Shortly after she was elected into the top structures of the DA last year, Helen Zille said: "I will not be leader; I will play a background role and I will stay in my lane."
On that Sunday in October, Zille, who had officially retired from active party politics some years before to make space for new leader Mmusi Maimane, was elected DA federal council chair — arguably the most powerful position in the party.
Prior to that moment, the concern had been raised that, with her formidable personality, Zille would become the de facto party leader if she was elected federal council chair — and that she would prove unable to stay in her lane. As it turned out, her election was to prove a catalyst for major leadership changes in the party, including the resignation of Maimane.
But that Sunday briefing was a Kumbaya moment for the DA. Zille was adamant that she wanted the party structures and systems to work, that factions should not matter, that she supported the party’s leadership, that she knew what a backroom role entailed, and that she would — she said this repeatedly — stay in her lane.
But intention doesn’t always align with reality.
Last week, a series of bizarre tweets wiped out those good intentions — and undid the work the DA has put into transforming the party into an organisation that speaks with one coherent voice, with policy offerings to match.
On Twitter Zille declared that there are more racist laws in democratic SA now than there were under the systematised racial oppression of apartheid. She also claimed that the country’s last National Party president, FW de Klerk, had "decided to dismantle apartheid" and, had he not done so, the ANC would still "be bogged down in the mess of its so-called liberation camps and infighting".
Her tweets — there were many more — put her fellow DA members on the spot: Zille’s position in the party means her sentiments could not be ignored. So her colleagues were left to counter comments that at best could be interpreted as factual errors, at worst as blatant apartheid denialism.
It brought huge pushback — publicly and within the party itself. For example, DA Gauteng leader John Moodey, who is in the running to become party leader, bluntly said Zille does not speak for him.
In a letter to party members, Moodey said Zille’s statements "bring back painful memories and open old wounds, both of which I had hoped to have forgotten".
He added: "This conduct is not what I would have expected from a senior leader of the DA and in the current political environment. It is wrong, insensitive and indefensible.
"She is causing more harm to social cohesion and damaging the DA brand."
Zille is now facing a probe by the party’s federal legal commission (FLC) for her tweets — just a few years after she was hauled over the coals for tweeting that the legacy of colonialism wasn’t only negative.
No timeframe has been given for the commission’s investigation. However, deputy federal council chair Thomas Walters says the FLC will look at all relevant facts, alongside the DA’s constitution and policies, and advise the federal executive on the matter.
What is inexplicable about Zille’s action — particularly given her social media history — is that the DA knows exactly what happens when the party takes a deep dive into racial controversy.
Just last year, after taking a huge knock at the polls in the general elections, the DA commissioned a review of its performance, structures and processes.
The review was conducted by former party CEO Ryan Coetzee, former leader Tony Leon and DA donor and Capitec founder Michiel le Roux.
In their final report, they listed a number of incidents that had damaged the party’s brand and dented its support. Among these were Zille’s tweets about colonialism, and how the issue was handled (she was disciplined by the party for her tweets), as well as various disputes over race issues. These included everything from Maimane’s tweet about the alleged racism experienced by former Springbok Ashwin Willemse, to the party’s handling of a racial issue in Schweizer-Reneke, to race-based redress policies.
The report said the party was uncertain and divided on the question of race, and this had a particularly negative effect on its electoral performance.
"Many conflicts over race are a consequence of a lack of understanding and empathy. The truth is that unless leaders and parties are sensitive to people’s feelings, intellectual debates over philosophy and policy will fail to resolve tension, generate trust or build consensus," the panel said.
"Transcending SA’s past, and leading a political party that seeks to do so, requires a sensitivity to feelings. It requires empathy, insight, patience and generosity. And it is possible to possess and display these attributes without compromising any principle. Unless every member, public representative and leader in the DA embraces this reality, the party’s effectiveness will be compromised at best and, at worst, its prospects capsized."
And yet, Zille’s tweets last week — and the response they drew — border on complete disregard for the outcome of the review, which is supposed to be the blueprint for change in the party.
A senior DA member tells the FM that it’s all good and well to have an intellectual, academic debate around what Zille had tweeted, but it’s foolish to think this is in any way helpful to the party.
All Zille is doing, the member says, is "spitting in the face" of her colleagues, who are working hard to get the DA back on track.
The party’s leader in KwaZulu-Natal, Zwakele Mncwango, tells the FM: "Regarding Helen’s views on race, I have honestly lost interest and energy."
Fatigue around the issue from within the party’s own ranks could bode badly for the DA if it translates into voters similarly losing interest.
The latest storm has elicited some criticism of interim leader John Steenhuisen for being unable to rein Zille in — or having the political will to do so — though reports over the weekend suggested he has silenced her.
Steenhuisen’s spokesperson, Azola Mboniswa, says the matter is now subject to an internal process, and the party will await that outcome before offering an extensive comment.
Mboniswa refers the FM to Steenhuisen’s comment last week.
"SA is an infinitely better, more just and humane society now than it was under apartheid. Not least because we have a constitution that guarantees everyone’s place and contribution, and which sees every person as equal before the law," he said.
But, he added, SA has a government that is increasingly and deliberately driving wedges between South Africans, "trading in racial divisiveness and making some South Africans feel as though they don’t belong. This is totally wrong. And law which excludes on the basis of race is inherently wrong."
Steenhuisen said Zille had pointed out that all racist laws are wrong — a point that is true and consistent with her long record of opposing injustice.
However, he questioned the accuracy of her comment about the number of racist laws now being greater than under apartheid.
Zille herself would not be drawn on the matter, telling the FM: "I’d rather not take this discussion further in the media. I am writing a book on the subject I tweeted about. What I see, from my research, as pretty obvious, comes as a real shock to other people. That is why I must hurry up and get this book done."
While that book is being written, the DA’s leadership congress, set for October, comes ever closer.
On the back of Zille’s tweets, DA Gauteng chair Mike Moriarty announced in a letter to some DA members that he would be standing for the position of federal council chair in the elections.
His pitch is direct: "The position of chairperson of the federal council is a role that requires a pragmatist. The incumbent must support the party leader, and the party as a whole, to reach its objectives."
In what can only be read as a dig at Zille, Moriarty writes: "The chairperson should bring stability, not controversy."
He adds: "The vision of the federal executive is that the DA should be the core of a realigned majority by 2024 to achieve an open opportunity society for SA. This is a bold vision which the country desperately needs."
The question is whether Zille still believes in this vision.
The lack of support she has been shown from within the party in the wake of her tweets perhaps speaks for itself.
A senior DA member who has supported Zille over the years cuts to the heart of the matter: she needs to decide whether she still aligns with the party. If not, the member says, she has to understand that it is not her job to force her views on others.
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.