The Zanu PF elites have lost their game

By Titus Gwemende

Four things have happened this year which are instructive in understanding the state of Zanu PF, and also suggestive of the fact that we are nearing the end game of the grand old party. First was the stunning loss of the Speaker of Parliament election earlier in the year. It appears some Zanu PF MPs may have voted with the MDC to reinstate Lovemore Moyo. Paranoia now reigns supreme as the party purges suspected rebels.

It is both baffling and amusing to witness the ruthless party unable to tame the will of its legislators. No doubt the party has formidable coercive means but the loss underscores the certain decline and factionalism in this once revolutionary party. To win the hearts and minds of members, a party needs to think beyond violence and intimidation. This is because all human beings have a threshold for abuse beyond which they may strike back regardless of consequences.

Second is the recent suspension of Tracy Mutinhiri and her subsequent loss of her farm. In a way, it’s a result of the paranoia and suspicion towards certain sections who are now accused of selling out. However, when such senior members of the party can no longer be trusted, then it is clear that the Mutinhiri case may just be a tip of the iceberg.

This episode has a striking resemblance to the last days of most dictatorships, that is, they collapse not so much as a result of opposition since that is normally dealt with viciously, but through implosion where senior leaders either defect publicly or openly defy party instructions.

That the party and not the government can repossess land begs the question: who owns the land? Is it the state or the party? Could this episode finally prove to everyone that the motive for land distribution wasn’t so much a people empowerment exercise but a way devised by the ruling party to control land so as to use it to reward loyalists and frustrate the ‘disloyal’ like Mutinhiri?

Can we be called a serious investor-friendly country if a private citizen clashes with the ruling party and they lose their farm? On a different note, isn’t it revealing to see these guys destroy each other while we Zimbabweans mind our own business? Isn’t this an ominous sign to Zanu PF loyalists who think they have become richer through association with Zanu PF that they actually don’t own all those cars, farms, and businesses but they are stewards of those assets until the party thinks it is time to repossess them?

How can the opposition react to all this? The temptation is go against the Zanu PF rebels or victims. While that sounds logical, the opposition can be more strategic and actually take advantage of this. The opposition needs to extend an olive branch to rebel senior Zanu PF members who are either defecting or expelled for the ‘right reasons’. Noone knows how to bring down a regime more than its insiders and it can be argued that beyond elections, one way to weaken or even overthrow a regime is to work with discontented officials in that regime.

If one studies the “Arab spring”, rebel forces have benefited in diverse ways from regime implosion. Unfortunately, a puritanical approach to opposition politics may lead to the ostracisation of defectors which in turn complicates or even prolongs the transition to democracy.

The ‘deBaathification’ of the Iraq civil service has been pronounced unstrategic and counterproductive in hindsight largely because any ‘rebel’ or ‘opposition’movement needs insiders during the fragile transition period. The democratic forces should not attack these people lest others who are considering jumping ship may think that there is no life after Zanu PF.

However, cooption or cooperation with discontents is admittedly, a political minefield because one has to consider whether ‘embracing’ means getting these rebels into democratic structures or having a framework or mechanism of cooperation without necessarily dishing out positions. I would go for the latter.

This is critical in countries with contested political terrains like Zimbabwe where the progressive forces have popular legitimacy but less leverage in influential instruments of force like security. It’s a trade off. It’s messy but necessary. Tracy Mutinhiri’s troubles show a frightened and uneasy party that is trying to crack down on dissent and thus desperate to send a tough signal to potential dissenters that the regime will brook no palling with opposition. That they have to go to these extremes is the ultimate sign that this party is in trouble.

Third is the age, deteriorating health and death of senior leaders. It is no secret that since January, top leaders like President Robert Mugabe, Vice President John Nkomo, Zimbabwe Defence Forces Commander General Constantine Chiwenga and many others have not been well health wise.

Whichever way one looks at it, you can only do so much without great health and the secrecy shrouding the health of the leaders does not help matters. Health issues are increasingly becoming worrisome even to some hard-line Zanu PF insiders. After all, even dictatorships require strong leadership. That’s why an ailing Fidel Castro stepped down for his brother Raul; so the logic goes.

Those who want Mugabe out are not necessarily clamouring for the people’s choice. Rather they want a healthier leader to continue this autocratic precedent. The key leaders simply aren’t on top of their game. At 87, Mugabe cannot be as effective as he was 30 years ago. Key Zanu PF leaders are either sick or age has really taken its course. In other words, without serious infusion of new blood, Zanu PF simply won’t have a future.

Decades of nauseating sameness in leadership and subscription to a hero model of leadership jeopardises leadership renewal and spells doom to those insiders who imagine a post-Mugabe Zanu PF. The party is simply too fractured with largely nothing holding it without Mugabe and sooner rather than later, Zanu PF will join Nkrumah and Kaunda’s political parties in the anals of the history of disgraced and defeated revolutionary parties. Such is the fate of ruling parties that don’t renew leadership and have an aversion for democracy.

The sudden August 16 death of the mercurial and enigmatic General Solomon Mujuru who seemed somewhat open to the reality of MDC legitimacy leaves Zanu PF at the mercy of the more hard-line elements.  

Fourth, Jonathan Moyo’s curious attacks on the party recently can only benefit the opposition as this will sure lead to more fights and arguments within Zanu PF. That Moyo is speaking like that when he sits on the politburo is fascinating and instructive. What exactly is happening in the party? No-one can say for sure but Moyo clearly has sympathisers in the party who are silently ecstatic at his audacity.

Indeed Moyo is the consummate Machiavellian politician who has mastered the 15th law of power, that is ‘crush your enemy totally’. He has a fabulously evil way of crushing the resolve of opponents and busting the bubbles of his enemies. As a deep ZANU insder, he is uniquely equipped to inflict killer blows to his party.

What we are witnessing in Zanu PF may be a predictable clash of generations and ethnic groups. What we are delightfully witnessing is the backlash against the Zezuru hegemony in a party which has treated other ethnic groups like the Ndebeles especially as lesser mortals.

The Zanu PF elites have lost their game, they have infuriated the average Zimbabwean by their arrogance and repression.Factionalism, infighting and ghosts of the past have plunged the party like a meteor into a pool of oblivion. We are witnessing ‘Zanugeddon’, the revolution has devoured its own children and the empire is imploding.

Titus Gwemende is the Head of Programs at Transparency International Zimbabwe and currently a Fellow at Stanford University in the USA [email protected]