On Mvura/Amanzi/Water Disband the Harare City Council

 

By Takura Zhangazha*

You cannot even begin to believe it. The Harare  City Council is pursuing a prepaid metre plan for water access.  That is basically a privatisation of what is Earth's most abundandant and necessary natural resource. Whether its from the sky, our rivers, the oceans or underground. 

In our African tradition, if you have a visitor, the first thing you offer is a calabash of water. Its for free. No questions asked. Until your thirst is quenched. 

In this there is no pre-payment. It is just basic humanity. And if you need to go to do any ablutions, as a visitor, we do not stop you. Except to give you more water to wash your hands afterwards. 

But now the Harare City Council has under the directive of the central Ministry of Local government decided without any iorta of resistance, to put a prepaid price on water distribution in the capital.

Not just drinking water as was already the case. But all types of water usages. 

There are those that easily argue that water is a 'commodity' like bread, sugar or tea. 

The truth of the matter, as established by the Univrrsal Declaration Human Rights via the United Nations, article 3 without direct reference to water. 

Infact it is one of the most fundamental. 

No human being can live without water. Whether you drink it, wash with it or marvel at its spectacular river course from Mosi-oa-Tunya  to the Indian ocean. 

Water belongs to the people. How you pipe it, treat it, distribute it will should always be framed within the ambit of its equitable access for all. Rich, middle class, working class, rural farmer or the downright poor. 

I know a number of cdes who have a colonial hangover about water and its distribution in our cities in Zimbabwe. They have a very capitalist mindset about a resource that is essentially an equalizer.  Mainly because they have boreholes or can purchase  Nigeria style the same said water as a privilege. 

All the while ignoring the universal right to water for all human beings. And assuming they are priviledged because of, again, their access to water.

And then enter the Harare City Council. I know some of the councillors. Some I have known for years on end when they were opposition 'ground activists'. 

 In particular I also know the current mayor Jacob Mafume as a one time very close cde. 

In that time of knowing each other we would discuss issues of social and economic justice.

 While we never dwelt much on the issue of water and water rights of the people, we probably found it ridiculous that someone can make a proposition that water can be privatised. 

Now I have never been to remand prison as my brother Jacob Mafume on what it appears were politicised charges. Neither have I had to face a Commission of Inquiry about my conduct in office. 

But I have also never been at the forefront of as ridiculous a proposition as that of privatising water. Mvura, Amanzi? 

So when I opened the gate to where I currently stay, expecting macde eJehovahs Witness, lo and behold there were young cdes from a company called Helcrow. 

They advised me that they were there to install a pre-paid water metre. I didnt argue with them. They asked for my council rates/metre number.  I gave them. 

Then they proceeded to change the old one that they claimed was now digitalised. 

I told them but there is currently no water anyway. They said it did not matter. It will only matter when the water eventually comes. 

I understood the young cdes. They were at work. And they also warned me that if I refused to comply I would be fined. Or they would lose their jobs. 

I sort of get it. I have served in many boards or organisations both private and public. All in which I have faced multiple tricky situations. 

I remember one in which we had to debate a question of medical aid versus funeral insurance. The latter was cheaper. I refused and thankfully won the argument that we cannot employ people in order to bury them with a subsidy.

Water, as one of my close friends says, is not a rumour. It is a human right. It should never be privatised. When it rains, we are all happy because water belongs to all of us. And it was, will never be prepaid. (Tichasvitsana kuma penalty)

*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity

Africa and the Immediate Threat of a Third Global World War (Israel-USA-Iran)

 Africa and the Immediate Threat of a Third Global World War (Israel-USA-Iran)

By Takura Zhangazha 

In another time I wish I did not have to write this article. 

But as an African, in Africa, it is necessary to do so in light of not only recent seismic global international events such as the USA/Israel military attacks on Iran. Wherein a 'nuclear option' is rumoured to be on the USA/Israel table.

But also the shifts in a long held assumption of global human equality under the auspices of the United Nations Charter and its one-time humane liberatory history.

Moreso with a clear return to a revived neo-imperialistic (also read as neo-colonial) mindset by the USA government of Donald Trump. And other western governments that under the auspices of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato) are too afraid to challenge the USA due to their fear of what they consider a stronger China or a re-emergent and agressive Russia. 

With China being feared by the global west for its new global economic/technological influence and Russia for its war of agression in Ukraine. 

