It’s business as usual Mr President!

By Rawlings Magede

It will be very unfair to compare President Emmerson Mnangagwa and the current Tanzanian President John Pombe Magufuli.This is so in the sense that the two African countries face different problems at the moment. For Magufuli he has proved his critics wrong by introducing sweeping reforms in his government that has even forced his doomsayers to acknowledge that its indeed no longer business as usual. On the other hand, Mnangagwa is presently seized with the mammoth task of managing relations within ZANU PF and ensuring that he does not disappoint those who help him ascend to the highest throne in the land.

What is rather interesting about these two Presidents is that they all belong to political parties that have been in power for a long time and the founding fathers of their parties (Mugabe and Nyerere) are both credited for their stance on the need for black empowerment. When Magufuli took over Presidency in 2015, Tanzania was burdened by a myriad of problems that include ghost workers in the civil service and corruption by officials connected to his party, Chama Cha Mapinduzi among other ills. But today he has made steady progress in addressing these problems.
Coincidentally President Mnangagwa inherited a government burdened by rampant corruption, poor economic policies and in some instances gross incompetence by those in government. In the case of Magufuli, his current tenure has brought a lot of positives and incremental gains for Tanzania. He has implemented sweeping reforms and has managed to reconfigure the Chama Cha Mapinduzi party.

The thousands of people who took heed to the call by the war veterans to stage a march against former president, Mugabe, had hoped that the new president was going to lead a new era that would see a departure from the old way of running a government. Most people criticized Mugabe’s administration of recycling deadwood which he interchangeably rotated among government ministries for his own parochial interests. In Mugabe’s era there are Ministries whose actual mandate was never known by the public, a clear example is the Psychomotor Ministry that was led by Josiah Hungwe.In my view such a practice by Mugabe forced citizens to lose trust and confidence in certain Ministries. Rather than have confidence in such Ministries, citizens would make jokes out of the Ministers appointed by Mugabe. Even his cabinet reshuffle did not even reflect “reshuffling” but was just a cheap way used to coerce his lieutenants to continue supporting him.

However, on 1 December 2017, the nation awoke to the news that President Mnangagwa had announced his long awaited cabinet. From the day he was inaugurated, the new President in my view had hit the ground running by implementing cost cutting measures that even saw him missing the inauguration of Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta. He even refused to have the expensive Mercedes Benz used by Mugabe as part of his motorcade. For a moment I concurred with his supporters that the President was on the right path.

His latest cabinet is uninspiring, seems like a return to the old day of the Mugabe era and is not in tandem with his earlier calls on rebuilding the country. Most of the Ministers in the new cabinet presided over corrupt activities and still owe citizens an explanation. The new cabinet has also seen the inclusion of military personnel who have taken up two key ministries (Agriculture and Foreign Affairs respectively). Whether the military personnel have a proven track record of competency remains to be seen and is the subject for another day.

My greatest disappointment with the new cabinet is the lack of inspiration from some of the appointed Ministers. In my view, the new cabinet seems to be a reward by the President of his allies who over the years advanced his bid to succeed former president Mugabe. What is even frustrating is the fact that some of the old cabinet ministers reappointed have long gone past their expiry date. Was the new cabinet not supposed to be made up of new faces who have enthusiasm and energy to work? Even the omission of someone hardworking like Mayor Justice Wadyajena is shocking given the sterling work he did when he was chairing the Parliamentary Portfolio committee on Youth and Indigenization. Former Ministers of Youth Savior Kasukuwere and Patrick Zhuwawo dreaded appearing before the committee where they knew that the committee was tough on issues of transparency and accountability.

It even baffles the mind why the president opted to even combine the Ministry of Women affairs and Youth given that the two Ministries are diverse and require special attention. Even the age of the new Minister Sithembiso Nyoni is even an insult to the ordinary youth. Citizens expected that the President was going to go the Magufuli way and implement sweeping reforms firstly by appointing new and capable ministers in his cabinet so that there is some semblance of a “new era”.

