|
Back to Index
This article participates on the following special index pages:
2008 harmonised elections - Index of articles
Post-election violence 2008 - Index of articles & images
Zimbabwe
elections: Hopes, contradictions and opportunities
Mandisi Majavu
May 21, 2008
http://towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/1319/1/
On May 2, 2008, the Zimbabwe
election officials announced that Morgan Tsvangirai had beaten Robert
Mugabe in the March 29 presidential poll. The results gave the Movement
for Democratic Change-s (MDC) Tsvangirai 47.9 percent of the
vote and Mugabe 43.2 percent. These figures mean that although the
MDC won the March 29 elections, the organization failed to win the
absolute majority necessary to avoid a runoff election.
According to
the Zimbabwe Electoral
Act, the period within which a second election for the office
of the president can take place is within 21 days of the date of
announcement of results of the first poll. Initially, the presidential
election runoff was scheduled to take place within this period;
however, the Mugabe regime has recently announced that it has extended
the period within which a second election can take place by 69 days.
This comes after the
allegations that the Mugabe regime tampered with the results of
the first poll. For instance, the MDC claims that Tsvangirai won
50.3 percent of the vote, compared with Mugabe-s 43.2 percent
of the presidential vote. Nelson Chamisa, MDC-s spokesperson,
is quoted as saying that "We maintain that we won the presidential
election outright and that, in a fair and just world, there would
be no need for the so-called runoff."
The Global Zimbabwe Forum
(GZF) argues that the outcome of the first elections was compromised
by the fact that over three million eligible voters who are living
outside of Zimbabwe were excluded from participating in the process.
The GZF adds it is concerned with the "rather inconclusive
nature" of the presidential poll process. Furthermore, Mugabe
no longer has "the express mandate of the majority of the Zimbabwean
electorate and therefore must not be allowed to continue as the
President of the country. He must step down," argues the GZF.
Although the results
of the first elections did not get the MDC to win the absolute majority
necessary to avoid a runoff election, they were a huge blow against
the Mugabe regime. The present election results mean that the MDC
has control of the legislative and budgetary processes on it, according
to the Sunday Independent (a South African weekly newspaper). Furthermore,
the MDC-s dominance in the national assembly has been reinforced
by an agreement between Morgan Tsvangirai and Arthur Mutambara,
the leaders of the MDC-s majority and minority factions respectively,
to act in concert:
"Their pledge to
form a single bloc 'with one caucus and one speaker-
means that the MDC will command the allegiance of 57 percent of
the national assembly-s representatives against the 43 percent
who were elected under the colours of Zanu-PF."
Be that as it may, it
is reported that Mugabe has unleashed militias to scare Zimbabweans
into backing him in the runoff elections. According to the Sunday
Independent, there are about 7,000 casualties of the rapidly worsening
violence in Zimbabwe "as the military-s campaign against
the MDC opposition party hots up." Another report reveals that
"about 35 houses in a village near Shamva, about 80km north
of Harare, were burned and smashed this week, ahead of the country
learning that Mugabe had been beaten by Tsvangirai."
There are fears
that the political violence might escalate. The 'An Yue Jiang-,
a Chinese ship carrying weapons to Mugabe, which was originally
prevented by
trade unionists and members of civil society from docking and offloading
in South Africa, has two weeks later finally found a safe harbour
at which to offload the weapons. It is reported that the ship offloaded
at a port at Ponta Negra in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
Civil society and human
rights groups believe that Mugabe is going to use the weapons to
repress and intimidate political opponents in order to win the runoff
elections. According to The Weekender, a South African weekly newspaper,
Mugabe has already deployed the army and police across Zimbabwe
to campaign for him through intimidation and coercive tactics.
The 'An
Yue Jiang- is reported
to have offloaded 77 tons of Chinese arms - 3 million
rounds of AK-47 ammunition, 1500 rocket-propelled grenades and more
than 3000 mortar rounds. To the general public, the ship has earned
itself a new name - 'China-s ship of shame-.
Actually, China-s record of supplying weapons to repressive
regimes on the continent is shameful, to say the least.
The weapons (i.e. the
machetes and axes) that were used in the Rwanda genocide were imported
from China. In just a matter of 100 days, the Hutus organised and
implemented the mass slaughter of about 800,000 Tutsis - using
weapons imported from China. Melvern (2004) writes that the total
number of machetes imported by the Hutu government in 1993 weighed
581,175 kilos; and that there was a new machete for every third
male in the country. One of the companies involved in these purchases
belonged to Felicien Kabuga, the businessman who had helped to finance
RTLM - a radio station that served as the main sources of
Hutu propaganda, which encouraged its Hutu audience to kill the
Tutsis. Kabuga openly used his company to purchase huge amounts
of machetes from a company called 'Oriental Machinery Incorporated-
in Beijing, according to Melvern.
Bishop
Tutu argues that shipping arms to African governments who could
use them to abuse their own people is "an abhorrent but almost
daily occurrence." He adds that at present there is nothing
anyone can do about it because there are no effective global controls.
"If you want to export weapons to a country that commits gross
human rights abuses, you can."
Election
background
Mugabe
has been in power for 28 years; he is a dictator who does not tolerate
dissent. For example, the Mail &Guardian (M&G), a South
African newspaper, reports that Zimbabwe remains one of the few
countries in the world where the government enjoys a monopoly over
broadcasting and controls the largest media company. The M&G
argues that the Zimbabwe Access
to Information and Protection of Privacy Act does not allow
access to information.
According to Amnesty
International Canada, the Act is not about improving access to information
or protecting privacy, rather, the Act is about protecting the government
from scrutiny by restricting access to information held by public
bodies and penalizing public and media inquiry into its actions.
Similarly, the
Zimbabwe Public
Order and Security Act and the Official
Act is in fundamental conflict with the right to freedom of
expression and of the media to access and disseminate information
in the public interest, argues the M&G. AllAfrica.com reports
that since 2000, the Act has been used by the ruling party to infringe
on the fundamental right to freedom of association, and has been
selectively applied to prohibit opposition party rallies and civic
organisation meetings.
Mugabe, however, is not
the only person who has contributed to the sad state of affairs
in that country. In their paper entitled 'The Zimbabwe Question
and the Two Lefts- , Moyo and Yeros argue that as long as
Mugabe was implementing IMF and the World Bank policies, the Western
governments did not consider Mugabe-s rule to be oppressive.
They explain that:
"It was only after
1997 that relations with the IFIs and the West soured, resulting
from the political economic turn-around in Zimbabwe that entailed
the suspension of structural adjustment, the beginning of active
state intervention in the land question, intervention in the DRC,
and debt default. At that point, all the economic and political
conditionalities began to be invoked, beginning with the suspension
of balance of payments support by the World Bank, and followed by
a broad range of formal and informal sanctions..."
Furthermore, in 1998,
the UK refused to take responsibility for its historic obligation
to fund land reform after the international donors- conference
in the same year. Moyo and Yeros add that in 1999 Zimbabwe-s
relations with the IMF deteriorated, leading to the suspension of
lending. They add that thereafter, the confrontation escalated,
leading to the door being shut by the whole of the donor community.
"It is estimated that overall development assistance contracted
from a peak of US$562 million in 1994 to US$190 million by 2000,
which was thereafter limited largely to 'humanitarian aid-,"
write Moyo and Yeros.
These are some of the
serious factors that have contributed to the status quo in Zimbabwe.
According to Tendai Biti, secretary general of the MDC nationwide
unemployment stands at 90%, and inflation at 400, 000 percent. In
addition, the prime lending rate stands at 4,500 percent and the
largest currency denomination; Z$50 million cannot buy a pint of
beer.
How the MDC is going
to deal with the present socio-economic situation, the land reform
question and economic institutions such as the World Bank and the
IMF remains to be seen.
Critics of the MDC, however,
are convinced that the organisation has no qualms with the World
Bank and the IMF agenda. The MDC was established in 1999, in a period
that Moyo and Peros describe as a political phase in which a more
generalized neo-colonial civil society emerged in Zimbabwe. They
point out that during this period any domestic NGOs that did not
conform to the 'opposition- line saw their financial
aid blocked; while pro-opposition NGOs were systematically financed
by US and UK government "via such agencies as the Westminster
Foundation for Democracy, the Zimbabwe Democracy Trust, the Southern
African Media Development Fund, and USAID, including its Office
of Transition Initiatives."
According to Moyo and
Yeros, when a neo-colonial civil society emerged, no organisation
could claim to represent a peasant-worker agenda. Consequently,
this political vacuum was filled by a radical land occupation movement,
led by the war veterans, which received the endorsement of the aspiring
black bourgeoisie and the political support of the Mugabe regime.
Moyo and Yeros
point out that the situation led to an inevitable clash between
the black bourgeoisie and the rural landless organised by the war
veterans under a ZANU-PF banner (the ruling party in Zimbabwe) and
a small section of the 'unaccommodated black bourgeoisies-,
and workers organised by Zimbabwe
Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU), "with the help of imperialist
forces, under an MDC banner".
Viewed from this angle,
a post-Mugabe Zimbabwe is likely to translate into a neo-liberal
democratic state. As despicable as neo-liberalism is, one hopes
that when or if Mugabe exits the political stage, there will be
room for radical voices to push for political reforms that could
lead to fundamental change of society in that country. Needless
to say, an ideal situation is to have radical voices pushing for
fundamental change in the economy and how the society is arranged
in Zimbabwe without making compromises. However, ideal situations
are almost impossible to get in human and political affairs.
*Mandisi
Majavu is with the Africa Project for Participatory Society. He
writes regularly for Zcommunications and has contributed a book
chapter to the forthcoming "Real Utopia: Participatory Society
for the 21st Century," edited by Chris Spannos (AK press, 2008).
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
|