Share this
Mister Wong
Digg
Del.icio.us
Slashdot
Furl
Yahoo
Technorati
Newsvine
Googlize this
Blinklist
Facebook
Wikio
Hear this text
Print
E-mail
Tags
South Africa did well, but danger is not over
The past tumultuous fortnight has seen South Africa move to the brink and back in developments featuring two of its more controversial characters at opposite ends of the political spectrum: ANC Youth League leader Julius Malema and the late Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging (AWB) leader, Eugene Terre’Blanche. The country seems to have survived quite well the first crisis moment –Terre’Blanche’s funeral – but a long and likely protracted drama around the trial of his alleged young murderers still lies ahead.
While there are clear indications that misinformation tactics surrounding the nature of the relationship between Terre’Blanche and his alleged murderers have been used to deflate the anger on the right, certain role-players on the right have used the incident as a recruitment platform for what was a fast-dwindling ultra-right movement. In the process, dangerous scare tactics are being used.
For the two young men being accused of the murder of Terre’Blanche, the misinformation campaign that has seen them changing their stories in a number of crucial aspects, may have blown fatally apart the integrity of any defence they may have been putting forward. In the process, we never may know the full truth above all doubt – a dangerous factor in a highly polarised society.
On the ultra-right wing, activist Dr Dan Roodt almost immediately gave an example of what can be expected from that side in the months to come. In a document written by him and widely distributed via e-mail, under the title “Eugene Terre’Blanche and the symbolism of war”, he likens the murder of the right-wing leader to the one of Franz Ferdinand in 1914 which triggered World War 1. In a clear attempt to scare whites – and particularly certain sections of the Afrikaner community – into action, he predicts that genocide of the “Boere and whites” is at hand.
Among others, he takes reports in British newspapers about an airstrip being built in Zimbabwean diamond fields to circumvent sanctions against that country and puts his own spin on it, claiming it will be used to fly in Chinese weapons to “arm on a large scale Zimbabwean and South African blacks to rob white farmers of their property. Even people in urban areas might be attacked”.
While racial tensions have been whipped up by the murder and the events that followed, probably the worst and most dangerous moment – Terre’Blanche’s funeral – has come and gone without incident. For once, there was quick action from the government, and the Terre’Blanche family and AWB leadership assisted in maintaining calm. But it so easily could have gone wrong. One spark could have set it all off, and it would be wrong to accept that the danger is completely behind us.
Not that the rag-tag army of would-be freedom fighters in Terre’Blanche’s AWB posed any real threat as a political, military or terrorist force of any kind. In fact, they were already a spent force almost before their inception several decades ago. What made it all so dangerous, though, was the level to which Malema had whipped up emotions with his racist attacks on whites – both in his song-singing and his speeches.
Perhaps it was fortuitous that Malema overstepped the line on his visit to Zimbabwe and the way he treated a journalist, creating the opening for disciplinary action from the ANC leadership. This, and the fact that his leadership came under attack in his home province of Limpopo, has helped to defuse the situation for now.
The events of the past two weeks further elevated extremist players in the South African political landscape to levels far loftier than they deserve. As much as Terre’Blanche and the AWB’s views and actions are not representative of the overwhelming majority of white South Africans, equally so Malema does not speak on behalf of the overwhelming majority of black South Africans. And the good that has come out of this is that the situation finally compelled the ANC leadership to act against Malema and silence him. Hopefully, it is the beginning of the end of his rock-star style political career.
On the other end of spectrum, it may well be that now, finally, the last remnants of organised white racist extremism in South Africa will be buried along with its leader. While many will say it certainly did not seem so judging by the turnout of mourners at Terre’Blanche’s funeral and the kind of racist and threatening statements many of them made to the media, they constitute a very small minority. At the very most, they represent 0.2% of all white South Africans, but closer to 0.1% – which is 0.01% of the total population. Now missing the charismatic leadership and oratory skills of Terre’Blanche, they are not likely to go anywhere or play any significant role in the future. The events of these past two weeks have put these players from both extremes in their proper perspective.
There is also opportunity to be found in these tragic developments, namely the opportunity for moderate, sensible and peace-loving South Africans of all races to unite and seize back the middle ground and to denounce racism and extremism in any from. Failure to do so will leave space for the resurgence of radicalism and polarisation. Should this be allowed to happen, it eventually could prove near impossible for any government, let alone the current one, to extricate South Africa from such a doomful scenario.
The country has done remarkably well in the situation to date, but the danger is not over. In its reaction to the Terre’Blanche murder, the South African Institute of Race Relations via a statement by its deputy chief executive officer Frans Cronje said: “The failure of sensible South Africans to take back the racial middle ground in the country will be serious. Polarisation will beget further conflict and a hardening of attitudes on all sides. This is perhaps the greatest leadership test that the current government has faced and one they cannot afford to fail.”
Why should they BOTH testify in camera when only ONE is a minor?