be effective for either quote

Mantashe answered: "Mondays are ANC days."

The colleague's question goes to the heart of the debate surrounding Mantashe's dual - and sometimes conflicting - roles as ANC secretary-general and SACP national chairman. Given his answer to this question, and the fact that he usually plays his SACP role on Fridays, isn't it fair to assume that when Mantashe arrived at Esselen Park last Friday for the start of the alliance summit, he was wearing his communist hat?

Judging by this weekend's news reports on the summit, ANC Youth League president Julius Malema and Gauteng Premier Nomvula Mokonyane are among the ANC leaders who suspected that this is the case.

According to the Sunday Times, Mantashe was hauled over the coals at an ANC caucus meeting held on the sidelines of the summit that afternoon for apparently not being firm in rejecting Cosatu and the SACP's demand for equal status in the running of both the alliance and the country.

For the past five decades of the alliance's existence, it has been accepted that the ANC is the leader.

But at the summit, Cosatu, and presumably the SACP, wanted an endorsement of a proposal by the alliance secretariat that the three parties - and not just the ANC - be jointly proclaimed the "centre of power".

The alliance secretariat is made up of the Cosatu and SACP general-secretaries - Zwelinzima Vavi and Blade Nzimande respectively - and Mantashe in his ANC capacity.

Whether Mantashe did indeed attempt to sign away the ANC's status as the alliance's senior partner is neither here nor there.

What matters is that his ANC colleagues are beginning to question his ability to wholeheartedly defend the ruling party's interests in disputes with the SACP, seeing that he is also chairman of the communist outfit.

Granted, the uneasiness over Mantashe's two hats could be fuelled by a desire by a cabal at Luthuli House to rid the party's top leadership of "leftist" individuals.

To his credit, Mantashe has demonstrated that he is not hindered by his SACP role and his Cosatu background in carrying out his ANC responsibilities.

We have seen him publicly admonish both the trade union federation and the SACP when they attempted to bully the ANC on contentious issues.

But as long as he continues to serve two masters Mantashe cannot be effective at either job.

With the SACP heading for a special national congress next month, it is an opportune time for the former trade unionist to reconsider his options.

When it was first pointed out that his two posts could lead to a conflict of interest, the communists defended him by pointing to alliance history.

Often quoted was the example of Moses Kotane, the late SACP general secretary who doubled up as ANC treasurer-general in the 1960s.

But those were the exile days, in a cold-war era in which a liberation movement could benefit immensely from the socialist block by flaunting its communist credentials.

Today the ANC is a ruling party in the most advanced capitalist state in Africa and governs in an era in which the world socialist project is in tatters.

Mantashe is not the first communist to occupy a top ANC position in the post-apartheid era.

The difference is that most of those before him did not take up top SACP posts once they accepted ANC office.

Take his ANC predecessor, the current deputy president, Kgalema Motlanthe, who - despite his long-standing SACP membership - chose to serve only the ruling party in a leadership capacity.

Looking at it from their perspective, the communists have as much right to run for office in the ANC as any non-communist member of the "broad church".

After all, they have contributed as much as any of the other political tendencies to making the ANC the titanic political force that it has become. It would be self-defeating for them to abandon the ship now that it is sailing on smooth seas of governance.

But Mantashe might soon find himself in choppy waters if he continues to straddle the two positions. He should do the wise thing and vacate his SACP office.

> Read more columnists

 Loading...

 or  to comment

Comments

Nov 18 2009 02:10:55 AM
StarGazer-KnowledgeSeeker
user name

A Thought provoking article Nomndayi.

What if he vacates his SACP post and still end up being ousted by Mbalula in Mangaung 2012?

While the conflict of intrest is fairly evident, the danger of him ending up in 'Limbo' in 2012 might just prevent him from making that 'choice'

The Idea was to ensure (on the Part of the leftists) that they are a Big force, months leading up to PLK 2007, now that Zuma is in Office, it is no longer just for " the good of the party " , but for Gwede's political survival as well...he needs the two hats now more than ever!
Nov 18 2009 03:42:24 AM
jsavo
user name
Sorry but what I see here is the deadpan hand of socialism. communism and all the other "isms". It is against human nature to stall, to bureacraticrise (my word), to humbug, to prevaricate. Above we have loads of uninspiring BS about what so and so is, and who did what, and who is the bestest, most wonderful leader in all of bla bla bla!
Quote from above: " abandon the ship now that it is sailing on smooth seas of governance" yeah right, and can we all go on that wee trip please? Will U check the engine room before we go?
Nov 18 2009 07:21:19 AM
nomakanjane
user name
i agree with sthembiso - that if gwede doesn't tore the line now, mablula will be the SG in 2012. malema has started talking "parting of ways" language. he has big support currently and he must exploit that before he becomes a target for elimination
Nov 18 2009 07:49:16 AM
florance
user name
Very true.
The ANC - and the whole of SA for that matter - can no longer afford the luxury of constantly swaying from one side to another as far as policies and strategies are concerned, and allowing the SACP deployees to effectively penetrate not only all ANC party structures and positions - but the government structures as well. The time has run out, and directions must be chosen.
Time to pick a side.
Sanity or madness?
Nov 18 2009 08:14:57 AM
Siya
user name
What I don't understand is this dual membership of ANC and SACP. Is it necessary or is it about opportinism. Nzimande and Cronin for instance are in the NEC of the ANC, Pumulo Masaule SACP treasure was recently elected ANC Chairperson in the Eastern Cape, Nomvula Makonyana is in the SACP central commite and in fact all the Communist in Parliament are there because of the ANC list process. Why then is it necessary for SACP to exist?
Nov 18 2009 09:21:23 AM
VinceRSA
user name
Why did I read this heading as :-

Mantashe must pick a spade?
Nov 18 2009 11:07:31 AM
Lumz
user name
I also had the same questions why do this guys have three membership cards?
Nov 18 2009 11:15:13 AM
Distressed
user name
The author appears to forget that the ANC itself has adopted the Soviet policy of a totalitarian "national democratic revolution" intent on subjugating even the judiciary to abuse by its unelected leaders, in violation of our Constitution. So there's no reason to fear that the unelected Mantashe, unanswerable to any voter, will feel uncomfortable pursuing his communist principles within the ANC. The ANC "is" the Soviet state, and Mantashe is running it with the help of Julius Malema! Viva!
Nov 18 2009 12:09:51 PM
TheVillageBoy_with a diploma
user name

That's why ANC members must ensure that (in the 2012 ANC policy conference) Fikile Mbalula is voted as the next Secretary General of the ANC, so as to get rid of the confused power hungry Mantashe.
Nov 18 2009 02:14:44 PM
Mommacyndi
user name
I still want to know why the SACP and Cosatu think they have any say in our politics at all. Not a single voter has ever given them a definitive mandate as they have never had the courage of their convictions so have never contested an election.

I suppose that it could also be argued that we don't have a true communist party as they all seem to be more capitalist than GW Bush


Today's Topics