Julius Malema

In the latest twist of the saga in current South African politics former ANC Youth League President Julius Malema has been charged with money laundering. Malema, once an ally of President Jacob Zuma now counts himself as Zuma’s chief foe.

“We must make sure Jacob Zuma does not become president of the ANC…. Remove him as a president,” Malema said on Wednesday after being released on bond. “Zuma has 700 charges against him. I only have one.”

And so it is hard not to see political machinations in the charges, however legitimate, against Malema. Malema certainly does. And if Zuma’s fingerprints are anywhere near the charges coming down now one has to wonder what the President is thinking. After all, Thabo Mbeki’s alleged meddling in the legal system against Zuma after Mbeki’s ousting as party president in the last great political reckoning in South African history, in Polokwane in December 2007, led directly to Mbeki’s resignation from the presidency and only barely indirectly to Zuma’s ascension.

One perhaps telling facet of Malema’s current legal wrangling is that the populist firebrand simply does not appear to be all that popular. Police preparations and media anticipation of a showdown notwithstanding, few supporters showed up for his hearing just as the numbers at a rally for him the night before he appeared in court were underwhelming. If Malema had plans to use these charges to resurrect his political career, or at least to do so in time for the ANC party gathering for its elective conference at Mangaung in December, he might need to change tack. Zuma may well be vulnerable, but right now it appears that Malema may be a spent force.

AUTHOR: Derek Charles Catsam
URL: http://africa.foreignpolicyblogs.com
E-MAIL: derekcatsam [at] hotmail.com

The BDS movement is overpowering the pro-Israel lobby in South Africa, Howard Sackstein said in an interview with the Israeli newspaper Haaretz yesterday. Sackstein has worked for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the largest pro-Israel lobby organization in the US.

South African BDS activists are “professionals”
In the interview, Sackstein warned the pro-Israel groups in South Africa that they’re up against “professionals.” He also claimed the the BDS campaign is “spearheaded”  by Muhammed Desai of BDS South Africa and Zackie Achmat of Open Shuhada Street:

According to Howard Sackstein, whether pro-Israel groups can get back up on their feet depends on how rapidly they realize that they’re up against “professionals”…

“One point I would make finally is that the BDS campaign, spearheaded by Muhammed Desai and Zachie Achmat, is very well run and seems to be well-funded.”

The above comments have since been removed by Haaretz from the online version of the article, with no editorial note or correction issued.

In an email to me, Desai responded to Sackstein’s observation: “It is ridiculous (or deliberately deceptive) to claim that the boycott of Israel movement in South Africa is spearheaded by two individuals. The Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU) with over two million workers, the South African Communist Party with more than 150,000 members, the South African Students Congress – South Africa’s largest student formation, the South African Council of Churches and others are actually at the forefront.”

He continued: “In fact, this very week COSATU, an official alliance partner of the ANC, reaffirmed its commitment to the BDS campaign at its national congress and has undertaken to ensure that this is advanced at the upcoming ANC National Conference in Mangaung. The ANC National Conference is the supreme ruling and controlling body of the ANC that determines ANC policy and ultimately the government policy for the next five years.”

Ministers have backing of the ruling ANC
In comments also removed from the online version, Sackstein criticized the actions of two South African government ministers in relation to correct labeling of Israeli settlement products and advice against travelling to Israel:

Trade and Industry Minister Rob Davies announced that he was to issue an official notice “to require traders in South Africa not to incorrectly label products that originate from the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) as products of Israel”.

Third, Deputy International Relations Minister Ebrahim “Ibie” Ebrahim said that Pretoria discouraged all South Africans from visiting Israel. He said: “Because of the treatment and policies of Israel towards the Palestinian people, we strongly discourage South Africans from going there.”

Sackstein is convinced that the most influential body in the ANC, the national executive council:

“…discussed Israel, Palestine etc. and decided that they would have a common front on the issue and that certain steps needed to be taken.”

In other words, said Sackstein, Davies and Ebrahim were not acting of their own accord, but effectively carrying out ANC policy.

These comments too were censored by Haaretz.

Sackstein claims that “much of the ANC’s latest emphasis on anti-Israel action is the result of trying to win Muslim votes in the Western Cape.” However, Desai refutes this claim in his email: “Its not the ANC pandering to the Western Cape. But the Western Cape together with other stakeholders such as the churches, unions, students and others that are insisting that our ruling party (and indeed our government) take the side of the oppressed, of the Palestinians by supporting the BDS campaign. Its merely the ANC listening and adhering to a position that the vast majority of its constituencies hold.”

Indeed, Palestine solidarity activists in South Africa have mobilized substantial support for the oppressed Palestinian people.
BDS South Africa books impressive results
At the end of Augst, the student council of the prestigious University of the Witwatersrand (Wits) in Johannesburg unanimously adopted a full acadmic and cultural boycott of Israel. Tebogo Thotela, president of the Wits Student Representative Council, explains the reasons for the decision in a video published by BDS South Africa (seen at the top of this post).

In 2011, the University of Johannesburg severed its ties with Israel’s Ben-Gurion University, following a campaign backed by Archbishop Desmond Tutu and over 400 South African academics. In a recent BDS news roundup, EI’s Nora Barrows-Friedman summed up the recent BDS victories in South Africa:

The Student Representative Council at the University of the Witwatersrand (Wits) in South Africa unanimously adopted a full academic and cultural boycott of Israel on 29 August.

This comes on the heels of increasing support of the Palestinian-led BDS movement in South Africa, including the recent moves by government officials to have Israeli settlement products correctly labeled to let consumers know they originate from settlement colonies in the occupied West Bank; and a proclamation by a government minister to discourage South Africans from traveling to Israel because of its human rights record.

Posted on the website for BDS South Africa, the Wits’ student council’s resolution says that it will “not participate in any form of cultural or academic collaboration or joint projects with Israeli institutions and will not provide support to Israeli cultural or academic institutions.”

AUTHOR: Adri Nieuwhof
URL: http://www.samora.org
E-MAIL: a.nieuwhof [at] samora.org

The specifics of the tragedy are reasonably well known — miners went on a wildcat strike, Lonmin’s, the company that owns the platinum mine in South Africa’s northern reaches, refused to yield and instead dug in their heels. Violent clashes between miners and police turned deadly.  The result was a massacre in which dozens were killed, score wounded, a description all too reminiscent of some of the more famous massacres in the Apartheid era.

Even as some came to call for a re-evaluation of the relationship between the state, capital and the workers, Lonmin’s rushed with unseemly haste to reassure skittish investors. The root causes of this particular tragedy are undeniably complex, but those complexities all point to a fairly simple reality: South Africa’s decisions are deep. And while they may not be irreconcilable, reconciliation is not going to come easily.

In December the ANC will gather at Mangaung, the governing municipality for Bloemfontein (a name change, or adjustment, that speaks volumes) in the Free State, which during the Apartheid years was a stronghold of white nationalism. And at that gathering the party will determine its course, likely for the next five or six years. As with the Polokwane conference in 2007, in which Thabo Mbeki was ousted as party president, which paved the way for his premature evacuation from the country’s presidency months later, Mangaung could prove to be fatal to the current president’s future.

Jacob Zuma does not face a single figure behind which a determined opposition can gather like the one he represented for Mbeki five years ago. And yet if anything, that absence of a singular unifying force makes Mangaung so compelling and worrying and fascinating and, from Zuma’s vantage point, fraught. Opposition parties, led by the largest such party, the Democratic Alliance (DA), and the once-promising but perpetually floundering Congress of the People (COPE), are calling for unity in advance of Mangaung. Such unity could be deeply threatening to the ANC and, if recent history is any guide, seems highly unlikely.

And of course outside parties are hardly the ANC’s only problem. Indeed, Mangaung will be about ANC politics, with the opposition parties tenting their fingers in anticipation of a political maelstrom from which they hope to benefit. A unified ANC, after all, gives no hope to the DA or COPE or any of the myriad other parties that freckle South African politics. But an ANC in the midst of internecine warfare? Well, that’s the chaos of opportunity.

And right now the deep divisions within the ANC are what give indications that allow for all sorts of speculation, all of which I heard from people across the spectrum in South Africa when I was there and talking to people in June and July. Will the party fracture? If so will the fracturing come from internal ideological divisions or from regional fissures that threaten to tear the party asunder? Will Julius Malema, the firebrand former (and still in some circles de facto) leader of the Youth League find a way to mobilize enough support to provide a real challenge to Zuma? (Depending upon the speaker, Malema’s promise inspired everything from barely concealed terror to forthright glee.) Is it possible that Thabo Mbeki, of all people, will rise from the political ashes?

So many of these questions point to the politics of personality in South Africa. And these personalities all seem to have one focus: Jacob Zuma. Whether we are talking about Malema v. Zuma, or Congress of South African Trade Unions head Zwelinzima Vavi v. Zuma, or former Interim President Kgalema Mothlante (who finished Mbeki’s aborted term and has clear aspirations to the office again) v. Zuma, or even Mbeki v. Zuma it is clear that in South Africa right now heavy lies the head that falls to sleep on the pillows in Genadendal and Mahlamba Ndlopfu. And if Zuma sleeps restlessly it must be because an alliance of those lined against him could very well spell the end of his time in power. And if Zuma’s time in power ends prematurely he may well not have the political heft to forestall any longer a range of criminal and civil charges against him.

Marikana revealed and exacerbated, but did not create, these schisms. Mangaung is around the corner. Marikana will surely cast a large and foreboding shadow.

AUTHOR: Derek Charles Catsam
URL: http://africa.foreignpolicyblogs.com
E-MAIL: derekcatsam [at] hotmail.com

Initially, after having 34 of their colleagues killed and many more wounded by the South African police bullets, 270 Marikana miners were arrested and charged with murder under the very same law the apartheid regime used to prosecute anti-apartheid activists. The “Upington 14” case comes to mind here, in which the accused were convicted and sentenced to death in 1989 for the murder of a policeman, only to have the ruling overturned by the appeal court after worldwide public outcry.

The law in question is called the doctrine of common purpose, which gives the state powers to charge anyone, even if they did not kill or throw a stone, who participated in mass crowd action. The ANC—the erstwhile liberation movement then and now the ruling party—vehemently protested against the law, and viewed it as part of the apartheid regime’s strategy to criminalize mass protesting in South Africa (which it was).

The police claim that the killing of the miners was unavoidable because it was an act of self-defense after they were overwhelmed from all directions by petrol bombs and machete wielding, angry miners. A day earlier, after they opened fire, two of their own colleagues were gruesomely killed by the striking miners, so making some people in some quarters of South Africa and around the world think that perhaps the shooting was a case of revenge. Thirty-four dead, a number half the 69 people killed by the apartheid police during the Sharpeville Massacre on 21 March 1960, is too large a number for a self-defense. Could it be that the police overreacted? Nobody seems to know the answer to that question. In an attempt to get some truth, South African president Zuma has set up a commission to investigate the shooting.

But having a legal backing from an apartheid law that is still on the files of South African case laws, the prosecutors who brought the case against the miners initially seemed to believe that they had a strong case against the miners only to back down after public condemnation against the prosecution.

Relying on an apartheid law to charge the striking miners with murder is not only strange for a new South Africa, but a blow to the historical relationship between the South African workers and the ANC Government. Workers Unions, especially miners, have been the backbone of the ANC’s anti-apartheid resistance. After the “Madiba magic” of national truth and reconciliation, who in their right mind thought that an ANC-led Government police would turn their guns on the protestors just like the apartheid security forces did in the 60 and 80s? This indeed a bummer in the post-apartheid South African exceptionalism the world got infatuated with!

AUTHOR: Ndumba Jonnah Kamwanyah
URL: http://foreignpolicyblogs.com/
E-MAIL: Ndumba.Kamwanyah [at] umb.edu

Traditional compositions of melodies and lyrics are created with community performances in mind and as such, these compositions do not seek to combine sounds to suit a particular taste. Their purpose is to express life – culturally, spiritually and socially. Another aspect of traditional music is its ability to fuse natural sounds with spoken word to create music. This is where the pattern of self expression gets accentuated. This can be found in simple structures of Malombo music or the haunting melodies of the Jeliya of Mali.

reedom music is rooted in self expression but most importantly it’s an expression that portrays community outlook. To the trained ear traditional music gives an impression that pentatonic scales, hexagonic scales or polyphony are used but the secret lies with the untrained ear –it’s the translation of emotions into sounds. It is an outward presentation of our thoughts and feelings. Social progress within communities also necessitates the need to use song to express certain milestones.

