The Tinkering President

By Mphuthumi Ntabeni

South African President Cyril Ramaphosa projects a genteel calm, a measured cadence born of his trade-union roots, boardroom prowess, and reputation as a consensus builder. Whenever he must make a decision, he approaches governance like a locksmith puzzled by a dozen nearly identical keys. He fiddles, adjusts tension, tries another angle, yet rarely finds the one that opens the locked door. In short, he is a Tinkering President suffering from an acute audacity deficiency.

1. The cautious Cabinet shuffle

When morale dipped and the ANC’s approval ratings sagged, many expected a bold cabinet shake-up. Instead, Ramaphosa trod lightly, imposing low-impact portfolios quietly altered, familiar faces shifted by a degree, not by magnitude. The rearrangement was less a show of transformation, more a gentle nudge, tinkering at the edges. We wondered, where was the bold stroke that signals real change? Where were the austerity government he talked, instead he reinforced an expanded and bloated cabinet.

2. Hesitation in confronting corruption

The Zondo Commission exposed an ampersand of scandals in the State Capture Report of looting, shadow networks, and a parade of implicated officials. Moments ripe for audacious confrontation were met instead by deliberate restraint. Pretence investigations were opened, committees formed, reports delivered … and then months of silence. When General Mkhwanazi dropped his bombshell, the President grew visibly jittery; his minister in the presidency fumbled nonsensical replies about the “risk of a coup.” Audacity would have meant immediate suspensions, decisive prosecutions, and a visible purge of the rot. Instead, Ramaphosa applied the antiseptic of judicial inquiry, the washing slowly commissions of inquiry, hoping for gradual healing rather than delivering a decisive cure.

3. Municipal collapse without consequence

South Africa’s municipalities, more than 80% of deemed dysfunctional, are collapsing under corruption, mismanagement, and sheer neglect. Water treatment plants fail, sewage spills into rivers, rubbish piles on street corners, and potholes become permanent fixtures. The Auditor-General’s reports read like annual obituaries for local governance, yet the President treats this crisis as if it were a minor administrative glitch. There is no whip cracked, no urgent summons to failing mayors, no ruthless imposition of national intervention. Audacity here would mean dissolving delinquent councils, appointing capable administrators, and holding criminally negligent officials personally liable. Instead, Ramaphosa tinkers, sending in “support teams” and “capacity-building workshops” to municipalities that have long since abandoned capacity, vision, and public trust.

4. Soft landings for stiff challenges

Whether facing energy collapse, rising unemployment, or industrial unrest, Ramaphosa prefers calibrated engagement over defiant leadership. Confrontation is postponed in favour of endless dialogues and commissions. Tinkering replaces transformation. Ministers are rotated; consultants are consulted. A leader with audacity deficiency avoids making enemies, but risks making no progress either.

5. International fizz-outs

Ramaphosa often appears more at home in global forums than in domestic showdowns. His addresses at the United Nations or G20 signal gravitas and vision. But back on home soil, these moments of rhetorical boldness fail to translate into political momentum. The soaring speeches don’t land with echoes, they evaporate, as if his resolve dissipates once the international spotlight fades. One is tempted to think he should have been Minister of International Relations, not President of the Republic.

Why audacity matters now

South Africa is at a critical juncture of infrastructure collapse in energy, water, rail, and roads; youth unemployment; the world’s worst inequality; climate disasters; and waning investor confidence. These crises demand more than good-intentions governance. The status quo can no longer do. What this moment demands is not fine-tuning, but levers yanked, systems overhauled, vested interests challenged. Party politics must be set aside for the greater good of the country. Audacious leadership isn’t reckless; it is targeted, strategic, and visionary. But Ramaphosa does not only lack audacity, he lacks vision.

Conclusion

Cyril Ramaphosa is no radical; he inherited a system built on compromise. But leadership in times like these must sometimes exceed caution. He can remain the Tinkering President, or choose to become The Audacious President. After all, as a sitting duck president he has nothing to lose but his legacy. South Africa doesn’t merely need finesse. It needs the firm, bold turn of the key that opens the gates to a future where intention becomes transformation.