Thabo Mbeki and the National Dialogue: Legacy or self-betrayal? - Fanie Bouwer

Key topics:

• Mbeki calls for national dialogue amid South Africa’s political and service crises.

• ANC’s failures: corruption, cadre deployment, and policy design worsen the country’s state.

• Dialogue risks symbolic rhetoric unless it includes honest self-examination and reform.

Sign up for your early morning brew of the BizNews Insider to keep you up to speed with the content that matters. The newsletter will land in your inbox at 5:30am weekdays. Register here.

Support South Africa’s bastion of independent journalism, offering balanced insights on investments, business, and the political economy, by joining BizNews Premium. Register here.

If you prefer WhatsApp for updates, sign up to the BizNews channel here.

The auditorium doors will open for BNIC#2 on 10 September 2025 in Hermanus. For more information and tickets, click here.

By Fanie Bouwer  

In a country where state institutions are crumbling, service delivery is stagnating, and public trust in government and politics is at an all-time low, Thabo Mbeki, former president of South Africa, has returned to the stage with a plea: a national dialogue. 

He calls on citizens, political parties, civil organisations, and intellectuals to come together to talk to build consensus about the future of the country.

For many, this sounds constructive. For others, it sounds suspiciously late. And for some, like me, it simply sounds naïve.

But what is Mbeki’s true motivation behind this initiative? And why is he advocating for dialogue at a time when South Africans are yearning for simple action, honest acknowledgment of mistakes, and tangible policy change?

The ANC is in decline; it’s no secret. In fact,  the ANC is in crisis. 

From state capture and the collapse of Eskom to rampant unemployment and institutions like Prasa, Transnet, and the health and education departments buckling under their own weight, the ruling party has been the driving force behind the decay of basic state capacity.

Mbeki, who served as president from 1999 to 2008, now looks from the outside at the ruins of the organisation he helped build. 

And while his presidency was not without controversy (think of his AIDS denialism or his centralised style of governance), many South Africans have long begun comparing him favourably to the outright failures of the later Zuma era. 

Even within the ANC, there has been a reassessment of his tenure.Yet the question remains: Why a dialogue now? 

Is it out of genuine concern for the country? Or is it an attempt to salvage his own legacy and absolve himself of the ANC’s burden of guilt?

Mbeki is not a populist. He is not a man of slogans, crowds or political theater. He is a thinker. And perhaps one of the most intellectual leaders South Africa has ever had. 

His entire approach to politics has always been reasoned, strategic, and often elitist. He was never comfortable with the mass populism that later engulfed the ANC.

His idea of an African Renaissance was rooted in cultural development, education, pan-Africanism and long-term vision. For him, dialogue is a natural instrument; not just a political mechanism, but a fundamental part of nation-building.

Yet this rational approach offers little comfort today in the face of an indifferent, corrupt and inefficient state. It suggest that a dialogue could be a smokescreen for the real problem.

What Mbeki does not openly acknowledge, is that most of the country’s current problems stem not from a lack of conversation, but from misguided ideological and organisational choices, many of which were set in motion by the ANC itself years ago.

Read more:

Under the guise of “transformation” and “democratic centralism,” the ANC has:

* Established cadre deployment as a norm, 

* Displaced competent public administrators

* Prioritised race and party loyalty over merit 

* Implemented policies that have eroded private sector confidence (think BEE, BBBEE, land reform without clarity); and

* Transformed state entities into extensions of party interests.

These mistakes, coupled with widespread corruption and the erosion of accountability, have plunged the country into a crisis. 

And what does Mbeki say? He does not name these core failures explicitly. He does not address them with urgency. Instead, he proposes: “Let’s talk.”

Yes, Mbeki’s call for dialogue comes at a critical  moment. South Africa’s fiscal space is limited. Service delivery in many areas is in tatters. The crime rate remains alarmingly high. Some young people are leaving the country. The tax base is low.  Even basic infrastructure cannot be properly maintained.

On top of that, there is a growing populist threat in the form of the EFF, RET factions within the ANC, and various extremist groups. Mbeki sees this too. His dialogue may, in part, be an attempt to restore moderation to build a bulwark against populism.

But without honest self-examination and policy reform, such a dialogue risks descending into symbolism and old rhetoric, without real impact.

If Mbeki truly wants to facilitate a meaningful dialogue, it must surely begin with an acknowledgment that the ANC’s policies have failed  - not just in implementation, but also in design. There should be a break with cadre deployment, the restoration of a professional, merit-based  public service. He must also openly acknowledge his own contribution to certain structural problems.

A shift from power retention to service delivery as a core value is required. Without this, the dialogue remains merely a political tactic. It will be an attempt to address structural decay with words, while the wounds continue to fester. 

Mbeki is right: South Africa urgently needs cooperation, reflection, and conversation. But this conversation will mean nothing without honesty, self-examination, and especially the courage to break with ideological and political sacred cows.

If he is willing not only to hold discussions, but also to speak the truth unequivocally -  even about the ANC and his own history, then his dialogue might just add value.

But if this is yet another attempt to repair a sinking ship from within without holding the captains accountable, then it is not dialogue. It will be  self-betrayal by ignoring his inner voice.

To conclude

Perhaps DA-leader, John Steenhuisen, must just be right after all when he  criticised the dialogue’s timing and origins, pointing out that Mbeki only called for it after the ANC’s poor showing in recent elections,  suggesting it was a political move to regain lost support for his party.