South African President Jacob Zuma was given a warm welcome by Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II, upon his state visit to Britain on Wednesday, with a Horse Guards’ Parade followed by a carriage procession to Buckingham Palace.
It was a royal spectacular with all the tradition, pomp and ceremony that only the British seem to manage with such aplomb that it somehow seems appropriate rather than over the top.
Zuma was met by members of the royal family, together with Prime Minister Gordon Brown and Foreign Secretary David Miliband, with no effort spared to ensure that the visitors understood that the visit was considered important to the host country.
On Thursday the serious business begins with discussions focusing on Zimbabwe and nationalisation, along with trade, climate change and the upcoming global non-proliferation conference in the United States. Undoubtedly South Africa’s hosting of the 2010 World Cup will also be on the agenda.
In terms of the sage words of advice of South Africa’s main opposition party, the Democratic Alliance, the time has come for Zuma to forget about the nonsense and demonstrate that as well as being a populist, he can also be a statesman of the highest order.
Of course, this may prove rather difficult with the current media storm in Britain focusing on the president’s polygamy and the recent love-child scandal, and with Zuma hitting back and accusing the papers of colonial attitudes.
And as always, the African National Congress Youth League was up in arms over the treatment being meted out to Zuma, claiming that “the British media is one that is characterised and defined by the worst form of barbarism, backwardness and racism”.
So no change there.
Of course as usual they have failed to factor in the way that former president Nelson Mandela has been hailed by the British media and the iconic status he has achieved in that country. Moreover the way in which former president Thabo Mbeki was received and the state visit laid on for Zuma himself.
Accordingly the issue, as far as the British media are concerned, is not the fact that Zuma is black, but rather his unfortunate tendency to put his foot in it before giving careful consideration to the consequences of his actions. In this regard, it is the negative effect he has had on the ANC’s own critical HIV/Aids campaign and the continuing failure to turn South Africa away from becoming a kleptocracy.
In this regard, too, the president has received just as much criticism, if not more, over these issues in the local media as he has in the British press.
In terms thereof the time has come for Zuma to accept that he is the president of South Africa and that he has a duty to this country, and even the region, to maintain and project the highest standards.
That means allowing criticism to wash over him without retaliating and getting down to the business at hand.
It serves no one’s interests for South Africa to respond to legitimate criticism with nonsensical generalisations like “these British racists continue to live in a dreamland and sadly believe that Africans are still their colonial subjects, with no values and principles”.
If South Africa has accepted that Zuma is a polygamous president and the British believe that this is unacceptable to their approach to culture, it does not make them racists. It smacks of an intolerance and a fair degree of arrogance in the case of certain journalists, but that they have the right to that opinion is indisputable.
Lest we forget there are many South Africans who aren’t wild about polygamy either.
President Zuma has it all to do, and if he emerges from this state visit with tangible success in the form of strengthening the ties with one of South Africa’s major trading partners, then he will be doing the job that he has been elected for.
That is the way to answer his critics.
We must all just remember that Jacob Zuma’s biggest asset is the fact that he is not Thabo Mbeki.
His replacement’s biggest asset will probably be that he is not Jacob Zuma.
I truly wish some from the ANC and and most of the ANCYL leadership would abide by the quotation (I think from Mark Twain if I remember correctly) “Better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than to open it and resolve all doubt”. It really is embarassing when non sensical, ill informed, inflamatory comments flow from the mouths of people who are meant to be an example to the people of South Africa in general and the youth in particular. Very concerning!
It is not that Zuma is polygamous – the Brits have many polygamous pals like the Arabs (ever since Lawrence of Arabia made them famous).
It is not because they look down on blacks – the Brits and the Missionaries established the Homelands (including Swaziland, Lesotho and Botswana ) to protect black culture and land. And the Brits were the forerunners of the banning of the slave trade and the freeing of the slaves (decades in advance of America and Brazil).
