Ethnic balancing in Zimbabwe irrelevant

Ethnic balancing in Zimbabwe irrelevant

RECENT OPINION ARTICLES

• Will the true mother of the MDC please stand up?

• Let's unite and make Mugabe history

• Who are the people?

• Our collective hatred for one another would burn Zanu PF

• The flies in Mutambara's hands

• Nyarota has selective memory

• IMF contributes to Zimbabwe's hyperinflation

• Let's fight the common enemy

• Mutambara might be his own threat

• Why we must get off Mbeki's case

• Is Zimbabwe a failed State?

• Economic reform impossible under Zanu PF

• I'm not a political robot for politicians

• Of idolism, cult status and African politics

• Ellen Johnson-Sirleaf election: what it means for Africa

• Non-resident Zimbabweans part of the solution too!

• Martin Luther King: lessons for Zimbabwe

• Why we are at where we are.....

• Silencing Silence Chihuri

• A leader who thrives among raw talent and flourishes in dull environs

• Reporting MacDonald

• Zimbabwe and software development

• Where is our Mandela?

• The myth of mass action in emerging democracies

• Sadc and human rights - bridging credibility gap

• A tribute to Rosa Parks

By Cris Chogugudza

THE period following the attainment of independence in Africa gave birth to politics of ethnic balancing on a grand scale following protracted wars of liberation, the rationale being among other things to create political stability and guarantee civil obedience.

In Southern Africa, ethnic balancing was part and parcel of the organization and stabilisation of liberation parties. In particular, the people of Zimbabwe were primarily bound together by the idea of a common enemy, in the name of the brutal white colonialists at the time. There was no Ndebele or Shona during the war, they were all freedom fighters.

To begin with, in Zimbabwe the concept of ethnic accommodation or balancing became popular after the split of the original Zapu Party which was a very strong multiethnic party whose membership was characterized a diversity of languages and cultures, Ndebele and Shona being he dominant factors. Dr Joshua Nkomo became the first leader of the original Zapu party on merit and the issue of tribe was secondary.

His style of leadership transcended across the tribal and cultural divide and was admirable. His lieutenants were equally competent and worth the position they held, these include Dr Parirenyatwa, Nikita Mangena, Masuku, Dabengwa, Tongogara, Leopold Takawira, Ndabaningi Sithole, Chitepo and Mugabe among others. The issue of Ndebele and Shona which is being opportunistically adulterated by vana mafikizolo late comers has largely negatively affected the political landscape in Zimbabwe today. The point that comes clear and strong here is that tribe was never the overarching factor in determining who leads the liberation movement otherwise Dr Joshua Mudhalawetu Nkomo would never had the opportunity to be at the helm. Dr Nkomo was a Kalanga from Kezi. Whatever happened after the split of Zapu and the formation of Zanu everybody knows that.

It was after the civil war and the unity accord that ensued when the issue of ethnic balancing became a salient feature of politics and politicking in Zimbabwe. This follows a period of general mistrust between the two liberation parties and the notion by Zanu that as the governing party they deserved to occupy all the influential posts. The Ndebeles were relegated to second rate politicians and in some cases it was ironic to see an educated and inspiring Ndebele politician deputizing some uneducated and incompetent Shonas at the helm of these many influential posts.

It is against the above background that l argue against ethnic balancing because it has never been an egalitarian or fair process. Ndebeles constitute about 20% of the population in Zimbabwe and surely this is a significant demographic representation enough to provide a President in Zimbabwe in the near future given the chance. There is a very subjective mentality in Zimbabwe that Ndebeles should never be allowed to rule Zimbabwe in the person of president because of their minority status. It is true that some elements within the Shona ethnic group have popularized this negative perception. In other countries progressive l suppose, in as much as the Majoritarian view is understandable in terms of the election of leaders, it does not always follow that top leaders should come from the majority tribe.

For instance in South Africa, Presidents Mandela and Mbeki are all Xhosa speaking but the largest tribe is Zulu where the Vice President comes from, Chiluba of Zambia came from a minority tribe, so was Kaunda, Chissano of Mozambique came from a minority tribe, Presidents Museveni and Kagame of Uganda and Rwanda come from a minority tribes, and President Moi of Kenya whose tribe Kalenjini is a minority tribe in Kenya.

