:: Politics 360 :: Your politics are only as good as your network

Another Look at the Dinkins Administration, and Not by Giuliani

Greg Fawcett — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 07:10:03 +0000

If my recollection is correct, Michael was at the Daily News when we were in the Hall. Always fair minded.

Nice start to the 20th anniversary of the election of the first African-American mayor of NYC. The mayor’s book (written by Peter Knobler) will be published in 2010.

Avatar, Afghanistan and Poisoning the Planet

Greg Fawcett — Wed, 30 Dec 2009 05:54:44 +0000

Avatar is first-rate entertainment, but it is also an allegory.

When the military contractors run amok and attempt to destroy a people and their habitat, I turned to my son and said “the earth will rise up.” He replied “I know Dad. I’ve learned from Native Americans that you have to be connected to the earth.”

In addition to the film’s message about the care of the planet, I believe Cameron’s Avatar is an allegory of conflicts such as those in Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine. The film should have an impact on how we approach these conflicts, but it won’t. The message that people will take from the film is that you truly believe in something if you are willing to go to war for it. Most will miss the message that if we respect cultural traditions and stop exploiting people, cultures and countries, we will find ourselves in far fewer conflicts.

Side note: Sam Worthington did a helluva job carrying the torch, but why does it always have to be a white guy making a story “accessible” to main-stream America? Biko, Mississipi is Burning, Invictus, Dances with Wolves, the history of cinema is littered with these films.

Patrick Gaspard, the White House’s political director, keeps it cool and calm

Greg Fawcett — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 06:36:36 +0000

The Washington Post link.

Good insights into personality and character.

Not enough analysis on why NY and the Northeast have been a focus for Gaspard.

The reporters could have noted that the Northeast is a traditional Democratic Party stronghold. That stronghold is being challenged. Any good general would at least defend against such a challenge.

It would have been instructive to explore if NY State could be of interest because Rudolph Giuliani is the likely Republican nominee? Would the former mayor’s candidacy have any relevance to the White House?

SOUTH AFRICA: THE TREMOR, THE RAPTURE AND THE AFTERMATH

David Maphumzana Sibeko Jr. — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 18:04:54 +0000

The political changes that have taken place in South Africa over the past year have been nothing short of colossal. The primary evidence of that change has come from the shift in political power on a national government level and a concerted effort on behalf of those now in power to change and transform the manner in which South Africa is governed. The embodiment of that change came with the election of the charismatic Jacob Zuma as the state President earlier in 2009. Mr. Zuma’s election as head of state came with a tacit understanding from the electorate that voted him into office that he would be a breath of fresh air from his predecessor, former President Thabo Mbeki. A total contrast in political styles and personality from Mr. Mbeki, Jacob Zuma consistently used his refined people skills on a public that generally welcomed and embraced him to giving assurance that there was going to be a marked departure from the style of the Mbeki Presidency. The same can be said for his own political party, the African National Congress (ANC). As the President of the party, he possessed an attractive alternative to the Mbeki Presidency, which often alienated people. Mr. Zuma’s ability to successfully woo the public and the ANC is a testament to his political savvy and legendary personal touch, strengths that allowed him to consolidate power on his drive to the Presidency of the ANC and later the country. Credit should be given to Jacob Zuma as an individual for accomplishing this feat as flawlessly as one could expect in present day South Africa. It is a testament to his profound magnetic personality.

Before delving into the events of the past year, one needs to examine the conditions that existed previous to the Zuma Presidency that brought about such drastic change to a young democracy that was once hailed around the world as a beacon of hope for successfully attaining democratic rule after years of abject tyranny, racial oppression and fearsome levels of violence. South Africa also established itself as a shining example of democratic stability on the African continent, an accomplishment that cannot be understated in light of the Africa’s political history of the past half century.

THE FIRST TREMOR, THE ECONOMY AND LEADERSHIP STYLE

To the casual observer, South Africa’s ruling party the ANC had governed successfully for three consecutive terms despite the incredible challenges it faced as the ruling party since attaining power in 1994. The euphoria of the first democratic elections held in1994 that ushered in the iconic Nelson Mandela as the first indigenous African and democratically elected President of the country eventually ebbed into a sober assessment of a fractured nation that had numerous pressing needs. Daunting levels of unemployment and poverty, a crumbling government infrastructure that almost had to be re-invented, dynamic population shifts (both internal and external migration) to the country’s large cities, HIV/Aids and escalating crime levels represented some of the challenges that confronted the new government. Despite all these issues, the ANC was consistently viewed as the only viable political party with the ability to deal with these problems by an overwhelming portion of the population. Successive election victories emphasized their popularity. Madiba (as Mr. Mandela is affectionately known by South Africans) was succeeded by the cerebral Thabo Mbeki as the ANC and state President. A man with a formidable intellect, Mbeki didn’t radiate the same warmth that his legendary predecessor and came across to his fellow citizens as distant and officious, who was aptly described as a technocrat by his colleagues from within his own party and those who dealt with him outside of the confines of the ANC and government. In hindsight, it would have been a difficult act for anyone to follow Madiba as President, but Mbeki certainly did not endear himself to vital centres of power within the ANC nor the population in general with his distant demeanour.

