 |
| Last laugh ... Zanu PF leader Robert Mugabe |
|
| |
| |
| |
|
IT IS now 11 years since Zimbabwe plunged into its current socio-economic and political malaise. One whole decade has passed and the solution to the Zimbabwean crisis is still as elusive as ever.
There is indeed no doubt from most corners of the Zimbabwean society that President Robert Mugabe’s regime has made a lot of political misjudgments and under no circumstances does its reign be extended by another day at the next elections. But how has Zanu PF managed to hoodwink the entire country, region and indeed the world into believing its indomitability?
Simply put, how has Zanu PF managed to survive relentless onslaught from left right and centre? Indeed, lives have been lost, homes destroyed, millions of United States dollars, British pounds and European Union euros have been channeled directly or indirectly to the struggle for “democratic” transition. Yet all these resources seem to have gone down the drain leaving Zimbabwe still firmly in the grip of a brutal tyrant.
Self defeaters and doubters often find solace in the refrain that the Zimbabwean population is made up of “cowards” who cannot stand the sight of a baton stick, and therefore any thoughts of unshackling ourselves from Zanu PF’s chains are nothing but a pipedream. This same category of people have sharpened this argument after the recent arrest of Munyaradzi Gwisai and 45 others over an alleged plot to dislodge the government through street protests.
Zimbabweans, under so much socio-economical and political pressure still refused to join the worthy cause, mainly because they lacked courage, so the argument goes. Nothing could be further from the truth. If anything, few countries on the African continent have the courage and capacity to resist and sacrifice like Zimbabweans when the need arises.
Zimbabweans need focused and selfless leadership. The First Chimurenga/ Umvukela of 1896/97 as well as the 1970’s liberation war are cases in point. I am not suggesting that Zimbabweans today should also pick up arms and fight a “real” Third Chimurenga, in order to realise the seemingly elusive freedom. There are several reasons that could easily work against such an endeavor in today’s Zimbabwe.
The most potent reason for the survival of Zanu PF as a ruling party lies not so much in the power of incumbency but within the inherent weaknesses of the civic and the opposition movements in Zimbabwe. Truth be told, a sizeable section of these bodies are comfortable in their perennial struggle or perennial opposition status. This helps explain the incessant power struggles within these movements.
The mistake that the European Union and the United States of America among other international power brokers made was to make their monetary support obvious and easily accessible to anybody who muted discontent against Mugabe whether genuine or not. Zimbabwe thus witnessed a rise in a number of the so called ‘pro-democracy’ NGOs with little or no focus at all especially after year 2000.
I am not bemoaning any opposition to tyranny, but most of these movements have done more harm than good to the struggle for democracy in Zimbabwe. If anything, they have strengthened Zanu PF without knowing it. Such movements have presented Zanu PF with a weak and divided opponent who can be easily dismembered part by part. In fact, the so called civil society in Zimbabwe has departed from any definition of civil society that aims to work for common good.
If civil society could be defined as ‘a public space between the state, the market and the ordinary household, in which people can debate and tackle action for common good', the Zimbabwean version of civil society has indeed ceased to be such and shifted from common good to ‘personal aggrandisement’.
These actions have only served to strengthen Zanu PF’s stranglehold on Zimbabwe, much to the disappointment of many courageous Zimbabweans, who still find themselves starved of worthy leadership. It is indeed not a surprise that the run up to the recent MDC congress in Bulawayo was marked by internecine power struggles, something which ironically never occurs at Zanu PF congresses – giving many any observer the false impression that Zanu PF is organised and therefore insurmountable.
It is true that Zanu PF has struggles within, but whatever means it uses to solve them, it does not wash its dirty linen in public. Zanu PF has therefore managed to exploit the embarrassingly open chasms within the opposition and civil society to develop a big political advantage.
Recent reports that the National Constitutional Assembly’s leader, Lovemore Madhuku, has unseemly refused, for the second time, to vacate the leadership of the organisation despite clear stipulations by the body’s constitution are another clear example of the serious problems that the struggle for democracy is facing in Zimbabwe.
It becomes even more astounding if one also takes into account indications by Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Union’s Lovemore Matombo that he will seek re-election as president of the labour body by amending its constitution to fit his personal aims. It is also public knowledge that the MDC-T leader Morgan Tsvangirai arm-twisted his party to amend its constitution to enable him to stay in power. The same can be said for the then MDC-M faction which is now MDC-N, where Professors Arthur Mutambara and Welshman Ncube were recently mudslinging each other for power.
All these groups have had their fair share of leadership that cannot resist the temptations of power. Examples are abundant. These are men and women who are ever ready to surrender their integrity or reputation as fighters for democracy, in order to be where the donor funds come through.
In light of this, most of the opposition leadership slowly fits the stereotypical view of the African leader who refuses to leave power, a stereotype that is shared by most people within and beyond the African continent. These leaders are seen as power-hungry, ‘grab and plunder’ kind of leaders, who see the fight for democracy or political office as a money-making schemes and not public service. They have indeed learnt nothing from Martin Luther King (Jnr) or Nelson Mandela.
Until such a time when those who are struggling for democracy in Zimbabwe cease to view their actions as ‘personal business’ and not a common cause, then we have a long way to go before we achieve Uhuru. The civil society and opposition movements must quickly realise that the capacity to force change in Zimbabwe depends on their ability to allow themselves to be imbued with the principles and experiences that govern the discourse of democracy and common participation that they all claim to fight for.
The civic movements and the opposition must strategically do away with the elitism ulcer that has slowly affected them in recent years. As long as they continue to drive their new top of the range cars (God knows where they get the money to buy them), wine and dine in high-end restaurants and at the same time claim to represents someone in Mabvuku, Makokoba or Mucheke -- Zanu PF will rule as long as they want.
All successful transitions to democracy that topple resistant dictatorships never shift their focus from the grassroots and pretend that elitist dialogue through workshops in hotels will win the day. Zimbabwe’s civic movements and the opposition need to go back to the drawing board and acknowledge that power and most importantly democratic transition lies within the ordinary people -- the everyday foot soldiers they are beginning to ignore.
A Jasmine or a Tahir is indeed possible in Zimbabwe, but people need leaders. Melusi Nkomo is a Masters student specializing in Democratic Governance and Civil Society at the University of Osnabrück in Germany. Contact him: mnkomozim@yahoo.co.uk |
| |
|
E mail this to a friend
Printable Version
No comments:
Post a Comment