Our reality is that as Africans we all, even if we didnt directly will it on ourselves,  live in a capitalist globalised economy. In fact we have done so since the end of the then Cold War (1989-91) mainly between the West and the East (mainly Russia before the emergence of China as also a counter-hegemon). 

So because of this reality as Africans, we need to immediately grasp a couple of matters and put them out of the way. 

The first being the historical phrase that when the global north/west sneezes, the world catches a cold (I am paraphrasing for context here)

Or to put it more into a contemporary geopolitical context, when the global north/west superpowers start a war of invasion/regime-change against a mineral rich state,  the globalised neo-liberal economy always has dire consequences for poorer countries in the global south. 

The second issue to immediately understand is that the USA/Israel vs Iran current war is not between the three countries only. It encompases a less ideological return to the equivalent of a new 'Cold War' in 2026. One which is more neo-imperialist than ideological. 

By this I mean it is more about global contestations for economic, financial (US$ vs Gold) and material (minerals, territory, military hardware) dominance. 

It is a battle that, make no mistake, does not have Africa's deliberately conscious participation. It is one that pits the USA/Israel, NATO member states against Russia,China and the now evidently fragile remaining  BRICS member states. These being India, Brazil and our African representative, South Africa. 

So we, or at least our African governments should have a full appreciation of the full import of this current USA/Israel-Iran war on oil/gas, travel/tourism, commodity exchanges (especially minerals), military repositioning and by dint of all of the above their effects on their own domestic performance legitimacy politics. 

Some African governments may fall simply because of their over-reliance on trade routes via the Hormutz Strait. 

Or their over confidence in financialised capital that is based in the mainstream Gulf States that are no longer fully functional and under current lockdown due to Iranian attacks.

But the crux of this matter as alluded to in the title of this article is Africa's placement in this USA/Israel vs Iran war, now and in the immediate future. Before we even talk about its more long term effects. 

This war is without a doubt couched in a colonial and racist ideological  narrative as clearly laid out by US secretary of state Marco Rubio in a recent address at the Davos World Economic Forum where he publicly and shockingly (I think it was deliberate)  called for a re-assertion of Western civilisation. As of racist colonial superiority old with widespread uncritical coverage in globalised private mainstream and social media. 

So this current USA/Israel vs Iran war that is increasingly becoming global wants to return Africa to an oppressive fear mongering and inferiority complex consciousness. By way of simply demonstrating military might as is the case with Venezuela, Iran and now potentially Cuba. Wherein the West is saying/implying to Africa, forget your own struggles against colonialism, imperialism and neo-imperialism/neo-liberalism. Or face a military attack or violent ouster of a current leader and subsequent civil strife. 

What has however been problematic for us has been the responses of our Africa continental ( African Union ) and sub-regional bodies (SADC, ECOWAS, EAC, IGAD).

These have been characterised by an over pliant diplomatic language that indicates more acquiesence than resistance to this newfound, global racist western neo-imperialism. 

A development which after what happened to Libya, Sudan, Saharawi and the DRC among others, still leaves a tragic sour taste in any organic Pan Africanists' mouth. 

While we can argue about Russia and China's role in this current global Orwellian 'war' state of affairs, we can be assured that historically these two countries are not as racist toward Africa as the USA and Israel have been. And they have never called us sh#thole countries. Something that some among us conveniently forget. For the money. 

I will conclude with what I consider a pragmatic way forward. In this age of global international uncertainty the words of the great pan Africanist Kwame Nkrumah are apt, "AFRICA MUST UNITE!" Beyond false diplomatic platitudes and pandering to the whims of former colonial powers. 

We cannot allow Trump, Rubio and Netanyahu to give a global impression that they can turn back our struggle hands of time to colonial frameworks of global interaction. Where we become natives again. 

That would be ahistorical and a betrayal of our own African being. 

We can overcome if we re-unite as Africans and revive the global humane solidarities that are now sorely lacking globally in order tonstop these unnecessary cruel globalised wars. 

*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity 

Twitter: @TakuraZhangazha

Zimbabwe Foreign Policy Has to Change, Return to the Principled Source

By Takura Zhangazha*

The Zimbabwean government under the ruling Zanu Pf party has had as a central narrative and dictum to its foreign policy, "A friend to all and an enemy to none."

In this it also adds the caveat that in all its dealings with Zimbabwe's central national interests in international relations that our country is quite literally 'open for business'. 