The challenges continued to confront government on a societal level. The same issues that confronted the previous administration remained and eventually seeped into the inner workings of the ANC and become fodder for an erosion of confidence amongst its alliance partners, The South African Communist Party (SACP) and the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU). The internal fissures that jeopardized the alliance began to permeate the ANC. With a number of senior leaders within the ANC holding dual memberships within COSATU and the SACP, disagreements with Mbeki became major issues. The situation deteriorated into questions about the leadership style of Mr. Mbeki within the ruling ANC and about the direction his policies were taking the country as a whole. The most pronounced disagreements in his first term as state President centred on the economic policies of Mr. Mbeki championed. His approach was seen as too cosy to big business underpinned by capitalist philosophies that were out of step with South Africa; they lacked the social emphasis that COSATU and the SACP advocated. The Growth, Employment and Redistribution (GEAR) initiative introduced in Mbeki’s first term as President established the first prominent battle lines within the tripartite alliance. Faced with high levels of unemployment and a policy that didn’t represent an immediate remedy and was opposed by other political parties, GEAR simply couldn’t be sold by the administration as a cure for the poverty that gripped country. Strikes followed and evidence of a blatant animosity toward government policy was championed by COSATU and the SACP. Mbeki’s popularity was beginning to face its first challenge from within the tripartite alliance. The deteriorated relationships within the tripartite alliance would contribute to the sentiment that Mbeki be removed as President of the ANC and the nation.

THE SECOND TREMOR, ZIMBABWE AND QUIET DIPLOMACY

Zimbabwe South Africa’s neighbour to the north was undergoing a startling decay, characterized by a rapidly deteriorating economy, questionable farm invasions by self proclaimed war veterans of Zimbabwe’s armed struggle for liberation, political intolerance from its national government, a judiciary, civil society, clergy and media under siege and increasing numbers of political and economic refugees spilling into South Africa. For the South African government, the situation became a burdensome issue that had a direct impact on South Africa. Zimbabwe’s President Robert Mugabe’s rhetoric had isolated him from the West and an increasing number of countries around the world. An ongoing war of words between the leadership in Harare (Zimbabwe’s capital and seat of power) had deteriorated into a stalemate with the United Kingdom (its former colonizer), Western Europe and the U.S. Negotiations were at a dead end with international bodies such as the United Nations and the Commonwealth looked increasingly bleak at best. The newly formed African Union (AU), formed with the intention of being a more efficient accountable body than its predecessor, The Organisation of African Unity (OAU), along with the Southern African Development Community (SADC), appointed Thabo Mbeki, on behalf of the entire African Community to develop a solution in Zimbabwe. His efforts were challenged almost immediately. Critics internationally and within South Africa felt that Mr. Mbeki’s policy of “Quiet Diplomacy” led to little progress and little more than appeasement of President Robert Mugabe’s government. The official parliamentary opposition in South Africa, The Democratic Alliance (DA) was the most vocal initially within South Africa. The President of the DA, Tony Leon remarked in a speech given in 2003:

We know that the only constant in life is change. But that might seem a rather optimistic attitude in light of the last three years of steady decline in Zimbabwe. The only changes there have been for the worse.

The remarks from the opposition were to be largely expected, but it was the remarks from COSATU’s President Zwelinzimi Vavi that were most damaging to the Quiet Diplomacy pursued by Thabo Mbeki:

“[Mr. Mugabe] is illegitimate. He is a dictator . . . He is already crumbling. He is on his knees . . . We hope that this last push from civil society will help deliver the demands of the people for democracy and development,”

The perceived failure of Quiet Diplomacy represented a watershed moment in the Mbeki Presidency. The tripartite alliance and the ANC signaled that yet another Mbeki policy was not in accordance with the wishes of vital constituencies within the country.

It was not surprising that Zwelinzimi Vavi became one of Jacob Zuma’s most ardent supporters during his march toward Presidency of South Africa and the ANC.

THE THIRD TREMOR, THE DEBATE ON HIV/AIDS

South Africa had earned the unfortunate distinction of having the greatest number of people living with the HIV and dying from AIDS in the world. The devastating impact that the deadly disease has wrought in almost every sector of South African society was appropriately labeled a pandemic by civil society, religious organisations, international bodies and vast portions of the South African public. The poor, people living in rural areas and South African’s viewed to be in the “prime of their lives” were most severely affected. The infection rates and death tolls adversely affected segments of the population essential to the vitality of any nation; civil service, teachers, health workers etc. As a result, mortality rates from the pandemic have now been factored into demographic projections for the near and long term future of the country.

