Back to Index

This article participates on the following special index pages:

Zimbabwe elites deal does not resolve underlying crisis
Munyaradzi Gwisai, International Socialist Organization
September 23, 2008

http://links.org.au/node/647

Introduction

In our last update in the July issue of Socialist Worker we reaffirmed our long - held position of the likelihood "of an elite political settlement between the ruling party and opposition around a western supported full neo-liberal economic programme", given the domination of all the political parties by bourgeois elites who are fearful of political implosions from the imploding economy and the rank opportunism of the MDC leadership.

The deal signed by Zanu PF and MDC in September, substantially confirmed our fears. We look at the deal and what it means for working people.

Despite gains MDC remains junior

The main elements of the deal include that: MDC leader, Tsvangirai becomes the new prime minister who shares executive authority with the president and cabinet. In addition he will chair a Council of Ministers that will oversee the implementation of government policies, although Mugabe will remain chairing cabinet. The opposition has a majority of 16 to 15 in cabinet. The two Zanu PF deputy presidents remain with two deputy prime minister reserved for the opposition. Mugabe remains the head of state and government, although required to consult Tsvangirai before making most appointments. The deal will last for up to five years although subject to review after the first eighteen months. The deal mandates a constitutional reform process that will lead to a referendum and new constitution in eighteen months time, overseen by a Parliamentary Select Committee.

The deal has received mixed reactions, with many ordinary people and some civic groups cautiously welcoming it in the hope that it will bring an end to their suffering as well as the beginning of the end of the Mugabe dictatorship. SADC and AU have endorsed it. The western countries, led by Britain and the USA have only cautiously welcomed it, with the feeling that it still leaves too much power with Mugabe. On the other hand, it has been opposed by a number of major civic groups including the ZCTU and NCA, who have denounced it as unprincipled capitulation to the dictatorship.

The deal does not surprise us. Three years ago we argued -

"the perspective of a government of national unity between the opposition and Zanu PF is shared by the elites now dominant in the ruling party, in the two main opposition parties and local and international capitalists. Their main efforts, despite current disagreements are driven towards achieving such goal, as an instrument in pre-emptying social revolution in an important periphery capitalist state sent into mortal crisis by the failure of neo-liberal capitalism . . . "

As for MDC we argued that -

"its primary preoccupation is towards reaching a sell out agreement with the Zanu PF dictatorship that will not benefit the poor and working people . . . (that) the opposition is dominated by the petite bourgeois elite, who long ago prostrated themselves before western neo-liberal forces and are now eager to get into state power, even as junior partners, and accumulate as a neo-colonial dependent capitalist class."

And for Zanu PF that -

"Zanu PF elites now want the peace to grow and launder the wealth acquired in the last decade but cannot do so in the context of a crisis ridden state under siege from the west . . . (and that) despite his rhetoric, Mugabe is now ready to capitulate and enter into an elitist compromise deal with the MDC, the west and business. But only after the 2008 elections, which he hopes to use to legitimize his party-s claim to being the senior partner . . . "

Whilst for the west, we argued -

"to ensure that Zanu PF elites do not relapse as they did in 1997, the forces of global neo-liberalism demand a political guarantee in the form of co-option in government of their trusted agents in Zimbabwe, the MDC."

The mixed reaction to the deal including the cautious welcome, by ordinary people, lies not only in their desperate economic condition but also that the deal itself is a mixed bag. It is not exactly a replica of Joshua Nkomo-s 1987 Unity deal. Tsvangirai is more than a ceremonial prime minister if one takes into account his control of the House of Assembly and urban municipalities, the opposition majority in cabinet , the right of MDC to opt out of the deal and that MDC remains a separate political entity unlike ZAPU and that MDC remains the relative gate-keeper of western economic support. Tsvangirai indeed enjoys at least on paper more power than his friend Odinga in Kenya or Nkomo in 1987, whilst the economic collapse and divisions facing Zanu PF makes the latter a much weaker opponent than then.

This is why many bourgeois analysts pushed Tsvangirai to sign, arguing MDC-s realistic objectives in the talks could not be full power now, but to get a strategic toe-hold in the state, neutralising the most vicious attacks on his party by the regime and thus be better prepared for the next elections, which Mugabe is unlikely to contest. Without defeating Mugabe in the streets, like the Patriotic Front in 1979, this was the best achievable result under the circumstances, they argued.

