Back to Index
This article participates on the following special index pages:
Zimbabwe's Elections 2013 - Index of Articles
Mugabe’s
not language of statesman or winner
Nancy
Forokah, Sokwanele
September 24, 2013
View this article
on the Sokwanele website
The latest betrayal
of the people of Zimbabwe by the African Union and the Southern
Africa Development Community through their hasty and scandalous
endorsement of the deeply flawed
July 31 elections can only further entrench governance in Zimbabwe
as a game of deceit, menace and one-upmanship.
It is not rocket
science to have foreseen that Zanu-PF, which has “won”
disputed parliamentary and presidential elections since 2000, would
be further emboldened by the latest turning of a blind eye by the
AU and SADC to its abuse of the Zimbabwean electorate.
Basking in the
false glow of a stolen victory, the leader of the party, President
Robert Mugabe, has wasted no time in taking advantage of the impunity
conferred by the AU and Sadc crony systems to gloat and rub salt
into the wounds of perplexed Zimbabweans.
His resort to
using un-statesman-like and menacing language in an outburst during
Heroes Day celebrations when he told those challenging the outcome
of the elections to “go hang” was particularly jarring
but was inevitable.
It showed he
lacks sufficient conviction in his supposed landslide victory to
refrain from commenting until the legal challenge being mounted
by the MDC was finalised. The fact that the case was dropped is
irrelevant.
As someone waiting
to commence his seventh term of office, Mugabe should conduct himself
as the president-elect of all Zimbabweans, including those who did
not vote him.
It is difficult
to fathom why the Zanu leader is so bitter against his vanquished
political rivals if he beat them fairly and has nothing to hide.
Conventional wisdom says he should have welcomed the MDC legal challenge
as a chance for the truth to come out and for him to be exonerated.
That he is not anxious to reassure Zimbabweans of his integrity
and thus regain credibility is a worrying sign of what could be
in store for the nation.
The octogenarian
continues to behave as though the position of head of state is a
party post, hence his failure to use the Heroes Day festivities
as an opportunity to put party bravado aside and reach out to Zimbabweans
of all political persuasions.
This combative
approach and use of crude language should be below the dignity of
a national leader but Zimbabwe’s president of 33 years seems
to relish it. Zimbabweans deserve better.
Even former
Nigerian president, Olusegun Obasanjo, the head of the AU election
observer mission which endorsed
the theft of the July 31 polls has not always escaped Mugabe’s
tongue-lashings. He was once subjected to a withering attack after
calling on the Zimbabwean leader to consider retiring and passing
the leadership baton on to someone else.
However, the
man who has posed the strongest challenge to Mugabe’s unyielding
grip on power, MDC leader Morgan Tsvangirai has been the most regular
victim of Mugabe’s verbal abuse. He has been regularly called
a puppet of the West and dismissed as a mere “tea boy”
who could never qualify to be the president of Zimbabwe.
These crude
attacks have been extended to include mocking the former trade unionist
about his physical looks. He has been publicly described as “chamatama”
at rallies, an uncharitable reference to Tsvangirai’s chubby
facial visage.
Tsvangirai is
no saint and has a multitude of faults but he represents a significant
segment of the electorate. In reality, these are the people Mugabe
is telling to go to hell.
The AU and Sadc
should ask themselves whether they should be throwing their weight
behind a leader who has reduced Zimbabwean politics to these ridiculous
depths.
Mugabe can afford
to be so vitriolic and insensitive because he himself is protected
by the insult laws under the draconian Public
Order and Security Act (POSA) and the Access
to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA). The provisions
of these statutes have been regularly abused and misinterpreted
to criminalise even legitimate criticism and scrutiny designed to
keep the government responsive and accountable to the people.
Mugabe’s
insensitive outbursts spark incredulity and embarrassment among
Zimbabweans who see how leaders such as Nelson Mandela are adored
and respected by their people long after they have left the political
scene. The behaviour of the Zimbabwean leader causes many to cringe.
As head of state it should be below his dignity to resort to hurling
insults at his political opponents. Mugabe fancies himself as a
Continental hero and Elder Statesman but he has still not mellowed
at almost 90 years of age to give up these juvenile ways.
It is difficult
to think of any other head of state who disrespects his own people
to the extent of subjecting them to such regular displays of lack
of decorum, tact and magnanimity.
By routinely
using abusive language the Zanu leader sets a bad example for the
nation not only as head of state in the 21st century but also as
a human being, a man, husband, father and senior citizen.
If Mugabe‘s
language against political opponents and those whose views do not
coincide with his is rude, he reserves his most scathing vitriol
to demean females of the species. He has mocked what he considered
uppity women on the international diplomatic scene who have crossed
his political path by speaking out on issues related to Zimbabwe.
In 2005, then
United Nations Habitat Executive Director, Anna Tibaijuka became
a casualty of Mugabe’s tirades. She was attacked as an agent
of Western powers and then British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s
puppet. This was after Tibaijuka had written a report describing
Mugabe’s Operation Murambatvina, during which hundreds of
thousands of abodes were demolished as inhuman and cruel.
The Tanzanian-born
UN official was accused of having come to Zimbabwe to fulfil Tony
Blair’s regime change agenda.
Eight years
later, Mugabe’s tongue is still as unrestrained and chauvinistic
as ever. At the beginning of July, he ripped into Lindiwe Zulu,
South African President Jacob Zuma’a international relations
adviser.
Her sin was
to speak out against the rush to hold the last polls on July 31
without affording all political parties enough time to prepare.
For apparently being the only voice of reason within the SADC bloc
as well as Zuma’s facilitation team in Zimbabwe, Zulu was
dismissed by Mugabe as a “street woman”. “Really
as a country, did such a person think we, as a country would take
heed of her stupid utterances”, Mugabe roared while addressing
supporters at the launch of his party’s manifesto on July
5. Like a child throwing a tantrum, he then threatened that because
of Zulu’s views, he could pull Zimbabwe out of Sadc.
Zimbabwean women
should ask themselves whether their head of state thinks of them
any differently if he can be so abusively dismissive of female officials
representing other governments.
The power of
patriarchy within African societies and politics ensures that Mugabe
can insult women with impunity whenever he wishes. He could not
get away with it in a more democratic country. In the United States,
a radio talk show host, Rush Limbaugh, sparked a nationwide controversy
in 2011 when he called Sandra Fluke, then a law student, a “slut”
and “prostitute”.
Mugabe’s
sexist insults make a mockery of his pronouncements about Empowering
Zimbabwean women. The danger posed by the complicity of regional
and continental blocs in the continual disregarding of the will
of Zimbabweans as expressed through their votes is that it makes
elections irrelevant.
With the focus
of these blocs being to shield Mugabe, Zanu-PF does not have to
win to remain in power. The electorate has been taken out of the
equation. And without guaranteed free, fair and unrigged elections,
the people of Zimbabwe have no mechanism to protect them from rampant
abuses and tyranny.
The octogenarian
claimed during his Heroes Day outburst that his party had delivered
“democracy on a platter”. His definition of democracy
is evidently different from everyone else’s. He spent the
greater part of 2011 threatening that elections would be held in
March 2012 whether his partners in the coalition government liked
it or not. That is his idea of democracy for which continental bodies
give him a pat on the back each time he wins a disputed election.
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
|