About this site

This resource is hosted by the Nelson Mandela Foundation, but was compiled and authored by Padraig O’Malley. It is the product of almost two decades of research and includes analyses, chronologies, historical documents, and interviews from the apartheid and post-apartheid eras.

05 Oct 1995: Myeni, Musa

Click here for more information on the Interviewee

Click here for Overview of the year

POM. Mr Myeni, if you had to evaluate the last 18 months, in what direction do you think the country is going?

MM. In some respects downwards, in other respects upwards.  Downwards in the sense that all promises made to people have not been honoured even in areas where we believe the government of Nelson Mandela and the ANC could have delivered.  We understand perfectly well that one cannot redress the anomalies and imbalances of many centuries within 18 months but there are areas where we believe the government could have done better.

POM. What areas?

MM. We will come back to that.  But then in other areas we would say, yes, there has been an upward move in the sense that people are feeling more citizens of this country than ever before.  They are feeling more confident although practically you will still continue to experience disparities between formerly privileged communities and disadvantaged communities.  The government of the ANC is at the moment spending a lot of money, resources and energies on trying to eliminate it's most formidable opposition, namely Inkatha Freedom Party.  This is very evident in areas like KwaZulu/Natal where they are fomenting violence officially.  Many people are being killed now, formally, by uniformed soldiers and policemen which is an attempt to eliminate and intimidate opposition.  The second sphere of their operation relates to their official investigations, investigating people of the ANC who died during the conflict between the two parties.  They are only investigating one side.  Nobody is investigating the death and the assassination of more than 400 IFP leaders, IFP being Inkatha Freedom Party, which means also that the ANC is now trying to succeed as a government where it failed to succeed as a liberation movement fighting other black liberation movements.

POM. You mentioned there are areas in which you think the ANC could have done better.

MM. Yes, the ANC could have done better in the area of housing.  It was very possible with the amount of budget that they had at their disposal in the past financial year to deliver quite a few houses on the ground.  At the moment there is still consultation going on after consultation.  Secondly, we believe that the ANC could also have saved billions of rands instead of giving it to the so-called Department of RDP, which they call it very nicely and euphemistically as Reconstruction & Development Programme.  The two billion rands budgeted last year, we don't know what they did with it and this current financial year they have an extra 2.5 billion. We don't see exactly what they are doing with it.  And when you come closer to what they call the RDP you actually realise that what they are doing under the RDP could still be undertaken by the various respective departments.  For instance, when they spend some money, claiming to be spending money building one clinic here or another one there, that naturally should fall under the Department of Health. The Department of Health at the same time is building clinics, the RDP Department is also building clinics, so it is duplication.  Also when you take roads, the RDP is claiming to be wanting, I am saying wanting because we haven't seen any roads, to be wanting and willing and wishing to help communities particularly in the rural areas build certain roads.  That could also be undertaken by the Department of Transport and Roads, we have a Department of Roads.  So it is also duplication and overlap.  You also take the area of education, there is no difference between what used to be and what is today in the field of education.  The first serious bill which is aimed at trying to address the imbalances has just been passed but it is not going to effect drastic changes because any change will require money and the department doesn't have money.  For the first time we are having mass action by nurses and other health workers simply because these people are working under the most horrible conditions you can ever imagine.

. I was talking about education as well.  I had finished about that.

POM. When you look at the municipal workers going on strike, the police calling strikes, the nurses calling strikes, the teachers calling strikes, does this not indicate a breakdown in social cohesion?

