African Agenda

It would be wrong to ignore the death of the mother figure of the latest struggle for Zimbabwe, for the New Zimbabwe. She was taken in the prime of her life, when all those things she has fought for, stood for and prayed for were all beginning to bear fruit.

For everyone who is married and yet has a risky job, profession or vocation as that which Tsvangirai has, you would agree with me that resistance at home incapacitates a man or woman from reaching their full potential, or if they are too strong willed to have their way anyway without winning over the support of their spouse, it often leads to such men (or women) having broken homes. That Susan Nyaradzo Tsvangirai was apparently by the side of her husband in all his tribulations meant that she should also have reaped somewhat the fruits of what she toiled for.

On the other note, many will have noticed that her six children are now mostly in their productive adult stages, maybe with the exception of a few. It is at this time that one slowly begins to wean off their children from material and financial support which would have so strained a parent for a great deal of time. Some children even begin to support their parents. Besides weaning off support, children at this time begin to marry and get married, a joyful experience for most parents. I wonder if she had had that joy yet before she passed on.

I have a few observations to make about this tragic death. It could as well have been an accident, or a carefully planned attempt on Tsvangirai’s life. I will personally believe that it was accident until fresh evidence arises. The reason I will conclude that it was an accident is the alarming frequency of accidents on the road in question, caused by trucks in particular and other speeding vehicles. If you travel say from Beitbridge to Harare on any day, you will most likely see evidence of a few crashes such as happened on Friday, usually fatal. And if you notice what I have noticed, such accidents usually happen on a straight patch of the road, like that Mhondoro-Ngezi turnoff. Every time I successfully complete this journey, I observe a few minutes of silent prayer to really thank God for travelling mercies.

My first observation is therefore that the state of Zimbabwe’s roads must be addressed as a matter of urgency. We notice this accident particularly only because it involves a high profile individual, but trust me, many families have grieved because of the poor state of our roads, in some cases entire families being wiped out. I remember a few years ago when a bus accident killed school children and teachers from Masvingo. A memorial service was later arranged by a group of churches in Masvingo where President Mugabe and his entourage were invited. I remember Mugabe’s speech where he said plans had been on the cards for a long time for the widening of our major roads, and vowing that such accidents cannot be allowed to continue.

Well, there was a feeble attempt to expand the road, from around Mbare to Skyline, and that was it. And I mean all our major roads. The Beitbridge – Bulawayo road has a patch of dust road that has been under construction for the better part of ten years, and boasts serious potholes; nay, craters. As the new government comes in, can we have a serious programme of rehabilitation and improvement of our road network? The good part is, it does not have to cost the government much. All they would need to do is to offer a private contractor like the BaKwena in South Africa who build roads, run and maintain them while collecting tolls. They would build private roads that are wider and more secure while the state roads remain in place, for those who would rather not pay tolls.

In Zimbabwe, however, such projects are frustrated simply because some of these players do not pay bribes, and so government ministers would rather there was no road if the company he awards a contract won’t buy him a Mercedes or pay some other stupid bribe. A lot of public infrastructure can be improved this way, in some cases the facilities can be transferred to the Government after an agreed period.

My second observation is that despite her contribution to the new dispensation of Zimbabwe in standing by Morgan Tsvangirai, nobody in government dared suggest that maybe Susan should be a heroine to be buried at the Heroes Acre. I mean, if Sally was granted national hero status by standing with Mugabe while mostly in her country of origin during his incarceration and all, where is the difference with Susan? Unless of course we are saying even Morgan is no hero of Zimbabwe either, and that if he had died as well we would have dug two graves in Buhera? I have always suggested we will need to exhume everybody at Heroes ‘ Acre and rebury by a criteria determined by the people, otherwise the history of this nation is being held hostage by a criminal cabal. I suggest we lay down the criteria of who becomes a national hero of Zimbabwe in the new Constitution, and not leave it to a few morally bankrupt individuals to decide from time to time.

My third observation is that our political leadership have had terrible fortunes with their spouses, very much to the detriment of the citizens. No wonder many deeply and genuinely mourn Susan Tsvangirai. Many in Zimbabwe are prepared to bet with their lives that if Sally Mugabe had been alive, Mugabe would long have retired to his Zvimba village latest by about 1995. Unfortunately, she passed away on 27th January 1992. Mugabe went on to marry a much younger and more ambitious woman in Grace Marufu: and the rest, as they say, is history. One cannot help but wonder how Tsvangirai’s remarrying will affect both his political career; and with it the fortunes of the Zimbabwean citizens. I know our culture is against such talk in these circumstances, but I am merely expressing the thoughts of millions.

