Coalition politics often force a delicate balance between principle and pragmatism.
This tension is evident in South Africa’s government of national unity (GNU), where the Democratic Alliance (DA) has assumed a contentious and often contradictory role.
While coalition politics often temper extremism and promote inclusive governance, the DA’s participation in the GNU raises doubts about its commitment to its stated principles and its role in safeguarding South Africa’s democratic integrity.
John Stuart Mill, in Considerations on Representative Government, said: “Compromise on the means is acceptable, but compromise on the ends is a betrayal of principles.” If what the DA federal council chairperson Helen Zille continues to say in the media is to be taken serious, then the DA’s continued involvement in the GNU appears to exemplify the betrayal Stuart Mill predicted, because it aligns itself with a coalition that undermines the very values the party is accusing the ANC of failing to uphold.
This past week Zille repeated on national television her party’s initial justification for entering the GNU, saying they did so to stabilise South Africa’s fragile political environment and counter the prospect of a coalition made up of uMkhonto weSizwe party, Economic Freedom Fighters and the ANC.
While this pragmatic choice may have had short-term benefits, it has come at a cost. The GNU has devolved into a platform for political expediency rather than principled governance, forcing the DA into positions that erode its credibility and alienate its base.
One example of the DA’s compromises lies in its muted stance on the Phala Phala matter, which is under judicial review. As a party that has long championed accountability and transparency, its silence not only diminishes its reputation but also risks signalling complicity in shielding executive wrongdoing.
On the international stage, the DA has taken a principled stand against South Africa’s position regarding Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine. The DA has also condemned the Lady R arms scandal, in which the government was accused of supplying weapons to Russia.
As Immanuel Kant observed in Perpetual Peace, governments must act with moral clarity in their foreign relations. But the DA’s influence on foreign policy in the GNU has been negligible.
Another contradiction is that of the DA positioning itself as an opponent to two clauses in the Basic Education Laws Amendment (Bela) Act, framing it as an attack on school autonomy and mother-tongue education. The Act aims to centralise control over language and admission policies.
DA member and Education Minister Siviwe Gwarube has been particularly vocal in her opposition to the Act, portraying it as a threat to constitutional rights. But her failure to attend the signing of the Bela Act underscores the DA’s limited capacity to influence policy decisions in the GNU. Her party’s consultation outside parliament with Solidarity, AfriForum and others is nothing short of desperation.
The same can be said about the DA’s opposition to the National Health Insurance, which has so far yielded no positive results; as usual the party has threatened to go to court.
These contradictions make the official opposition’s participation in the GNU untenable. Aristotle, in his Politics, warned that “a state aims at being a community of equals, but it can be undone by alliances of unequals”.
The DA’s partnerships with parties that often hold diametrically opposed ideologies, exemplify this tension. Niccolò Machiavelli cautioned that alliances born out of necessity often sow the seeds of discord, a dynamic that is evident in the DA’s uneasy alliances in the GNU.
A more contemporary critique by political theorist Hannah Arendt warns of the danger of “thoughtlessness” in politics — the failure to critically evaluate the long-term implications of one’s actions. By remaining in the GNU, the DA risks appearing thoughtless, prioritising short-term political gains over its long-term role.
Its continued presence in the GNU undermines its credibility and effectiveness and in the main its involvement has diluted its ability to hold the ANC accountable for governance failures, diminishing its stature as a watchdog for the public good.
A withdrawal from the GNU will distinguish the DA from smaller, ideologically rigid opposition parties, positioning it as a party willing to make tough but necessary decisions for the sake of democratic integrity.
To borrow from Edmund Burke, “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.” But who are the good men? By choosing to remain in a coalition that perpetuates dysfunction as the DA wants us to believe, it is now complicit in the very failures it claims to oppose.
Coalition politics is often viewed as pragmatic solutions to political gridlock, but this is by no means a political standoff. The question that lingers is whether the DA’s continued stay in the GNU is out of principle or designed to protect business interests that poured millions into their election campaign.
As South Africa grapples with problems of unemployment and economic stagnation, the country needs leaders who are willing to stand up for what is right, even when it is politically inconvenient.
The DA has an opportunity to take such a stand, but only if it musters the courage to act and end its grandstanding.
Karabo Seane is a tech entrepreneur, communication strategist and consultant.
