Jacob Zuma's troubles and his likely departure from office should the charges stick could sully what has been a fairly competent navigation of a treacherous terrain. He has confounded sceptics by the manner in which he carried out his duties, especially given the fact that he was not Thabo Mbeki's first choice as deputy.

The number two job in any country is a dogsbody. Deputies live in the shadows, always looking over their boss's shoulders to see if there is something the boss would like them to do. That could even mean taking the rap for something you have not done. Because it is usually an unscripted position, you are always the fall guy.

You dare not outperform or outshine the man in charge.

Doing something good or saying something really inspirational can count against you, because it could make your boss look something of a meathead.

You do not have a mind of your own, at least in public. And if you do, keep your own counsel. You while away time attending the odd funeral, wedding, racehorse meeting - any menial task which the boss may feel is beneath him.

In reality cabinet ministers have more power and influence - they are responsible for government departments that impact directly on the lives of people. You exercise real power in the absence of the president. Your job, your primary occupation is simply waiting in the wings in case something happens to the incumbent which makes him unfit to be in office, or he retires. That means always keeping your nose clean.

In the United States, for instance, the obvious consideration when choosing a running mate is: what does he bring to the ticket? He has to make up for the candidate's weaknesses.

Jack Kennedy had to rope in his political foe, Lyndon Johnson, because Johnson had what he did not have - gravitas, experience in the ways of Washington and a Protestant in a country still wary of Catholics. Al Gore brought sincerity and good family values to a candidate, Bill Clinton, given to bimbo eruptions. Dick Cheney, not George Bush, had to be taken to a bunker. The president has to be seen to be in charge, especially in times of danger.

The thought crossed my mind with the events at the Union Buildings on Women's Day when the president had to crawl to safety from under a collapsed tent. If, God forbid, something were to happen to Mbeki, is Zuma ready to take over, given his little difficulties? Right now the answer has to be a no.

Zuma's appointment as deputy president was somewhat fortuitous. Mbeki had invited Mangosuthu Buthelezi to be his deputy after the 1999 elections. Buthelezi turned him down. He argued that Mbeki had taken with him the power he had as deputy president. What Buthelezi failed to realise was that Mbeki was not a classic deputy in a presidential system.

In a truly presidential system, the deputy president has no power. He is the servant of the incumbent president. Mbeki, under Nelson Mandela, was different. He was more of a prime minister than a deputy president, in charge of the running of government. Also those were unique circumstances. Mandela had two deputies - Mbeki and FW de Klerk.

Reality demanded that Mbeki get more responsibilities than De Klerk. He was from the majority party, and he was heir apparent.

When Buthelezi refused the invitation to serve as Mbeki's deputy, the job fell to Zuma. There were many who doubted whether he was the man for the job. But he took to it like a duck to water. He carved his own niche. He's seen as straightforward, and unlike his boss, an uncomplicated man and therefore easy to talk and relate to. He grew in stature.

When Winnie Madikizela-Mandela had a fall-out with Mbeki, she appealed to Zuma to resolve the matter.

The accusation two years ago by Mbeki's acolytes that three top ANC men were plotting to topple him led many to wonder whether Mbeki had lost his marbles or was simply too drunk with power, and they started casting around for an alternative.

Suddenly Zuma looked a genuine presidential material. The argument is that, unlike Mbeki, he knows his shortcomings and he can take advice. In the midst of the coup plot controversy, Zuma issued a statement pledging his undying loyalty to Mbeki. It took everybody by surprise. It is said the "suggestion" came from the presidency.

But all that is now water under the bridge. He is now fighting to save his reputation, let alone his career. If we are to be seen to be fighting corruption, it is the big fish, not just the small fry, that should be dealt with. What is even more troubling about Zuma in all of this is his judgment. Schabir Shaik does not seem like somebody the presidency should associate with, let alone use as financial adviser. You are judged by the friends you keep.

Zuma may be a decent man, but he's now damaged goods. He should spare the country further embarrassment and fall on his sword.

With acknowledgements to Barney Mthombothi and The Star.