Zimbabwe Information Center in North America
A project of the North American Coalition for a Free Zimbabwe (NACFREEZ)
MDC
By Stanford G. Mukasa
Letter from America
March 12,, 2007
Mugabe's last kicks?
Last Sunday’s vicious attack by Robert Mugabe’s trigger happy police on innocent civilians, and the arrest of the leadership in the Zimbabwean opposition movement who had planned to gather for a prayer day in Harare, came hot on the heels of a series of repressive measures by the Mugabe regime.
What is clearly emerging is a pattern of systematically depriving Zimbabweans of whatever remaining civil rights they may have.
It can only point to one thing. Mugabe is now preparing for the 2008 elections by making sure he can rig the elections in his favor.
When elections come Zimbabweans will be bound hand and foot by all kinds of disenfranchising restrictions.
Having reportedly decided to run again, instead of postponing the elections to 2010, Mugabe now knows that unless he rigs the elections he stands to lose heavily.
No sane Zimbabwean will willingly vote for a tyrannical regime that has brought the country to a Stone Age existence.
Mugabe’s handmaiden, Tobaiwa Mudede, has already stopped issuing passports and identity cards on the pretext his department is broke. These are part of plans to disenfranchise millions of eligible voters. A new registration drive will bring into the voters roll young Zimbabweans whose votes will clearly go against Mugabe.
But whatever Mugabe’s plans and strategies, the fact of the matter is he cannot stop the tidal wave of protests that has been spreading around the country. And Mugabe is aware of it.
In using the armed police to block MDC rallies Mugabe knows he has won only the battle but not the war.
The war against Mugabe is multifaceted.
It is a hydra- headed monster made up of the decrepit economy, a restless population numbering in millions, disgruntled party members and a sizable chunk in the armed forces who have been tossed out of the gravy train, and the international community that is waking up to the increasing repression in the country.
Then there is old age that is gripping Mugabe, making everyday he wakes up alive a miracle.
It is, therefore, not inconceivable that Mugabe will rig the elections to give himself another six years in office.
At his age it will be a big miracle if he makes it to the end of the next term. For he will be 90 years old!
However, during this time, Mugabe’s daydream is not only to choose his time to retire but also who will replace him.
But Mugabe may not have everything his way. The sheer thought of Mugabe running again now irks even his own party members.
Mugabe is trying to accomplish two objectives. The first is to paralyze the opposition movement and instill fear among the Zimbabweans.
The second objective is to create an environment where he, Mugabe ,will at his own time, at his own leisure, and with no pressure from any quarter, decide when, how and in what manner he will step down as well as nominate his successor.
But Mugabe is getting either too senile or dumb if he thinks he can accomplish his objectives. He is using exactly the same methods of repression that Ian Smith used, knowing fully well that Smith never accomplished his objectives of “no black rule in Rhodesia in a thousand years.”
Mugabe thinks he can use force to dictate the course of events in Zimbabwe. He has vowed that MDC will never rule Zimbabwe --neither in his lifetime nor after his death. He has even threatened to resurrect himself as a ghost to fight against an MDC government, should one emerge!
Just as Smith failed dismally to prevent black majority rule in Zimbabwe, Mugabe will probably be alive under another government that may well be under discussion right now.
Zimbabweans are now beginning to feel the last hard kicks of a dying horse. The Mugabe era is going down like the setting sun.
One roadmap to Mugabe’s end comes from predictions that Mugabe’s political epitaph is probably being decided right now.
A great deal of interest and excitement has been generated by the publication of the report of the International Crisis Group recently.
That interest has been put on high gear with the news that Zambia, which will assume the presidency of the SADC in August, wants the Zimbabwean issue on the agenda.
As if not to be outdone, South African president, Thabo Mbeki, who had been written off as a possible influence on Mugabe, was reported to have had about one hour’s meeting with Robert Mugabe in Ghana recently.
In this hustle and bustle of the underworld of diplomatic activities the prospect for mass action is now more real than ever before. Just a few months ago, some politicians were labeling mass action as wishful thinking.
The usually dormant Save Zimbabwe coalition appears to have gained a new strength and determination following spontaneous mass protests around the country.
The coalition’s meeting in South Africa recently will hopefully signal a new momentum by the united front in actually leading the mass protests.
Last Sunday became a test day for the coalition’s resolve and determination when Save Zimbabwe called for a major rally in aftermath of nationwide bans.
If Save Zimbabwe coalition maintains its resolve it will be following in the footsteps of the United Democratic Front in apartheid South Africa in late 1980s and early 1990s.
UDF played a crucial role in the development that led to the negotiated solution and end of the apartheid rule in South Africa.
Save Zimbabwe coalition will be a rallying point for the opposition movement in Zimbabwe. It will also be the answer to the problems of the split in the MDC. By getting the factional leaders in the MDC to operate under the auspices of the Save Zimbabwe there will be more talk on how to get rid of Mugabe than how to unite the split MDC.
