|
Back to Index
This article participates on the following special index pages:
2008 harmonised elections - Index of articles
Looking
beyond the horizon
Chris Maroleng, Thought Leader
April 18, 2008
http://www.thoughtleader.co.za/chrismaroleng/2008/04/18/zimbabwe-looking-beyond-the-horizon/#comment-27418
Zimbabwe-s harmonised
election, which saw presidential, senatorial, parliamentary and
local government elections being held simultaneously, took place
peacefully on March 29 2008. This watershed plebiscite was anticipated
to be a poll that would radically change the political landscape
of this troubled country.
More than two weeks have
passed since the initial votes were cast with no clear indication
of the future trajectory of Zimbabwe. Parliamentary and senatorial
results trickled out during the weeks following the elections but
the all-important presidential results have been withheld by the
Zimbabwe Election Commission (ZEC), this amidst growing speculation
of the doctoring of the expression of the will of the people in
favour of the will of Zanu-PF.
Most observers-
attention has been narrowly focused on trying to establish the causes
of the delay of the release of the results. The main opposition
party, the MDC-Tsvangirai, has noted that Zanu-PF is preparing to
unleash a reign of terror on its citizens and has called for international
intervention. They also appealed, unsuccessfully, for an urgent
injunction to the High Court to compel the ZEC to release the results.
Amidst wide media speculation
on the results, the behind-the-scenes political manoeuvring, and
the anxiety that has gripped the local and international communities,
we must maintain a focus on how to transcend the deepening quagmire
that has gripped this country for the better part of this decade.
The parliamentary and
senatorial results reveal a society that is politically torn down
the middle. This polarisation has been evident since the elections
in 2000. The divisions coalesce around two dominant crisis narratives.
One focused around regime security concerns and an alleged neo-colonial
imperialist conspiracy epitomised by the campaigning slogan, "sovereignty,
land and empowerment", and one that has been championed by
civil society and the opposition parties emphasising the need for
a post-nationalist liberation discourse centred around good governance,
democratisation and human security that finds expression in the
broad notions of political choice and societal renewal.
Elections have become
the main battleground between the contending discourses, personalised
in stark contrast by a militarized Zanu-PF with Mugabe at its helm
and a people-centred MDC with presidential hopeful Morgan Tsvangirai
steering the battleship.
The air of optimism that
permeated in Zimbabwe on the 30th of March has now given way to
despair as the battleground is seemingly shifting from the polls,
to the courts, with the possibility of spilling over into the streets.
Violence has flared since Zanu-PF lost its parliamentary majority
in elections, with reports indicating the deployment of security
forces and paramilitary groups like the War Veterans and Youth Militia,
especially in the rural areas.
On Monday 14
April the High
Court rejected an application by the MDC to force the release
of election results.
It has become increasing
apparent that the attention of both domestic and international observers
alike has been captivated by assessments of events and personalities
that have shaped recent political development in that country.
The net effect of this
demand for "event-centric" analysis has left little
or no room for a rigorous consideration of the "structural"
or "systemic" nature of the crisis that has afflicted
Zimbabwe for almost a decade now. The danger is that many of the
assessments of the situation in Zimbabwe that enjoy what can be
best described as popular appeal have been characterised by this
event-driven analysis of this very complex situation that has now
come to be commonly known as the Zimbabwean crisis.
Most of these event-centric
analyses that typically focus on proximate causes and triggering
events normally only serve to indicate to us what the symptoms are
without shedding much light on the actual causes of the problem
and possible solutions.
While such analyses do
serve some utility, they have unfortunately, in the case of Zimbabwe,
led to numerous miscalculations about the factors that have influenced
this country-s politics and what motivates the seemingly irrational
behaviour of this troubled country-s political elites.
Many of these miscalculations
have often been characterised by a disproportionate focus on the
personality of President Robert Mugabe and the haphazard implementation
of land-reform programme as the primary factors that have led to
the socio-economic crisis in Zimbabwe.