It is clear that the issue of ethnic majority is not a major determinant as to who should be President. Ethnic considerations can be ignored for the sake of quality and substance in leadership. It should not be given that if one is Shona one is guaranteed of leadership ahead of a capable Ndebele who may be better qualified. If one wants to make wild parallels, even in the UK the heir to Blair’s throne Dr Gordon Brown is Scottish and so is Sir Menzies Campbell, the leader of the Liberal democrats. It should be noted that politics of ethnicity have deprived Zimbabwe of some of the best brains simply because their ethnic affiliation is ‘not politically correct’.

Who knows, may be if we had some of these brainy Ndebeles in influential posts running the economic our problems could have been lessened. Gibson Sibanda suffered the fate of being a leader from the minority when he lost his influence to Morgan Tsvangirai MDC, so was Welshman Ncube and many other capable cadres from the Ndebele tribal divide. Under the current situation, it would need attitudinal political changes of seismic or cataclysmic proportions for Zimbabwe to have the first Defence Forces Chief, Chief Justice, Police Commissioner, Registrar General, UZ Vice Chancellor or Foreign Minister and President who is Ndebele not because they are not there but they will not be allowed to get there. It is unfortunate that those who dare publicly challenge the status quo are branded tribalists, but in a healthy society issues such as deprivation of leadership opportunities on the basis of ethnic background should be openly deliberated. The nation urgently needs a healing process before genuine discourse on the above matter progresses.

Time has come to accept that we are all equal as Zimbabweans and that no one tribe is anointed to rule whilst the other is a perpetual follower. The recent elections in the Anti-Senate MDC prove my point of ethnic deprivation of top posts, the highest post that a Ndebele person was allowed to have is that of Vice President which is ascribed not based on meritocracy. This scenario inevitably compromises quality, people should just be given a free reign to contest posts they feel they are qualified for and let the best person get the post. In Zanu PF it is the same scenario as in the opposition, aspiring Ndebele politicians can only be guaranteed the post of Vice President and any anything further than that is Taboo. In the Zanu PF Politburo only a handful of Ndebeles are heads of departments and the rest are deputies. At one time some very capable Ndebeles were deputizing people of the likes of Chinotimba’s intellectual capital in the War Veterans Organisation. It is a pity that enlightened people of the intellectual calibre of Dr Sikhanyiso Ndlovu, the architect of Open University Learning in Zimbabwe has been relegated to professional deputy ministerial portfolios in the bloated Zanu PF ministerial bureaucracy.

The Pro-Senate MDC for example could not appoint one of their one top leaders as President of the party for fear of breaking the long standing taboo, instead they went out of their way to convince ‘rocket scientist and budding business mogul’ Arthur Mutambara to lead their party. There were very intelligent and capable people like Welshman Ncube who could have led the party. It is unfortunate that this issue has been allowed to continue and l believe genuine unity of ethnic groups can only come about if each one of them have an equal chance setting foot at the State House. Who knows maybe the power of Mzilikazi can exorcise the demons at the State House that have haunted the country for nearly a decade now.

I believe that true ethnic balancing should be supported introducing elected regional governments or assemblies where elected governors and their commissioners have access to a budget which essentially means local people controlling own resources. This form of empowerment will resonate well with grassroots people especially in underdeveloped Matabeleland where there is general mistrust in the Shona dominated central government.

t is time the Ndebeles and Shonas bury their suspicions, work together and allow each other the opportunity to occupy posts based on merit as opposed to which tribe one belongs to. Other countries in Africa have gone past the ancient era of tribal politics and Zimbabweans should join the bandwagon for their own good. This essay is not supposed to ignite ethnic tensions as has been advocated by those people of the likes of overzealous clergymen and traditional politicians from the establishment. This is an eye opener to all Zimbabweans who see things from a rational spectacle. Unity Ndizvo.

Food for thought!

Crisford Chogugudza is a political commentator based in North London, UK. He can be contacted at: chogukcris2001@yahoo.co.uk
JOIN THE DEBATE ON THIS ARTICLE ON THE NEWZIMBABWE.COM FORUMS
debate@newzimbabwe.com