MM. It also indicates a breakdown of confidence in the new government which signed a contract with the voters.  Mandela and his gangsters, if I may call them that, cheated the public because they said to the public, we will give you free health, free education, new jobs, we will give you free housing if you vote for us.  OK?  And then people said, oh, is that so? Then we will vote you into power.  Then as soon as the voters honoured their side of the promise and side of the contract, then Mandela, once in government, turned around and said, sorry guys no free education, no new jobs, we would like to create new jobs but there are no new jobs, we can't give you free housing, we can give you some subsidies but we can't give you free housing so you must continue staying where you are staying.  All right.  Now that is a breach of contract on the side of the elected.  And then, which is also reminiscent of the agreement he dishonoured between Dr Buthelezi and himself and Mr de Klerk when Inkatha Freedom Party agreed to participate in elections on the understanding that immediately after the elections there will be an international mediation team to help mediate on the issues that they were still disputing about, that they reneged on and another breach of contract.  So we are seeing, therefore, people who voted the ANC into power, people who are still wearing ANC uniform wearing SACP caps marching in the streets of Johannesburg, Pietersburg, Durban, Cape Town, Bloemfontein, everywhere in the country, calling for the delivery of promises.

POM. To turn for a moment to KwaZulu/Natal, look at the local government elections for a moment.  Now I know the IFP elections are not going to take place in KwaZulu/Natal but no two single people can tell me what the system of voting is.  What's your understanding of the voting system, the local elections and how the system of voting works?  And I was telling you that every other person that I talked to had a different variation, a different understanding of how in fact the system does work. Could you give me your understanding of how the system works?

MM. First of all I must admit that this whole thing is a mess. This is why Inkatha Freedom Party called for the postponement of local government elections and this is why in KwaZulu/Natal there will be no local government elections on 1 November.  The date for elections down there is still going to be determined some time next year, that is it will take place next year.  Now in terms of the Local Government Transitional Act we understand that you have rural areas under traditional leaders, that is where you have more confusion because of the lack of clarity on the role of traditional leaders, vis-à-vis new councils that might be elected in rural areas.  But in the urban areas the situation is slightly different.  Where you have got big cities like Johannesburg, Durban, Pretoria and Cape Town you have three types of votes.  You have the Metropolitan Council which is the body that comprises all the sub-structures within that particular greater city area.

. Giving you an example; if you take Johannesburg central, not talking about the eastern part of the city which includes Germiston, Springs, Boksburg, etc., etc., many towns, but just Johannesburg central where we are now, you are looking at a situation where you have the Greater Johannesburg Metropolitan which is one overriding chamber which will have people representing various districts sitting on the chamber there.  Then under that one you have the sub-structures. At the moment we have four sub-structures for greater Johannesburg, and then there are people who are therefore going to be elected on the basis of a ward system in each sub-structure.  This sub-structure consists of two types of votes. In other words there is somebody who is going to run for elections as a candidate in a ward, that's one, that takes up 60% of all the votes in terms of the law.  Secondly, the other 40% will be elected on a party basis, that is proportional representation basis.  So, people voting, therefore, at that sub-structure level will vote twice.  They will vote for a candidate they choose, that is one vote.  Then they vote for a party they choose, that is the second vote and, therefore, you will have candidates on the party list and then you have candidates on a ward system list, that is the sub-structure.  But then the third vote is the vote then that goes for the Metropolitan that now says who do you elect for the Metropolitan or which party do you elect for the Metropolitan so that then from each sub-structure there will be people going to the Metropolitan, elected at that level.  But in other towns where there is no Metropolitan there will only be two votes and where there are Metropolitans there will be three votes.  So smaller towns like Empangeni, or rather not in Natal but just here in Gauteng, smaller towns outside Johannesburg and Pretoria and Vereeniging like your Bronkhorstspruit, like your other little towns there, you are going to have only two votes, one for a ward candidate and the second vote for a party candidate.

POM. What happens when maybe up to two million people turn up at the polling stations wanting to vote and they are not registered and they simply say, "Nobody ever told us we had to register, we didn't have to register before, why can't I vote now?"  What do you do with those people?

MM. At the moment there are about two million registered voters and that is a far cry from the potential voting population of Johannesburg.  I'm talking about just Johannesburg, two million, just Johannesburg, not the Vaal Triangle or Pretoria.  And indeed there will be many people who will show up and who will find that they are not registered either because they did not register or they registered but their names don't appear on the ward list.  For instance, there has been deliberate incompetence.