As a result of this propensity
to seek easy answers and quick fixes, very little structural analysis
of the Zimbabwean situation has been presented in the public domain
that assists in dispelling some of these myths and which also allows
for clearer thinking on what the true causes and, more importantly,
possible solutions to the this crisis are.
An understanding of these
structural aspects or pervasive factors, which have become so engrained
into the institutions, policies and the fabric of this country-s
society, may help us to better gauge the trough of the Zimbabwe
cycle. An example of some of these structural characteristics that
have not featured as prominently in other assessments of the Zimbabwean
situation relate to; governance and political institutions, political
culture, ideology of political elites, economic structure and performance,
and last but not least, the impacts of external factors.
This why so much hope
was placed on the Southern African Development Community (SADC),
which held an extraordinary summit in Zambia on 12 April 2008, to
discuss the deteriorating situation in Zimbabwe following the March
29 elections.
This extraordinary meeting
came in the wake of mounting international condemnation of Zimbabwe-s
failure to publish the presidential election results of the March
29 poll that the MDC have claimed would show that President Mugabe
lost to Tsvangirai. The leader of the opposition has been on a tour
of neighbouring states to help defuse the political crisis and curb
an increasing number of attacks on his party.
He told African National
Congress leader Jacob Zuma, and presidents Ian Khama of Botswana,
Armando Guebuza of Mozambique that a peaceful Zimbabwe was in the
region-s best interests. In an interview with SABC news, Zuma
said that "keeping the nation in suspense . . . keeping
the international community in suspense", was wrong. "I
don-t think it augurs very well," Zuma said. In contrast,
President Thabo Mbeki urged "patience" and described
the situation in Zimbabwe as "manageable".
Regime
change vs regime reconstitution: polarised perspective on resolving
Zimbabwe-s crisis
Regime
change
One of the main
challenges that have limited progress in finding a solution to the
crisis in Zimbabwe has been the existence of different and often
asymmetrically aligned approaches aimed at assisting in bringing
about political and economic reforms to this country.
These differences have
come to the fore due to the varying interpretations of what the
causes of the crisis are in the first place. This divergence in
approaches has largely lead to the polarisation of public policy
perspectives on Zimbabwe, that has seen many governments in the
global West pushing for "regime change" while African
governments, particularly in Southern Africa prescribe that "regime
reconstitution" should first occur as a prerequisite for broader
reforms in governance.
Generally speaking, public
policy sentiments in the West that have advocated for what can be
described as a "regime change" approach have been influenced
by assessments that indicate that the primary problem in Zimbabwe
is President Mugabe and his Zanu-PF, and what is required to resolve
the crisis in Zimbabwe, somewhat simplistically, is a replacement
of the ageing head of state and his party with a more amenable political
alternative, (read, until recently the Movement for Democratic Change)
that is open to the practice of democratic principles and implementation
of sound neo-liberal macroeconomic policies.
What this approach betrays
is that it is based on the deionisation of Zanu-PF and the notion
that this country-s ruling party is a monolithic organisation
that suffers from a curious absence of progressive agents of change.
It is not surprising
that many Western countries quickly adopted this approach when they
were first faced with having to deal with President Mugabe-s
cleverly set Pan-African Trap, with its accompanying persuasive
anti-colonial rhetoric, which enjoys high levels of resonance in
Africa and its Diaspora.
By internationalising
the Zimbabwean crisis President Mugabe has been able to displaced
the crisis affecting his country from the national to the international
as a pan-African struggle against imperial domination. In this regard,
President Mugabe argues that the sanctions imposed by the West were
a form of punishment for the dispossession of the West-s "kith
and kin" of lucrative commercial farms, which was done as
part of the land-reform programme that Mugabe claims was introduced
to address the social injustices that arise from the inequitable
distribution of resources, which was a common feature of the colonial
experience in Africa.
Regime
reconstitution
On the other
hand, the "regime reconstitution" approach that is diametrically
opposed to regime change, which has been primarily advocated for
by many African countries, has been shaped by what can be described
as a realist assessment of political development and their implications
in Zimbabwe.