With all due respect to Ambassador Khaya Moyo, isn’t the Energy Ministry too big for him given that his recent deployments have been around the Information portfolio and then Economic planning. I can go on and analyze each ministry and highlight loopholes and gaps. In any democracy, the success of any Ministry is dependent on citizens’ confidence in the minister leading that particular Ministry. I am totally aware that there are permanent secretaries within the various Ministries who do the majority of the work but the contribution and innovation by Ministers is key and must not be overlooked. In our case, the crop of the redeployed ministers in the new cabinet have proved over a long time that they are unable to run ministries effectively and even is some cases looted public funds for self-enrichment.

The new cabinet by the President in my view is a contradiction to his recent calls to have a corrupt free country and quality service delivery. What can the recycled Ministers bring that is new and has innovation? What is important to note is that there are some faces within his new cabinet that are detested by many because of gross incompetence and corruption. For example, Ministers like Obert Mpofu have been implicated in corruption scandals even under the Mugabe administration.

In the final analysis, there are some who have argued that permanent secretaries within the various ministries are hardworking and overshadow the incompetent Ministers. It remains to be seen whether the new ministers will reform and change for the better. As for me it seems like business as usual.

Rawlings Magede is a rural political enthusiast from Gokwe-Kana who writes in his personal capacity. He tweets @rawedges and contactable on vamagede@gmail.com

It’s not yet Uhuru for Zimbabwe

By Rawlings Magede

The events of the 18th of November 2017 will go down in the history of the country as memorable, yes memorable, in the sense that people from diverse political and socio-economic persuasions united for a common cause and heeded to the call by war veterans to march against former President Robert Mugabe. What was encouraging on the day in question was that even the old, youths and even women who previously shunned demonstrations organized by pressure groups came in their numbers. To me that alone was symbolic and representative of the deep seated problems bedeviling our nation. For me the fact that for that moment people managed to suspend differences and agreed that indeed Mugabe was the elephant in the room. Never in the history of the country had we witnessed such a record crowd during a demonstration against Mugabe.
Not to be left out was the media (both public and private) followed developments with enthusiasm right from the time Emmerson Mnangagwa was fired both from ZANU PF and government. For once the combat hate-filled narratives seen in local newspapers disappeared as the media preached message of peace and unity. In all this the government was also worryingly silent and was on auto pilot. The government which during the time of Mugabe’s rule has often been abusive and predatory, transformed itself as various Ministries scrambled to have the national broadcaster to cover their events.

On the other hand, citizens utilized social media for satire and expressed their displeasure on the continued refusal by Mugabe to resign. So yes, there has been some sense of unity and common purpose among citizens and going forward it is imperative for citizens to continue demonstrating such ethos as they help to build a just and tolerant society.

Today as the nation slowly comes to terms with the reality of the departure of Mugabe, there are quite a number of serious conversations that citizens must begin to initiate. Will the departure of Mugabe herald a new culture of the observance of human rights, economic revival and the end of the culture of impunity that had shaken the very foundations on which a just and liberal society is founded on?

How did we get here?

I think there is shared consensus even across the political divide that the current mess in the country boils down to Robert Mugabe simply because as head of government he was overally responsible. Added to this and most important is how corruption had become institutionalized by Mugabe who openly rewarded his cronies even against overwhelming evidence of corruption and graft. I mean we have our archives of corruption hidden in deep parts of our memories. Yes, this is our hope at least for now, something that has become part of us and as the political tides continue to trudge towards exciting times ahead, all we can do is watch. We have so many cases of parastatals that were left in the intensive care unit by political figures who even in the wake of a new dawn continue to bask and revel in ill-gotten wealth.

But alas, in the past our courts had earned a fame of being magnanimous to criminals, by continuing to operate and skirt on corruption cases with rehearsed precision. Shockingly some quarters within society today can be exonerated for branding our courts as factional proxies used to achieve parochial fights. Even today in a “new Zimbabwe” all those people who marched in solidarity with the war veterans still hope that maybe with the change of leadership, our courts can have a semblance of a just and credible justice system.

What must Mnangagwa do in a post Mugabe era?

