The African world cup that never was

Millions of men, women and children have withstood repression,depression,suffering and death in uprisings, civil wars, boarder disputes and coups all in the name of nation building and developing African states in the image and likeness of the industrialized Northern nations. It’s too high a price to pay. The object of anti-imperialist nationalism and Pan-Africanism was not the nation –state but rather justice, equity, dignity, prosperity and freedom of domination (Bunting, 2000, pp87-88). This statement appears more poignant with each passing day especially when we look at the impact of the 2010 World Cup being hosted in South Africa. This is an African moment or chance that was supposed to “benefit” especially neighbouring countries to South Africa. The subtle herald for the world cup arose hope and life especially to our resurrecting economy amid rumour that most teams participating in the world cup were going to establish bases in Zimbabwe. This brought a fairytale experience especially among the locals who were already beginning to cast their hope on this great experience that was going to change their lives forever. Apart from this fairytale experience, those in the property business were beginning to borrow loans so as to build lodges and hotels for this great event. On the other hand those in the transport sector had the temerity to buy more and more taxis which would ferry people to and from airports. On the other hand the Zimbabwe Tourism Authority and its ally, the Ministry of Tourism did not spare us. From time to time we saw them on television bragging that Zimbabwe was bracing up for the World cup because they had done “enough” marketing to convince the world that Zimbabwe was a “safe “tourist destination. One thing that I thought about critically before the world cup kickoff was the state of our boarder towns. If one is to visit a town like Beitbridge today, many would see schizophrenia in the authorities. In fact they would see how unserious they were especially about the world cup.Beitbridge being close to South Africa was supposed to have an Infrastructure upgrade. What we have in Beitbridge is a sad story. Upon entrance you are welcomed by donkeys and scotchcarts.Apart from this, the roads themselves reveal a typical remote growth point in Hukuimwe.Were these small towns not supposed to be developed in the spirit of the world cup? The problem that we have is that of a country that keeps on harping on the same theme of Zimbabwe being a safe tourist destination. More emphasis has been put there and I think whoever was supposed to receive the message got it a long time ago. Little or nothing meaningful has been done in the regard of improving infrastructure in these small boarder towns. One “positive” thing we have seen as far as the world cup is concerned is the availability of large screens where people pay their hard earned dollars to watch the beautiful game of football. Those with night clubs and bottle stores have since joined the gravy train where people have no option but to watch soccer there since ZESA has failed to fulfill their part of their bargain. This is a sad story comrade. Is this the ideal African world cup that many anticipated? To say the least, there is really nothing tangible for Zimbabweans to show for after the soccer showcase. We gave so much into the World cup and yet harvested nothing. For example ZTA and the Tourism ministry paid a hefty us$ 2million dollar to the Brazilian team for taking part in a “friendly” game. What’s friendly about it if a poverty stricken country such as Zimbabwe pays that huge amount so that they play a friendly match and yet we are failing to pay our arrears to the International Monetary Fund and World Bank let alone our warriors? Maybe if that money was converted to something useful it could have been better. We have a majority of our population living under the poverty datum line. Now the ugly truth now stands before us. Surely the much awaited African world cup has come and yielded nothing to our benefit. Sadly to say, those who had borrowed loans are going to struggle repaying them while them who went on a building madness building lodges and buying taxis are going to be left in the cold having pocketed not even a cent from the world cup. Who can be blamed for this great loss of chance and opportunity? Maybe we should take solace in the fact that Ghana, an African team tried their best but i would like to believe that only South Africa benefited greatly but here in Zimbabwe it is a sad story. Blame can be attributed to those who did not do serious marketing of our country for the purpose of tourism and recreation. For us Zimbabweans, this was an African World cup that never was. Rawlings Magede is a social commentator and writes from Nkayi, Matebeleland North and can be contacted on rawedge699@gmail.com or http//no-rawedge.blogspot.com

ARE ZIMBABWEANS READY FOR ELECTIONS?

