| The best Zimbabwe news site on the world wide web |  |
| NEWS |
| FORUMS |
| NEWS ANALYSIS |
| READERS' FORUM |
Negotiated settlement only exit route out of election logjam
By Percy
F. Makombe
THIS is not how it should have been. This election was never about democratic
choices. It was an election that was meant to deal with Zanu PF’s
succession politics. Zanu PF was supposed to overwhelmingly thrash the
Movement for Democratic Change (MDC).
The MDC was bitterly divided and plans for a united coalition to face Zanu PF had reached a dead end. President Robert Mugabe was supposed to trounce Morgan Tsvangirai. With a Zanu PF majority in parliament and President Mugabe securely ensconced in his position, he would serve for two years and then chosen a successor who would then be rubberstamped by Zanu PF’s majority in parliament. But in politics, as has been proven time and time again, even the best-laid plans often go awry.
President Mugabe, who has been in charge in Zimbabwe since 1980, had previously said that he would not seek re-election when his term expired in 2008, but as his term drew closer to an end, he gave indications that he would want to continue for just a few more years to “safeguard” the revolution.
Outgoing legal affairs minister, Patrick Chinamasa, was then sent out to test the waters for Mugabe’s prolonged tenure. The initial project that Chinamasa tried to sell was that the synchronisation of elections would be in 2010, and in-between Mugabe would be a transitional president. This project was rejected by Zanu PF as seven of their ten provinces wanted leadership renewal.
Mugabe, being the crafty politician that he is, decided to change tact. He bizarrely announced from Namibia that he was offering himself for re-election when his term expired in 2008. He then unsuccessfully tried to railroad Zanu PF’s central committee into supporting his candidature. This, as is known, did not work which is why through Mugabe’s manoeuvrings an extra-ordinary congress was then called whose main agenda was to endorse his presidential election bid.
The war veterans and Zanu PF’s youth wing were then roped in to preach the ‘Mugabe for President’ gospel and this gave rise to the provincial marches in support of Mugabe. The idea was to pressure Zanu PF members into supporting Mugabe. Every week in the run-up to Zanu PF’s extra-ordinary congress, we were treated to the circus of one group or the other pledging their support to Mugabe in the public media.
Under the mistaken impression that he was on solid footing and also given the incessant bickering within MDC’s two formations, Mugabe moved swiftly to call for elections on 29 March. This was strange because the date of elections was the subject of South Africa President Thabo Mbeki’s mediation discussions. By unilaterally declaring a date for elections when the date was itself the subject of the SADC dialogue, Mugabe was in fact showing the middle finger to the dialogue process. His single minded determination was to catch the opposition flat-footed, but unfortunately for him this strategy terribly backfired.
The harmonised election has left Zanu PF’s succession project in disarray. Having won 97 of the 207 contested seats, it means that for the first time since 1980, Zanu PF does not have a majority in parliament. Even if President Mugabe wins the expected election run-off, he cannot get parliament to rubberstamp his chosen successor if he decides to retire after two years as in the original plan.
Over the years, Mugabe has shown that although lacking in ideas of how to deal with the economy, he quiet clearly had the energy. This time around he neither has the energy nor the ideas of how to turn this economy around.
In politics, as has been aptly observed, there are few things more dangerous than a mixture of power, arrogance, and incompetence. Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent and Zanu PF is always ready to dish it out in good measure. When Zanu PF supporters say: ‘Zanu ndeyeropa’ (Zanu is a blood party), they are not just uttering some whimsical statement to be dismissed as the ranting of a mad man. They are expressing the values that underpin their party.
Those who have followed Zimbabwe’s elections since 1980 will not have failed to observe that every time Zanu PF is accused of stealing the elections, their argument is never that: “We won the elections because we received the most votes.” No. Zanu PF’s argument is always that they won the election because they fought for and liberated the country. In other words, Zanu PF’s legitimacy does not derive from the ballot but comes from the bullet. The ballot for Zanu PF is merely a veneer that gives them some semblance of democratic conduct.
This is what those who are trying to come to grips with Zanu PF’s shenanigans on the recent harmonised elections in Zimbabwe need to understand. This also needs to be understood by all those who have begun to write Robert Mugabe’s epitaph. Zanu PF is prepared to do whatever it takes to stop an MDC victory. It does not sit very well with President Mugabe that the man he has said is a western puppet and will never, never lead Zimbabwe is just about to do exactly that.
Besides Zanu PF’s supporters’ willingness to die for their cause, Mugabe’s regime continues to receive protection from SADC and the AU. At the United Nations, South Africa and China will brook no criticism of Zimbabwe. In South Africa’s case, it has not been shy to mobilise other African countries to keep Zimbabwe off the UN agenda.
