Contrary to conventional wisdom and popular belief, the Democratic Alliance (DA) stands not as a subordinate to the African National Congress (ANC) but as an equal “coalition” partner in South Africa’s current Government of National Unity (GNU). All things considered, the GNU represents a practical co-governance arrangement, not a surrender of one party’s principles to the other.
The DA has a legitimate mandate to pursue and implement its policies within the GNU, just as the ANC does. However, this partnership seems increasingly fraught, especially in the wake of accusations of “white supremacy” and racial bias levelled against DA cabinet ministers. This rhetoric only exacerbates divisions and distracts from the real issues facing South Africans.
Labelling DA cabinet ministers as “white supremacists” because they challenge the ANC’s policy direction in the GNU does nothing to advance constructive dialogue. Instead, it fuels the narrative of division, fostering an outdated inferiority complex that holds black South Africans back from claiming their rightful place on the social and economic hierarchy.
Resorting to racial accusations whenever there is a disagreement between GNU partners is counterproductive. It reinforces stereotypes and hallows the legitimate and genuine cries of the true victims of racism. It also makes it harder to address genuine concerns about racial equity and social progress.
As I have previously argued, the GNU was not born out of a convergence of ideals. Rather, it was a byproduct of political expediency — formed after every political party to the arrangement abruptly abandoned its principles to secure a seat at the dinner table. Or to put rather charitably, the GNU was a necessary compromise in a fragmented political landscape.
The ANC and the DA each made concessions, setting aside some of their guiding principles in order to collaborate. Yet, these concessions should not be mistaken for ideological capitulation. Helen Zille, the DA’s veteran leader and Federal Chairperson, has made it clear that the DA did not enter this partnership to be marginalized or controlled by the ANC. The DA, according to her, joined the GNU as an equal player, with the intent of actively shaping the direction of the GNU
Criticism aimed at the DA’s participation in the GNU, often couched in accusations of racial insensitivity or superiority, overlooks a fundamental reality: it was the ANC that chose to go into government with the DA, not the other around. By inviting the DA into the GNU, the ANC accepted the responsibilities and consequences of sharing power with a party whose values and vision for South Africa differ markedly from its own.
If ANC supporters are dismayed by the DA’s influence, they must confront the fact that this partnership was borne out of the ANC’s strategic decisions or blunders. Instead of dismissing DA cabinet ministers as interlopers, it is time for the ANC to adjust to a co-governance model that includes ideological diversity.
This political marriage of convenience challenges both the ANC and the DA to mature in their approach to governance. Each must resist the temptation to resort to race-based arguments or accusations to deflect from policy discussions. Doing so only impedes the constructive dialogue needed to tackle the socio-economic challenges facing the nation. The GNU should serve as an opportunity for both parties to bridge divides and demonstrate that South Africa’s democracy is resilient and adaptable.
Ordinary South Africans are well within their right to expect their leaders to rise above factionalism and work together to achieve tangible improvements for the people. The GNU could mark a new chapter in South African governance—one in which ideological differences coexist within a framework of shared responsibility. However, to realize this potential, both the ANC and the DA must commit to a relationship grounded in mutual respect, even amidst their contrasting political ideologies.
Ultimately, this partnership is a test of South Africa’s political maturity. If the ANC and DA can move beyond racialized conflict and collaborate in the service of all citizens, they will provide a powerful example of democratic resilience. This experiment in co-governance, difficult as it may be, has the potential to strengthen the country’s democratic foundation—if only both sides would approach it with the vision and discipline it demands.
Lehumo Sejaphala holds a BA Law and LLB degree from Wits University and an LLM from the University of the Free State. He also runs an online blog platform called the Voiceless and has contributed articles to various media houses.