Prof. Ncube: Well, of course I can't say about this split where it is going or when it is going to end. What I can tell you are the things which divide us and to some of us, those things which divide us are very, very fundamental. The things which divide us, as far as we are concerned, are threefold. There is the issue of violence that we have spoken about, and that is issue number one which has been a problem in the party for most of 2005 and as Tendai has given all examples the assaults on Dr Mudzingwa in Gwanda, the assaults on some staff members in Bulawayo, the attempted murder of the Director of Security at Harvest House, the torture for a week of many political leaders during May and June 2005.

It is a question of how we deal with it, as far as we are concerned young people will always resort to violence in frustration. It is how we deal with that violence as leaders and if we deal with it in a committed manner where it is clear that none of us are sponsoring violence or condoning it for our own political ends, we would not be divided at all. It is when it is apparent or it appears that some of us in the leadership, and senior leaders, are actually using violence as a tool to organise the party, to organise their own colleagues. And, that is where we have a problem.

The second issue where we have a problem, is that as a democratic movement founded on the values of collective democratic decision making where we have created institutions and structures in our party which must make decisions. And those structures make decisions, those decisions might even be wrong, that is not the point. The fact is that once those decisions have been made collectively in those structures, they must bind us at all times.

Otherwise what stops Mugabe, in an election, to say 'the people who have voted they are wrong, I overrule them', as he has been saying over the years. Because once any person in a position of leadership superimposes himself or herself over the people to say I can now decide which decision is in the interest of the nation or which decision is not taken by the people, then you have a problem. You are introducing some form of individual meritocracy, that there are those who have the wisdom to overrule the people. And this is where we have a problem.

Where you have people in leadership positions asserting this right, to say this thing can go this way. If the vote goes the opposite way it is not valid. In other words, to say democracy is valid only to the extent where it is consistent with my view and that is not democracy and in fact it is very, very dangerous, extremely dangerous. Because what stops that person from doing that when they are president, when they are prime minister and when they are running the state.

The third and final thing which has divided us is the disrespect which is accorded to the elected organs of the party. Once you disrespect these organs by establishing and instigating kitchen cabinets when these substitute themselves for elected organs you are negating democracy again. It basically means if you are a government you will be basically ignoring government, ignoring cabinet and basically making decisions in collaboration with some other body not known by the constituents and the law. And this is where we have a problem and these are the things that divide us and we have said if there was a recommitment not just in word, but also in deed, to these principles then there would be no problems and you probably would have a united MC one day.

Violet: And Tendai, what is your permanent solution to the split?

Tendai Biti: Well I think a number of things. I think that, with the greatest respect to the Professor, personally, as an individual, I'm not going to enter into a discourse that tires me; that fatigues me, and I'm not going to enter into a discourse that to me does not positively contribute towards the vision that I have for a new Zimbabwe and that to me, does not resonate with my understanding of the requirements and the demands from the ordinary average Zimbabwean who is in Dotito, who is in Nkayi, who is in Murehwa and who is in Dulibadzimu in Beitbridge.

As far as I'm concerned, that individual is tired of Zanu PF. That individual is tired of inflation that is over 2000 %. That individual is tired of going on one meal in two days. That individual is tired of going into hospital where there are no drugs. That individual is tired of sending children to school who will be sent back a week later because they can't afford the school fees. The bottom line: that individual is tired of Robert Mugabe and is tired of the system of corruption and patronage that he represents. That individual is tired of the national security state and the securocrats that are abusing and mis-abusing us. And that individual wants organisations, political parties that these same people have set up.

The MDC was not set up by the genius of individuals, its was set up as a result of collective effort by the working class of these people and what they want is a democratic confrontation of this regime so that we have democratic change in Zimbabwe. In that process, yes, you've got rules that bind you; your constitution; you're own internal constitution; but the bigger picture still remains. The one fundamental process of completing the change. The one fundamental process of saving our country. The one fundamental process of turning the dream of a new Zimbabwe into a reality. And, to me that must be the starting point, and to me, that must be the vision that binds us. If we are not united in respect of that vision then we have no business in the democratic trenches. Then we have no business in the battlefields against Zanu PF and we should remain where we are.