Zimbabwean Prime Minister, Morgan Tsvangirai pulled out of the presidential elections in 2008 citing political violence against his supporters. He won the first round of elections in March 2008 but failed to get the majority to be sworn into office. There has been talk or speculation in the media of elections next year in 2011.While it is a very good thing to wish for, one question that we must not ignore is whether or not the people of Zimbabwe are really ready for elections. There is truism that the people are not ready yet. I am forced to pose this question by events that unfolded on the 25th of March at a public debate hosted by the Mass Public Opinion Institute. The debate was hinged on the subject of sanctions that have continued to dog the performance of the inclusive government. The motion put in play was whether or not the sanctions debate among the political parties in the inclusive government was going to lead to the debacle of the government. Most of the parties in the inclusive government were represented.MDC-M was represented by David Coltart,ZANU PF by Cain Mathema.Also among the panelist were Mavambo Kusile president,Dr Simba Makoni and University of Zimbabwe lecturer,Dr John Makumbe. All of the panelists gave their different opinions on whether sanctions really affected the economy. In this presentation, I am not going to dwell on which opinion is correct but rather on how their different opinions incited stark criticism.Dr Makoni presented his argument and suggested that Zimbabwe was not under sanctions but the leadership of this nation has continued to take people for granted by ignoring people’s pleas for basic services such as health facilities while government Ministers waste money on useless international trips which the government argues it does not have.For example the government argues that it does not have enough money to rehabilitate the health sector but a closer examination of government’s expenditure clearly reveals a lack of political will According to him, this was a form of sanctions against the people of Zimbabwe. Some thugs only began to bring the discussion to a stand still when Dr Makumbe and Minister Coltart began to present. One is forced to ask if this was because of their skin colour.On such a day I realized that there are some people who are still living in the past and very racist. We complain about European countries being racist but we are actually ahead of them. I overheard one saying that people should not care when a white man dies. Which Zimbabwe are we living? It’s a sad development when we have some people still inclined to this kind of thinking. Where are we going as a nation if we cannot tolerate other skin colours and races? Does being white make one less Zimbabwean? We have to be honest with ourselves especially when it comes to the issue of elections. The action by these youths opened up some critical thinking especially on the readiness of the people for an election. The youths were very militant to the extent that one even charged towards Dr Makumbe and no one knows up to now what he intended to do. Of course it would be myopic to just think they were doing this out of pure frustration or disagreement. They had their handlers who obviously are politicians who just planted them there to disturb the debate especially knowing how topical the subject of sanctions is. Here was a bunch of youths being used by politicians to incite turmoil and despondency. The youths have nothing to show for the “dangerous” activities they do except for a few trinkets in the form of beer and a few Obama dollars. These youths must be reminded not to take their frustration on the people just because they skipped school because of their academic truancy and social deviancy. What might happen this time around in the 2011 elections given the scarcity of jobs in the country at present, these “useless” and destitute youths are going to be used to unleash violence like what happened in the 2008 presidential elections. The Ministry of National healing was created to deal and rehabilitate the victims of the election violence but up to the present, it has delivered nothing. People are still angry with each other and there are a lot of obstacles which might even result in vote apathy among the populace. Measures must be put in place to make sure that structures are put in place that guarantee people’s safety especially after casting their votes. What transpired at the public debate really showed that among us there are still comrades who can still be used by politicians to further their agendas? What I was thinking all along was that since the inception of the inclusive government, people have changed but I was wrong. There are some youths among us who will kill in return for a can of beer. What I thought was going to transpire at the meeting was a free expression of views and opinions. Everyone at the debate was going to contribute something that was going to give flavour and essence to the debate. I thought Zimbabwe was now at a level where we can tolerate diverging views. If our political leaders can meet every Monday and have coffee while they talk and agree on certain things, why can’t we do it as well? The approach taken by those youths at the meeting further led me to ask whether whoever their political handler was, if such a debate was so vital to them, what more of elections? If one can dedicate and plan to disrupt such a normal debate, then they can even plan even worse for an election. Comrades and friends let us not be fooled Zimbabweans are not ready for elections and let us not be deceived by politicians by trying to rush us to elections. They can’t wait to either get in power or continue being in the drivers seat. If I am wrong, I stand to be corrected but if not then, you have every reason to begin to prepare for what lies ahead. By Rawlings Magede

ARE WE THERE YET?