Afrikan compositions tell stories that bring colour to our everyday lives. There are songs for weddings, working, hunting, farming, death, and fishing. Music also symbolises birth in many African cultures. We are bound to the drum both in communication and in rhythm. Colonisation brought with it a different perspective not only on Afrikan lifestyles but music. The systemising of education created a process of learning and with it came Anglo Saxon schools and churches. These institutions became the training ground for music in what is known as Choirs. This new platform created a new found symbiotic relationship between religion and revolution. We cannot deny this fact. Musicians in early tribal wars produced many songs of revolution and proclamation. They not only became the repositories of community and family history but also the first voices to communicate the community’s feelings. They captured the essence of living and cultural philosophies.

This early development of freedom music to some degree, assisted in fuelling the fire that enabled Afrikan nations to defeat imperialists. In South Africa, music was the weapon that gave comrades courage to keep up the fight. The same was experienced in Namibia, Mozambique and Zambia. Bob Marley incited comrades in Zimbabwe to rise up and claim their land. The early settlers on our continent brought with them many things but none more life changing than schools and churches. Before this time people praised the creative creator. They tuned into this creative force and fashioned songs of joy and awe. The western approach to music and religion created a meeting place that gave birth to choral music. A lot of our compositions took on this early developing route of which, gospel music played a critical role. It started flourishing in small communities across South Africa but it’s important to note here that this change did not remove our ability to express our true emotions. During these early days South Africa was overwhelmed by new cultures and continuous displacement of people.

The reality of living in one’s own land as a foreigner was beginning to frustrate Africans and in their efforts to appease the almighty, western religion took hold of our mothers and through them singing was re-fashioned and directed at the creator asking for salvation, and relief from oppression.

The South African natives caused commotions with their songs of hope, freedom and redemption. The dawning of the 20th century brought with it events that transformed South Africa and also resulted in a free society we live in today. Up until 1949 lyrics did not court political confrontation mainly because black politicians in those days belonged to a select few elites. These black elites were mostly intellectuals and possessed a dualist’s mind.

This idealistic state got short circuited by a gentleman famous for a futuristic contribution to our history– “Nkosi Sikele i Afrika”. Elder Enoch Sontonga composed a hymn that asked for blessings and salvation for people of the land. This song was a major turning point in the evolution of freedom music and it spread across Southern Africa. Dr. Cornell West says one cannot remove religion or Christianity from liberation struggles and he is right; Elder Enoch’s song transcended the dualistic idealism and evolved into a liberation song of unified hope. Countries such as Zimbabwe, Zambia and South Africa honoured elder Sontonga by using his lyrics as their national anthems.

Dr John Dube of the Ohlange institute amplified Elder Sontonga’s composition through various performances. This twist in the journey of South Africa’s freedom music changed the way music was composed. It brought with it emotive driven melodies. Songs began to express feelings of the day such as the Song of Oppressive act. These kind of songs married politics and music and gave birth to various genres that used songs to reach the young and old. Gone were the black elites who occupied high chairs. The wheels of liberation had started to turn. Music became a political weapon and a loud speaker of retaliation. Songs like “Umteto we land act” became the blue print on which the South African Native National Congress (SANNC) declared their intention to free South Africa. This organisation went on to change its name to African National Congress (ANC).

The state of the nation became the subject matter of many songs. Militant lyrics became the stuff of thought and some old songs like “Senzenina” took on a different meaning. Freedom music also had African American influences which to a large extent were sparked in 1891 by Orpheus McDoo and his Jubilee singers. Black South Africans identified with their African American brothers and composers shifted their styles (i.e. Rueben Thokalele Caluza’s Ragtime compositions) to fit in with the flavour of the day.

Between 1920 and 1993 compositions became a blend of nationalism with moral / Christian viewpoints. They articulated deteriorating socio-political conditions and the evils of the god head. Songs like “I dipu eTekwini” articulated one of the most de-humanising aspects of apartheid. It called for a condemnation of white city administrators who introduced a new dispensation that required all black work seekers to undergo “deverminisation” in dipping tanks for public hygiene. A few South African musicians found their way to other continents and continued to spread the message. Whilst Hugh Masekela and Miriam Makeba were setting the scene is America. Johnny Dyani was grooving to Song for Biko in Denmark and later on in Botswana as part of ANC’s Festival of Culture and Resistance. Freedom music was now in the hand of global South Africans whose sole careers became intertwined with freedom of Azania.

In the homelands, political groups were being organised and members were educated through song. They used extended melodies with words to tell of their situation. The American connection stayed strong in the form of Jazz compositions by the likes of Dudu Pukwana, Kippie Moeketsi and Abdullah Ibrahim. The melodies of freedom songs took on a different groove driven by the evolution of Jazz within the black society. Township life began to grow as more people from different parts of the country moved to big cities in search of work. Masikandi and Mbaqanga were addressing the order of the day. Lucky Dube’s Prisoner and Leta Mbulu’s Uhuru propagated the never ending struggle of native South Afrikans to gain independence. The behaviour of native South Africans began to shift to adapt to new environments and as such the direction of freedom music followed suit.

The era of Motown and bump jive showcased urban living to the masses and with it the heightened activities of political ideologies. This change saw Sophia town emerging as a haven for gangsters, priests, musicians and political debaters. The Sharpeville massacre and the 1976 uprising took a lot out of people and the need to fight the oppressor heightened. Musicians started using their popularity to push the political agenda. Groups like The Beaters used their musical instruments to smuggle youngsters into exile to join the liberation struggle. The death of Hastings Ndlovu in June 1976 in Soweto triggered wide spread violence in South Africa. Feet shuffling and toyi –toyi were amplified by freedom music. ‘We shall overcome!’ they sang, defying the false hope the sun brought. This attitude became the spirit of defiance that swept the nation from villages to townships. Old songs underwent changes to reflect the mood of the people and one such example was the song ‘Senzenina’ which asserted a sense of worth and belonging for the common man. It also critiqued the political climate calling for recognition of the African voice within.

The 80’s brought accelerated urbanisation and with it influences of American music. People like Malcolm X and Martin Luther King were symbols of association and musicians began to take on a philosophical approach and the emergence of social consciousness through the powerful sound of Reggae Music. South African greats used their exile status to push the idea of revolution through song. In fact, all exiled musicians took on this stance and artists such as, Kippie Moeketsi, Lefifi Tladi and Johnny Dyani debated freedom in South Africa through musical compositions and poetry. The African experience necessitated this and through freedom music Mbaqanga and township pop created a cacaphony of songs that addressed personal experiences, political, and social oppression.

