As Future Atlas noted more than a year ago, Jacob Zuma presents challenges to the future of South Africa.
Accused of corruption and even rape in the past, he is now closer to power, having been elected head of the African National Congress (ANC), the only party currently able to win national elections.
New corruption charges may derail his rise; if convicted he would be ineligible to run for president of the country in 2009.
Zuma’s situation might produce at least two effects:
- If he is blocked, his followers could be tempted to amend or bend the rules, endangering the primacy of law.
- South African academic Sheila Meintjes told the VOA that the Zuma affair could presage a split within the ANC, between the business-middle class wing on one hand, and the more radical working class elements on the other. This would be a positive development, as it might break the single-party hold on elections.
Recent events suggest that South Africa faces the same danger of destructive leadership that has been the bane of so many other African states.
This danger is personified in the form of Jacob Zuma, who has been accused of serious corruption and of raping the HIV-positive daughter of a friend. (He said that he had taken care of the risk of AIDS: he took a shower afterwards.)
He is nonetheless considered one of the leading contenders to become the head of the ANC party and thus the next president.
If this occurs, South Africa will be at heightened risk of taking Zimbabwe’s path, and self-destructing due to the choices of its leaders, at great cost to South Africans and to Africa.
The Economist Intelligence Unit released its 2006 e-readiness rankings yesterday. The index is a measure of a country’s readiness for e-business, judged by Internet access, broadband penetration, innovation, information security, and other factors. More telling than the ranking is the country’s distance from a score of 10.
The ratings are a good indicator of general abilities in IT, and thus an important component of present and future competitiveness.
The top countries
Rank. Country — score out of 10 (2005 rank)
1. Denmark — 9.00 (1)
2. US — 8.88 (2)
3. Switzerland — 8.81 (4)
4. Sweden — 8.74 (3)
5. UK — 8.64 (5)
6. Netherlands — 8.60 (8)
7. Finland — 8.55 (6)
8. Australia — 8.50 (10)
9. Canada — 8.37 (12)
10. Hong Kong — 8.36 (6)
11. Norway — 8.35 (9)
12. Germany — 8.34 (12)
13. Singapore — 8.24 (11)
14. New Zealand — 8.19 (16)
14. Austria — 8.19 (14)
16. Ireland — 8.09 (15)
17. Belgium — 7.99 (17)
18. South Korea — 7.90 (18)
19. France — 7.86 (19)
Other countries of interest
Rank. Country — score out of 10 (2005 rank)
21. Japan — 7.77 (21)
22. Israel — 7.59 (20)
23. Taiwan — 7.51 (22)
25. Italy — 7.14 (24)
30. United Arab Emirates — 6.32 (X)
31. Chile — 6.19 (31)
35. South Africa — 5.74 (32)
37. Malaysia — 5.60 (35)
39. Mexico — 5.30 (36)
41. Brazil — 5.29 (38)
42. Argentina — 5.27 (39)
45. Turkey — 4.77 (43)
46. Saudi Arabia — 4.67 (46)
48. Venezuela — 4.47 (45)
49. Romania — 4.44 (47)
51. Colombia — 4.41 (48)
52. Russia — 4.30 (52)
53. India — 4.25 (49)
55. Egypt — 4.14 (53)
56. Philippines — 4.04 (51)
57. China — 4.02 (54)
60. Nigeria — 3.69 (58)
61. Ukraine — 3.62 (57)
62. Indonesia — 3.39 (60)
64. Kazakhstan — 3.22 (62)
65. Iran — 3.15 (59)
67. Pakistan — 3.03 (64)
Regional standouts in the developing world are Chile, South Africa, and the United Arab Emirates. The low scores of some countries, notably India, China, and Russia, disguise significant specialized capabilities in infotech.
The South African army is planning for its medium-term future, with attention to distinctly African issues, from dealing with “superstition” to fighting child soldiers and mercenaries.