POM. So they turn up to vote?

MM. Yes, then they will turn up and find that they are not registered, as I have said already, for two reasons.  Either they did not register or they have deliberately been taken out.  For instance, the IFP has launched many official complaints already because ANC employees in the Johannesburg Metropolitan have found it appropriate and convenient to be inefficient in so far as transferring names of IFP supporters from IFP known strongholds, transferring them from the preliminary voters' roll in which they appear into what is called the ward voters' roll, so that when a voter goes to the ward where she or he resides, he will find that his or her name does not appear on that particular list so that he can't vote.  And even our own candidates, we have quite a number of candidates who do not appear on the ward voters' roll where they live but appear on the main voters' roll which means that they did register and their addresses are correct, but when they started working on the ward voters' roll then they are hiding behind mistakes, incompetence, maybe inefficiency, etc., etc.  But in the meantime we are approaching the election day and people will come, oh it's a mistake, oh it's this and that, until we go to the elections.

POM. But they arrive at the polls on election day and what happens?

MM. And then it might turn out ugly and chaotic if you are going to have, let's say, a couple of hundred of people at the same time who might disrupt these elections at various polls if they are disgruntled.

POM. Do you think these elections can be fair and free?

MM. There is nothing you can ever hope to be fair and free for as long as the interests of the ANC and the SACP are involved or at stake, and the National Party.  They are the masters of all forms of cheating and corruption.

POM. Why does the IFP continue to participate in the government of national unity?

MM. Look, we are not there because we are at anybody's sufferance, but we are there because of our mandate from our voters who voted us, who gave us the constitutional right to be there.  But truly speaking it is a farce.  We are also still there because we realise the repercussions on peace and stability in South Africa if we were to pull out.  It will certainly destabilise everything else. So in the interests of stability, reconciliation and peace, we are still there.

POM. Yet in KwaZulu/Natal Dr Buthelezi over the Shaka Day weekend, I went down to both Stanger and Umlazi for the ceremonies, talks increasingly of the Zulu people moving towards their final destiny of self-determination.  That sounds dangerously like talking about secession, about an independent Zulu state.

MM. I am not aware of any speech by Dr Buthelezi which implies a break away of KwaZulu from the rest of South Africa but what I am aware of is his demand for meaningful powers not just for KwaZulu only but for all provinces of South Africa so that people can determine their own destiny within the greater federation of South Africa so that we are seeing South Africa as one united country following a federal formula but allowing more power to regions so that they can determine what happens to their own security, to their own water situation, to their own education, health, etc., even having fiscal powers to be able to have regional taxation just like you have in the United States of America where each state imposes certain taxes over and above federal taxes.  And in the US you have police forces, let's say, for instance, the New York police force which is totally different from federal forces, and yet the state of New York is not independent but has got autonomy in many areas of competences.  That's all that Chief Buthelezi is calling for.  He is not calling for an independent Zulu state away from South Africa and outside the rest of South Africa because that will now enjoy tremendous support for a number of reasons.  We have one economy, extremely inter-dependent regionally speaking, and KwaZulu/Natal is one of the poorest regions and yet has got pockets of real good wealth.  We have also contributed to the development of the rest of South Africa and we cannot suddenly deny ourselves the pleasures of the wealth we have created in places like Gauteng, so we will always remain like that.

POM. In the Covenant of Allegiance people are called upon, or people of the Zulu nation are called upon, to pledge, it has to organise an autonomous kingdom as a democratic, pluralistic and constitutional monarchy in which the King reigns under the constitution but does not govern.  When he uses the word 'autonomous' how does he use autonomous as distinct from a state in a federation?

