Is the leader of the GNU lost at sea? : Ramaphosa's leadership style questioned
President Cyril Ramaphosa is losing the country.
His hold on it is unravelling like a ball of frayed string rolling downhill.
The government of national unity, which had vowed to rescue South Africa, is dysfunctional, largely because of the president's appalling lack of leadership.
Unprecedented depths of economic and social distress have heightened public discontent and one senses that it needs just a spark to erupt.
The ever-faster cascade of events has punctuated the president's customary sang-froid. He has made foolish decisions and he has been caught in fabrications that he should have realised were bound to be exposed.
Lieutenant-General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi's explosive allegations about political meddling, cadre deployment and institutional capture in law enforcement and the justice system left Ramaphosa flat-footed.
It says much about how out of touch Ramaphosa has become that, despite the gravity of Mkhwanazi's allegations, he genuinely seemed to think he could shield his close ally, police minister Senzo Mchunu and deputy national commissioner Shadrack Sibiya.
Public outrage swiftly made his stance untenable. As Mchunu's stand-in, Ramaphosa chose Prof Firoz Cachalia.
A respected academic who, on paper, looked like a safe choice, Cachalia arrives with baggage of his own.
When Mkhwanazi earlier this year went public for the first time with claims of political meddling, Cacha lia accused him of 'public grandstanding' and urged him to stick to the internal police channels that he had accused of corruption.
But the comedy continues. Farcically, the portfolio in the meantime has been handed to Gwede Mantashe, the most compromised but longest-serving minister Ramaphosa has had.
It's during all this slapstick that Minister in the Presidency Khumbudzo Ntshavheni deemed it to be an opportune to release the 2024-2028 National Security Strategy assessment, which confusingly concludes that, despite political assassinations, incipient terrorism, violent extremism, economic sabotage and ram pant corruption, South Africa is a stable and secure nation.
She then went on to make some extraordinary remarks at the press conference about a potential coup d'état.
'There is,' Ntshavheni told the increasingly bewildered journalists, 'a potential risk of a coup d'état. We have identified it and put measures in place to mitigate against it.
So, that's why we say to South Africans that there will not be anyone attempting to do a coup in South Africa.'
ALSO READ:'Cyril must fall': Organisations march against Ramaphosa to Union Buildings on Mandela Day
In the past few days or in the past few weeks, there has not been anyone attempting to do a coup in South Africa.
That does not mean people are not planning one. Or, as Lewis Carroll put it with greater elegance and far less chance of rocking national confidence: 'If it was so, it might be. And if it were so, it would be. But as it isn't, it ain't.'
Unfortunately for Ramaphosa, his other pet project, the National Dialogue, is not going to save the day for him.
To many, it's just the latest manifestation of Ramaphosa's preference for symbolism over action. Even ANC legacy foundations, long accustomed to wielding quiet influence behind the scenes, are now publicly voicing their frustration.
This week, the Walter and Albertina Sisulu Foundation issued a blistering statement, warning that Ramaphosa's habit of 'preaching dialogue while insulating political elites from accountability' amounts to little more than political theatre.
The foundation charged that his leadership – tarnished by the still unresolved Phala Phala scandal – 'contradicts the very principles his administration claims to uphold'. The foundation's conclusion was stark: it's time for Ramaphosa to resign.
