All our assumptions and predictions are slowly coming to light - albeit with a twist. When Cosatu backed now President Jacob Zuma through his legal trials and tribulations, most expected Zuma to offer its leader, Zwelinzima Vavi, a top spot in cabinet in return.

But Vavi stayed on at Cosatu.

He has now lashed out, saying that though the union federation played an important role in ensuring an ANC victory during the elections, it would vigorously challenge Zuma’s administration to deliver on campaign promises to workers.

The trade union federation has warned of a crippling national public-sector strike should the government not meet its demands.

The relationship between a trade union and the state is the first sign of the efficiency of a government. When that relationship breaks down - as it is threatening to in SA - the overall economy suffers. Labour-intensive countries, like most other developing nations, require sound labour policies to cater for those who make the country’s economic wheels turn. Ignoring them is detrimental for growth targets required to create additional employment, and a downward cycle may ensue.

Vavi has every right to say: “A trade union worth its salt must raise issues that affect its members, irrespective of who is in charge of government at any time. If we don’t do that then our credibility will fly through the window.”

There are a lot of kids lingering around on the streets due to poor social infrastructure. Those who get an opportunity to study don’t have enough funding to complete their courses, fuelling hatred towards society and academic institutions. It’s only a matter of time before we hear from outspoken ANC Youth League leader Julius Malema again – Zuma and his crack team better be prepared.

Has anyone noticed that there’s major humility in losing a war? Take a look at countries like Japan and Germany, for instance. Both got battered in the biggest wars in the world, but they are now among the most progressive countries in the world; when it comes to technological and social advancement, they are leaps and bounds ahead.

So how is that possible?

The answer lies in a combination a factors. For a start, the citizens of the respective countries swore never to go through such horror again. Also, like Japan, Germany was forced to surrender unconditionally. In other words, the Allies could do as they pleased with the country. The country was divided into four zones (US, British, French and Soviet) governed by the four powers of occupation. Germany was not allowed to have an army like Japan’s post-war disarmament. However, the Cold War changed this: though the size of these forces was limited, they were permitted to retain a force capable of national defence.
What this means is that war-chest funds are diverted into other areas of the economy – mainly research and development, and towards creating a better lifestyle for the countries’ citizens. German now stands at the forefront of the European Union and has intervened in a number of financial and squabbles between euro-countries. It has also spent six decades undoing the damage the war left on the country and its citizens, and has welcomed foreign nationals to benefit from its world-class economy.

SA, on the other hand, without even the remotest threat of war spends up to R32bn on defence. Do we need war and a subsequent arms embargo to make us divert funds into helping the poor and fighting HIV/Aids? I wonder.

The country and the global financial community have embraced President Jacob Zuma’s cabinet and have said it is well thought of and put together. The sterling track record of former SA Revenue Services commissioner Pravin Gordhan, for example, makes his appointment as finance minister even more assuring. Despite this, markets still reacted slightly negatively as profit taking took place. The rand also weakened slightly against the major currencies earlier this week, indicating the normal human trait of fear of change. What if things go pear shaped? It’s a gamble the financial sector, investors and the Average Joe will have to take. Though almost 100% on the mark, the appointment of certain people to cabinet slightly questionable. Take business heavyweight Tokyo Sexwale’s “hurried” appointment to cabinet, for example. Zuma must have made Sexwale an offer he couldn’t refuse – one good enough for him to resign as top brass of Mvelamphanda Holdings.

Though this is a shining example of good corporate governance, it places a little uncertainty on the purpose of some of the appointments. Is Zuma actually paying his dues? Sexwale was at some point mooted to take Zuma’s place at the head of the presidential race – he reported declined, instead becoming a staunch Zuma fan. His strategic outlook, which has seen him use his political influence to become one of SA’s top black businessmen, may be well applied in the Zuma presidency.

As long as politically-related deals remain just that. Property developers and investors will be watching all the ministers’ moves carefully and will be the first to cry foul if a conflict of interests appears.

Marketers must be revelling in the announcement of the 2009 election results. They clearly showed there hasn’t been much deviation from South Africans’ post-apartheid frame of thinking.

The consumer “black box” (the theory of behaviourism), which is difficult to decipher, is a tool that, once harnessed, can enable companies or brands to eat into the market shares of their competitors – just as the ANC blanketed the supposed IFP stronghold province of KwaZulu Natal.

The theory attempts to understand the buyers’ decision-making processes – both individual and group processes. It studies characteristics of individual consumers – including demographics and behavioural variables – in an attempt to understand people’s wants. It also tries to assess the influence of groups, such as family, friends, reference groups and society in general.