It has maintained these foreign policy positions since 2017 when President Mnangagwa announced what he refers to as the 'second republic.' And also after the 2018, 2023 harmonised elections where Zanu Pf retained both legislative and executive authority over state power. Albeit in still disputed circumstances. 

But their electoral and, in the contemporary, functional retention of power is a reality that we live with. 

As is with their government's foreign policy positions as they affect how we look at the world and how the world in return looks at us. 

A little bit of history is important here.

 Zimbabwe over the years between 1997-2009 was viewed as a 'pariah state'. A term which was both academic and political in the global north as well global liberal (read that as neo-liberal) democratic or Blairite/Clinton 'third way discourse.

This was mainly due to two main issues. The first being that in the late 1990s, we had a radicalising left-wing motivated workers movement that was countering the ruling Zanu Pf via labour unions that went on to form the mainstream opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) before the turn of the 21st century. 

This was against a perception that the world had reached what we now know as a discredited assumption of a global 'end of history' as ennunciated by intellectual and populist supporters of global neoliberal ideology. 

So Zimbabwe was, contrary to the late 1990s popular opinion, not liked for its emerging left leaning opposition politics which were eventually re-harnessed into more conservative narratives. 

The second historical point about Zimbabwe's global 'pariah status' was the still politically argued but structurally real, Fast Track Land Reform Programme (FTLRP) from 2000 to present day. Though today it is increasingly more formalised in relation to central government land policies. 

This is Zimbabwe's almost, to use a biblical term, 'original sin', within private property/capital motivated international relations post the start of the millenium. 

A sin that a decent nunber of future generations of young Zimbabweans will still have to resist, suffer or eventually atone for at the altar of globalised financialised capitalism.

Now that was just a little bit of history of Zimbabwe's placement in the world. And why it is viewed, even in an African context as 'pariah'. 

But where we look at our current context with a government that claims to be a 'friend to all' and 'enemy to none' in the world, we should raise a number of questions in the 'global now'. 

The first question is if we have had this foreign policy since 2017, what has it achieved that changed our pariah status? Others may argue it has opened up new avenues to global financialised capital and investments from the west. 

But the counter argument is that this has only been incremental over the course of  at least 9 years. And the country remains under a complex western sanctions regime that is more intrumentalised than seeing its own backdoor on Zimbabwe. 

So it has not had the intended immediate effect. Nor is it guaranteed to.

The second question that arises is that of, okay, we did the FTLRP, challenged assumptions of colonial private property rights and fulfilled one of the key tenets of our own national liberation struggle.

 Only to turn back as a 'friend' to former colonial and post colonial white farmers and offer them compensation. As part of an appeasment foreign policy framework? At an estimated US$3,5 billion cost. 

The third and final question that arises from Zimbabwes current foreign policy trajectory is what does it mean in an emerging age of global unilateralism by global superpowers and the undermining of the United Nations 'rules based' global world order. Especially by Donald Trump of the USA. 

And within the global economic protectionism by the same said supepowers (EU, Russia, China, The Emirates, Israel) as they scramble not only for new markets, rare earth minerals but more significantly for compliance with their own foreign policy interests. 

In such a polarised and unpredictable context, Zimbabwe cannot be a'friend to all'. Or an 'enemy to none'. 

That is unrealistic and dangerous to our organic national interests in global relations. As a matter of fact, its highly impractical. 

As of old, Zimbabwe's foreign policy has to revert to principled historical, solidarity and non-aligned tenets with Pan -African countries, the global south and the global east before it assumes what is essentially a 'false global neutrality'. 

Historically and progresively our foreign policy was never designed to be self centered or self absorbed since not only the liberation struggle but after it and as designed for posterity. 

Where we think we can stand alone with this current unprincipled foreign policy, we will fall alone as a country. Unless we change it and return to the source. 

*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity

Twitter: @TakuraZhangazha

Saluting Dr. Blessing Makunike

 By Takura Zhangazha *

I learnt of the sad news of the recent passing away of Dr. Blessing Makunike from a journalist colleague Godwin Mangudya. 

Apart from the shock of the news, I was deeply saddened that a cde who was relatively young had passed on. 

Dr Makunike was my and many others senior at the University of Zimbabwe. To be specific he was a teaching assistant in the Political and Administrative studies in the Faculty of Humanities then run by the late Professor Mukonoweshuro in 1997. 

