By Takura Zhangazha*
Last Friday two of Zimbabwe’s arguably most powerful women,
Vice President Joice Mujuru and First Lady Grace Mugabe, received doctor of
philosophy (PhD) degrees from the University of Zimbabwe. It was an occasion that was both as celebrated
as it was controversial.
Not least because of the current public and private debates
concerning Zanu Pf’s electoral congress
and its attendant succession politics. But also because over the last month or
so, the First Lady’s almost given ascendancy to the post of Zanu Pf Secretary for Women's Affairs has been touted as a key move to stop Mujuru either retaining her
current post or preventing her from succeeding the incumbent.
So perhaps these doctorates are being acquired in pursuit of
perceived (or even real) academic competition/ ascendancy between the two and on
behalf of their alleged factions. And in
positioning either of the two as fully if not over qualified to either retain
or take over national leadership positions in Zanu PF.
The awarding of the PhD's to the two ladies has also courted controversies
in its own right. A number of media reports
have queried the unusually short period the First Lady took to register and
graduate for a degree programme that usually lasts at least three official academic
years. Or alternatively, but far less controversially, the timing of
the qualification of the Vice President to coincide with an electoral congress
year.
All of these issues as they have emerged over the last week
are symptomatic of a number of key issues that are demonstrating the true
character of their leadership bids, their party’s internal dynamics as well as
the status of women in our society.
To begin with, their leadership bids, which they are since
their party has an elective congress, have had to be structured within a highly
male dominated political framework. This
is both because of the history of the liberation struggle as well as the significance of being in proximity to the incumbent leader, President Mugabe.
Vice President Mujuru’s narrative has been carefully
tailored to demonstrate not only liberation war credentials but a post independence
capacity to not only to be a longstanding cabinet minister but an educated and
commitment one too. Just like those who dominated leadership in the
liberation struggle, Zanu Pf and government.
The First Lady on the other hand has also had to link her ambitions to her proximity
to her party’s leader who incidentally is also her spouse. She has however also sought to demonstrate
her intellectual capacity and acumen not only through her recent PhD acquisition
but by trying to develop a persona of being ‘Mother of the nation’. The latter point only within the ambit (and
permission) of a male dominated framework.
That they operate within such a misogynist environment is no
fault of their own. It is something that
perhaps can be blamed on the historical genesis of many a liberation struggle
on our subcontinent. The sad truth is that they are most likely to be successful
if they do not seek to revolutionize such a status quo Sankara style.
The much more interesting question and issue therefore
becomes, what exactly do these two women stand for. One ostensibly representing herself while the
other alleging representing a rival faction to the other as led by a male. The
answer to this might reside in the reality that they do not so much represent
any potential shifts in Zanu Pf policies or intentions. Neither are they keen on proposing anything
different to what obtains. Especially
where and when it comes to women.
In their many years of influence, one as First Vice
President and the other as First Lady, they have never claimed to be
progenitors of any overall new policies that have benefited women in
Zimbabwe. Where one checks with what Zanu
Pf has claimed as its most successful policy in the last decade, the fast track land
reform programme, it has turned out that women felt short changed. Even in their own party.
This is an important point to make because it must be remembered
that in all of these political manoeuvres,
there has rarely been a moment where these
two highly influential women so close to power in their own party have demonstrated
an organic linkage with the plight of ordinary women across the country. Nor have they been brought to direct account
on that score.
It is not as if they
would divide the country by doing so. They would only stand to not only gain
better leverage to relieve women of the myriad social and economic challenges
affecting them but also be in a position to demonstrate that leadership should essentially
be un-gendered. And that everyone’s interests,
including those of women, matter.
So in the midst of the PhD graduations, the factional fights
and shifting allegiances in their party as well as in government, they would do
better to take into account the fact that perhaps, only perhaps the ordinary
Zimbabwean girl, woman, mother and grandmother are not too sure as to what is
really going on up there where power is kept or allegedly being fought for. Hence the narrative of who women support is neither popular beyond party structures nor in the hearts and minds of a majority of our population (women).
After all, they as ordinary women are still faced with unaffordable maternal care, poor health infrastructure, lack of land tenure/security, domestic /gender based violence and unequal access to education (unless their parents are well to do and alive).
After all, they as ordinary women are still faced with unaffordable maternal care, poor health infrastructure, lack of land tenure/security, domestic /gender based violence and unequal access to education (unless their parents are well to do and alive).
*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity (takura-zhangazha.blogspot.com)
No comments:
Post a Comment