Options for non-violent reform in Zimbabwe

By Freeman Chari

When Morgan Tsvangirai was sworn in as the Prime Minister of Zimbabwe in a loose coalition with Robert Mugabe, there was hope that his presence could influence reform in the country. This government is only a few months old but it has become clearer that ZANU PF is not willing to give up its autocratic hold on power.

It has become necessary again to take a closer look at past and present events and try to predict the likely course of future events. This way, pro-democratic forces in Zimbabwe may live conscious of what may become of them or may be required of them when such events begin to unfold.

There is substantial evidence that MDC holds minimal power in the current setup. Examples that quickly crop up are the continual invasion of farms at the instigation of ZANU PF leadership despite calls by the Prime Minister for them to stop. MDC members continue to be persecuted and harassed by ZANU PF supporters with no action from the police.

The Reserve Bank continues to engage in quasi-fiscal projects despite Finance Minister Biti’s order. Reserve Bank Governor Gideon Gono and Attorney General Johannes Tomana are still occupying their positions despite MDC’s protestations. Robert Mugabe continues to make key appointments to government unilaterally and most of those appointments have stood. So, it could be argued that ZANU PF is still the core of the Zimbabwe Government with MDC coming in as auxiliaries.

It is also evident that little reform to the political and economic systems of the country has occurred since the Unity Government was formed. The constitution-making process has stalled amidst claims that ZANU PF is sabotaging the process. Draconian laws like AIPPA and POSA are still being used to maintain the state’s grip on civil liberties. Government-assisted hostile takeovers of businesses are still common in the country.

There has been a noticeable change though in the economic climate of the country since the introduction of the United States Dollar as the official trading currency. Most notably is the massive decrease in inflation and an end to shortages of basic commodities in the country. There is little hope that substantial reforms will be instituted in the near future given the public contradictions in beliefs held by the two parties.

Given the little influence that MDC seems to be holding in the GNU, it is also evident that its presence in this government is unlikely to bring much positive reform to the country. Changes in ZANU PF on the other hand seem more likely to bring considerable reform in the political and economic terrain of the country. Let us explore such changes, their likelihood and their likely impact on the country:

Voluntary reorganization of ZANU PF

This explicitly refers to change of leadership within ZANU PF. People have discussed the need to revamp and restructure the party particularly the succession of its geriatric leader Robert Mugabe. A wholesome change of leaders in ZANU PF might result in the party being led by reform-minded young people who appreciate the need for contemporary reforms and modernization of the political and economic systems of the country.

Are there people like that in ZANU PF? This question is hard to answer when looking at the current crop of the party’s leadership even from its youth ranks. There are a number of people who were nurtured by ZANU PF who eventually decided to leave it because of its unwillingness to embrace change. This can point to the presence of people within its system who may not be averse to reformist ideas.

How likely is this change? Succession in ZANU PF is not an idea that can be thrown around without scars and scalps. When Eddison Zvobgo brought the issue of Mugabe’s succession in 1990; the results were not pleasant. He was sidelined from government and his closest ally Dzikamai Mavhaire was suspended from the party for 2 years.

The infamous Tsholotsho Declaration was allegedly hacked by some senior members in ZANU PF to influence the structure of the presidium. The results were not pleasant; six provincial chairmen were suspended from the party and eventually Jonathan Moyo had to leave ZANU PF. Currently, there is commotion over the successor to Joseph Msika with the old guard again throwing spanners to ensure that another geriatric takes over.

As convenient as it may sound, there is no indication that the executive of ZANU PF is willing to retire and leave power to younger and competent people. Moves by certain sections of ZANU PF to declare Mugabe the Supreme Leader of the party may as well signal that Mugabe wants to die in office. It can therefore be concluded that the possibility of ZANU PF reorganization in the lifetime of Robert Mugabe is close to impossible.

Forced reform of government

There are situations where a government can be forced to reform due to unsustainable internal and external pressure. The reformation of the Soviet system in the 90’s was a result of both the constraints that the global economy was placing on its government and the overwhelming reformist sentiments shown by the massive support that Boris Yeltsin got when he became president in 1990. Pressure from within and without also helped bring down authoritarian rule in Hungary, East German and South Africa.

Is domestic pressure feasible in Zimbabwe? In 1989, Arthur Mutambara and Munyaradzi Gwisai led University of Zimbabwe students in protests against ZANU PF’s intention to impose a one-party state in the country. They were arrested and brutalized. So was Morgan Tsvangirai when he wrote to the Herald newspaper in support of the two.

When food prices rose by about 40% in 1998, people decided to take to the streets in protest. There were reports of a massive crackdown is high density suburbs of Chitungwiza, Budiriro and Glen View by the army and police to quash any dissent.

From 2000 to 2003 ZCTU and MDC led a number of successful boycotts to force the government to reform. Successful in terms of popular response but rather ineffective in forcing the government to change. It appears as though, these earlier demonstrations and boycotts served to sensitize the regime towards the use of brutal force as a means of containing dissent. The response with which the regime quelled the June 2003 Final-Push goes to show that the system had completed its mutation into a senseless, brutal and unashamed dictatorship with no respect for life at all.

