Mutsvangwa accuses Chiwenga of weaponising ‘zvigananda’ in succession battle

ZANU PF spokesperson Christopher Mutsvangwa has publicly criticised Vice President Constantino Chiwenga, accusing him of using criticism of wealthy and politically connected businessmen as part of a broader campaign to advance his political ambitions.

Speaking during a press conference at the ruling party’s headquarters on Thursday, Mutsvangwa challenged Chiwenga’s repeated use of the term zvigananda, which has become synonymous with a group of controversial businessmen often accused by critics of benefiting from their proximity to political power.

Mutsvangwa argued that the term originally emerged from Marxist class theory and was never intended to be used as a political label against individuals.

“The name Zvigananda generally refers to what is called the petty-bourgeoisie. In Marxist class analysis people are placed in classes and there is a class struggle between one class and the other; the workers, the peasants, the middle class and the super rich,” he said.

According to Mutsvangwa, the term gained prominence during internal disputes within the liberation struggle, where it was allegedly used to discredit rivals and advance factional interests.

“The petty-bourgeoisie was translated to Zvigananda. Now, because people were ambitious for power in the 1976 Vashandi Rebellion, they started labelling someone as a Chigananda in the war,” he said.

He warned that using such labels for contemporary political purposes risked repeating historical mistakes.

“Behind it was an attempt to grab power. If you start labelling other people then out of that you say this should happen to them, it is not right,” Mutsvangwa added.

Chiwenga first brought the term into the national spotlight during a rally last year, where he appeared to criticise a group of politically connected businessmen, including Wicknell Chivayo, Kudakwashe Tagwirei, Pedzisayi Sakupwanya and Paul Tungwarara.

The businessmen have repeatedly denied allegations that they improperly benefited from government contracts or political connections.

Mutsvangwa defended entrepreneurship and wealth creation, arguing that economic success should not be viewed with suspicion simply because it is achieved by black Zimbabweans.

“There is nothing wrong about acquiring property, about having a middle class,” he said.

“You abuse that term now and want to use it for political purposes because you have ambitions … that is not the way to go.”

He questioned why wealthy black Zimbabweans were often criticised while successful businesspeople from other communities were not subjected to the same scrutiny.

“If a black man makes money, there is a problem, but Indians and white people can make as much as they want?” he asked.

Mutsvangwa also called for restraint among senior political figures, particularly those who participated in Zimbabwe’s liberation struggle.

“Zimbabweans deserve better in terms of political leadership, especially leadership that went to war. We need to conduct ourselves in the correct manner,” he said.

The remarks come amid increasing speculation about succession dynamics within ZANU PF as President Emmerson Mnangagwa approaches the end of his constitutionally mandated term.

The debate has intensified in recent months alongside controversy surrounding Constitutional Amendment Bill No. 3 (CAB3), which critics argue could have far-reaching implications for Zimbabwe’s political future and internal power balances within the ruling party.

While supporters say the proposed constitutional changes are necessary reforms, opponents contend they could reshape future leadership contests and alter the country’s political trajectory.

With CAB3 appearing increasingly likely to clear Parliament, attention is turning to how competing factions within ZANU PF may position themselves in the evolving succession landscape.