Foreign Policy Blogs

Defending Mandela

For whatever reason, Blake Hounshell at Foreign Policy's “Passport” decided that on Mandela's birthday he needed to write a blog post declaring that “Nelson Mandela is No Saint.” Let's leave aside the fact that no one has actually argued that Mandela is a saint, and so Hounshell is heroically creating a straw man to beat him up and then declare victory. Huzzah. And Hounshell's point would have disappeared into the nether had it not been for the fact that Andrew Sullivan reproduced large portions of Hounshell's post, including the “No Saint” crack. And he did so uncritically.

Andrew Sullivan is a huge driving force in the blog world, and even though he has never given any indication that he has any real concern, interest, or understanding of Africa, if he grants his imprimatur to an argument, it will have a huge ripple effect. Thus I wrote him an email (which has gone unacknowledged), which I would like to excerpt here (I have edited the email slightly without changing the meaning at all):

Andrew —
 I really wish you had been a little more fair to Mandela, especially on his 89th birthday, even in using someone else's article. Was his tenure in office as ahead of the curve as it ought to have been on AIDS? No. But let's keep in mind a few salient points — as important and devastating as the AIDS scourge has been in Subsaharan Africa and in South Africa, Mandela had a few things on his plate in his one term in office (and serving just one term, given the context of African politics, is itself incredibly laudable). He took over from a loathsome regime during a time when the idea of reconciliation was not some quaint idea but a real need in his country. The transformation which he oversaw was a tremendous accomplishment. He had to deal with not only foreign affairs as newly elected head of state, he had to do so as the first legitimate leader of the region's only superpower. He had economic issues to address. In other words, his AIDS policy may have left a lot to be desired, but let's keep in mind that the man had a few things on his plate.
 
But furthermore, your glib “no saint” characterization also reveals a static understanding of contemporary history. Mandela's life, even his public life, did not end in 1999 when he gave way to Thabo Mbeki. His foundation has made AIDS a central issue and Mandela has often been forthright that as president he did not do enough. Can one imagine many other leaders being that candid about their shortcomings so soon after leaving office? And then taking the issue on which he or she fell short and making it a centerpiece of an active and profoundly important foundation?
 
I know that blogging sometimes invites glibness. I am the blogger and writer on Africa and especially South African issues for the Foreign Policy Association and I have a blog of my own,  in addition to my normal writing duties and responsibilities as a professor. But we, and especially someone with your profile, must avoid an unfair glibness in which nuance gives way to a “gotcha” approach. Mandela is not beyond reproach, but he warrants more than a dismissive treatment, even if you can cover it by saying you are using someone else's words.

The problem with taking a one-issue focus on Mandela, who certainly is not beyoind reproach, is that doing so is myopic. But furthermore almost all of the examples of irresponsibility Hounshell cites and Sullivan uncritically replicates fall in the lap of Thabo Mbeki. And while Sarafina II proved to be a disaster, but at its essence the idea was not necessarily a bad one even if its execution proved a disaster — have a playwright with an international education produce a show that will serve as a public educational tool in the fight against AIDS. Every major public health crisis that I can think of has been accompanied by a major education component. The idea of such an endeavor is not the problem — the misallocation of scarce resources and the execution is what doomed Sarafina II to the status of an unfunny punchline.

 It seems unseemly to me to publish a post declaring Mandela not to be a saint on his 89th birthday when there is so much to celebrate. But that unseemliness is multiplied when the criticisms are repeated by people who have not otherwise shown themselves to be especially dedicated to South Africa or to African issues generally.