History in Five: The book starts with your experience on April 10, 1993, as a newly minted reporter for The Star who was sent to cover Chris Hani’s assassination. In writing this book, what was it like to revisit your memories of that day?  As you researched and constructed the timeline of events that fateful week, was there anything that stood out to you years later that didn’t register in the moment?

Justice Malala: There are two things that stand out for me. The first was realizing just what a dangerous, fraught, fragile, uncertain journey the country was going through in the early 1990s. After 27 years in prison, Nelson Mandela had been released from prison in 1990. Yet, true freedom was not guaranteed as the apartheid government was still in place and the democracy talks were stalling. In 1993, morning news bulletins were filled with reports of tens or even hundreds of people having died overnight in political violence, much of it stoked by the apartheid government. Looking back thirty years, we take it for granted that the journey from apartheid to freedom was a straight line and virtually guaranteed. But it was an uncertain and fragile time and working on this book reminded me just how afraid even I was about the future. It reminded me why Desmond Tutu described the birth of post-apartheid South Africa as a miracle. Given just how difficult and bloody its birth was, perhaps it really was a miracle

The second thing that stands out for me came from one of my interviewees for the book. He said ‘memory is not the most credible source of historic events’. Many of the key players in the story have vivid memories of some events, but also have little or no recollections of some events at which they were present, with evidence such as pictures placing them there. I think that emotions and senses were so heightened in that nine-day period that most of the nation was traumatized by the murder of Hani – and our recollections of it as a nation illustrates some of this. For example, both Mandela and FW de Klerk write in their memoirs about Mandela giving a great speech on the evening of Hani’s murder. Many others say the same. Yet that’s simply not true – Mandela’s speech that evening was halting and lacked inspiration. The great speech everyone remembers was only delivered three days later.

HI5: The nine days after Chris Hani’s assassination were critical in keeping South Africa’s democratic transition on track and preventing civil war. Was there one moment during that time that you think was particularly impactful in averting a civil war?

JM: There are several but the one that really stands out was Nelson Mandela’s second speech to the nation appealing for calm. His first speech on the day of Hani’s assassination was delivered late at night and was a dud. In the second speech, parts of which he wrote himself, Mandela used his belief in a non-racial future to cajole the nation into peace. When Chris Hani was shot and killed the witness was a white woman called Retha Harmse. She immediately called the police and, just under 30 minutes later, her identification of the car led to the arrest of the assassin. Now, Mandela used his speech to say: “A white man, full of prejudice and hate, came to our country and committed a deed so foul that our whole nation now teeters on the brink of disaster.  A white woman, of Afrikaner origin, risked her life so that we may know, and bring to justice, this assassin.”

It was incredibly moving and humane and bridge-building. And it began to take the sting out of the racial interpretation of that assassination. It was no longer whites versus blacks, as the assassins wanted to make it, but the good against the bad.

HI5: These events offer a primer in leading during complex and challenging times. What’s one leadership lesson from Nelson Mandela that you hope today’s leaders could learn?

JM: After Chris Hani’s murder, both Mandela and de Klerk reached out to each other to quell what they said was a “moment that may tip SA into war”. The two men had been suspicious of each other at the beginning of their relationship when de Klerk released Mandela from prison in 1990, but by 1993 they were openly attacking each other verbally. Yet, at such a grave moment for the nation, they both knew that it was their duty to do what they could to prevent an escalation.

Mandela was under tremendous pressure from his supporters to abandon peace talks and take up arms against the apartheid government. Many of his fellow leaders felt the same way. He pushed back against such sentiments. He made it clear that he was focused on two goals: the establishment of a transitional government and the setting of an election date – and he pursued both goals with vigor.

By collaborating that week, Mandela and de Klerk rose above their own partisan interests to avert a war. Great leaders do this – they see the bigger picture and the greater good and collaborate to achieve peace and democracy. South Africa and the world are lucky we had Mandela and de Klerk on that day.

HI5: Many countries, including the US, are seeing a rise in extremism and hate. What similarities did you observe from writing about South Africa in 1993 that correspond to our current political and social climate, and how did Mandela and his government address them?

JM: As South Africa’s first democratic elections loomed in 1994, extremists made it known that they planned to disrupt them and take power. They claimed that they commanded thousands of armed men and women. In one instance, in an incident eerily similar to the January 6 attack on the Capitol, about three thousand members of the Afrikaner Volksfront (AVF), Afrikaner Weerstandsbeweging (AWB) and other right-wing Afrikaner paramilitary groups stormed the World Trade Centre in Johannesburg where democracy negotiations were taking place.

Mandela never tolerated or accommodated hate. Yet, he realized the need to engage the extremists. Over several months, in meetings that sometimes went through the night, he convinced the leaders of the extremists that they had a place in a future democratic South Africa, and they should embrace the democratic changes that were taking place. The result was that extremist groupings lay down arms and participated in the first non-racial elections in South Africa in 1994 and got representation in a new Parliament.

HI5: What do you hope readers take away from The Plot to Save South Africa?

JM: We are living through a highly polarized time in the world. Challenges to leaders and citizens are numerous and relentless. Such times need ethical, values-based, solutions-driven leaders who can rise above narrow, selfish, interests and put citizens first. Through Mandela’s challenging week, I hope The Plot To Save South Africa gives an example of how we can lead through complex and challenging times.