My final observation is, Gono should use this funeral to reflect on his legacy. Firstly, it should remind him that we all die at some point, usually when we are least prepared to and when we least expect it. One cannot therefore assume they will have time in the future to correct their legacy. Gono has to right the wrongs he has perpetrated on the people of Zimbabwe by allowing them room to move on. How in his conscience does he continue to stay in his job when he knows that he is probably the major stumbling block to economic relief needing to come into the country for the betterment of every Zimbabwean? Those with power to help us have explicitly said so, that he must go. Political brinkmanship must have its limits, and at the end of the day, it is not about his principal wanting him to stay– it is about his own moral rectitude. His principal will be judged separately.

Gono is a highly qualified and able individual and would not struggle to get a job that makes him remain comfortable. Why, he could still take up his World Bank offer if at all it genuinely existed in the first place. He must not behave like some of these guys in politics who’s CVs read Zanu PF under ‘work experience’ and who outside Zanu PF would find they are unemployable. The point is, if you become a stumbling block to the progress of the common man – move out of the way.

Surely the worst of his reproach would have been to be chased away from Susan’s funeral for all his gloating about his extra-terrestrial efforts to keep the economy of Zimbabwe afloat. I mean, a funeral is a most sombre thing; even quarrelling relatives usually bury the hatchet for the duration thereof. If people cannot stomach you even at such a time, it is time to let go of whatever you are holding, even if its witchcraft. People are very quick to forgive and forget, and if what he really wants is political power, he then can always have a chance to rebound later.

I was thrilled with an online article I read in the Zimbabwe Times (27/02/09) about a clash between Webster Shamu and Nelson Chamisa over the control of the Communications department. The latter prevailed over the former, categorically telling him to buzz off his turf. The instigator was none other than the infamous George Charamba who whimpered off first from the heated exchange.

What is also instructive is that the NetOne workers were on Chamisa’s side, to the extent where Shamu felt embarrassed and admitted some other people were trying to use him. He knew he was playing a political game but this time round Chamisa stood him up and he had no answer.

This then must be the answer to MDC in this mortal game of death that they have engaged with Zanu PF. The law of the jungle needs apply: no quota asked, no quota given. The MDC must proceed with the business of ruling within their sphere of influence according to the GPA. Let Zanu PF do the complaining and let MDC dare the President to fire the Ministers or Prime Minister.

Let us start with the office of the Prime Minister. Mugabe is always doing a fait accompli knowing that open confrontation maybe impossible and decisions difficult to reverse. Well, fair and good. Why does the Prime Minister not do the same? For example, instead of waiting for the imposition of the permanent secretaries, Tsvangirai should have come up with a list of his governors, permanent secretaries and ambassadors etc long ago; and publicly announced these. If it is by quota, fair and good, let us know those names representing the MDC quotas and leave Zanu PF to their quota. Particularly in all ministries under MDC, chekumirira hapana, fambai nebhora machinda! (There is nothing to wait for, make your moves now).

Even now, let the MDC announce Permanent Secretaries to Ministries under its control in addition to nullifying Mugabe’s appointees, and these must proceed to their offices Webster Shamu style, of course ‘acting temporarily while awaiting Presidential confirmation’. The same thing must be done with Governors, Ambassadors etc. Ndokutotonga kwacho machinda, don’t think for a minute you will be told where the levers of power are.

The same thing must happen with the RBZ Governor and Attorney General’s positions. MDC should identify its preferred candidates, get them to agree and actually announce them. Let these people begin reporting to RBZ and AG’s offices respectively. Tsvangirai announced Ministers and it stood; privately done I am sure Mugabe would have resisted a few characters and suggested different permutations to those that prevailed in the end. In my opinion, that is precisely why Roy Bennet was taken in, to prevent the inevitability of him becoming Deputy Minister of Agriculture. Acting Mr. Nice, Understanding guy will get Tsvangirai and the MDC nowhere. Do anything and everything that appears like it is covered by the Global Political Agreement.

Next is the office of the Minister of Finance. If Gono could usurp the functions of the Minister of Finance and many other ministries, I do not see why it should not be possible for Biti to do the same. After all, he has the purse strings. He should find ways of circumventing the Central Bank. If Mugabe insists on Gono remaining in the office, let it be a hollow shell. After all, most of the money to be administered will be coming on the goodwill of the MDC’s presence in government. No secret must be made of the deliberate effort to circumvent the Central Bank and emasculate Gono, the whole world must know.

