EFF statement on Mantashe and Western influenced regime change
11 May, 2015
The EFF rejects Gwede Mantashe’s claims of regime change influenced by the Western powers as yet another sign that ANC is planing to resist going out of power. Addressing the media after a meeting of former liberation movements in Zimbabwe, Mantashe claims that the Western powers are targeting South Africa because the regime is inconvenient to them. He went further to use the Zimbabwean example of ZANU-PF and MDC, arguing that MDC was a tool of the West to remove the former liberation movement, ZANU-PF.
As a point of departure, Mantahse must be told that whilst the ANC and ZANU-PF share common history in that they are both liberation movements, they also differ in significant ways. To mention only two, the ANC, unlike ZANU-PF never liberated the country through a guerrilla war, or even conventional war. The South African struggle was won not because of the strength of liberation movement armed forces, but the resilient protest activities of unarmed youth and workers’ movements. It is the death and sacrifice of these unarmed protesting masses that would mobilise the international community towards full international isolation of South Africa.
This is critical because it essentially means the people, and not the ANC, liberated South Africa. The South African people never waited for liberation armies to come and save them from the murderous apartheid regime. Above all, the liberation armies never came, never conducted any war inside the country, except in missions that relied on the very protest ability of our people.
The second significant difference that Mantashe must know of is that the ZANU-PF government, unlike the ANC government, expropriated land from white people. This is the pragmatic basis upon which many revolutionaries, now and then, believed in the claim that MDC was being used by Western forces to remove the ZANU-PF government. Regardless of all its weaknesses, ZANU-PF became the target of the West because of its refusal to concede on the land question.