The magical difference of an alliance of the opposition in Zimbabwe

By Tapiwa Chininga

As the debate and controversy around the Constitutional Court ruling that Zimbabwe must go for elections before July 31 swelled, consensus is shifting towards the need for the two MDCs and other opposition parties to forge a grand coalition against Zanu PF if the transition to democracy for Zimbabwe is to be realized.

Although Professor Welshman Ncube’s MDC quickly dismissed the idea, it is clear all the parties realise the need to work together if they are to deliver a killer blow to ZANU PF. They all face a common enemy and division will not help them.

At the same time, despite various talk of unity in the opposition to President Robert Mugabe and ZANU PF, the major contentious problem has been how to share power among the two MDCs and other parties.

There has been also much hype about personality differences between the leadership of the parties scattering any hope for unity.

It is clear that ZANU PF is cornered and with just a month away from the plebiscite, the former ruling party is at zero in terms of preparedness for the election.

The party is riddled with factionalism, no manifesto, no policy, rules and guidelines to govern primaries to chose candidates that will represent the party during the elections are not ready and the party faces collapse in most provinces.

Despite their brave faces, clearly the election is not going to be a stroll in the park and any talk of a coalition by their opponents is making ZANU PF behave like a dog with Rabies.

There is clearly no agreement about the best framework for a power sharing agreement between the major opponents of Zanu PF and other fringe parties . They just don’t agree on how that can be done yet his should be where the focus is.

In a paper tittled “The Prospects for Electoral Pacts and Democratic Progress in Zimbabwe” , the director for Zimbabwe Democracy Institute, Mr Pedzisai Ruhanya , clearly demonstrated the magical difference an alliance of the opposition could have worked in the 2008 elections.

“In Harare, Tsvangirai got 72%, Mugabe 19% and Makoni 8%, Bulawayo Tsvangirai 51%, Makoni 37% and Mugabe 11% and Mashonaland West Mugabe 52%, Tsvangirai 42% and Makoni 5%. This trend of Mugabe hugely losing to the combination of Ncube and Tsvangirai was recorded in Masvingo, Midlands, Manicaland, and Matabeleland provinces.

The quantitative meaning of these results is clear: a coalition between Tsvangirai and Ncube will bury Mugabe,” Pedzisai Ruhanya wrote .

Ruhanya underscored the need for the opposition to understand the importance of uniting around a single presidential candidate, and crafting a genuine democratic framework for the elections and beyond.

There is no doubt the two MDC formations are central to any electoral pact and therefore it is attendant on the MDC T (being the major party) to initiate serious and genuine talks with other political players and civic society institutions as every vote counts.

The timing and reality dictates necessity for a pact which I think is critical at this moment.

There are many views and suggestions on the best compromise framework between the parties although the appropriate choice of power-sharing approaches will depend on the conflict’s dynamics within the different parties.

The first model will be to use the 2008 elections as the baseline. Parties should agree to support and not contest each other in areas where each party won in 2008 , share and support each other in areas where Zanu PF won.

For presidential candidates, the parties must work as one and choose a candidate most likely to garner the most votes to represent them and share ministerial posts. This will give a chance to parties like MKD and ZAPU that are unlikely to win seats.

The 2008 election show us that MDC -N has support in Matabeleland South while MDC- T has support in other constituencies. Rallying around Tsvangirai gives them more chances.

This model will also give influence to legitimate representatives of minorities groups thereby establishing a more equitable balance of power, making negotiation an attractive alternative to division, promoting and expanding citizen participation in the political process, strengthening voter confidence in open methods of choosing government, and encouraging a competitive political environment.

This option seems more preferable because it emphasizes inclusion and moderation and provide losers with an incentive to work within the system, guaranteeing a voice in national politics for numerically weaker parties, rather than to opt out and confront their supposed coalition partners.

The second model is that each party fight for itself at parliamentary level. At presidential level the parties support the candidate with the best chances of winning. The PACT has to be an Executive pact, i.e. Unity on the presidency – on the understanding that Morgan Tsvangirai will share some of the Executive prerogatives he will have around ministers, Ambassadors etc – not parliament.

Although the first idea will be the best and comprehensible one, given developments on the ground, and also the reality that some of the parties have no stake in the baseline of 2008 elections – it may be too late to have a parliament inspired arrangement.

This is compounded by the fact that the parties have asymetrical electoral strength and hence it will be sensible to fight it out where they have to and get what they get. Another real challenge lies in how best the parties can balance individual interests and party interests and ultimately national interests.

An MDC- T leader who was very close to the failed attempts in 2008 lamented how the negative results affected the democratic discourse of this country and for the same reasons and for the fear that attempts this time may yield similar results, he was tempted to go the executive pact route.

Feeding into expectations of weary Zimbabweans are reports, that Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai , leader of the mainstream MDC formation, Welshman Ncube leader of the smaller faction of the MDC and former ZANU PF heavyweights Simba Makoni and Dumiso Dabengwa, who now lead Mavambo and a resurgent Zapu respectively, on Wednesday took a public stance and vowed not to participate in an electoral process without the full implementation of the Global Political Agreement (GPA) which is the basis of the unity government.

But ZANU PF secretary for administration, Didymus Mutasa reportedly poured scorn at the position taken by the MDC formations in the unity government and other opposition parties.

“They (the political parties) have ganged against ZANU PF in the past and what have they achieved? We are not afraid that they will be united at the summit and we are going to elections” Mutasa said, referring to the extra ordinary SADC summit that was supposed to be held this Sunday but had to be postponed indefinitely following reports that ZANU PF had developed cold feat.

It was also reported that Tsvangirai took advantage of the gathering and tried to push for a grand political pact against President Mugabe in the forth coming elections.

It is important to examine closely the two major characters that will be instrumental in this unity pact- Professor Welshman Ncube and Dr Morgan Richard Tsvangirai.

Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition director, McDonald Lewanika said the current electoral map based on 2008 results seems to suggest that Tsvangirai cannot win the first round without Ncube’s votes.

“He knows this, so does Welsh. More than personal gripes or revenge, Welshman’s reluctance to talk a pact now could be based on a power equation. Whatever is perceived as power now, and Welshman’s votes now, if they are retained in an Election with no clear winner, they quadruple in value”.

At the end of the day Welshman has no real choice than to eventually get into bed with Morgan, but the price for doing that is lower now because of the stakes, and will be higher just before an election or in a run off scenario. That could probably be the calculation, “ Lewanika observed.

Both Welshman and Morgan have a history, but both of them have shown that they can see the bigger picture and can set aside rivalries in the interests of what is best for the country and what is most advantageous to them as parties.

Despite these challenges, it is not too late to forge a workable alliance although some parties may not be sufficiently desperate or feel insufficiently compelled.

Enmities may be too deep for parties to share power for mutual benefit, but there is no doubt it is in their best interest and the above mechanisms or any other can form the basis for the discussion.

One may not have intimate knowledge of the situation, especially of the true predisposition of the parties and their willingness to live together within a common or shared political framework but it is certain a coalition will work if the leaders’ commit themselves to democracy-building and believe that the failure to accommodate will precipitate greater setbacks or failure of the democratic revolution •

Zimbabweans hope that the suggested framework for Power-sharing will be embraced by a core of moderate political leaders who genuinely represent the groups they purport to lead and arrangements will be arrived at indigenously, not merely the result of heavy external pressures or parties’ short-term, zero-sum expectations.

Tapiwa Chininga is a Journalist and a Law student based in South Africa.