Zimbabweans have spoken, and the message is in the detail

Zimbabweans have spoken, and the message is in the detail

• Mugabe's re-election would be disaster for private enterprise

• Zimbabweans at the polls: the great debates

• Change cannot wait for Madhuku's post-election ambitions

• Voting for change in Zimbabwe

• Can an independent win in Zimbabwe? Yes he can!

• Makoni: puppet, Zanu PF agent or national hero?

• Who is behind Makoni? Please count me in!

• Obama v Billary Clinton: lessons for Africa

• If Zuma is corrupt, who isn't?

• Charamba gives civil service a very bad name

• Be the change that you want to see

• The paradox of African liberation and change

• Zimbabwe and the Jacob Zuma factor

• The EU-Africa relationship post-colonialism

• Beyond Lisbon: setting the African agenda

• Implications of Zuma winning ANC presidency

• Africa's enduring economic apartheid

• Does indigenisation threaten law of succession?

• Defining the role of the state in post-colonial Africa

• Mushore's ordeal and the Zimbabwe we want

• Does rule of law pose a threat to Africa?

• Capitalism may challenge the poor, but it gives them hope

• The Africa we want: out of time?

• Africa: From Berlin to Lisbon

• The turning point that never was

• Zimbabwe's turning point

• Black Economic Empoerment project gone awry

• Africa's bitter harvest

• Africa's real brand ambassadors

• Indigenisation: a case of hypocritical manipulation?

• Can Africa's brand ambassadors please stand up?

• Is Zimbabwe a candidate for economic surgery?

• Zimbabwe's leadership paradox

• Rhodesia not so good

• Wither Zimbabwe?

• Investing in fear: Mugabe's economic revival plan

• Mugabe takes over as leader of the opposition

• Mugabe under siege: a failed ideology or conspiracy?

• Robert Mugabe's fate

• Without a cause, Africa's progress stunted

• Kofi Annan and the outsourcing of Africa's future

• The Africa we want

• Africa's development challenge: from civil to platinum rights

• 2008 may already be a done deal

• To quit or not to quit: the leadership question

• Business sector cannot remain indifferent to political question

• Gono plays Pope and Cop

• Trust and succession politics in Africa

• Robert Mugabe and Ian Smith: two of a kind

By Mutumwa D. Mawere
(www.mmawere.com)

WHAT kind of Zimbabwe do Zimbabweans want to see remains one of the most complex issues that has occupied the minds of not only South Africans but many friends of this critically important African economy.

It is not unreasonable for any friend of Zimbabwe to ask whether the results of the parliamentary elections that were announced last week by the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC) is a true reflection of what the people of Zimbabwe deserve and wanted to see.

The politics of Zimbabwe over the last 8 years has been dominated by President Mugabe (Zanu PF) and Morgan Tsvangirai (MDC). Over the last eight years, the country’s destiny has been shaped by these two strong personalities.

Even President Mugabe would agree that the post-colonial experience under his watch has failed to deliver on the promise of independence and yet surprisingly he appears to be unfazed by the political and economic quagmire that his administration has placed the country in with disastrous consequences.

The root cause of the Zimbabwean crisis continues to be a contested issue with President Mugabe backed by his party arguing that all the problems confronting Zimbabwe have a historical and racial context while his opponents contend that the blame should and must squarely be placed on Zanu PF, the ruling party.

This year’s historic and defining elections were a consequence of President Mugabe’s self serving harmonisation project designed to shield him from direct humiliation by Tsvangirai, but what has emerged from the results of senatorial and parliamentary elections is that President Mugabe and not Zanu PF may be a victim of his own making.

To Zanu PF, this election represented the last attempt to bury what they have consistently labeled as an imperialist-inspired regime change agenda. In fact, President Mugabe has never considered his political opponents as deserving any equal treatment but ridicule.

To the MDC, this election was about regime change meaning that both President Mugabe and Zanu PF were going to be buried.

To Simba Makoni, this election was about leadership change, specifically the removal of President Mugabe and not about obliterating Zanu PF as a political force in the prosecution of the national democratic revolution.

Judging from the parliamentary results in which MDC got 99 votes, Zanu PF 97, MDC-Mutambara 10 votes, and Jonathan Moyo 1 vote, it is evident that the message from this election confirms the proposition that the people of Zimbabwe are evenly divided between these dominant parties.

What is, however, significant is that the people of Zimbabwe have sent a message that they are now tired of the politics of point scoring, name calling, the past and bitterness. It appears that the people of Zimbabwe have effectively castrated the office of the President and placed the future of the country in the hands of their parliamentary representatives.

People of Zimbabwe have rejected the regime change agenda and appear to have been persuaded by the Makoni message that the urgency of now in so far as the Zimbabwean politics is to create a new dispensation in which political pluralism can thrive and effectively bury the superman post-colonial political culture and ideology that has become so common in many developing states.

It is now clear that President Mugabe and Tsvangirai will go for the run-off and the outcome is as predictable as sunrise follows sunset. This first phase of the election notwithstanding the synthetic political atmosphere created by President Mugabe’s state assisted election campaign has demonstrated that President Mugabe’s days are not only numbered but that he is history.

What is clear is that even in the remotest chance that President Mugabe wins the runoff elections, he still would need to obtain the support of the MDC-Mutambara faction that is now effectively under the control of Makoni.

However, in order to overcome this difficulty, Zanu PF’s politburo that met last Friday decided that the best route to alter the parliamentary results in its favour is to challenge 16 constituencies that have been won by the MDC.

This cynical move by Zanu PF demonstrates how desperate President Mugabe is to cling to power. It is ironic that Zanu PF, by challenging the conduct of the ZEC, appointed by no other than President Mugabe’s government, is effectively trying to convince the world that it is not in control of the organs of the state.

The devil in the election result is that the people of Zimbabwe have effectively placed the burden of correcting the dysfunctional politics of Zimbabwe on Makoni and his team, assuming that the Zanu PF challenge is not sustained in court.

In doing so, the people of Zimbabwe have eloquently sent a message that has not been correctly captured so far that the politics of Zimbabwe has fundamentally changed and during the next five years, the people of Zimbabwe want to see a President who can reach out across the political divide to put the interests of the country at the top of the national agenda.

If my analysis above is correct, it means that Tsvangirai has no choice but to cut a deal with Makoni and effectively combine the vote against Mugabe and Zanu PF into a new force for change and progress.

However, to allow the country to move forward a new constitution will be required and, if anything, the message from this election is that people of Zimbabwe have put in place a poison pill to discourage any President from delaying to deal with the issue of reforming the constitution. To do so, even Zanu PF’s support will be required.

Mutumwa Mawere's weekly column is published on New Zimbabwe.com every Monday. You can contact him at: mmawere@global.co.za
JOIN THE DEBATE ON THIS ARTICLE ON THE NEWZIMBABWE.COM FORUMS
newsdesk@newzimbabwe.com