But the comparison with 1979 is misplaced. The Patriotic Front elites conducted negotiations even as they accelerated the war. And even then they were forced to make major concessions, accepting a deal that left the white settlers with legislative veto power, control of the civil service and judiciary and the land, for at least ten years after independence. But they had a fall back position on a mobilized peasantry and armed cadreship whilst they retained substantial control of the armed forces and national treasury.

On the other hand Tsvangirai, supported by a dupliticious and largely cowardly civic society, actively undermined any attempt at serious mass action solely relying on western sanctions. Not surprising they have been forced into a deal which gives a desperate dictatorship breathing space to renew itself, whilst laying the foundations for massive long term assaults on the living conditions of working people. Make no mistake, despite the above concessions, MDC is the definite junior in this deal with very unclear chances of success whilst the future of the deal itself is very uncertain.

The subordination of MDC was painfully evident in Tsvangirai-s face as he cringed and covered his eyes when Mugabe was lambasting the west and opposition at the signing moment! Whilst "humiliating" in form, the deal as Mugabe himself has said, in substance, leaves Zanu PF " in the driving seat: "

1. Firstly contrary to MDC-s earlier demands, Mugabe remains with most executive authority. He remains the head of state and government with authority to appoint ministers, chair cabinet, dissolve parliament, declare war, enter into international treaties, assent to legislation and appoint or dismiss key state officials like the service chiefs, judges , RBZ governor, ambassadors and permanent secretaries. All he is required to do, in exercise of some and not all of these powers is to consult the Prime Minister or Parliament, but not necessarily agree with them. This is made worse by the fact that MDC signed a deal without even an agreement on what ministries they would get. The humiliation for Mugabe is the need to consult a person he has long derided as a stooge of the west, but he signed because he still retains the basic power, as he is now showing insisting on holding most of the key ministries. The opposition-s slight majority in cabinet does not amount to much because its decisions will be made by consensus, giving Zanu PF veto power. . Tsvangirai-s much vaunted Council of Ministers is little more than the administrative and implementing sub-committee of Cabinet, as no executive authority vests in it.
2. Secondly the deal affirms Zanu PF-s position that the land reform programme is irreversible and any compensation paid to the white farmers will be from Britain. This allows Zanu PF to protect its crucial rural base ahead of future elections whilst hoping that economic recovery will minimize the opposition-s protest vote. For Zanu PF the land issue is non-negotiable -- its entire life and future depends it.
3. Thirdly, unlike the Patriotic Front, MDC has no real fall back position if the deal collapses. Its only guarantor is a mediator who has now been ousted. Having consistently neutralized the mass action route , MDC has solely relied on the western sanctions. But MDC is not in full control of this. Locked in a hotel room and virtually coerced by Mbeki and Mugabe to sign there and then or risk immediate collapse of the negotiations, Tsvangirai seems to have signed a deal that does not meet the full approval of his western allies.

The west has only partially endorsed the deal, because whilst supporting an elitist negotiated settlement they do not want one that leaves Mugabe in substantial power and his dignity and land reform programme intact. They need to humiliate Mugabe to make him an example to other 3rd world nationalist leaders who have imposed neoliberalism, especially in South Africa, that they cannot try to retain power by appeasing revolting masses by retreating from such programmes, or attacking private property especially of a globally connected white minority, or attacking the western imperialists at global forums, as Mugabe has done.

Tsvangirai took the gamble that the west would eventually side with him, even if not fully happy with the deal. This seems to be happening now, but with the west only partially supporting the deal and maintaining the sanctions to ensure the new regime complies with its political and economic demands. These include: substantial parring down of Mugabe-s powers, MDC receiving key economic ministries and removal of his key state officials like RBZ Governor G. Gono and the service chiefs as well as an all out free market economic programme including acceleration of Gono-s dollarization of the economy. The west will continue with humanitarian aid, which it uses on the one hand to disguise its savage economic siege and at the same time to undermine Mugabe-s support in his key rural hinterlands. In any case the current global financial meltdown imposes limits on their capacity to dole out large aid sums.

With economic siege continuing, especially in an environment of global economic crisis, the deal looks very fragile and may unravel sooner rather than later. Popular acceptance of such an expensive and over bloated coalition government, proportionately the biggest in the world in a country with the world-s highest inflation, is likely to wane rapidly if the promised economic recovery fails to take place, with the draft national constitution a possible flash point. At such stage Mugabe-s continued control of the security apparatus, the state and treasury will be decisive and the opposition-s nakedness and foolishness in signing such deal exposed.

