Back to Index

This article participates on the following special index pages:

Why MDC may end up covered in slime
Terence Ranger, The East African
February 22, 2009

http://www.theeastafrican.co.ke/news/-/2558/533132/-/view/printVersion/-/a3cnsrz/-/index.html

Now that a Government of National Unity has been formed in Zimbabwe, commentators are harking back to the Unity agreement of 1987. This was between Robert Mugabe-s Zanu PF and Joshua Nkomo-s Zimbabwe African Peoples Union. Unity Day has been celebrated every year to commemorate it. But survivors - and revivers - of Zapu are now warning Mugabe-s new partners of the dangers of a Unity agreement. Their own experience was that Zapu was swallowed up in the belly of the Zanu PF python and many people are saying that the same thing will happen to Morgan Tsvangirai-s Movement for Democratic Change. But while it is certainly true that the MDC cannot yet protect its own supporters against the Central Intelligence Organisation, the police and the army, there are important differences between the two Unity agreements.

Put simply, the 1987 event was a fusion of two parties into one. The 2009 event is a coalition of two parties. Some of the same dramatic transformations have happened on both occasions. After 1987, for instance, Dumiso Dabengwa - Zapu-s intelligence chief - went from being imprisoned on a charge of treason to appointment as Minister of Home Affairs. After the agreement of 2009, Tendai Biti has gone from facing a charge of treason in court to become Minister of Finance. So far, so similar. But the recent agreement is nothing like so much of a triumph for Mugabe as 1987 when, after years of military and police pressure on his supporters, in which some 20,000 people died, Nkomo had no alternative but concede dominance to Mugabe. A supposedly new party emerged from the Unity agreement but it was still called Zanu PF and it still used the same symbols of the clenched fist and the cockerel. Nkomo was allowed ceremonial status and ex-Zapu men were allowed to dominate local government in western Zimbabwe, but Mugabe controlled the central state. An amnesty was declared for all those who had committed political violence.

The emergence of the single party was supposed to portend the creation of a one-party state and Zanu PF totted up the percentages of its combined voter support. "We worship the majority as Christians worship Christ," said Eddison Zvogbo. This time round, it is very different. This is a coalition government: There is an agreed statement of principles, in which Zanu PF tries to bind the MDC to its doctrines of sovereignty and the MDC seeks to restrain Zanu PF by commitments to human rights. Nevertheless, the two parties remain quite distinct. And both have made it clear that they look forward to competing against each other in an election as soon as possible. In September 2008, when the agreement was first signed, Mugabe called upon his party to revive itself so that it could achieve a smashing electoral victory and he would never again have to suffer the "humiliation" of working with Tsvangirai. During the long delay between the agreement and its implementation, Tsvangirai called for internationally supervised elections as an alternative to coalition.

Those who worship the majority are torn between the parliamentary majority won by the MDC in March 2008 or the claimed presidential majority won by Mugabe in the uncontested election in June. There is no amnesty this time round, which is why police are still able to arrest a nominated MDC deputy minister - Roy Bennett - and why many in Zanu PF fear prosecution for crimes against humanity. When there is another election the old Zapu will contest it. If the 1987 agreement was designed to usher in a one-party state, this agreement seems designed to usher in intense competitive multiparty "democracy." The MDC will not be swallowed up and digested by the python. But it may emerge covered with slime. It is part of the largest and most expensive cabinet in Zimbabwe-s history. Now in charge of the economic ministries, it may be blamed for failure to bring about recovery. So, everything will be done with an eye to electoral advantage. And the most important thing of all is to seek to create conditions in which a fair election can be held.

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