But if the vision is to see the democratic change that this country long needs; that is long overdue; that we owe to future generations, then surely surely, surely we must appreciate the stability of a united or of a popular front but not one based on suspicion, not one based on a patchwork, because as I said, before, you are not doing anything about this. I will not enter into discourses about this and that after all before October 12th, I was just an ordinary member of this party. I've got my strong views, you know, about what happened on 12th October and what led to the split, but I will not follow into the Zanu PF foot-balling pitch or cricket field and fire salvos that will make Robert Mugabe and Chombo smile. I will not do that.

And, I want to remind Zanu PF, and I know they are listening or will read the transcripts, I want to remind Zanu PF that as far as I'm concerned and as far as the movement that I represent is concerned, they are the focus and they are the focus of the people of Zimbabwe, but that doesn't mean that to say housekeeping issues of transparency are irrelevant. They are not. Some of us are democrats to the bone, to the bone marrow, and I make no apologies for that and I don't think I would be where I am if the structure was fundamentally flawed, what is fundamentally flawed is Robert Mugabe and the entire system that he represents.

Violet: But, Tendai, do you agree that the issue of having the same name is not practical, and, therefore, when are you going to deal with this problem, with this particular problem?

Tendai Biti: That's different from the causes of the split and why the split will continue, that is a different issue. I think the issue of the name, the issues of identity are not a problem in the immediate short term because each one of us is carving his or her own identity. But I think the more fundamental issue is that if you two bodies pretend to be fighting Zanu PF and you purport to be saying the same thing then surely, at the very minimum, you must have some understanding, some co-existence, some non aggression position and you mustn't be tearing each other to pieces and that should be a minimum starting point.

I know that people are not impervious or opaque to the inevitability of discussions around that and in the long term as Madhuku has said, wounds are still fresh and for people like Professor Welshman Ncube, they were in the cauldron. I don't know what they did to each other in the so called Top Six, which in my view was in fact the Kitchen Cabinet because it was not a formal structure of this party so I don't know what they did to each other in the Kitchen Cabinet of the Top Six.

Some of us were outsiders. But the duty on some of us is not to let 12th October take this struggle 25 years back and it is the duty of all of us to rebuild the morale of the pro-democracy movement to the commanding heights that it was in 2000 and in 2001 and confront this dictatorship. We should not allow the dictatorship to continue having the honeymoon that it's been enjoying quite comfortably since October 12th 2005 and that is fundamental.

Violet: Are you saying that basically the problem was with the Top Six and not with the general membership because you seem to imply that you don't know what the real issues were?

Tendai Biti: Look, the 12th of October was merely the culmination of a dis-functionality that had arisen in the top leadership. So the top leadership, the so called Top Six, must take full responsibility for what happened on the 12th October. There was clear evidence of dis-functionality in this party. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to understand that there was no chemistry in the top leadership of this movement. That paralysed the party, we did nothing after the 31st October, after the theft of the election on March 31st 2005.

We did nothing; not even issue a statement when we had Murambatsvina in May of 2005. So clearly, clearly the was a process of slow death to the party that I would argue probably commenced after the heavily stolen election of March 2002, but that is a long debate. That is a separate debate, and as I said, I personally do not have the energy of doing a discourse into the causes around the split. In my private time, I am actually writing and chronicling my own view of events in the same manner as Brian Raftopolous has done in his article. But, that's my private position, and I am not going to allow that to exhaust me and I need all my energies to confront Robert Mugabe and the sycophants that are at Government Building in Samora Machel Street.

Violet: Now, Dr Madhuku, sorry, I'm going to come back to you but I just need to do a follow up question with Professor Ncube on what Biti has said and which has reminded me of some of the reports that are coming up. Now, Professor Ncube, is it true that your faction is negotiating with people like Tendai Biti for rapprochement and if so, do you not find it unsatisfactory and contradictory that you seem to be fighting each other on the streets and negotiating behind closed doors?

Professor Ncube: Well, I'm not sure what you mean by negotiations, there is nowhere we have done any formal negotiations. What we do is talk to each other all the time; at least talk to those who are willing to be spoken to in the other group and I can assure you, there are not many. And, when we talk we talk about exactly the things that Tendai has referred to. Which is to say if we are all genuine, then we are democrats, if we are all genuine then we are in the business of confronting the Mugabe regime. Then surely we have no business of fighting each other. We should agree to disagree that we disagreed on 12th October, there are things on which we disagreed which resulted in the split and it's time to move on. Even as separate entities there's no need, for instance, to be beating up each other.