HIV/Aids is so pervasive as an issue that political leadership from the very highest levels of government is an essential component of the society’s ability to manage, comprehend and cope with interventions and strategies to deal with its far reaching impact. Unfortunately for many South Africans that leadership did not come from the President. Conflicting and ambiguous statements from Mr. Mbeki on the issue ignited a maelstrom of condemnation on the way the pandemic was handled. The huge strategic mistake by Mr. Mbeki was made when he questioned the link between HIV and Aids. It was a tragic miscalculation that only re-enforced the notion that the President was out of touch and in direct opposition to the international and local scientific community. The damage done to Mr. Mbeki as a result of this mistake was never repaired with a lot of people, comrades and political opponents alike. It signalled an appalling example of his confidence in his intellectual prowess against an overwhelming body of evidence to the contrary.

The issue was further exacerbated when the then Minister of Health (Dr. Manto Tshabala Msmimang) advocated unconventional remedies for people living with the virus and the syndrome (garlic, beetroot etc.) as a palatable alternative. The shift in focus went from President Mbeki to his Health Minister, but the taint of atrocious leadership spared neither of them in this affair. The issue of the former minister’s fitness to hold office was called into question when allegations surfaced about alleged personal problems (alcoholism) surfaced. Mr. Mbeki didn’t relent and kept his Health Minister in her office despite overwhelming criticism, from within the ANC and from the opposition. It signalled a pattern that would follow Mr. Mbeki until he was removed from office, loyalty to those who showed him unquestioned loyalty, no matter how big a liability they represented. It was a tactical fault that sowed the seeds of his demise.

THE RAPTURE: JACOB ZUMA AKA THE ANTI-MBEKI

In the backdrop to all of the negative activity surrounding Thabo Mbeki there was the country’s Deputy President Mr. Jacob Zuma. Mired in controversy after controversy, Mr. Zuma found himself in the middle of countless investigations into his conduct into the arms controversy and his alleged corrupt activities, a rape case and a media that was generally bloodthirsty for his removal as Deputy President. Jacob Zuma to the media was the embodiment of corruption in government and a living example of two sets of rules when it came to the law of the land. Those in possession of political power, money and influence had one set of rules and the man on the street a totally different set of laws.

The irony was that Jacob Zuma had built up an increasingly popular support base that appealed to the ordinary masses in South Africans. The notion that he was the only guilty party in an arms deal that had dominated the headlines for years was patently absurd and subsequent allegations that he had raped someone fit the classic lines of his being framed by unknown forces. Gaining political support from within the ANC and the tripartite alliance, Jacob Zuma was portrayed as a victim of a power play. A conspiracy theory started to emerge within the tripartite alliance and amongst Zuma supporters in the ANC that he was being framed. The tripartite alliance quickly popularised this notion and by implication fingered the main conspirator as Thabo Mbeki.

Former President Mbeki made a series of political gaffes within the ANC that would cost him dearly, among the most crucial and irreversible were:

Firing Jacob Zuma as Deputy President of the country before Jacob Zuma could have his day in court.
Announcing he would seek a third term as ANC President, which essentially meant that he sought a third term as State President since the ANC President was a shoe in for the State Presidency.
Retaining controversial Ministers (Health Minister Manto Tshabalala Msimang and National Police Commissioner Jackie Selebi that had fallen out of favour with his own party and with the public in general.

A groundswell of support for Jacob Zuma had become an overwhelming force against Thabo Mbeki’s plan for a third term within the ANC and his subsequent acquittal of rape charges against Mr. Zuma gave him an aura of invincibility amongst the centres of power in the ANC and the tripartite alliance. Plus his mass appeal gave him “The man on the street” credebility, cementing his future as the preferred candidate for President!

A subsequent Party Congress in Polokwane, Limpopo in the most northern province in South Africa seemed the perfect backdrop for the power shift that the ANC and Zuma’s allies had yearned for and planned with meticulous precision.

Thabo Mbeki was resoundingly beaten in his election bid for a third term of the ANC Presidency. The power shift took on an often crude form, but the democratic process was generally observed within the conference. Those senior members of the political leadership that were identified as Mbeki loyalists were openly jeered by the rank and file of the ANC. Certain political commentators remarked that the antics of the conference didn’t represent the ANC’s legacy positively. However, Zuma reigned supreme and his control of the party was unquestioned at the conference’s conclusion. Thabo Mbeki? It became apparent that “The Emperor had lost his clothes.”