To cap this revolutionary mutation, the establishment went on to disintegrate the social and economic livelihood of its people through operation Murambatsvina. This was clandestinely aimed at silencing the opposition’s powerbase although hidden behind claims of cleaning up the Harare.

If this was under disguise, then the ruthlessness that was blatantly shown in June 2008 run-off elections was a show of how the regime was prepared to kill those who did not submit to its existence.

Despite the culture of resistance that Zimbabweans had developed in the first five years of this decade, ZANU PF managed to beat them into submission. The globalization of world economy did not help matters too as the middle-class which is usually the most vocal in such situations was the first to flee the country followed by a massive exodus of the generally populace into surrounding countries.

Only a people that had been brutalized into submission remained of Zimbabwe. Their only hope was elections. They voted overwhelmingly for change but their vote did not count. Today they are again stuck with the same violent regime with no hope whatsoever.

It seems as though it is impossible to challenge the system with bare hands. Any further challenge to ZANU PF seems to require that people arm themselves or that they totally lose the fear of death. These are hard choices.

International pressure through disengagement and sanctions has been instituted on Zimbabwe by USA, The EU and Australia. Sanctions are designed to force the targeted government or institution to change. Sanctions on Zimbabwe although designed to target specific individuals had other far reaching consequences on the general populace of Zimbabwe.

Instead of forcing the regime to bow out, sanctions actually gave them an excuse to act irresponsibly and ruthlessly. One example is when Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe diverted about $4, 5 million from Global Fund on HIV, TB and Malaria towards other unknown activities. The result was that donors found it hard to channel resources into the country resulting in massive starvation and health crises.

The government seemed to respond to sanctions by sanctioning its own people too. In 2008 at the height of food shortages, they barred relief agencies from operating in the country. They further barred World Vision, Care International and Catholic Relief Services from moving food from Zambia into Zimbabwe.

What could have contributed to the ineffectiveness of sanctions in forcing reform was the inability by Zimbabwe’s neighbours and other African states to augment western efforts. Only Botswana, Kenya and Tanzania seemed willing to apply pressure on Mugabe.

So, can international pressure force change in future? Sanctions can hopefully bring change in Zimbabwe if they are a concerted global initiative which every country is obliged to observe. The ideological differences amongst members of the UN Security Council remain an impediment. The unwillingness of Zimbabwe’s neighbours to support sanctions is based mostly on reluctance to commit resources to sustain the burden of refugees who would be anticipated to cross into those countries.

Apart from sanctions, international pressure can indirectly be applied on the current regime by constantly and lucratively supporting alternatives in the country. As an example, students’ relief schemes can be put in place to assist those students persecuted by the regime. This would not only assist courageous students but would also serve as incentives for more students to come out and challenge the regime.

It has become hard to find people who are willing to challenge the government through non-violent means; but with proper education and assurances of alternatives people of Zimbabwe may rise again but not within the foreseeable future.

Circumstantial changes in ZANU PF leadership

What will happen if Mugabe dies today? There are many scenarios: The Vice President Amai Mujuru can constitutionally be elevated to the post of President and take care of the transition. A rational woman with limited ego could be what Zimbabwe needs to manage the pressures that may arise from such a situation. What if Emmerson Mnangagwa – the current Minister of Defence- decides to challenge her? Remembering that The Tsholotsho Declaration was meant to impede the rise Joyce Mujuru, their rivalry is documented.

If Mnangagwa decides to challenge Joice Mujuru, two things may occur; she can give in or decide to fight. If she gives in then Mnangagwa becomes the President and given his history of brutality; from the persecution of the Hamadziripi group in the late 1970s, his involvement in the Matabeleland massacres and his subsequent involvement in the 2008 elections, then Zimbabweans would most probably have to brace for a tougher time.

If Joyce Mujuru decides to fight on then we can expect a split of ZANU PF along factional lines. Both factions are guaranteed substantial military support. Solomon Mujuru was the commander of the Zimbabwe National Army until 1992. He still has substantial influence in the army and can be the pillar that his wife can rest on.

Not to be outdone, Mnangagwa was the Minister of State Security from 1980 to 1988, he is currently the Minister of Defence sealing his control over the military and intelligence of the country. A civil war may occur. The impact and duration of such an event is beyond the scope of this article but suffice to mention that a civil is the last thing that Zimbabwe needs right now.

It has become clearer that reform in Zimbabwe is dependent more on events within ZANU PF that other things. With Mugabe unwilling to retire, it remains logical that Zimbabweans wait for his death for reform to occur. Unfortunately his death may also signal a cascade of events likely to cause more pain than happiness to Zimbabweans. Finally, let it be known that no condition is permanent- change may as well be on the cards for Zimbabwe.

Source: http://freemanchari.blogspot.com/