I am a very big fan of Christopher Mutsvangwa on the basis that from his subsequent dismissal from ZANU PF, he has been talking sense. Among issues he identified as being an Achilles heel in our economy was serious corruption by the G40 faction that he singled out as the main hurdle to economic revival. However, there are some problems that I have with Mutsvangwa. In a just and democratic society, there is no institution that is immune to criticism. The way he views the army as invincible and flawless is worrying especially from a man who was vocal to the creature of a demigod that Mugabe had become. In the past, even Mugabe was portrayed as flawless and invincible such that even those within ZANU PF believed it for 37 years! It is this culture that must never be tolerated in a new Zimbabwe. The army including the Generals are human as well who can err and make mistakes just like everyone. Positive criticism and tolerance must form the foundations of this “new Zimbabwe” for the simple reason that today skillful politicians around have proved adept at manipulating populist sentiment and using democratic structures to erect forms of personalized, authoritarian rule.

I think an onerous task lies ahead for Mnangagwa as the nation trudges towards democracy. The obvious task is to rebuild the economy and assure would-be investors that Zimbabwe is a safe investmet destination. This process might involve serious amendments to the country’s indigenization laws that have scared away potential investors. This will also involve the implementation of sound economic policies that stifle economic growth. Other issues to be addressed include responsible governance, transparency, prosecution of those fingered in corruption, free and fair elections and an even application of the rule of law. One cancer that had crippled government ministries and parastatals is nepotism. The new government must also create a conducive environment where citizens enjoy fundamental human rights and freedoms that are enshrined in the constitution.
Closely related to this is the fact that the system of Mugabeism is still very intact and had permeated even to the lowest ZANU PF structures. These structures wield a lot of influence and power that even usurp that of constitutionally provided institutions such as Traditional leadership. For these and other hang-ons, it is high noon for them to appreciate and embrace the reality that Zimbabwe just like any sovereign state is for all of us to enjoy and rebuild.

In the final analysis, incoming President Mnangagwa has a herculean task ahead of him that require a tough and no-nonsense policy on corruption and impunity. This is so because through his recent press statements, he has raised hope and expectation on the need to be inclusive in the rebuilding exercise. The citizenry at the moment is closely monitoring if Mnangagwa will weed out corruption, deal with the deep rooted problem of impunity, improve Zimbabwe’s tainted human rights record and implement policies that will herald a new dawn for the country.

The days ahead will have many eyes.

Rawlings Magede is a rural political enthusiast who writes from Gokwe-Kana.He tweets @rawedges and contactable on vamagede@gmail.com

Cyber Crime and Cyber Security Bill: A wake up call for Zimbabwe’s opposition parties

Over the years I have deliberately avoided writing about the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), South Africa’s vibrant opposition party that was formed in 2013 as I felt that it was too early to measure and evaluate its achievements. The EFF is famed for its vibrancy in the South African Parliament. Not only this, they have also been credited for inciting the public to speak out against injustices that include the Marikana incident, demanding the Executive to be more democratic and transparency among other issues. The strength of the EFF has been its ability to measure the gains of post independent South Africa against those enunciated in the Freedom Charter that was adopted in June 1955.What was striking about the Freedom Charter is that it harboured the aspirations of all the diverse races in South Africa.

Its preamble sought to address the more contentious issue of race given the diverse races that even make up present day South Africa. Therefore, its preamble was clear in that it specified that South Africa as a sovereign country belonged to all people who live in it, black or white. In short, the charter was in essence inclusive and neither racially loaded or exclusive of any group. It is to this important aspect that the charter owes its majesty. And it is from this seed that the much-lauded South African constitution took root and grew. It is this clarity by the EFF that has allowed it to gain national audience especially on issues that range from economic to political. What is interesting about the EFF is the fact it’s not the only the political party made up of comrades from the ruling African National Congress (ANC). In 2008, former ANC stalwarts Mosiuoa Lekota, Mbhazima Shilowa and Mluleki George founded the Congress of the People (COPE) but its popularity, if any was short lived as it failed to rally numbers around key issues such as inequalities that cut across race and tribes.

