By Thelma Chikwanha, Community Affairs Editor
Zimbabwe and South Africa could be headed for another diplomatic furore after Zanu PF strategist and serial political turncoat Jonathan Moyo suggested that facilitator to the Zimbabwe political crisis, President Jacob Zuma could be aiding the “regime change agenda” in the country.
- Tsholotsho North MP Jonathan Moyo
But Zuma’s international relations advisor, Lindiwe Zulu immediately dismissed Moyo’s astonishing claims, saying they will not be distracted from continuing their facilitation role for the sake of Zimbabweans. Political analysts also dismissed Moyo saying he was an ambitious individual who was strangely creating more unnecessary problems between Zimbabwe and South Africa.
The analysts said Moyo’s agenda was far deeper than “defending” Mugabe amid reports that the man who sensationally said the 87-year-old leader was so unelectable he could lose to a donkey, was destroying Zanu PF from within after a dismal failure in the Tsholotsho “coup” of 2004.
Moyo, who has of late been at the forefront of Zanu PF propaganda even though the official spokesperson Rugare Gumbo recently said he should not speak on behalf of the party, questioned whether Zuma’s facilitation role was similar to US ambassador, Charles Ray’s “regime change agenda.”
He wrote in the state media yesterday: “Ambassador Ray’s intervention last week must be taken very seriously when seen not only against the background of Tsvangirai’s demonisation of the security sector as a backbone institution but also as seen against the very worrying archival fact that the Facilitator’s Report of the ill-fated Sadc Troika summit held in Livingstone on March 31 is astonishingly entitled “Zimbabwe Peace Process”.
“In God’s name, what peace process did the Facilitator have in his mind? Is Zimbabwe at war? Indeed, has Zimbabwe been at war? Which or who are the warring armies? Is the Facilitator not aware that Zimbabwe has a GPA government in place?
“The GPA stands for “Global Political Agreement” and not “Global Peace Agreement”.
The GPA was signed after an inconclusive 2008 parliamentary election and not after a war. Quite clearly, the attempt to revise the 2008 GPA from a political to a peace process smacks of a sinister and totally unacceptable attempt to allege that our country has rabies of war when it clearly does not. Is the intention to justify Ambassador Ray’s regime change wish to change the roots and foundation of our country?”
Moyo particularly dwelt on paragraph three of Zuma’s report at the Troika summit in Livingstone which he said was dangerous for Zimbabwe. The paragraph reads: “The developments in the Northern part of our continent should impress upon all of us within the Sadc region, about the need and importance of resolving the Zimbabwean impasse speedily and in a way that will not just satisfy the Sadc region but also that would be acceptable to the entire world”.
Moyo commented on Zuma’s paragraph and said: “God forbid! Did the Facilitator really believe that we in Zimbabwe should conduct our national politics in a way that would be acceptable to the entire world? Which entire world? Which country in Sadc conducts its national politics in that way?
“It is such unacceptable sentiments, as captured under paragraph three of the Facilitator’s Livingstone Report which is now consigned to the archives, which dovetail with last week’s regime change call by US Ambassador Ray to change not just the roof of our government but also the foundation or roots of our governance as part of the Sadc election roadmap which prove the current threat to our national security represented by Tsvangirai and his MDC.
“The new issues about security sector reform, media reform and the reform of ZEC among others which Tsvangirai has tabled as part of the so-called Sadc roadmap to Zimbabwe’s elections are not only outside the GPA as signed on September 15, 2008 but they also constitute a threat to our national security and should be vigorously resisted for that reason and that reason alone.”
Contacted for comment on Moyo’s views, Zulu said Zuma did not want to be involved in the “irrelevant” newspaper opinion but insisted that they will continue with the mandate of solving the Zimbabwean crisis given to them by Sadc.
“We do not want to be side lined from our mandate which is to assist in the implementation of the Global Political Agreement (GPA) and the drafting of a roadmap which we have done and Sadc has accepted the reports made by President Zuma,” Zulu said.
“We are not going to be side-lined from the process by people who are not even part of the negotiating team. We are trying to get Zimbabwe back to normal therefore we will not comment on anything outside the formal process,’’ Zulu said.
Analysts canvassed by the Daily News called on Sadc to heed to Moyo’s ramblings which they believe are seriously undermining the negotiated government. Political analyst Charles Mangongera said it was about time that sensible people in Zanu PF stepped onto the scene and reign in Moyo who was now destroying relations between Zanu PF and the world.
“His unmeasured language is not suitable for engagement. Zanu PF must put an end to the nonsense. Moyo is a senior member of the party and what he says is perceived to be the views of Zanu PF,” Mangongera said.
“Jonathan Moyo is just representing a small clique which includes some members of the security establishment,” Mangongera added on.
“Moyo represents a small clique which includes some members of the security establishment and I sense that he is trying to ingratiate himself with the military so that he can strategically place himself. He sees them as the king maker and he wants to put himself in a strategic position,” Mangongera said.
Human Rights researcher Pedzisai Ruhanya said it was unfounded for Moyo to dismiss Sadc intervention through the facilitator Zuma because Zimbabwe had invited regional intervention because of the manner in which elections were conducted.
“If Moyo is a real political scientist as he claims to be, he should know that politics is about regime change and regime retention and there is nothing unlawful about the two sides of politics. Moyo himself for the better part of his political life has been calling for regime change,” Ruhanya said.
“His book entitled Voting For Democracy published by the University of Zimbabwe in 1992, is purely about regime change.
“The question is why should Zimbabwe and the rest of the world pander to Moyo’s flip flopping at every stage of his political life?”
Ruhanya went on to describe Moyo as an epitome of political confusion which any serious policy maker should not take heed of. He warned the military against taking Moyo’s advice.
“My warning to generals is that whereas Moyo uses the pen to incite hatred, if they follow his advice, they will be sent to The Hague while he remains safe. They need to be careful,” Ruhanya said.
He urged the military to stick to their constitutional mandate of protecting the citizens saying that history would judge them for not operating within the mandate of the Zimbabwe Defence Act. Daily News