Lucky Dube featured prominently and through his music the plight of Afrikan natives to the global community became a talking point. Remnants of early forms of freedom music echoed in compositions by Gospel and Jazz musicians. This era highlighted the growing frustrations of oppressed Afrikans and the need for freedom. The ANC cadres used music to spread their message. Thami Myeni’s Medu projects in Botswana use both art and music to chronicle the changing voice of the people. Farm workers used songs to protest against the oppressive working conditions that continued to deprive them of economic freedom. The singing tradition continued in many parts of the country and fuelled protest marches that eventually resulted in apartheid being abolished and the ushering of a new era for Afrikan natives

The message changed in 1994 and musicians in South Africa and abroad found a new voice. The effects of apartheid still endure until today and the emergence of popular culture sparked a youth movement that used music to talk about urban living, education and economic empowerment. Kwaito music was born with hints of a rebelious disposition. This genre of freedom music was and still is the most potent urban music to come out of Johannesburg and it drew attention to living conditions in townships. Arthur Mafokate’s hit song ‘kaffir” reflected the new freedoms that emerged after the political changes of 1994. The song’s lyrics were fiery and addressed the classist society that placed the native at the bottom of the food chain. Music became a tool for young people to bring attention to their own communities and expressed an attitude of self- expression, self-reliance and determination. Kwaito still remains a fiery genre conceptualized by township youth for township living. Many other artists such as Boom Shaka, Trompies and Brothers of Peace epitomized the changing signs in South Africa.

A genre that revolutionized freedom music came in the form of Hip Hop music. This genre emerged as another powerful voice that had its history in praise poetry and slave songs from America. Prophets of the City, Black Noise and the iconic Open Mind Sessions in Johannesburg gave birth to a new Pan Afrikan voice that used music to ask questions and to project a positive outlook. Artists such as Public Enemy, KRS – One and Poor Righteous Teachers influenced the modern song of the heathen is Africa. Today, hip-hop music has become the number one genre in the world all because it allowed the voiceless to express themselves in their language with their own style. Freedom music is alive and well as seen though the works of Tumi, Sifiso Sudan, Tidal Waves, Obitha and numerous other acts that use their artistry to effect change.

This is but a snippet of a story that can be told in many ways. I guess the question to ask is; is freedom music still relevant today and in the future? We are in the throes of globalisation after all; and the protest principle has sailed the world wide web as witnessed in North Africa. We have also been entertained by the comedy of Afri Forum and Julius Malema “toyi toying” to the Dubula iBhunu song. Do these events project a world that is changing and in need of a different tune? I believe the role of freedom is yet to be exhausted in our communities. As much as the lyrical content could be mistaken for hate speech in some quarters the historical importance of such songs cannot be trivialised. Self Expression remains a cornestone of freedom and we need to do all we can to protect it. The Afrikan revolution has not yet been realised and until then the Heathen songs of the natives will be heard and continue to be composed. We need them desparately.

AUTHOR: Charles Nhamo Rupare
URL: http://www.proudlyafrikan.org
E-MAIL: Nhamo [at] kush.co.za

Putatively the goal of the week is simply to establish both continuities and new directions in ANC policy moving forward. Zuma’s party is likely to continue to dominate South African politics for the foreseeable future, and so party policy is in most meaningful ways national policy, full stop.

And yet policy-qua-policy really is not the biggest point of contention in South African politics. Sure, there are issues to be hammered out — where does the ANC stand on nationalization of the mines? If the willing-buyer, willing-seller approach to land reform is out (and it appears to be) and Zim-style farm invasions are out (as we hope they are), and the party remains committed to land reform and redistribution, how will such reform take place? How is the party adjusting to the backlash from reforms clearly aimed at the media in the last year?

There are also big picture items that the ANC is tackling at Gallagher Estates, namely something called the “Second Transition.” Essentially, the premise behind the Second Transition is that South Africa is entering a new phase in its post-Apartheid life and that the first phase of transformation is complete with a new vision needed going forward. While it is hard to blame the ANC for trying to develop a larger framework for the future, it seems to me that the concept of a first or second transition is largely meaningless. Was there really a secret eighteen-year plan that has finally, and without anyone noticing, come to fruition? Of course not. Transition, which is to say the ongoing process of transformation, is really a process more than a destination. The “Second Transition” is largely a rhetorical political template and not a blueprint for coherent policy planning, even as it serves to reveal the intersecting fault lines of class and especially race that still divide and haunt South Africa.

But beyond policy formulation and the big picture items that are the luxury of a party firmly ensconced in power, much more is at play in Midrand. And to understand what is at play it is vital to understand that South African politics are about far more than ideology and policy. Indeed, relatively little about politics in South Africa is explicitly about debates over policy and ideology. The defining differences between the ANC and its chief opposition, the Democratic Alliance, are certainly not ideological. Within the ANC alliance is a stew ranging from far left to center (and on some issues even right) views that overlap with many of the left, center, and on some issues right views of those within the DA. The biggest difference between the DA and ANC, beyond some regional political variations, tie to questions over delivery of services and concerns over corruption and inefficiency in government, to how government works as much as what it does when it is working.

As a result of these realities, and of the fact that some of the most crucial (and very real) arguments in South African civic life take place within the ANC, South African politics so often break down on the lines of personality. For a party that so cherishes party unity, loyalty, and discipline, the members of the ANC oftentimes do not seem to like one another very much. Make no mistake about it — the ANC may be dominant relative to other parties in South Africa, but intense political differences are still a characteristic of the country’s politics. Those differences just tend to manifest first and foremost within the ANC.

Think back to the 2007 Polokwane conference that saw Thabo Mbeki supplanted by Jacob Zuma as the head of the ANC, a moment that led nearly inevitably to Mbeki’s resignation a few months earlier and Zuma’s ascension to the nation’s presidency. Not two South Africans in ten could have elucidated three policy differences between Zuma and Mbeki in December 2007. And not two South Africans in ten in 2012 can elucidate three policy differences between Zuma and, say, Kgalema Motlanthe, the caretaker president after Mbeki resigned who has proven more resilient and Machiavellian than I ever thought he would and who has positioned himself to take advantage if Jacob Zuma succumbs to some of the same forces in Mangaung this December that took down Mbeki five years ago. And in perhaps the ultimate irony, in some circles Mbeki’s reputation even seems to have been rehabilitated, with some going so far as to fantasize that Mbeki will somehow return to power, a fever dream that nonetheless says a great deal about the importance of personalities and shifting loyalties in contemporary South African life.