He worked closely with again the late Professor Masipula Sithole as his tutorial assistant for a course titled (cdes can correct me if I am wrong) "Survey of Political Ideas". And subsequently on another course which related to Zimbabwe's political history and Pan Africanism. I cannot quite recall its title. 

So we were undergraduates and he was assiduosly studying for his PhD. Together with, if I remember correctly now Dr. Knox Zengeni who also tutored us at that time. 

Dr. Makunike was an undergraduate students helper. He was allowed to review our assignments for the courses he tutored and generously gave humorous advice about where we had messed up. Be it in referencing or factual and theoretical misnomers. 

He was affable to a fault. He would talk to us as though we were his peers but he was already doing a PhD. And he would wade into student politics with snide comments about how we, his students, didn't know what we were doing. 

This was based on his own history of student activism as he would explain it to us. 

He had a great relationship with the Students Union at the University of Zimbabwe. He, as rumour had it, helped Tafadzwa Musekiwa, who was later on to become Zimbabwe's first youngest Member of Parliament, campaign to again become the first vice president of the University of Zimbabwe Students union coming from the department of Political and Administrative Studies (PolAd). 

He gushed over the achievement of a student of political science being a vice president of the students union. And thereafter he always followed Prof Masipula Sitholes dictum of arguing that you cannot study political science if you don't want to practice it. 

We would laugh about this in tutorials about Africa and Zimbabwe while arguing about Samuel Huntington or even Nkrumah, Ujamaa and Pan Africanism. 

And for sure he had a satirical sense of humour when some of us got low marks.

Moreso when laughing at how, why and where we got it wrong

If I remember correctly he also directed myself, Linus Tsuro, Chofamba Sithole and Charles Mangongera to visit the main University's Stack Room 3 more often! That was the main floor for many social science students library readings as listed in course outlines. 

In all of this he was focused on finishing his post graduate studies. And when he got his PhD most of us the R97s had left the University if Zimbabwe.

He had also moved on to the academic registrars department . I think he had a speciality in administration.

And he eventually became a deputy academic registrar with a focus on post-graduate studies. 

But I will never forget that time he asked me, 'Pinda mu SRC mpfana (get into the SRC young man)'. This was after a meeting where mdara Morgan Tsvangirai and cde Thoko Matshe among many others had come to address the students union on the issue of a new constitution in 1998. I had waffled a question that got rapturous applause. And my brother Witness Zhangazha was already a Campus celebrity.

Dr. Makunike was ever active in following student politics and understanding the dynamics of the same.

When I won the SRC presidential election in 1998 he laughed at me and said, 'Yah, now you will know the real political science'. And for sure I learnt the hard way. But thanks to his regular advice, I survived suspensions and expulsion. 

Post my undergraduate studies and as emplyees, Dr. Makunike would after 2004 occasionally phone for a meet up. He, like his mentor Prof Masipula Sithole would say 'ngatiitei one'. He would normally be with cde Godwin Mangudya and we would meet at the press club at Ambassador Hotel, Harare before they made their way to Mufakose. 

When I would ask him about politics cde Dr Blessing Makunike would just say 'takakudzidzisei vapfana?' (What did we teach you?) And he would give a haughty life while we were convivially imbibing. 

My impression of the now late Dr. Makunike was that I could tell a man who had an intellectual presence that did not require the usual praise and sing songs. He believed in his work. He gave the impression he loved it. And I believe that to be completely true.

Furthermore he had no problem with passing on the baton stick. 

I remember trying to get into academia and setting up a meeting.with him at the registrars office at the University of Zimbabwe. I got the appointment. He told me, ""Imbomira sonny. Pano panonetsa. " 

We can only thank him for the consciousness. 

*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity 

Twitter: @TakuraZhangazha

Prof Mas would Have Laughed at Me.

 So my father passed on in 1991. He was an amazing father. We would play football. And then watch British Wrestling on a lazy Saturday evening. On  his prized black and white television with awkward legs. 

He would also laugh at us about me getting almost bitten by the dog we had.

 He did not laugh when my little sister got bitten and we had to go to the Waterfalls clinic to save her eye. Or when my " buda ndibudewo" sister saved me from an over-enthusiastic moment with electricity.  

I got the biggest hiding of my life after that. 

And my father still sent us to Mission school. He passed away when my brother was in his teenage years and my sisters were just about to grow up into young female cdes. 