This perspective rejects
the notion that Zanu-PF is monolith that suffers from an absence
of change agents. Instead those who push this point of view locate
the crisis in this country as resulting from the failure of Zanu-PF
to effectively transform itself from a liberation movement to a
modern political party that is open to political competition and
also to this party-s inability to address the issue of presidential
succession and leadership renewal.
Furthermore, those who
support this perspective point out that due to the increased securitisation
of the state that has been deliberately carried out by the government
(mainly as part of its ongoing preoccupation with regime security),
the military perceive themselves to be more than just the custodians
of Zimbabwe-s territorial integrity and sovereignty from external
threats, but also as some type of Praetorian Guard that must safeguard
Zanu-PF-s political dominance. Until the latter sanction the
implementation of political reforms a stable and sustainable change
is highly unlikely to occur in Zimbabwe.
Regime
reconstitution: a means to addressing Zimbabwe-s security
dilemma
This regime
reconstitution approach has enjoyed more credence, due to a watershed
event the occurred on the eve of presidential elections in 2002.
On 9 January 2002 a startling
statement made by all the security chiefs publicly and jointly declared
that they would not salute a president lacking "liberation
credentials", which was interpreted as a thinly coded reference
to the MDC candidate Tsvangirai in the March 2002 presidential election.
The former Commander
of the Defence Forces General Vitalis Zvinavashe, flanked by all
service chiefs and the head of the CIO, issued this statement declaring
that the country-s security organisations would only support
political leaders who "pursue Zimbabwean values, traditions
and beliefs for which thousands of lives were lost in pursuit of
Zimbabwe-s hard-won independence, sovereignty, territorial
integrity and national interest."
The statement continued:
"To this end, let it be known that the highest office on the
land is a -straightjacket- whose occupant is expected
to observe the objectives of the liberation struggle. We will, therefore,
not accept, let alone support or salute anyone with a different
agenda that threatens the very existence of our sovereignty, our
country and our people."
This widely condemned
ultimatum to the voters was not only dangerous and unconstitutional,
but was the clearest signal that the Zimbabwe military was prepared
to take over the reigns of political power should there be an electoral
outcome unfavourable to them.
As such it could also
be seen as indicating the willingness of the security forces to
carry out a pre-emptive coup d-état if Tsvangirai had
won the presidential elections. It was also the clearest indication
of the existence of the disposition to intervene in active politics
by the security establishment in support of Zanu-PF.
Many public institutions
have been securitised through the appointment or secondment of serving
or retired military officers, purportedly to instil discipline and
efficiency in the institutions. The security personnel are now ubiquitous
in carrying out even straightforward law and order enforcement functions.
Such active involvement of the security sector has contributed to
the alienation of the military and other security branches from
the general public.
There is evidence that
the military has assumed a distinctly expansionist political role
in the affairs of the country. In fact, the role is so decisive
that for the ICG, "the security services now overshadow the
Cabinet as the country-s primary policy-making body, with
the National Security Council [NSC], which Mugabe chairs, effectively
managing macroeconomic policy".
There is also the secretive
Joint Operations Command (JOC) — comprising the top commanders
of the army, air force, police, intelligence services and prisons
— that may in fact be the real and core "kitchen Cabinet"
that makes strategic decisions about the direction of the country.
The official Cabinet may now be reduced to rubber-stamping the critical
decisions made by this all-powerful but unaccountable JOC. This
suggests that the official Cabinet may now be as much a rubber-stamping
structure vis-à-vis the JOC as the Zimbabwe legislature is
with respect to the executive.