To add insult to injury, all charges relating to corruption charges against Jacob Zuma were dropped due to improper conduct on behalf of the State’s prosecuting authority. The perception that there was a plot to railroad Jacob Zuma seemed like a reality because of the abuse of the State’s power. Zuma’s supporters went for the jugular and unanimously voted to end Thabo Mbeki’s Presidency before the conclusion of his term and replace him with Kgalema Mothlante, the former Secretary General of the ANC. It was in many respects a bloodless coup within the ANC and much to the chagrin of the opposition who viewed it as a callous manoeuvre by the new leadership within the ANC to flex its muscle, there was very little they could do within parliamentary rules. The oppositions’ arguments were a moot point and easily outvoted. The Mbeki era had met its unceremonious end.

THE AFTERMATH

Jacob Zuma was sworn in as The Republic of South Africa’s fourth President on May 9th, 2009 in a memorable ceremony that had all the hallmarks of dramatic theatre that accompanied Mr. Zuma’s ascent into the highest office in the land. The day started out with rain, but transformed into brilliant sunlight by the time Mr. Zuma took the oath of office. That was preceded by Jacob Zuma kneeling at the feet of Madiba before assuming his mantle in an act of respect, gratitude and reverence rolled into one. His speech called for reconciliation with Mr. Mbeki and a way forward for all South Africans that would be characterized by unity, competence, service and nation building. The transformation was complete, Jacob Zuma had evolved from the populist ANC firebrand to a statesman in a flawless manner that can only be admired by even his most ardent of critics.

After looking at all the changes that have taken place in South Africa, are there more changes or similarities within Mr. Zuma’s first term and that of Thabo Mbeki’s?

THE SIMILARITIES

STRIKES

Enjoying the support of his tripartite alliance has not provided automatic immunity from the industrial strife that followed Thabo Mbeki’s first term. Strikes from the municipal workers had a devastating effect on the major cities in the country, resulting in losses that amounted to the millions of Rands for the effected municipalities.

INTERNAL DIFFERENCES WITH TRI PARTATE ALLIANCE PARTNERS

At COSATU’s recently held Federation Policy Making conference in Northern Johannesburg the following was stated; the third day of the conference began with a presentation by Sanco deputy president Lemias Mashile.

“It is disturbing to find the phrase ‘tripartite alliance’… its meaning is often the SACP and the ANC,” said Mashile.

“We as Sanco do not accept a junior partner status,” he said.

“We have been too tolerant of the government not engaging or engaging very little.”

National Union of Metalworkers of SA delegate Fana Dlamini also remarked about the recent strike by members of the South African Defence Force Soldiers and the hard stance taken by the Zuma administration:

“In 2006, when he was not the state president he was a different Zuma,” said Dlamini. “I was expecting him to say a lot on the soldiers’ wages and their working conditions.”

SERVICE DELIVERY PROTESTS

It took less than four months for the country to experience service delivery protests in its townships across several provinces. The failed promises and the lack of delivery were the usual reasons given by the residents of Townships that were gutted by fire, barricades and looting, giving South Africans and eerie reminder that issues like service delivery are still extremely sensitive and can have a tinderbox effect in the worst of cases.

THE DIFFERENCES

To President Zuma’s credit he made a quick visit to an affected area and demanded to see those in charge of the township firsthand and get a report about the issues stemming from the violent protest and interventions the area representatives intended to implement. The President’s visit was met with general approval by most observers and represented a departure from the Mbeki era style of engagement.

The most striking example comes from the restructuring of government and the creation of new departments, namely the National Planning Commission.

Perhaps the most profound change I’ve noticed is a shift in the foreign policy by the government from the previous administration’s attitude towards Sudan, its President Omar El Bashir and the question of the atrocities that have taken place in the Darfur conflict and the International communities’ legal remedies.

Going against the grain and specifically the resolution by the African Union (AU) not to assist in the arrest of the Sudanese President. The Director General (De facto Minister) of the Department of International Relations and Co-operation stated that South Africa would abide by the decision by the International Criminal Court (ICC) and arrest Mr. Bashir, should he step on South African soil.

CONCLUSION

Jacob Zuma recently marked his first 100 days in office (an adopted practice of rating American Presidents) and it was generally received with a tempered enthusiasm that this President will do well, but that more time is needed to see any substantive change in the quality of lives of South Africans. The past week also is the first anniversary of the removal from office of former President Thabo Mbeki.

Photo Copyright World Economic Forum www.weforum.org / Matthew Jordaan mattjordaanphoto@gmail.com

Health Care Reform 101

Greg Fawcett — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 05:51:11 +0000

In the midst of all the noise (reality check), what’s going on in health care?

It’s getting pretty simple. The bill that will come out of the House will include a public option (what some are calling true health care reform.) The public option will be non-profit and offer affordable health care. Private insurers don’t like it because they feel they can’t compete with such an option. The stakeholders for private insurers are shareholders of their stock, not patients, therefore they must maximize profit by charging as much as the market will bear.