My mother had to raise us on her own. And she did a sterling job of it. As a widow. We all somehow made it to college and university with my elder brother as an anchor for the family. 

The key issue, with hindsight was always who we thought we were. We were family! Something we would never be able to wish away. 

From my own side and I cannot speak for my brother and sisters, we suffered but we continued. In Harare and in Bikita. 

Almost as though we were living our father's legacy. 

But reality always hits you in the face. Hard. As we have grown older there are things that we now know. For example it is apparent that things have changed. For many cdes money matters. In its immediacy and importance. 

Or that lifestyle expectations matter. In the long term.  Even in false consciousness.

I have also argued with cdes that age is not an ideology.  It also turns out that it can be a reality. A reality that is both existential as well as falsely ideological.  

Wherein we live life as preferred by what we find popular or we suffer pain in order to get to a happy place. And then repeat the cycle. 

In my current intellectual space I had to re-read the much maligned Dambudzo Marechera. Including rethinking what he meant in an acerbic tones "My name is not Money but Mind"

 I half laughed at this comment when I was at the national archives in Harare and assiduosly listened to his interviews. (I was doing an undergraduate research dissertation at the University of Zimbabwe at that time under Prof Masipula Sithole)

And until we had that moment when Prof Masipula asked me to come to town for a beer from Dzivaresekwa where he bought only one of the same at the now closed Pointe restaurant. (Hanzi mwanangu ndati huya ndikuitere hwani)

So ProfMas in his jocular fashion said let us us drink at home. We went to Borrowdale and almost drank the night away. We argued a bit about  who was better Thomas Mapfumo or Oliver Mutukudzi. We could not agree. Because the two musical icons had the "Bvuma" and "Marimanzara" hit songs.

Prof Mas as we called him loved Tuku more than Mukanya's music. It was our perennial bone of contention. Tuku or Mukanya? I am a Mukanya afficionado. 

Unfortunately Prof Mas  passed on later soon after.

 And if you are curious crosscheck the years the albums/music was released. 

What I have realised though is that we have to be more organic about our political and economic thoughts. Our intrinsic  national values and principles.

We can longer afford to be abstract. We have to think through our being. Especially if you consider yourself a Zimbabwean.  

Zimbabwe needs a newer belief and principles, in order to continue the struggle for a progressive future. 

To that extent we should work on learning  not to  panic. 

We fought a liberation struggle. But we must look for a better future. 

*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity

From the Rear or the Front? The Historical Nuts and Bolts of Zanu Pf Succession Politics

By Takura Zhangazha*

A decent number of previously publicly unheralded war veterans of Zimbabwe's national liberation struggle have recently been interviewed by internet based journalists. 

(Kindly crosscheck CITE Zimbabwe, Zimbeat or , Chimurenga Files or SlyMedia YouTube accounts for examples of these interviews.)

These include those war veterans that were with the then Zimbabwe Peoples Revolutionary Army (ZIPRA) and those that were with the Zimbabwe African National Liberation Army (ZANLA). 

As politically controlled by PF ZAPU and ZanuPF respectively. 

In some instances others interviewed made impassioned reference to the Zimbabwe Peoples Army (ZIPA) which was an attempt at a unitary combination of both liberation armies. 

In most of the interviews one can easily discern a dichotomy or division between the historical understanding of what was then referred to as fighting from the 'front'. Or fighting from the 'rear'

There were those that fought at the battle front from the mid-1970s and those that were considered the nationalists that fought from the diplomatic rear. 

Neither could do without the other. But simultaneously there was a question of who is more legitimate to lead Zimbabwes struggle for liberation. 

Or at what stage do cdes from the diplomatic rear (nationalists) make way for cdes from the military front (guerillas) in leading the same said struggle? During its actual and real-time occurrence. 

While the politics, as a general Maoist dictum was meant to lead the gun, within the liberation movement both separately and as a united military front under ZIPA, there was a general assumption by commanders of the thousands of trained guerillas that the nationalists were not pulling their weight in the capitals of Lusaka- Zambia, Dar es Salaam-Tanzania and Maputo- Mozambique. 

The key evidence of this was in a dichotomy of diplomacy versus the war in and of itself after Herbert Chitepo's assassination in 1975 and the now legendary Mgagao declaration in Tanzania of the same year.

Inclusive of the jailing of Josiah Tongogara by the Zambian government and his subsequent release at the instigation of the more influential members of the then Frontline States. 

