The content on this page is not written by Polity.org.za, but is supplied by third parties. This content does not constitute news reporting by Polity.org.za.

My dear friends and fellow South Africans,

This week marked the first 100 days of President Jacob Zuma's
presidency; an event which will be the subject of widespread review
and commentary.

Whilst I harbour doubts about the wisdom of passing a judgment on a
presidency after only 100 days in office, a practice, I believe, which
began with President Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal presidency, the
anniversary is an important yardstick for every president.

The President has, in my view, demonstrated humility, gravitas, for
these are serious times, and exuded a sense of purpose, if not
certitude, in his first 100 days in office. His warm and reassuring
public persona somehow seems to resonate with the nation's deep-seated
anxiety about the economy and his approach has been, largely,
consensual and reconciliatory. The mood music, as it were, is right.

He has, thus far, avoided the unfortunate depiction in some quarters
at home and abroad as the 'accidental president'. If his but one
predecessor had a reputation, and I stress reputation, of being a
remote philosopher king, Mr Zuma is still seen as a man of the people.
And my more delicate friends, colleagues and staff have, perhaps, been
reassured to have heard a little less of his hit rendition of 'Umshini
wami', although, personally, I don't mind it - too much.

One is, however, concerned about his government's clear Leftist drift
and there are some early signs of political populism a-la-Eva Peron
which need to be checked. Many commentators are rightly (excuse the
pun) concerned about the ideological centre of gravity of the
government. This has led some seasoned analysts to posit that Mr Zuma
is merely a figurehead and that the true centre of power has
gravitated to Luthuli House and ANC secretary-general Gwede Mantashe.
Rather alarmingly, Mr Mantashe recently, when asked by a reporter if
he would describe himself as a Marxist, replied: 'I would not describe
myself as a Marxist. I am a Marxist'.

Just as disconcertingly, Mr Zuma's other friends in COSATU are being
equally unhelpful. Mr Zwelinzima Vavi, Cosatu's secretary-general, has
suggested that policy should be determined by the alliance, not the
government. 'We are the policymakers,' he said, 'and the government
implements. The government does not lead anymore'.

And to make matters worse, the President appears to be ceding to the
ruling-party's youth wing a debate about the merits (or, more
accurately, demerits) of nationalisation. This debate, in my view, is
spurious as the debate about nationalisation has long passed
everywhere, with the exception of North Korea, Cuba and a clutch of
maverick Latin American states. I don't think for one moment Mr Zuma
is about to nationalise the mines or even abandon inflation targeting:
a central tenet of the Reserve Bank. But the impression created is
that the President has not got his hand on the tiller of economic
policy: is the tail wagging the dog or vice versa?

Mr Zuma's big problem, and it will get worse if not remedied, is that
he has had to tailor an executive out of the cloth of his political
exigencies: i.e. to maintain the internal cohesion of the disparate
elements of the tripartite alliance which brought him to power. The
result is a mix of oil and water: former union leaders hold seven
posts In Mr Zuma's massive 34-member cabinet, including the key labour
and economic development portfolios. Another four posts have gone to
the SACP, including trade and industry.

On the other hand, the moderate and internationally respected Mr
Trevor Manuel is charged with formulating economic policy from the
Orwellian sounding National Planning Commission, which, one would have
thought, that the eminently sensible Minister of Finance, Mr Pravin
Gordhan would have been left to implement.

None of this makes for a happy tea party.

Mr Zuma clearly stated that, as of July this year, cabinet ministers
would be held accountable through performance instruments. If anyone
has failed their mandate so far, we can expect this to be exposed. My
hunch is if Mr Zuma is to succeed, he will have to finesse the size
and quality of the cabinet sooner rather than later. He will need to
create a smaller and more nimble top-level leadership within the
cabinet stamped with his authority and direction. For in a time when
doctors, miners, train drivers and workers in the chemical,
construction, energy, paper, printing, retail and state broadcasting
sectors have downed tools, never before has SA's hard-won and
carefully-crafted socio-economic contract been so imperiled.