What I somehow emulate about the EFF is that it is a fairly new political party that has been in existence for less than 5 years but in this shortest period, it has managed to achieve quite a handful of feats that some opposition parties across the African continent can only yearn for. Since the EFF won seats in 2014,it has transformed the South African parliament to be more vibrant and explosive thereby encouraging citizens to give attention and follow parliamentary procedures which had been naturally ignored since the country’s independence in 1994.The EFF has also stirred debates in parliament demanding the Executive to be more accountable and publicly calling President Zuma to pay back the money that he allegedly used to improve his rural home of Nkandla among other key issues. So yes, this is what an opposition party that is still in its infantry stage is doing across the Limpopo. Time would fail me if I begin to talk about the numerous times the EFF has been ejected from Parliament as they protest against procedures and policies.

Why are opposition parties silent on the Implications of the Cyber Crime and Cyber Security Bill?

The Sunday mail carried an article on the Cyber Crime and Cyber Security Bill. The article revealed that if the bill is to be passed into law, citizens who abuse social media or any other computer based systems will be prosecuted. The bill has been described by experts as an infringement on fundamental human rights and freedoms by the government meant to tighten its grip over the control of cyber space and spy on citizens. Misa Zimbabwe, a vibrant media advocacy and lobbying group has stated that the Cyber Crime and Cyber Security bill infringes on basic people’s rights, including freedom of expression. This article is not dedicated to analyze the provisions of this bill but on the seemingly surreal silence by opposition parties that have Legislators in Parliament. Why there is no national discourse even across opposition party supporters especially on this bill still baffles the mind given that most of their activities that include demonstrations rely heavily on the use of social media platforms. Of late I have been following religiously the Parliamentary debates aired on the national broadcaster and I have been deeply saddened by lack of consensus among opposition MPs in parliament over issues that they put on the agenda. What I have witnessed are incidences of heckling and tired jokes right in the house! I have not heard or seen any incidence where Parliament was momentarily shut down as opposition parties push for an important agenda. The few who get opportunities to move motions in Parliament have however concentrated on petty issues such as ZANU PF’s factional fights and the issue of succession. This has in turn reduced Parliament to a theatrical platform where tired jokes and non-issues reign supreme. Legislators such as James Maridadi have however raised critical issues that deserve applause.

Opposition parties that have legislators in Parliament must also identify from amongst themselves resource personnel with strong research skills who can better articulate and present evidence based issues rather than cheap political slogans. Opposition parties in Parliament also have a lot of arsenal at their disposal. There is also the opportunity presented by Parliamentary Portfolio Committees that have in the past or present chaired by opposition party legislators. These committees offer an opportunity for opposition legislators to address, probe and scrutinize transparency, corruption and procurement within government Ministries.

In the final analysis, the Cyber Crime and Cyber Security Bill presents a window of opportunity for opposition legislators and the nation at large to say no to such repugnant and draconian piece of legislation. Of course different laws apply differently for different countries but for us in Zimbabwe, our past experiences with draconian legislation from the days of the enactment of the Public Order and Security Act (Posa) and the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (Aippa) have taught us otherwise. While it is necessary to have laws that help to safeguard abuse of each other’s human rights, it’s equally necessary not to enact laws that curtail the enjoyment of fundamental human rights and freedoms such as freedom of expression that are well provided for in the constitution.

Rawlings Magede writes in his personal capacity here. He tweets @rawedges and be contacted on vamagede@gmail.com

Africa’s Leadership renewal: A facade of Transitional Democracy

Africa is currently grappling and coming to terms with the seemingly interesting news that Africa’s second long serving President, José Eduardo dos Santos will step down after current country elections. This is after 38 years of plunder and self-accumulation of wealth.as part of a “peaceful” transition dos Santos has handpicked his ally, Defence Minister João Lourenço to be his successor. Given the past dominance of the People’s Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA), Lourenco is likely to win the Presidential election. Under the new arrangement dos Santos will remain the President of his party, the ruling until at least 2021. This alone vests considerable power in him including power to choose parliamentary candidates. Earlier this month, parliament also passed legislation safeguarding dos Santos’ picks at the head of Defence and intelligence services.

While this is cause for celebration in terms of leadership renewal in Africa’s tainted history of military coups, dos Santos’ invisible hand of control will continue to dog Lourenco’s administration at least for the foreseeable future. The appointed new president is just a ceremonial president with no power of decision. Stepping down by dos Santos is meant to deceive Africa yet the truth is that he is still in control. Closely linked to this is the passing of new laws by government last month which prevent the next president from firing the military, police, and intelligence chiefs.

