For over a week in July this year, South Africa was wracked by its worst violence since the end of apartheid in 1994. Riots in the country’s Gauteng and KwaZulu-Natal provinces left at least 342 people dead, with at least 3407 arrested. The trigger of the unrest was the jailing of former President of South Africa and African National Congress (ANC) leader Jacob Zuma for contempt of court.
Zuma’s legal troubles date back to the mid-1990s, shortly after South Africa emerged from apartheid, a time when sanctions had left it unable to procure arms internationally. To strengthen and modernise its military, its government embarked on a “Strategic Defence Package”. Despite being advised by a 1996 white paper that the country was “not confronted by an immediate conventional military threat”, in 1999, the South African government— with Zuma as Deputy President — spent R 30 billion (30 billion South African rand) on its eventual arms deal. The expenditure was widely considered grossly excessive, and suspicions soon arose that it had been made to personally benefit those who made it.
In 2005, Durban businessman Schabir Shaik, an intermediary between Zuma and French weapons company Thomson-CSF (now Thales), was found guilty of corruption and fraud for soliciting a bribe from Thomson-CSF for Zuma’s benefit. A corporate group to which Thomson-CSF belonged had won a contract that was part of the arms deal. Though Zuma was not directly criminally implicated by the judgement against Shaik, his standing was severely damaged. Judge Hilary Squires found that Zuma was compliant in the bribery arrangement, which allowed him to “maintain a lifestyle beyond what he could afford”. Zuma was subsequently sacked as Deputy President by then-President Thabo Mbeki.
However, in 2007, Zuma defeated Mbeki in a contest for the ANC’s leadership, paving the way for him to become President (which he did in 2009). Less than a month after becoming ANC leader, Zuma was charged with corruption himself. Amongst other allegations, he is accused of accepting bribes from Thomson-CSF in exchange for protecting them from an investigation into the 1999 deal. The charges were dropped in 2009, amidst claims that they were politically motivated, but were reinstated in 2017. Facing pressure from his party, Zuma resigned from South Africa’s presidency in 2018. He was replaced by his deputy, Cyril Ramaphosa.
This transfer of power had significant implications for how South Africa would be governed. Whilst Zuma’s left-wing credentials are unimpeachable, having struggled against apartheid since he joined the ANC at 17, Ramaphosa is even more ideologically hard-line. In 2018, he approvingly quoted Mao Zedong in a speech to, among others, Chinese dignitaries in Beijing. Two years after Ramaphosa took over the presidency — before the COVID-19 pandemic decimated the global economy — South Africa’s economy had seriously deteriorated.
Despite his embroilment in corruption scandals, Zuma maintains a sizeable supporter base. This has been attributed to multiple factors, including his support for economic redistribution, his charisma and culture (such as his ability in the Zulu language), and his grassroots, man-of-the-people image (in contrast to the considerably wealthier Ramaphosa). Meanwhile, under Ramaphosa’s governance and the effects of the pandemic, hunger, unemployment and economic inequality have risen sharply.
So when Zuma — the man considered by many to have governed the country far better than Ramaphosa — was the one taken into custody on July 8, a fuse was lit. Zuma had already been convicted and sentenced to 15 months in prison for contempt of court, owing to his refusal to attend court hearings in his corruption case. It was for this reason that he was ultimately jailed. When, on July 9, the Pietermaritzburg High Court refused to defer this sentence, a point of no return was reached.
Zuma’s favourite song is Umshimi wami, a Nguni language anti-apartheid song meaning “Bring me my machine”, “machine” being a reference to “machine gun”. And that’s the spirit in which his supporters reacted. Beginning on July 9, violence erupted in Gauteng and KwaZulu-Natal. The violence took the traditional forms of looting, arson and other vandalism, but also more extreme forms such as gunfire and explosions. As well as the confirmed 342 deaths, the riots involved the looting of 200 malls and 3000 other shops, costing South Africa’s economy R 50 billion (USD $3.4 billion) and endangering 150,000 jobs. Furthermore, insurance payouts have amounted to at least R 25 billion (USD $1.7 billion).
Troublingly, racial elements have emerged in the unrest. One such element concerns the ethnic groups to which the current and former presidents belong. Zuma is ethnically Zulu. Ramaphosa is ethnically Venda. During the unrest, Ramaphosa accused the rioters of “ethnic mobilisation”, seizing on the fact that the riots occurred in mostly Zulu areas. This may have been an attempt to delegitimise the rioters’ legitimate (but atrociously expressed) grievances against government mismanagement, by portraying them as concerned only with ethnic self-interest and anger that one of their own has been arrested. Given the extremely sensitive nature of ethnicity in South Africa, Ramaphosa’s comments were criticised as playing with fire and potentially destroying the country itself. Days later, Ramaphosa backed off from this characterisation.
Another worrying racial element concerns Indian South Africans. As of 2015, South Africa was home to approximately 1.3 million people of Indian descent. However, racial tensions between black and Indian South Africans have existed for decades: an anti-Indian pogrom in Durban in 1949 killed 142 people. More recently, Indian South Africans have been are viewed negatively by many in the country due to the actions of the Gupta brothers, three Indian mining magnates and entrepreneurs whose dealings with South Africa have seriously damaged the country. This year, when the Indian-majority town of Phoenix in KwaZulu-Natal was attacked by rioters and the police did not intervene, residents formed militias to respond. Militia attacks were indiscriminate and random, and not limited to attacks on rioters. Ultimately, 36 people died in the town, 33 of whom were black.
All this has taken place before Zuma has even received a verdict in his trial, which commenced in September but has now been postponed to October 26. Zuma is currently free on medical parole, but should he be convicted of corruption, a return to prison would be almost inevitable. There is a real risk that this would cause violence to recommence. For his part, Zuma seemingly feels no obligation to try and put a stop to any violence: at a rally shortly before his arrest, he was singing “bring me my machine” to a crowd of his supporters.
The riots are a sobering reminder that South Africa faces a multitude of challenges that go far beyond the legacy of its white minority oppressing its black majority. Economic difficulties are getting worse. New social divisions, such as between the backers of Zuma and Ramaphosa, are opening up. Grievances and tribalism lead to conflict, which leads to victimisation, which results in more grievances. When it comes to patching up its fractures and extracting itself from its troubles, the Rainbow Nation has an unenviable task ahead of it.
