| The best Zimbabwe news site on the world wide web |  |
Interview Part 5: Madhuku, Prof Ncube and Biti
This is the 5th part of an SW Radio Africa Hot Seat interview with the two secretary generals of the MDC factions Professor Welshman Ncube and Tendai Biti and NCA chairman, Dr Lovemore Madhuku. Violet Gonda asked the questions:
Broadcast on August Tuesday August 8th 2006
Violet: Welcome to Part Five of the Teleconference debate with Doctor Lovemore Madhuku, the Chairperson of the National Constitutional Assembly, Professor Welshman Ncube from the Mutambara MDC and Tendai Biti from the Tsvangirai MDC. This week we discuss the issue of the roadmap to democracy and mass action. I start by asking Tendai Biti why, in light of the current crisis situation in Zimbabwe the opposition has not been able to capitalise on so many government failures
Tendai Biti: Well, I think that firstly, you know, you must understand what you are dealing with. And I think what you are dealing with is a very privatised state and a very militarised state. In fact, I would argue that the current Zimbabwean state is what I would call a national security state, in other words, a state where, bar name only, it’s really the military running this country, and that the existence of Zanu PF, the existence of regular elections is just a veneer and make up; mascara, to cover what is really a securitocracy, what is really a silent military coup de tat in respect of which the military has taken over the Zimbabwean state.
And, our problems I think have been that as civic society and as political parties, we have been slow to really understand the fascist military junta that is in fact ruling or misruling us. Also, I think that, yes, people might want to see opportunities haven’t been taken off but I think that it’s easy to adopt an armchair approach without understanding the true nature of the crisis in Zimbabwe and the true nature of the militarised and privatised kleptocratic state presided over by Robert Mugabe. And, I think that we are growing and the language we are speaking is the language that understands certain values that we want to see in the new Zimbabwean society. Which is why, to me, for instance, it is key, it is key that we focus our struggle around a new constitution. Two, it is key that we continue pursuing a non violent democratic peaceful confrontation with this regime.
There is a temptation, and you hear this being said by many sectors, by our youth in particular, that ‘oh, people should get guns and so forth’. The minute we do that, we are finished. So, the biggest challenge on us as political leaders or the civic society is to remain relevant but in a peaceful, constitutional democratic manner. I would rather have change that comes slowly that is permanent than change that comes in a fast track manner but that is inconsistent, that is ambiguous and that takes you twenty years back. And, we have seen the results of botched up settlements across Africa.
Look at the history of countries like Sierra Leone, Liberia, look at the crisis in Ethiopia and Eritrea, and as the Professor has already referred to, the situation in Zambia which happened because, Kenya for instance, is an excellent example, and is one of the things that in the road map we have crafted, we have made it very clear, that, as far as we are concerned, there must be a new constitution first by Zimbabweans before you have any general election so that people are clear and we are all operating on the same side of the fence; we are opposition and therefore in the constitution that we see we are distrusting anyone. In the constitution that we want to see, none of us has got a superior advantage to the other. Those are fundamental values, and fundamental principles that ensure that never again should anyone bastardise us in the manner that Robert Mugabe and Zanu PF has done and to be fair, in the manner that Ian Smith, and his grandfather Cecil John Rhodes did, and to me, that is critical.
Violet: We will come to the issue of the constitution later, but I still want to talk about the road map to democracy and the issue of mass action. I want to ask Professor Ncube the same question that I asked Tendai Biti. Or rather, Professor Ncube, how did the opposition party miss such important opportunities to mobilise people during or immediately after Operation Murambatsvina and when the elections were stolen or rigged.
Professor Ncube: Well, that’s of course a very important but also difficult question. Some of us hold the view that while you are bleeding and you are sick as an opposition, you are not in a position to take part in a race; you cannot participate in a race, you cannot participate in a match when in fact you are hospitalised and you are sick. And, this is what was happening, in my view, to the MDC during the time of Operation Murambatsvina. This is a time when you had young people abducting Provincial leaders in Harare, the Secretary for Harare, the Chairman for Mashonaland East, and beating them up. And, the party then turned inwards and focused on those things and at the end of the day, lost the opportunity to be united in confronting the regime. So, those opportunities have been lost.