Just like past and present African presidents, dos Santos has also created an empire and dynasty for his family during his 38-year tenure at the helm. While he remains party president, his daughter Isabel will stay in charge of Sonangol, the state oil company, after being appointed in June 2016, and Jose Filomeno, dos Santos’ son, will remain in charge of Angola’s $5 billion sovereign wealth fund.

The developments in Angola are not new but have happened elsewhere across the world. In Cuba long serving President, Fidel Castro, who in his early 30s, aligned Cuba with the Soviet Union and used Cuban troops to support revolution in Africa and throughout Latin America, appointed his brother Raul Castro as his successor. In Venezuela, the late President Hugo Chavez credited for initiating a leftist political process, Bolivarian Revolution, appointed a former driver, Nicolás Maduro as his successor in 2013.To date the administrations both in Cuba and Venezuela have been accused of diverting from the script and plunging the two countries into retrogression in terms of previous gains by their predecessors. Their failure has also been largely to the ever unpredictable webs of patronage and business interests left by their predecessors, making them vulnerable to exposure.

So yes, the stepping down by dos Santos should not be celebrated beyond its normal confines as doing so is akin to applying lipstick to a frog. The new President Lourenco will take over from where dos Santos left and will not even seek to antagonize the current status quo. So, given the mixed experiences with the contentious but yet necessary debate of transition in African countries, we can also identify a trend where incumbent presidents have continued to grip on power by any means necessary by appointing loyal and subservient successors. Ghana should be credited for managing peaceful transitions since 1992 and today its credited for this. This is of course outside other African countries such as South Africa that have done well in this regard.

Will Mugabe ever choose a successor?

Recently, First Lady Grace Mugabe shocked the nation when she announced that it was noble for President Mugabe to choose and anoint a successor. In her own words, she said that,” the president has the right to be involved in naming his successor, and that the president’s word is final. “Since the 1990s ZANU PF members who have dared raise this controversial subject of succession have either been disciplined or expelled. What is important to note is the underlying meaning of First Lady’s sentiments. Firstly, her sentiments imply that she has finally conceded that her husband will not be there forever to offer her protection. Secondly, while its necessary for party members to debate about it, her husband must name successor and whoever that successor will be, he or she will serve at the mercy of the President. Thirdly, given in the recent past, she has demonstrated both influence and authority in the dismissal and public humiliation of party cadres who at one point were untouchable, the likely successor will also serve at her pleasure. This is more so because naturally, there is no way Mugabe will appoint a vengeful foe who is unpredictable and likely to torment and scuttle wealth accumulated by his family.

Just like the case in Angola, Mugabe’s invisible hand even from beyond the grave will continue to dictate decisions for any ZANU PF administration in the future. In the event that Mugabe does indeed appoint a successor, it will be a mere perpetuation of his rule.

When discussing about transition in Zimbabwe, succession is a puzzle that we cannot avoid. This article is not about who will emerge the ultimate successor within ZANU PF’s succession matrix but about the precedence in Africa where leaders still remote control events even from their graves. What even makes succession interesting is Mugabe’s reluctance to name a successor even when there are overwhelming signs of fatigue and incapacity on his part. The delay in naming a successor even at a ripe age of 94 reveals the continued thirst and appetite to continue ruling even when the body gives off its ghost.

Close cronies who have worked with Mugabe over the years have all revealed how power hungry Mugabe is. In his book, The Story of My Life, former Vice President Joshua Nkomo, confessed that he once asked Mugabe a question over what was the supreme organ in the country. To this, Mugabe replied that it was the ZANU PF Central Committee. This was at the height of the Gukurahundi atrocities in Matabeleland and the Midlands region after Nkomo was dismissed from government. After his subsequent dismissal from ZANU PF, former ZANU PF Secretary General, Edgar Tekere simply remarked that “Democracy is in the intensive unit”. All this points to the fact that Mugabe is willing to maintain power at any costs.

