The Myth of Unity: A Deep Dive into South Africa's New Coalition Government

Examining the Political Realities and Power Dynamics Behind the 'Government of National Unity'

Less than 24 hours from the first sitting of Parliament, the “Government of National Unity” made up of the ANC, DA, IFP, Rise Mzansi, and other parties is set to be formed, marking a new era for South Africa. This coalition government is being framed as a "Government of National Unity" to make the coalition more palatable to the South African public.

A Government of National Unity is typically formed when a country faces a crisis that transcends the political system. Political parties come together to represent an overwhelming majority, enabling them to pass legislation effectively. In the unique context of South Africa in 1994, this involved splitting the cabinet proportionally according to the votes. The IFP, ANC, and NP collectively made up over 90% of the electorate, and it was agreed that all parties receiving more than 5% of the vote would be part of the government. These three parties were set to govern South Africa, and there were two deputy presidents, one being FW de Klerk, the last president under apartheid. This government shared a desire to transition South Africa into a post-apartheid state.

In contrast, a coalition government is an agreement between two or more parties to govern a particular area, province, or even the nation. Unlike a Government of National Unity, most coalitions aim to surpass the 50+1% threshold required for a political party to govern. Additionally, there is no obligation for power sharing on a proportional basis, meaning the larger party is not required to share positions or any form of governance. In some cases, concessions are made that can impact provincial or municipal levels as parties prioritize different areas and levels of governance. There is no overarching goal or shared reason to remain in government.

In South Africa, we are now witnessing the framing of this “Government of National Unity,” which fails to fulfill various criteria. The first and most obvious failure is that South Africa is not currently facing a specific crisis or transition. The negotiations have not been about solving a particular crisis but rather about choosing a political narrative for the country in a post-ANC majority government. The left prioritizes land and equitable distribution of wealth and resources, while the right prioritizes the economy. This dynamic influences how the ANC positions itself as the largest party in South Africa.

Furthermore, the government of national unity failed to represent the majority of constituents in the electorate, with the exclusion of the MK and the EFF, both political parties that represent the far left. They failed to come to the table and put their political differences aside for the benefit of South Africa, which is an essential aspect of a Government of National Unity. Differently, with a coalition, the ANC was allowed to reject individuals and let political parties fight amongst themselves.

The ANC was well aware that the DA's only aim was to ensure that the left remained outside of power. By calling a coalition with the MK, ANC, and EFF a doomsday coalition, the DA clarified their lack of willingness to partner with either the EFF or the MK in coalition discussions. The parties placed their principles and political values before the people of South Africa, stripping the unity it aims to form. Additionally, both the MK and the EFF refused to work with the ANC with Ramaphosa as the president of the party and the country, doubling down on their stance to not share power with the oppressor. They too were unable to put their differences aside.

The open invitation given to all political parties to govern South Africa was framed as a “Government of National Unity.” The media continues to paint this narrative that politicians are coming together for the benefit of the people. This has been outright untrue. This government that comes together will be tasked with protecting the interests of their supporters and voting constituents.

The ANC's reluctance to outright claim that they were going into coalition with the DA and their unwillingness to address the blatant exclusion of the EFF and MK has deepened political divides in South Africa. Reliance on the nostalgia and reminiscence of Mandela and 1994 has once again been used to blindside the South African public.

In reality, this is a coalition where policies, positions, and territory were traded between parties so they could hold on to power and remain in power. For other political parties, the active inclusion of specific political parties in this new government promotes the exclusion of other political parties and fails to represent all South Africans.

The “Government of National Unity,” which was in part gifted to the ANC and the DA as a result of the workings of 1994, needs to apply the same principles and truly govern for the people of South Africa. Currently, they show a lack of willingness to relinquish power and hold on to their principles.

As we watch the 7th administration sit in the first parliamentary meeting and we truly engage with our new government, it is clear that this is about power and who accesses the levers of power, with very little to do with unifying the South African people.