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
October 8, 2007
MDC must be wary of Mugabe’s Trojan Horse in the so-called talks
The talks between representatives of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) and the Robert Mugabe regime have generated a resurgence of a sustained international interest in, and debate on, the situation in Zimbabwe.
And the initial agreements, some of them leaked, have so far been met with mixed responses from a public that is rightly skeptical and suspicious about Mugabe’s game plan.
Mugabe has historically refused to hold talks with the MDC. He has in the past publicly stated that he will only meet with the British because , according to Mugabe’s incomprehensible logic, MDC is controlled by the British. Mugabe has also in the past publicly said that the only place for talks was in the parliament where MDC and ZANUPF MPs debate national issues. Mugabe has also traditionally argued that the Zimbabwean problem was what he called the refusal by the British government to meet its obligations to fund the land reform program.
Now Mugabe seems to have swallowed his pride and is now fully engaged in talks with the MDC. Leaked reports appear to indicate that MDC is making headway in gaining concessions from ZANUPF. South African President Thabo Mbeki said last week that the talks were going on very well and that he expected full agreement in October. However, Justice Minister Patrick Chinamasa told parliament that there would be no revamping of the voter registration roll. ZANUPF’s will make cosmetic changes to the existing voters roll by moving some of the voters to the new constituencies in the enlarged parliament.
Control and manipulation of the voters roll is ZANUPF’s trump card in rigging elections. Everybody, even ZANUPF, is aware that the voters roll is in utter shambles. An analysis of a sample of the voters roll by the MDC two years ago revealed that 64 percent of the registered voters in Harare North were not known at their registered addresses.
The MDC audit of the voters roll came only after the party had appealed to the High Court because of the stumbling blocks in accessing the voters roll that had been placed by ZANUPF. The audit of a sample voters roll led the MDC to project that as many as one million deceased voters were still on the voters roll including over 300,000 duplicate voters and over one million voters who were not living at their registered addresses.
The MDC audit challenged the claim by ZANUPF that there were 5.7 million registered voters for the 2005 elections when , according to 2002 census, the real figure was most likely to be 3.2 million, especially in the aftermath of millions of Zimbabweans who had left the country and the number who died of HIV/AIDS , estimated at over three thousand every week.
Mugabe has used a wide range of strategies to strengthen his rigging machinery. For example, in the presidential elections it was estimated 40 percent of the polling centers did not have any MDC representation during the counting of the ballots. All election results were phoned in from these centers to an election directorate in Harare and made up of army officers before the same results could be released to the public.
There is abundant evidence that in some cases the figures that were released to the public by the election directorate were very different from the figures which were phoned in. Some small rural constituencies with a handful of voters were sometimes reported to have had a turnout that vastly exceeded the constituencies’ populations.
There is no doubt that for the next elections this process of rigging elections will be meticulously followed, having been refined during the subsequent elections.
Any attempt to radically change this process will be resisted by the Mugabe regime because it is Mugabe’s lifeline to wining the elections.
Not surprisingly, ZANUPF has rejected a proposal for a very simple procedure for voting that would allow Zimbabweans to vote on production of a valid ID. This procedure was adopted and used in the 1980 elections because ZAPU and ZANU did not trust the voters roll that had been designed by Ian Smith. It is obvious why Mugabe and ZANUPF would not want to change the voters’ roll. The current voters roll is their assurance to a successful rigging of votes. There is every reason to believe that Mugabe is giving minimal concessions at the talks just to create the impression that ZANUPF is now willing to engage MDC seriously .
However, some people may think the concessions given by ZANUPF are significant. For example, under constitutional amendment number 18 all the seats in the lower house of parliament will be contested, unlike before when the president had the power to choose up to 30 members. This may sound like a significant concession. But the devil is in the details. ZANUPF has another card up its sleeve to mitigate the adverse impact on rigging that such concessions may have.
It is also reported that ZANUPF has adamantly refused to allow Zimbabweans outside the country to vote. Initially, Chinamasa said in the past elections that government had no money to conduct polls outside the country. But then the international community stepped in with offers of money and resources to help.
Now the new reason is apparently that ZANUPF leaders are under travel restrictions and that it would be difficult for them to go abroad to campaign. This is yet another very hollow and nonsensical argument. The vast majority of the Zimbabwean exiles are in South Africa where there is no travel ban on top ZANUPF officials. Furthermore, the international community does not need to be convinced that if there is an irreversible progress towards free and fair elections in Zimbabwe help will be forthcoming. Travel restrictions on ZANUPF top leadership will undoubtedly be lifted at that point.