MM. Let me just read that, "Organise our autonomous kingdom as a democratic, pluralistic and constitutional monarchy in which the King reigns under the constitution but does not govern ... restore this province as the kingdom of KwaZulu/Natal to serve as the primary government of the people of this region enjoying without exclusions and limitations all those powers and functions which in fact can adequately and properly be exercised by an autonomous kingdom such as ours within the parameters of a unified and pluralistic Republic of South Africa."  Because you see one has got to read the second point in the context of the first point because, as I was saying, within the parameters, as if I was aware of this, within the parameters of a unified and pluralistic Republic of South Africa.  So he is not saying we must secede, but what he is simply saying is that the extent of the powers the region will enjoy as a province will be such that they will be exclusive powers enjoyed by the King as a monarch and reigning but not governing because the job of governing will be left with elected members of government.  The job of reigning over this particular kingdom will be the job of the King.  But then that in its totality constitutes part of the greater South Africa and operating within the parameters of our South African jurisprudence and jurisdiction.

POM. I just want to get it absolutely straight: there is no question of KwaZulu/Natal attempting a secession at some point from the state of South Africa?

MM. I can speak for now and for the foreseeable future and also for as long as the IFP is the dominant party there.  I do not foresee any plans or any desire for that matter to secede from the rest of South Africa and I am one person who loves KwaZulu, that's where my roots are and that's where I am largely based, but I live in Gauteng and I am a member of the provincial government in Gauteng which is the second stronghold of the IFP.  There is no way we can allow that to happen, either from KwaZulu point of view or from IFP Gauteng point of view.  Talking to many leaders of the IFP in KwaZulu I do not get the impression that people down there want to be autonomous in the sense of being an independent state, but definitely all the people I speak to want powers, they want more powers that will enable them to determine their day to day lives. There is no way, for instance, no-one even I have spoken to, who thinks of us in KwaZulu having a Department of Foreign Affairs, a Department of Defence, except that we do think, and again this is based on our history of violence in that province, we do think that the provincial government must have some control over some kind of force which can respond to provincial orders immediately and intervene in places of crisis so that those people will be accountable to the local communities instead of very arrogant forces who go in there full of hatred and full of their desire for revenge, wanting just to kill Zulus who are historically known for their bravery, etc.  Now they want to take delight from the fact that they are soldiers and policemen accountable and responsible only to some guys in Pretoria and then they can do what they like far away and the provincial government cannot say a thing.

POM. So do you see the national defence force as operating as an oppressor in KwaZulu rather than an impartial enforcer of the law?

MM. Definitely the word 'impartial' does not even exist in their dictionaries so we are not doubting that.  The present police force is controlled by a member of the South African Communist Party, Mr Sydney Mufamadi, and he is one of those guys who really hates Inkatha Freedom Party and has no respect for Zulu heritage.  On the other hand the defence force is controlled by Joe Modise who is also a member of the Communist Party Central Committee and his Deputy, Ronnie Kasrils, is a well known Stalinist and, therefore, we are also aware that they have integrated their former so-called liberation army, uMkhonto weSizwe, into the South African Defence Force, and these are the people wearing uniform who used to fight the IFP as members of the ANC and who are today in government armed forces who are now continuing where they left off before the elections.  And then the question is, what chances are there?

POM. Now, the IFP have withdrawn from the Constituent Assembly and are not participating in it.  How can a new constitution emerge out of the Constituent Assembly that does not have the participation of the largest province in the country in terms of population?

MM. Well the ANC will deny that. I'm saying that the ANC will deny that the largest province in terms of population is not participating.  They will say because there are ANC and some of them come from KwaZulu/Natal, therefore the province is participating.  But if you are talking about the largest party in that province and also by the same fact the greatest majority of that population is not participating in that particular constitutional negotiation, then I will agree.  And then what I think also will emerge will be a constitution which will suit the interests of the ANC.  The biggest mistake the ANC is making with this constitution is that they are structuring the future constitution of our country around one man. They are looking at Mr Mandela and because he is like a god to them they are giving or assigning too much power to the head of state for two reasons; one because they forget that Mr Mandela will not be President of South Africa for ever, they forget that, and two, simply because some of them, that is ANC people, who are prime carpenters, if you like, structuring and drafting or drawing up the new constitution, are people who are likely to become heads of states in the near future.

. So, they are already thinking about themselves and one person in mind is Mr Cyril Ramaphosa who is the Secretary General of the ANC and Chairman of this national Constituent Assembly.  He is also being groomed to be either Prime Minister of South Africa or President of South Africa.   So whatever powers he is assigning to the head of state he knows that he might be the next one to exercise those powers.  And that is a mistake because they forget that Mr Mandela might be good in terms of how they see him but his successor might not be a good man, he might become a real dangerous dictator who will abuse all these powers they are assigning to the central government.

. This is why the IFP is saying, let us not think of party interests, let us not cushion and protect certain political characters of today, let us structure a constitution which will stand the test of time in future, which will look after our nation never mind who is in power at the time.  This is why we are saying the best way of safeguarding the interests of our nation will be to ensure that you devolve more power downwards to the people where it actually belongs and retain those powers desired for the head of state and the central government to have in order to exercise and execute their allocated duties.  So this constitution will definitely be a biased one and you will still be there, you will remember what I am saying, it will fail to stand the test of time.

POM. Now what about the constitution in KwaZulu/Natal?  Dr Buthelezi, again, has said that if the ANC ram-rails legislation through this week that he might very well call a snap election in KwaZulu/Natal.  What would be the purpose of calling a snap election?

MM. Well I would imagine that you already have an answer to that.  When Dr Buthelezi spoke about that he must have mentioned to you that the constitutional requirement is that we ought to have two thirds support for any constitutional amendment or adoption of a new constitution in any of these provinces and for that reason some people in the party, IFP party, believe that if they cannot get support as a party in the KwaZulu government or legislature to adopt the proposed IFP sponsored constitution the best way will be to have a snap provincial election so that then they can go back with an increased majority.  The assumption, of course, which is correct, is that the IFP has more support in KwaZulu than reflected in the last elections because large areas of KwaZulu voted but their ballot boxes were not counted and those areas range from 95% to 100% IFP support.  So the chances, therefore, are that if we go to such elections the IFP will return with a huge majority.

. But the other danger with that is that since it will only be in KwaZulu/Natal that such elections will be taking place it might be very difficult to control hundreds of thousands of people that might be encouraged by the ANC from other provinces to go and vote there, which therefore means that you will have to have an extensive well-checked out voters' roll of residents of KwaZulu/Natal or citizens of that particular province so that come the day of the elections then you will be assured that only people from KwaZulu will vote.  But you do not know also possibilities out of desperation on the side of the ANC bringing in bus loads of people just to disrupt these elections, so that then you don't end up with those elections, you end up with a situation where parliament has been dissolved.

POM. If the province is not in a position to hold local elections on 1 November, and probably won't be ready until next March some time, how could it be in a position to hold a snap election?

MM. You can't have a snap election without a voters' roll otherwise you will have massive fraud.  As far as I'm concerned it just means that we have to have a voters' roll.

POM. But that might take some time to compile?

MM. That might take maybe six months to get people registered.  We are talking here of about eight million people to be registered.

POM. Dr Buthelezi himself mentioned, I brought the subject up, he admitted that there were some divisions within the IFP itself as to the best way forward.  He went on record as saying he would rather resign than preside over a divided party.  What are the nature of these divisions?

MM. I don't know them.  I seriously don't know if there are divisions.  But if we are talking of different points of view then I would say the IFP is indeed a democratic party and individual members are free to uphold certain ideas and views.  If I express a different view from that expressed by one other prominent leader that does not actually spell or smack of some kind of division.  It only means as individuals brought together by our party we are dynamic and we can think and therefore we can look at things differently.  All that is required is to manage that process until you come to some kind of consensus of some sort.  That's very democratic.  When Cabinet ministers debate issues and they differ, they have to differ until we say, OK guys let us vote, or until we convince the other side, or one side convinces the other, and then they end up maybe with one uniform point of view.

POM. What are the major different points of view that are on the table?