In the final analysis, Zimbabwe has reached a defining moment in as far as transition is concerned. The calls for Mugabe to name a successor are growing louder with each passing day. Even if he does concede and names his successor, he will likely name a candidate who will be loyal to him even in his retirement. It will just be a mere perpetuation of his rule just like the case in Angola.

Rawlings Magede writes here in his personal capacity. He tweets @raw edges and can be contacted onvamagede@gmail.com

Crisis in the DRC, a lesson for Zimbabwe

While Zimbabweans battle coming to terms with the seemingly false news yet true reality of the new Amendment bill, the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has slid into a constitutional crisis. The crisis in the country located in central sub-Saharan Africa, started in December 2016 when President Joseph Kabila’s mandate officially and up to this day there are still no signs of an upcoming vote. The current regime led by Joseph Kabila have a sober understanding of the ground rules and is using the crisis to tighten its grip on power. December 19, 2016 should have been his last day in office as president in the country’s first democratic transition since independence in 1960.Kabila won the Presidency in 2001, secured a mandate in 2006 and then romped to victory in the 2011 elections that were described by many as fraudulent. This is partly because the elections failed to pass the democratic test as enunciated in the Congolese law and by various African Union (AU) instruments such as the Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance. The current crisis in the DRC is a legacy of elections of the 2011 elections that failed to pass the democratic test of free and fair elections. Such is the sad story in the DRC today.

When analyzing the crisis in the DRC, it’s important to also try to unpack the various interventions taken by regional organizations such as SADC and AU in the DRC. These two regional bodies have been credited in some quarters for fostering peace and brokering political agreements that have insulated the continent from the threats such as civil wars that hinder development. SADC key role in the restoration of peace in the DRC comes from decades of security engagements and regional diplomacy having intervened twice. The first was in 1998 after the DRC was invaded by Rwanda and Uganda.SADC swiftly responded by rallying member states such as Zimbabwe, Namibia and Angola to drive the invading forces away. In 2003 again, SADC yet again was key in the country’s security sector reform and was swift in deploying troops from South Africa, Malawi and Tanzania to contain the M23 rebels in eastern DRC.Fast forward this to present day SADC where the big brotherhood syndrome has crippled the effectiveness of SADC.Present day SADC has found itself in a difficult situation where it has to decide the fate of former SADC chairperson, Kabila.

Such a predicament has compromised its role and has left the country in a constitutional crisis that presents a ticking time bomb for thregional body that will likely divide it. In October 2016, the AU brokered a deal in the DRC that set a transitional government and clear timelines for elections in 2018 but left out partners from the main opposition coalition termed le Rassemblemet. The Catholic church that was instrumental and vocal against the undemocratic government of Kabila distanced itself from the SADC brokered arrangement protesting over the exclusion of the opposition and previous violent crackdown of protestors by government forces that left people dead. Many even outside the DRC criticized SADC for brokering such a flawed agreement that ignored a lot of key issues and seemed biased in favour of the government. This was against a background where SADC had enjoyed a good reputation across the African continent as an impartial institution and actor that had earned trust and respect when it intervened to bring peace and combat threat posed by terrorism DRC back in 1998 and 2003 respectively. It’s true that SADC’s role in the DRC has been key especially in past political crises but it has dismally failed to deal or intervene in the crisis that currently dog the DRC.

Its role in the region in mitigating regional conflagration is key given the number of crises that have spilled over borders. Back in Zimbabwe, many a time, people have criticized SADC as a regional grouping devoid of bringing lasting and durable solutions especially to long serving Presidents who have continued to enjoy over protection from SADC.Even today, when one goes through the Global Political Agreement (GPA), you wonder why a winning Presidential candidate got less from the agreement. In Zimbabwe for example, while many would to credit it for brokering the GPA that midwifed the inclusive government, the agreement was violated several times by ZANU PF. In search of lasting solutions, opposition parties that were in the inclusive government lobbied SADC and AU citing the violation of the agreement by ZANU PF. In a clear sign of weakness on the part of SADC, the lobbying produced nothing. It turned out that SADC wanted to remove Zimbabwe from its problems as they went on to even endorse and recognize ZANU PF leadership at various platforms besides the flagrant violation of the GPA.