Despite deal . . . prepare for more poverty and repression

One of the fundamental problems of the deal lies in that its success lies on a western supported economic neoliberal programme, whose efficacy is today being dramatically challenged by the financial melt-down in the USA and globally. Today neoliberal capitalism faces the abyss of the worst economic crisis since the 1930s and one that has only been avoided so far by the pouring of hundreds of billions of dollars of public money into the money markets by the western governments. Yet it is such economic paradigm of austerity for the working people and the third world and subsidies for the rich that is being pushed by the west as a necessary precondition for any support of the deal. In their election manifestoes both MDC and Zanu PF have indicated their willingness to comply. So despite the deal, employers, businesses and capitalists will continue paying workers starvation wages, imposing inhuman price increases of basic goods and services indexed to the $US dollar and acceleration of privatization of water, electricity and education. So the respite that many expect from the deal is highly unlikely. Poverty, deprivation and suffering for the ordinary people is likely to continue, and with it repression as the now united political elites seek to deal with hungry and increasingly angry working people. The looting of state resources by politicians, now both from Zanu PF and MDC will reach elitist deal and continue the fight for a better future.

Aluta continua . . . regime can be defeated

We are cognizant that in the short-term the possibility of massive mass action is slim. This is because people are exhausted, hungry and weighed down by the long-running crisis as well as the misleadership, duplicity and opportunism of the opposition and civic elites. The deal sows further false illusions in appeasement with the dictator. We saw it with how many supposedly radical civic leaders in the Peoples Convention suddenly lined up behind MDC as the deal neared signing. This scuttled the Days of Mass Action in Zimbabwe and South Africa on the 13th and 16th August respectively as agreed by regional trade unions and civic groups. Civic leaders like Takura Zhangazha of MISA, virtually abandoned the Peoples Convention to become technical assistants to the MDC negotiation team, whilst others snubbed the 10th August meeting convened by COSATU in Johannesburg to spearhead the regional mass action.

However, given the fragility of the deal and the worsening global economic situation we are convinced that the deal is unlikely to deliver economic or democratic salvation for the ordinary people. Continued poverty will likely continue to trigger small to significant revolts around bread and butter issues, such as we see with the teachers and doctors strikes. The challenge will be to generalize and link such different small actions into broader and bigger campaigns supported by all the various forces still ready to fight including the newly established regional solidarity campaign led by COSATU. And in doing so always deepening the ideological basis of our struggles and movements to clearly expose the root cause of poverty and dictatorship as capitalism.

At the same time working people and their organizations must continue the struggle against the de facto continued rule of the illegitimate Zanu PF regime including an all out resistance to the attempt at imposing an elitist constitution driven and controlled by politicians in their so-called Select Committee of Parliament. We therefore welcome the positions taken by the ZCTU and NCA for continued demand of a genuine people driven constitution and the holding of free and fair elections thereafter. With Mugabe-s ally in South Africa, Mbeki, ousted, there will be further scope for expanding regional mobilization especially involving COSATU, the SACP and social movements in South Africa who have all rejected the deal as well.

But to ensure progress it is imperative that there be the urgent regroupement in a united front of the radical, anti-neoliberal and left forces, including organized labour. To avoid the treachery we experienced in the popular frontist Peoples Convention, which was dominated by the imperialist funded and controlled groups, it is essential that there be a serious shake-out and split of civic society between the militant, serious and pro-working people anti-neoliberal movements and the opportunistic, cowardly and imperialist funded and controlled ones. We hope the coming Zimbabwe Social Forum in October provides a further platform for remobilization of the radical forces.

Whilst, in the short-term, the regime might have bought itself some time with this sell-out deal and through continued repression it cannot last in the medium term because it has no solution to the escalating economic crisis, it is alienated from its capitalist class base and hated by the masses whilst it suffers massive serious internal divisions around the unresolved succession question. This is why the regime made significant concessions to MDC and was so desperate for Tsvangirai-s signature.

In the medium term therefore there remains a possibility of a people - centred resolution of the Zimbabwean crisis that smashes both the dictatorship and elitist plans to replace it with a regime that perpetuates the neoliberal capitalist agenda. Such solution immediately means : a new people driven constitution prioritising economic rights of working people, free and fair elections and democratic rights; land-redistribution and support to the peasants; nationalisation of the major sectors of the economy and the general subordination of private property to satisfy society-s needs like education, health, transport, housing and food security. But as history has taught us such reforms cannot be sustained in the long term unless the very system of capitalism which breeds poverty and dictatorship in the first place is uprooted, locally , regionally and internationally, and replaced by collective and democratic ownership and control of the economy and the state by working people, i.e. socialism.

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