MM. I am only aware of differences of opinion as to whether we should go for a snap election or should try and water down the present proposed constitution and win the support of the other parties.  My personal view is that the constitution as proposed in KwaZulu/Natal, I personally think, is asking for too many things too early.  I would have gone, personally and this is not my party line it's my personal view which I know is shared by many people, my personal view is that since we come from a history characterised by violence and distrust and KwaZulu/Natal is the only province which is claiming or demanding to have its constitution in terms of the South African constitution of 1993, we should have gone for a softer constitution, very flexible, acceptable to the majority of the people and then wait and see and then amend it along the way until you reach what you want.  But if you have got to demand everything from the onset you are bound to create the impression that you want to be an independent state.  The danger also lies in the fact that the central government can in fact intervene and amend the national constitution so that even if you want to call for a snap election and you go back as IFP with an increased majority and then adopt the constitution, even before you adopt that constitution the national parliament will quickly amend the clauses relevant to provincial constitutions so that even if you have an increased majority you will not even be able to adopt a constitution because the constitution at the top shall have been changed as a pre-emption to what you want to do.  So that is what I fear, because we don't have the majority at national level.

POM. Is there no doubt in your mind that if there was this snap election with a properly conducted voters' roll that the IFP would in fact come back with an increased majority?

MM. No I don't doubt that.  I don't doubt that.

POM. It's a big risk.

MM. It's a big risk but I don't doubt that we will go back with an increased majority, but my fear is that in certain circles the ANC might use a very damaging argument saying that you guys are now asking for a new mandate, telling the electorate, because you can't govern, you are in the majority but you can't govern.  They will say so many things.  There are many risks attached to it, but as to our support I don't doubt, and I think my leader here has also accurately estimated or calculated, is sure of an increased majority and I am also sharing that.  This is not what I doubt.  What I doubt is the wisdom of actually doing it instead of going the other route and come up with a softer acceptable constitution at the beginning, bring these other parties along with you, then gradually with your majority adopt clauses which amend the constitution with more support, then you can get somewhere.

POM. But is there any way that elections could be held in the foreseeable future in KwaZulu/Natal that wouldn't involve large scale violence or the possibility of large scale violence?

MM. That's another consideration one should have.  Out of desperation the ANC will definitely escalate violence to try and disrupt those elections and dissuade people from going to the polls.  So that danger will always be there, as you say, in the foreseeable future.

POM. How do you think the media treat the IFP?

MM. I think it is sobering up a bit, the press now is sobering up to certain realities.  When they artificially built the ANC it was hoping for miracles but now they are aware that reality is totally different from dreams.  At the same time when it comes to reporting they are not doing justice to the IFP.  For instance with the demand for more powers they always create the impression in the eyes of the public that the IFP in KwaZulu/Natal is demanding independence from the rest of South Africa, which is not true.  And this belief or distortion is sinking slowly in the minds of many people that this is what the IFP is wanting.  When it comes to television it's a disaster.  SABC, which is the South African Broadcasting Corporation, is an ANC instrument.  They like showing negative things about the IFP and nothing positive.  Seldom will you find them covering our rallies in full.  Most of the time they will show people closer to the podium and snapshots, selected snapshots of the stadium as a whole, whereas when it is the ANC they give you an excellent aerial view as well inside and outside that same stadium in the same shot which gives you the sense of how many people attend such rallies.  And very often they don't even cover our activities.  If they do they will not report and if we are lucky then they will report.

POM. Now, Mr Mandela on the occasion of his 500th day in office gave an interview during which he said that the white controlled media had not given sufficient coverage of the gains that had been made by the government of national unity, that they tended to concentrate - he blamed the media for the impression that most of his attention was given to whites, saying white editors and owners glossed over his work for the majority and focused on gestures towards conservative whites.  Then he went on to say, "One must take into account that the media is controlled by whites and the element of racism is still there."  Now he is attacking the media, yet you are saying the media is pro-ANC.

