Ramaphosa's Turn. Ralph Mathekga

League president, Bathabile Dlamini, was kept on but moved to a ministerial position where she can do little damage. In this cabinet reshuffle, Ramaphosa managed to yield to the internal logic of the ANC, which required that he retain unpopular ministers, while at the same time he listened to the broader society and appointed credible ministers in key government departments. It’s a win-win situation. This is what Ramaphosa has to do throughout his leadership whenever key issues are concerned.

      If the ANC engages in conflict with the broader society regarding the moral basis of its leadership and justification for its decisions, then Ramaphosa can serve as a mediator by giving each side an opportunity to make its case. This will require that he be seen as a fair arbiter between society and the ANC. He cannot use his position as the president of the country to undermine the ANC as that will have a detrimental impact on his tenure as president of the party. On the other hand, Ramaphosa is expected by the broader society and especially by the private sector to use his position as president of the ANC to manage the party and moderate its distaste for the values held in the broader society.

      This points to a type of leadership that is focused on managing crises instead of pursuing a vision. In managing the expectations of the ANC and that of society and allowing for “fair play”, Ramaphosa will have to be indecisive on contentious issues, particularly those that pit the ANC against the broader society. It is known that Ramaphosa has taken a cautious position regarding such radical policies as expropriation of land without compensation. In this way he has straddled the middle road and sent out a message that, even while endorsing the EFF’s parliamentary motion in this regard, he can be trusted to manage the process and ensure that the ANC does not go overboard in implementing the land policy. This is the leadership style in which indecisiveness appears strategic. The ultimate goal is not to lead the country to the land of milk and honey, but to manage conflict. Perhaps that is what South Africa needs at this stage: a president who acts as referee in an ongoing battle between society and the ANC. In this way, Ramaphosa’s main job is to restrain the ANC in its tendency to drift further from society. By allowing him to do this job, the ANC will be rewarded by the votes that Ramaphosa will help the party obtain from the broader society. This does not mean that South Africa will turn the corner on corruption; instead, it means that the country will remain corrupt, but at the same time be functional as a democracy, much like Turkey or Russia.

      Leading South Africa in the post-Zuma era is a balancing act which requires the ability to appreciate small gains instead of aiming high and falling hard. In his first act as South Africa’s crisis management supremo, Ramaphosa navigated between the wishes of the broader society and the preferences of the ANC on the matter of Zuma’s exit from power. I will explain this point further in the next chapter, which focuses on how Ramaphosa has to manage yet another crisis, this one involving the ANC’s alliance partners.