A former SACP leader in KwaZulu-Natal cautions the ANC against attending the conference. The recent meeting between the South African Communist Party (SACP) and the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) has once again stirred the political waters within the Tripartite Alliance. For many observers, it raises a question that has lingered for years: Is it finally time for the African National Congress (ANC) to sever ties with the SACP?
The Tripartite Alliance, composed of the ANC, the SACP and COSATU, was forged in the crucible of the liberation struggle. It was not merely a political arrangement; it was a shared mission against apartheid. The SACP brought ideological clarity and intellectual depth.
Its leaders, many of whom were simultaneously members of the ANC, played pivotal roles in shaping strategy, policy and underground operations. In that context, unity was essential. But South Africa in 2026 is not South Africa in 1986.
[paywall]
The ANC is no longer a liberation movement; it is a governing party facing declining electoral support, rising public frustration and growing internal factionalism. The SACP, meanwhile, has increasingly positioned itself as both partner and critic, often condemning ANC leadership failures while remaining embedded in government structures. The SACP’s recent engagement with the EFF adds another layer of complexity.
The EFF, formed in 2013 after a split from the ANC Youth League, has largely defined itself as opposed to the ANC. Its brand is radical, confrontational, and explicitly critical of what it calls the ANC’s betrayal of revolutionary principles. For the SACP to hold strategic discussions with the EFF inevitably raises questions about loyalty, alignment and long-term intentions.
Is this political engagement normal in a democracy? Certainly. Parties talk.
They explore options. They test ideas. But within the framework of a formal alliance, optics matter.
When one alliance partner courts a party that actively seeks to replace the ANC, it signals either dissatisfaction or contingency planning, neither of which inspires confidence. Critics argue that the ANC has outgrown the SACP. They contend that the SACP exerts disproportionate influence over policy without bearing electoral accountability.
The Communist Party does not contest elections independently, yet many of its leaders hold influential government positions through the ANC’s deployment. This arrangement allows the SACP to shape policy from within while distancing itself from electoral consequences when governance falters. From this perspective, the alliance creates blurred lines of responsibility.
When policies fail, the ANC takes the electoral hit. When corruption scandals erupt, the SACP condemns from within, preserving its ideological purity. This duality increasingly frustrates ANC members who believe that accountability must be clear and direct.
On the other hand, defenders of the alliance argue that abandoning the SACP would be strategically reckless. Despite its modest independent electoral base, the SACP commands organisational depth and ideological coherence. It anchors the ANC to working-class politics and provides a counterweight to neoliberal tendencies within the governing party.
In a time when inequality remains among the highest in the world, discarding that voice could alienate labour constituencies and weaken the ANC’s moral claim as a progressive force. Moreover, political fragmentation already threatens the ANC’s dominance. In recent elections, it has struggled to secure outright majorities.
Removing the SACP from the alliance could accelerate internal splits, encourage defections and embolden rivals such as the EFF and the Democratic Alliance. Unity, even if strained, may still be electorally safer than rupture. Yet the heart of the matter is not merely electoral arithmetic.
It is about clarity of purpose. If the SACP believes it can better advance its agenda independently, or in cooperation with other parties, it should test that belief at the ballot box. If it remains committed to the ANC-led project, it must prioritise alliance cohesion over parallel engagements that fuel speculation.
Similarly, the ANC must confront an uncomfortable question: is the alliance still a partnership of shared strategy, or has it become a historical habit sustained by sentimentality? Ending the alliance would be dramatic and symbolically profound. It would mark the definitive closure of a liberation-era chapter.
But maintaining it without honest recalibration may be even more damaging. Voters are increasingly impatient with blurred accountability and internal contradictions. The meeting between the SACP and the EFF may not signal an imminent split.
It could simply be a tactical engagement. But it has exposed underlying tensions that can no longer be ignored. Perhaps the time has not come for the ANC to “vomit” the SACP in a moment of political disgust.
But it may well be time for a sober, transparent reassessment of the alliance’s relevance in a rapidly changing political landscape. History forged the partnership. The present must decide whether it still serves the future.
[/paywall]
All Zim News – Bringing you the latest news and updates.