There are also other external objective facts. It is a mistake to view the struggling Zimbabwe as a short term struggle and the sooner we realise that this is a long term struggle and we should be prepared for the long haul and therefore plan in that context, the better for everybody. And, I therefore, do not find it useful to speak of missed opportunities. I think we should talk about strengthening the pro-democracy movement; strengthening civil society, finding common ground on the things which unite us and agreeing on those things which unite us and work together and agree to disagree on those things on which we do not agree, and then move forward in that area. I agree with Tendai, that the obvious starting point is a new constitution.
Whatever else happens, whether you build bridges with Britain, whether you have Mkapa whatever else you have, unless and until you find a formula, a roadmap, to use that popularised term, to make peace with the people of Zimbabwe, so that each of us is at peace with each other so that the government of Zimbabwe is not at war with its people, so that Zanu PF is not at war with the people of Zimbabwe. Unless we do that, we are not going to move forward.
And, the starting point, in my view, is the question of the new constitution, because the constitution is fundamental. It sets out the fundamental framework, the fundamental rules under which we are going to structure the State, under which we are going to compete for political office. That is where the crux of the matter is. And, in my view, it is important for the NCA, it is important for all the components of the MDC and other components of civil society to begin to realise that taking fundamentalist views on the process of achieving that new constitution is not going to take us anywhere. You can only impose your procedure, your process, if you have won a war. If you have not, and you have all the contending people in the ring, you need to arrive at some compromise so that Zanu PF is in the ring, the two MDC’s are in the ring, the NCA and its constituent elements are in the ring. We say: OK, that is the Zanu PF way; that is the MDC Tsvangirai road map; that is the MDC Mutambara roadmap; that is the NCA roadmap, can we find a means somewhere in respect of which we can agree. After all the most important thing at the end of the day, is the content of the constitution and how it is operated in practice, and then, of course, the buy-in of the people through the process is also important in this respect.
But, we cannot then be slaves to the process, that unless someone is able to impose their process we can’t move on. And, that is the view that I hold, that we need to be able to find some compromise which will be acceptable to the pro democracy forces in the country, acceptable to the ruling party, because Zanu PF still has the supporters, whether they are 30%, 20%, they are still part of Zimbabwe, and you need a national consensus of everybody in Zimbabwe, including those who support Zanu PF of a new constitution because these are the ground rules under which we will then compete for political office. They must be acceptable to everyone. Just as much as if you were going into a soccer match, a football match; the rules are accepted by the referee, they are accepted by FIFA, they are accepted by the teams who are playing under that, and then you can play a game of soccer. Politics is the same. And, the constitution constitutes those rules, and I think there is general consensus that is the starting point.
The disagreement as I understand it, is over where do you begin, how do you begin, who are to be the players. And, my own understanding in various discourse over the last six years with people in Zanu PF, is that Zanu PF has an obsession with controlling the process and controlling the outcome. And, they need, somehow, to be persuaded that it is not in their interest to seek to control the outcome and to control the process; but to seek to guarantee that the outcome is one which is reflective of the generality of opinion in Zimbabwe as a whole.
Violet: Now, Professor Ncube, you said some of these missed opportunities are not useful to discuss now but I disagree with this because many people say that it’s important to discuss issues of how and why the opposition missed such important opportunities to mobilise the people, you know, during and after Operation Murambatsvina and when the elections were rigged because the same things are happening again. Mugabe is at his weakest right now with a collapsed economy but the MDC is busy fighting each other. Now, my question to you is, it has been reported that while others in the MDC wanted to mobilise the masses for street action, there was resistance from some people, and mainly from yourself . Is this true?
Professor Ncube: That is part of the garbage which is propagated in the course of the dispute within the MDC. As Tendai will no doubt confirm to you, at every meeting of the National Executive of the MDC before October 12th, at every meeting of the National Council, there was always unanimous endorsement of the need for democratic resistance; not one dissenting voice. What some of us later had problems with had nothing with the principle of commitment to mass action and to democratic resistance. What we had problem with goes back again to the thing that Tendai says he doesn’t want to talk about and disempower himself; that when the Party then decides on a course of mass action, of democratic resistance, the responsibility then for running with that is then reposed in a kitchen cabinet which then runs away with that process; is not accountable to the political processes and indeed does things in its own way, and when the Zanu PF reacts to mass action, the targets are not these shadowy kitchen cabinet people who were never accountable to anyone.
