Back to Index

Ways of reading events in Zimbabwe
Aubrey Matshiqi, Business Day
December 06, 2008

http://www.businessday.co.za/articles/opinion.aspx?ID=BD4A899150

In September, I said that two tests determine the success of any mediation effort. First, has the mediator succeeded in persuading the protagonists to sign a compromise settlement? Second, does the settlement constitute a lasting solution?

I have no doubt that Mbeki and SADC are committed to a lasting solution. But I suspect — and my suspicions in this regard are very strong — that the solution Mbeki and his comrades in SADC have in mind has no room for a Zimbabwe governed on the basis of the consent of the majority of Zimbabweans if this means the country must be governed by the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) and Morgan Tsvangirai.

Furthermore, I still maintain that a careful analysis of the balance of forces in Zimbabwe, and how it might change in ways that include factors that are currently not knowable, is one of the best analytical tools available to us. Analysis based only on anger and hope does a disservice to a party that is still in opposition despite the fact that it won an election.

A balance-of-forces analysis facilitates a better understanding of what is possible and helps us understand the possible responses of each of the internal and external parties that constitute the Zimbabwean crisis. Fundamentally, the balance of forces in Zimbabwe is characterised by an imbalance between the repressive capacity of the state, internal dynamics within Zanu (PF) and the security establishment, the levels of popular resistance and electoral support for Zanu (PF) and the MDC. Since Zanu (PF) has rendered electoral outcomes irrelevant and popular resistance is still very low in relation to the enormity of the challenges facing Zimbabwe, a shift in the Zanu (PF) internal balance and a change in dynamics within the security establishment seem to be the only hope for the people of Zimbabwe.

Is the sight of soldiers rioting in Harare an indication of a change in the balance within the security establishment? We must be careful not to either overstate or under estimate the significance of these riots. Rioting foot soldiers are not necessarily a sign of rifts within the securocratic class but are, at the same time, indicative of the possible emergence of a crisis of legitimacy that might cause serious divisions within Zanu (PF) and the securocrats. But we must not rule out the possibility that Robert Mugabe and the Joint Operational Command will simply respond instinctively in an attempt to further impose the repressive capacity of the state on a worsening economic and political crisis. A collapsing state can have as pernicious an effect as a military dictatorship that is at the height of its power. We must, therefore, not rule out the possibility of gun battles between soldiers and the police, a generalised mutiny or battles between different groups of soldiers.

In the current situation two things are certain. First, SADC will be riven by divisions that will paralyse it even further. Second, Zimbabwe has crossed the point of no return beyond which things are going to get much worse before they get better.

Since I am very far from the scene of Mugabe-s crimes, I am leaving room for the possibility that I am either being presumptuous or naive in suggesting that it is still not too late for Zimbabweans to realise that neither Mbeki, SADC nor the African Union will save them. It is ordinary Zimbabweans who must stand up and make the sacrifices that need to be made for a new Zimbabwe to be born.

As for the so-called leaders of this continent, they are the solid waste that is floating in the cholera-infested waters that are killing Zimbabweans.

* Matshiqi is a senior associate political analyst at the Centre for Policy Studies.

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