The security sector,
as hinted above, has also entangled itself deeply in the battle
for succession. All indications are that the security establishment,
particularly the military branches, will be a decisive factor in
determining or at least giving it-s blessing to the next person
to reside at State House. Apparently, with the possible exception
of Police Commissioner Augustine Chihuri, all the other service
commanders — ZDF Commander General Constantine Chiwenga, Air
Force Commander Air Marshal Perence Shiri, Director General of the
CIO retired Brigadier Happyton Bonyongwe and the Commissioner of
Prisons, retired Brigadier Paradzai Zimondi — are protégés
of retired General Solomon ("Rex Nhongo") Mujuru. This
makes for an interesting point of conjecture, when we consider the
alleged close links between the latter and Simba Makoni.
The point here is not
to declare any of the dominant perspectives on facilitating change
in Zimbabwe to be superior or more effective than the other, but
to provide an analytical foundation which helps us to understanding
the rational that underpins and motivates the various interventions
in Zimbabwe.
It is still not clear
whether SADC will be able to take decisive action on this crisis
since the member states of this organisation are believed to be
divided about whether their organisation should assume a wider role
in the Zimbabwe crisis.
Many observers hoped
that the unfortunate events in Kenya, following elections, would
spur Southern African leaders into action in a bid to avoid another
contested election, which could usher in a period of mounting political
instability in Zimbabwe.
Faced with the possibility
of a political transition, concomitant loss of status and possible
prosecution for misdeeds committed while in office, Zanu-PF hardliners
are beginning to act as spoilers: re-mobilising the security apparatus
both formal and informal, contesting constituency results, demanding
a recount of presidential results, assertions of vote-rigging, detaining
its own ZEC election officials for allegedly tampering with the
results and rallying around the president to face a run-off election
— all of this while the presidential results are ostensibly
unknown.
The MDC, after proclaiming
an outright presidential victory, have had to temper their rush
to State House and engage with the realities that a run-off is a
likelihood and/or that their win would have been by a marginal majority
and hence the need for alliance building and possible deals with
Zanu-PF prior to any exit, i.e. the politics of political expediency
rather than political morality. It is clear that if a solution is
to be found to this protracted crisis a middle ground has to be
reached, the winner-takes-all rule that presides heavily in the
political culture of the elite, on both sides, has to begin to give
way to compromise.
What
then are the possible scenarios emanating from this political stalemate?
Scenario
one: Run-off (rating: most likely)
The ZEC finally
releases the results that show that no presidential candidate got
more than 50% of the vote and they both decide to participate in
a run-off.
A de-facto opposition
alliance puts the opposition in a prime position to take the lead.
Zanu-PF retaliates through the use of violence as a campaign strategy:
it intimidates the electorate, restricts the media and freedom of
association, engages in more vote buying and possibly extends the
period in which the run-off has to take place from 21 to 90 days
by presidential decree.
The MDC changes strategy
to focus on mass mobilisation leading to a violent confrontation
with state security forces that side in the main with Mugabe. The
run-off keeps Zimbabwe in an adversarial political competitive climate
for a longer period. A positive end result in this scenario is that
despite the obstacles, Tsvangirai still obtains the majority in
a massive protest vote and a new government is formed.
The more disturbing
end result is an election in which Mugabe wins but, because of the
process, we are back to square one with an election that lacks credibility
and therefore a ruling party that lacks legitimacy and thus slips
further into international isolation — regime security becomes
the only game in town and the country slides further into the political
and economic abyss.
Scenario
two: Clampdown (rating: likely)
The Zanu-PF
refuses to have ZEC release the results leading to possible violent
confrontation. Mugabe declares a state of emergency and continues
to rule. A few friendly states to Zanu-PF in the region rally to
his aide causing a rift in SADC.
The SADC organ is paralysed
and we go on in this predatory situation for a number of years until
Zimbabwe is categorised amongst those states in Africa said to have
experienced "state collapse." Alternatively this provides
sufficient grounds for SADC to mobilise and intervene using its
voice and if necessary standby force and we see the emergence of
a negotiated settlement.
Against the background
of hyperinflation, an economy in rapid descent, and the possibility
of Zimbabwe emerging from an election marred in controversy, one
could easily make the argument that these conditions were indicative
of the fact that Zimbabwe was on the brink of experiencing some
kind of mass revolt. However, the lack of organisational capacity,
and tactical divisions that have emerged in the opposition and civil
society have militated against this segment of society-s ability
to organise widespread protest action against the government.
