🎙️ Voice is AI-generated. Inconsistencies may occur.
It has been noted with fanfare that more people are eligible to vote in 2024—over 4 billion—than ever before. But that includes pretend voting in countries like Russia that hold sham elections. So, let us instead focus on what's real and celebrate actual advances as they come. There has been one this week, in South Africa.
The achievement is that at last, 30 years after the abolition of apartheid—the system under which the black majority was denied suffrage and equal rights—the African National Congress has failed to win a majority. This is an achievement not necessarily because the ANC, which won outright majorities in six straight elections for five-year terms of parliament, performed so poorly.
Indeed, it has a mixed record: South Africa has experienced nothing like the disaster in its sister country to the north, Zimbabwe—where oppression of the white minority, despotism and economic collapse were the main features of misrule.
The ANC has had successes. Despite corruption and inequality and persistent poverty, South Africa is also a country with some political stability, economic growth, and substantial foreign investment. To the extent that there is an ideological argument in South Africa, it has to do with free markets versus strong-armed interference to give blacks the upper hand—with the ANC somewhat on the fence. Otherwise, the country functions, if barely, as a state that serves its citizens. That's a lot, given the state of the world.
The current president, Cyril Ramaphosa, seems likely to keep his position despite the loss of the majority; the ANC is the largest party and should be able to form a coalition. But this bump in the road is a sign of national maturation. It gives us hope that South Africa is, in a somewhat outlying situation for Africa, on the road to being a true democracy.
Zoom out, if you will: The dominance of a single party is typical of the early years of developing economies and emerging societies in post-colonial circumstances and in the post-World War II order. When they eventually lose support, they can either drag their countries into despotism (like China) or give way to true democracy (like Taiwan).
Examples include:
- In India, the Indian National Congress ruled from independence in 1947 until the late 1970s. Elections have since been competitive, and a nationalist rival, the Bhartiya Janata Party (BJP)of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, has been in charge since 2014.
- Following the Mexican Revolution, which ended in 1920, the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) was established, remaining the dominant political force for much of the 20th century. Elections are now competitive.
- In Kenya, which gained independence from Britain in 1963, the Kenya African National Union (KANU) led by Jomo Kenyatta and later by Daniel arap Moi, remained in power until 2002. It is now a somewhat functional country.
- In Israel, the Labor Party ruled the roost from independence in 1948 until a messy election in 1977, when splintering and corruption finally nudged it from power. Now it is one of the smallest factions in the Knesset.
- The aforementioned Taiwan was established when the Nationalist Chinese government retreated to the island in 1949 after the Chinese Civil War, which yielded a communist regime on the mainland. The dominant party, the Kuomintang (KMT), ruled by martial law until 1987 and remained the dominant political party until 2000. Since then, Taiwan has developed into a multi-party democracy.
In some of these cases, and in other cases not mentioned here, the original party eventually exited as a spent force, accused of misrule. With the ANC, the process seems gradual and natural—a result of the years passing since it was led by the iconic Nelson Mandela, whose halo shone brighter than that of any leader in recent history.
Mandela had served decades in prison on charges of sabotage and conspiracy to overthrow the government; he was not a terrorist, but he did help establish the ANC's armed wing. His true legacy was his refusal to take revenge on the whites, embarking instead on a series of procedures, personal examples, and symbolic gestures aimed at reconciliation.
That included a Truth and Reconciliation Commission under the leadership of Archbishop Desmond Tutu, whose aim was nominally to uncover the truth about human rights abuses but which actually promoted national healing. At one point Mandela aligned himself with the mainly white national rugby team, in a gesture that touched many hearts and was celebrated in the Clint Eastwood film "Invictus."
Mandela had style. He once remarked to a media executive I know well, who was vertically challenged: "I did not know a man of your stature could be a man of your stature." On a visit to the country in 2006, I was told by a man who had shaken Mandela's hand that he felt electric energy; he clearly believed it.
His successors have not been anywhere near his level.
Thabo Mbeki (in power from 1999-2008) was a bureaucrat focused on economic growth, infrastructure development, and pan-African issues. He got into trouble for a haughty style of rule and was compelled to resign in 2008, in favor of an interim leader, Kgalema Motlanthe. In the 2009 election Jacob Zuma became the president and dragged things down even further.
In 2008, I interviewed Zuma, who survived rape and corruption charges to become president. He was accused by the HIV-positive daughter of a family friend and argued that encounter was consensual; he was acquitted— but not before he made damaging comments that led many to question his judgement, including that he believed taking a shower after the sex would reduce the risk of contracting HIV/Aids.
It is interesting to contemplate why people like Zuma can last in politics for so long and are so much more prevalent than decent people like Mandela. One wonders whether they may be a more natural fit for politics than people like Mandela, or Tutu. I can say this: I found Zuma charismatic.
He lauded the ANC, saying: "Here is an organization in the African continent that shows the deep roots of democracy in the sense that we have never seen before. ... I think that's what we need in Africa." And he spoke like a democrat of sorts: "There's been a debate about the culture of good governance ... (I have a) very firm position that no military takeover will ever be supported... I'm more confident that Africa in the next two decades or so will be a different kind of place."
Zuma's presidency was marked by numerous corruption scandals, economic challenges, and political controversies, and he resigned in 2018 amid mounting pressure from within the ANC and the public. But now he's back and has had his revenge: the MK party he backs, and which received over 10 percent of the vote, seems to be the reason the ANC has lost its majority.
The two decades he mentioned are almost up, and Africa is still in bad shape. But South Africa may be the exception. At what is in fact a difficult hour for democracy, let us find some solace in that.
Dan Perry is the former London-based Europe/Africa editor and Cairo-based Middle East editor of the Associated Press and served as chairman of the Foreign Press Association in Jerusalem. Follow him at danperry.substack.com.
The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
