Mbeki tonight bookended his dismal career with a melancholy statesman like speech, where he talked about democracy and inclusiveness.
Indeed it was a speech sans the soaring rhetoric and energy of his I’m an African speech – even as it aspired to the same ethos of an open and inclusive society that was the antithesis of his years in power.
A part of me felt sorry for the man.
But all should temper their sympathy with an analysis of the destructive legacy of Thabo Mbeki. Zackie Achmat has so far said it most succinctly:
“This is long overdue. Personally I would have liked to see him impeached for causing the deaths of many hundreds of thousands of people living with HIV; for the corruption of the arms deal; for the undermining of every independent state institution.”
Some commentators like President De Klerk have pointed to the positives of the Mbeki presidency. There has been some.
The performance of the economy under him is oft over emphasized – we were in the midst of a global boom (and a commodity boom at that) and most other African countries have outperformed South Africa in that time.
Mbeki’s pro-business policies is presented as a false choice between that and a completely nationalised state. There were many options in between these extremes.
Often the state under him was privatised without design, through the twin impact of unchecked corruption and incompetence.
He will go down as a president that only sacked one member of parliament. His political opponent Zuma.
The extensive social grants introduced by his administration since 2002 should be commended. It has kept the wolf from the door for many of the poorest.
He has achieved some successes in diplomacy on the African continent.
Before that he has persuaded a reluctant ANC that negotiations were preferable to the armed struggle. Arguably this was his biggest achievement.
Mbeki was savvy. He wooed the western media to the anti-apartheid cause and thereby greatly strengthened its cause.
But Mbeki was a lifelong and natural authoritarian that operated with disdain for ordinary people. In Mbeki ideology trumped people time and time again.
He squandered the goodwill, trust and social capital that Mandela built across the whole society with obscene glee.
The Frankenstein that is the violent wing of Zuma supporters were nourished and nurtured by Mbeki’s harsh exclusionary and authoritarian style of power politics.
Mbeki re-racialised South African political discourse. It will take a remarkable politician to undo that damage.
Seldom has the rhetoric of a politician at the start and end of a term been so out of step with what happened during it.
Related deployments:
12 responses so far ↓
1 alleman
// Sep 21, 2008 at 4:53 pm
Good post Wessel, but I do not think there was any glee in the way he squandered social capital. He merely did not have it in him to use and mobilise it in the way Mandela was able to.
When assessing his legacy, people should note that he cared for Africa, and was always in favour of the peaceful solution.
2 Kameraad Mhambi
// Sep 22, 2008 at 2:11 am
Perhaps your right alleman. Glee was perhaps the wrong word.
He arguably did prefer peaceful solutions to violent ones. But violence rarely was front of mind to Mbeki if and when it was in a framework that supported his aims and beliefs. Zimbabwe is a good example of that.
3 boerinballingskap
// Sep 22, 2008 at 8:16 am
Although I’ve never been an admirer of TM and acknowledge the fact that his downfall was very much of his own making, I couldn’t help feeling a little sorry for him. It reminds me very much of the year 1989. The question remains: Are the people of South Africa going to be better off without him? If I look at JZ and his cronies, I’m not sure myself.
4 Kameraad Mhambi
// Sep 22, 2008 at 10:11 am
alleman, as little as 6 months ago I thought that out of a shaddow of a doubt, that Zuma would be hard pressed, and unlikely to be worse than Mbeki.
Zuma has three key character trait that makes him a lot more suited to running a divided country like SA than Mbeki. He is open and approachable, he likes people in general and is secure in what and who he is.
Mbeki was none of these things. He thought all whites are racist, Afrikaners ’special’ (in the negative sense of the word) rural blacks uncouth and in general was an Afro-pessimist.
But now – after the likes of Malema has come out of the woodwork in support of Zuma – I’m a little less sure.
5 Kameraad Mhambi
// Sep 22, 2008 at 10:13 am
I meant Boer of course, and not alleman. Apologies.
6 David Ansara
// Sep 22, 2008 at 2:38 pm
Good observation about never firing anyone except his enemies (and how he viewed them as enemies and not opponents).
Mbeki’s major flaw was surrounding himself with mediocre people and prizing loyalty over performance.
There was also plenty of political autism – only listening to the voices inside your head. Zuma may appear to have a less profound mind, but as you say, he is a listener and this will give us something that was severely lacking in his predecessor.
The visuals for the “I’m an African” speech were very football orientated, don’t you think?
7 Friend
// Sep 23, 2008 at 1:11 am
I agree, Mbeki has many shortfalls, but the reason he should have stayed is the replacements.
Isn’t this great fear of the Zuma camp the reason why SA is in such a mess? I mean, maybe Zuma tackles crime, like he said he would?
8 boerinballingskap
// Sep 23, 2008 at 7:33 am
I’m actually on record saying that JZ must have his chance and that he cannot be worse for the country than Mbeki was. BUT the more I listen to JZ and read about him, the more doubtful I become. I’ve also said that I don’t believe that JZ will become President, because the Mbeki camp will do anything to prevent it. I still believe that JZ remains a marked man among his opponents and that he will have to watch his back for all those knives. I don’t think we’ve seen the last of Mbeki.
9 Kameraad Mhambi
// Sep 24, 2008 at 9:19 am
Friend, I don’t agree with you that Mbeki should have stayed at all.
If I was not clear enough above then let me be clearer, I think by and large that he was an unmitigated disaster.
David makes an excellent point above about Mbeki’s political autism.
Even Mark Gevisser who so thoroughly research Mbeki, spent time with him and his lieutenants, and who is a gifted wordsmith, even he had considerable trouble explaining these voices in Mbeki’s head.
That’s hardly what you want in a leader.
10 Mhambi’s 2008: Twice bitten by South Africa, once comfortably numb // Jan 18, 2009 at 8:34 am
[...] When Judge Nicolson found that Thabu Mbeki had interferred with the NPA and that the Zuma trial therefore could not go ahead, the Zuma ANC found the pretext to get rid of Mbeki as the countries president having earlier lost his position as head of the ANC. Mbeki gave a great speech. [...]
11 Michael Graaf
// Jun 8, 2009 at 4:28 pm
I have always found Mbeki reminded me of Jan Smuts – and not just because both had goatees. Both were intellectuals who aspired to grandiose global roles to the detriment of their tasks at home. Both had nasty little skeletons in their cupboards (Smuts must have been the first world leader to use his airforce against his own citizens).
12 Floyd Tshegare
// Jun 10, 2009 at 8:22 am
It’s such an easy thing for all these commentators to sit and pontificate on how the public should judge Thabo Mbeki’s legacy. Yet let’s bear in mind that even Tony Blair was judged harshly by his detractors. I doubt if this platform will be of any value in terms of offering any balanced perspective on this matter. But what the heck.. We try.
All we can say for is that under his stewardship, South Africa experienced the longest economic growth period. Hence creating many job opportunities albeit not enough! Given our enormous challenges, it’s not surprising.
The clamouring of the left is deafening to any forward looking, logical South African! Those who regard Mbeki’s orientation to global affairs ‘Internationalist’ forget to mention that the idea of an Africa that seeks to be self sufficient in this current world economic environment was given life by Thabo Mbeki! Who will now have the energy to criss-cross Africa in search of peaceful solutions to these endemic social conflicts? If the saying “Africa for Africans” is true, then we must all agree that an Africa at war with itself will be of no value to its people and the World.
I think to call Thabo Mbeki’s era an “unmitigated disaster” is naive and foolish. What fickle grandstanding ! Absolutely over the top and irresponsible.
Leave a Comment