So this week’s National Policy Conference is less about policy than it is about the ANC positioning itself rhetorically and strategically. But it is also very much about individual members of the ANC and the alliances they have forged positioning themselves within party and thus national politics. Thus far Jacob Zuma appears to be stepping up to the crease and using all of his populist wiles to remind his comrades of why he can be so formidable. But do not think for one moment that the anti-Zuma forces are not themselves vying for position and waiting to strike.

AUTHOR: Derek Charles Catsam
URL: http://africa.foreignpolicyblogs.com
E-MAIL: derekcatsam [at] hotmail.com

At The Atlantic Howard French makes a really good point: if the United States is really committed to democracy in its (to be fair, increasingly engaged) Africa policy, why does it so often partner with autocratic leaders?

It is going to be one crazy second half of the year in South African politics. This theme will be at the heart of my writing for the next three weeks, but let’s just say that President Jacob Zuma’s chances of emerging from the ANC’s Mangaung conference unscathed seem to be declining by the day. I’m not ready to say that the country will see a repeat of the 2007 Polokwane conference that saw Thabo Mbeki ousted from the ANC presidency, an act that led to Mbeki’s resignation as head of state, but the circumstances seem to be conspiring to create another rather interesting moment in the history of the ANC and South Africa.

The competition for continental supremacy between Nigeria and South Africa is a bit of a reductionist fiction — Africa is hardly beset by a bi-polar Cold War competition — but it is true that the two countries’ conceptions of themselves tend to clash. Nigeria has a massive advantage in population. Resources are a bit of a wash– Nigeria produces oil, which would seem to give it an advantage, except that South Africa has a diverse array of  minerals and agriculture — and South Africa is dominant economically, culturally, politically, and militarily. And whatever critiques one might levy against South Africa, it is a bastion of stability and practically represents the platonic ideal of democracy when compared with Nigeria. Still, as Africa’s prominence grows, so too will the sense of competition between these two regional giants.

Important constituencies in South Africa are lining up against nationalization of the mining and other sectors. The Northern Cape ANC wants to emphasize land reform and a report from the national leadership of the ANC calls for higher taxes on the mines. Both reject nationalization, which is a frontal attack on the calls from Julius Malema and some factions in the ANC Youth League for nationalization.

Foreign Policy has produced its 2012 Failed States issue, and Africa continues to be overrepresented on the wrong side of the ledger. Of the bottom twenty states on the 2012 Index, fifteen are from Africa, including the bottom five.

On the positive side, a special report from Global Post indicates that we might be reaching a turning point on combating HIV/AIDS globally and especially in sub-Saharan Africa.

Global Post also has a report on the ways in which Africa’s entrepreneurs are fueling the continent’s growth.

Just a friendly reminder: Mugabe’s got to go. But the devil is in the details — how?

COSATU wants to cut down on the presence of “foreign whites” at the country’s universities. This strikes me as a demogogic solution in search of a problem inasmuch as there is little evidence that qualified students are not getting into universities because those slots are going to foreigners. There are more than a few universities in South Africa that would welcome more bodies on campus, foreign or domestic.

Kenya’s proximity to the failed state that is Somalia and especially with the encroachments of al Shabaab’s militants means that the country runs the risk of becoming embroiled in a “forever war.” This is especially worrisome in light of the country’s own internal divisions that have at best been papered over.

It is hard not to be pleased to see Charles Taylor, Liberia’s former warlord and Big Man, convicted and sentenced for his crimes in Sierra Leone. But as John Campbell has rightly pointed out, the trial and its outcome was not without its problems and its potentially problematic ramifications going forward.

A few weeks back the New York Times had a story on Laamb, traditional (but increasingly lucrative) traditional wrestling in Senegal.

In case you missed it, F. W. De Klerk gave a non-apology apology interview with CNN. There were times when I wanted to bang my head repeatedly against my desk. de Klerk was a pivotal figure in South Africa’s transition because he saw the inevitable changes that his predecessor P. W. Botha refused to recognize. But de Klerk was no hero. The idea that Nelson Mandela had to share the Nobel Peace Prize with de Klerk even while de Klerk’s government was engaging in myriad Third Force and Dirty Tricks campaigns is simply galling.

In the New York Times Ian Bremmer argues that Africa stands at a vital pivot point that should allow its leaders finally to have real options in operating in a global economy.

Finally, if you haven’t bookmarked Awesome Tapes From Africa just do it now.

AUTHOR: Derek Charles Catsam
URL: http://africa.foreignpolicyblogs.com
E-MAIL: derekcatsam [at] hotmail.com

In Johannesburg, a graffiti artist helped promote this year’s Israeli Apartheid Week.

This year’s Israeli Apartheid Week in South Africa created a buzz nationwide. BDS South Africa and other Palestine solidarity groups teamed up with trade unionists, political parties, student bodies, churches, youth organizations and activists in Gaza to reach out to a wide audience. Organizers used various means to inspire broad-based support for boycott, divestment and sanctions activism.

Huge billboards were put up to announce Israeli Apartheid Week. Durban-based GangsOfGraffiti inspired fellow street artists and graffiti writers to participate by creating works with “Free Palestine” as the theme. On walls in several cities, artwork appeared in support of IAW and boycott activism. In thirteen towns around the country, the film Roadmap to Apartheid was screened, including all major cities and in Soweto (“National film tour, 5-11 March 2012,” BDS South Africa ).

According to an article in The Jerusalem Post, the Israeli “Public Diplomacy Ministry” had sent a delegation to South Africa to “battle the apartheid label,” but Israel’s messengers did not succeed in changing the perception held by many South Africans that Israeli apartheid is similar to apartheid in South Africa (“Envoys to fight Israel Apartheid Week on campus,” 19 February 2012).

Fatima Gabru of the Palestine Solidarity Forum qualified the public relations exercise as “a stalling technique so that they [Israel] can continue with what they are doing: throwing Palestinians off their land, building walls, continuing human rights abuses” (“South Africa highlights Israeli apartheid,” Press TV, 9 March 2012).

