Back to Index

This article participates on the following special index pages:

Kenya and Zimbabwe: No size fits both
Tajudeen Abdul Raheem, Pambazuka News
September 11, 2008

http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/panafrican/50455

There are indications that after so many false starts, grand standing, braggadocio and unrealistic demands, both sides in the Zimbabwe conflict are finally negotiating genuinely and a deal may be reached soon. It will be a tribute to the much criticised President Thabo Mbeki's tenacity but also a final realisation by the hawks on both sides that neither can finish the other without finishing the country.

One recalls a statement I made at a public meeting in Harare in 2000 soon after the unexpected defeat of Mugabe and ZANU PF in the referendum on the constitution. The Public Forum at Hotel Monomopata was organised by SARIPS (a formidable institute then, under the leadership of Prof Sam Moyo). The CDD Observer Group was led by Former President of Liberia, Prof Amos Sawyer, who also spoke at the forum. One of the speakers, Dr Ibbo Mandaza was booed because of his pro-Zanu PF stance.

My key contribution in that Forum was that the government was not prepared for defeat while the opposition was not prepared for victory. My conclusion was based on extensive conversations we had with different groups and leading figures on both sides. When we met Prof Jonathan Moyo, one of the key figures propelling the government proposals, at his Sheraton residence and office the day before the referendum, I asked him what will happen if they were defeated. His answer was that there was no way they could be defeated and if it happened, there was going to be chaos. When the delegation met Morgan Tsvangirai, the MDC leader, the same day, his response when I asked him what would happen if they won, was that there was no way Mugabe would allow it. He was convinced that the government would jail all opposition leaders.

Forty Eight Hours later the opposition had won the referendum and the government had sadza on its face. Since that day, the doomsday scenario feared for different reasons by either side had been unleashed on the people of Zimbabwe.

The fundamental reasons for the seeming unbridgeable gulf between the MDC and ZANU PF are not that many.

For one, neither of them thought the other was such a formidable opponent. ZANU PF hardliners believe themselves the liberators of the country and its only legitimate leaders into perpetuity. Worse still, the older liberators saw Morgan Tsvangirai and the youthful urban base of the MDC as a mere rebellion of prodigal kids that will come to pass. The MDC on its part underestimated the entrenchment of ZANU PF in the state and society and triumphantly thought that it could just sweep to power with its urban guerrillas armed with nothing more than their votes!

Secondly, after the referendum a reassessment began, but both sides went into the mutual delegitimation phase which has continued till now. ZANU PF denounced MDC as the creation and puppet of white settlers and their Anglo-American imperialist interests. Unfortunately, dominant sections of the MDC reinforced that image because of the way they attacked the liberation war heritage and everything ZANU PF did including the Land reform, which happens to be a very with the Black populations. By so doing, the MDC denied itself a share of the patriotic constituency.

Thirdly, the delegitimation produced different coalitions both internally and externally that encouraged belligerence. Internally and externally Mugabe, who was knighted by the British Crown and enjoyed cordial relations with the former colonial power for more than 10 years of his presidency, now became the Chimurenga war hero again promising to deliver what he could not do to the masses after 17 years in power. Internally, the MDC's ambiguities about historical wrongs made it appear politically closer to settler interests and more friendly to imperialism. Many Zimbabweans who were tired of ZANU PF became uncomfortable with MDC thereby furthering the stalemate.

Fouthly, the external dimension of the support for both sides created a racialist solidarity that made many Africans and peoples in the Third World to choose Mugabe and ZANU PF while people in Europe and America and other pro-western leaders were more sympathetic to the MDC. This made it difficult to get honest brokers.

And Fifth - As a result of the pattern of international alliances the MDC became dismissive of the African dimension of the conflict believing African leaders and states were as undemocratic as Mugabe, and therefore cannot call him to order. It took many years for the MDC to start taking intra African diplomacy seriously, thereby countering the historical identification with and sympathy for ZANU PF and MUGABE. Mugabe, having taken African and anti-imperialist support for granted did realise that people were no longer taking his vitriolic attacks on colonialism at face value. After the general elections which he lost in March 2008 before running against himself in the run-off in June, he became a complete embarrassment. He now needs Africa more than Africa needs him. In Cairo at the last AU summit, some leaders regained their public voice on the matter. Also, MDC was talking more and explaining its position to African audiences and players on the scene at the political, diplomatic and CSO levels.

How does Kenya inform the Zimbabwean situation?

The Kenyan crisis and the role of the AU and the legitimate political framework it provided through Kofi Annan's mediation and the support it got from the international community became a possible course for resolving the Zimbabwe crisis.

However similar they may seem, the parallels should not be forced. The Grand Coalition of Kenya was possible because composition of government was the main issue negotiated. In Zimbabwe it is the composition of the state that needs to be negotiated. If there are parallels between Kenya and Zimbabwe it is not 2007, but 1992. Imagine if Moi and KANU had been defeated in 1992 instead of his self chosen heir being humiliated in 2002?

*Tajudeen Abdul Raheem is the Deputy Director of the UN Millennium Campaign in Africa, based in Nairobi, Kenya. He writes this article in his personal capacity as a concerned Pan-Africanist.

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