The same application can be used by political parties to understand their supporters and ensure their vote is guaranteed. The ANC’s consumer “black box” is a simple one: it is the party that liberated the country and fought for the freedom. The DA’s is also simple: it opposes the inefficiencies (lacklustre civil service, corrupt government officials and disregard for law) by the ANC.

It’s a no-brainer – in other words, actual economic and social policies and how to address issues are insignificant – when it comes to choosing a party here. There are no grey lines yet, just black and white – literally and figuratively.

A lot was said about change in SA by the DA and the Congress of the People, which seemed to be charged-up by US president Barak Obama’s campaign. But trends in voting allegiance have stayed the same, leaving marketing executives with the easy task of labelling and defining their target markets for profit making. For the marketer, this means the attitudes, motivations and perceptions of the potential and existing clients has pretty much stayed the same – which makes marketing (market segmentation, pricing and positioning), a walk in the park.

The ANC has missed the target in several of its promised deliverables – yet most of the nation feels it needs another chance to deliver on the economic and social promises it made when it stepped into power in 1994.

One of these was commented on by the Congress of the People’s Mbhazima Shilowa, who pointed out that a party that sits on a double-digit unemployment rate for two terms is not worthy to rule.

A cut-throat economic policy should have a well thought-out plan – but, more importantly, it should be implementable, otherwise it amounts to “hot air”.

Speaking in an open debate on television programme Third Degree, leaders of the main parties also argued about the issue of crime. All of them – with the exception of Independent Democrats leader Patricia de Lille – concentrated on the corrective rather than preventative approach. The former approach costs a lot more and only comes into play once the damage is already done.

The ruling ANC has had 15 years to put the foundations (social work, education and infrastructure) in place. Without these, the unemployed and frustrated look to other sources of income, such as crime. And then the judiciary, correctional services and law enforcement agencies are inundated with the task of managing the scourge of society.

That, coupled with under-spending in areas such as housing and health, which need the most attention, has undermined the efficiency of the ruling party.

Yet people are hopeful. And think the party will get it right this time.

SA’s Mickey Mouse politics and the results of this week’s elections can seriously affect the growth and performance of the economy if they are not managed carefully in the coming few months.

One “transmission mechanism” or path through which growth may be guaranteed is through the business alliances. ANC president Jacob Zuma has promised not to go after those who sought out to end his political campaign and quest to be the next president. But we all know things like that never happen. Former National Prosecuting Authority boss and businessman Bulelani Ngcuka, for one, is a likely first target. Tokyo Sexwale anticipated this and aligned himself to Zuma very quickly.

Business heavyweight Saki Macozoma, whose name often comes up in empowerment deals, will probably be next. Macozoma is supposedly affiliated to the new kid on the political block, the Congress of the People.

My bet is these fellows are already looking outside SA, where their political affiliations will not affect whether they get awarded tenders and major deals.

The concern, naturally, is what happens when these players – who have the capital, expertise and resources to fix things and provide much-needed services in the country – are financially strangled. Hopefully this will be considered by the new outfit in power.

US president Barack Obama has a knack for biting huge chunks off the world steak. Not only did he break new ground when be became the first black president of the superpower; he has now taken on another seemingly impossible feat.

Former US president George Bush was linked to the oil-flush Saudi royal family at the same time the US supported anti-Palestine Israel. So you can imagine what a hypocrite he is considered by the Islamic world when he blabbers on about the “war or terror”.

Barack has set out to correct the antagonistic foreign relations policies set out by the Republicans.
On his first visit as president to a predominantly Islamic nation, Obama reached out to Arabs and Muslims in his Ankara address, saying the US is not, and never will be at war with Islam. He also spoke of the Arab-Israeli peace process, saying he will actively pursue the goal of creating a Palestinian state alongside an Israeli one.

The move was cheered in the Islamic world. Syria’s foreign minister praised Obama’s address in Turkey, and many were pleased by the leader’s promises to push for a Palestinian state.

There is more than a morally corrective motive behind Obama’s campaign. Mending relations with the Islamic world can foster trade of goods, information and services. Bush and his cronies got what they needed from specific, oil-rich Arabic nations. But good foreign relations could bring in a lot more than just petro-dollars and benefit the economies of all parties and citizens concerned.

Bilateral trade between Vietnam and the Middle East countries reached US$2,03bn in 2008, for example, a year-on-year increase of 70%.

Removing religion-related scars that date back centuries will be a long process – but I wish Obama the best with it; he’s made a great start in the right direction.