Mbeki/Zuma amnesty: it's not always about principles.

The Zimbabwe debacle was brought about by an elite who, upon learning that the policies that they propounded were no longer popular to the majority, utilised the constitution, legislative machinery and existing structures of government to decimate their country in order to retain power.

In fact if you were to ask members of their government, military or police even now, they would advise you that they were acting within the laws of their country and in most cases in terms of orders from above. Nuremberg revisited.

Law and principles, if applied in an unkind society and without flexibility, can be just as dangerous as anarchy and sometimes more so. Somalia with all its warlords and militancy run amok can never inflict the damage that Stalin inflicted on his own people within a strictly regulated society.

In South Africa we are reading commentators expressing the view that any attempt at negotiating out of the ANC conflict situation, in terms of granting amnesty, is a dangerous precedent which should never be visited. They believe we cannot allow rogues to think that there might be a way out should they commit crime.

Thinking that runs along the lines of once you have an example of amnesty in play the future is bleak, with one president after the next doing as they please until their amnesty is granted.

In America, for example, they would never contemplate such a thing; maybe Gerald Ford with Richard Nixon but surely no more than that.

Then of course we must look at whose principles we are referring to. In terms of the new South Africa I’m sure that many would consider the ‘arms deal’ with all it’s alleged corruption, as the worst crime committed so far. No doubt in my mind that the ANC and all those who were involved in this deal should have to answer for this disgusting misuse of public money, money that could have been better spent on uplifting our poorer communities instead of preparing to fight non-existent wars.

It is in the way that you deal with it that will determine our future: amnesties for Mbeki and Zuma coupled with further safeguards negotiated with all parties to avoid a repeat in the future is my suggestion. In addition, full disclosure in order that opposition parties obtain maximum benefit at elections by exposing what the ANC did. That, as opposed to strict adherence to principles which could tear this country to pieces.

To my mind the arms deal is not the worst crime of the new South Africa. The price fixing of bread was far worse. While the arms deal money did not find its way to the masses, the bread price fix made the little money that they did have, not enough to afford what is a vital staple to many. The impact was far worse for them in their day to day lives than the arms deal.

Yet in the selective morality of many of those who are married to principles because, in the main, it did not affect them, a fine and a slap on the wrist for that disgrace was sufficient for robbing the poor people of this country. As far as I’m concerned that conduct makes the arms deal seem insignificant in comparison. At least you can justify buying arms on a military basis what basis do you have for making a few extra billion while people starve?

Yet we are watching as some people proudly promote this group while condemning any talk of amnesty.

In other words as long as people have money or can benefit you in some way there is no depth to which some people won’t sink. Integrity is a word they use to dismiss people they don’t like, all the while condoning thugs who have committed, in my opinion, a crime against humanity.

When it comes to achieving a settlement which will attempt to bring an (imperfect?) peace to our country and allow our political focus to shift to other pressing matters we encounter non-negotiable principles. When it comes to corporate thugs who steal the food from the people who have endured apartheid, then the Zimbabwean exiles and corruption then these principles can be compromised.

Of course the precedent that you can steal the bread out of the mouths of our starving masses and get away with a fine before they welcome you back into the old boys club appears lost on them.

The precedent we are setting in terms of amnesty, as far as I am concerned, is the same as we did in 1994. That South Africans faced with a major problem can get around a table and negotiate a settlement that will be in the interest of all South Africans.

Principles without regard for what is happening on the ground are a recipe for something far worse than setting a bad precedent. Take a trip and find out what the majority of the people of this country will accept before it’s a deal breaker.

Better yet, why not send the guys who fixed the bread price to have a look. They can then come back and tell us: “Let them eat cake”.

Last time that sparked a revolution.