The targets became the structures of the Party in Mabvuku, in Bulawayo, in Harare, everywhere else. The people who were arrested, who were tortured and who became the victims of the state aggression around mass action were in the formal structures of the party. Whereas, in fact, the people who were then running the show were some shadowy people outside those formal structures. This is what some of us took issue with.
And of course, members of the kitchen cabinet will go around saying those of us who opposed them being given a free rein to run some of the processes of the party were opposed to mass action, maligning our names. But, that was never the case. We all, in all instances, were unanimous on the need for democratic resistance, and we disagreed when this was then reposed in the hands of unaccountable, unelected individuals. Then, those who suffered the pain, after that, were the elected individuals in the political structures of the MDC.
Violet: Tendai, can you comment on this?
Tendai Biti: Well, I mean I can’t comment on organisational issues with regards to what happened in the past. I can speak authoritatively with what happened in the last action that we did which was the so-called ‘Final Push’ between the 2nd and the 5th of June 2003. In my respectful opinion, I think that the only mistake we made there was to describe that action as a ‘Final Push’ which then denoted an attempt to dispose of Mugabe through street action, which I think in my view, was never the intention. I think the intention was to stretch the dictatorship and to increase the – (inaudible) of the dictatorship and in that respect I think we achieved our goal.
As far as 2005 was concerned, I think that it was a lost year; I think the Party missed a lot of opportunities and I think that we set so much momentum with regard to the 31st March General Election. I think we campaigned so much. Remember, we took the decision to participate as late as the 28th January 2005, but two months down the line we had run, possibly, our best campaign ever, we were in all places; you know, Mutoko, Gokwe , Nkayi, Tsholotsho -- places where we had never been active even in the fantastic 2002 Elections, even in the fantastic June 2000 Elections. Having raised the people’s momentum and people’s expectations so much, I think we abused it by failing to respond to what the people wanted on the 1st April 2005.
And, again, come Murambatsvina, there was so much anger and we did not respond and provide leadership to that anger. So, I think that in 2005 we failed to provide to the leadership to the huge fear or frustration that was there and I think that, to me, that leadership was critical. And, because we failed to provide that leadership we begin to eat into ourselves and the 12th October was the inevitable result of that. But, yes; we are entitled to learn from the past, but I think what is critical is to re-focus on the vision, to re-focus on the agenda again for democratic change in Zimbabwe. And, I think some of us are re-energised, nothing has changed on the ground; as I keep on saying, inflation is high, there are no jobs, there is no food and that is the language that Zimbabweans want to hear being talked about. And, that is the language that we, in the democratic trenches have to keep on talking about.
Violet: Now, Dr Madhuku, on the issue of street protests. The NCA has, in the past, been one of the few organisations that has taken to the streets, but, it has been said that the demonstrations would have had more impact if you work with other stakeholders in the pro-democracy movement. Now, what is stopping you from doing that?
Dr Madhuku: Ya, we have been talking about that. First, we agree that the demonstrations have more effect if we have more people, we work with others but those who would want us to explain why we have not been doing that, may not be understanding the nature of the NCA demonstrations. Demonstrations by the NCA over the past few years; two, three years, have been designed simply as a way of putting across our message. They have not been demonstrations necessarily to either overthrow the government or to do spectacular things. They have been demonstrations to put across a message and we believe those demonstrations have succeeded to the extent that they have always kept the message of a new constitution.
As for the demonstration succeeding in effecting pressure on this government to change and to accept what we are demanding, I think, that what I would agree, and in fact everyone in the NCA would agree with those who criticise our demonstrations for not being big enough to put the kind of pressure that the people have in mind; a pressure, which, when exerted, would make Mugabe agree and give in and say ‘ yes, I see your point, I now do this’ and so on. We don’t even know how much pressure that is. So, our demonstrations have succeeded on the first rung of trying to make a message. Keep putting across our view like as an advocacy point, and then, we obviously need to work with others. We obviously need to ensure that these demonstrations are bigger to achieve the second rung; which is to put the pressure, or to achieve the relevant pressure.