As relieving as it is,the mediation of South African president Jacob Zuma has been the talk with many questioning if he is going to break the impasse that has continued to dog the inclusive government.The deadline fiasco has once again come to the fore.what many still question is whether this time the parties will meet the deadline.However be that as it may,both parties clearly know that failure to meet the deadline set by Zuma,will not result in any punitive action.Is this just another topical issue that people must frequently debate about or it is a fore sign that the final debacle of the inclusive government is imminent?.We just have to wait and see.

WAS MADHUKU RIGHT?

Imagine waking up one morning to find out that your mission or what you stand for has become irrelevant? No one is interested in hearing what you have to say or your business. It seems like no one cares about what you have to say or do. This is tragic and sad especially if one used to have some clout especially when it comes to influencing events. This is the sad story of the National Constitutional Assembly which disapproved the constitution making process citing irregularities such as that the process is being led by politicians. When they announced that they were not going to participate in the process they were harangued by many and accused of living in past glories especially the 2000 referendum when they campaigned for a “no” vote. Many questioned why the NCA had become more critical of the process. Many Zimbabweans thought that the opportunity to write a constitution had come especially at a time when there was an inclusive government in place. The NCA crossed swords with most civic organizations especially when it came to the issue of the constitution. It was a the bane of unthinking egocentricism.Many thought that the inclusive government was going to ameliorate the lives of many and eliminate the dark cloud that had hung over many people’s heads over whether or not a new constitution was going to be written by the people. When the constitution making process kicked off, many anticipated that within the GPA specified time, the constitution was going to be written and follow the whole procedure of meeting the time frames. One thing that has characterized the process from its inception is bickering and continued dragging of feet especially among the three main political parties who have proved to the rest of the world that they will continue to push for their own parochial interests at the expense of the expense of the whole population. Now with the debacle of the constitution becoming a reality, many critics of the NCA are beginning to give Dr Madhuku some respite while others remain adamant that the process should be given enough time. One reality that every Zimbabwean has to awaken to is that the Constitution making process has failed due to one obstacle – politicians. This group of carders that is to include all the political parties are all enjoying the benefits from the gravy train known as the inclusive government from where they have adopted meaningless titles such as ‘honorable’ which do not reflect the dismal performance of the establishment and appear reluctant especially on the need to come up with a new constitution as stipulated in the GPA. . For the MDC, the mere fact that they overlooked the issue of people driven makes them delinquent because they call themselves the ‘people’s party’. It really becomes inane especially to its supporters who have received a raw deal since the inception of the inclusive government. They have been sidelined from the beginning. The MDC is always in chronic denial under the delusion that people should be patient with the inclusive government for it to deliver. On the other hand, ZANU PF has been enjoying the whole moribund process because that gives then time to scheme and come up with better and more successful tricks to lure the MDC to give out more concessions like in the beginning. From the time the inclusive government came into effect, ZANU PF has tested the competence and effectiveness of SADC, the guarantor of the GPA by violating the agreement. To their advantage, SADC is as incapable, useless in bringing an end to the current stalemate just like MDC. This is not to let Dr Madhuku and company off the hook. Of course they have been masquerading as people who sympathize with the people. I am amused by the kind of camaraderie that they purport to have with the people. Madhuku has openly vowed that he will decampaign the whole constitution making process. What if people after all want to be part of the process? In the event that the people don’t buy into the NCA’s manifesto, then that will take them into extinction. Speaking at a recent Quill speak, Dr Madhuku described the moribund constitution process a farce. I do agree with him there but what they stand for as NCA appears insipid because he says that NCA was created to oppose politicians not to lead the constitution making process. What if politicians really come out successful by writing a perfect constitution for this country?.Then what it means for the NCA is that they should close shop because they would have run out of business. Of course I don’t want to take credit from them because at least they predicted the failure of a monster called GNU which was going to reduce people to unthinking robots, who are incapable of contributing something meaningful to the development of society. The inclusive government has failed. It is no longer news to anyone who seems to care. The politicians have failed to write a constitution not for the people but for themselves just like what Madhuku predicted. Rawlings Magede is a free thinker who writes from Nkayi, Matebeleland North. He can be contacted at rawedge699@gmail.com

