Guarding cushy jobs – not the country – will see Zuma survive

At A Dispatch Dialogue event I hosted two weeks ago, former cabinet minister and current ANC MP Charles Nqakula took time to explain why, in his view (and that of many other ANC leaders, I might add) the president should not be removed from office when the no confidence vote is decided today.

Nqakula, like many others, has been a vociferous critic of Zuma – calling on him to step down for having been scandal prone and for \threatening the ANC’s future survival.

His lack of regard for Zuma goes far back, in fact. In his recently published book, The People’s War: Reflections of an ANC Cadre, Nqakula refers to Zuma as having been undeserving of his election to the ANC’s top six as deputy secretary-general at the ANC’s 48th national congress in Durban in 1991.

But Nqakula is against Zuma being removed through a vote in the National Assembly this afternoon.

When quizzed about his contradictory standpoint at the Dispatch dialogue, Nqakula was frank – saying that his interest was in preserving the ANC as an early election, given the scandals that surround Zuma at the moment, could see the party lose control of the country to opposition parties.

“I’m preserving the ANC because to me that is what matters. It is the ANC which has a progressive programme for the liberation of our people. I’m not talking about the country ... I’m talking about the preservation of the ANC.

“If the speaker calls a snap election, will the ANC win that election? Isn’t it that we still need time to mobilise our people ... to vote for us? The problem that will arise as a consequence of us wanting this man out will be bigger than we carry him along till December,” he said.

In other words, the ANC’s political survival matters more than what is in the best interest of the country.

That Zuma is a flawed character who is undeserving of leading this country is not in dispute. But removing him from office during the debate this afternoon is not even an option for Nqakula and others.

They would rather wait for December’s national conference, where Zuma’s successor will be elected.

Their logic is that, if they could suffer Zuma for the past 10 years, what is a few months between now and December?

While the approach of a respectable man like Nqakula is more about saving the ANC from embarrassment and further divisions, for others it is about saving their own jobs as MPs and cabinet ministers.

This unfortunate attitude explains why Zuma will survive the vote this afternoon – even with voting being conducted by secret ballot.

Much has been said about the members of Zuma’s cabinet being at risk of losing their positions should the vote succeed – as the president, his ministers and deputy ministers would have to step down.

But the seats of ordinary MPs from all political parties are not guaranteed as an early election – which the speaker of parliament would have to call if the National Assembly is unable to elect a president within the prescribed 30 days after the removal of a president – could see them replaced.

The latter scenario would mean that a new parliament will have to rise after the snap election, and given our party-political system, some current MPs across the party lines might not return.

This has implications for all the parties in the National Assembly and not just the ANC.

It would not be surprising if some opposition party members either abstained from voting or vote to keep Zuma in office.

Unfortunately, most politicians across the spectrum share a common trait – elevating their own selfish interests above those of the very people they claim to represent.

This also explains the SA Communist Party’s schizophrenic response, where on the one hand they have called for Zuma’s axing – even marching with opposition parties to that effect – and then suddenly made an about-turn to say they would vote to keep him in office.

Clearly the SACP’s decision is merely about keeping Blade Nzimande and other communist leaders in their cushy government jobs.

Nationally Assembly Speaker Mbete’s decision to hold the vote by secret ballot is an important one.

Announcing the decision yesterday, Mbete said: “I have considered the environment and heard voices expressing doubt in the integrity and values of our 20-year-old constitution. We therefore have to use this opportunity to show responsiveness to our people.

“This decision is therefore in the best interest of the country ... decision is about putting the resilience of our democratic institution to test”.

As courageous as Mbete’s decision is – given how she has shielded Zuma from scrutiny in the past – frankly, it is meaningless as this morning ANC officials will address their parliamentary caucus to drum into their minds the implications for each one of them should they vote to remove Zuma.

So then Zuma will survive the vote today – not because he is a political strategist or the ultimate survivor, as some would want us to believe. Far from that. Rather, he will survive because of the selfish interests of MPs whose own preservation is uppermost in their minds.

Even though they can clearly see Zuma’s handprint on every brick of the country and the ANC’s ruin, they would rather keep him on for their own selfish interests.

Like Zuma, all those who will vote to keep him in office this afternoon do not care about our country and are complicit in the destruction of our young democracy and its capture by the Guptas.