NOW READ: What now for Senzo Mchunu? Police minister's political career on the ropes
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Star
6 hours ago
- The Star
US to punish top ANC officials over foreign policy, graft allegations
President Cyril Ramaphosa Former South African ambassador to US, Ebrahim Rasool. ANC first deputy secretary general Nomvula Mokonyane. South Africa's relationship with the United States is on a diplomatic knife-edge, as the U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee push forward a bill that could see senior African National Congress (ANC) leaders hit with sanctions, including travel bans and asset freezes. The proposed U.S. – South Africa Bilateral Relations Review Act of 2025 calls for a sweeping 120-day probe into Pretoria's foreign policy stance, targeting individuals accused of corruption or of acting against American interests. The looming sanctions have intensified diplomatic tensions, placing several senior ANC figures squarely in the crosshairs. President Cyril Ramaphosa, ANC National Chairperson Gwede Mantashe, former International Relations Minister Dr. Naledi Pandor, ANC First Deputy Secretary-General Nomvula Mokonyane, and former U.S. Ambassador Ebrahim Rasool have all been flagged as potential targets of the proposed U.S. action. The bill's advancement has triggered a political storm in Pretoria, with ANC leaders condemning it as an affront to South Africa's sovereignty and its right to pursue an independent foreign policy. Although the U.S. legislation stops short of naming individuals, growing pressure is falling squarely on President Ramaphosa and his cabinet, whose diplomatic choices have increasingly drawn fire from U.S. lawmakers. At the heart of the growing rift is South Africa's vocal and consistent defence of Palestine. Pretoria has become one of the strongest international voices condemning Israel's war on Palestinians, and this has not gone unnoticed in Washington. The South African government's move to initiate a case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza was seen as a deliberate shift away from its previously neutral stance on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Alongside this, Pretoria's growing alignment with Russia, China, and Iran has further strained its relationship with the U.S., who view these ties as contradictory to American geopolitical interests. President Ramaphosa, who has steered South Africa's foreign policy in this direction, faces intense scrutiny. His administration's engagement with Russia and its stance on the Middle East has drawn sharp rebuke from U.S. lawmakers, who have accused South Africa of aligning with authoritarian regimes and undermining democratic values. U.S. diplomats have expressed frustration over Ramaphosa's outspoken criticism of U.S. policy, particularly on issues such as Israel and the war in Gaza. In June, IOL reported that President Ramaphosa released a cautious statement calling for dialogue and a peaceful resolution to rising geopolitical tensions. His remarks highlighted South Africa's sensitive diplomatic position, balancing its longstanding relationship with Iran and its vocal criticism of Israel's actions in Gaza. 'President Cyril Ramaphosa and the South African government have noted with a great deal of anxiety the entry by the United States of America into the Israel-Iran war," the statement read. 'It was South Africa's sincerest hope that President Donald Trump would use his influence and that of the US government to prevail on the parties to pursue a dialogue path in resolving their issues of dispute. 'South Africa calls on the United States, Israel, and Iran to give the United Nations the opportunity and space to lead on the peaceful resolution of the matters of dispute, including the inspection and verification of Iran's status of uranium enrichment, as well as its broader nuclear capacity,' the statement reads. Gwede Mantashe, serving as both ANC National Chairperson and Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy, is among those who could come under scrutiny. He was named in the Zondo Commission report, which linked him to alleged corrupt dealings with the now-defunct facilities company Bosasa. The report detailed claims that Mantashe received illicit security upgrades at his properties, allegations he has consistently denied, but which continue to cast a shadow over his political standing. Nomvula Mokonyane, ANC First Deputy Secretary-General and former Minister of Environmental Affairs, also appears to be in Washington's sights. Her alleged involvement in the Bosasa corruption scandal remains a point of concern, but it is her recent proposal to rename Sandton Drive, where the U.S. Consulate is located, to 'Leila Khaled Drive' that has drawn international attention. Khaled, a Palestinian militant associated with plane hijackings and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), a group designated as a terrorist organisation by the U.S., has made Mokonyane's comments especially controversial, sparking widespread outrage and potentially deepening the diplomatic rift. Then there is Dr. Naledi Pandor, South Africa's former Minister of International Relations and Cooperation, who has emerged as a central figure in the foreign policy debate. Her vocal defence of South Africa's position on Israel, along with continued diplomatic engagement with Iran and Hamas, has made her a lightning rod for criticism. U.S. lawmakers have accused Pandor of steering South Africa toward increasingly adversarial alliances, arguing that her actions are undermining the country's longstanding relationship with the West. Ibrahim Rasool, former South African Ambassador to the United States, has also come under scrutiny from U.S. lawmakers. Known for his outspoken criticism of U.S. foreign policy, especially regarding the Middle East and Israel, Rasool has often been at odds with American diplomats. His influential role in shaping the ANC's foreign policy during the Obama administration is now being reexamined amid Washington's broader review of its diplomatic relationship with South Africa. The ANC's response has been one of defiance, with ANC Secretary-General Fikile Mbalula condemning the bill as an 'attack on our sovereignty.' Mbalula has warned that the proposed sanctions are part of a broader U.S. effort to undermine South Africa's political independence and foreign policy decisions. "There is no justification for sanctions against our leaders simply for standing up for what we believe is right, especially on the issue of Palestine," Mbalula said in a statement. While the US sanctions bill may pass into law, it is far from certain that the Trump administration will take immediate action. Joel Pollak, a former senior fellow at the Hudson Institute, suggested that the sanctions would likely be targeted at individuals deemed to be responsible for actions that go against U.S. interests. 'The Magnitsky Act is about holding people accountable for undermining democracy and supporting corrupt practices. This is not an attempt to punish South Africa, but to target those who undermine key democratic norms,' Pollak said. As the U.S. Congress moves closer to passing the bill, South Africa faces a crossroads in its relationship with the United States. Should the sanctions go ahead, it will signal a significant shift in South Africa's international standing, particularly with the U.S., and potentially mark the beginning of a new phase in its foreign policy, where its support for Palestine and criticism of Western powers takes centre stage. The Star [email protected]
