Saturday, September 29, 2012

Tony Leon se veglus nie geblus

Bookmark and Share


29 Sep 2012 | Hanlie Retief  | Rapport

Amen.

Dis Tony Leon se antwoord op Barney Pityana se kaalvuis-tirade die afgelope week teen die ANC as ’n onverantwoordelike regering “sonder enige kollektiewe intelligensie om te verstaan wat gedoen behoort te word”.

Hy lag so ’n bietjie daarvoor, sê Tony oor ’n dowwerige telefoonlyn uit Buenos Aires.

“Toe ons ander dit gesê het, was ons morele en politieke uitgeworpenes. So, mnr. Pityana: Ek weet wat jy van mý gesê het ’n paar jaar terug. En jy’t Dennis Davis ’n rassis genoem oor jy nie met hom saamgestem het nie.

“Nou’s jou kritiek op die regering veel erger.”

Dié oud-DA-leier se drie ambassadeursjare in Argentinië het hom dalk ’n staatsman en diplomaat gemaak, maar al die bankette en seremonies kon die “Veg terug” in Tony allermins blus.

“Ek dink die stemming in Suid-Afrika het die laaste paar jaar verander. Ek was destyds ’n stem in die wildernis en in baie gevalle is ek reg bewys. En nou?

“Die hele Suid-Afrika is nou in fight-backmode.”

Die joernalis Justice Malala skryf in 2007: “Hy (Tony Leon) was openlik krities toe baie net in fluisterstemme gepraat het.”

Ná seker 200 afskeidspartytjies (“die Argentyne gaan groot met dié soort goed”) was dit vir Tony en Michal Leon dié naweek “adios Argentinië” in ’n SAL-vliegtuig op pad huis toe. In die romp was ’n aangenome Argentyn, die worshond Julio, nadat hul geliefde Jemima haar einde teëgekom het in ’n dammetjie oorkant die Leons se dakwoonstel in Buenos Aires.

So, vra ek hom, kry Suid-Afrika ’n ander Tony Leon terug as die een wat pres. Zuma drie jaar terug Argentinië toe gestuur het?

“Gawer, sagter, meer diplomaties? Nee. My nommer-twee by die ambassade sê hy ken nou óók my ekstreme vlakke van ongeduld!

“Kollegas en ander ambassadeurs het nogal gesê ek’s ’n vars bries, seker oor ek presies sê wat ek dink.”
Hy’t darem niks onbesonne aangevang nie, skerts Tony, maar die seremoniële rituele van diplomasie kan erg vervelig raak. Soos die keer toe hy ’n minister na afgeleë Jujuy vergesel. Alles was laat – die vliegtuig, die ete wat eenuur die nag begin het. Al wat vinnig was, was die Spaans.

Halfvier het hulle gaan slaap om sewe-uur weer te begin met seremonies ... “Terug in Buenos Aires het ek gewonder: Is dit nou wat dié job behels?”

Dan byt Tony maar op sy tande en hou die SA vlaggie hoog.

Die Buenos Aires Herald, Suid-Amerika se oudste Engelse koerant, het laas Sondag in ’n lang artikel spesifiek verwys na Leon se transformasie van doemprofeet tot rasieleier ... en watter fyn balans hy kon handhaaf tussen die openbare en private sektore.

Al was dit net drie jaar, het sy ambassadeurskap hom ingrypend verander: “Profoundly.”

Toe Zuma hom die pos aangebied het, het Zuma gesê dis belangrik dat ook nie-ANC-lede Suid-Afrika se gesig na die wêreld word.

“Mooi woorde, maar toe ek oor daai ambassade-drempel tree, hét ek gewonder hoe ek dit gaan regkry, want ek verteenwoordig skielik ’n regering waarmee ek nie saamstem nie. Maar ek moet sê, dit was nie een keer ’n probleem nie, wat net weer bevestig het: Daar’s ’n wêreld se verskil tussen die belange van ’n land en dié van ’n party. Ek het nooit ’n krisis van gewete beleef nie. Bygesê, ’n ambassadeurskap in Harare of Tel Aviv sou ’n heel ander storie gewees het.”