There's no need to be making accusations day in day out about a whole range of things; accusing people of collaborating with Zanu PF, accusing people of being bought and so forth and so on. And if we are all genuine in that we are fighting Zanu PF and so some of us are concerned and have been committed to dialogue between the two parties so that you could, for instance, end up with some understanding of co-existence and so each party is left to wage the struggle against Zanu PF the best way it sees how rather than be derailed by the struggles against each other. I respect Tendai when he says he doesn't want to have his energies sapped by a fruitless struggle within the opposition itself and which will leave of course Mugabe and Zanu PF smiling all the way to the bank. That is true.

But, for some of us, when we struggle against Zanu PF, we want to hold ourselves to the highest standards. We want to hold ourselves to those ideals for which we say that the Mugabe regime must go, and therefore, we will not turn a blind eye, even if it is exhausting, to actually make sure that we fix ourselves before we get to State House. Let us fix ourselves. We owe it to the people of Zimbabwe that we do not give them a false revolution, a false beginning. It happened in Zambia for ten years, they went backwards to worse times then they were when they were under Kenneth Kaunda, and it can happen in Zimbabwe. This is what we are saying and we insist that this must not happen. People may feel disillusioned, might feel disappointment and some people might say that the bigger struggle, the bigger enemy is Zanu PF. But we must be careful that in the process of fighting the bigger enemy we do not end up internalising the values and principles of Zanu PF and by the time we get to State House we are in fact no better than the dictator we have removed.

Violet: But, could you explain further, a little bit more about who you are talking to and what you are trying to achieve? I mean are you trying to join forces again or are you talking about the issue of the assets; dividing the assets?

Professor Ncube: No, we have not talked. We have said or agreed in principle there is a need to talk about, for instance, a code of conduct between the parties; how we can behave and things that are not allowed. So, that, for instance, the violence which occurred last Saturday does not occur and the attacks on each other do not occur. It is that sort of discussion which we are saying is necessary. It hasn't commenced, it hasn't started. We don't know whether it will start. There are those in the two parties who are saying it is necessary for us at least to have some understanding that the enemy is not the other side, the enemy is Zanu PF and therefore why not have some sort of code of conduct in respect of which we behave towards each other; we relate to each other. Whether or not that small beginning can contribute to some greater co-operation in future is another thing but we are saying at the very least there is need to talk about that. If we can't we cant, but if we can, all the better.

Violet: And Dr Madhuku on the issue of the two parties moving on, how do you think these two groups should resolve the issue of the name, because it is said that as long as there are two MDC groups not only does this confuse the grassroots but it also fuels violence.

Dr Madhuku: Well, I think that it would be a mistake to think that you can simply resolve the issue of the name without creating an atmosphere that allows them to debate and to be able to believe that they can resolve their differences. When they reach an agreement on the name that will presuppose an understanding of respecting each other, respecting their different roles, their different perspectives etc. It will be impossible to resolve the issue of the name without going through the important process of recognising the two different groups that exist and also recognising that each of the groups has a right to exist and to propagate its ideas.

So I would suggest that they wait and then engage in processes that they seemingly, from myself listening to Tendai and to Professor Ncube, that they all believe ultimately they have to focus on confronting Mugabe, and I think if they prioritise on confrontation with Mugabe in the process the chemistry that Tendai wants to see coming out, I think it will come out and then perhaps in that process they will get the name. But, they can't just rush into resolving the issue of the name, it is impossible and it will really waste energies and time.

Violet: And join us next Tuesday when the three panellists will discuss another difficult issue; that of the constitution. Has Dr. Lovemore Madhuku created a crisis in the democracy movement by the controversial amendment of the NCA constitution? What agreement was reached between Zanu PF's Patrick Chinamasa and MDC's Welshman Ncube on the issue of a new constitution, and, is the draft constitution that was written by the two political parties a starting point for negotiations?

Audio interview can be heard on SW Radio Africa’s Hot Seat programme. Comments and feedback can be emailed to violet@swradioafrica.com
JOIN THE DEBATE ON THIS ARTICLE ON THE NEWZIMBABWE.COM FORUMS
newsdesk@newzimbabwe.com