The priority for government is the uninsured because:

1) of the tremendous cost imposed on all of us from the uninsured receiving health care

2) health care is a right

The bills in the Senate are more focused on insurance reform, more limited than health care reform. Insurance reform would include prohibiting insurance companies from rejecting an applicant or denying care to a patient because of a pre-existing condition.

There is one House bill that proposes a single-payer system (http://www.healthcare-now.org/). Single payer is a publicly funded, privately administered program to offer a Medicaid type program to all of the nearly 50 million uninsured in the U.S. It will not pass, but would have a far greater impact than any proposed legislation in terms of reducing costs by eliminating profit from the cost of health care. It will not pass because:

1) Congress will not prevent an industry from profiting, even on health care

2) There is not sufficient courage in Washington to face the charges of socialized medicine that a single payer system would certainly unleash. What is Medicaid, you ask? Socialized medicine.

Mudda, questions, please!

I Am a Part of All That I Have Met

Laura Hart — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 00:00:42 +0000

At the 1980 Democratic National Convention at New York’s Madison Square Garden, Senator Edward M. Kennedy delivered his eloquent swansong to a sea of thousands bearing blue and white Kennedy signs. It signaled an end to his campaign and a final elegy to what might have been.There would be no Camelot II, ever. This speech, penned by veteran political consultant and Kennedy aide Robert Shrum (known as Shrummy to those of us who’ve worked with him), evoked the better angels of America and of his brothers, these men of whom he has reluctantly spoken in the years since their assassinations.

“And may it be said of us, both in dark passages and in bright days, in the words of Tennyson that my brothers quoted and loved, and that have special meaning for me now:

“I am a part of all that I have met
To [Tho] much is taken, much abides
That which we are, we are –
One equal temper of heroic hearts
Strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.”

Kennedy took his fight to the convention floor, fighting Jimmy Carter for delegates while marching toward the inevitable endgame. However, he conceded, saying, “For me, a few hours ago, this campaign came to an end.” Senator Kennedy’s final grace note was this: “For those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die.”

Sitting in the rafters of the Garden as a teenage volunteer for the Kennedy campaign in 1980 in this my maiden voyage of a lifetime of political involvement, the moment was potent and true. It was authentic and significant. Ideals had import and impact, and political words and politics and the process of electing leaders could stir the soul. This wasn’t mere rhetoric but a glimpse of what America could be in its finest hour.

Many campaigns followed, most were losses and the successes can be counted on a couple of fingers. To wit: Kennedy, Carter, Jesse Jackson, David N. Dinkins, Mark Green, John Kerry, and some that may be forgotten and need to be fact checked against the rusty campaign buttons housed in coffee canisters beneath the bookshelf. There is the one and only local race on which this writer worked and it was victorious: Joseline Pena-Melnyk, a member of the MD House of Delegates representing the 21st District, and the only woman of color to be elected to this post.

Kennedy’s speechwriter in 1980 would regain notoriety, albeit negatively as the top strategist in John Kerry’s failed presidential bid in 2004. He became the pundit’s piñata for advising Kerry badly when the candidate was perceived as lacking in muscle and pushback to the Swift Boat barrage. Twenty-four years later in 2004, this same Kennedy volunteer drifted aimlessly in a union hall in Flint, MI at the “victory party” for the Kerry/Edwards campaign as Media Director for DNC in this battleground state. Well, at least we won Michigan, I thought on the plane back to Washington as a loud and drunken quartet of Bush leaguers boasted of their victory in the seats behind me for the entire trip. A nasty exchange of words erupted when the plane landed and yes I started it.

With the news of Senator Kennedy’s diagnosis of a malignant brain tumor, there’s a tendency to eulogize this lion of the Senate, this iconic figure on the Hill. I see it as an opportunity to hail the good Senator from Massachusetts for his radical endorsement of the presumptive Democratic candidate and Senator from Illinois. As he did in his 1980 campaign, Ted Kennedy “sailed against the wind” when he endorsed Barack Obama. He could have bent like a palm reed to the pressures exerted by the Clinton machine, especially to the Tony Soprano-like coercion from the man whom Maureen Dowd at The New York Times calls “The Big Dog.” Ted didn’t give way; he kept sailing against the wind. For Ted Kennedy, Bill’s bark didn’t have much bite.

Lest one forget another defining figure in the formative years of this one Kennedy 1980 campaign volunteer, let’s give a shout out to George McGovern. While too young to engage meaningfully in political activism, I shed tears when McGovern lost to Nixon (Nixon!!!???) in 1972. This year McGovern was a Clinton supporter; and then he saw the light, flipped like a pancake and embarked on vigorous campaigning appearances in North Dakota on behalf of Obama. The cynics and death knell tollers are quick to liken Obama’s journey to that of McGovern but in this instance–the past is not necessarily prologue.