It is because Zuma pretends it is cultural – and it is NOT Zulu culture at all to have babies by mistresses out of marriage.
The British Royal Family know that – they are friends with Buthelezi. Laurens van der Post, Prince Charles’ godfather, called Buthelezi the best staesman in South Africa during the apartheid days,and the Zulus the best warriors in Africa.
This entire state visit is an embarrassment, a desperate attempt by the Labour Government to win a bit of credibility by bamboozling Zuma into signing away some of South Africa’s assets. That’s why the Tory press is smearing Zuma; if the Tories stood to gain by it they would be covering up for him. But the whole thing remained shameful. Zuma should never have gone.
By the way, did Mbeki ever have to ride in Liz’s silly chariot? I don’t recall him doing so.
Everyone is trying to tie in the love child, and sexual relations out of wedlock with poligamy. This should not be. If one follows the poligamy culture so be it, but it does not sanction relations and children out of wedlock. A polygamist still has to marry (traditional or otherwise) to indulge in these activities. Our president did not, therefore he has no moral standards, cultural or otherwise.
If he only remembers that the media there cannot be bullied or brushed aside and that people there are not as gullible as the masses here, he may get it right. Arrogance and rhetoric will relegate him to just a typical African leader.
so it’s ok for the arabs to have wives and harems at this point in time and be held in high esteem.the british welfare system is currently supporting polygamus muslim families.families have disintergrated and play second fiddle to homosexual relations;the same people try to turn around moralise to africans for maintaining a particular lifestyle.and yes tshaka zulu himself had many wives.
@ Traps
This is a genuine and sincere question – how on earth do you expect a person with a Std 4 education (jacob Zuma) to have meaningful “discussions focusing on Zimbabwe and nationalisation, along with trade, climate change and the upcoming global non-proliferation conference in the United States.”
Many people regarded George Bush (who has an MBA from Harvard)as a bit of an idiot / simpleton.
What does that make JZ?
Would you allow him to complete your income tax return?
Would you?
Thought not, but he’s OK to run a country, right?
Apologies for being rude about our president, but “it’s my culture!”
The Poms have the ability to make one feel good and stab a knife in the back on the way out. A meeting between two parties, miles apart in culture, can never be productive.
If both parties are trying to do some damage control, the agenda’s will not meet but -with a little spin- individual agenda’s could be served in the process.
“…Arrogance and rhetoric will relegate him to just a typical African leader.” Wich is, indeed, what he is, with all the inabilities including that of not being able to keep it in his trousers.
In the words of English-speaking five-year-olds all over the world: Statesmanship is a very long word, can you spell ‘it’?
And since you wrote this Traps: ‘South Africa is not about to Nationalise mines…IN THE NEAR FUTURE’(stoy on Reuters, Mining Weekly, etc). Bet that has the investors begging to sign on the dotted line! Look where land reform is…bad timing that, too. We now have a smash and grab bill entering parliament…
I’m beginning to see Zuma rather like the bull with a ring through his nose. He can be led, but I wouldn’t send him off into a big field alone, you don’t know who he’ll butt.
I think he wouls be the wiser for a few mentoring sessions. Any offers? I doubt he spent the sort of money on his own personal branding that Mandela and his first government did!
I can’t agree more with that Zuma could have handled the critisism much better than he did. May he should really fire his spin doctors as they seem to have no clue about how to handle critisism. Anyway, he probably won’t fire them as he hired them not because they know the job but because they are his supporters.
By the way, Zuma can learn even from his enemies like Mbeki who never responded to critisism thus avoiding Rose Morrow’s reference of Mark Twain. When he (Mbeki) did, he always tried to be tact about it even at the worst times. I guess education is important when you’re a leader, at least of a progressive democracy like SA.
I suspect the visit to the Queen and Gordon Brown involved some talk of BAE and the West’s acceptance of massive bribes (called fines) to hush up bribery investigations. SA didn’t get any of the BAE bribe money and Zuma is probably feeling a bit left out. After all he almost went to jail because of those colonial arms dealing bastards. Surely he’s entitled to some moola too.