MM. I am saying television is ANC, the press is very supportive of the ANC still but less so compared to what it was before elections.  You see the distinction?  And Mandela is the first one to complain at the slightest negligence on the part of the press and then he will point out that it is so because it's controlled by a white minority and so forth.  But if he had to be treated the way Dr Buthelezi and the IFP have always been treated by the media I don't know what he would say.  You can't even compare what the media does adversely to the ANC and what they do to us adversely.  You can't compare those two.

POM. At one level it would seem to me rather obvious to say that the level of crime in the country is a legacy of apartheid, yet why did Mr de Klerk take such offence at Mr Mandela's remarks last week when Mr Mandela said no more than what would appear to be obvious to many people, that is that the level of crime and the legacy of apartheid in fact go hand in hand?

MM. I think it is natural for Mr de Klerk or any other person to react the way he did because Mr Mandela has never praised any positive development work and development of the country as a legacy from apartheid.  Only the negative things are mentioned as legacies from the apartheid era.  This does not mean one is apologetic about apartheid.  Definitely not.  But what I am saying is that De Klerk reacted in that way because Mr Mandela never said, look, despite apartheid South Africa has developed economically, infrastructurally, look at our roads and things like that, and is the best therefore in Africa in that sense.  And these are the positive legacies of apartheid.  People don't talk like that in politics, you can't praise either your enemy or your opposition, you can't.  But you would normally focus on the negative aspects of your competitor.  This is what Mr Mandela did.  He mentioned something which is true, everything that we see here is in fact a legacy of apartheid because we are just from apartheid, only yesterday.  That's it.

POM. How long can you use race as a way in which to explain everything?  I'll give you an example.  It existed in the United States, people look at the O J Simpson trial and say it was a verdict made purely around racial lines. 90% of black people believed that he was innocent and 90% of white people believed he was guilty and it just broke down completely along a racial divide.  Is that inevitable and will last for a long, long time do you think in this country too?

MM. I think it will because we will continue to have the Alexandras of this world, the Sowetos of this world, etc., places that are historically residential places for black people and you will always your Houghton, your Sandton and other places, notwithstanding a sprinkling of some black guys who are buying properties in those areas.  And for those reasons I think you will always continue to have this racial divide because your children go to the nearby schools in those areas and therefore they have a certain upbringing influenced by the physical environment.  And you will also have black schools in black areas who will admit exclusively black children.

POM. When you look to the future how do you see it after 18 months of there being a government of national unity, of democratic structures in place?  What do you see happening within the next year?

MM. I don't know what's going to happen next year.  If I knew I would make money.

POM. Are you optimistic?  More optimistic about developments that will take place or will crime continue to increase?

MM. I think I am more realistic than optimistic.  I think crime will still increase.  I think foreign investors will still continue to express concerns and fears and therefore not come forward with huge investments that this country needs.  I'm not expecting the heavens to cave in.  I'm expecting dissatisfaction amongst many members of the public with the present government because it will not be able to deliver and I also think that as soon as the new constitution is finished there will be no need to continue with the present government in its form.  The period of waiting for 1999 for general elections, people are going to have elections before that. Once the constitution is ready the question is, what are you waiting for?

POM. Would you prefer to see elections before 1999?

MM. It depends whether you are ANC or not.  If you are ANC you might probably prefer to have elections before 1999 for the simple reason that you are aware that you are losing support and therefore you would like to have elections before you lose completely so that you can have your term in office extended.  And also if you are IFP you may wish to have elections before 1999 so that you can get out of this GNU.  I think that's it.

POM. Do you think that what the country lacks is an effective opposition?

MM. I think it will be desirable to have an official opposition party.  That will keep the ruling party on its toes.  It is undesirable for the ruling party to have a huge unchallengeable majority.  It's not good for multi-party democracy.  You need to have a majority, yes, but not hundreds, not in terms of 30% more.


MM. OK thank you.  I am tired.

POM. Thank you.

This resource is hosted by the Nelson Mandela Foundation, but was compiled and authored by Padraig O’Malley. Return to theThis resource is hosted by the site.