|
Back to Index
The
roots of political violence go deep in Zimbabwe
Levi Kabwato,
Pambazuka News
April 07, 2011
http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/books/72344
Zimbabweans ought to
take time to understand the country-s tortured history of
violence in order to make sense of the present. This is the message
from the University of Zimbabwe-s Professor Lloyd Sachikonye
who is in South Africa to launch his new book, 'When A State
Turns on its People: Violence in Zimbabwe-.
The book itself
is the end product of research into political violence in Zimbabwe,
especially during the 2008
election campaign. Hence, it is primarily an analysis of records
of violence documented in the past 10 years. 'What sparked
my concern,- Sachikonye says, 'is that in 2008, Zimbabwe
was on the verge of political change with [Morgan Tsvangirai of
the Movement for Democratic Change] having won the first round of
the [March 2008] presidential
election and the indicators were there to suggest a similar
result in the run-off. But then you had a process whereby state
agents intervened and stopped that process.-
The professor said other
concerns which led him to write the book were borne out of a need
to analyse the ramifications of 2008 political violence on the wider
Zimbabwe society. He noted acts of revenge perpetrated against those
who were deemed to have voted for the 'wrong party-.
These victims reportedly suffered livestock theft, arson attacks
and displacement.
But there seems
to be growing yet mistaken thinking that political violence in Zimbabwe
had its genesis moment in 2000 and only reared its ugly head 2008.
An obvious elimination of a key fact by that thinking becomes the
Gukurahandi massacres of the 1980s, reflective discussion of which
has been consistently repressed by the state. So, where exactly
do the roots of political violence lie in Zimbabwe-s history?
'Roots of political
violence in Zimbabwe go deep,- says Sachikonye. He adds: 'They
go back to the 1960s. When ZANU PF and ZAPU were rivals in this
period, they used violence as a tool for mobilisation, especially
in the townships. These groups used petrol bombs, stones and other
tools which enabled them to gain the upper political ground. That
tradition continued during the liberation struggle, particularly
within the liberation parties themselves; there was use of violence
against dissidents and those who questioned the leadership both
in ZANU PF and ZAPU.-
Unfortunately, there
would be a hangover of this culture in the postcolonial state. 'After
independence, the state began to use the very same structures of
violence it had inherited from its colonial past to put down those
it deemed its opponents,- says Sachikonye. He does not absolve
colonialism of any responsibility. 'But one cannot runaway
from colonial violence because then you even had the use of dogs,
detention and torture and those techniques were carried over into
the new state,- he adds.
The professor describes
as a 'missed opportunity-, the failure of a newly independent
Zimbabwe to seek a different political path from what colonialism
had chartered for it. 'In 1980 we missed an opportunity to
pause and reflect on political violence and maybe even probe deeper
and find out who had participated in political violence and address
the issue of impunity,- he says.
Although Zimbabwe is
not an exception on the continent with regards to inheriting, in
their entirety, colonial structures of violence, could not its comparatively
late independence in 1980 have served as a lesson on what needed
to be done soon after winning freedom in dismantling the shackles
of oppression?
'A reason for this
could be that the liberation war was a distraction for this kind
of consideration. The majority of countries, especially our neighbours
in the [SADC] region except for Mozambique did not pursue the option
of liberation war. But there still was a need to take a serious
review of that,- says Sachikonye.
He adds: 'There
was a policy of reconciliation but this was from the top, it wasn-t
a collective response by society to what had happened. Every family
in Zimbabwe had been touched, one way or another, by the liberation
war. I think 1980 would have been the vantage point to look into
the excesses that had happened during the war both within the liberation
movements and also those committed by the colonial state against
the citizens. That golden opportunity was missed.-
Be that as it may, Zimbabwe
is at a point where the country desperately needs to go through
national healing processes, which can enable issues of transitional
justice to be addressed in a sensitive but comprehensive way. But
what shape can - and should - the organ for national healing? What
should it look like? And how could it be informed by, for example,
the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) in post-apartheid
South Africa?
'South Africa managed
to grapple with the issue of political violence and healing in a
different but comprehensive way through the TRC . . . In the book,
I make reference to what civil society organisations in Zimbabwe
have been proposing for some time now - the need for a comprehensive
transitional justice approach. Those in government can do well to
look closely at those proposals,- says Sachikonye.
But what about
the role of the state through the organ
for national healing? What interventions can be made taking
this avenue? '[The organ] has not been very active, has had
very little credibility within Zimbabwean society and I don-t
think it has accomplished what it set out to do. I think that partly
is a result of the restricted terms of reference it received from
the onset,- Sachikonye says. He adds: 'I also think
here again was an opportunity that was missed under the GPA
(Global Political Agreement) for a forum or institution to take
a much more comprehensive but also participatory approach to transitional
justice. This organ was imposed from the top but what is needed
is broad representation from civil society and other layers of society.-
He also makes the point
that this organ will have to look to international practices and
experiences such as those from countries like Sierra Leone and Liberia
to discover the strengths and weaknesses of their approaches to
transitional justice. This is not rocket science. So, why does there
seem to be a great reluctance to pursue such avenues? Or does Zimbabwe
have a government in place that has got its priorities in the wrong
place?