So in a nutshell, it’s quite dangerous that main opposition parties in Zimbabwe do not realise that lobbying SADC yields no fruits. Closely linked to this is the fact that the DRC is set to hold its national elections in 2018, the same year with Zimbabwe. Both SADC and the AU are currently at sixes and sevens over how to resolve the crisis in the DRC.Adding Zimbabwe to the list of its problems especially given that the 2018 election results are likely to be disputed after opposition party, MDC-T declared that they will not accept the outcome of the 2018 elections.

What then must the opposition do?

While it’s always key to lobby these regional bodies, opposition parties must organize themselves right from their structures to ensure that once the voter registration commences, they register en masse. There isn’t much that can come from lobbying SADC particularly when it comes to long serving statesman who at one point have assumed the chairmanship of SADC.There isn’t much that the current chairperson from Botswana, Ian Khama can do. In the past he has taken a strong stance against Zimbabwe but failed to rally fellow African countries to be firm and tough on Zimbabwe. Even if he is to take a strong stance against the way the Zimbabwean elections will be run, fellow members in these regional groupings will neither support or endorse his stance.

The ill-advised talk of disbanding the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC) by some “lawyers” is not even a feasible option given that elections are just a few months away. Even that legal initiative risks eclipse as it seems that political parties (including opposition parties) are already preparing for elections that will be run by ZEC.It seems the urge for office and sinecure has overtaken the need to reflect and strategize. Such calls for the disbandment of ZEC are reared in opposition politics of cold comfort that shy away in the face of daring facts. The important point to note is here is the inevitable, directional and messaging confusion created by such calls on opposition members. When talking to even an opposition member at the lowest structure, they can’t help it but in rehearsed precision, call for the disbandment of ZEC just a few months before the 2018 plebiscite. However, the political world is always a setting for unsympathetic watchers, for critics who watch empathy as a weakness.

Recently I attended a public meeting on the Biometric Voter Registration (BVR) where Dr Alex Magaisa spoke at length about a Logistics committee within ZEC that is responsible for running elections. Apparently, no one, even opposition parties know the members who constitute this committee. Opposition parties must also use the engagements with ZEC to probe further the kind of people employed in this key committee. Then there is talk of “defending the vote” whatever that means. But all this talk of “defending the vote” is another matter, another story for another day!

In the final analysis, the 2018 elections will be a make or break scenario. President Mugabe knows this and this explains the country wide Youth Interface meetings where his message is clear on the need for youths to register to vote and ensure that they vote for ZANU PF. I’m not sure if the opposition parties pushing for a coalition will have enough time to mobilize their members, share constituencies ahead of the 2018 elections. Only time will tell!

Rawlings Magede is a rural political enthusiast who writes in his personal capacity. He tweets @rawedges. Feedback on vamagede@gmail.com

2018 elections and the Youth Vote

I wish to add my thoughts to the ongoing debate on the intentions of President Mugabe youth interface meetings that are currently ongoing across the country. This is one of the most debated issues among political parties today with some opposition parties crying foul alleging that state resources are being used to campaign for ZANU PF ahead of the 2018 elections. In this conversation, I will not try to probe whether its noble for the President to do such a thing but rather on why youths are a key constituency as 2018 elections loom. The Youths interface meetings were also necessitated on the need to capture new voters who seem reluctant to participate in electoral processes. At these meetings his message has been one of rallying this important group to vote for ZANU PF resoundingly in the 2018 elections. What’s rather suspicious is why the interface meetings are specifically targeting youths and not women or men given that in past election campaigns, he has combined his rallies to address all age groups. A quick review of such a move will better help us to understand this sudden departure.

New Voters on the horizon

Previous voter registration campaigns by political parties and civic society, especially in 2013, failed to capture the youth vote. This is attributable to the fact that most youths who have found themselves in urban centres due to varying reasons, have distanced themselves from participating in electoral processes due to a number of reasons. The high levels of unemployment have created a youth who is mindful about bread and butter issues at the expense of other responsibilities such as participating in democratic processes such as voting. Because of the pinching economic environment aswell, youths have somehow shied away from processes such as voter registration exercises that seem to consume their time and energy. Previous voter registration such as that experienced in 2013 were tedious and discouraged the few youths who were willing to register to vote. What remains true is the fact that new voters have been born and they constitute a sizeable chunk of the new electorate. As 2018 elections approach, people born in the year 2000 will add to the number of people eligible to vote. This has created a tussle among political players for this new constituency of youths who if convinced to vote, can be a game changer come 2018 elections. Let me attempt to interrogate the reasons behind some of the reasons why the President is on a country-wide campaign to meet this new crop of voters.