IOL News
7 hours ago
- IOL News
South African Lens: Pakistan's Divorce Laws Leave Women in Financial Limbo
As it stands, Pakistan follows a model where property remains separate unless jointly titled—regardless of a woman's unpaid contributions to the household or her support for her husband's career. This issue has been spotlighted in Pakistan's courts. Image: Supplied In many societies, divorce is not just a personal rupture but a financial reckoning — especially for women. This is starkly true in Pakistan, where the legal system fails to recognise a woman's right to marital property, often leaving divorced wives with little more than the clothes on their backs. For South Africans watching global gender justice trends, Pakistan's legal landscape raises urgent questions about how tradition, law and social norms can entrench inequality in the private sphere. Despite Islam's emphasis on justice and the protection of the vulnerable, Pakistani women who exit a marriage often do so without any claim to assets acquired during the relationship. This is because Pakistan does not currently have legislation that guarantees women a share in property accumulated while married. As it stands, the country follows a model where property remains separate unless jointly titled, regardless of a woman's unpaid contributions to the household or her support for her husband's career. This issue has been spotlighted in Pakistan's courts. The Lahore High Court recently instructed the federal government to consult on a proposed amendment to the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance of 1961. The amendment, initially brought forward by Senator Barrister Syed Ali Zafar, introduces terms such as 'matrimonial asset' and seeks to give women fairer recognition of their contributions. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Next Stay Close ✕ The court's intervention may become a turning point, as public discourse grows around the injustice of women leaving long marriages with nothing, despite having raised children, run households and sacrificed careers. To understand the impact, it helps to look beyond Pakistan's borders. Countries such as Turkey, Malaysia and Morocco — Muslim-majority states like Pakistan—have adopted laws that balance Islamic principles with modern family realities. In Turkey, marital assets are presumed to be jointly owned unless otherwise agreed. Malaysia takes both financial and non-financial contributions into account when dividing property. Morocco's Family Code permits couples to decide beforehand how to share property, with the law recognising joint management during the marriage. These countries demonstrate that religious values and women's rights need not be in conflict. Legal frameworks can uphold the dignity and equality of both spouses, particularly when marriages dissolve. Currently, Pakistan's system mirrors what legal scholars call a pure separate property regime. Under this model, property belongs only to the person who earned or acquired it. There is no assumption that marriage creates an economic partnership, and courts generally require strict proof of ownership. This often disadvantages women who have worked in the home or made indirect contributions, as they lack titles or formal income records. South Africa, by contrast, provides multiple options when couples marry, including community of property, which assumes equal ownership of assets acquired during the marriage. This legal approach acknowledges that both spouses contribute to the financial foundation of the household, even if in different ways. South African courts, when dividing property, also take into account each partner's needs, contributions and the duration of the marriage. It is a system far more aligned with the complex social reality of marriage than Pakistan's outdated laws. The cost of inaction in Pakistan is high. Women who divorce often lose access to shelter and income. Even where they have invested years in managing the home or caring for children, the law offers no recourse. Many end up dependent on their families or feel pressured into remarriage for economic survival. This perpetuates gendered cycles of poverty and limits women's agency. Pakistan has ratified the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW), which requires states to ensure equality in marriage and family relations, including property rights. CEDAW's guidance calls for equal access to marital assets. Other Muslim-majority countries have made strides toward compliance. Tunisia and Iran, for instance, have introduced property-sharing rules that acknowledge both partners' roles in a marriage. Pakistan, however, remains out of step. Legal reform is not only a technical matter. It is about recognising that women are equal partners in family life, deserving of financial security when that partnership ends. Amending the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance to define and protect matrimonial property would help courts provide more consistent, fair outcomes. It would also signal that Pakistan is serious about its commitments to gender equality, both to its citizens and the global community. For South Africans, watching this debate unfold is a chance to reflect on how far we have come and how far others still need to go. In a world where women's rights are constantly under pressure, the battle for fairness within the family is as important as any public policy reform. Pakistan stands at a fork in the road. One path leads to continued injustice and economic hardship for women. The other leads to fairness, dignity and the recognition of women's work — paid or unpaid—as valuable and deserving of protection. The choice, now, is in the hands of lawmakers.