And now that BAE has agreed to pay the fines its business as usual I suppose. Tank anyone?
Shaka had wives? I dont recall that.
Traps, I do not agree. The British Media followed our Media in saying disgusting things about our own President.Britain never rolled out the curtesy carpet and called their media to order.The assumption was that they were permited to do so.Neither Gordon Brown nor the Queen displayed disdain of the conduct.Someone had to step in and call order!Rightfully Zuma interpreted this thing correctly and responded in a way that answered the attacks.it is easy to feel sorry for the British from Africans. We are used to being called anything and we smiled. Not with Zuma!! The Buck stops there!They got the message.All of you were quiet and still are like during Apartheid:We were not supposed to even say eishhhhh!No more.
The British have over the years succeeded in indoctrinating South Africans through the education system, press media which has completely adopted the British culture, language, etc. If you had slept for 100 years and woke up today, you would be forgiven to think that South Africa is still a British colony.
The intolerance level towards anything which tends to deviate from the English culture is very alarming.
African values like Ubuntu, respect for elders, helping your poor neighbour have all been replaced by the robust freedom of speech, individualism, materialism and demeaning and undermining those in authority.
Guy
What country in the world has not been colonised?
What country in the world does not speak a colonial language as its main language?
Other than China (which has about 500 languages – which is why there are more people speaking English in China than in the USA)
India has over 1000 languages – which is why their constitution is written in English.
I can respect the Queen not their press and Gordon Brown.JZ did us proud by putting them in their place in public.He could have withdrawn his visit. Let us see what China is offering and we then close that door.We will solve the Zim issue well on our own and their sanctions will be null and void.They want MDC-T their stooge.We cannot do that.The worst thing is what Guy refers too.Mbeki took us there and we are stuck,JZ is taking us back! Welcome home South Africans/Afrikaners!
…and Guy, African values are a myth, or way over emphasised rather. Ubuntu is a modern concept that struggles against the reality of a violent society that practices witch-killing (care for their elderly), muti murders and mutilations, tribal warring and factionalism, lionising criminals etc. Not to mention gender inequalities and crimes against children.
Where have you been?
Sihle
Forget China. We belong to Gadaffi of Libya, whose imperialist ambitions have made him fund most of Africa’s civil wars and crooked leaders.
Guy
Gadaffi of Libya is a much greater threat – he wants to be emperor of Africa. China has interests in the whole world – SA is small beer to them.
Calerisi writes that most of Africa’s wars are funded by Gadaffi.
JZ may well “belong” to Gadaffi of Libya just as he “belongs” to lots of other people and groups such as the Shaiks and the ANCYL, et al – does that mean South Africa belongs to Gadaffi? The man doesn’t have much support in Africa for his being “Emperor of United States of Africa” – I think saying RSA belongs to Gadaffi is an overstatement in the extreme. If Africa in general and South Africa in particular “belonged to Gadaffi” then I would think he would get his way quite easily. Instead he didn’t even get a second term of office with the AU! Most view him with amusement at best and as a despotic megalomaniacat worst – he has no power in RSA – althought with JZ possibly owing him – who knows?
Another thing – many of Africa’s wars have been funded by America under various presidents!
Shaka specifically did not want heirs to his throne, he did not have any wives for that reason. He had concubines but none were permitted to bear children. Legend has it that his lifelong partner Phampatha bore a child but it had to be smuggled out or risk being killed by Shaka.
@Lyndall Beddy
Fund is such an interesting term. Would you care to calculate for us his average percentage contribution? As an example, let us take Idi Amin, and compare the amounts of money that he received from Saudi, Israel, and Libya, then we can move on to the next war, and calculate the percentage of Libya’s contribution, and so on, then average those percentages.
Alternatively, take all the war spending in African wars, and calculate his financial contribution. I’m looking forward to seeing your calculation(s) and source(s).