President Thabo Mbeki’s approach is misnamed quiet diplomacy, when in fact his diplomacy has been loud on behalf of the Zanu PF regime. The so called quiet diplomacy presents Mbeki with a win-win situation. If it fails, he can always assign the blame to the megaphone diplomacy of those who are always shouting about Zimbabwe. He can use them as a scapegoat and say their confrontational approach has yielded nothing. If there seems to be progress in Zimbabwe due to the bravery and sacrifices of the ordinary people, he can claim that is the result of painstaking quiet diplomacy.
We can all be impatient with Mbeki’s approach, yet whatever Mbeki’s faults are, it is rather intemperate for MDC’s secretary for international affairs Elphas Mukonoweshuro to liken Mbeki to a drunkard. As a person aspiring to the highly influential foreign affairs position, the secretary for international affairs’ approach is no way to win friends and influence people.
The MDC also really needs to be in charge of its foreign affairs. In the last three weeks we have seen all sorts of people on Sky News, BBC and so on purporting to be MDC spokespeople, uttering statements from the fanciful to the ridiculous. One such statement was that the MDC leadership was in hiding. This did not inspire confidence and gave the impression that while brutality was being visited on the ordinary MDC membership, the leadership of the party had abandoned them.
However many votes the MDC got, however many legislators the MDC will put in parliament, the fact of the matter is that Zanu PF is with us for a long time to come. What cannot be doubted however, is that there are widespread cracks in this monolithic party and that this election was to all intents and purposes a drubbing for Zanu PF.
It is difficult to imagine that there could be a way out of Zimbabwe’s problems without a negotiated settlement. Participating in a run-off would be a disaster for the MDC because the Zanu PF machinery and Mugabe’s securocrats will not allow another MDC victory. They will not allow Mugabe to suffer the “indignity” of being beaten twice by Tsvangirai in a space of two months. It will only happen over their dead bodies, after all Zanu PF ndeyeropa.
It is, therefore, regrettable that the opportunities presented by the SADC initiated dialogue were not fully utilised as Zanu PF adopted an intransigent position and decided to scupper the talks by unilaterally announcing an election date when this was itself part of the negotiations. The other parties to the negotiations had pointed out that they would be happy with the postponement of the elections to at least June 2008. By rushing to the election, Zanu PF gravely miscalculated the national mood, now they are saddled with a result that they do not want to announce.
For all the blustering and pretence, it is evident for all to see that in Zimbabwe “uneasy lies the head that wears the crown”. Given the partisan way that the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission has handled the election results, President Mugabe cannot claim to be the legitimate leader in Zimbabwe. A man may build himself a throne of spears but he cannot sit on it.
Supposing Mugabe wins the runoff, what exactly will he do to restore the economy? The economy cannot be intimidated not even by fifty million dollar notes that the Reserve Bank has recently introduced. How does he intend to deal with inflation? What does he do after his supporters have taken over the remaining two hundred or so white-owned farms, what will be there to invade anymore? The kind of policy paralysis that is gripping Zanu PF is such that they have no answers to these questions.
It is not doubted that President Mugabe is a founding father of Zimbabwe and an icon of the liberation struggle but the time has come for him to retire peacefully. He should show that he has the nation at heart by calling it a day and allowing other people to begin the process of building this once great nation. That task of rebuilding does not belong to one political party but cuts across the political divide. If there is one other thing that these elections have shown, it is that people are disenchanted with the way politics is conducted in the country. There is a sense of disillusionment and despair which has expressed itself in the low voter turnout. It is quite astounding that in these elections there are constituencies where aspiring parliamentarians won by getting less than four thousand votes.
Healing the wounds is not going to be easy in Zimbabwe. Reconciliation will be equally harder but for this process to begin, there needs to be a realisation especially from Zanu PF that it no longer commands the kind of support that it used to command, and that in any case, the people of Zimbabwe have a democratic right to chose which party they want to support.
Ultimately, Mugabe
and his securocrats will do well to follow Mugabe’s own advice
in June1980: If those who have suffered defeat adopt the unfortunate
and indefensible attitude that defies and rejects the verdict of the
people, then reconciliation between the victors and vanquished is impossible.
Percy F. Makombe is a policy analyst and writes from Cape Town,
South Africa. He can be contacted on pfmakombe@yahoo.com
JOIN
THE DEBATE ON THIS ARTICLE ON THE NEWZIMBABWE.COM FORUMS
debate@newzimbabwe.com
All material copyright newzimbabwe.com
Material may be published or reproduced in any form with appropriate credit to this website