CAMBRIDGE LETTER
Two faces of democracy
BILL KIRKMAN
|
Contrasting pictures of hope and despair in South Africa and the UK…
|
Photo: AFP
Smooth transition: Jacob Zuma has a young admirer.
In April 1961, Dr. Hendrik Verwoerd, the deeply racist President of South Africa at the height of the apartheid era, announced in London the withdrawal of South Africa from the Commonwealth. The decision was in effect to forestall his country’s expulsion. Those observing South Africa at the time (and I was doing so, as a journalist) could see little hope that the country would move to any kind of democratic system in the foreseeable future. The picture was one of profound gloom.
As everyone knows, three decades later there was a dramatic change. Nelson Mandela was released from incarceration on Robben Island. In 1994 elections were held — in which all were able to vote, regardless of race or colour. The African National Congress won a resounding victory. Following a short period of coalition government, in which the ANC and the largely Afrikaner Nationalists shared power, Nelson Mandela became the country’s first black President — and very quickly an iconic and much respected figure in his own country and round the world.
South Africa has just had another election. The ANC has retained power, but with a smaller majority, and Jacob Zuma, a controversial figure, has become President.
In London a few days ago I was present at the Royal Commonwealth Society at a lecture given by Mr. F.W. de Klerk, the former President of South Africa, who moved the country, and his fellow Afrikaners, out of apartheid, working closely with Nelson Mandela. The lecture was chaired by Baroness Scotland (who is black). The South African High Commissioner was present. Mr. de Klerk spoke positively about the political situation in his country, describing the elections as being “as free and fair as those of any other constitutional democracy”.
He was not uncritical. He commented, for example, that, disappointingly, voters continued to cast their votes overwhelmingly according to race rather than political principle. He reminded his audience that almost 50 per cent of South Africans live in poverty. He was under no illusion about the huge problems faced by the incoming government, and drew attention to the weaknesses, as well as the strengths, of Jacob Zuma.
All that said, he ended his lecture on a positive note, declaring that he was no “Afro-pessimist”, and asserting his belief that Zuma will “make the right choices — and that he will confound the prophets of doom”.
Success story
It was a remarkable lecture, remarkable above all for both content and context. Such a lecture, by such a man, would have been inconceivable even 20 years ago, as would the elections which were its subject. It was, in short, a most encouraging reminder of democracy successfully working.
The contrast with the current situation in Britain is depressing. In the course of two weeks, revelations about the gross abuse by many Members of Parliament of their expenses system have provoked a huge, and wholly understandable, eruption of fury among the public. It has been made worse by the attempts made by MPs to prevent information from being revealed. The abuses came to light only when the Daily Telegraph obtained details, and published them.
The effect of the revelations has been cataclysmic. Trust in politicians is at an all time low. Trust in Parliament has similarly been destroyed, because of the manifest failure of the parliamentary authorities to impose and insist on ethical and moral behaviour by MPs. Such is the public anger that little distinction is made between those who have abused the system, and those who have not.
Lost trust
The Sunday Telegraph put it succinctly: “It is no exaggeration to say that the revelations on MPs’ expenses have come close to destroying the trust between voters and those for whom they vote”.
The UK is in the midst of a major crisis which has struck at the very foundations of democracy. The big question now is what the politicians, and in particular the leaders of Britain’s political parties, will do about it. If the steps they take are to have the slightest chance of succeeding, they must be both rapid and radical.
It is, frankly, difficult to be optimistic, particularly since this scandal has come so soon after the scandal of huge bonuses paid to bankers as a reward for incompetence and failure.
The de Klerk lecture did, however, offer me a glimmer of hope that the situation may be retrievable. Political change in South Africa was achieved, even though most people thought it impossible. The question now is whether the UK can achieve the impossible at our time of crisis.
Bill Kirkman is an Emeritus Fellow of Wolfson College Cambridge, UK. Email him at: bill.kirkman@gmail.com
Printer friendly
page
Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
Magazine
