08/07/2013
Researcher, Real Instituto Elcano
The great conciliator, the charismatic leader, the inmate, the martyr, the symbol of freedom, the icon of the struggle against apartheid, the activist, the legend, the global brand. There are many ways of referring to Nelson Mandela, some have even wanted to compare him with George Washington, like Barack Obama. "The indispensable man"–as James Flexner called the first American president in his famous biography–,decided to step down after two terms. Mandela did the same at the end of his first term, despite being the first to realise that five years was not enough to heal all social wounds and to balance all economic disparities as a result of decades of apartheid.
Like Washington, Mandela had that unusual combination between conservative and revolutionary. But in addition to this, Mandela was proud and simple, decidedly stubborn and flexible; vain and shy; serene and impatient. And, above all, a figure of international renown. A notoriety which he curiously acquired over those 27 years he spent in prison, a period without pictures or any word from him. However, the South African opposition was able to attract the empathy from the world and the anti-apartheid movement–the great global social movement of the past century–bestowed on Mandela quasi-messianic dyes.
That appeal served afterwards to tell the world that the young South African democracy would be successful through reconciliation and consensus, the two keys of his presidency. But without forgetting trade, tourism, investment and education in a country emerging from a fierce isolation. The road had been indeed hard–in the 12 months prior to the 1994 election 4,400 people died in acts of political violence–and much remained to be done. But he let others take the rudder to steer and left the presidency, giving an example to those who, in similar circumstances, would have chosen to continue there indefinitely. However, Mandela did not prevent South Africa from becoming a one-party country, with the consequences we can see today.
Today, the nation is economically wounded, corruption and violence spread dangerously, and South Africans more than ever yearn for their leader. A figure turned into a legend, and this has done a disservice to his entire legacy, with its successes and failures. The abandonment of the principle of non-violence in the sixties, or his lasting friendship with countries that supported the cause of the ANC, like Cuba and Libya, will not detract reputation from him. He has admitted to having made mistakes, and asserted his being a "man" before the "deification" of his figure, or the marketing of his image. It's time to "humanise" him again.