Thabo Mbeki’s verbal contortions and sophistry in defending his administration’s tepid response to load-shedding are a futile exercise in distraction. The cold, hard truth is that ignoring the sage advice and warnings about Eskom’s generation capacity was not just ill-advised; it was a heartless oversight. How many more voices must echo this sentiment before Mbeki concedes to the obvious folly of his denial and acknowledges that his administration shares a hefty portion of the blame for the crisis that engulfed Eskom after 2007?
By Themba Khumalo
The way former president Thabo Mbeki clings to the narrative of load-shedding is a spectacle of absurdity, a bleakly amusing story that flirts with manipulation and shameless untruths.
In a spectacular act of negligence, his administration sowed the seeds of the load-shedding crisis by turning a blind eye to the urgent need for new generation capacity, even as the warnings echoed like a siren song of impending doom.
Mbeki, ever the opportunist, never misses a beat in blaming Eskom for the load-shedding nightmare. With each speaking engagement, he escalates his rhetoric to dizzying extremes, asserting that Eskom’s management had wilfully orchestrated an electricity crisis due to their failure to perform the simplest of tasks—”replenishing coal.”
He spins tales of phantom conspirators within Eskom, who, in his fevered imagination, were hell-bent on plunging the country into a perpetual blackout.
In a spineless retreat that would make even the most timid of mice blush, Mbeki flails about, desperately attempting to exonerate himself and his administration from the wreckage of their own making. He incessantly parrots the absurd notion that the tale of his administration’s negligence in heeding urgent calls for new generation capacity and infrastructure is nothing but a “false” and “cooked up” fabrication as if repeating it enough will somehow conjure the truth from the ether.
In December 1998, the Department of Minerals and Energy released a White Paper that sounded the alarm about Eskom’s generation capacity surplus. They predicted that Eskom’s surplus electricity would be completely consumed by around 2007, emphasising the urgent need for proactive measures to prevent demand from outstripping the available supply. This obliterates the falsehoods Mbeki is now attempting to sprinkle throughout the country, in a misguided effort to protect himself and his administration from the unadulterated reality of their gross dereliction of duty.
“Eskom’s present generation capacity surplus will be fully utilised by about 2007. Timely steps will have to be taken to ensure that demand does not exceed available supply capacity…” – Department of Minerals and Energy’s 1998 White Paper.
In my relentless journey through the desolate fields of revulsion and fury, it is worth recalling Mbeki’s moment of remarkable bravery in December 2007, when he admitted: “When Eskom said to the government: ‘We think we must invest more in terms of electricity generation’, we said no, but all you will be doing is just to build excess capacity. We said not now, later. We were wrong. Eskom was right. We were wrong”.
The sheer absurdity of Mbeki’s sudden about-face is enough to make one’s head spin. How did we arrive at this point where he feels entitled to absolve himself of all blame by concocting a series of outlandish fictions? Surely, he owes us an explanation for his reckless decision to mount the wild stallion of denial.
One can hardly contain their amusement at the former president’s utter failure to comprehend that a cascade of lies and clever misdirection can obliterate one’s credibility and legacy quicker than a flash of lightning.
Lying and obfuscation—those charming little vices that have been rightfully condemned as morally and ethically dubious—are nothing short of a recipe for disaster. They may promise a quick fix or a momentary advantage, but they are the proverbial poison in the well of trust, leaving a trail of destruction in their wake.
Even the most illustrious achievements become mere shadows when one’s integrity is compromised; their brilliant life’s work gets reduced to a cautionary tale.
Lying after leaving office is not just a betrayal of trust; it is a direct assault on a president’s legacy. Once a leader is caught in a lie or misrepresentation, every statement they made, every policy they enacted, and every decision they took during their tenure comes under scrutiny.
For instance, if a former president denies or manipulates the truth about key moments in their administration, it raises questions about the honesty of their leadership throughout their time in office. The very essence of good governance—transparency, honesty, and accountability—is compromised, and this can overshadow any positive achievements they may have had.
Even well-intentioned policies can become tainted in the public eye, as people wonder whether they were motivated by truth or personal gain.
Obfuscation—deliberately confusing or hiding the truth—can be just as damaging as lying, if not more so. A former president who obfuscates critical issues or refuses to take responsibility for past actions invites speculation and suspicion. History demands clarity and understanding, particularly when it comes to major decisions with lasting impacts.
When a leader deflects or evades taking responsibility, it not only confuses the public but also creates an environment in which their actions are constantly open to wild interpretation. In such a scenario, their legacy is likely to become muddled, with future generations questioning the true motivations behind their decisions.
The ambiguity surrounding their post-presidency actions can overshadow the clarity of their achievements and create a sense of uncertainty about their leadership.