It’s a numbers game!

President Mugabe has been credited by many for having a sound ideological grounding, that of nationalism coupled with cheap populist rhetoric. Over the years, he has used this to his advantage by utilising local and international platforms to churn out his agenda in a bid to convert and indoctrinate people. Of special mention is his anti-western stance which has become his mainstay every time he gets an opportunity. Over the years he has tried with limited success to sell this to the younger and unemployed constituency. Of course his message has failed to find meaning because it has failed to explain the current state of affairs that the youths are facing. President Mugabe knows and appreciates that for his rhetoric on recolonization and onslaught of western sanctions to find meaning, the younger generation needs an ideological orientation of some sort. His youth meetings are very predictable, and will likely involve narratives on the liberation war, what his government has done to safeguard sovereignty and lastly, what the youths should do to ensure that the gains and sacrifices made are not washed away. This will be done by voting resoundingly for ZANU PF in the 2018 elections. Lastly he is likely to make false promises such as creation of jobs and projects and stands for the youths. This is rehearsed because he knows that at the heart of every youth is the urge to make progress in life and be able to be self-sufficient. So it’s a matter of capturing this important constituency by whatever means.

Closely linked to this is the fact that over the years, youths especially from across the country have complained over the lack of direct access to the Presidium. This includes even youths drawn from ZANU PF structures. The intermediaries between them and the Presidium have been blamed for using youths to further their own parochial agendas while neglecting their concerns. What this has created is a sense of resentment for the Presidium on the basis that it does not engage this important constituent. The youth interface meetings will seek to demystify this perception among the youths and create a false picture of a President who is easily accessible to them.

Lastly and equally important is the fact that the current crop of youths have horrific stories to tell about the consequences of being actively involved in politics. The widely held view among the youths is that politics is a dangerous game. The vicissitudes of past electoral violence in 2002,2005 and 2008 have constantly reminded youths of the dangers and risks that exist within the political arena. Over the years, this new crop of voters who by the way are very active on social media have read and watched heinous videos of how ZANU PF crushed dissenting political voices and intolerance. This has then relegated them to spectators despite the fact that they make up the majority of the population. By creating the youth interface meetings, President Mugabe wants to dissolve some of these widely held perceptions.

Can opposition parties capture the youths vote?

I have been criticised so many times for opposing the need for a coalition in 2018.In my view, I think that the problem facing opposition politics is not necessarily that a single opposition party cannot beat ZANU PF in an election. No. If the MDC-T did it in 2008, it means it’s still possible today. There is no doubt that the majority of people desire change in Zimbabwe. The deepening economic crisis that we are currently experiencing have in some way acted as a catalyst for the ordinary citizens to desire to seek change via the ballot. So in my view, it’s not a question of having opposition parties coming together under an umbrella of a coalition. It’s a question of how opposition parties can be organised as we draw closer to 2018 elections. How can they capture new voters and convince the youths to register to vote? It’s a question of strategy used to lure them to vote. Politics in general is a discipline where blunders are costly and that has been the case with our opposition parties in Zimbabwe. The height of naivety by opposition parties was demonstrated when they chose against better advice to boycott all by elections citing issues of electoral reforms. What still confuses till today is their intentions to participate in the 2018 elections without even a single electoral reform implemented. With such discord at this eleventh hour, we can even begin to read and make predictions of what the 2018 elections will yield. So, I don’t believe in a coalition on that basis. I just believe that if “bigger” opposition parties can best organise themselves better they are able to get something out of the 2018 elections. I have deliberately avoided to delve deeper into the debate of what is a big opposition or what numbers do some opposition parties have. This is best left to the reader to stir such conversations, lest I be labelled.

Rawlings Magede is a rural political enthusiast,and writes here in his personal capacity.For feedback vamagede@gmail.com