×
NewsDay

AMH is an independent media house free from political ties or outside influence. We have four newspapers: The Zimbabwe Independent, a business weekly published every Friday, The Standard, a weekly published every Sunday, and Southern and NewsDay, our daily newspapers. Each has an online edition.

It’s primarily about Zim — not this or that party

ZIM TRANSITION
I HAVE never had any pretensions of being prescient or prophetic, but the sociological perspective I was exposed to as a keen-to-learn first-year university student taught me that society has a way of resetting itself, of balancing itself, whether 37 years later or much sooner.

I HAVE never had any pretensions of being prescient or prophetic, but the sociological perspective I was exposed to as a keen-to-learn first-year university student taught me that society has a way of resetting itself, of balancing itself, whether 37 years later or much sooner.

By CONWAY TUTANI

I wrote on Facebook on November 6, 2017, the day former President Robert Mugabe sacked his then deputy Emmerson Mnangagwa: “I believe the firing of Mnangagwa could have unintended and, crucially, positive consequences not necessarily immediately, but in the medium to long-term. I hold no brief for Mnangagwa, but it (his dismissal) has the potential to backfire on Mr and Mrs Mugabe and remove their chokehold on the nation. Watch this space.” Well, my prognosis was proved correct.

After Mugabe’s forced removal by the military, I went on to dispassionately say that in the circumstances it was a necessary first step towards democratisation based on empirical evidence the world over.

Of course, some people don’t want to hear this because they are too much of interested parties and/or cannot think outside the academic box. But in her book titled The Role of the Military in Political Transition: Egypt — A Case Study, Rozetta Meijer laid out how it pans out: “Militaries have played significant roles in the transition from authoritarian regimes to more democratic political systems. Most of these transitions took place in Southern Europe and Latin America. They often started with cracks within the ruling party, which ultimately led to a transition towards the installation of another regime and, in most cases, to some form of democratisation. Based on those empirical examples, a few key indicators predicting the behaviour of the military in transition can be distinguished . . . During the transition the civilian authorities should guarantee the military certain prerogatives in order to keep it satisfied.”

Precious Shumba displayed this clarity of mind about the current situation, as illustrated by Meijer, when he said on Facebook this week: “The MDCs in their various formations will not FULLY (my emphasis) defeat Zanu PF and gain State power without the support of the Zimbabwe Defence Forces.”

That’s the reality of the situation instead of issuing empty ultimatums. You cannot afford to get the basic premise wrong. You cannot start with the second step, but the first step. If you get the starting point wrong, you are doomed — monumentally and disastrously so.

This is fact, not fiction — and it doesn’t change whether you are MDC-T or Zanu PF; or whether one reads my opinion pieces mainly for “diction and expression”. We are talking about universal truths here to show how Zimbabweans can work out a win-win situation after Mugabe’s long-overdue fall. It’s about dealing with the reality of the situation, not go the route of false radicalism we are hearing from some quarters that have no leverage to talk about who are calling for immediate confrontation with the army, which can make the situation even worse for the long-suffering masses.

Fortunately, there is growing consensus in Zimbabwe about what needs to be done or not be done. Consensus is defined as “general agreement among members of a given group (such as a nation like Zimbabwe), each of which of which exercises some discretion in decision-making and follow-up”.

In that vein, I am detecting a paradigm, even seismic, shift in how people are now viewing things post-Mugabe. More and more people are now thinking outside the academic box after seeing through the vacuity of positions proffered by some experts, who postulate, hypothecate, hypothesize, assume, presume, presuppose ad nauseam. Postulated Mlondolozi Ndlovu on Facebook this week: “Opening Zimbabwe’s economy to the markets without addressing major political questions is like building a house on sand. Not yet uhuru (freedom).”

First, it’s not true because China and Singapore have done that without effecting major political reforms.

Second, Ndlovu did not reckon with the growing number of Zimbabweans who will have none of this confirmation bias — the tendency to cherry-pick information that confirms one’s pre-existing beliefs or hypotheses.

Shot back Shephard Ben Abraham: “Hambani khatshana lama political questions enyu (Go away with your political questions). People want bread and butter issues, not philosophies of dead Europeans . . . intozenu zofukunda kakhulu sezilihlanyisa (too much education is now making you mad).”

Indeed, we need to interrogate these postulations which often prove to be carefully-packaged and high-sounding empty, senseless talk or writing and even outright lies. We should be as frankly honest with each other as we are with the government and the opposition, not propagate and perpetuate balderdash. We should state it plainly like political analyst Pedzisai Ruhanya did this week: “Why do people think that the MDC, especially the one led by Morgan Tsvangirai, can’t be criticised and that if one does so, they are Zanu PF?”

Referring to such people who oppose for the sake of opposing, Felix Chiroro wrote on Facebook: “They cried Mugabe must go.

Now he’s gone and they make lots of noise about a forced resignation. Of course, resignation happens through force of circumstances! Exactly what do these folk want? Of course, they want to be the only ones who cause people to resign. If it’s not them who have caused it, then it’s a coup, illegitimate, illegal, improper, or forced resignation. Any ideas to build the economy belong to them; anyone else who tries is stealing their ideas . . . How self-serving! In life, we have to accept that even our rivals can help us achieve our goals.”

In that vein, the opposition MDC Alliance’s blanket and over-the-top condemnation of the reasonable, though not 100% perfect, National Budget presented last week is not only totally misguided and self-defeating like the outright condemnation of the way Mugabe was removed, but hypocritical in that the budget is not much different from their policy papers issued over the years.

What’s needed is a constructive opposition, which not only remains vigilant in holding government accountable, insisting on transparency and watching out for corruption, but also promotes equality and access to opportunity so that more and more Zimbabweans can achieve their goals and share in the wealth of the nation. Not one which opposes anything and everything regardless of the consequences to the nation. The last thing we need is a situation where winning power at any cost becomes more important than passing laws for the good of the nation.

That is the growing consensus in the nation after decades of mutually destructive conflict with political parties perpetually doing each other down at any and every opportunity.

So, it’s primarily about Zimbabwe — not this or that party.

lConway Nkumbuzo Tutani is a Harare-based columnist. Email: [email protected]