admin
Ironically, she is an international relations adviser to President Zuma, who should be spearheading efforts to cement relations between the two revolutionary parties, instead of mudding the waters.
What makes her recent attacks on Zanu-PF more regrettable is the fact that she is the spokesperson of the South African facilitation team charged with ensuring the implementation of the Global Political Agreement in Zimbabwe.
Zulu was quoted in The Sunday Times of 21 October 2012, in a front page story titled “Zanu ties to Malema a big worry for SA.”
In the article, she said that Zanu-PF should not entertain expelled ANC Youth League Chairman, Julius Malema. Malema was expelled from the ANC for allegedly bringing the name of the ANC into disrepute and has since been critical of President Zuma. Of late, he has been calling for the nationalisation of the mines as a way to resolve the widespread demonstrations that South Africa is grappling with in the wake of the Marikana massacres that claimed the lives of 34 mine workers.
Zulu was quoted saying that the ANC would never host an individual expelled by Zanu-PF. “It’s a problem when you have individuals — because it’s not Zanu-PF as a collective – who begin to think, ‘Nice South Africa also looks bad.’ It’s unacceptable because we would never do that, we would never entertain somebody who Zanu-PF has come out to say,’ We don’t need this person because this person is weakening our organisation, destroying our organisation’,” Zulu said.
While Zulu is entitled in her personal capacity, to spew any damaging trash about Zanu-PF, her twin roles of foreign policy adviser and spokesperson of the facilitation team demand due caution to be taken by her when making public statements.
The question is in what capacity was Zulu speaking? What did she intend to achieve? And to what end?
Zanu-PF has no place to interfere with the internal politics in the ANC, in as much as the ANC should not in Zanu-PF affairs. Secondly, Zanu-PF respects the ANC, given the rich historical ties that bind the two parties. As a result, it is buffling why Zulu chose to attack Zanu-PF for allegedly hosting Malema on his recent visit to Zimbabwe. For starters, Malema visited Zimbabwe in his personal capacity. He came not at the invitation of Zanu-PF, but his friends, who are Zanu-PF youths. Malema’s private visit was meant to attend the wedding of two Zanu-PF cadres, Tendai Wenyika and Mike Gava.
That is why even the privately owned Financial Gazette of 18 — 24 October 2012, in its own twisted way, led with the story “Zanu-PF bigwigs ignore Malema.” While this is a vindication that Zanu-PF never entertained Malema, the story is twisted in the sense that no one was ignored, rather Malema was on a private visit and had no brief to meet Zanu-PF. It is important for Zulu as an international adviser to know that, Zanu-PF is an institution, not individuals. Thus, as an institution, Zanu-PF never invited Malema. Consequently, her utterances are not only misplaced but irresponsible.
This explains why there was no diplomatic tiff when President Zuma and his estranged wife, Nkosazana Dhlamini Zuma, who was then South African Foreign Affairs Minister, visited Bulawayo to dine with Zanu-PF’s nemesis, MDC-N leader, Professor Welshman Ncube, at the wedding of their children. Prof. Ncube’s son married Zuma’s daughter. The Zumas visited Zimbabwe, not in their official capacities but as in-laws to Prof Ncube, period. Zanu-PF never found offence with this, despite its differences with the MDC-N. The point here is that, Zulu needs to distinguish between official and private visits, so that she does not get her legs in a twist on non-events.
The question then is where one draws the line between official and private visits. Zimbabwe is a democracy that values freedom of association. Malema is free to visit Zimbabwe as much as Zulu or President Zuma can visit Zimbabwe. Surely, it would be interference of the highest order, if Zanu-PF had to select on behalf of Gava and Wenyika, on who they should and should not invite to their wedding. The two lovebirds have worked with Malema since they were in the respective Youth Leagues of the ANC and Zanu-PF and became friends. It therefore boggles the mind how Zulu found it prudent to find fault with Malema’s private visit. Moreso, given that Zanu-PF as a party never held any meetings with him nor invited him.
On the other hand, the insinuation by Zulu that Zanu-PF was celebrating the unfortunate and regrettable developments in South Africa emanating from the Marikana massacres is manifestly irresponsible and malicious. Zulu should focus on playing her official roles to the letter and spirit than to engage in side shows that serve no one, but only damage sound relations between the ANC and Zanu-PF.
The fact that the calls by Malema to nationalise the mines and land in South Africa resonate with what is happening in Zimbabwe, surely is not Zanu-PF’s problem. Neither should Zanu-PF apologise for it. If Malema’s crusade is inspired by the highly successful land reform programme and the budding indigenisation programme, it should not miff Zulu. No one in Zanu-PF lectured Malema to influence him to embark on that path.
When the ANC Secretary General, Gwede Mantashe, visited Zimbabwe in 2011 he felt Zanu-PF was influencing Malema’s radical thinking. Back then, Zanu-PF Secretary for Administration, Didymus Mutasa, told the media that “We talked about the youths [with Mantashe]. They [the ANC]) blamed us saying Malema speaks like you and thinks like you. We told them that we are not influencing him. If he speaks like Zanu-PF, that is the way he likes to speak, we cannot change him. If he thinks like us that is up to him.”
Zanu-PF Politburo member, Professor Jonathan Moyo, in an article in The Sunday Mail took a swipe at Zulu for abusing her twin roles to lampoon Zanu-PF. He wrote: “The point should be made once again that Lindiwe Zulu is supposed to be the spokesperson of the facilitation team and not a Sadc spokesperson and certainly not an anti Zanu-PF spokesperson which she has clearly become through the proregime change media that now routinely use her as their reckless mouthpiece.” This followed Zulu’s unsolicited posturing following the decision by Zanu-PF’s Politburo not to accept the election roadmap timelines recommended by GPA negotiators.
Zulu is best advised to shut up given her twin roles and shelve her self evident hatred for Zanu-PF for the good of the long standing historical liberation history that the ANC and Zanu-PF share.
Online Reporter