Violet: Tendai, are you there? Now what about this winter of discontent. You know it was said recently we are discontented and winter is nearly over. Now people ask, when is the MDC going to deliver on its promises that people would rise up and show Mugabe the red card?
Tendai Biti: Well, I think that people should not have illusions as the Prof. has said, about the process of this struggle. I think we shouldn’t have any illusions that this is not a short 100 metre sprint which you do if you are as fast as Ben Johnson in 9.7 seconds. You know, that is not going to happen. But, in so doing, clearly, I think there is a duty of care on the democratic forces to confront this regime democratically and peacefully and I think we have made a commitment to that. But, having made a commitment to that democratic resistance, we are not going to be rushed into doing things when we are not ready.
I think, at the present moment, we are busy trying to institutionally rehabilitate the Party, institutionally rehabilitate relations that were dented and assaulted following the 12th October 2005 happenings, and it’s very important to refocus and bring back the morale back in the democratic movement. So, we will not allow anyone, ZAanu PF or otherwise, to set the pace for us. I think the democratic movement, and the people of Zimbabwe must set the pace of all the processes that they are going to engage in and all the processes to which they are shareholders.
Violet: And, still on the MDC roadmap. Is non-violence a principle or a tactic?
Tendai: Well, I think if you have read the roadmap, if you are talking about the document per se, it’s quite clear. There’s a section there which is labelled ‘How do we get there’, and we make the point that, should this regime not accept the roadmap, we are entitled to engage in peaceful, constitutional, non-violent, democratic discourse or confrontation with the regime in order to persuade it to adopt a paradigm shift that accepts the reality that Zimbabweans want change, that there has to be a dialogue on the process of arriving at a new constitution, and, that there has to be a constitution written by Zimbabweans and for Zimbabweans and eventually, that there has to be free and fair elections in terms of that constitution. And, what we offer in that roadmap imposition of our views, we don’t have a right to do that. But, what we simply say there; and to us there are two or three principles that to us are inviolable... The first is the need to agree on the process of writing the constitution.
he second thing, which we think is not negotiable, is the need and obligation for Zimbabweans to write a constitution for themselves and by themselves; which constitution has to be subjected to a referendum. The third thing, which to us is not negotiable, is the obligation to resolve the issue of legitimacy once and for all by having free and fair elections in terms of that particular constitution that would have been written by Zimbabweans and accepted by Zimbabweans at a road map. In our roadmap we suggest the issue of a constitutional conference. That’s just a suggestion.
Some might say ‘no, look, let’s go the South African CODESA route and have elections to elect people into the constitutional assembly’. I am not against that. That’s for Zimbabweans to define. Some might say ‘let’s go the Kenyan route’, some might say ‘let’s go the Ugandan route’. To us, those are matters of detail. What is not negotiable is the need to have a new constitution and a new constitution before elections so that you avoid the chaos that for instance, Kenya finds itself in. And, we are quite clear in what we are trying to achieve in that particular roadmap.
Violet: And, Dr Madhuku, so much has happened and has been destroyed in Zimbabwe. In the event of a new Zimbabwe, you know, the post-crisis period, what specifically can be done to rebuild the social fabric and the economy?
Dr Madhuku: Well, I think that first and foremost, you really need a legitimate government. Once you have a legitimate government in place it must engage all Zimbabweans or stakeholders in defining our priorities there, re-building our economy; which is primary so you can get jobs, you can get the clinics working again and so forth. So, what is required in my view, I mean I haven’t focused on the nitty-gritty’s; if you get a legitimate government that has the interest of Zimbabweans at heart, that will be able to then engage all of us in building a new society.
Violet: That was Part Five of a series of discussions with the principle architects of the opposition. Join us next Tuesday for the final discussion officials give us their thoughts on the reported appointment of former Tanzanian President, Benjamin Mkapa.
Comments and
feedback can be emailed to violet@swradioafrica.com
JOIN
THE DEBATE ON THIS ARTICLE ON THE NEWZIMBABWE.COM FORUMS
newsdesk@newzimbabwe.com
All material copyright newzimbabwe.com
Material may be published or reproduced in any form with appropriate credit to this website