POWER SHARING: THE REAL OUTSTANDING ISSUE

“DEAL SEALED” was the front headline in the Herald when the Global Political Agreement (GPA) was signed. I can still recall the day like it was yesterday. I remember that on that fateful day I was sitting on my college balcony when a close friend of mine, Charles Saki who had a copy of the Herald dashed in with the news. It so happened that on this day I had almost forgotten about any talks that had been taking place because I had lost track of the developments due to procrastination or should I say bickering over who should be what and with what executive power especially among the political parties. So as far as I was concerned, the so called talks were nothing to look forward to. I remember the furore as people took to the streets to celebrate what seemed like an escape from the claws of corruption, dictatorship and starvation of the ZANU PF regime into the “promised land”. The main prognosis of the Zimbabwean economy at the time was mismanagement of public funds compounded by a lack of transparency within the central bank as sound economic policies were shelved in place of arcane and individualistic ones. So this new development of signing of an agreement was a defining moment for the people of Zimbabwe as it was a sign of hope for a better life. The GPA later gave birth to what became known as the inclusive government comprised of the three political parties namely ZANU PF, MDC-M and MDC-T.The inclusive government marked a historical epoch which many have described as positive in that it brought with it, the use of multiple currencies which made commodities available. However, one thing that many will forever question is whether or not the inclusive government has lived up to people’s expectations. Many people have been affected by the vicissitudes of what has become known as “outstanding issues” in trying to answer the question The GPA document resembles a perfect deal in the sense that it has provisions that seem palatable in diction that is employed. Power sharing agreements have proved to be very difficult to implement in Africa. Allow me to digress from the Zimbabwean situation for a moment. Power sharing arrangements have proved difficult to translate into practice and have failed dismally in Africa. An examination of recent high-profile peace processes in Sierra Leone, Angola, and Rwanda suggests that power-sharing is a surprisingly unstable form of government that, even at the best of times, provides only a short-term reprieve from violent conflict. Other than as transitional remedies, power-sharing agreements are virtually unworkable. As argued elsewhere, in the aftermath of civil war, power-sharing agreements are difficult to arrive at, are even more difficult to put into practice, and when implemented rarely stand the test of time. Indeed, the problem with power-sharing is even more fundamental. Power sharing does not resolve conflict but instead may only temporarily displace it or disguise disputants' more malevolent intentions. There is much that is intuitively appealing about power-sharing, and it is no surprise that it is repeatedly proposed as a form of post conflict governance. Since each group is given a slice of power and access to state resources, disputants should find, at least in theory, less to fight about. Moreover, since recent efforts at power-sharing have also included provisions that allow each group to contribute its own troops to an integrated military, a semblance of group security is sustained. In fact, despite Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki’s and his Zimbabwean counterpart Robert Mugabe's manipulation of their respective elections, power-sharing deals legitimized them to take the highest seats in the government. Botswana President Ian Khama explained the agreements in Kenya and Zimbabwe as "bad precedents for the democracy in the continent." The Kenyan case also shows that structural reforms are very difficult to implement under power sharing. The recent power-sharing agreement in Zimbabwe between Mugabe and Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai has several similarities with the one signed in Kenya. Even though the historical and political situations in the two countries are profoundly different, in both countries elections were manipulated by the governments and ended up in violence. Both power-sharing deals envisaged the creation of separated center of power and the drafting of a new constitution that could prevent further conflict in the future. Negotiated settlements of civil wars involve multiple and complex challenges. They must cope simultaneously with problems of representativeness, effective governance, and economic development. Under conditions of great turbulence, how can negotiators design institutions that will increase the likelihood of an ongoing bargaining process? One alternative, widely favored in contemporary Africa, is to attempt to reassure weaker parties about their future through the adoption of power sharing institutions, such as executive power sharing or federalism. Such arrangements appear to be logical responses to the need for ethnic inclusion, but at a possible price in terms of dealing with the challenges