|
Back to Index
This article participates on the following special index pages:
Inclusive government - Index of articles
Q&A
with Morgan Tsvangirai
Alex
Perry, TIME Magazine
July
23, 2009
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1912365,00.html
Morgan Tsvangirai's route
to power has been long and tortuous. Shortly after he broke with
Robert Mugabe's regime as head of the country's trade union movement
in 1997, a group of men thought to be from Zimbabwe's secret service
burst into his 10th-floor offices in Harare and tried to hurl him
through a window. Since then, he has faced three more attempts on
his life, been repeatedly beaten and arrested, and has seen Mugabe
steal two elections from him, in 2002 and 2008. On March 6, less
than a month after he became Prime Minister, his wife of 31 years,
Susan, was killed when a car in which he was also traveling collided
with a truck. He spoke to TIME's Africa bureau chief Alex Perry
at the central Harare offices of his party, the Movement for Democratic
Change.
TIME:
How real is the transition?
Tsvangirai:
This transitional inclusive government can already record some significant
progress, in critical areas like education, health, water and sanitation
and food. Inflation has gone from around 500 million percent to
3%. But there are very serious challenges, and there is accumulated
frustration at the slow implementation of the Global
Political Agreement [the power-sharing deal with Mugabe]. But
the challenges are not insurmountable. Zimbabwe is changing. It's
on an irreversible path of transition. The reforms we have implemented,
democratic and economic, are building the foundations for a prosperous
future, for a democratic future. In five years, this will be a totally
different place. Africa isn't just an opportunity continent. This
is an opportunity country. Its potential is huge. The reconstruction
will be much faster than anticipated.
TIME: You often sound
more optimistic than your people, many of whom question sharing
power with Mugabe.
Tsvangirai: This arises
out of a lack of change of paradigm, among all the people. It is
sometimes very difficult to change mindsets. But our people were
experiencing struggle fatigue because of the economic and social
pressures they were facing. At some point we had to define a roadmap
to resolve our national crisis: a transition, a new constitution.
If we had not gone into government, what would have happened? Collapse?
When we came into government in February, we found $4 million in
the state coffers. What government can survive on that? Anything
but political cohabitation was suicidal. We are moving from being
an opposition movement to positioning ourselves as a party that
is trying to change the power matrix of the country. It's not a
gamble. It's brave, but it's something calculated. This is not a
revolution. This is an evolution, and evolutions are sometimes slow
and frustrating. If we had been looking for a revolution, then we
would have had it, but with all the consequences of that, all the
chaos and conflict. There were people looking for more immediate
change, but that was not going to happen. One of the subtler questions
facing us is: how do you have national healing without retribution?
How do you do that? Each country has its own experience, but we
were trying to craft a soft-landing for this crisis. We do not ignore
the cries of the victims, but at the same time we do not punish
the perpetrators. That's the balance we are trying to manage. And
these are hard choices, you have to navigate through conflicting
positions, but we were not going to be authors of our own chaos.
Zanu-PF [Mugabe's Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front]
has entrenched itself in power for 30 years. To prise off those
tentacles is going to be a hard slog.
TIME: How much of your
success depends on how Zanu can change itself?
Tsvangirai: I don't think
Zanu has ever transformed itself. It was a liberation movement based
on a military-political power structure, and it just moved straight
into government. There was no distinction between the party that
came out of liberation and the party in government, and that has
cost them over the years. They did not move with the times. And
it is the highest of irony that a government that invested so much
in education became a victim of people's increasing sophistication.
Today, there is no cohesion in Zanu. And Mugabe, to all intents
and purposes, is institutionalized in Zanu - and a party that is
not able to exist outside an individual is not a party with much
to talk about. I don't want an MDC that is not able to fight on
if I am not there. Their support has dwindled to 10-20%. They know
we beat them last time. They heavily relied on state institutions
to back them up - the courts, the police, the army, the electoral
mechanisms, all there to serve Zanu. This is the reason why the
transition is important - to create the necessary institutional
reforms so that the next election is credible.
TIME: How is your personal
relationship with Mugabe?
Tsvangirai: It's been
a difficult adjustment. I can't hide from the fact that the animosity
between us is legendary. We have begun to have some personal chemistry.
We are business-like. We are respectful even if we disagree. I am
hopeful that can move to trust, but we have not reached that yet.
Don't get me wrong. You cannot defend Mugabe's past, especially
since 2000, especially the violence, the election rigging, the refusal
to give a voice to the people. That part is totally indefensible.
But the most interesting part, to me, is how he moved from national
hero to national villain. That transformation was quite dramatic.
To me, Mugabe in 1980 was totally different to Mugabe in 2000. That
transformation is something that preoccupies Western countries.
And I can't explain it.
TIME: How is it that
so many people can have so many disparate views, and such extreme
ones, of the same country?
Tsvangirai: Some extremists
have understandable concerns. If I had grown up in privileged society
because of my race, I would probably like to protect that. You feel
nostalgia for the past and forget the reality of the present. And
there's the other extreme: let's burn down the buildings to cross
out the past. That's unacceptable. It's self-destructive. The middle
ground is where the majority is. The majority of people are not
ideological. They want prosperity and to look after their children.
TIME:
How do you try to steer this very vexed transition when, at the
same time, you lose your wife?
Tsvangirai:
And my grandson.
TIME:
I heard. I'm sorry.
Tsvangirai:
It has been a terrible personal loss. It has an effect on your personal
stability. I lived with somebody for 31 years, someone who was a
pillar through all the trials and tribulations. It [the loss] is
not something you can explain. You just live on a daily basis. You
experience daily loss. The fount of grief has been lessened by the
amount of support and grieving by the whole nation. It relieves
you. It is not only your loss. And you throw yourself into your
work hoping that you are able to suppress these emotions. But they
keep returning.
TIME:
When will the transition be complete?
Tsvangirai:
The agreement does not mention when an election will be held. We
left it out deliberately because our elections are characterized
by violence. If you have set a date, you will have a situation of
election mode from day one. A constitutional referendum will be
conducted in the next 18 months, and at the end of that, the President
and the Prime Minister will sit down and set a date for elections.
TIME:
Do you worry about a repeat of last year's violence?
Tsvangirai:
In Zanu, the hardliners are just a dwindling minority. They are
not able to mobilize support. People have seen the light at the
end of the tunnel. No one wants Zimbabwe to slide back to where
it was in November or December last year. You have to give it to
Zimbabweans. Their resolve, their choice of the ballot over the
bullet. Their commitment is amazing.
Please credit www.kubatana.net if you make use of material from this website.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License unless stated otherwise.
TOP
|