A search of the bookshelf proved fruitless in locating “Ted and the Kennedy Legend” by Max Lerner, a tome I consulted for an undergraduate political science paper at NYU. Ted Kennedy went to the Senate in November of 1962; Barack Obama was born in August, 1961. Now, with Obama ascending, alive as long as Kennedy has served and despite the trouncing he took in Kentucky to Sen. Clinton, it seems that the torch has passed to a new generation—as his brother famously said it had when he became President.

What finite but meaningful lessons are there after 28 years as a political tourist? Two come to mind: RFK’s characterization of himself as “an idealist without illusions” and the question posed by Prof. James Carse at NYU in a course called “Existentialism and Political Commitment”: “Do we make history or does history make us?”

I Am a Part of All That I Have Met

Laura Hart — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 00:00:30 +0000

At the 1980 Democratic National Convention at New York’s Madison Square Garden, Senator Edward M. Kennedy delivered his eloquent swansong to a sea of thousands bearing blue and white Kennedy signs. It signaled an end to his campaign and a final elegy to what might have been. There would be no Camelot II, ever. This speech, penned by veteran political consultant and Kennedy aide Robert Shrum (known as Shrummy to those of us who’ve worked with him), evoked the better angels of America and of his brothers, these men of whom he has reluctantly spoken in the years since their assassinations.

“And may it be said of us, both in dark passages and in bright days, in the words of Tennyson that my brothers quoted and loved, and that have special meaning for me now:

Excerpts from Senator Kennedy’s Health Care Op-Ed

admin — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 05:16:37 +0000

Originally Published in The Boston Globe

President Obama knows it’s time to act and he’s providing impressive leadership. And I am thrilled to be working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to help bring forward the legislation that will build on what’s already working and fix what’s broken.

If you like the coverage you have now, you keep it. But if you don’t have health insurance or don’t like the insurance you have, our bill will give you new, more affordable options.

We’re also hearing that some Americans want the choice of enrolling in a health insurance program backed by the government for the public good, not private profit - so that option will be available too.

And we must make sure that an emphasis on primary care and basic prevention is at the heart of our efforts.

To achieve these changes, all must share the responsibility and the costs - businesses, government, healthcare providers, and individuals alike. Health reform will benefit all our citizens, reduce the financial burdens on our nation’s businesses, and put the healthcare industry itself on a sustainable basis.

Arab and Israeli Statements on President’s Speech in Cairo

admin — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 00:02:36 +0000

Listen to the speech by clicking here.

Hamas and the Palestinian Authority reacted to Obama’s speech (Ma’an):

The Palestinian Authority said it considered US President Obama’s speech “a new and different American beginning and a new message to the Israelis,” while Hamas said the remarks contained a number of good points.

PA spokesperson said that “President Obama’s readiness for partnership, listening, building confidence and confronting tension” ought to be celebrated, and applauded the US leader’s remarks on Palestinian suffering.

• The Palestinian Authority said it considered US President Obama’s speech ”a new and different American beginning and a new message to the Israelis,” while Hamas said the remarks contained a number of good points.

• The Hamas movement described Obama’s speech as a refreshing change, although ”full of contradictions.”

Reaction of the Israeli government (BBC):

The government of Israel expressed its hope that President Obama’s important speech will indeed lead to a new era of reconciliation between the Arab and Muslim world and Israel.

An official source said “We share the hope of President Obama that the American effort will signal a new era that will bring an end to the conflict and a pan-Arab recognition of Israel as the Jewish state living in security and peace in the Middle East.” “Israel is committed to peace and will do its utmost to expand the circle of peace while taking into consideration its national interests, security first and foremost.”

Hizbullah: Obama speech signals no real change in U.S. Policy (Naharnet):

A Hizbullah official said that U.S. President Obama’s landmark speech to Muslims signals no real shift in U.S. policy in the Arab world despite its conciliatory tone. A MP from the militant Shiite group said “The Islamic and Arab world does not need lectures, but real acts starting with a radical change toward the Palestinian cause,” he said. “The problem of Arabs and Muslims lies with Washington’s support for Israeli aggression in the region, especially on the people of Lebanon and Palestine.”

Photo Credit: Pablo Martinez Monsivais

South Africa Prepares For a Zuma Presidency

David Maphumzana Sibeko Jr. — Mon, 04 May 2009 20:16:10 +0000

As the dust settles on election victory posted by the African National Congress (ANC), the attention now turns to the Jacob Zuma Presidency. There is a great deal of optimism attached to Jacob Zuma for a number of reasons, chief among them are that he represents a departure from the style of the former President Thabo Mbeki, who was widely regarded as aloof to the issues that affected the man on the street and dictatorial within ANC party circles.

