Botswana has repeatedly called for the new elections in Zimbabwe.
I doubt if she will continue with such vim and verve after recent shocking revelations of corruption.
Mugabe must be rejoicing. Frankly, new elections are unavoidable in Zimbabwe. But African leaders have distorted views about elections.
They believe that holding elections, whether free and fair, or not, can automatically resolve their political differences. It is not so in Africa. In Africa, elections hardly produce credible governments. Frequently, ‘democratically’ elected governments notoriously pass ‘undemocratic’ policies. Those in power only reward their closest friends/relatives at the expense of the poor and weak, who voted them into power. Some leaders connive with multi-national corporations to arrest national development. In Africa, elections are meant to legitimize ‘illegitimate’ governments. Such elections are never fair. Ruling parties are clandestinely funded by public funds disguised as donations from ‘our friends’. There are allegations that some presidents bribe elections observers.
Elections observers report what their countries want to hear. They are not independent.
And will never be. The International Community is always biased towards one party/leader for selfish gain. For how long have we been told that Botswana’s elections are free and fair? Institutions in Africa are weak, personalized and corrupt to the core. Unless we have independent and accountable Independent Electoral Commissions (IECs), Africa must forget about credible elections. Why then do we expect Zimbabwe to hold credible elections? It is flimsy to demand free/fair elections from Zimbabwe while ‘elected’ governments continue passing ‘undemocratic’ policies. Mugabe is aware that his peers are in power through ‘undemocratic’ means. They froze when he threatened to pinpoint them. Botswana and Zambia were brave enough to shout. Ironically, Botswana is now nursing an acquired political cancer known as ‘Mugabeism’. In Zambia, there are gristly revelations of corruption under the late Levy Mwanawasa’s leadership. Chiluba must be rejoicing.
I cannot comprehend how new elections will resolve political tension in Zimbabwe. What mechanisms would be put in place this time? Why such mechanisms were not availed during the first round of elections held in March 2008? The March 2008 elections were said to be nearly free. Obviously not fair. In Africa, fair elections are impossible. During the March 2008 elections, there was less political intimidation. Tsvangirai too, endorsed this assertion. It was only after the results had shown that Mugabe terribly lost that political violence and accusations emerged. It then took over a month to release elections results. The bone of contention was not mainly about the voting process itself, but the way the counting was done. What are the lessons that SADC, African Union (AU) and elections observers learnt from that experience? Will the lessons be positively used to better the impending elections? It is only after the commitment to act on previous anomalies that we can loudly call for new elections. The second round of elections held in June 2008 did not produce a president in Zimbabwe. The chaotic political atmosphere was not conducive to hold elections. The same June 2008 conditions are latent in Zimbabwe. There is entrenched mistrust between political parties. Critically, this cannot be resolved by elections. What makes us think that Mugabe would accept the elections results if he loses? He previously refused to do so. If Mugabe refuses again, what will our leaders do? Nothing. Their hands are also dirty. SADC and AU failed Zimbabweans many times. African leaders connive with Mugabe to undermine the will of Zimbabweans. They do not have confidence in Tsvangirai. He, himself, does not have self-confidence. He has all the hallmarks of a political buffoon. He sometimes chastises those who call for new elections. But his spokesperson, Nelson Chamisa, said that new elections are inevitable to resolve the political impasse.
I repeat that new elections cannot ease the tension between Mugabe and Tsvangirai. And it will not resolve Zimbabwe’s political woes. Zimbabwe’s political culture is profoundly different from that of many African countries. This is the reality that those who call for new elections must accept and accommodate. Free and fair elections are impossible in Zimbabwe. When Mugabe assumed power in 1980, he declared that he wanted to create a one-party-state. His views have not changed. In 2008, he declared that only God will remove him from power. ZANU-PF too, truly believes this. In Botswana too, our leaders were/are determined to establish a one-party-dominant-state. Using Machiavellianism, they managed to achieve their mission. Annoyingly, Batswana revere their leaders so much even if they confess to have corruptly amassed tainted wealth to remain in power. True to the spirit of the slogan: “Domi ya rona le bana ba rona”, Batswana are stubbornly passive.