Daar’s ook dinge wat nié vir Tony verander het nie.

Soos sy twee linkervoete. Drie jaar in Buenos Aires en señor Leon tango stééds nie. “Ek kon skaars dans op my troue. Maar ek het darem 27 tango-vertonings saam met gaste deurgesit.”
Tony Leon with the President of Argentina -
Cristina Fernández de Kirchner
Sy Sandton-Afrikaans is ook steeds strate beter as sy sypaadjie-Spaans, erken hy. Maar Tony het vasgebyt, nooit vertalers gebruik nie en self sy Spaanse toesprake voorgelees. Michal, spog hy, praat al Spaans soos ’n portenho, ’n plaaslike inwoner.

Ná al die Argentynse asado’s is die Leons ook vir eers klaar met rooivleis. As jy vir ’n Argentyn ’n bord kos gee sonder beesvleis tel dit nie as ’n ete nie, grap hy. “Dis seker nie ’n gewilde ding om te sê nie, maar asado’s is in ’n ander liga as ons braaie. Elke stukkie vleis word opgedien sodra dit gaar is. Dis heerlik, jy eet bietjies-bietjies, en ná die tyd voel jy soos ’n luislang.”

Tony is byna klaar met sy nuwe boek, The Accidental Ambassador – From Parliament to Patagonia.

“Hoe sê hulle? As jy dit nie geskryf het nie, het dit nie gebeur nie. Dis lig en humoristies en vertel hoe ek en Michal so half- toevallig deel geword het van hierdie geheime gilde van diplomate en ons interaksies met al die hoëkop-gaste uit Suid-Afrika.”

Hy skryf oor hoe hy ’n vlieg op die muur was een nag toe oudpres. F.W. de Klerk en pres. Cristina Kirchner ’n 40 minute-gesprek gehad het.

“Dit was ’n maand ná haar man (die vorige president, Néstor Kirchner) se dood en ek moes notas maak.”

In die boek raak Tony glo erg krities oor Kirchner se ekonomiese beleid. “Argentinië se onortodokse ekonomiese beleid is geen geheim nie en dit kom onder skoot, maar meer wil ek nie nou sê nie. Ek’s nog ambassadeur vir ’n paar dae,” wikkel hy hom sjarmant daaruit.

“Middelorde-lande soos ons en Argentinië moet maar die ekonomiese wêreld se reëlboek volg, anders kry jy pak.”

Hy’s ook allermins die eerste eks-ambassadeur wat kritiek het op sy gasheerland. Hy noem die voorbeeld van Christopher Meyer se omstrede memoirs ná sy tyd as Britse ambassadeur in Amerika in die dae van Blair en Bush.

“Deel van ’n ambassadeur se werk is om krities te wees. Min. Maite Nkoana-Mashabane het altyd vir my gesê: ‘Moenie vir my die goed vertel wat ek op CNN kan sien nie.’”

Tony stem saam met Zuma se onlangse erkenning dat Suid-Afrika se aansien in die buiteland afneem.

Toe hy die TV-beelde van die Marikana-slagting sien, kon hy dit nie glo nie. “Ek het gedink ek kyk na iets uit die 1960’s. Bygesê, hier langsaan in Brasilië is 120 mense in ’n tronk-opstand dood.

“Sulke dinge gebeur oral. Destyds, met Boipatong, het die hele wêreld nog ’n belang gehad het in ons nuwe demokrasie. Nou’s ons maar net een van baie lande en as iets soos Marikana gebeur, moet ons weet: Die wêreld se welwillendheid, en ons morele kapitaal, raak op.”

’n Piesangrepubliek, noem Julius Malema Suid-Afrika – nogal ’n term met sy oorsprong in Suid-Amerika. Nee, sê Tony, ons is veel eerder ’n vrugteslaai “met goeie én vrot vrugte – waarvoor Malema maar net in die spieël hoef te kyk”.

Toe Juju almal vroeër vanjaar op hol gehad het, twiet Tony twee reëls uit ’n Yeats-gedig: “The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of pas- sionate intensity.”

Ja, lag hy nou daaroor: “Ja ... Yeats ... Thabo Mbeki se digter, nou van toepassing op Malema!”