of governance and economic development. It therefore becomes necessary to examine other alternatives, such as political centralization, territorial partition and various hybrid models to see if these approaches have the potential to offer durable solutions during the consolidation phase of agreements. Power sharing has proved to be very arduous since there will always be acrimony especially when it comes to implementation. For example the GPA explicitly stipulates that the Prime Minister “exercises executive authority, shall ensure that the policies so formulated are implemented by the entirety of government”. Any honest person can agree with me that we haven’t seen the Prime Minister really exercising the so called “executive powers”. The GPA also stipulates that the PM “shall ensure that the Ministers develop appropriate implementation plans to give effect to the policies decided by cabinet: in this regard, the Ministers will report to the Prime Ministers will report to the PM on all issues relating to the implementation of such policies and plans”. The question however is whether ZANU PF Ministers such as Emmerson Mnangagwa, Patrick Chinamasa really report to him. Of course on paper they are supposed to do so but do they really report to him? Since the unity government came into effect we have witnessed a violation of the agreement. President Mugabe made unilateral appointments without consultation with the Prime Minister as provided for in the GPA.The GPA also states that the President in consultation with the Prime Minister “makes key appointments”. We did not see any consultation when Gono and Tomana were reappointed by the president. In addition to all this, they say the Ministry of Home Affairs is co-chaired. How true is that when we have police being used to unleash violence against MDC supporters who happen to have a representation there? Do hardliners such as Chihuri really submit to Mutsekwa? All these questions are not worth asking because the truth is already known. The truth that the MDC must always come to terms with is one outstanding issue-power sharing. Power has not been shared equally and instead of saying Gono, Tomana are outstanding issues, among a gamut of irrational issues, the real issue that they must have sought to address in the beginning was power sharing. If the MDC has been more aggressive and more tenacious towards advocating for power balance within the inclusive government, then we would not have the so called outstanding issues dogging the performance of the inclusive government. If the MDC had seen that power was not being shared from the beginning that was the best time to blow the whistle and call upon SADC to push ZANU PF to respect the agreement. But suffice to say; probably we can give them respite, since they have never been in government before. They were probably living in a fools’ paradise and busy with the fantasies of driving posh cars and being addressed as “honourables” and yet forgot that they were supposed to be equal partners in the agreement. They only announced of a partial “disengagement” late in October, after 9months of unbalanced power matrix. The inclusive government is just an establishment that has brought less change as far as ZANU PF’s hegemenony with regards to the media, security and agriculture is concerned. Of course there might be a grain of truth in saying that real change has come but most institutions have remained intact. The MDC’s role in the inclusive government was to accomplish the 3d’s; destroy that is ZANU PF’s control over state apparatus, displace the torture and unwarranted arrests and dismantle ZANU’s draconian rule. To the present day little in this regard has been achieved. ZANU PF Ministers frequently defy the GPA day and night and nothing is being done. The inclusive government lacks structures that are autonomous from political interference. For example the Joint Monitoring and Implementation Committee was created to oversee the progress and implementation of the Global Political Agreement but it is toothless in the sense that it cannot carry out its mandate because lack of structures to support its work. We have a situation where we have moribund committees and Ministries created by the inclusive government that lacks any form of power. For example the Ministry of National Healing and Reconciliation is defunct and has delivered nothing since its inception. These Ministries are of paramount importance but what ZANU PF has successfully managed to do is to paralyze these institutions so that they exist only in name but with really little or no progress at all. As the inclusive government celebrates its one year anniversary maybe one thing to reflect and take stock of is, whether power has really been shared especially among the political parties. This question appears more poignant to many because the situation that we have after a year of “power sharing” cannot escape scrutiny. Maybe the MDC needs to rethink their position especially when it comes to power sharing. Will the MDC continue to get a raw deal in 2010? Only time will tell. We just have to wait and see. Rawlings Magede is an intern at Misa-Zimbabwe.He can be contacted on http://no-rawedge.blogspot.com/