Broad support

Israeli Apartheid Week received broad support among political groups and national organizations in South Africa. The Congress of South African Trade Unions, the South African Students’ Congress, the African National Congress, the Young Communist League of South Africa, the South African Council of Churches, Kairos Southern Africa, Kaleidoscope LGBTIA Youth Network and South African Artists Against Apartheid were all motivated to participate in IAW because of South Africa’s own history of apartheid.

The South African Council of Churches called on all South Africans and the church in South Africa to participate in Israeli Apartheid Week. In a press statement, SACC reminded church leaders that “Israel remained the single supporter of apartheid when the rest of the world implemented economic sanctions, boycotts and divestment to force change in South Africa.” The statement added that Israel continues to “share a similarity with the old South Africa in implementing apartheid where all non-Jews of Palestine are discriminated against, displaced of their land and homes, and subjected to refugee camps and a permanent state of violent military rule” (“Media statement,” 24 February 2012).

The South African Students Congress, the biggest student body in South Africa, supported Israeli Aapartheid Week because it firmly believes that “Israel is an apartheid state that daily tramples on the rights and dignity of Palestinians.” SASCO has officially endorsed the Palestinian call for boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) against Israel. “History has taught us that boycotts were instrumental in the defeat of the murderous and oppressive apartheid regime in South Africa and we believe that boycotting apartheid Israel is kernel to overthrowing the oppression of Palestinians,” wrote SASCO in a statement (“SASCO statement in support of Israeli Apartheid Week,” 6 March 2012).

SASCO branches participated in various activities and called on students not to accept scholarships and “opportunities” for cultural exchanges of young and promising black South Africans to study in Israel, just like students rejected the tactics of co-option by the South African apartheid regime.

On an Israeli Aapartheid Week speaking tour in Europe, SASCO member and BDS South Africa board member Mbuyiseni Ndlozi informed European audiences about the similarities between apartheid South Africa and Israel. He called on Palestine solidarity activists to apply the same BDS method until Israel respects the rights of the Palestinian people.

Reaching an old bastion of support for apartheid

Muammed Desai, spokesperson of BDS South Africa and co-organizer of Israeli Apartheid Week, told The Electronic Intifada that he was “thrilled, really impressed, how there was an Israeli Apartheid Week sense of energy.”

He added: “In Port Elizabeth they packed a room of 300 people. The mayor of Port Elizabeth, Zanoxolo Wayile, attended the event. It is unheard of in the Eastern Cape. Students at Stellenbosch University held a rally on Palestine — it is a step forward.”

In the past, Stellenbosch University was a bastion of support for apartheid. The university’s vice-rector for research confirmed and acknowledged the university’s “complicity with the injustices of apartheid” last year, as reported in the aforementioned Jerusalem Post article.

During IAW at Stellenbosch, students organized a peace march and set up a checkpoint at the main gate of the faculty of theology. A copy of “The Bethlehem Call” in Afrikaans was handed over to the Beyers Naudé Centre. The Bethlehem Call is an urgent appeal to take act against Israeli apartheid and supports BDS activism.

ANC approval

The African National Congress played a leading role in overthrowing apartheid in South Africa. During this year’s Israeli Apartheid Week events, several ANC officials spoke out against the oppression of the Palestinian people.

Ebrahim Ebrahim, deputy minister of international relations and an ANC National Executive Committee member, spoke about “Palestine and South Africa: Partners in a struggle for a better world” at an event in Cape Town.

On the occasion of 100 years ANC, two ANC veterans participated in a panel discussion on the lessons that can be drawn from ANC’s history for South African solidarity with Palestinians resisting Israeli apartheid. Dennis Goldberg, veteran of the military wing of the ANC, and Ahmed Kathrada, former political prisoner who spent nearly thirty years in detention, contributed to the discussion.

Kathrada told the audience: “As a South African who has lived and suffered under apartheid and spent nearly thirty years of my adult life in its jails for resisting it, I can and do humbly claim to know something about the meaning of apartheid. You do not get to journey as far and as long as I have with the ANC and leaders such as Govan Mbeki, Walter Sisulu and Nelson Mandela and not recognize apartheid when you see and experience it.”

At the Russell Tribunal on Palestine meeting in Cape Town last year, Kathrada held the conviction that the Palestinians are “experiencing life akin to — and in many respects far worse — that what we had under apartheid in South Africa.” He called on the ANC to further its support to the Palestinian struggle for justice and self- determination.

“We are saying that if you [Israel] continue along the road of apartheid and we cannot stop you, at the very least you will do so without our consent, our investments, economic, cultural and political agreement.”

The Israeli Apartheid Week events in South Africa were part of a global effort to bring attention to Israel’s apartheid policies. Last year, Palestinian students called on students around the world to “put BDS at the forefront of your campaigns and join together for Israeli Apartheid Week, the pinnacle of action across universities worldwide” (“An open letter from Palestinian students to their peers in Europe,” BDS Movement, 21 October 2011).

Considering South Africa’s own experience of apartheid, it is no surprise that the country’s students are mobilizing against Israeli apartheid.

First published at The Electronic Intifada.

AUTHOR: Adri Nieuwhof
URL: http://www.samora.org
E-MAIL: a.nieuwhof [at] samora.org

The impact of Malema’s expulsion on the ANC is still uncertain, but some people within the ANC and ANCYL are reportedly not happy about the decision and are already urging Malema to fight back. Why? Malema, despite his affluent lifestyle, for the most part is seen as the voice of the poor in South Africa. But for me, I see Malema as symptomatic of what is wrong with the South African leadership (or African leadership in general) because he appeals to the darker side of the South African democracy.

AUTHOR: Ndumba Jonnah Kamwanyah
URL: http://foreignpolicyblogs.com/
E-MAIL: Ndumba.Kamwanyah [at] umb.edu

Los Aneles, California, 5 May 2010

For many years I supported the anti-apartheid struggle in South Africa as a member of the Holland Committee on Southern Africa (HCSA). I apply what I learned in supporting the Palestinian people to achieve freedom, justice and equality including the right of return for refugees. Dutch and South African anti-apartheid activists provided input to broaden the basis of the article.

Powerful vision of the South African Freedom Charter

The people of South Africa developed a clear vision for the future that gave guidance to anti-apartheid activists and organizations. Thousands of volunteers collected countrywide the ‘freedom demands’ of the people.

