Back to Index

Zimbabwe: The role of neighbors, Mozambique and Angola, as opposed to that of the SADC and AU Leadership.
Andrew M Manyevere
January 31, 2008

Looking at events at home compels for more analysis to provoke world opinion to prevail on AU do and take action that resonate with the tenets of democracy and human rights respect. Too much smoke screen is being done and shown by some leaders of Africa which begin showing why the AU cannot make sound economic decision when called upon to do so. My short paper challenges for deeper thinking on the role of Mozambique and Angola on politics of development in African. Might it be that some of our leaders have vested interests of their 'masters', and do they deserve being leaders anyway? This question keeps coming at every stage when Africans make efforts which are undermined from within.

As Africa goes towards a meeting this week we need show our disgust and disapproval despite what might be done. My paper is one such attempt if you will give it support as an idea than a person writing.

Obviously President Mbeki of South Africa has shown he has a human heart and feels for ordinary Zimbabweans in a quest to have Robert Mugabe and Morgan Tsvangirai meet face to face outside Zimbabwe. After he lost party presidential elections to Zuma and his quiet acceptance of defeat, Thabo Mbeki has emerged a mature democrat after all, much to the surprise of many Zimbabweans.

The preponderance to this shift needs understanding of its cause and effects. Mainly the home issues political wise have made Thabo Mbeki realize his stance on both quiet diplomacy and no push on Mugabe, as vote losing areas despite that his time was none renewable for another term of presidents. But the learning curve in Mbeki and his desire to create a plain political field shall be remembered as a worthwhile political effort in resolving Zimbabwe political impasse.

As a mater of fact the African Union shall never remain the same again now that division on militarallism as opposed to pure democratic methods has surfaced and chalked AU to look at solving Zimbabwe problem. Record shall exonerate Mbeki and have AU held as negligent and careless to attending intra political issues of sister states on the continent.

We must ask why AU is rendered impotent after having transposed from Organization of African Unity (OAU) at the close of the 1900s with the demise of colonial rule on Africa, emerging to a post-colonial era instrument for peace and development, the African Union (AU)? Might it be that leadership is becoming more and weaker on matters of addressing maturity to true values of democracy? Could it also be that the radical states in Africa with limited democratic practice to show and account for dislike on Political developments that have taken place in Zambia, Malawi, South Africa and Tanzania where relative stability is being based on second and third term elections of new presidents into power?

Let-s take a brief look at the two neighboring countries to Zimbabwe which took a veto on an idea of dialogue between Mugabe and Tsvangiarai on a face to face.

Mozambique and Angola both became independent from Portugal in 1975 in the months of 25 June and 11 November respectively. They were free after an intense war of liberation between colonial rulers and the natives. Mozambique changed leadership effectively in December 2004 when President Chissano stepped down for the current incumbent President Amando Guebuza. Otherwise when the first president of Mozambique Samora Machael died from a plane accident the constitutional succession was Joaquem Chissano.

Angola on another hand has had one president from 1975 to this day, Jose Eduardo Dos Santos is still the president. He had indicated that the country would have elections in 2006 without follow up. He again made an indication for elections to be held in 2007 to no avail. Still people hope something may happen in 2008 even though some strong speculation are pointing to 2009 as the possible year of elections for Angola. Real differences between Dos Santos and Mugabe politically is not substantial, no wonder why Angola veto has been recorded to foil Zimbabwe assent to democratic rule.

Looked at in the context of Southern Africa and the revolutionary zeal, Zimbabwe, South Africa, Mozambique and Angola are the states where war was fought prior to attainment of independence. Tanzania and Zambia were the backbone to the thrust of the armed struggle and its success in the countries that successfully waged some liberation military struggle against the ruling settler masters.

The radical dispensation is therefore fairly shared among those who led the moral and financial support to the war allowing their grounds to be used for the war to succeed. They were as well part of the struggle just like the countries that faced attacks from Rhodesia, Portugal and South Africa. Their countries were invaded and their citizens shared the loss of life just like Zimbabweans, Angolans and Mozambique-s then did.

There could therefore be no justified reason of the two pretending to be the most radical if not an arrangement within the SADC political ploy to thwart true democratic process in the region. It is honesty to observe that of all the leadership in the SADC sub region, Mozambique and Angola shares the weakest personalities with no strong position on a case of democracy. Dos Santos does not just believe in change of those who achieved independence from colonial masters. He loathes the idea of worker movement taking means of power and production. This however is a strong indictment against the sincerity of the African so-called socialism and communism when it rejects its pillars as support for proletarians and workers assenting to power.

Amando Guebuza is a quasi socialist who does not hold strong views on anything really than parroting his predecessors. Chissano having been the best man at Mugabe wedding to Grace Marufu in the 1990s has strong sentiments that go beyond worship of Mugabe as a super hero in Zimbabwe politics. It can be understood therefore that these two countries would stage a veto against general stance that would see Africa radically change her passive role to tyrannism and assuming a strong mediatory and intercessory position. Both these two countries are stooges to American influence no doubt and somewhat show the side where their bread is buttered by.

Mbeki leadership might have its weakness but he still is African at heart and has made certain stance which have disturbed the western nations contrary to these two nations, for example, his denying that aids was a disease but an implant by western society. Our good friends do not appear to hold any views beyond demonizing their people for wanting multi political parties to take over power from the ruling parties.

Zimbabwe political answers are a matter that rests with the AU now. With all that the world now knows on Zimbabwe and the intransigence of President Robert Mugabe to shift from power whether a Zanu-pf successor takes over or not; should Africa endorse the veto by two minor countries on the voice of democracy denied to Zimbabweans people? Why did AU ever endorse mediatory initiative if she did not have plan number two? Should we consider that if the initiative fails the AU would bless armed struggle by Zimbabweans to remove a leader who cannot listen to his AU council through the SADC machinery? On another hand can South Africa act unilaterally and impose sanctions if Africa would not support stronger measures to have free and fair elections done in Zimbabwe?

While Zimbabweans can solve their own political problems, all they ask for is a fair comment on the wrongs and the source thereof. Restraint on those who support the government arbitrarily should be cast away and the truth revealed in the interest of establishing permanent features for democracy. The case of China support for Zimbabwe on military hardware is a case of unnecessary and poor reason for offering help. The case of South Africa loaning Zimbabwe money without ask for concessions that lead to problem resolving, plays against the spirit of cooperation but for Mugabe oppressing his fellow men with iron feasted approach. Honesty more than anything else from anyone is what is needed for Zimbabweans to come to a solution.

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