WHO SHOULD WRITE A CONSTITUTION?

< WHO SHOULD WRITE A CONSTITUTION? By Rawlings Magede A Constitution is in simple terms and its most fundamental level, a society’s decision-making rule book which has some temporal continuity. But how do we decide who writes the book? If an elite group determines the fundamental rights which are an essential component of democracy, they face the charge of being undemocratic. If it’s left to the majority to determine these rights, the majority, might in its own self self-interest exclude a norm, such as that of equality, which by some international standards is regarded as an essential component of democracy. A Constitution provides a society with a vision for the future. It is a guiding document containing principles that limit the state power and protect people’s liberties and rights. It is a supreme law that provides for an open and free society based on government accountability, the rule of law and transparency. A constitution affects all citizens. Government should ensure that the constitution making process is legitimate, credible, lawful and reflective of the will of the people. Citizen participation should ensure that minority voices are heard and addressed during the constitution review process. Without civil society participation, the constitution will never be accepted by its main constituency, the people it purports to serve and protect. A minority opinion should be given as much weight as a majority public opinion by those tasked with overseeing the constitution-making process. Without a participatory people-driven process, constitution making or constitution reform is deemed a failure. Therefore the role of a vibrant and active civil society cannot be overestimated in the process of constitution making. In a country like Zimbabwe where the ruling elite lack political will, where there is limited or no free media, where an open and transparent political governance is non-exist ant, where a constitutional committee undertakes its work with a severely restricted mandate and it carries out its mandate timidly, too afraid to challenge its political masters, it is often only civil society that agitates for a meaningful change and holds government excesses in check. The role of an open and free media is seminal in the educational aspect of the constitution making process. People trained in and knowledgeable about the process and constitutional issues should be deployed throughout the country to conduct information sharing sessions and to solicit submissions from the public. The people who conduct the education and information sharing should be selected for their lack of political bias and credibility in the community and their ability to speak local languages. Their work should be done in an open and transparent manner. The quality of democracy can be affected by the substance of its constitution. The process of constitution making, however essential must be analyzed in the context of the issues regarding the context or substance. A constitution cannot be expected to act as a panacea for all political problems. Many constitutions in the world were negotiated by parties locked in a sort of entrenched political stalemate. An example is Kenya where since the formation of a unity government brokered by former U.N Secretary General Mr. Kofi Annan, President Kibaki has been making unilateral appointments without consulting Prime Minister Odinga.They have also been also been singing from different hymn books on how the constitution should be written. The Kenyan example is very similar to our own problems at home .Even if a constitution is written legitimately; there is a possibility of abuse of power by any incumbent of power. However what is important is constant constitution reform from time to time if the morass that surrounds democracy is to be cleared out. The current constitution process underway is a caveat of what is likely to erupt in the near future. It is common knowledge that the Parliamentary led process does not reflect the will of the people. Parliament has not been effective in maintaining any independence from the executive and if anything, the executive has had its way in terms of law making to the extent that the separation of powers doctrine has not been operative. The constitution making process now hangs in limbo.ZANU-PF cannot endure the thought of loosing elections under a new constitution while the MDC has not fully nursed the wounds of political violence unleashed against its supporters in 2008.The lack of funding that has crippled the process really force one to question whether the Inclusive government ever prioritized the constitution making process. Also of interest is Paul Mangwana’s remark who is part of the Parliamentary Committee. He even reiterated that people should not continue reminding him that by speeding the constitution process, he was writing his own removal and that the chances of him voting for a new constitution would be diminished. An onerous task lies ahead of us. The constitution is being written when the country is facing a political crisis and where it has to address certain social economic problems. There may be a temptation to address these particular issues speedily and the solutions offered may not be appropriate in the long term. It is impossible to determine which factors will prevail in the future and this is important that drafters of the constitution allow sufficient flexibility to meet unpredictable and unforeseen challenges. Although the inclusive government has continued the constitution process which various schools of thought have questioned, one thing will always hover on the horizon of disappointment for the inclusive government. The process is not people- driven and therefore illegitimate.