'It seems as if
the priorities in Zimbabwe at the moment are constitutional reform
and the next election. There is very little talk about serious institutional
and collective approaches to transitional justice so the chances
of having this organ functioning as it should are limited until
there is a new democratic government is set up,- says Sachikonye.
Concern is growing around
Zimbabwe-s next election. Recent reports indicate a rise in
cases of political violence and analysts are warning against regression
into the 2008 atmosphere. How damaging can such a regression be?
'2008 was symbolic
in that for the first time in Zimbabwe-s history, the [ZANU-PF
regime] lost a crucial election but sought to maintain power through
the use of widespread, systematic and targeted violence,-
says Sachikonye. He adds: 'As I mentioned earlier, violence
in Zimbabwe is deep-rooted. [ZANU-PF] has leaders who boast of having
degrees in violence. These 'degrees- were obtained from
experiences accumulated in the 1960s and 1970s and that culture
is part of the fabric of how they look at political processes. They
don-t see a peaceful election as a normal election anymore.-
But at the heart of this
culture of violence are young people, most of whom still had not
been born in the 1960s or indeed the 1970s when political parties
such as ZANU-PF were 'accumulating experience- in the
use of violence. How come youths buy into this culture and become
feared agents of terror in Zimbabwe?
'Unfortunately
we have not been able to address the issue of violence seriously.
As a result, we have thousands of youths who have been indoctrinated
into this whole strategy of political violence. Unemployment and
promises of jobs, cash and other opportunities are partly the motivators
of youth going this way. But then these youths are usually discarded
after the elections. This is very unhealthy for our society,-
says Sachikonye.
It is quite clear that
ZANU-PF has successfully hijacked the discourse on Zimbabwe and
is looking set to claiming the agenda-setting role. Already, it
would appear that in the fragile government of national unity (GNU),
the party is dictating what issues should be tackled. What weaknesses
in Zimbabwean society could have possibly delivered this outcome
to the erstwhile ruling party?
'There is little
analytical discussion of violence itself in the media, particularly
the state-controlled media. What you tend to find is underreporting
of incidents political violence, misreporting of that violence in
that the perpetrators of such are not named and sometimes you have
disinformation regarding political violence. All these do not contribute
to an analytical discussion on violence, we need to go beyond this,-
says Sachikonye.
But how can Zimbabweans
go beyond that, arguably, shallow understanding of the role of violence
in their history?
'I think they need
to be honest with themselves, they need to be honest with their
history. Since the 1960s, political violence has been used as a
tool of obtaining political power. We need to grow out of that,
we need to grow out of state impunity but also party impunity. We
need to break the cycle of violence and the only way to break it
is to break the cycle of impunity. This means that those who were
involved in violence during the time of the Gukurahundi and in later
years such as 2000 and 2008 need to be brought before the courts.
But they know that this won-t happen. So there is cynicism
towards the system that lets people get away with murder in the
name of a particular party,- Sachikonye says.
He adds: 'The rule
of law needs to be implemented rigorously and independently. This
means that there is need for strong, non-partisan institutions.-
But then, Zimbabwe-s institutions are pathetically weak, a
result of a decade of unashamed manipulation and deliberate disabling
of the capacity for them to deliver as they are mandated. What then
becomes the role of African institutions such as the Southern African
Development Community (SADC) and the African Union (AU)?
'SADC has guidelines
and principles on the conduct of democratic elections. That body
can play the role of a moral force and can encourage adherence to
those principles. The AU also has a charter on good governance and
elections and its incumbent upon them to enforce such charters.
Moving towards the next election, SADC and AU must dispatch teams
to Zimbabwe quite early, not a week before the election but perhaps
two months before the election and a month after that,- says
the professor.
He continues: 'I-m
not naïve. I know that in these institutions there are countries
that are not fully democratic like Swaziland. You-re probably
expecting too much if you think that those countries can play a
crucial role in the democratisation of other countries. But all
the same, they have agreed to abide by certain guidelines and they
must do that.-
So, faced with all of
the above, how can civil society best engage in the region with
success? 'Solidarity, Solidarity, Solidarity. There is a lot
regional civics have learnt from each other and they must continue
to do so. Beyond that, there is an opportunity for collective approaches
on particular campaigns such as those on violence and elections,-
says Sachikonye.
The book is a deeply
provocative intervention that will take the reader through half-a-century
of political violence in Zimbabwe. It will direct the reader to
intra-party violence motivated by the scramble for positions. Even
civil society organisations and the church will discover that this
very same violence has seeped into their structures and has begun
to affect the entire political culture of Zimbabwe.
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
|