For the majority of South Africans that voted for Jacob Zuma, Msholozi (as he is affectionately known) represents a welcome change and a breath of fresh air compared to the recent past. Positive sentiments notwithstanding, the Zuma Presidency will be forced to distinguish itself by delivering on issues that have featured prominently in his campaign for the highest office in the land. The path that Jacob Zuma took to become state president was unconventional to say the least (spending the last 7 years in and out of court for various charges) and his ability to overcome that adversity made him immensely popular and against orthodox rationale, a shoe in for the Presidency of the ANC and eventually the country.

But that victory came at a cost. A legion of people cast their lot with Zuma and now the President elect has to perform a delicate balancing act to deliver to his constituents, while at the same time satisfying his political backers. How will he do it? The following represents a possible scenario as to how things may unfold.

GOING BACK TO HIS ROOTS

ANC strategist and the head of the party’s transitional management team, Collins Chabane, told the Mail & Guardian last week that the Zuma administration will introduce a new ministry dedicated to rural development. The proposed ministry’s connection with the Zuma is as simple as it is visceral. Born in rural Nkandla, KwaZulu Natal Province, Jacob Zuma has created a ministry with a sole focus of addressing the needs of rural communities nationwide. The ministry is a signal to the communities that gave him overwhelming support that he will reciprocate by giving them a means of greater participation to leverage South Africa’s democracy.

The Ministry of Rural Development represents Zuma’s desire to bring back a sense of indigenous African identity. The shift in focus toward African culture and identity is embodied in the values associated with Ubuntu, which literally means “being a human being.” A central feature of African culture in South Africa, Ubuntu is the recognition of one’s humanity and active care for other human beings. “The idea of Ubuntu survives, but it has been contravened by the current economic consensus,” says Ms. Sithole, a researcher at the Human Sciences Research Council in Durban. “But most communities in South Africa are bound by Ubuntu, the notion that if your brother dies, you are obliged to engulf his family as your own.”

A key feature of the Zuma campaign was to prioritize and identify with this demographic group and establish a rapport that translated into votes. “People look from a point of view of what a leader can do for them,” she says, and while “educated South Africans might appreciate what [former President Thabo Mbeki] has done, you hear people talk of his coldness and his abstract achievements.” By comparison, “people like Zuma because he tends to spend time locally. He observes local traditions. He listens. He is sympathetic, and he can say, ‘I have gone through the same thing.’ “

THE RESTURCTURING OF GOVERNMENT

According to Mr. Chabane, the Zuma administration will expand the number of ministries from the current 28 to 32. However the restructuring of the ministries will not be confined to expansion, certain ministries are to be split and other departments within respective ministries will be merged.

An example is the Ministry of Education. Plans are afoot to have it divided with one Ministry dedicated to Higher Education and Vocational Training. The objective is to develop vocational skills in collaboration with SETA (Sector Education and Training Authority). Previously under the auspices of the Department of Labour, SETA did not perform up to expectations and the incoming administration believes the change in the structure of the Ministry of Education will improve SETA’s performance. The other Ministry of Education will be responsible for primary and secondary schools, which will seek to address several challenges, most notable among them, low pass rates for aspiring high school matriculates and the slow transition of Outcome Based Education systems amongst students, teachers and the Department of Education.

Other departments slated to be divided include the Department of Minerals and Energy, one focusing on mining and the other on energy. According to Mr. Chabane, the same fate awaits the department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism. Tourism will stand alone, however it is expected to absorb several components from the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), such as, enterprise development, consumer development and business regulation. The current head of DTI, Minister Mandisi Mphalwa, is regarded as an ally of former President Thabo Mbeki and is not likely to return to his position in a Zuma administration. A seasoned business leader with influence and an impressive track record in South Africa and the African continent, speculation has it that he goes into private business.

Perhaps the most impressive move in the planned restructuring of government is the merging of the department of Water (formerly the department of Forestry and Water affairs) into the revamped environment affairs. In a deft strategic move that addresses medium to long term planning, these two departments merging has come about as a response to global warming. “Global warming will have a significant impact on our water resources. The challenge in the next 15 years will be the management of water,” Mr. Chabane emphasized. What makes this particular move so impressive for Jacob Zuma’s administration, is that it takes a proactive approach to the environment, trend setting for a government on the African continent and establishes something that will be part of Jacob Zuma’s legacy as President of South Africa.

THE TRIPARTITE ALLIANCE FACTOR

An integral part of Jacob Zuma’s ascension to power was the support that he received from the ANC’s tripartite alliance partners; The Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU) and the South African Communist Party (SACP). The antagonism that existed between the Mbeki Presidency and the alliance partners in the SACP & COSATU was well documented and it was common knowledge that there no love lost between the presidency and alliance partners. The coalition, cemented in the philosophy of liberation politics, had become frayed because of opposing agendas.