SADC SAILING UNDER FALSE COLOURS

One of the most controversial questions being asked by many people today is can SADC find a lasting solution to the disagreements within the Inclusive government? Many stories especially on the role of SADC in Zimbabwe have been written and they will continue to be written, but what many people still question is when the “African solutions to African problems” are coming. The fulsome conclusion that SADC leaders are pressuring the three political parties in the inclusive government is very myopic and deceiving. The charade stance by SADC to make the world believe that it is doing everything in its power to bring to an end the disagreement or outstanding issues in the Zimbabwean scenario is very misleading. Since the inclusive government came into effect, several summits on Zimbabwe have been called and this has not brought any change whatsoever.SADC has continued to digress from its promises that it made to the world. Towards the end of 2010, they called a summit in Maputo to try and make the MDC re-engage with ZANU PF and more interestingly they gave the inclusive government a deadline to implement what the MDC termed “outstanding issues”. The deadline elapsed with no outstanding issue having been dealt with within the stipulated timeframe and SADC never took any punitive action against the party that was in violation. Such a development has caused many people to question the role of SADC in resolving conflict. Of course there might be a grain of truth in the assertion that SADC has over the years managed to bring a little bit of sanity in regional politics but one truth that we can not deviate from is that when it comes to serious matters especially that have to do with conflict, SADC has proved that it incapable of bringing lasting solutions. For example we can look at war torn and poverty stricken nations like Somalia, Nigeria, Sudan, and Ivory Coast where thousands of people have been displaced due to political upheaval while SADC has only gone to the extent of taking a critical stance but failing to bring a solution. There is stark misconception especially among elements within ZANU PF that SADC must find an African solution to the Zimbabwean crisis is simply a move by a bunch of inept leaders who have benefitted greatly in 1997 when their leader, Robert Mugabe was the chairman of the SADC organ on security and defence. Being the chairman of SADC, Mugabe deployed Zimbabwean troops and led Angola and Namibian troops in a military intervention in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Being the Chairman at the time it is the same SADC,a bit reformed though, that Mugabe is dealing with today. He knows how to play his “game” well and he can delay all he wants because she knows the very weaknesses of SADC. All the stories in the media about the about the role of SADC in the Zimbabwean situation have ceased to have meaning. All these stories are compact, apocryphal, told in rapid succession and most people now are tired of this same rhetoric.SADC objectives clearly summarized, include evolving common political values, systems and institutions and promoting peace and security. One is forced to ask what or how many countries have had peace restored to them under the close monitoring of SADC. SADC is more concerned about peace rather than justice. Peace means that as long as there are no people in the streets demonstrating about any social injustice, then to SADC there is no need for intervention. In the case of the current environment where everyone is busy with trying to survive, then to SADC its main objective of fostering peace is being achieved. As far as the administration of law is concerned, such a mandate is too much for SADC. In countries such as Zimbabwe and Botswana strengthening African Institutions and pressurizing them to uphold their protocols on human rights, elections and good governance is the best path to democracy. A lasting solution to the current political upheaval in the country in Zimbabwe or elsewhere on the continent is strengthening the ballot and amplifying regional and continental peacemaking through the African Union and SADC. BY Rawlings Magede