Letter from America
October 1, 2007
Lessons from
Myanmar : Zimbabwe needs its own Buddhist monks to lead the
anti-Mugabe rebellion
Zimbabwe’s dictator, Robert
Mugabe’s speech at the United Nations was overshadowed by
demonstrations in Myanmar, formerly Burma, where thousands of people
demonstrated against the military regime.
With the exception of sycophants,
no one in his or her right mind would have seen Mugabe’s speech as
anything other than a desperate diatribe from a geriatric who has
far outlived his relevance to Zimbabwe.
If anything, Mugabe’s speech, in
which he relished with monotonous regularity on his infantile
pastime of attacking the United States and Britain for everything
that has gone wrong in Zimbabwe, must be seen as the last kicks of a
dying horse. With the situation in Zimbabwe being what it is, this
could have been the last time Mugabe appeared at the United Nations.
Mugabe’s speech at
the UN was far less significant to the Zimbabwean struggle than the
lessons that could be learned from the demonstrations in Myanmar
where 10,000 Buddhist monks staged a spectacular demonstration
against the repressive military regime.
Anyone who watched
the demonstrations must have been impressed by their organization.
The Buddhist monks came in their characteristic long maroon robes
and some barefooted as they marched in the center of the capital
city of Rangoon.
Their resilience,
stubborn determination and seriousness of purpose won the Buddhist
monks popular admiration and respect. By the end of the day over
100,000 people had joined the Buddhist monks.
It was estimated
that for every Buddhist monk there were nine to ten protesters, many
of whom formed a protective ring around or along the marching monks.
What lessons can be
learned for the Zimbabwean struggle?
The Buddhist monks
are regarded as the strongest political force in the opposition
movement in the country. They are well organized. They have a
history of demonstrations. Their Buddhist religion has taught them
strict rules of self discipline and selflessness. They have no
selfish ambitions because they are guided by the spiritual idealism
of a virtuous life. They live a frugal lifestyle. And they have
endeared themselves to their populations.
Looking at the
situation in Zimbabwe the leadership in the opposition movement may
occasionally demonstrate virtuous leadership qualities. One example
was when MDC president Morgan Tsvangirai walked to his office in
solidarity with the struggling workers, or when he and his
colleagues sustained savage assaults from Mugabe’s barbaric police
and thugs.
But such leadership
qualities are sometimes undermined by bickering and other
unnecessary quarrels that amounted to washing one’s dirty laundry in
public.
The opposition
leadership in Zimbabwe need not be Buddhist monks, but they
certainly can and should exhibit leadership qualities that reflect a
serious, organized and resolute cadre of leaders.
There is a
strategic balance between good and skillful leaders, on one hand,
and an equally committed followership, on the other hand.
The leadership
skills demonstrated by the Buddhist monks were well compensated by
members of the public who, without any prompting at all, joined in
the march and swelled their ranks to an estimated 100,000 freedom
fighters.
In the case of the
Zimbabwean public no such dedication has been exhibited, even after
numerous calls for mass action.
The latest spate of
demonstrations in Myanmar was triggered by just one event - the
doubling of the price of oil by the military dictatorship.
In Zimbabwe Mugabe
has committed literally hundreds outrageous and provocative acts,
each of them enough to trigger a spontaneous uprising. Yet
Zimbabweans have remained docile.
They have on many
occasions just watched like sheep while their colleagues were being
assaulted by the police. They became stupefied spectators when their
badly injured leaders were brought in and out of prison to the
courts and paraded like common criminals. Many pictures that show a
few demonstrators being assaulted by Mugabe’s police also show a
very disturbing spectacle of crowds just standing and watching. No
one lifted a finger to protest.
Some apologists for
the inaction by Zimbabweans have argued that the people are too
hungry, too oppressed and too poor to ever stage a meaningful
popular demonstration.
But Myanmar is one
of the poorest countries on earth. It is ruled by the military. Yet
it was those impoverished and unemployed people who took courage and
inspiration from the demonstrating Buddhist monks and became be part
of the historic struggle.
Faced with this
crisis of followership the opposition leadership can sometimes be
forgiven for feeling demoralized and frustrated.
A strong leadership
in the opposition movement needs dedicated followers. Without a
committed mass public who can be relied upon to demonstrate when
called upon to do so it will be difficult for the leadership to
extract meaningful concessions from Mugabe.
Mugabe only
understands the language power, influence and force. He will never
regard himself as an equal to the MDC in any negotiating process
because MDC has nothing to show by way of strength.
If Mugabe were
convinced that MDC can mobilize thousands of Zimbabwe in a sustained
protest Mugabe would be more willing and ready to give meaningful
concessions. Mugabe has been told that MDC has the capability to
mobilize but he has not seen any signs of that strength on the part
of the MDC.
The Myanmar
experience cannot, of course, be superimposed on Zimbabwe.
But there are some
very valuable lessons civil society and the opposition movement in
Zimbabwe can learn from Myanmar.
First, the
opposition movement needs a strong dedicated leadership made up of
individuals who are highly motivated to carry on the struggle
through thick and thin.
Demonstrations will
not always bring down a regime. Sometimes they will be effectively
suppressed. But a dedicated leadership will remember, and be
inspired by, the words of Amilcar Cabral, former liberation hero of
the Guinea Bissau: Do not expect easy victories. Prepare for a
long drawn struggle.
The opposition
movement also needs a leadership who will not engage in meaningless
bickering or humiliating each other in public. Public interest
demands that the leadership show tolerance as well as help each
other with ideas and logistics. Although the opposition movement is
made up of a number of parties the leadership should not allow this
division to undermine the movement. They should, instead, transform
into a multiparty democratic movement whose members respect each
other and share a common vision to get rid of not only Mugabe but
ZANUPF from the vicious stranglehold they have on Zimbabwe.
While some people
in the opposition movement may not agree with the action taken by
the MDC to support the passage of the constitutional amendment No.
18 they should avoid gratuitous insults and needless attacks on each
other. At this point no one in the opposition has a monopoly of, or
claims to have, a strategy that is guaranteed to yield the desired
results.
What will
ultimately bring Mugabe down is a combination of forces, factors and
strategies. This means each party in the opposition movement has a
role in the struggle to end Mugabe’s reign of terror.
The next step will
be to give the Zimbabweans their sovereign right to choose through
free and fair elections the individual and party that will rule the
post-Mugabe Zimbabwe.
Based on lessons
learned from Myanmar Zimbabwe needs its own Buddhist monks. Not in
the literal sense but in character. These will be a group of
dedicated people who have the vision, the determination and the
courage to blaze a new revolutionary path towards a real
confrontation with Mugabe. This group of Buddhist monks could be
civil servants, youths, women, men, school teachers, or any other
social formations.
In what appears to
be an endless struggle against Mugabe and ZANUPF it is very
tempting for people to lose hope and give up.
What is needed are
dedicated Zimbabweans who will keep the flame of the anti-Mugabe
revolution burning.