Daily Maverick
8 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
National Dialogue will be meaningless without honest leaders, warns Mbeki
The National Dialogue, which will be held in three weeks, aims to foster national unity and develop shared solutions to South Africa's pressing challenges. As South Africa prepares for the National Dialogue, with an estimated price tag of R700-million, former President Thabo Mbeki warned that without capable leadership, the process risked being meaningless. 'What will come out of that National Dialogue will need honest, capable hands with integrity to implement what people have said,' said Mbeki. He was giving a keynote address at UDM leader Bantu Holomisa's 70th birthday celebration in Sandton, Johannesburg, on Saturday night. In recent years, Mbeki has been critical of the ANC, speaking about what he refers to as a decline in ethical leadership and the growing problem of corruption in the party. On Saturday, however, he toned the criticism down, saying that although he had views about ANC leaders, he was not free to mention them by name. He admitted that he, too, was part of the broader problem and anticipated that this would come up during the dialogue. 'They [South Africans] will say uncomfortable truths about us. 'You were President, and look what a mess you have created in the country.' And this is therefore what needs to be done in order to respect the people and implement what they have discussed: you need a particular kind of leader. I am not free to talk about our leaders by name.' The National Dialogue aims to foster national unity and develop shared solutions to South Africa's pressing challenges, including failing public services, high unemployment, rising crime, corruption, food inflation and economic stagnation. It starts with a National Convention on 15 August, which will set the agenda for the broader dialogue. The dialogue has been widely criticised by political parties and ordinary citizens, some of whom have argued that these are not just topics for debate but their daily realities. They want a concrete plan to lead the country out of crisis. One of the the parties that has rejected the National Dialogue is the EFF. Addressing President Cyril Ramaphosa in Parliament two weeks ago, the party's Nontando Nolutshungu said it was not the people of South Africa who had wrecked state-owned enterprises, failed to create jobs and allowed drugs to destroy young people. She pointed to the ANC's performance in the 2024 elections. 'The people have spoken, and you don't need R700-million to repeat the message they gave you at the ballots in 2024,' said Nolutshungu. The uMkhonto Wesizwe party's John Hlophe said the ANC sought to use the National Dialogue as part of its election campaign ahead of the 2026 local government polls. 'Let me tell the people of South Africa what it really is: it is not a dialogue for them, it is an ANC election campaign funded by taxpayers' money. 'Mr Ramaphosa, you lead a broken ANC: a party with the lowest membership in decades, a party that has lost key metros, a party that has become a mere shadow of its once proud self. Branches are non-existent, communities are leaderless, and the people have lost faith,' said Hlophe. Last month, the leader of the DA, John Steenhuisen, announced that his party had withdrawn its support for the National Dialogue, citing Ramaphosa's failure to act against officials accused of corruption, some of whom were members of the Cabinet. 'It is clear that this dialogue will be nothing more than a waste of time and money to distract from the ANC's failures. This explains why President Ramaphosa and the ANC are so obsessed with it,' said Steenhuisen. 'It is an electioneering ploy, at taxpayer expense, to gloss over the serious crises that the ANC has plunged South Africa into. The dialogue also has no constitutional standing whatsoever to take or impose decisions.' Responding to the criticism, Ramaphosa said people must ask themselves: 'Do we want to break or do we want to rebuild?' The National Dialogue will be led by the Eminent Persons Group, made up of 31 prominent South Africans, including business leaders, former MPs, academics, athletes, actors, and traditional and spiritual leaders. Some of those in the group are Springbok captain Siya Kolisi, Miss South Africa 2024 Mia le Roux, the leader of the Zion Christian Church, Bishop Barnabas Lekganyane, and the award-winning actor John Kani. Mbeki wants the dialogue to be a 'genuine' one. 'Let the people get together and say this is the South Africa we want,' he said. DM