All in order to carry on the more military version of the struggle under ZIPA which eventually collapsed due to ethnocentric divisions as allegedly instigated by cdes who were at the rear and not the war-front (crosscheck cde Dzinashe Machingura's memoir on this). 

This historical thread remains somewhat whispered or deliberately unsaid in Zanu Pfs contemporary succession politics. 

They still have a 'rear' and a 'front' historical cadreship as they had when the late Robert Mugabe was still in power. 

But also more critically that when the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) emerged in the late 1990s, it was to help them by default to blur up those 'rear' and 'front' divisions within Zanu Pf in order to protect what they considered the revolution. As they understood it. 

Hence we had not only the Fast Track Land Reform Programme (FTLRP) but also the violence that accompanied the 2002, 2005, 2008 and 2018 elections. 

It was arguably the military 'front' that once again came to the defence of the nationalists 'rear' in the aforementioned elections.

Moreso when we had Mugabe's now infamous 'asante sana' speech in 2017. As our military had asked all of us to 'remain calm' when they took control of the country with popular support.

Albeit and arguably politically briefly. (For some cdes this was/is more permanent.)

What was however demonstrated and clear was the centrality of the historicity of the 'rear' and the 'front' of defending a 'revolution'. Again. 

Meaning as their political civilian leadership faltered, the politised military once again, in its self-assumed historical role remained key in holding the national revolutionary ship steady. 

So when you look at Zanu Pf succession politics as they are occurring now, you have to bear this historicity of their party in mind. It is 'unignorable.' 

If this was the United States of America (USA) I would call it our own version of a Military Industrial Complex (MIC) without the capacity to produce weapons of mass destruction. 

But with a clear partisan intention of not relinquishing power to anyone deemed inimical to the original intentions of what they still consider to be a national revolution. Ideological warts and all. 

And there's the contemporary rub.

Zanu Pfs ideological ambiguity within a fluid contemporary capitalistically multi-polar global political economy is beginning to creep into their national political character. 

Where, as a ruling party they are embracing neoliberal and ironically state capitalism and cronyism they have reignited their own internal contradictions about liberation struggle values and narratives about 'zvigananda'. 

A term that was also used as a value based reflection of the difference between the 'rear' and the 'front'. 

Or those that were benefitting versus those that were directly suffering in the military liberation struggle. 

Even further, as exemplified by those that were in the now proverbial comfort of Lusaka/Maputo versus those that were at Nyadzonia or Chimoio. 

Except that in the now, the so called nationalists have a numerical and economic advantage.

 They have greater control of younger, materialist Zimbabweans. 

From young(ish) urban land barons who are beneficiaries of the FTLRP, miners, bankers, small scale traders, tourism operators, tenderprenuers through to educationists and health care professionals.  

Inclusive of those that are also somehow highly politically ambitious such as your Tagwirei's and Tungwarara's with their legion of fans.

 Some of whom are also now either in Parlaiment or local councils already. 

In tandem with owning football clubs and running cultural and musical shows in a new celebrity and 'mbinga' culture. 

They can win, at least monetarily, any future general harmonised election for Zanu Pf.

 Inclusive of eventual if not already existent co-option of the opposition political parties via money or politicised protection. 

But the war veterans have a riposte to this based on security sector issues.

In this we revert to their ruling party's historical contestations of the 'rear' and the 'front' of their revolutionary war. 

Neither has historically been able to do without the other. In their own party's context. It is just that the nationalists won the long duree post independence round under Mugabe as crossed over to Mnangagwa. For now.

So whatever is being said about 2030 or will be said about its scheduled 2027 national elective congress and the 2028 constitutionally scheduled Zimbabwe general elections, it is necessary to understand Zanu Pfs positioning on these matters. 

With a key question to its next leader being ,

"Are you historically operating from the 'rear' or the 'front'?" 

Either way #Songambele

*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity 

Zimbabwean Journalism is Important to Our Progressive National Being: Respect It.

 By Takura Zhangazha*

A colleague shared with me some social media posts about allegations of the dire state of salary and working conditions of journalists at one of Zimbabwe’s most respected private print and now multi-media company, Alpha Media Holdings (AMH) based in Harare, Zimbabwe. 

It owns the newspapers the Newsday, the Zimbabwe Independent and the Sunday Standard.  Together with a reputation that crosses our national borders as a beacon of free expression in Zimbabwe.  

