Zimbabwe Information Center in North America
A project of the North American Coalition for a Free Zimbabwe (NACFREEZ)
Letter from America
June 11, 2007
MDC
Mugabe's psychosis
In a dramatic replay of the storming of the Bastille, a notorious French prison, on July 14, 1789, by the peasants, hundreds of members of Women of Zimbabwe Arise last week confronted Mugabe’s police at the Bulawayo central police station in protest against the arrest of their leaders.
Many historians believe the storming of the Bastille marked the beginning of the peasant revolt that led to the French Revolution in 1799. WOZA demonstrators may not have brought the police station down, but they showed by their presence the kind of popular strength, courage and will that was demonstrated by the French peasants 218 years ago.
The reaction by the police in Bulawayo was predictable. They resorted to the only language they knew. And that was the language of violence that Mugabe has boastfully made his trade mark by dubbing it "degrees of violence". But what the Bulawayo police did not know, or chose to ignore, was the fact that the storming of the Bulawayo central police station could well have sowed the seeds of a new revolution in Zimbabwe.
When told that the peasants had no bread, Marie Antoinette the queen of France reportedly said "Let them eat cake." – although many people think she was misquoted. But whatever she said, the reaction by the French monarchy, just like that of the Bulawayo police, was that of utter indifference. They could not care less about the plight of the masses.
Last week I talked about how a single event could trigger a mass demonstration in Zimbabwe. The action by WOZA activists showed clearly that Zimbabwe is now a tinderbox ready to explode at any minute. The fact that WOZA had the courage to march to the Bulawayo central police station and demonstrate showed how Zimbabweans are slowly but systematically generating the courage of the peasants that led to the French Revolution.
WOZA action was a timely reminder for those who had written off mass demonstration in Zimbabwe that beneath the people’s resilience there is an undercurrent of mass protest which could be unleashed at any time.
Even Mugabe is aware that the situation in Zimbabwe is now explosive. The people have been dragged to the brink of an absolute disaster and are in a fighting mood. The masses are now like a volcano whose steam is a constant reminder that it is active and can and will erupt anytime.
Mugabe and his cronies are now desperately seeking a solution not to resolving the crisis in the country but to save them from what could be a vicious peasant revolt, if it came to that, or some mass protest from any quarter. The reason Mugabe is not serious about talks with the opposition movement lies in the purpose of those talks. Mugabe is interested in talks that will save his political career and possibly his life, not talks to save Zimbabwe from his misrule.
Mugabe and his cronies are now resigned to the idea of talks brokered by South Africa, or the suggestions for new elections that will be free and fair, and any attempts to restore the rule of law in the country. They know for a fact that any free and fair elections or restoration of the rule of law will mark a dramatic end not only to Mugabe’s dictatorial rule but to his political career as well.
It should not surprise anyone that Mugabe is dilly dallying on talks. He is dragging his heels and is being brought kicking and screaming to the conference table. Mugabe will do literary anything to sabotage the talks with the opposition leaders, or to rig the next elections. Mugabe knows he has two choices. Either he allows free and fair elections and the restoration of the rule of law, or faces an increasingly restless population who, like the French peasants, could mount a mass demonstration.
None of the choices or options Mugabe realistically has will work to his advantage in the long term. The winds of change have now landed and are simmering in Zimbabwe.
Mugabe has decided that he would rather fight than surrender through peaceful free and fair elections. Of all the people, Mugabe knows he does not stand a chance in hell in winning free and fair elections, even if he was campaigning against a divided opposition.
One popular myth among many analysts is that Mugabe and ZANUPF enjoy the majority support of the rural peasants. But without a rigged vote, no sane Zimbabwean, whether in urban or rural areas, will cast a vote in favor of ZANUPF or Mugabe. Mugabe knows that for a fact. He would not resort to rigging elections, especially in rural areas, if he was confident of victory.
