Zim's Political Reality Check + Zanu Pf’s Internal Transition

By Takura Zhangazha*

There is one good thing that is now emerging from the current political crisis in Zimbabwe.  This is that the lead role in seeking to resolve the impasse has now been taken over by the politicians.  At least by way of pronouncements, rallies and internal ruling Zanu Pf party meetings.
 

The broad popular support for the army in the last week, as seen via Saturday 18 November 2017 marches in Harare and Bulawayo turned what was initially a feared presence of the army on the streets to a popular one.  At least for now.  

Subsequent appearances of President Mugabe at a graduation ceremony and on national television (where he disappointed many by not resigning in public) has further entrenched the political option out of this current national crisis.

This is an important consideration primarily because the problem of succession has largely been one that resides in the ruling Zanu Pf party.  That it got out of hand is entirely their fault and they have a national and historical obligation to return the country to full civilian rule.

The latter process they have already begun with their appointment of Emmerson Mnangagwa as the interim President and First Secretary of Zanu Pf to replace Mugabe.  Interestingly they have also announced their new interim leader will also be their candidate for the 2018 harmonised elections (if accepted by their Congress. )

So a return to 'normalcy' essentially points to a retention of political power by Zanu Pf under the leadership of Mnangagwa. 

And to do this, they will not need the opposition to partner them whether be it through a national transitional authority or any other similar arrangement.  They will make overtures to it, but not integrate it into influential positions either in government or in electoral processes. They will listen to the oppositions suggestions but not always be inclined to pursue them.

So the step by step process , and as agreed by their Central Committee, would be to get Mnangagwa to finish off Mugabe’s term, hold their scheduled congress as planned in early December, and begin in earnest to campaign for elections in 2018.  

There are very limited options for the opposition here.  They may simply have to buckle up and get back to campaigning with a renewed vigour and vigilance that speaks more to people centered politics.  At the moment, their public popularity cannot exceed that of the ruling establishment and those who if they finally succeed, are at the front of seeking  the departure of Mugabe.

Opposition leaders therefore need to stop being ambivalent and pursue electoral politics with greater diligence and vigour or else they will be defeated in 2018. And resoundingly so. They need to re-coagulate their support bases, conclude their alliance talks and avoid easy co-optation into ruling party processes that they do not have equal say on. 

Where mainstream Zimbabwean civil society is concerned, they are best placed remaining true to democratic value and principles. Even where it seems at odds with a popular support for the army’s ‘intervention’.     

Furthermore, civil society needs to be aware of the economic blueprint of the Mnangagwa government.  It is likely to be one which puts business and private capital a the core of its economic policies.  This is moreso as confirmed by ZNLWVA chairman Chris Mutsvangwa in a press conference he held last week.  And as indicated when Mnangagwa was still vice president under Mugabe when he spearheaded the ‘ease of doing business’ policy cluster.

CSOs and social movements should push back against this planned neo-liberal economic model and place on the table people centered social democratic economic policies.   These policies should clearly outline the progressive welfarist role that the state should play in the provision of education, water, infrastructure development and affordable, accessible health care for all among other services. 

Indeed while it is early days, the likelihood of a determined and ‘new’ Zanu Pf leadership’s concerted efforts to prove their critics wrong but without necessarily sharing their newly acquired power, are high.  

There may be opportunities to glean from this state of affairs but essentially these will be subject to the benevolence of Zanu Pf.  SADC’s role is still critical but we may have passed a phase where it will directly intervene and seek means to reverse internal political processes as they are now occurring.

*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity (takura-zhangazha.blogspot.com) 

Zim Politics by Soap Opera: Ambition minus People nor Democratic Value.

 By Takura Zhangazha*

You couldn’t make it up if you tried.  It is the stuff of soap opera scripts.  An aged patriarch with a relatively young spouse.  A (previously, but that would be a spoiler) blue eyed ‘boy’/ successor/runner.  And the supposedly intriguing issue of ‘succession’ to head the empire. And yes, there is a much suffering audience, but as with soap operas, it is enthralled by the rapid speed at which events occur, empathising with one side or the other and forgetting its own real circumstances.  Of course there are bit part players (the opposition) that will occasionally get a glance by the audience but it is clear where the latter’s attention is.  

For the main actors (the ruling establishment) speed is key.  Hence the rapid nature of the dismissal of the runner and the ascendency of the wife of the patriarch. As well as the emergence of new and younger ‘runners’ together with a captured media  for the patriarch and his spouse.

While the main (political) actors are key in all of this, it is the audience (the people) that is most important. 

On the face of it the audience is not only intrigued by the goings on in the establishment but regrettably it is also entertained. With each passing (melo)dramatic event as led by the patriarch’s youngish and ambitious wife, national chatter goes up.  What will the former blue-eyed boy do?  What will his supporters do?  How will the first family defend its position?

These are questions that would be typical of a person watching something they know they are powerless over when it concerns the script.  Their only control is akin to the television switch and turning their gaze away from it.  And with many soap operas it is the will to be entertained that keeps viewers gazes firmly set.  Even if for 30 minutes at a time. 

This captivation of the people of Zimbabwe by the factionalism and real division in the ruling establishment points to a paucity of organic democratic values in our national politics.  And the lack of a people-centered understanding of the meaning and import of a progressive, virtuous politics. 

This is because in essence the factionalism in the ruling party and divisions in the mainstream opposition, as they play out at rallies and in boardrooms are elitist fights for the spoils of the state. 

Quite literally these are mini-struggles for power for its own sake.  That is to wield power and utilise it for self-aggrandisement.  Either as powerful individuals, cliques or as politically correct hangers-on.

These manoeuvres to acquire the levers of state power are therefore devoid of  broader national agenda beyond removal of either the ruling party’s incumbent leader or being the next in line to lead a struggling opposition.  But that is not the real problem, only a symptom of it.

The direct link of political power and wealth has made for many any ordinary Zimbabwean, politics appear as a privileged exercise for those that already have money or those that are close to them.  That is why across the board (the ruling and opposition political parties) there are startling similarities such as an all powerful leader, youngish wives, blue eyed ‘boys’ and ethnocentric assumptions of entitlement to power.  Hence our national politics has the characteristics of a soap opera.

But these are not ‘the days of our lives’.  It is imperative that we begin to seek and achieve a value driven politics that is people-centered and in the process transformational if not revolutionary in its democratic end effect.

In order to do this, we need to challenge two key inhibiting developments in our national politics. The first is the crass materialism that has come to determine who gets into political office and why.  This materialism has led to not only elitist political leaders but also a culture of entitlement merely because they have the resources to create undemocratic political patronage networks.   

The second key issue that requires not only broader national introspection and counter action is a creeping culture of a deliberate strategy of pursuing incremental politics. The most emblematic process that brought this into being was the undemocratic constitution making process of 2013.  It ushered in a culture of accepting what political principals of ruling party and opposition elite instructed.  And with this we began to accept piecemeal change as though it is fundamental to the extent of losing sight of the structural problems our country has.  We need to revert back to a more thorough approach in our activism, one that is perhaps more difficult but is people-centred and that fully understands cause and effect of the national economy, national politics and broader societal challenges as they occur.

*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity (takura-zhangazha.blogspot.com)