By Pinky Khoabane
The Democratic Alliance (DA)’s regime change campaign failed once again this past Thursday.
It was always expected that unless there was a major split in the ANC, the chances of the DA and the EFF, with 22% and 6.5% respectively, could never have pushed through the motion of impeachment in the National Assembly even with the latest theatrics involving demands for the ANC to vote in a secret ballot.
In their desperation to unseat the President, the opposition had pleaded for ANC MPs to vote in line with their conscience. But why would ANC MPs, mandated by 62% of the population in 2014, assist the opposition in going against the wishes of the electorate?
The lesson, which the opposition doesn’t seem to be getting is that the ANC, unlike the Economic Freedom Front, will not assist it in taking power. The DAEFF project will have to go to the polls and win elections there.
The other lesson the DA must learn is that when the ANC publicly criticises itself, it doesn’t mean it will allow the opposition, more so the DA, to gang-up against it and effect regime change. On the contrary, the DA’s interference in internal processes of the ANC has helped bring-about unity albeit short-lived.
There are many disgruntled members of the ANC, and the local government elections of August 2016 have sent a clear message to that effect but the DA should never think those ANC faithful will help it usurp power from a legitimately and democratically elected party. As the DA saw in those elections and in the vote of no confidence, ANC faithful would rather not vote than vote for or with the DA.
Buoyed by the preliminary findings of a hurriedly-put-together State Capture report and utterances by ANC-insiders like Jackson Mthembu and Mathole Motshekga, the DA thought it could use them to overthrow a legitimately and democratically elected president.
The ANC has emphatically said that only its branches can overturn the mandate given to the person they choose to lead the movement.
But beyond everything else, the ANC can see straight through the DA.
IT was left to the Minister of Home Affairs, Malusi Gigaba to put it to the DA what they represent. He came out guns blazing: “Here we are again for a 05th frivolous attempt by the opposition since 2014 to win by stealth and cunning battles they had lost on the ground…..
“For people who claim to respect democracy, the judiciary, rule of law and fairness to act in this fashion which demonstrates, on the contrary, their disdain for these fundamental Constitutional principles and values which our nation holds so dear betrays their disingenuity…
“If the opposition believed in fairness and the rule of law, they would have welcomed the Public Protector’s Report in toto and instead of jumping the gun to call for a no confidence vote in the President, on the basis of an inconclusive report, they should have waited patiently for the Commission of Inquiry and what it will find.
“However, the fact of the matter is that such patience does not exist among those eager to dispose of the ANC in order to defend racial privilege and supremacy.”
But it was on the matter of the true battle in South Africa, an issue some of us have been making since the reshuffling of the finance ministers late last year – that Gigaba rammed into the DA. Our contention has always been that there’s a serious battle for South Africa’s economy wherein whites are desperately trying to hang-on to the wealth against a president who’s ruffling feathers by looking to the East and BRICS for partnerships.
“The truth is that there is a bitter struggle in South Africa between the former oppressors and those whom they had oppressed, for the right and power to determine the political direction of this country as well as the ownership of its economic resources.
“Throughout its existence, the system of white supremacy had been predicated on this very notion that in order to plunder South Africa’s natural resources, the white minority had to have the exclusive monopoly of political power in its hands.
“At best, this motion is merely about political point scoring, but at worst, it is characteristic of the abhorrent ploys by the global empire and their local political hoodlums under guises of good governance and defending the Constitution and the rule of law to steal political power in order to defend, protect and advance their exclusive economic interests….
“The CIA used this strategy in Iran in 1951 following a decision by the then Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh to nationalise Iranian oil, thus taking it away from a British company that was exploiting it and the Iranian people….
“The modus operandi remains the same, driven by a cartel of global governments, local politicians, big global and domestic capital and corporations.
At its heart, this is about the commercial interests of the rich and powerful who control the media and pay off local political actors, journalists and others in pursuit of their depraved agenda….
Mossadegh’s crime in Iran was to reclaim their oil; Torijos’ crime in Panama was to reclaim the Panama Canal, Roldos’s crime in Ecuador was to defend their oil, and so were the crimes of Muammar Gaddafi in Libya and Saddam Husein in Iraq.
In our case, our extensive mineral wealth, BRICS and the prospective nuclear power station in South Africa lie at the heart of the regime-change offensive we are subjected to.
Accepting this agenda and not opposing it to the very death will be our biggest folly”.
And then this parting shot:
“We will oppose this vote, not because, as we have said it, we take lightly the issues of corruption, integrity and transparency, but because we cannot join the regime change and economic plunder campaign of your global and domestic masters.
You may be their puppets, but we are not!”
Here’s Gigaba’s full speech