Mbeki’s economic policies were structured to entice big business to play a primary role in the development of the “new” South Africa. Whereas COSATU and the SACP championed the plight of the union members’, workers, and the growing numbers of the unemployed. Then Jacob Zuma enters the picture. Deputy President of the Republic at the time he was dogged by guilt by association (see Schabir Shaik).

But Jacob Zuma is the antithesis of Thabo Mbeki, hailing from the hinterland of KwaZulu Natal; he is a traditionalist, has a popular following within the ANC and is adored by a cross section of society in his home province. His liberation struggle credentials are as impressive as was his ascent to the second highest office in the land. “Msholozi’s” legal problems were seen by the alliance partners to have been orchestrated by a faction of conspirators within the ANC that wanted to prevent Jacob Zuma from becoming president of the republic.

A strategic partnership was formed among COSATU, SACP and Jacob Zuma, with the alliance partners assuming the mantle of PR operatives for Zuma and attack dogs against Mbeki’s leadership within the ANC and the nation. Zuma tacitly approved the use of their services through his ascent to the leadership of the ANC and the ultimate prize – The Presidency of The Republic of South Africa!

Results like these don’t come without a Quid Quo Pro. For COSATU and the SACP the rewards are cabinet posts in the Zuma administration and a prominent role in policy formulation on national initiatives. Speculation is rife that SACP president Blade Nzimande will be cabinet minister and only time will tell if his party policies will be integrated into government policy.

In the current global financial crises which starting to take its grip on the South African economy, it will be challenging for the Zuma presidency to keep all of the campaign promises it made to the people and to the alliance partners. A grim projection has the government shedding tens of thousands of jobs this year which will put a strain on the alliance.

According to political analyst Zamikhaya Maseti, the pressure on Zuma to make the correct choice of appointments to his cabinet is crucial. “If he associates himself with good people, he will be able to steer the economy out of the effects of the global financial crisis.”

In a statement issued by COSATU right after the ANC victory, the expectation is clearly announced: “Our priority now is to make sure that the ANC’s commitments in its progressive elections manifesto are driven forward and turned into a programme of action.” This type of rhetoric maybe a pre-cursor to the potential strain within the tripartite alliance in the near future, the reality is the campaign is over and so is the honeymoon, it’s time for a Zuma Presidency to deliver on its end of the bargain.

ANC national executive committee member Ayanda Dlodlo, a member of the transition team’s secretariat has the type of perspective that all South Africans are going to have to live with in relation to the global financial crises and the Zuma presidency, stressing it is “way beyond his control!”

THE PRIORITIES OF THE ZUMA ADMINISTRATION

The following statements have been taken from the ANC election manifesto of 2009 which articulate the priorities that have been identified for the country:

Building upon our achievements and learning from our experience in government since 1994, we are committed to improving the quality of education, health care, sanitation, and to accelerate the delivery of houses to millions of our people and achieve a better life for all.

Our fight against crime will be a key priority to ensure safer and more secure communities.

Rural infrastructure development and agricultural reforms are at the heart of our plan to improve our country’s food security.

All of the above are admirable goals and no rational person can be critical of these objectives to improve the quality of life for the majority of South Africans. How will a Zuma presidency implement these plans and how will the average South African notice the difference?

IMPLEMENTATION

The first initiative that the Zuma era will introduce is the Planning Commission, whose mission is spelled out by Jeremy Cronin of the SACP. “This commission is not about personal power, but the alignment of strategic functions. Previously, there has been a lot of contradiction [regarding the roles of various government departments]. It does not make sense to have financial management without a strategic instrument”. He went on to add one of the planning commission’s key roles will be to monitor the performance of ministers and create employment opportunities.

HOW WILL THE AVERAGE SOUTH AFRICAN FEEL THE DIFFERENCE?

In the words of Local Journalist William Gumede, “Dashed expectations and infighting in the coalition over how to address South Africa’s urgent problems under a Zuma presidency may trigger another split in the ANC. And he is unlikely to have the honeymoon period enjoyed by past ANC governments. If he fails to deliver the poor will also turn against him”.

No matter which way one looks at the fast approaching Zuma era, one has to acknowledge that the challenges to the incoming president will be considerable in their complexity, frequency and evolution. The novelty of leadership change in any healthy democracy is relatively short-lived across the world, South Africa is no different. The challenge for most new leaders is to produce tangible evidence that effort and resources are being applied to solve problems for all citizens, regardless of their race, gender, ethnicity, culture or religion. If Jacob Zuma is successful in delivering on this promise, it may be his defining moment as President of South Africa.