Ernstiger: As daar een ding is wat hy graag wil doen, is dit om jong Suid-Afrikaners te oortuig dat politiek ’n edel, ordentlike beroep kan wees. Nié laelewe nie.

Jong leiers moet buite die partypolitieke konteks ontwikkel word – iets wat sy tyd (“een van die beste van my lewe”) by die Harvard-universiteit se John F. Kennedy School of Government by hom ingeskerp het.


Michal and Tony Leon in the historical Cordoba, Argentina
 
Al waaroor hy spyt is in sy lang, politieke loopbaan is daardie gewraakte “Fight back”-slagspreuk in die 1999-verkiesing, het Tony laas week aan die Herald gesê. Ja, sê hy nou, “maar in die konteks van daardie tyd was dit wel toepaslik. Waaroor ek éintlik jammer is, is dat my politieke lewe en bydrae aan dié twee woorde gekoppel word. Dis darem veel meer werd as dit.”

Die “konteks van daardie tyd”, sê hy, was die greep van die ANC op die swart stem en ’n versplinterde opposisie. “Ons moes eers ons posisie konsolideer. As ons dit nie gedoen het nie, het die DA nie nou bestaan nie.”

En wat lê in Tony se toekoms?

Weer partypolitiek? Die toespraak-rondomtalie soos sy naamgenoot Tony Blair?

“Nee, nie partypolitiek nie. Die DA én ek het aanbeweeg. Ek sal altyd in die opposisie bly, maar mens kan kreatiewe dinge doen sonder om ’n party-banier te swaai.”

Daar wag ’n Business Day-rubriek, lesings, iets in die sakewêreld. En, altyd, ’n kritiese oog.

In die SAL-vliegtuig dié naweek sal Tony Leon vele hoogtepunte onthou uit die land van Peron en die Pampas. Sy besoek aan die boere-gemeenskap in Patagonië en dié se versugting na ’n Afrikaanse onderwyser; die première van Invictus met Joost van der Westhuizen se “fantastiese toespraak” wat 300 oud-Pumas laat trane sluk ...

Die handelsgroei tussen die twee lande, “iets waarop ek gefokus het, het gegroei tot meer as R1,3 miljard”.

“Toerisme van Argentinië na Suid-Afrika het in een jaar met 122% toegeneem.”

Mens waardeer glo eers jou eie land as jy in ’n ander een gaan bly – en so was dit met Tony Leon.

“Toe ek weg is ná 20 histeriese jare in die politiek, moes ek afstand kry, ons land leer waardeer sonder agtergrondgeraas.”

Hierdie drie jaar, sê Tony, het net weer bewys: Daar’s niks verkeerd in Suid-Afrika wat nie reggemaak kan word deur die dinge wat rég is nie.

“My oë het hier oopgegaan.”

Amen, Tony.

Sunday, September 23, 2012

The Leon King seeks a Jungle New

Bookmark and Share

23 Sep 2012 | Michael Soltys | Original Publication: Argentina

 

Monday, August 27, 2012

Starting a new chapter

Bookmark and Share


27 August 2012| By Martin Williams  |  The Citizen Online

When South Africa’s ambassador to Argentina was in Johannesburg recently, he was required to fill in his name upon driving into a secured parking area.

 “You’re Tony Leon,” said the security guard. “I thought you were dead”. Leon related the story to me in the lobby of the Park Hyatt Hotel in Mendoza, a few hours before the Springboks faced Argentina at the Malvinas Stadium on Saturday.

We had pre-arranged this interview amid what was for him a busy week, crammed with receptions and business briefings centred on the ascension of the Pumas to what is now the four-nations Rugby Championship.

The previous evening, at a function in honour of the Springboks, Leon had shared with former Bok captain and current commentator Bob Skinstadt the experience of being a well-known face on TV.

“People assume a familiarity. They think they know you. And when you disappear they assume you’re dead, but you’re not. You’re  doing other things, off TV” said the envoy who will be leaving his post on September 28. Right there in the foyer, the accuracy of the first part of what he was saying was being played out.

We were continually interrupted by people, many of them strangers, wanting to shake his hand or have their photo taken with him. That’s in addition to the large number of Argentines and South Africans who actually know him  and greeted him in passing. Tony Leon is very much alive. It was clear from the several gatherings I attended that he has been active.

The Pumas’ first home match in the Rugby Championship,  with all the accompanying commercial buzz, is a fitting climax to  his brief diplomatic career which saw the volume and value of exports from South Africa to Argentina increase by 80 percent from 2010 to 2011, to reach R1.3 billion. The number of Argentines visiting South Africa has increased by 122 percent since 2009. Ever the diplomat, Leon praises his team. But it is clear from talking to a range of affected people that the energy that has driven SA’s mission for the past few years would not have been achieved without what Standard Bank’s boss in Argentina, Johan Roets, calls Leon’s “infectious enthusiasm”.

So, what lies ahead for Leon, who will be a mere 55 when he arrives back at his home in Cape Town? He is finishing his third book, The Accidental Diplomat: From Parliament to Patagonia. It won’t be as hard-hitting or as long as his 776-page On The Contrary, which explored some of his tough battles in politics, where he led the Democratic Alliance (DA) to new heights. Rather it will explain how he came to represent a South Africa led by Jacob Zuma’s ANC.

Leon will also serve a one-month fellowship at the Swedish-funded Stellenbosch Institute for Advanced Studies, where he will “interact with people much more intellectual than me. Basically you write, you talk. I will  do there in a more serious way what I’m doing in my book, which is to ask: ‘Where in the world is South Africa?’ “We have a whole set of foreign policy objectives. Do they align with what I think should be the diplomatic function, and with what our national priorities are? “We say they do but, as TS Eliot said: ‘Between the idea and the reality falls the shadow’.” In addition, in order to “put bread on the table”, he will be involved in some business. This will include trying to create more of a bridge between South America and Africa. We can also expect to see and hear more of him on the speaking circuit. A clear and articulate writer, he is likely to have regular bylines in several publications.

Earlier, in a separate conversation, a former colleague of his said it would be a waste for South Africa not to be able to use Leon’s considerable talents, suggesting he could be deployed in a corruption-busting role. I put this to Leon. If he had the opportunity, would he like to do a job in similar vein to that of the Public Protector? “I haven’t  thought of it. But I’m a little maxed-out on bureaucratic structures. “I  never say never, but I’m not aware of anything and I’m not looking for anything. I’m not in that market. “But I keep an open mind about things.”  

One thing he’s not going to do is go back into party politics. “You know, never step in the same river twice. The DA have got a leader and they are doing well. I will talk about it in my book. There are leaders for different eras. I was the leader in one era, and now it’s different.” Here’s his recipe for success in politics, diplomacy or in fact any career: “It’s probably clichéd but some clichés are based on repeated truths. You’ve got to be passionate about what you do, that’s the first rule of life, engagement. Don’t take yourself too seriously, and try to involve yourself in a cause greater than you.”

Although he did not start his diplomatic assignment with passionate intensity, after arriving in Buenos Aries he devoted himself to promoting South Africa, “to prove, not just to myself but to the world that you can actually do it very well and effectively without necessarily promoting the governing party, or the opposition for that matter. “You don’t have to be an ANC hack to serve South Africa. You certainly can serve South Africa from the opposition side and you can do it as effectively as anyone. “I became very passionate about the numbers. You’re no good if you can’t get the numbers up.” Well, he certainly succeeded in that, and in making South Africa more visible in Argentina.

Zenani Mandela-Dlamini, Madiba’s eldest daughter, will become South Africa’s ambassador to Argentina on October 1.

 • Follow Tony Leon on Twitter: @TonyLeonSA

 

Friday, July 13, 2012

Bookmark and Share
Birthday Greetings for Madiba
(Double click on article to read)
 

Wednesday, July 8, 2009

Old-style oppression has new adversaries

Josef Stalin cynically said: “A single death is a tragedy — a million deaths is a statistic.” He prosecuted his tyranny, replete with mass murder, according to this formula.
There is some accuracy in the tyrant’s observation. Perhaps that is why one 12-year-old boy, Hector Pieterson, is the iconic embodiment of the June 16 uprising against apartheid. Although hundreds of lives were lost when the riots spread into intractable national unrest, Sam Nzima’s photograph of the shot boy being carried by his sister and a fellow student was the freeze-frame that catapulted this event into the consciousness of the world.
Two Saturdays ago in Tehran, a 26-year-old woman was shot dead by an Iranian government militiaman. The video clip of music student Neda Agha-Soltan’s dying moments captured on a cellphone was bounced across the globe by satellite and through new media such as YouTube, stamping her instantly as a symbol of the anti-government protests.
The Iranian opposition proclaimed her as a martyr for freedom in a society that, as Nazila Fathi noted in the New York Times, “is infused with the culture of martyrdom”.
Two days after her death, there were already 6860 entries for her on the Persian-language Google search engine. Perhaps the potency of the new media is revealed by the fact that Mirhossein Mousavi, the main opposition candidate in the disputed, probably rigged, presidential election in Iran, has used social network Facebook to mobilise his supporters. Twitter is another new tool of communication against the theocrats in Tehran, who base their authority on a religious tradition that is more than 13 centuries old.
The incompatibility between old-style repression and newfangled media is only one of many contradictions that the tumultuous events in Iran have highlighted.
Another is the fault line which the poll, and the protests against its outcome, revealed between the two plates of the Iranian revolution — one theocratic and the other democratic.
Most power in Iran is wielded by the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and various religious bodies such as the Guardian Council.
Lesser authority lies in the hands of the democratic parliament and the popularly elected president.
Under the rule of populist conservative Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, there was little to separate the outlook and approach of the two branches of the Iranian revolution. But reformist challenger Mousavi became a lightning conductor for the young and disaffected, especially marginalised women, who have spearheaded the protests in the firm belief that massive fraud prevented their candidate from winning.
The signs of splits and fissures, even within the previously united religious leadership, are clear, although the direction in which the 30-year old Iranian revolution will head is not. There has been a stirring of a moderate revival elsewhere in this most combustible arena of geopolitics, in Lebanon and in next-door Iraq, for example.
But, of course, the issue in Iran — and one with huge consequences for this troubled neighbourhood — is its nuclear potential.
Although Ayatollah Khamenei has the final word on nuclear and security matters, both Ahmadinejad and Mousavi, and most Iranians, apparently see the development of nuclear power as a totem of their sovereign independence. However, there is obviously a difference in approach between the president, who threatens to “remove Israel from the map of history” and announces that Iran has successfully tested a new solid-fuel missile with a range of 1900km, and a challenger who denounces his opponent’s “foreign policy adventurism”.
This then brings in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel. Before the Iranian election, Israel’s Haaretz newspaper, in an authoritative article, stated that Netanyahu’s actions are “shaped by a profound conviction that Israel will be in danger of extermination if Iran has nuclear weapons at its disposal”.
It also quoted a recent interview, which the prime minister gave to an American journal under the headline Netanyahu to Obama: Stop Iran or I Will.
Influential Middle East watchers in the US have suggested that Netanyahu far prefers to face the anti-Semitic Ahmadinejad, who has suggested the Holocaust was a hoax, as president than his rival.
As one of them expressed it: “Israelis believe he reflects the true and immutable character of the Iranian regime. If a moderate were to take over, it would not herald any real change in Iran or its nuclear ambitions, but simply disguise it better.”
The repression of the pro-democracy demonstrations on the streets of Tehran suggests that Netanyahu will be granted his wish in the choice of his opponent. After all, bullets are more powerful, in the short term at least, than Twitter. But, over time, the ineradicable human craving for freedom is more difficult to suppress.
We can only guess how much time will lapse between the shooting of Neda Agha-Soltan and the arrival of the freedom she now symbolises.

