Maravi

(TALKZIMBABWE) Shock and awe tactics do not work for Zimbabwe

Shock and awe tactics do not work for Zimbabwe
Philip Murombedzi
Sun, 26 Oct 2008 00:10:00 +0000

“THE whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary” wrote H. L. Mencken. The MDC has managed to do this and more. It has managed to induce political, economic, and social chaos that would result in revolution.

To the MDC and many of its supporters, the post Mugabe era is very predictable: plenty jobs, a booming economy, huge inflows of foreign direct investment, regional harmony, no political opposition, great international relations, happy people. Many critics today fantasize about that era – an era they think will be transformed by the exit of just one individual.

The political, social and economic structure that is holding in Zimbabwe today will not be transformed by the exit of just one individual and experiences elsewhere in Africa should inform such debates.

Such narrow-minded political fanaticism is one reason why we, as a nation are failing to develop a mature political culture that is capable of cushioning the problems associated with social and political change.

Change cannot be forced, it is inevitable, but it has to be managed.

The problem, with the change forced upon Zimbabwe, is that the “movement for that change” has a different agenda. You can plan for change, but you cannot force it.

Our current combative leaders, mainly in the opposition, who claim to be the agents of change, give lip service to “a culture of political life” while practicing intolerance and selfish greed.

The argument that Morgan Tsvangirai’s integrity should not be questioned should be placed in the dustbins by those who seek democracy. The current thinking that guides many people in the opposition is that Tsvangirai is infallible and cannot do bad. There is also the argument that Mugabe should go first and then we can all focus on the next system. Others have even gone further to suggest that Tsvangirai would be easier to remove once he becomes president.

This is lazy thinking. Leaders are not elected so that they can be removed.

Morgan Tsvangirai must pass certain tests as a potential leader of Zimbabwe and that test has nothing to do with Mugabe, as a person, as a President or as leader of Zanu PF.

But this is not the main issue. The issue is that power-hungry individuals within the MDC seek to use to various strategies (that do not work in the Zimbabwean body politic) to effect change. For instance, by using a corps of aggressive strategists assisted by outside forces, friendly news media to force a realignment of political power.

Zimbabweans wait with baited breath, not for a replacement for Mugabe, but a successor for President Mugabe – a statesman who can help Zimbabweans develop as people.

As successor for Mugabe, Tsvangirai has never espoused principles and policies that I feel comfortable with, and I will never be as narrow minded as to suggest that we need change for the sake of change.

MDC wants change so that their various groups and individuals control the means of production and political power – nothing more, nothing less. The way to do it, for them, is to create a crisis – publicly visible disruption in Zanu PF’s ability to run the country.

By calling for mass demonstrations, they wanted this to happen spontaneously, but that strategy failed. Then they appealed to people’s emotions: “Are you angry and hungry?” That also didn’t work.

Then they went back to the drawing board.

The economic document RESTART espoused by the MDC some years ago is the last piece of policy document that I remember coming from the MDC. It was based on some pseudo neo-liberal idealism that will never work for Zimbabwe.

For instance the RESTART document talks about privatization of the public health service to ensure efficiency in service delivery. Privatizing the health service will increase the cost of delivery making it inaccessible to the general population. If you do not privatize, what do you do? The MDC seems to think that by some magic wand they will find a national purse ready and waiting to develop the country from.

The rescue package they are expecting from the West will not be forthcoming as US Secretary for African Affairs, Jendayi Frazer indicated two weeks ago, given the current financial crisis in the world.

The MDC has no strategy on corruption. How would they dismantle the culture of corruption, for instance? It does not disappear by controlling a certain ministry; neither does it disappear by changing the top leadership. Where will the MDC get the expertise to run these ministries if it does not draw from the civil servants – some of whom are still supportive of the Zanu PF party? People are not simply going to change their attitudes and allegiances because the leadership has changed.

Many of the people vying for positions in the MDC (Biti, Mutambara, etc) have never run state institutions. How will these people run these ministries without the requisite experience? Lectureship positions and research positions at NASA, and being a human rights lawyer does not prepare one for running institutions of government.

The MDC should let us know who and why certain individuals will be selected into those positions.

Comparisons with institutions in the UK and USA do not hold because these parties have existed for many years and have a repository of able individuals, some of them ex ministers and leaders.

The Conservative Party for instance, has shadow ministers who have been ministers under Margaret Thatcher and John Major.

The MDC simply does not connect the dots sufficiently enough for me to trust that things will transform for the better.

The argument that let’s help run down a country so as to replace government does not bode well with clear thinking people. The principle of “destroy to build” that Tsvangirai has been riding on for a very long time is a very dangerous principle. It is dangerous because you could destroy and fail to build.

The comparisons and contradistinctions between PF Zapu and MDC make me very uneasy. PF Zapu had the same vision as Zanu PF and shared the same roots. The two parties started as one and ended as one. You could change your name by deed of poll, that doesn’t change your fundamental make up.

Morgan Tsvangirai will never come anywhere near the late Dr Joshua Nkomo (May his soul rest in peace). Dr Nkomo was not called Father Zimbabwe for no reason and that title still holds, even in his death.

Nkomo cared about his people to the point of agreeing to completely merge his party with Zanu PF What was in a name afterall?

PF Zapu members never changed their vision of Zimbabwe; neither did they compromise their position with regards to their relationship with former colonizers. In any case, Zanu was formed out of Zapu, so what was wrong with Zapu becoming Zanu PF?

The MDC record of party management disasters and sulking attitude and lack of principle makes me worry about what sort of government will be borne out of this party.

As Zimbabweans we are either very naïve or borderline ignorant to want to install a party that has neither the experience nor the mental stamina to pursue national policies when party policy has been so flawed. I am worried that we do not understand the consequences of our actions and relentlessly carry on anyway because we (or will) somehow benefit.

The strategy of forcing political change through orchestrated crisis is neither honourable not responsible. The MDC merely seeks to hasten the fall of Zanu PF by overloading it with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing Zimbabwean society into crisis and economic collapse. In the meantime, an unsuspecting population waits in the wings for a sunny day that will never come.

For me, the best arrangement is what we are expecting to be borne out of the Sadc Troika meeting today – the formation of a power-sharing Government, where the MDC and Zanu PF parties can learn from each other.

The winner-takes-all attitude we have witnessed will not bode well for a country that is struggling to reclaim its position in the region and in the world.

Labels: COLOUR REVOLUTIONS, FINANCIAL CRISIS

posted by MrK @ 9:52 PM