There has been a dramatic shift in the politics of confrontation in Zimbabwe in a way that scares Mugabe. Mugabe’s propaganda had sought to place the confrontation between Mugabe and Tony Blair, the outgoing British prime minister. Realizing that no one believes this Mugabe has now seen the conflict as between ZANUPF and what he calls the surrogates of British and American imperialism, namely the opposition movement.
But what Mugabe has secretly been advised by his security chiefs is that the real confrontation is between Mugabe and the masses in Zimbabwe. Mugabe may have fooled himself into thinking that if he can control the propaganda about being a victim of western sanctions and imperialism he will sustain himself politically, especially in the eyes of Africa and the Third World.
But Africa is taking a second hard look at Mugabe. African leaders may still have some remnants of adoration for their perceived role of Mugabe in the anti colonial struggle.
But the reality of the Zimbabwean geopolitical situation is slowly hitting home.
It is very difficult to defend Mugabe on the basis of the role he played in the struggle for independence when the same Mugabe is not only assaulting and jailing members of the opposition movement but also boasting about how thoroughly they were beaten by the police. It is also increasingly becoming difficult to defend Mugabe against daily reports of escalating state- sponsored violence against unarmed civilians.
When Mugabe addressed a meeting of COMESA in Nairobi, Kenya, recently he compared what he was doing to the Mau Mau of Kenya. He said ZANUPF had been for land redistribution as much as the Mau Mau in Kenya was struggling to repossess their land from the British colonialists. Here, again, was Mugabe trying to pull the stunt about being a victim of western imperialism and alleging that he, like Mau Mau, had been struggling to repossess land for the masses.
The Daily Nation of Kenya hit back hard at Mugabe calling him to step down for two reasons. One was Mugabe had extensively damaged the country and there was no chance Zimbabwe could ever recover under Mugabe’s continued misrule. The other reason was Mugabe, at 83, is simply too old to continue in office.
A number of Kenyans felt Mugabe had abused his hospitality in Kenya by insulting the Mau Mau. One Kenyan told me there was absolutely no comparison between Mau Mau and the modern- day Mugabe. He described Mugabe as a misrepresentation of Robin Hood. Like Robin Hood, Mugabe stole from the rich whites, but, unlike Robin Hood, Mugabe did not give to the poor all the loot he had stolen. Instead he shared it with his cronies.
This rebuff came hot on the heels of another humiliation for Mugabe.
Scotland's Edinburgh University’s stripped Mugabe of the honorary degree awarded to him 20 years ago. Not even the feeble reaction from Mugabe’s Ministry of Information could hide the fact that this was a major blow to Mugabe’s pride. The step taken by Edinburgh University could have a domino effect, with other universities revoking the honorary degrees they awarded Mugabe.
Like Idi Amin, Mugabe had always had a secret and personal admiration and respect for Scotland. There was a rumor years ago he had bought, or planned to buy, a castle in Scotland to serve as his retirement home.
Much as he may show a brave face in public Mugabe has suffered a personal humiliation that can only be equated with what the late Edison Zvobgo used to say about Mugabe’s string of what he called “meaningless” degrees.
On the economic front, the Chinese, whom Mugabe had invested all his hopes for an economic miracle for Zimbabwe, have not shown the same energized enthusiasm for bailing him out. The visits to Africa by Chinese president have always conspicuously avoided Zimbabwe by including neighboring countries like South Africa and Zambia! A last minute visit to Zimbabwe by a junior-level Chinese official was tantamount to throwing a diplomatic bone to keep a wailing dog quiet.
All the internal and external challenges to Mugabe have put him in a difficult corner. His savage use of violence has only generated an even more determined opposition to him. His flirtation with the Chinese has not brought about the economic recovery miracle he boasted about in his “Look East” policy.
This has left Mugabe with essentially one option: to fight like hell with all the means at his disposal. The fierceness and savagery with which Mugabe will assault the opposition supporters in Zimbabwe is directly proportional to his state of psychosis borne out of the realization that Mugabe is fighting a losing battle, and that sooner or later his end will come.