Should Mandela have done more?

Should Mandela have done more?

By Moses Magadza

Windhoek (Written Dec 6, 2013) - By now word has reached even the most far-flung corners of the earth. Nelson Mandela, South Africa’s Founding President and world-acclaimed anti-apartheid icon, is no more. 

South African President Jacob Zuma confirmed that President Mandela, who was 95, died on Thursday evening (December 5, 2013) in Johannesburg. President Zuma hailed Mandela as South Africa’s “greatest son” and said the former President was now “resting … at peace”.

As the world’s citizens come to terms with Mandela’s passing on, focus has once again fallen onto his legacy.

There can be no denying the fact that Nelson Mandela represented the last breed of the African continent’s value-driven politicians who catalysed change in South Africa using all manner of means. Most importantly, Mandela was indeed the longest serving political prisoner on the continent in recent history. That we cannot take from him; he was an icon of resistance against oppression and racialism in any form.

In many respects Mandela was a model of reconciliation. He was in a rare class that arguably includes Namibia’s Founding President Sam Nujoma and Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe in terms of embracing and successfully bringing about reconciliation in an environment in which no-one would have anticipated it possible. 

Imagine someone rising in Afghanistan or in Iraq and bringing about reconciliation with the west that allows former American President George W. Bush to take a beer in Kabul without being lynched…

Viewed in this light, Mandela’s was a revolutionary form of reconciliation that he brought to bear on our accursed continent.

Mandela is to be credited, also for introducing modern era parliamentary democracy in Africa. From South Africa’s independence in 1994 it has been possible to change successive presidents without any bloodshed or any complaints from any quarter of rigging or malpractice. One can argue that by so doing, Mandela provided inspiration for both people in leadership and aspiring leaders. He served his term and left power without having to be ejected or rejected by the people. When he relinquished power, he sat back and let the new rulers run the show without interference. 

The beneficiaries from his struggles and his brand of leadership have been across the board; encompassing the young and old across gender. Mandela even allowed a discussion about gay and lesbian rights in South Africa to a point where now South Africa allows same sex marriages. To that extent Mandela was for all-inclusiveness and a plural society.

With regard to doing something for women, Mandela ensured that there was some parity and equality among the sexes. If one looks at the African National Congress (ANC) which he led, one realises that it represented women very broadly and perhaps thanks to the foundation Mandela and his administration put, women in South Africa hold very key positions in government and industry. South Africa today has one of the highest proportions of women in parliament in Africa. In terms of the cabinet, the country has a substantial number of women holding ministerial and other senior positions.

It is difficult to say what Mandela did for women in terms of economic development. However, given that the national cake in South Africa does not seem to be too male dominated, it can safely be said that Mandela tried to lay the foundation for equal access to resources in the country.

It is also hard to say at the drop of a hat what kind of laws came into effect during Nelson Mandela’s tenure and to what extent they promoted the welfare of women and children. Nevertheless, with respect to access to education, Mandela and his administration did well and today female students are well represented in the country’s institutions of higher education. This can be seen as a major achievement.

Mandela’s many positive legacies notwithstanding, some people find it ironic that with his seemingly big heart for reconciliation and forgiveness, he was unable to forgive his wife of many years and compatriot in the struggle, Winnie Mandela, for her alleged shambolic sexual behaviour. It is difficult to marry the two personas of Nelson Mandela. There is a contradiction here.

One of the things that stick out like sore thumbs as one of Mandela’s negative legacies is what can be said to be his selective amnesia. Having walked that often-cited long walk to freedom and come into power in Southern Africa’s biggest economy, he did not do what many would have expected to acknowledge in one way or the other the contribution of the many countries that were battered by pre-independent South Africa in pursuit for the independence of that country. Those countries include Namibia, Mozambique and Zimbabwe.

One would have expected Mandela to have gone an extra mile in the journey that was started by another African called Dr Kwame Nkrumah who famously declared that the independence of Ghana would not be good enough unless and until the rest of Africa was independent and that Pan Africanism as an ideal was to be pursued, or words to that effect.

Accordingly, one of Nelson Mandela’s negative legacies is that South Africa is today to a large extent closed to the rest of Africa. It is more open to white people than to Africans. You are more likely to be required to produce a transit visa in Johannesburg if you are a black person from Africa than if you are coming from Washington. This is one of the legacies of Mandela that are difficult to understand.

One would have expected that Mandela would have been at the frontline of acknowledging support - through bloodshed and economic retardation - by countries that stood by South Africa in its hour of need. Until now there seems to be no plans to show any form of gratitude. The downfall of apartheid did not come merely by Mandela being in prison for 27 years. Many other people and countries – especially the Frontline States – played a major role in South Africans’ struggle.

Prior to his death, Mandela spent a long time in hospital. Few African leaders visited him or said anything substantial about his health. While this trend is difficult to read, one can put it down to respect for his privacy and acknowledging that the end was not too far for the man who once famously said that one of his greatest regrets in life is that he never became the heavyweight boxing champion of the world. 

It seems heads of state and government in Africa followed the example set by America’s President Barack Obama of not being too intrusive into what was essentially a private family matter, particularly when it was common cause that Mandela was critically ill. 

While it is very difficult to judge Mandela on the basis on what he did or did not do while he was President of South Africa mainly because he got into power when EVERYTHING was being set up, the man, even in death, remains a highly polarised subject. It is possible that the debate around his legacy will rage on, even long after he has been laid to rest. –moses.magadza@gmail.com