It was reported that ZANUPF is now demanding that MDC seeks the lifting of the so -called sanctions against Zimbabwe. ZANUPF may well insist on the removal of sanctions before ZANUPF can give more concessions. There are two fallacies here, namely, that there are sanctions against Zimbabwe and that MDC can campaign for their removal. MDC has made it clear that if there are any sanctions these are policies and decisions of sovereign governments over which MDC has absolutely no power. The facts on the ground speak for themselves. There are no sanctions against Zimbabwe. There are, however, targeted travel restrictions against the regime’s top leadership.
Many of Mugabe supporters have quoted the Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act of 2001 as evidence that there are sanctions against Zimbabwe.
The United States has, through the Zimbabwe Development and Economic Recovery Act, or ZIDERA, set aside as much as $26 million to assist in the efforts towards free and fair elections as well as help the post- Mugabe Zimbabwe to rebuild her tattered economy.
Incidentally, the same ZIDERA has been erroneously quoted by the pro-Mugabe lobby as a sanctions document against Zimbabwe. Nothing could be further from the truth. ZIDERA was passed after many international institutions had already withdrawn support for Zimbabwe.
One of the preambles in the ZIDERA states that
Through economic mismanagement, undemocratic practices, and the costly deployment of troops to the Democratic
Republic of the Congo, the Government of Zimbabwe has rendered itself ineligible to participate in International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and International Monetary Fund programs, which would otherwise be providing substantial resources to assist in the recovery and modernization of Zimbabwe’s economy. The people of Zimbabwe have thus been denied the economic and democratic benefits envisioned by the donors to such programs, including the United States.
The Act makes it clear that Mugabe regime has created conditions that would make it difficult for the country to receive international loans and assistance. If, as Mugabe likes to say, sanctions have been imposed on Zimbabwe then it must be Mugabe himself who caused those sanctions.
One point that the pro-Mugabe lobby has missed or chosen to ignore is that ZIDERA became law on December 21, 2001. Before this date Zimbabwe had lost credibility with a number of financial institutions as detailed in another preamble to the ZIDERA.
In September 1999 the IMF suspended its support under a ‘‘Stand By Arrangement’’, approved the previous month,
for economic adjustment and reform in Zimbabwe.
In October 1999, the International Development Association suspended all structural adjustment loans, credits, and guarantees to the Government of Zimbabwe.
In May 2000, the International Development Association suspended all other new lending to the Government of Zimbabwe.
In September 2000, the International Development Association suspended disbursement of funds for ongoing projects under previously-approved loans, credits, and guarantees to the Government of Zimbabwe.
From the above findings it is clear that ZIDERA did not initiate the denial of credit and economic sanctions if any, to Zimbabwe, although many apologists for the Mugabe regime think so.
Coming back to the talks, the real questions that should be asked are: Is Mugabe serious about the talks with the MDC, or has he a game plan aimed at buying him time while he looks for a successor ? What is driving Mugabe into these talks and into making these concessions?
It is not clear at this point that Mugabe is serious about resolving the problems that he has created in Zimbabwe. While MDC accepted the constitutional amendment number 18 as part of its confidence -building measure, Mugabe has done nothing in return by way of a confidence -building measure. Right now the repression and violation of human rights in Zimbabwe by ZANUPF continues unabated. It is almost as if there are no talks going on at all.
MDC must be strongly advised not to concede any more confidence- building measures until and unless ZANUPF reciprocates. MDC must be very careful not to be duped by what may turn out to be Mugabe’s Trojan horse. There is a possibility that Mugabe, unable to formally swallow MDC the way he did with ZAPU in 1987, may be looking for subtle ways to swallow the MDC with the opposition movement’s blessings.
The proof of Mugabe’s intentions and agenda will come when ZANUPF is faced with the demand to allow, for example, for the cessation of violence and an ID-based system of voting to replace a voters roll that is in absolute shambles; as well as allowing Zimbabweans outside the country to exercise their constitutional right to vote.
These are only a few of the measures that Mugabe will have to concede to prove that he is indeed trying to turn a new leaf and is very serious about bringing meaningful change in Zimbabwe.
For its part the MDC must draw a line in the sand beyond which it will not cross by way of concessions, or confidence- building measures, to ZANUPF.
The MDC must not hesitate to opt out of the talks and to boycott the elections if it turns out that Mugabe was taking everyone for a ride and is not serious about conceding fundamental issues in the construction of a process that will lead to free and fair elections.