Meyer’s US posting raises questions about ANC reforms
Anthony Butler’s most recent column refers (“Ramaphosa’s trust in Meyer faces Washington test”, April 17).
There has been a lot of hype about Roelf Meyer’s appointment as South Africa’s ambassador to Washington. For example, President Cyril Ramaphosa seemingly reaching out in the national interest to a broader spectrum outside the ANC inner circle.
The references to Meyer’s contribution to Codesa and his negotiating skills suggest preference was given to a technocratic appointment over an ideological fellow traveller.
However, Meyer has reportedly been a member of the ANC since 2006. This suggests he is at home with the ANC’s race-based and economy-destroying policies, though he did call for Jacob Zuma’s removal as president.
The upshot then is that Meyer’s appointment suggests both no backing down by Ramaphosa on his harmful and antidemocratic, anti-minority agenda: BEE, expropriation without compensation, National Health Insurance and cadre deployment.
It also suggests there will be little to no attempt to accommodate the concerns of not just President Donald Trump but the US political establishment on both sides of the aisle about South Africa’s domestic and foreign policies, bar possibly some tweaking of trade policy, which has so far produced few results.
There’s no doubt Ramaphosa is a master strategist and a survivor, though the imminent Constitutional Court ruling on Phala Phala, albeit on process rather than substance, is clouding the horizon. On the other hand, the “fly-fishing narrative” referred to by Butler presents Meyer as “vaguely inept but willing to learn”.
This may be unfair to Meyer. But then it should be remembered that Meyer previously served as chair of the defence review committee, which in 2015 produced the South African Defence Review. As memory serves, this was a competently drafted and useful report that was promptly shelved.
The eventual result was the South African National Defence Force’s defeat in 2025 by M23, effectively by Rwanda — a catastrophic outcome and strategic setback for South Africa as a so-called regional power.
More than at the time of Ramaphosa’s counterproductive meeting in the Oval Office last May, Washington today is a highly unstable and unpredictable environment. Largely due to his ill-advised war against Iran, Trump is flailing about desperately attempting to extricate himself from a conflict that is about to tank the global economy and wreck his electoral chances in the November midterms and beyond.
Trump is likely to become increasingly dangerous, at least until he’s cornered by a Democratic Congress, which is now a possibility. Should Meyer get any meaningful access to the Oval Office, he is likely to be confronted by a president with little incentive to placate a weaker interlocutor.
Ambassador Meyer will certainly need all his proven human skills but may well still end up eating humble pie.
Francois Theron
Via Business Day online
Phala Phala case tests judiciary’s independence
Your editorial opinion refers (“Phala Phala shadow lingers over Ramaphosa as court ruling looms’, April 17).
This case is a test of whether some South Africans are above the law, which is in itself a comment on the independence of the judiciary and the status of the rule of law in our country.
No matter how this is spun, there are some outstanding questions that should have been explored and aired in court by now:
- Was the law followed when bringing the money into the country ― was it reported as required?
- Were taxes paid on transactions (sale or donation) involving the money?
- Was this a one-off case?
The judiciary also needs to explain the delay in the ruling. Supreme Court of Appeal judges used to write their judgments before the end of the session. What has changed?
The presidential nature of one of the parties is not the only possible reason and that is not an acceptable reason in my book. I cannot see a situation where this is acceptable, and if this is unprecedented even more questions are raised.
Greg Becker
Via Business Day online
Transformation Fund proposal sparks fears of renewed state capture
As always, Ann Bernstein’s article was considered and logical (“Proposed BBBEE shake-up is reckless and must be stopped”, April 17).
Unfortunately, the ANC does not do reason. The purpose of this Transformation Fund is to facilitate massive theft. The ANC doesn’t want companies to only deal with black companies and that’s why that part of the proposal is impossible to comply with.
The drafters want companies to pay into the fund because they know they are going to be out on their behinds come election time. They need one more big heist, and this fund is it.
Remember the PPE Fund? They first tried with National Health Insurance, which also has a fund in its structure, but everyone and their aunt stalled the implementation of this insane idea. So back to the drawing board to access a new fund.
And voila! The Transformation Fund is created. We need to stop this in its tracks too, even if it means lawfare.
Andrea Robertson
Via Business Day online
JOIN THE DISCUSSION: Send us an email with your comments to letters@businessday.co.za. Letters of more than 200 words may be edited for length. Anonymous correspondence will not be published. Writers should include a daytime telephone number.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.