Will Mugabe quit in 2010?

Will Mugabe quit in 2010?

RECENT ARTICLES BY MARY

By Mary Revesai

NOW that what sceptics have suspected all along -- that Zimbabwean strongman Robert Mugabe has no intention of relinquishing power when his current term ends in 2008 -- has been confirmed, the 64 million dollar question is: will the man be finally ready to pass on the baton in 2010?

It may seem premature to raise such a concern, but considering that dictators have never been known to leave office voluntarily, the possibility that the crafty Mugabe could have one more trick up his sleeve come 2010 is not farfetched.

One only has to look at how he has out-foxed everyone in the ruling party and the in the whole of Zimbabwe for that matter, to anoint himself absolute ruler over the last 26 years.

And the fact that this latest announcement was made by Saturday Herald columnist Nathaniel Manheru, George Charamba’s pseudonym, shows just how adept the wily Mugabe has become at playing the politics of divide and rule.

Having sparked frantic jockeying for position with his earlier hints that he would finally call it a day in 2008, the octogenarian has thrown another spanner in the works with Charamba’s announcement that “when Zimbabweans go to the polls in 2010 to choose their president and members of parliament, our repining private media, the British and the Americans will have died from confounded predictions.”

Note that the statement does nor refer to Zimbabweans choosing a “new leader” but “their president.” Coming as it does hardly a week before the Zanu PF people’s conference; it is bound to cause great discomfiture among delegates who must figure out a politically correct reaction in the few days remaining.

While presidential hopefuls in the main factions spawned by the murky succession process within the ruling party ponder their positions and new strategies, Mugabe will no doubt relish watching their confounded frustration and making mental notes ahead of 2010. His health permitting, he could be ready to make them see red again by engineering yet another scenario to postpone his departure.

Mugabe’s angry outbursts of late against anyone showing an interest in vying for the highest office in the land shows to what dangerous extent he now believes in his immortality and indispensability. He has become too used to the misplace adulation of sycophants such as the late Tony Gara, who once described him as the Son of God.

Of late, some misguided church leaders have fallen over each other to declare that despite his repressive governance, Mugabe was anointed by God to lead Zimbabwe as long as he lives. Taking this flattery to heart, the Zimbabwean leader has let rip on many occasions about how unimpressed he is with those aspiring to succeed him. He has variously accused them of visiting traditional healers for “muti” to enhance their chances. In one angry tirade Mugabe even characterised those members of his party entertaining hopes of taking over from him as witches.

Without saying who he was talking about, Mugabe angrily alleged that some people were so ambitious that “even before the president has left, you are waiting at the door like a witch”. And yet there is nothing sinister or untoward about anybody who decides to seek election to any political office in a supposed democracy. Mugabe fails to realize that such people are exercising their democratic right and that there are no taboos about when they choose to make their intentions known. In some countries, speculation about candidates for presidential elections begins years ahead of the polls.

Jacob Zuma’s name has been mentioned repeatedly in connection with the future presidency of South Africa although Thabo Mbeki is not due to relinquish office until 2009. Hilary Clinton and others have been touted as aspiring candidates for the next presidential elections in the U.S. while it has been an open secret in Britain for years that Gordon Brown has ambitions to become the next Labour prime minister. None of these have been labelled witches by the incumbents they intend to succeed as Mugabe has done in Zimbabwe.

Mugabe’s fighting talk, which is not limited to references to potential challengers, shows to what extent he has personalized a national issue on which all Zimbabweans should be entitled to have a say. His inability to fathom the idea of anyone else being good enough to govern the country is reflected in how paranoid he has become about what he regards as machinations by America and Britain to effect regime change in Zimbabwe.

Under normal circumstances the term "regime change" should not cause any panic as it simply means a change of government. But it causes such consternation for Mugabe because he regards it as a personal affront and an attack on his ego and pride. Regime change is such an unacceptable possibility because it would mean the end of his reign. His regular and un-statesmanlike attacks against United States president George Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who are cast as the main proponents of regime change show how determined he is to cling to power. It has nothing to do with the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Zimbabwe.

In a speech following the mid term congressional elections in the U.S. in which Bush’s Republican Party lost some ground to the Democratic Party, the Zimbabwean leader displayed his knack for adopting double standards without bating an eyelid when it suits his purposes. He mocked Bush and Blair, who will both not be seeking re-election, as having got a taste of their own “regime change medicine” supposedly because their people no longer wanted them.

According to this reasoning, regime change is alright for others but not for Mugabe. And more importantly, while it is possible for some leaders to be guided by public opinion in making decisions about their political future, this is anathema for Mugabe. He will fight tooth and nail to forestall any expression of dissent as he has done through the repressive state machinery he has assembled and the draconian laws he has introduced to buttress his iron-grip hold on power.

Blair voluntarily announced his impending departure from politics and Bush is prohibited by his country’s constitution from seeking a third term. When Blair was elected prime minister in 1997, Mugabe had already been in power for 17 years and by the time Bush took over from Bill Clinton in 2000, the Zimbabwean leader had clocked 20 years as head of state.

Zimbabweans have reason to be worried when their president pokes fun at those who pass on the baton after 10 years and he thinks he needs more time at the helm after 26 years!

By 2010, Mugabe will have been in power for 30 years. He may not consider this such a long time, after all, he has allies like Cuba’s ailing Fidel Castro, who has held sway since 1959.

Mary Revesai is a New Zimbabwe.com columnist and writes from Harare. Her column will appear here every Tuesday

JOIN THE DEBATE ON THIS ARTICLE ON THE NEWZIMBABWE.COM FORUMS
debate@newzimbabwe.com