The future of any country or society is primarily determined by a policy or ideological position, a team tasked with translating the policy ideas into action and resources needed to meet the policy goals.

By Tapiwa Gomo

The general assumption is that when these are in place in a conducive and supportive environment where structures exist, systems and laws are adhered to and where safety and security of both capital and human resources are guaranteed, chances of success are high.

On November 24, President Emmerson Mnangagwa laid out his policy position during his inauguration.

On 30 November, he announced his Cabinet, the team he entrusted to deliver on his policy ideas — until the next election in 2018.

And on December 7, Finance minister Patrick Chinamasa laid out the 2018 National Budget, allocating resources to some of the President’s policy ideas.

Keep Reading

In between, the President has issued some directives such as the moratorium on externalised funds.

From a policy perspective, the President demonstrated in his inaugural speech that he has a good handle on the situation and what he needs to do or what should be done to address the country’s economic and development problems.

But again, we need to be cautious. It is one thing to say something and another to mean it and do it.

The three major announcements so far — the President’s policy position, the Cabinet and the Budget — are supposed to collectively and collaboratively deliver on the objectives.

In our case, the budget has received less boos than the Cabinet and yet it is the same ministers who are supposed to play a leadership and figurehead role in implementing the President’s policy ideas.

This disconnect will play a major role on the performance of the President and the ministers.

A lot of time and efforts has been invested in terms of both defending and justifying the Cabinet appointments via different media platforms.

Given the circumstances through which Mnangagwa assumed office, the limitations are both understandable and incontrovertible.

His hands are tied, as he is yet to secure his own legitimacy and the mandate through a democratic electoral process.

And for that reason, he has to work with what is available to him, hoping for better days after the 2018 elections.

In addition, while it is acceptably too early to judge him, it is also too early to believe him.

Millions of questions linger about his credibility. The onus is on him to clear his name in order to earn respect and trust.

We come from a brutalised past by the same hands with which he leads us. We are bleeding the blood that is dripping from his hands.

Now back to how his vision will pan out in the next eight months.

A good policy position alone, even when backed by a solid budget may not materialise if the implementors are not up to their game or are perceived not to carry the right credibility for the job.

Take for instance, Major General Sibusiso Moyo, the man who is the face of the coup, is now Foreign Affairs and International Trade minister.

He is the country’s top diplomat responsible for assuring the world that all is now well in Zimbabwe, negotiating the lifting of sanctions, rejoining the Commonwealth and giving foreign investors’ the confidence and assurances of political and economic stability.

Take nothing away from his capabilities, but Moyo carries the label of a “rogue soldier”, who can break the Constitution in pursuit of a factional agenda.

On this man, the country bequeaths its hopes of “attracting foreign direct investment to tackle high levels of unemployment while transforming our economy towards the tertiary”, as one of the key choices made by the President.

Again, enough of Moyo, the name that dominates our politics for curious and capricious reasons.

In my travels across the continent, I have met Diasporans who are hungry to return home and foreign investors who wish to come to Zimbabwe because of its skilled and disciplined labour plus the potent environment which has been contaminated over the past two decades by politics and corruption.

These will not come on account of a good speech and a promising budget when most of those “criminals” who presided over the destruction of lives and our economy are still sitting in positions of power.

Short of real change, this “new era” will be remembered for nothing other than the coup and the demise of former President Robert Mugabe, than the beginning of a new Zimbabwe.

We will fall in the same category as Iraq, Libya, Egypt and others that disposed of their dictators, but never recovered from the euphoria.

Such an objective, progressive and seemingly critical view seems to encounter frail opposition from parochialists and sympathisers of the new administration who are of the view that we must uncritically give the new administration a chance.

In their slumber of myopicism, they are oblivious of the mundane fact that it is not an ordinary citizen like me who gives a chance or withdraw it from a sitting President.

Mnangagwa now has a national responsibility to deliver and prove himself and citizens have a right to ask questions where necessary.

The only good thing in all this is that there are plenty of opportunities.

Mnangagwa has an opportunity to prove himself, clear his tainted name and sell himself to the electorate as one who deserves a full term come 2018 elections.

He also has an opportunity to give performance-related targets to his Cabinet.

That way, he will be able to lay the blame of his administration’s failures on individual ministers.

And that too will allow him to prune the deadwood that litter his Cabinet today.

Ministers, too, have the opportunity to surprise the nation by performing — something they are not known for.

When that happens, citizens will have a better opportunity to choose based on performance.

And the opposition will have the opportunity to choose between being relevant or face their demise.

Tapiwa Gomo is a development consultant based in Pretoria, South Africa