There is nothing wrong with both Tsvangirayi and Mutambara leading their separate movements, as long as they can agree on who retains the name MDC, or if this fails, they can develop different designations for the party just as the ZANU split between Sithole and Mugabe some years ago.
The bottom line is the liberation movement and the struggle against Mugabe must not be undermined by leadership squabbles.
Having different parties that are well coordinated in the struggle for independence is a good democratic practice. It will instill among the Zimbabwean the culture of multiparty democracy. If all factions were to be united under one leadership this could perpetuate the notion of one party state in the post Mugabe era.
A good democratic tradition or culture is based on the slogan unity in diversity. Here unity means all different factions are united in purpose, namely to confront Mugabe rather than lambasting each other. Diversity means they retain their own ideologies and structures that are governed by democratic culture.
What weakens the opposition movement in Africa is when different factions start fighting against each other outside the established democratic rules of behavior.
The consequence has been the inability or unwillingness by the losing faction to accept election results even if there is no evidence the elections were rigged.
Kenya is a good example of this.
While Kenyans consistently and overwhelmingly voted against the ruling party, KANU, in presidential and parliamentary elections the intra fractional fighting in the opposition movement consistently gave victory to the ruling party.
It was only when the opposition movement came to its senses and formed the national rainbow coalition , or NARC, that the opposition movement was, with the help of renegade KANU MPs, able to wrestle power from KANU.
There was a great deal of analysis that the split in MDC slowed down the momentum against Mugabe.
If indeed the split in the MDC had undermined the protest against Mugabe then events in the past few months, notably in 2007, have shown the opposite results.
It is very difficult to establish a clear basis for arguing that the split has undermined the freedom struggle.
Yes, the bickering within the factional leaders has worked against the struggle from the leadership perspective.
I have always stated in previous postings that the masses in Zimbabwe are united and have rallied around the cause for their freedom from Mugabe regime.
The Zimbabwean masses have been very focused on who the enemy is.
So when protests and strikes mushroomed all over the country this was a clear result of the fact that the leadership tussle was not an issue at all among the grassroots movement – just as in Kenya the majority of Kenyans consistently voted against the ruling KANU.
What Save Zimbabwe must recognize now, as they were meeting in South Africa, is that different factions are not each other’s enemies.
They must all recognize the right for each other to exist. If they are to attack each other it must be within the rules of robust debates established by the democratic traditions.
Next, they must agree on the procedure for democratic elections that will ensure free and fair elections. They must recognize the sovereign right of Zimbabweans to choose their own leaders and they must accept the decision by Zimbabweans as final.
It appears that the two factions within ZANUPF, one led by Solomon Mujuru, and the other led by Emerson Mnangagwa have also agreed not to allow Mugabe to continue as president beyond March 2008.
Understandably, there may not be enough time to launch a real campaign for next year’s presidential elections, since Mugabe has now dug his heels and is unwilling to step down. This means a great deal of time and energy will be spent fighting to get Mugabe to relinquish power.
According to the ICG report what is envisaged now is a government of national unity that will bring all factions in the ruling party and the opposition movement into a transitional government that will set the electoral and democratic rules for free and fair elections in 2010.
In those elections there will potentially be four candidates for the presidential elections: Tsvangirayi, Mutambara, Joice Mujuru and Mnangagwa.
Presumably all the four candidates will be in the government of national unity starting in March 2008, assuming Mugabe has been dragged kicking and screaming to step down...
There is also the possibility that Mugabe might be bananized that is, allowed to continue in the present office but with greatly reduced powers like his predecessor the late Canaan Banana. In that case, executive powers will rest with the prime minister.
The prime minister will wield a great deal of influence in the period leading to elections. Anybody who aspires to be a candidate in the presidential elections should not be prime minister as this will give him or her unfair advantage.
The coalition administration must therefore agree to elect a non partisan and highly respected individual who will run the transitional governed with an even hand.
Another issue will be the infusion of neutral police and security forces. The Zimbabwe police and army have been politicized to the extent they are now a security arm of ZANUPF rather than the nation.
SADC countries should offer to provide peacekeeping forces. While SADC leaders have had a political infatuation with Mugabe, the regional security forces are likely be professional and non partisan.
One advantage with bringing regional peacekeeping forces is the logistical convenience of transporting and rotating them on short distances.
The preparation for the elections will likely be a two-part process.
The first will be the setting up of the mechanisms for free and fair elections.
The second will be establishing a new Constitution for Zimbabwe.
If an agreement can be reached on these two structures then Zimbabwe will see 2008 move the country back to a democratic nation where the rule of law reigns supreme and citizen’s rights are guaranteed.
Under the Constitution everybody will be bound by the law.
Anyone who violated other people’s rights will be liable for criminal and/ or civil prosecution as provided by the law.
The law of the land must be the supreme organ for redressing grievances and the denial of people civil rights.
True reconciliation for Zimbabweans can only be recognized through justice.
It appears the year 2007 could well herald the long awaited winds of change.