Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi never promised loyalty to ‘the government of the day’, either before 1953 or after. You can’t just make things up, says the writer. Picture; Doctor Ngcobo/African News Agency(ANA)
Mkhuleko Hlengwa
Two years ago, UCT student Yonela Mlambo penned a ridiculously ill-informed opinion piece about Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi.
One wondered whether it was born of ignorance, gross stupidity or an appallingly poor attempt at propaganda. Apparently it was the latter.
In his latest piece titled “Mangosuthu Buthelezi was far from being a hero” Mlambo let the insults fly. Zulus, he wrote, are ignorant. Their traditional institutions are “insignificant and irrelevant”.
Their kings have lacked backbone.
Even the land on which their ancestors were born is not theirs: it was a gift from the colonial government.
How does one even respond to such bile? Initially I thought this was Mlambo’s revenge for my previous exposure of all his lies. But the real agenda became clear at the end of his piece: “IFP and ANC reconciliation should be avoided in all possible ways... having the IFP reconcile with the ANC would pose a deadly threat to the ANC...”
Evidently Mlambo fears the truth being told about the past. Thus he desperately repeats his lies, despite being presented with facts and hard evidence the first time around.
He insists that Prince Buthelezi founded Inkatha on his own steam, without the blessing of the ANC. Yet he has read the 2019 statement of former Zambian President Dr Kenneth Kaunda, reminiscing with Buthelezi about the formation of Inkatha – “Clearly conditions in Apartheid South Africa made the struggle for liberation waged from outside the country necessary. But at the same time this was not completely ideal because it made the internal mobilisation and organisation of your oppressed masses difficult. We were facing a real difficult situation and ordinary people in (South Africa) were beginning to lose hope in the struggle.
This is the challenge the African National Congress in which you were a prominent member was faced with. We therefore decided to come up with other means of mobilising the masses inside South Africa.
“It was then that we agreed to instruct you to form a mass-based organisation from within. Because a dangerous vacuum was developing in that country. I and other leaders of the frontline states, together with comrade Oliver Tambo of the ANC were convinced that you should take up a new role in the organisation. You were the most suited for this job because you came from the Zulu royal family. When you visited in 1974 you were encouraged to go back to Apartheid South Africa and form a membership based organisation...
“You shouldered that responsibility and advanced the struggle for liberation... during that critical period of our time. Let me thank you for taking up that historical instruction and task with such dedication and honour.
“I know there were difficult days in the struggle especially in the 1980s when brother turned against brother resulting in unfortunate violence and death among black people. It is during that period that you showed your unwavering courage and commitment to the cause of liberation...
“Thank you once again for the course you took with such dedication.... Your role in the struggle is never in doubt.”
Mlambo has no problem contradicting the facts, or even contradicting himself. After claiming that Buthelezi founded Inkatha for his own benefit, he claims that Buthelezi never founded Inkatha.
With equal conviction, he declares that Buthelezi rejected independence for KwaZulu while declaring that the IFP preached the independence of KwaZulu. Make up your mind Mr Mlambo.
Even if he stuck to one narrative though, Mlambo was going to paint Buthelezi as a villain either way.
According to Mlambo’s reasoning, if Buthelezi had accepted independence for KwaZulu, it would have proven him a traitor to the liberation cause and a puppet of the apartheid regime.
But by rejecting independence, he becomes a self-centred opportunist trying to weaken the Zulu crown.
Damned if you do and damned if you don’t.
But, as much as he wants them to, words cannot obliterate reality. Mlambo’s claim that Buthelezi “doesn’t have a history of establishing anything” is complicated by the existence of the Mangosuthu University of Technology, the Prince Mshiyeni Hospital, Ithala Bank, the Tembe Rhino and Elephant Park, or some 6000 classrooms in KwaZulu-Natal, to name but a few.
Claiming that Buthelezi took up leadership of the Zulu Territorial Authority of his own accord, contradicts both the ANC’s Cleopas Nsibande and former President Kgalema Motlanthe, who confirmed that Nsibande was sent by Luthuli and Tambo to ask Buthelezi to lead.
The highly unoriginal accusation that Buthelezi “rose to power” by “slaying his own people” demands answering. Who did he slay to become Inkosi of the Buthelezi Clan? Who did he slay to become traditional Prime Minister to the Zulu Monarch and Nation? Or to be appointed head of the Zulu Territorial Authority, Chief Executive Councillor of the KwaZulu Legislative Assembly, or Chief Minister of the KwaZulu Government? Who did he slay to found Inkatha yeNkululeko yeSizwe? Or to be appointed Minister of Home Affairs, or Acting President of South Africa?
On the subject of defamatory nonsense, who are these “renowned white supremacists from Italy” whom Mlambo claims drafted a federal constitution?
This is a history no one else is aware of! Thanks to Mlambo we now know that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission got it wrong too.
Describing the black-on-black conflict that claimed 20000 lives, the TRC claimed that the ANC was the common denominator in a spiral of violence that targeted Inkatha, the PAC and Azapo. Not so, says Mlambo, it was just Buthelezi killing everyone.
It would be impossible to enlighten him, but let me try. If Buthelezi had taken independence for KwaZulu, he himself would have led its government. But he refused to deprive millions of black South Africans of their citizenship.
Like the ANC, in which he served, Buthelezi rejected the apartheid government’s plan to create independent states. By refusing to take independence for KwaZulu, he derailed the grand scheme of apartheid, ensuring that when we achieved liberation we received our inheritance, instead of finding ourselves foreigners in our own country.
Buthelezi never promised loyalty to “the government of the day”, either before 1953 or after. You can’t just make things up. He also never called for the secession of KwaZulu. It was the king who approached President (FW) de Klerk to seek independence for the Zulu Kingdom. And Buthelezi never came up with the title President Emeritus. It was bestowed on him by the IFP at a conference.
The list of absurdities goes on and on. But like I said to Mlambo the first time he tried to take on Buthelezi, an ant shouldn’t try to eat an elephant.
The elephant still stands. But the ant looks pretty stupid.
Hlengwa is IFP’s national spokesperson
Cape Times
Related Topics: