Back to Index

It has to be the Zimbabwe we, not Mugabe, want
Arthur Mutambara
December 03, 2006

http://www.thestandard.co.zw/viewinfo.cfm?linkid=21&id=5390&siteid=1

ON 28 November 2006 the MDC leadership met with the Church leaders who are behind The Zimbabwe We Want initiative. This was the first time that our party was engaged in this project. There had been misrepresentations in the Press that the Church bishops had met some of our leaders before the launch of the document. This was completely false.

Zimbabwe is going through an economic and political crisis of unprecedented proportions. Any initiative that seeks to foster and develop solutions to this crisis must be supported. Whenever any group of Zimbabweans gets together in pursuit of such initiatives, it must be hailed and encouraged. The state of our country and the pain of our people demand nothing less. Consequently, in spite of its initial exclusion from this particular Church initiative, the MDC is solidly supportive and wishes to be actively involved.

In pursuing a national initiative such as the National Vision for Zimbabwe it is essential to ensure ownership and buy-in by the generality of the people of Zimbabwe. The people must own both the process and content of the national vision. Furthermore, the process of an initiative cannot be de-linked from its content. A dysfunctional process will lead to distorted and contested content.

It is our submission that the Church leaders’ process in crafting a National Vision for Zimbabwe has been fundamentally flawed. It has been characterised by dishonesty, manipulation, and lack of inclusiveness. A few examples will suffice to illustrate these aspects. Critical stakeholders in the form of civic organisations, political parties, and church organisations (e.g., NCA, Crisis Coalition, MDC, ZCTU, ZINASU, Christian Alliance, and National Pastors’ Conference) were not engaged nor consulted prior to the launch. To compound matters, there were falsehoods in the media, which were never retracted, about some of these groups being consulted. The lack of involvement of key players led to the spectacular failure of the document launch, where it ended being a Zanu PF orgy in self indulgence.

In addition, some of those organisations engaged were shown versions of the document that were different from what was eventually launched. This has led to complaints about duplicity and manipulation from the Catholic Jesuits and Archbishop Pius Ncube. The perception is that people and organisations were being used to legitimise a dubious agenda.

The most problematic process aspect of the Church initiative has been the way they have engaged Robert Mugabe and Zanu PF. From the tea sessions at State House to the launch of the document by Mugabe, the Church leaders have allowed the criminal dictatorship of Mugabe to destroy the potential of the initiative.

Mugabe’s ill-advised comments about non-negotiable issues, defence of the Lancaster House Constitution, and general disdain for other stakeholders, have compromised the effectiveness of the initiative. In a very cynical way, Mugabe embraced the project in order to destroy its credibility, and then unleashed his chief apologists and propagandists to viciously attack the initiative in the State media. What a shameful ploy!

The Church leaders are well-intentioned and their motivation is honourable. However, they have been extremely naïve. With the continuously deteriorating economic malaise and global isolation, Mugabe wants to buy time. He could use the initiative to do just that by appearing to be doing something. The suffering people of Zimbabwe will reject any process that will provide a lifeline to Mugabe’s evil regime. They will not be part of any efforts to sanitize the dictator.

The general gist of the document is in sync with the views of most Zimbabweans, that is, the material is common cause. However, there are areas characterised by omissions and distortions. Some of the distortions are due to the dysfunctional process through which the initiative has gone. The ugly hand of Zanu PF is evident. As already submitted, you cannot separate content from process.

For a start, the vision statement sounds like apple pie and motherhood. There is no economic vision, neither is there a social justice aspect to it. There is no clarity on the economic strategy that will take Zimbabwe from the economic crisis to the Promised Land. The recommendations on the economy are weak, poorly structured and lack congruency. Similarly, the section on land requires more input around collateral value of land, security of tenure, agricultural productivity, secondary agriculture, justice and equity.

A major distortion in the document is around the nature and cause of the Zimbabwean crisis. At the root of our national problems are issues of bad governance, political legitimacy, economic mismanagement, corruption, and political dictatorship, all due to the absolute failure of Mugabe and Zanu PF. This must be stated without equivocation or ambiguity. The vision document at best equivocates, at worst it is apologetic. Misdiagnosis of a problem will lead to wrong solutions.

It is also astounding that the language of the document is very subdued and apologetic when describing national institutional ills such as POSA and AIPPA. In some cases the diction resembles that of Zanu PF in the way issues like patriotism and sanctions are discussed. Presumably these language overtures are meant to placate the dictator. It must be emphasised that this is done at a huge cost: De-legitimisation of the content leading to its total rejection by the people of Zimbabwe.

Another area of contention in the document is on the subject of Gukurahundi, which is treated shamelessly as a footnote. There is a celebration of the first 15 years of independence as blissful and full of hope. Yet, it is during this period that the regime of Mugabe massacred over 20 000 civilians in Matabeleland and the Midlands. The nation must come to terms with this reality. There must be a Truth and Justice Commission, followed by an acknowledgement of what transpired.

Only then can national healing begin. We must seek restorative justice, victim-based justice, and rehabilitation of the communities affected. Today there are young people who cannot get birth certificates and identification cards because both parents were killed during Gukurahundi; and it is not officially acknowledged that the parents are dead. These are people being victimised today. Hence no! Gukurahundi cannot be a footnote in a National Vision for Zimbabwe.

A general point about the document is that it lacks time-frames, and prioritisation of the different initiatives and recommendations. There must be clarity on what matters are short-term, medium-term and long-term.

The document extensively uses Christian Biblical chapters and verses. This is inappropriate in a national vision document. Even if our country is 90% Christian we still have Moslems, Hindus, and Jews as part of our nation. There are also Zimbabweans who believe in traditional religions. We need religious tolerance in our national vision.

As indicated earlier, our detailed written response on the content is forthcoming.

In conclusion it is clear that the Church leaders have process and content challenges in their great initiative. It is important that they embrace the critique we have provided above and address relevant matters.

The National Vision must be owned by all Zimbabweans.

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