Colour theme tricky for an opposition wedding

LAST Sunday, Congress of the People (COPE) leader Mosiuoa Lekota said in an interview on my talk show on Talk Radio 702 that if and when the opposition formed an alliance, it would have to be led by an African. He argued that since the majority of the electorate is African, it stands to reason that an African face would have the best chance of leading such a party to electoral success. Courtesy of the ungodly hour when my show broadcasts, other party leaders may have missed this. It is, however, worth debating Lekota’s viewpoint.

In some ways this is a premature discussion. COPE has yet to have its inaugural elective and policy conferences. By Lekota’s own admission, they are not yet in a position to decide whether to form coalitions, alliances or mergers and, if so, under what conditions. They need to reach conclusions about their own leadership and policy debates.

Similarly, the Independent Democrats (ID) party is in no rush either. The ID has given itself another six months to decide on the details of the matter. The United Democratic Movement has been even quieter about its position.

The Democratic Alliance (DA) is also buying time. In an analogy designed to avoid committing to specifics, DA leader Helen Zille regards her party as engaged to the other lot but has made it clear that she has yet to decide on marriage itself — notwithstanding the fact that engagement usually is a commitment to marry at some point.

Or so one would have thought.

Nevertheless, it is obvious that the reason all these parties are only cautiously optimistic about working together is that any future alliance will require two critical negotiation points to be dealt with successfully.

One is the question of what the ideological and policy content of an alliance should be. Unless the parties are on the same page about the central policy questions, or at least the principles that should inform policy choices, Lekota may find himself serving divorce papers yet again. At some point the parties would have to decide, for example, whether ID leader Patricia de Lille’s “social democratic” philosophy is compatible with Zille’s “open, opportunity society”.

The second negotiation issue centres on leadership. Lekota has now made an opening move. The implication of his opinion is that both Zille and the DA’s parliamentary leader, Athol Trollip, should be happy with roles other than being the main face of an alliance. Is this sensible?

There certainly appears to be disagreement within the DA itself on this matter. At least one very well-placed source within the leadership structure of the DA has told me there is no consensus. Some, like Trollip, and notwithstanding the liberal media’s unreflective excitement about his Xhosa-speaking credentials, are adamant that an alliance must be colour-blind when it comes to debate about who should lead it. Others, such as Zille, are more pragmatic in their recognition that an alliance leader would have to be black for strategic reasons.

In fact, Zille had already previously sought a deal with De Lille in terms of which, had they co-operated in fighting to defeat the African National Congress in the Western Cape, Zille would have been happy for De Lille to be provincial premier. I must confess this surprised me. The very muscular public image, tone and style of Zille suggests a megalomania one might not naturally square with selfless calculations about what is best for the party and for democracy.

Looks, even with the help of Botox, really can deceive.

In the end, it seems the alpha male instinct of white male politicians within the DA, such as Trollip and Western Cape leader Theuns Botha, who behaves as if SA came into race- neutral existence in 1994, may sustain internal disagreement about whether to accept Lekota’s viewpoint. One senses personal career political manoeuvres driving some of this resistance, rather than purely sober calculations about how best to forge an effective opposition alliance. Let’s hope Zille’s men will eventually see the light for the sake of dislodging, or at least threatening, the political monopoly of the ruling ANC alliance.

It is understandable that many of us may be deeply irritated by the claim that an alliance leader must be black. Yes, it is not desirable in an ideal world. But it is regrettably necessary in the world we actually live in. Our electoral results continue to be partly determined by racial identities. Just because we may wish for people to vote purely for a party they think will deliver them bread, or teach them how to bake the stuff, does not mean they will reason accordingly. Many folk who desire a colour-blind society, such as Botha, fail to distinguish idealism from pragmatism. Lekota, on the other hand, is simply being pragmatic.

The headaches are not yet all gone, though. The next question is which black leader should do the leading. Lekota himself is not ideal. His anger alienates. Mbhazima Shilowa is solid but lacks oratorical presence. It should really be De Lille but, like Trevor Manuel in the ANC, she just might not be black enough. Such is political life some 60 years after the birth of the Population Registration Act .