I am concerned too about the President's undertaking to be a kind of
inspector at large of schools, townships, failing municipalities, etc
- this, in addition, to his election commitment to elicit the views of
unsuspecting in-flight SAA passengers. Whilst Mr Zuma's intentions are
no doubt good, it is simply not possible to micromanage the country
like this. The man will simply wear himself out. It is not practical
for the President with the domestic and international responsibilities
of being head of government and head of state to be running helter
skelter around SA doing his lieutenants work.

But Mr Zuma's desire to have an ongoing national conversation does
speak to one his nicest attributes: his penchant for reaching out
beyond the ANC tent. As one who has advocated the separation of the
two offices, if anyone can straddle the undesirable dichotomy of being
both head of state and head of government, I hope it is Mr Zuma.

The President's consensual approach has also been, by and large,
evident in his approach to the public service and his relations with
the opposition.

Yes, the IFP would have preferred a professional rather than political
appointment as the police commissioner. I hope that this did not
portend the President's approach to making appointments to the public
service.

We have no great concern about the President's nomination for Chief
Justice, save the fact that he did not follow the Constitutional
imperative or protocol of consulting opposition leaders first. But I
think this was clumsiness rather than a deliberate act.

Finally, there seems to be a feeling amongst the opposition that Mr
Zuma won the election and he had a clear mandate to govern despite the
controversies which had dogged him. I think he has cannily managed
relations with the opposition, too. He has shown some nice touches in
parliament and seems genuinely interested in the opposition's
interventions.

The President, however, did overstep the mark by calling for a merger
between the ANC and the IFP. Whilst I hope that the relations between
the two organisations will normalise befitting two distinct political
competitors in a mature democracy, the President need not put the
champagne on ice pending a merger as long as 'Yours Truly' leads the
IFP.

That aside, 'good luck Msholozi!'

And, I had the good fortune to attend the National Women's Day
function in Vryheid last which was addressed by President Jacob Zuma.

For me, it was a great disappointment for a number of reasons. I have
heard people refer to SA with the natty marketing slogan of the
'Rainbow Nation'. I always argued that we are not a Rainbow Nation,
bur rather a bowl of salad.

In a bowl of salad all the ingredients retain their identity (or
should I say taste) and yet it remains one bowl. The salad would not
be a delectable salad without the inclusion of each of the ingredients
to tickle one's palate. This is the multi-culturalism in which I and
my Party believe in.

But these National Day's which we are all supposed to observe as one
Nation sadly demonstrate, as was the case in Vryheid, that we are far
from being the Rainbow Nation. Over the last sixteen years, I have
yet to see a National Day event attendance which truly reflects the
face of the South African .nation.

In Vryheid there were hardly ten white people! There were a couple of
Indians and some employees of government departments and service
providers. This is tragic because whilst we delude ourselves into
thinking that we are all reconciled as desperate cultural groups which
comprise one nation, we are far from that. This has nothing of course
to do with President Zuma. It has been the case since the dawn of our
fledgling democracy.

Our nation is great, and our strength lies in the richness of our
cultural diversity. The social engineering of apartheid was
predicting on the notion that our diversity was a disaster. They
concluded that we could not live peacefully together as one strong
multi-cultural nation. Then, they tried to fragment us by trying to
balkanise the country.

In Vryheid at the Women's Day function, it was depressingly
conspicuous that our Rainbow Nation is still an unrealised dream.
Unless we do something to show that we are one, we shall continue to
have huge problems in relating to one another as diverse members of
one nation. I do admit, of course, that while affirmative action was
well-intentioned, it has alienated many in the minority groups. Many
feel they are not accepted as members of the same South African family.

I am on record for saying that we need to re-look at how we implement
this policy. And if its implementation is causing other communities
of our nation to be aggrieved, then we really do need to revisit it.
This applies also to Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) policy, too. I
was encouraged when the Deputy President Mr Kgalema Motlante, when he
was still secretary-general of the ruling- party, expressed similar
sentiments.