*Published Sunday Times 6 July 2009


Bookmark and Share

Meaning of the f-word to be a battle zone over the next year

IN A recent interview, Co-operative Governance Minister Sicelo Shiceka raised the question: “Do we need provinces?” and suggested that a definitive answer would be given by the government next March. I thought it significant that his ministry had once enjoyed the title of “constitutional and provincial affairs”. Perhaps its renaming is a harbinger of things to come.
The minister’s speculation, coupled with his demand that “nobody is expected to be out of tune” with the country and its president, brought to mind how central the provinces were to the Kempton Park negotiations, which led to the inauguration of democracy in SA, and how comprehensively the African National Congress (ANC) out-negotiated its opponents on this issue. This was due to both the balance of forces and the burden of our history.
The f-word during the negotiations was not a vulgar expletive, but the politically loaded idea of federalism. Democratic Party (DP) negotiator Colin Eglin — whose party’s central plank was the promotion of a federal dispersal of authority as an alternative to untrammelled majoritarianism — recalled how the Bantustan policy of the National Party (NP) “had given federalism a bad name”. He therefore, during negotiations, tiptoed around the topic by using code: “I tried to avoid using the word federalism in advancing my arguments, preferring to use the cumbersome but less repellent phrase, ‘constitutional decentralisation’” to advance the case for provincial powers in the new constitutional set-up .
Inkatha’s position at the negotiations was the opposite of the prevailing political wind: it wanted a federal SA to give it more power, given its lock on support in Natal. The ANC wanted a unitary state precisely to prevent that eventuality. The case, however, was never properly prosecuted since Inkatha was boycotting the negotiations in pursuance of an issue — the role and place of the k ing — which today, seems remote and obscure.
The NP, which during the negotiations still held the formal reins of power, made a confused and enfeebled fight for federalism. It understood it was likely to be knocked off its national perch of power in the elections, and reduced to a regional redoubt in the Western Cape. But its strategy was far more focused on dividing the spoils of office at a national level through power-sharing than in according the provinces significant, and original, powers. As the most reliable chronicler of the negotiations’ process, Patti Waldmeir described it: “After 45 years of ruling a highly centralised old South African state, the NP seemed to have little idea of what federalism meant, and only a weak inclination to fight for it.”
With the NP confused, Inkatha absent and the DP speaking in code, it was little wonder that the ANC prevailed. Indeed Waldmeir obtained an accurate assessment of the location of power in the new SA from a key negotiator: “Joe Slovo, speaking freely out of exhaustion and drink on the eve of the deal, insisted that the new state would be ‘not remotely a federation ... we’ve managed to give them devolution, without losing control’, he told me with considerable satisfaction.”
Slovo was to die within a year of the establishment of the new order; the NP received in Hermann Giliomee’s apt phrase a “prostitute’s funeral” after the 2004 elections; the Inkatha Freedom Party has been ousted from power in KwaZulu-Natal and the DP has morphed into the Democratic Alliance, but won control of the Western Cape .
But just how accurate and prescient Slovo’s boast has proven to be was on display in Cape Town this week. Provincial Premier Helen Zille — political boss of the only province in the hands of the opposition — was reduced to taking legal advice and writing a letter to the newspaper to explain that the Provincial Commissioner of the SAPS, Mzwandile Petros, refuses to meet with her and the provincial MEC for policing, Lennit Max. Given the agenda Zille had in mind for the meeting, including the allegation that the police had sexed-up the crime statistics in this crime-ravaged province, the commissioner’s coyness was understandable. But, of course, he is answerable and accountable to Pretoria, not Cape Town.
A glance at the exclusive powers which the constitution grants to the provinces yields a decidedly threadbare list. Schedule 5 grants it sole jurisdiction over such matters as abattoirs, ambulances, and culture and veterinary services. But in the areas of delivery, the provinces currently are the public’s interface with both hospitals and schools. Little wonder, then, that when he was minister of national education, Kader Asmal once remarked to me that, in comparison with his provincial counterparts, he felt “like a eunuch in a harem. I have the desire to act, but not the power.”
Interestingly, as the ANC moves to further centralise power, the DA is moving in the opposite direction. Its key parliamentary staff, including national strategist and MP Ryan Coetzee have taken leave of Parliament and relocated to the provincial government and the Office of the Premier.
The battle of the provinces — and the meaning and extent of the “f” word in our constitutional arrangements — is likely to be a key battleground arena over the next year. It remains to be seen whether the federalists are more successful in the next, perhaps final, round than they were at Kempton Park.

*Published Business Day 4 July 2009


Bookmark and Share