Real Politics: Zuma’s health throws open MK’s succession | Financial Mail

Anyone who has met Jacob Zuma will tell you his warmth is hard to resist. You might expect a former president to be a stately figure, shaped by the rituals of high office. Instead, you meet a man whose simplicity and common touch catch you off guard.

For those of us who spend months working in Johannesburg, a thousand kilometres from our families in the rural Eastern Cape, there is something familiar about the way Zuma welcomes you. He greets you like a grandfather receiving his children home for Christmas.

I first met Zuma more than 20 years ago. For much of the past two decades, I have reported on him, often disagreeing profoundly with his leadership style and political choices. But I have never stopped admiring his ability to put ordinary people at ease.

That is the paradox of Msholozi: you can disagree with the politician and still love the man.

It is why news of his hospitalisation in Pietermaritzburg has touched such a nerve. The concern is about more than the health of a former president. It is about a man whose personal warmth sustains a political bond that no successor can automatically inherit.

His illness has also exposed the central weakness of the uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party: its dependence on a leader whose authority is not matched by any settled succession process.

Family resists state care

Zuma, 84, is reported to be receiving care at Netcare St Anne’s Hospital after falling ill while campaigning in KwaZulu-Natal. The MK Party insists that he is healthy and in good spirits. But reports that his condition is serious have fuelled anxiety among supporters ahead of the November 4 local government elections.

President Cyril Ramaphosa, who said on Friday that Zuma had not been well, wished his predecessor a speedy recovery. He said the military surgeon-general had been briefed on Zuma’s treatment.

Reports that Zuma’s family has resisted a proposed transfer to 1 Military Hospital in Pretoria, amid mistrust of the state security apparatus, point to strained confidence between the family and the government. But conflicting accounts have created an information vacuum around a man whose political fortunes are inseparable from those of a major party.

For the MK Party, the timing could hardly be worse. It needs to show that its 2024 breakthrough was more than a protest vote against the ANC.

Zuma is central to that case: his ability to draw crowds in KwaZulu-Natal and embody opposition to Ramaphosa gives the party its identity. His absence from the campaign trail would leave the organisation facing a test it has not prepared for: surviving the day he can no longer lead it.

The MK Party has weathered leadership changes, disciplinary disputes and factional tensions without holding an elective conference. Zuma’s appointments have shaped its structures, but they have not settled who would succeed him.

What happens next?

In August, Zuma appointed his son, Duduzane, as first deputy president, replacing former judge president John Hlophe, with Tony Yengeni as second deputy president. Neither appointment establishes who would assume the presidency should Zuma die or become permanently incapacitated.

Would the party rally behind a successor chosen by Zuma, insist on an elective conference, or splinter over the legitimacy of whoever emerged? At stake are the party’s parliamentary caucus, its provincial structures and the careers of those who built them around Zuma.

The MK Party’s strong showing in 2024, when it took about 45% of the provincial vote, reshaped KwaZulu-Natal’s politics. Its support reflects opposition to the ANC, dissatisfaction with governance and, for some voters, a connection to Zuma’s political and cultural identity. His appeal to sections of the Zulu electorate cannot be reduced to traditionalism. He has cultivated an image of political defiance and cultural familiarity.

The younger Zuma may inherit his father’s surname, but political authority does not pass through family ties. The party must hold together disaffected former ANC supporters, voters drawn to its message and people whose attachment to Zuma is personal. If rival leaders claim different parts of that legacy, the party could fragment.

The Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) and its founder, Inkosi Mangosuthu Buthelezi, offer a revealing comparison.

Buthelezi announced in 2019 that he would not seek another term as IFP president. Velenkosini Hlabisa, now cooperative governance minister, was elected unopposed at the party’s national conference that August. Buthelezi remained influential until his death in September 2023, but the transition had already taken place.

The IFP did not have to settle its presidency for the first time while mourning its founder. It remains a force in KwaZulu-Natal’s provincial government and municipal politics. Succession planning alone does not explain that, but it shows the value of settling leadership legitimacy before a founder departs. The MK Party has not done the same.

The Ramaphosa mistrust

Zuma’s relationship with the ANC under Ramaphosa is deeply antagonistic. If Zuma were to die, Ramaphosa would have to mourn a former president with whom he has fought bitterly. A state funeral would honour the office without endorsing the record.

SA’s official funeral policy provides for a state funeral for former presidents, but that does not give the government ownership of the body or licence to override the family’s wishes. The prolonged litigation between former Zambian president Edgar Lungu’s family and the Zambian government over his remains shows how a funeral can become a political and legal confrontation.

The wider danger is that uncertainty deepens mistrust. Speculation about Zuma’s health, the reported military-hospital transfer and claims about possible security deployments have created fertile ground for rumour. The MK Party has challenged reports linking his health to possible unrest in KwaZulu-Natal, and there is no basis to treat violence as inevitable. But transparent communication, within the limits of medical privacy, serves everyone.

The MK Party must show that it is more than the vehicle of one man, even as it depends on his presence to mobilise voters.

Buthelezi prepared his party for a future beyond himself. Zuma’s political legacy may depend on whether the movement he created can do the same.