There were also other unfortunate incidents at the Women's National
Day in Vryheid which I would also like to mention. The President in
his state of the nation address made comments which, as I said
earlier, the opposition parties interpreted as him reaching out to
them in the spirit of multi-party democracy. Something which took
place in Vryheid was a clear indication that this was not the case.
We are still far from being a multi-party democracy.

I attended the function after receiving a joint invitation from the
Minister of Women, Children and People with Disabilities, Ms
Noluthando Mayende-Sibiya and the Premier of KwaZulu-Nata,l Dr Zweli
Mkhize.

There have been complaints for years from members of opposition
parties about the fact that these National Days have been abused by
the ruling-party by turning them into ANC rallies. After receiving
the invitation, I contacted some of our leaders in the Abaqulusi
Municipality. Some of our members expressed a reluctance to attend
for the reason that these so-called National Day functions had
essentially become ANC rallies. I, however, indicated that I was
attending the function.

On arrival, I found the Mayor of the Zululand District Municipality
Mrs Zanele KaMagwaza-Msibi already at the function. She is also the
National Chairperson of the IFP. She was quite livid! She was
angered that the ANC Women's League Chairperson Mrs Angie Motshekga
and members of the ANC Women's League were all wearing the ANC Women's
League uniform.

Mrs KaMagwaza-Msibi said that IFP members were told not to wear any
party uniforms. So although the Chairperson of the IFP Women's
Brigade Mrs Thembi Nzuza had a slot in the programme to deliver a
message, for the sake of appearances, the attendance of so many
hundreds of members of the ANC Women's League dressed in their uniform
belied the picture of it being a national government function.

To make things worse, the ANC women did not end up just wearing their
uniforms, they started chanted ANC slogans and singing ANC songs, too.
As if this was not bad enough, they started to sing derogatory songs
about the IFP during the function.

In a recent online letter, in which I responded to President Zuma's
repeated call for the IFP to merge with the ANC and "to return home",
I cautioned that President Zuma was ignoring the extent to which the
IFP has been at the receiving end of ANC hostility, denigration and
violence for decades. First and foremost, I said, we just need to
reconcile and normalise relations between the two political
organisation's.

The events Vryheid should have indicated to President Zuma how
unrealistic his hopes are that we can be reconciled while the
relations between our members are still as ugly and febrile as we saw
on Sunday. One notes that this very week we have had by-elections
triggered by political assassinations that have taken place between
our members in the Umvoti Municipality. I hope that this will inspire
President Zuma to flex his muscles in an effort to achieve
reconciliation since these events do not augur well for the future
well-being of this nation. I also acknowledge that it takes 'two to
tango'.

Mind you, also present at the function was a figure no less than the
leader of the ANC in KwaZulu-Natal, Dr Zweli Mkhize. These matters
were brought to his attention by Mrs KaMagwaza-Msibi but to not avail.
Nor was Dr Mkhize alone. There were at least five national ministers
and a deputy minister present at the function. Their presence and the
presence of President Zuma did not make the slightest iota of
difference to the provocative behaviour of members of the ANC.

Finally, when one watched television coverage on Sunday evening of the
provincial functions, the pattern was the same. There were no Whites
and Indians and only a few coloureds in some provinces. At all these
functions the members of Women's League of the ANC wore their uniforms
and sang ANC songs and chanted ANC slogans in scenes redolent of the
old Soviet Union.

We still have a very long way to go. If President Zuma's presidency
can make a difference, history will remember him as one of the great
Presidents. I wish him well, but I am not optimistic because, as I
alluded earlier, the ruling-party resembles a tottering Tower of Babel
too much. They are often described in the media as a 'broad church'.
I am afraid this church choir might be huge, but there is precious
little in the way of harmony or unison.

Sincerely,

Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi, MP