Focus on politics, not polygamy

I was proud when I saw my President talking to Queen Elizabeth and when I saw my President and his wife standing with Gordon and Sarah Brown outside 10 Downing Street. I thought, now, this is how it should be. Look how far we have come. Usually, I am the first to place Mr Jacob Zuma in a box. I have written letters of criticism about him to newspapers, concerning his corruption and rape charges. I tried to dissuade people from voting for him.

Since moving to the United Kingdom, however, I have become increasingly upset by the constant negative television coverage and newspaper reporting of South Africa; some articles written by journalists who have never been to the country and have made no effort to understand the variety of cultures or troubled history.

At the time of Jacob Zuma’s arrival in England, the media focussed on President Zuma’s polygamous lifestyle, with one journalist even shouting “Would you recommend polygamy to Mr Brown?” to Zuma outside No. 10.

Now, I find myself coming to the defence of Mr Zuma. Janet Street-Porter, editor of The Independent on Sunday (7 March 2010), sums it up pretty well, “When it comes to polygamy, Mr Zuma may be a Zulu, but he’s not an acceptable caste to the British media folk”. Polygamy, especially if it involves a black leader, is an issue which seems to bring out the worst in the British and “middle-class liberals suddenly go into meltdown and become narrow minded moralists”, says Street-Porter. Why is King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia or the Prime Minister of the United Arab Emirates acceptable to the British media? Both of these leaders have several wives and children.

Sally Bercow, the Speaker’s wife, made comments she may have thought humorous but were distasteful, if not hugely ignorant, “President and Mrs Zuma are here later...pretty sure it’s the same Mrs Zuma I met last night...if it’s not the same Mrs Zuma, I’ll feel as if I am being disloyal to the one I met”.

Zuma should not be judged on his polygamous lifestyle by ignorant people in this country or the media looking for an catchy headline. Leave the subject of his many wives and children to his own people and fellow countrymen. Do judge him on his stance on Zimbabwe, his action (or lack of) on policy in South Africa, his view of the AIDS catastrophe.

As much as it is absolutely necessary for newly independent countries to be judged by the same standards as other democratic states, it is also relevant to remember that the majority of South Africa’s people were oppressed for nearly two centuries. Sixteen years on from the first democratic election, it needs to be emphasised that South Africa and other developing African countries are still struggling with the colonial legacy; rearranging culture, language and belief around a “Western” lifestyle and values, dealing with the financial gap between the elite and the poor, intense poverty, AIDS, and racial tension. Zuma admits that ultimately, “Africa’s future rests in the hands of Africans” (The Economist, The World in 2010).

Let the media celebrate the positives as well as the negatives of President Zuma’s visit. Seventeen years ago, a visit to the United Kingdom by the President of South Africa would not have happened. Her people were at war with an apartheid government. In 2009, a majority of voters kept the ANC in power and chose Jacob Zuma as their leader. As was written in The Times editorial, “South Africa is easily the most sophisticated and powerful country in the continent” (5 March 2010). There is no doubt that Zuma has much to prove to the international community. But for goodness sake, focus on his politics, not his polygamy.