In Zimbabwe, Tsvangirai is losing credibility and trust, at a fast rate, among Zimbabweans. This is ZANU-PF. They have politically crippled him. They did the same to Joshua Nkomo after signing a deal with him in the 1980s. Tsvangirai can only win the impending elections simply because Zimbabweans want to get rid of Mugabe. Tsvangirai’s sincerity and political vision are increasingly becoming distorted. He now purely resembles a trade unionist leader; the Chiluba type. Tragically, Tsvangirai is now suffering from an acquired political cancer known as ‘Mugabeism’. Today, he tells us that Mugabe is fully cooperating. Tomorrow, he comes with a politically incoherent speech lambasting Mugabe. In the same speech, he would be asking the world leaders to lift sanctions against Mugabe. Tsvangirai is only best as a workers’ union leader; advocating for pension funds for mine workers, not as Zimbabwe’s president. He is politically brave, but empty-headed. Zimbabwe needs a better leader. For ordinary Zimbabweans, the talk of new elections only brings sad memories. It reminds them of ‘Operation Red Ink’. Here, they were brutalized for positively abstaining from the chaotic June 2008 elections. This was preceded by another brutal campaign: ‘Operation Makavotera Papi?’ (Who did you vote for?). I doubt whether ordinary Zimbabweans want new elections. After all, their political choice is dwindling. Tsvangirai and Mugabe are now sworn ‘husband and wife’. Till death do us part! Pure African politics!
In the first place, Zimbabwe’s power-sharing deal should not have been implemented. During the negotiations, Mugabe was accorded undue respect as the supreme leader of Zimbabwe despite having embarrassingly lost the elections. In peace negotiations, all parties should be accorded equal status so that their views are heard, analyzed and acted upon by impartial negotiators. But in Zimbabwe’s case, Thabo Mbeki was very biased. He doubted Tsvangirai’s capabilities, intellect and political intentions. Mbeki saw Tsvangirai as a politically incoherent buffoon and ‘a cry baby’. Now, I understand why Mbeki did not have confidence in Tsvangirai. After all, Mbeki, like Mugabe, is an intellectual. Tsvangirai is just a miner. Mugabe’s involvement in the Congo war in 1998 helped this miner to fully participate in Zimbabwe’s rough politics.
Tsvangirai used the opportunity to transform his trade union into a political party to oppose Mugabe’s political decisions. In 2000, when Mugabe grabbed white-owned farms, things ‘fell apart’. Tsvangirai suddenly became the darling of the West; a privilege indeed. Zimbabwe’s land question is too political to resolve. When calling for new elections, we must put Zimbabwe’s politics into proper context.
In conclusion, I reiterate that the elite conflict in Zimbabwe has exacerbated the anxiety of ordinary Zimbabweans. There were hopes that the two men will resolve Zimbabwe’s pressing socio-economic and political problems. Over a year now, Mugabe and Tsvangirai are still quarreling over the appointment of the Central Bank Governor and Attorney General. And peasants are struggling to eke out a living. I commend Zimbabweans in Diaspora for feeding and educating their relatives back home. Otherwise, we would have witnessed a humanitarian catastrophe. Because of political bickering, Zimbabwe’s future is uncertain. I appeal to the International Community, AU, SADC and Zimbabwean leaders to be considerate to the suffering of the majority. I am angered by the biasness and self-serving attitude displayed by all these groups. We should not blindly believe that elections alone can resolve Zimbabwe’s complex problems.
Zimbabwe needs reconciliation. Its problems did not start in 2000; a distorted view held by our leaders. Since 1980, Zimbabwe state has been captured by an intolerant brutal regime. Thousands were murdered in Matabeleland and Midlands by Mugabe’s ruthless Fifth Brigade. Genocide is unpardonable.
Tsvangirai must know that his unholy actions are reversing democratic change. Why is he vigorously campaigning for the lifting of sanctions against Mugabe and his cronies? He should be talking of sanctions against Zimbabwe not individuals.
Zimbabwe’s land question is complex. It cannot be resolved by elections. Lastly, I implore our leaders in Botswana to put their house in order if they want to give Zimbabwe some holy lectures. I recommend these books to African leaders: Ayitteh (1993), Africa Betrayed; Bayart (1993), The State in Africa: The Politics of the Belly; and Bayart et. al. (1999), Criminalization of the State in Africa.
*MANATSHA is a PhD Candidate (Asian Studies) Hiroshima University, Japan