The demands were summarized in the Freedom Charter. Three thousand delegates from an alliance of South African political movements adopted the Freedom Charter at the 1955 Congress of the People.¹ The first paragraph states,

“We, the People of South Africa, declare for all our country and the world to know:

• That South Africa belongs to all who live in it, black and white, and that no government can justly claim authority unless it is based on the will of all the people
• That our people have been robbed of their birthright to land, liberty and peace by a form of government founded on injustice and inequality
• That our country will never be prosperous or free until all our people live in brotherhood, enjoying equal rights and opportunities
• That only a democratic state, based on the will of all the people, can secure to all their birthright without distinction of color, race, sex or belief
• And therefore, we, the people of South Africa, black and white together equals, countrymen and brothers adopt this Freedom Charter
• And we pledge ourselves to strive together, sparing neither strength nor courage, until the democratic changes here set out have been won.”

“Let all people who love their people and their country now say, as we say here: These freedoms we will fight for, side by side, throughout our lives. Until we have won our liberty,” it ends.

The demands of the Freedom Charter on equality of race and language are addressed in the post-apartheid constitution of South Africa.

Palestinian call for BDS to pressurize Israel

The 2005 Palestinian call for boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) to pressurize the Israeli government to change provides guidance for international solidarity.^₂ The BDS call adopts a rights-based approach that is anchored in universal human rights and has reached a near consensus in Palestinian civil society. It defines three basic Palestinian rights that constitute the minimal requirements of a just peace. Israel should:

• End the occupation and colonization of all Arab lands and dismantling the Wall
• Recognize the fundamental rights of the Arab-Palestinian citizens of Israel to full equality
• Respect, protect and promote the rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes and properties as stipulated in UN resolution 194.

The inclusive character of the BDS call is shown by the appeal to conscientious Israelis to support the initiative.

The Freedom Charter and the BDS call are tools to mobilize support internally as well as externally. Compared to the anti-apartheid struggle in South Africa, there seems less clarity on the vision for the future and less unity among Palestinian political parties. However, this does not dismiss NGOs and solidarity groups from the responsibility to hold governments and companies accountable for their complicity in Israel’s violations of international law.

A clear, broadly supported Palestinian vision is important to shape the future. It would also provide the answer to the question that solidarity activists often hear: What do Palestinians want, one or two states?

International solidarity to support liberation

The early campaigns in South Africa against unjust apartheid laws of the 1950s were based on the analysis that the masses of the oppressed need to determine themselves the course of their liberation. The 1952 Defiance Campaign sparked off a mass movement of resistance to apartheid. During the campaign, “Non-Europeans” walked through “Europeans Only” entrances and demanded service at “White’s Only” counters of post offices. Black people broke the pass laws and Indian, Coloured and White “volunteers” entered Black townships without permission. The success of the campaign encouraged further campaigns against apartheid laws.

The formation of the Mass Democratic Movement (MDM) in the 80s also reflected the vision on the role of the masses in the fight for liberation. The MDM was formed to fill a void that was left by the banning of political activity and political formations. It brought together all formations that were opposed to apartheid such as the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU), students’ organizations, women’s organizations, NGOs, civic structures, academic formations, and sympathetic business structures. These were all brought together under the banner of the United Democratic Front (UDF). In 1984, the UDF organized the Million Signature Campaign denouncing apartheid.³Two years later, the largest stay away in South Africa’s history took place. Other actions included a rent boycott in Soweto and a two day strike to protest the exclusion of black people from parliamentary elections. The MDM maintained an internal boycott campaign which inspired international BDS activism.

In the West, anti-apartheid groups organized campaigns on BDS and the release of political prisoners. The groups were able to influence the public opinion by speaking freely about the unjust treatment of black people under apartheid. The groups were not formally linked but met occasionally at international conferences or consultations on specific topics such as sanctions against South Africa. The groups differed in aims and methods but most of all in the context in which they operated.

Most groups tried to build coalitions with trade unions, churches, political parties and youth organizations in order to influence different sectors of society. In the campaigns of the Holland Committee on Southern Africa (HCSA), BDS action went hand in hand with dissemination of  information about ugly apartheid practices and the mobilization of political and material support for the ANC.

Intimidation and propaganda

Pro-South Africa lobby groups and the apartheid regime itself tried to undermine the campaigns for BDS and the release of political prisoners. The HCSA and some of its members received threats on a regular basis just like other anti-apartheid groups. Violent attacks were carried out. Dulcie September, ANC representative in Paris, was shot in front of her office in 1988. She researched the arms trade between France and South Africa. The office of Dutch anti-apartheid group Kairos was bombed in 1989, but fortunately, the damage was limited.

In addition, the South African apartheid regime began a propaganda war using diverted funds of the Ministry of Defense. In the period 1973-1978 about 85 million rand (then 100 million US$) was spent on “buying magazines, newspapers, publishing houses, and film studios in an effort to counter widespread anti-apartheid press coverage with a rosy image of the country.”⁴ Finance journalists were covertly enticed to write positive articles about South Africa. The Department of Information launched daily newspaper The Citizen and other publications and front organizations such as The Study of Plural Societies and the SA Freedom Foundation. To counteract South Africa’s exclusion from international sport the Bureau of State Security created the Committee for Fairness in Sport.⁵

BDS campaigns against Israel are also met with resistance, attacks on the integrity of persons and propaganda. Activists should resist attempts to lead them away from their activities in support of the Palestinian people in achieving freedom, equality, the right of return for refugees, and the right to self determination. Ilan Pappe wrote about the intimidation by Zionist lobby groups, “What you learn is that once you cower, you become prey to continued and relentless bashing until you sing the Israeli national anthem. If once you do not cave in, you discover that as time goes by, the ability of Zionist lobbies of intimidation around the world to affect you gradually diminishes.”⁶

Years of campaigning by anti-apartheid movements revealed the racist character of South Africa to a wide audience. Massive propaganda efforts of the apartheid regime could not rub off this image. The same is true for Israel. Facts about the occupation of Palestine, the practices of apartheid and the treatment of Palestinian political prisoners cannot be hidden. Informing the public about these facts will influence public opinion. It will create a climate where politicians and businesses can be successfully challenged to end their tolerance of Israel’s violations of international law.