Other national media companies such as the Zimbabwe Newspapers Group (Zimpapers) also have their reputations (they own not only the Herald, Sunday Mail, Chronicle and Manica Post) among a multiplicity of other radio, newspaper and television stations. Including a new journalism training college.

Not to leave out the Associated Newspapers Group of Zimbabwe group (ANGZ) which owns another private flagship newspaper, the Daily News, the weekly Financial Gazette and an online television station.

There are also other private television, radio and print media houses inclusive of the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation (ZBC) but for the purposes of this analysis and defense of journalism the previously aforementioned above cited examples will be enough. 

Now there is a generally unwritten code about journalists and media workers not writing about each other unless there are clear court, ethical, criminal or discrimination issues.  Or in cases where there is the deliberate criminalization of journalism as a profession.

But the social media post the cde shared with me had not been an unknown rumour within media circles about AMH and others I cannot mention due to the fact that the information has not been made as public.

It has been a rumour about the ongoing unfair labour related treatment of journalists and media workers at not only AMH but also in part across the national media industry.

As a clear example, it basically turns out that allegedly journalists working for AMH have not had regular payments of their salaries for at least ten (10) or so months.  With some social media reports also alleging recent extraordinary acts of protests at this state of affairs but also some labour related arbitration processes. 

Having worked in the media and with journalists and media workers (logistics, graphic designers, finance, media freedom advocacy, unionists), in various capacities, I am of the strong persuasion that journalists and media workers are correct not only at AMH but any other media institution in Zimbabwe to air out their views publicly.

Not only about their working conditions, salaries and labour rights but also the state of freedom of expression in Zimbabwe.  As they all come together in the national democratic public interest. Without a default censorship of poor working conditions as well as politicized editorial policing.

 I however understand the idea of the media as a ‘business’.  Almost as though that for Zimbabwe’s media to survive it must be ‘corporatized'. 

As is the case emerging now in the United States of America  (USA) and the global north or east.  Wherein we have oligarchs that can determine national discourse that is preferential to their political and economic interests without accountability to the working conditions of journalists and media workers. In tandem with their right to free expression.

This is where the media industry is viewed from the narrow lenses of assuming it is for monetary and political profit (advertising, clicks, likes, views, winning partisan elections). But not for the public interest purpose of promoting democracy, public accountability and most importantly, freedom of expression. 

This is where the public’s support for journalists also becomes important.  In an almost dual way.  Where journalistic rights and stable working conditions are protected and they do their public interest job well, the Zimbabwean public will appreciate their profession more. 

Where a public perception is allowed to fester that journalists are pushing ‘brown envelopes’ the public will lose, or in our case, may have lost respect for journalism as a profession. Let alone media ownership and assumptions of the media as industry to simply be a money as opposed to a national freedom of expression consciousness machine.     

Journalism and the media may have been made to appear as though it is simply about the money.  That is not true. 

It is a key cog in any free country’s progressive consciousness.  And note that I deliberately mention ‘progressive consciousness’ and not ‘propaganda’.  As is now largely the case in the global north, Russia and China.

Our journalists form a cultural backbone of our country.  Or at least they should.  Where they are at fault, they can be corrected without the general criminalization they have faced since our national independence in 1980.  

It becomes worse when media owners decide that they can and should exploit them in relation to their salaries and spend copious amounts of time without paying them or ignoring their union’s demands for cost of living adjustment negotiations and better working conditions.  

I will conclude with the centrality of the media, journalists/journalism as both a profession to our national independence. 

In its various forms and roles it was central to how we came to perceive of ourselves as Zimbabweans.  

Where we assume it is abstract we are missing its significant historicity.  

Where we mistreat journalists and media workers in relation to not only their salaries or working conditions then we are lost as a country.

I know that the journalist unions including the Zimbabwe Union of Journalists (ZUJ) and the Zimbabwe Graphic and Allied Workers Union (ZIGAWU) are trying their best at getting media owners, parliament, our courts and central government to understand this key point. 

While at the same time defending their members from unfair labour and working conditions.   

However we have to contend with the fact that if you treat journalism and the media as insignificant to the past, present and the future of the country then you may be missing the point of why you own a media house, a private business or are in government/parliament or local council.

And wrongly assume that journalism is about marketing, public relations or social media influencers.  That is not journalism. 

Journalism is a key profession. In its independence and its functions to promote freedom of expression and access to information in the public interest.  Pay the cdes fairly.

*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity