Back to Index

This article participates on the following special index pages:

Whither Zimbabwe: Social crisis and resistance?
Peter Jacobs, International Socialist Group
March 01, 2008

http://www.isg-fi.org.uk/spip.php?article624

The ongoing political and socio-economic crisis in Zimbabwe is considerably worsening as the country prepares for its 2008 parliamentary and presidential elections. Rival political parties, ZANU-PF and the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), competing for control over the political space, are internally divided by fractional strife based on petit bourgeois opportunism. Tensions within and between the dominant political forces, mobilized around parties and social movements, regularly erupt in violent clashes between the army and protesters. Other countries in the region have felt the impact of this crisis as manifested in the priority they have given to the Zimbabwe situation at summits of the regional trade bloc, the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC). This fourteen-country body, promoting an enhanced neo-liberal integration of economies in the region, has appointed South Africa-s President Thabo Mbeki as the chief mediator to resolve the standoff between ZANU-PF and the MDC. Blocking the crisis from spilling into neighbouring countries is crucial if they are to gain better 'good governance- ratings from imperialist investors. However, imperialism is infuriated by their hands-off approach to 'Zimbabwe-s elder statesman-. Imperialism wants them to practice the 'doctrine of regime change by an external force-, but also to turn a blind eye to the disaster this doctrine has brought to Iraq and Afghanistan. To date, however, Mbeki has not succumbed to imperialist pressures but has instead practiced so-called 'quiet diplomacy-. Yet even Mbeki-s 'neutral power broker role- is facing resistance from the fractured political parties and he has been unable to get these protagonists to agree to a set of constitutional and other political reforms.

Winning independence in 1979-80 was a milestone in the history of Zimbabwe. In the view of prominent intellectuals like Ibbo Mandaza, national independence cleared the way for, 'an onward movement towards socialist construction-. To make this seamless transition between a victorious national liberation struggle and socialism, it was vital to mobilize, organize and sharpen the political consciousness of the working class and peasants. These labouring classes have nothing to lose and everything to gain through joining a national revolution and steering it uninterruptedly towards socialism. More than two decades later some assert that the country-s 'revolution- is still incomplete but continuing under the old leadership. In a recent article leftist intellectuals Sam Moyo and Paris Yeros argued that from 1997 until today, the period in which Zimbabwe ostensibly suspended its economic structural adjusted programme (ESAP), the country has been in a revolutionary situation headed by a radicalized state. While the state may have 'petty bourgeois shortcomings-, its commitment to radical nationalism and agrarian reforms, its rejection of neo-liberal economics and 'Look East policy- bear testimony to its progressive credentials.

In the view of other left commentators, like Raftopoulous and Phimister, this complex and fluid situation flows from the country-s more recent history. They contend: 'By the end of the 1990s, the problems of economic neo-liberalism as well as the serious democratic deficit of Zanu PF, created conditions for a general crisis of legitimacy, and to the jettisoning of the structural adjustment programme.- For them ZANU-PF is an authoritarian force bent on destroying, 'democracy and human rights- to cling on to power. Indeed, the stakes are high for the ruling party because it has been unable to quell civil dissent and grassroots demonstrations through the use of nationalist slogans dating back to the glory days of the liberation struggle. Economic instability, exacerbated through its past and present pro-capitalist trajectory, is inflicting egregious suffering on the peasantry, working class and middle class.

So is there a pre-revolutionary crisis lead by a 'radicalized state- searching for a simultaneous solution to the national and agrarian questions? Or is the situation the consequence of a degenerating nationalist elite led by President Robert Mugabe and the ZANU-PF governing clique?

Fighting for National Liberation
Zimbabwe went through a militant and protracted struggle to free itself from colonial and white minority rule. Blacks have been resisting British invasion, occupation and settlement of Zimbabwe from the late 19th century onwards. Who took up the struggle against colonialism and white minority rule, what forms this resistance assumed and, more importantly, the strategic goals of this movement were inseparable from the restructuring of Zimbabwe-s political economy. In the earlier period, given the agrarian nature of the country, resistance was based primarily in rural areas. It was natural for the peasantry to defend itself against large-scale land expropriation. Despite the militancy and heroism of theses struggles, a beacon of inspiration to Zimbabwe-s future freedom fighters, this resistance movement could not match the superior weaponry of the colonial settlers. These rural rebellions, by and large based on tribalism and superstition, were drowned in blood.

As the mineral revolution was fastening its tentacles around the economies of the subcontinent, industry developed apace, giving birth to a black proletariat and a petty bourgeoisie. But this was a small proletariat, retaining strong ties with the peasantry as they circulated between the mines, urban and rural locations. Around the late 1970s and early 1980s, for example, industrial employment stood at approximately 4% of the labour force compared to 6% in mining, which was still a marginal sector despite heavy investment by the UDI regime to diversify the country-s economic base.

In the early 1960s, the emergence of ZAPU and ZANU shifted the approach in the fight for freedom in Zimbabwe. Before that time, the black middle-class, craving the political liberties of their white counterparts, either joined white liberal parties (like the United Federal Party) or formed their own nationalist organizations. But they invariably looked and appealed to Britain to put pressure on the governing party to institutionalize political reforms. Pre- and post-1960s nationalist formations united the peasants and workers under the leadership of the black middle class. ZAPU and ZANU, both products of ongoing splits within the national liberation movement, nevertheless boldly articulated a programme for national independence. While both had embraced radical anti-imperialist slogans and guerilla war, Mandaza lamented the fact that, 'armed struggle was just to place pressure on Britain to bring about a conference that could lead to an African government in Zimbabwe-, a 'normal rather than exceptional road- to independence across Africa.

A number of other weaknesses within the national liberation movement placed limits on the 'kind of freedom- eventually achieved in 1979-1980 and subsequent developments. Firstly, the nationalist movement lacked a genuine and consistent orientation towards revolutionary socialism. Before the country would embrace the structural adjustment programme of the Bretton Woods institutions in 1989, President Mugabe would frequently decorate his speeches with socialist slogans. But even this lip-service to socialism seems to have been predicated on whether support would be forthcoming from Moscow or Beijing, the camps associated with 'really existing socialism-.

Secondly, divisions, internecine strife and splits plagued and crippled the movement before and after 1979-80. Balancing divergent class interests under the leadership of the petty bourgeoisie proved to be impossible. And the forced unification (when ZANU and ZAPU eventually became ZANU-Patriotic Front) in 1987 did not overcome the movement-s inherited contradictions and fragmentation. Factions of ZANU-PF would periodically break away, setting up rival 'electoral formations-. Support for the governing party also dwindled in the urban areas. This party-s defeat in the 2000 referendum on Constitutional reform strikingly exposed its lack of popularity. It marked a formidable mass-based political challenge to ZANU-PF.

Devastation under Lancaster House
Although the guerilla war in Zimbabwe had intensified around the mid-1970s, its overarching goal was to get British imperialism to arrange a negotiated settlement between the nationalist movement and the repressive Smith regime. At that time, Britain and America judged and responded to the radicalization in Zimbabwean on the basis of dramatic changes elsewhere in the third world. Following the victory of the liberation movements in Angola, Mozambique and Vietnam, British and American imperialism stepped up their efforts to stage such a settlement. Another compelling reason for them to act was the remarkable resistance of the oppressed and exploited masses in South Africa. Together, the 1973 Durban strikes and 1976 Soweto student revolt were the beginnings of another cycle of resistance that would bring to an end apartheid rule in 1994.

Zimbabwe did not gain its liberation by toppling the racist and repressive state through a relentless war and armed insurrection. Instead, national independence was the product of a negotiated settlement. Throughout the 1970s, Britain and America hosted several conferences to strike a compromise between the 'minority settler regime and the representatives of the nationalist movements-. The Lancaster House conference in September 1979 would produce a 'new- Constitution and transitional proposals broadly in line with imperialist designs. This formed the basis for the March 1980 elections. With private property firmly entrenched, and agrarian reform subjected to the 'willing seller and willing buyer- principle, the land question was left unresolved. With Britain effectively reneging on its responsibility to financially support socio-economic development, the state had to turn to creditors to assist with the delivery of healthcare education, social welfare and land to the population.

When the Lancaster House Agreement came to an end in 1987, the cash-strapped and indebted state adopted a bailout agreement with the IMF and World Bank. In exchange for more loans from these institutions, the government adopted the Economic Structural Adjustment Programme (ESAP), putting in place a series of neo-liberal counter-reforms in 1989-1991. Developmental social policies of the 1980s were reversed. In addition to the social service cutbacks, real wages collapsed while job losses expanded. With socialist rhetoric now abandoned, ESAP also served to justify the private wealth accumulation among the black elite, especially those with ties to the ruling party according to Raftopoulos and Phimister.

Radical or petit bourgeois nationalist state
The radical nature of the Zimbabwe state today, according to Moyo and Yeros, stems from its radical nationalism (anti-colonial populism) and interventionist policies. State intervention on multiple fronts - the most progressive being the agrarian reforms, price controls and the 'Look East- policy- are cited as critical departures from the dominant neo-liberal orthodoxy. Yet the critical test is if and how much the poor and labouring classes are benefiting from current state policies. If each so-called radical intervention is evaluated against this fundamental question, the petit bourgeois nationalist and internal contradictions of the state are clearly evident.

Historically, the agrarian question formed a central axis in the programme of the national liberation movement. This was so because almost all the most fertile land was concentrated in the hands of about 6,000 white farmers while over a million black peasants were forced to subsist on 45% of marginal farmland. More broadly, the country remained an underdeveloped and peripheral capitalist country, in which at least 60% of population remained locked in rural areas alongside a tiny and weak industrial base. To satisfy its land hunger, the landless peasantry joined the liberation movement and the guerilla army. Today they form a mass base for the liberation war veteran-s association (ZNLWVA).

But during 1980-1997 agrarian reform had to be pursued within the limits imposed by the Lancaster House compromise and the structural adjustment programme. Resources were woefully inadequate to tackle fundamental agrarian inequalities through land and agricultural markets. By 1997, the state had achieved less than half of its resettlement target set in 1980- resettling 71,000 rather than 167,000 peasant families. And most of this had taken place during the first 5 years after independence, yet poorer peasants rarely gained access to productive farmland that largely remained in the hands of large-scale agricultural capitalists.

Under the pressure of large-scale land occupations, the state launched its fast track land reform campaign in 1997. It identified 1,417 large commercial farms for expropriation and redistribution to smaller farmers. According to Moyo and Yeros, the state-led expropriated process involved 80% of the targeted farms, whereas on the rest of these farms more or less uncoordinated occupations continued.

In May-July 2005 the ZANU-PF government launched its ill-conceived and brutal 'Operation Restore Order/ Murambatsvina- across all urban informal areas. This militarist eviction of 'irregular urban settlements- caused large scale homelessness and forced displacement to rural areas that eventually triggered a United Nations investigation. In Harare alone, Murambatsvina rendered at least 35,000 families homeless and two years after destroying these fragile urban livelihoods, at least 10% of families are still encamped on a farm outside Harare. On the one hand this campaign forms part of longstanding state coercion to assert control over urban municipalities, which have been strongholds of opposition politics (including the MDC). Moreover, and at a more profound level, this 'so-called urban disorder and informal settlements- flows dynamically from the unresolved agrarian question. For rural misery, rooted in ongoing land hunger, is forcing more families to migrate to depressed urban locations in the hope of building a decent life in the cities. The proliferation of urban slums is a consequence of subjugating rural and urban land allocations to capitalist economic logic.

The cost of living in the country keeps escalating at a breathtaking pace and it is predicted that by year-end the annual inflation rate will be in the order of 15,000%! Wages have not kept pace with this skyrocketing cost of living. As hyperinflation devours the purchasing power of the labouring classes, growing numbers of people have been pushed to eke out a living far below the conservative poverty line. The Zimbabwean dollar is constantly sliding in value, with 'black market traders- profiteering big time from dealing in goods and currencies. Some regions of the country, especially tourist hotspots, have become 'dollarised- zones. In rural areas, where peasants rely on remittances from relatives working in neighbouring countries, the South African Rand (ZAR) has become a preferred currency.

The state has been using typical social democratic measures - price controls and printing higher denominated paper money and rationing - hoping that these will stabilize prices and drag the economy out of depression. But these knee-jerk responses have not stopped the socio-economic meltdown and the devastation this has brought to bear. Retailers in the same locality still charge hugely different prices for the same commodities whilst landlords profit from unscrupulously hiking rental rates. Selective subsidies of essential items, such as maize, seem to have helped very little in a context where 80% of the labour force is jobless.

Many factors, ranging from anti-patriotic foreign companies and natural disasters (drought, etc), are blamed for the hyperinflation and economic slump. But in the final analysis, it remains the private accumulation of wealth that is driving this crisis. Speculative capital inflows and the consumerism of the elite are key drivers of hyperinflation. The leading South African business daily recently reported that, 'Zimbabwe is in its ninth year of recession but in the past 18 months its stock exchange has made some heady returns. The industrial index has gained more than 5500% this year.- In the meanwhile a South African agricultural corporation, Tongaat-Hullet, is vigorously buying shares in large sugar estates in Zimbabwe. These capital inflows for hit-and-run profits exert upward pressures on prices by artificially expanding the money circulating in the economy. Imported inflation, derived from the luxurious consumption of the elite, is also fanning hyperinflation because it is paid for by printing money and a growing public sector indebtedness. The state has just spent several million American dollars to buy a new fleet of vehicles for the ministers, who, in turn, bought their 'old vehicles- for a tiny fraction of their market value.

The state has now drafted and parliament is debating the National Indigenisation and Economic Empowerment Bill as part of, 'completing the national democratic revolution-. This bill, coupled with the amendments to the Mines and Minerals Act and price freeze campaign, aims to transfer 51% of economic assets to 'indigenous- ownership. [20] The state will buy minority shares in mines currently under the full control of foreign corporations. But in the context of the state-s overarching commitment to, 'nurturing black business people-, and powerful lobbies such as the Indigenous Business Development Center, the Affirmative Action Group and Zimbabwe Indigenous Empowerment Organization, these minority shares could end up in the hands of black economic empowerment candidates. But this indigenous bourgeoisie, a key base of the governing party, can only enrich itself according to the laws of exploitation and profit - wholesale theft. In reality, this class will be compelled to cast aside all patriotic pretention and behave like other capitalists.

It is common to trace the current wave of social struggles back to the latter part of the 1990s. For it was in that era that a variety of movements for political and socio-economic reforms arose. The socio-economic devastation and widespread misery inflicted by ESAP had by 1995 given rise to angry and bitter protests. This wave of strikes and mass demonstrations culminated in a general strike of December 1997 and a mass stay away in March 1998. A broad coalition, called the National Constitutional Assembly (NCA), was instrumental in uniting these mobilizations that included the ZCTU. What started out as typical anti-neo-liberal protests became transformed into a political movement with its central demand for meaningful and genuine Constitutional reform. It is in this milieu that the MDC was born in September 1999. Although the ZCTU spearheaded the formation of the MDC, this movement has attracted an array of anti-ruling party elements, most notably supporters of the Ian Smith regime backed by imperialism.

*Peter Jacobs is a member of the African Peoples Democratic Union.

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