International coordination

Coordination with the African National Congress (ANC) and groups fighting apartheid was essential to increase the pressure on the apartheid regime. In many countries, ANC representatives  engaged with solidarity groups to stimulate BDS activism. South Africans who spoke about the deplorable conditions of apartheid made a huge impact on audiences in Europe.

The ANC consistently supported campaigns with public statements, information about companies or requests to companies to withdraw from South Africa. If companies continued business as usual they were confronted with demonstrations in front of their offices or at public locations in South Africa. Support for the international campaign for an oil embargo was shown in a striking manner: the military wing of the ANC set the South Afrcian oil refineries in Sasolburg and Secunda on fire in 1980.  One year later, ANC President Oliver Tambo made the position of the ANC very clear at the International Conference on Sanctions Against South Africa, “Apartheid`s collaborators must be made to realize that they cannot defend racists and claim to be non-racist. They cannot support apartheid and preach freedom.”⁷

Compared to the  ANC, the PLO has failed to support international BDS activistm. However, many Palestinians and a small group of Israeli’s gave substantial support to BDS campaigns by providing information, documentation, testimonies and by organizing demonstrations. Increasing mobilization  in the Occupied Palestinian Territory and Israel on Palestinian rights issues and the complicity of states and companies will give a boost to international solidarity, just like it did in the anti-apartheid struggle in South Africa.

Ending formal apartheid in South Africa

After decades of resistance, the South African apartheid regime arrived at the conclusion that there was no future for apartheid. Decisive factors were the notion that it would be an almost impossible task to continue to control the black South African majority (80% of the population). The deplorable state of the economy was a threat; the international isolation of “white South Africa” and the rising tide of anti-apartheid protest both inside and outside South Africa’s borders made it clear that it was not only morally but also financially and politically impossible to continue the oppression of black South Africans.⁸ Following years of secret negotiations between the apartheid regime and the ANC, President de Klerk took some bold unilateral moves in 1990 to show that his government was serious about change. Mandela and other political prisoners were released, the ban of the ANC and the Communist Party was lifted, and some apartheid restrictions were lightened. 

In 1985, the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU) was launched in South Africa uniting all unions opposed to apartheid based on the Freedom Charter. I invited Jay Naidoo, founding president of COSATU, to share lessons from the anti-apartheid era with the Palestinians. He replied,

“Real leaders speak the truth to their people. Both the harsh messages of when to compromise, retreat or advance. Mandela once said to angry supporters who were dying from violence orchestrated by covert forces in the apartheid state. ‘One does not negotiate with friends but enemies.’

The only hope is for the next generation to reach out, build bridges and put the past behind without forgetting the brutal lessons it teaches us. In SA, I sat next to Buthelezi who lead a political organization that fought a war with us and even had me on death lists. But we worked together and learnt to respect each others views. I did the same with the then deputy President de Klerk and many former members of the apartheid state. We must learn to build the future and heal the wounds of division sown over the decades and accept that we are all part of one human race. As Gandhi said ‘Become the change you want to see in the world.’ ”

I asked Ghadija Vallie the same question. She acted as coordinator of the Western Cape Relief Fund (WCRF) and was heavily involved in the resistance. The WCRF was founded in 1985 to support the increasing number of political prisoners following the declaration of the State of Emergency to oppress the intensifying resistance. She wrote,

“Someone asked me, ‘yesterday we fought for democracy. Look today, where is democracy?  What did we fight for? The poor are getting poorer, crime is out of control, the freedom fighters are asking for a place in the sun. Every day is like a public holiday in the township. The politicians are only aware of the masses when elections are due.’ My answer, dear comrade, is that we were romantic. We allowed negotiations to happen without our contributions. Now we have to face the demons that haunt us. We should not fret because we are the government! We must take responsibility. Let us make the freedom charter alive. Each one teach one. There shall be jobs for all, comrade. Don’t fret. All is well, we are the government and each person must take responsibility to make the changes within and work with passion and commitment to realize our vision. Stop being a victim, take charge of your life. I know there are a lot of similarities with apartheid in South Africa. Palestinians have a lot to deal with but they have to take charge of their future.”

Responsibility of the West

Fellow activists of the Holland Committee on Southern Africa, Trineke Weijdema and Sietse Bosgra, are now involved in Palestine solidarity work although most people of their age would have retired. Their solidarity activism dates back to Vietnam and the former Portuguese colonies in Africa. They want to share the following,

“Reflecting on our past we see the destructive role of the West – the United States and Europe – serving its self-interest.  Apartheid would have been destroyed much earlier if Western governments had put South Africa under heavy pressure and companies had ended their profitable business with the apartheid regime . It would have saved many lives. Western governments and companies have not learned one thing. Look at what is happening in Palestine. It is our responsibility – the people in the West – to hold governments and companies to account that are complicit in Israel’s violations of international law.”

It is clear that BDS campaigns were effective in the struggle against apartheid in South Africa. Israel’s reaction of throwing money into propaganda activities is a clear sign that BDS activism is already effective. 

• 1      http://www.anc.org.za/show.php?id=72 retrieved 8 January 2012
• 2   http://www.bdsmovement.net/callRetrieved 8 January 2012)
• 3    http://www.nelsonmandela.org/udf/index.php/poster/udf_million_signatures_campaign/ retrieved 8 January 2012
• 4    Sasha Polakow-Suransky, The Unspoken Alliance, Israel’s secret relationship with apartheid South Africa. (New York: Pantheon Books 2010)
• 5    Bio of Eschel Rhoodie, http://www.sahistory.org.za/people/dr-eschel-mostert-rhoodie retrieved 5 January 2012
• 6    Ilan Pappe, “Confronting intimidation, working for justice in Palestine”, The Electronic Intifada, 27 December 2011. Retrieved 6 Janyary 2012 http://electronicintifada.net/content/confronting-intimidation-working-justice-palestine/10746
• 7    http://www.sahistory.org.za/archive/impose-comprehensive-and-mandatory-sanctions-against-south-africa-speech-oliver-tambo-intern Retrieved 8 January 2012
• 8 See also: Adri Nieuwhof, Bangani Ngeleza and Jeff Handmaker, “Lessons from South Africa for the peace process” (1/2),The Electronic Intifada, Feb 1, 2005 Retrieved 8 January 2012

AUTHOR: Adri Nieuwhof
URL: http://www.samora.org
E-MAIL: a.nieuwhof [at] samora.org