It has also become apparent
that the operations of the state security apparatus, especially
the Central Intelligence Organisation (CIO), which has resulted
in the government experiencing success in its objective of infiltrating
and disrupting the activities of the opposition and civil society,
have acted as a further disincentive. Furthermore, the propensity
of the state security forces to use violence against citizens perceived
to be supporters of the opposition have made political activism
in Zimbabwe a dangerous activity that few of this country-s
citizens are willing to risk engaging in.
These factors highlighted
above and the seemingly pervasive presence of the partisan state
security forces will make it very difficult to organise protest
action that could lead to mass revolt that would lead to the unseating
of Zanu-PF. What is more likely is that following an electoral victory
by Mugabe in a run-off, Zimbabwe will experience a number of sporadic
protests that are unlikely to gain the required momentum for a change
driven by mass action.
Scenario
three: Mugabe victory (Rating: likely)
The ZEC announces
that Mugabe has an outright majority. He continues to rule in similar
fashion and Zimbabwe slides further down the slippery slope to ruin.
Alternatively, having proven the world wrong in its assessment of
his people-s support for him, a few months down the line he
invokes the 18th amendment and appoints a successor.
The successor is a moderate
Zanu-PF who is able to turn the party around and begin to put in
place measures for the rebuilding of the society — or it is
a hardliner where we see a different face but the same rhetoric
and bankrupt visions of the future as we essentially wait until
the next set of elections to once again see the ideological battle
between Zimbabweans take its course.
A Mugabe victory at the
presidential polls would not result in increased political stability
but in Parliament becoming the next battleground. As indicated above
in passing, it is not impossible to foresee a situation arising
from this that would culminate in President Mugabe within a year
of his election seeking to invoke new powers derived from the Constitution
of Zimbabwe Amendment 18 of 2007 to anoint a successor to take over
from him.
Mugabe-s decision
to step down would be motivated by pressure from dissidents within
his own party, from opposition MPs and the expected accelerated
economic decline. At its climax this pressure could see a united
front across party lines being formed in Parliament in a bid to
impeach the President.
This situation would
set the stage for a protracted battle in Parliament that would see
the attention of the Parliament divert away from passing legislation
geared towards finding a resolution to the crisis and instead focusing
on playing political games.
Inevitably
this scenario will result in the state, ruling party and its policy-making
bodies continuing to be absorbed in the struggles for succession
within Zanu-PF. This scenario certainly has beneficiaries as those
dependent on ruling party patronage continue to use the criminalised
state to pursue their accumulation activities. Moreover given the
paralysis characterising the ruling party over the succession question
there are strong forces pushing for the maintenance of the status
quo in Zimbabwe.
Scenario
four: Mugabe bows out (Rating: unlikely)
The results
show a run-off but President Mugabe concedes defeat, this only on
the basis of a deal that sees the formation of a transitional government
of national unity and that provides protection for him and his comrades.
This provides him with a face-saving measure in that he did not
lose outright but has placed the greater good of his country before
his own interests. This results in a win-win situation.
Scenario
five: Tsvangirai victorious (Rating: unlikely)
The ZEC announces
that Tsvangirai has won an outright majority. State House is vacated
and its new incumbents enter. They receive assistance from all quarters
and are able to put the country back on track. Alternatively, the
military refuse to accept the victory and we have a stalled transition
with similar results outlined above.
Conclusion
One of the striking
features of the scenarios presented above is that none of them seem
to resolve the structural aspects that have characterised the crisis
in Zimbabwe; none has the possibility of succeeding without the
buy-in of all the key political actors. Therefore, the party that
emerges victorious may be of little consequence in resolving Zimbabwe-s
long-standing crisis of governance if both Zanu-PF and the opposition
are not committed to entering a new phase in their relationship,
one which could foster broader positive interaction and policy formulation
geared towards recovery.
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
|