Up next should be the investigation of atrocities that were perpetrated in the run up to the second election period. There should be a parliamentary or ministerial committee set up, supported by neutral judicial personalities such as Justice Sandura or other such. This must start by compiling nationwide data of who destroyed, burnt or killed what and who, and at whose command. Next it must hear evidence from people in those communities affected and a people’s verdict passed.

If there is improvement in the human rights situation as this is progressing, such as the unconditional release of all political prisoners, a stop to all arbitrary arrests and detentions, free play to those who would wish to publicly voice any opinion, a return to press freedom and such like – maybe those found guilty, if they apologise unreservedly; can be let to go with suspended sentences in the interest of national healing. A motion in parliament should get this going as soon as possible; I believe a simple majority would be enough to carry it. Obviously those ‘residual forces’ resisting the GNU, if they indeed exist, after inflicting so much harm in the past 10 years, still want to hold people to ransom but the people must fight them and we will prevail.

On that reasoning, the MDC must not make deals of amnesty by reason of its comrades held in detention. Instead, it must get into motion immediately the very thing these Very Bad Men are trying to prevent, it means they know it can be done successfully! There can not be any going back, or any further delay. Any chess player will tell you attack is the best form of defence.
MDC should also employ divide and rule tactics. In every institution, in every place, they must identify senior people sympathetic to them, and these abound; and use them as the fulcrum upon which they wriggle themselves into positions of advantage. For example, is it true that all judges are sympathetic to Zanu PF? Is it true that all senior Army and Police Officers are sympathetic to Zanu PF? All senior Prison Officers? All senior CIO officers? Indeed all Prosecutors?

If these people could be found, the strategy would be to do actions that are embarrassing to Zanu PF and Mugabe to reverse, like get a judge to release prisoners on bail, get a police unit to stop farm invasions and generally shake up things everywhere in the establishment without waiting for a discussion over a cup of coffee with Mugabe and his henchmen. The people will always be behind them, and should they be dismissed, it is surely better than to ‘walk away’ from the GNU in dejection, because people will remember the strings they were pulling.
Of course this strategy will have its casualties, but either way, this mortal combat for the soul of Zimbabwe is bound to have many. It is better to have those casualties you budget for than those imposed on you by the enemy.

I do not for one minute advocate for lawlessness, all these things are merely political decisions and the exercise of political muscle: and can all be done without an iota of violence and within the laws of the land, as Shamu tried unsuccessfully because people were against him. Imagine if he was on the side of the people, just dare imagine what would have been the outcome.

I will inspire you with this link where a herd of buffalos kick a pride of Lion, a real life story. If buffalos can defeat a whole pride and rescue their young calf from jaws of certain death, anything is possible for the people of Zimbabwe.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=LU8DDYz68kM

By Kudzai Mudhadha

With due respect to the new Prime Minister, I am always filled with trepidation every time he opens his mouth to make some public pronouncement, maybe more so now that he is in Government, speaking from a position of authority that goes with office. Mr Tsvangirai has a penchant for putting his foot in his mouth, but I did not think he would do it quite so early in his premiership; in fact at his maiden speech!

In the recent past, the ultimatum he issued to ZANU PF in protest to the political abductions comes to mind. Mr Tsvangirai threatened to walk away from the talks if all political abductees, including Ghandi Mudzingwa and Jestina Mukoko were not released by a set date. ZANU PF called his bluff; they are still incarcerated.

Promises and euphoria
In a recent article in The Zimbabwe Times, it is reported at his maiden speech as Prime Minister Mr Tsvangirai has promised Zimbabwe’s 150 000-strong civil service salaries will be pegged in foreign currency beginning end of February.

“We must make the country start working again,” Tsvangirai told an estimated 30 000 crowd that thronged Harare’s Glamis Arena on Wednesday to witness his inaugural speech as Prime Minister, to deafening applause.
This is as it should be. A new beginning. Some might even urge it was reminiscient of the euphoria and hope that greeted Mr Mugabe`s speech on 18 April 1980 at independence.

So why am I still worried?

The questions that come to mind are;
• Is this part of a carefully considered and well thought-out plan, which may be part of the MDC`s secret Economic Recovery Blue Print we mere mortals may not be privy to? End of February is just over two weeks away as I write this article.
• Was this an off-the-cuff idea, spurred on by the euphoria that went with the occasion? If it is, was it necessary to make such a reckless promise and raise the people`s hopes on hazy probabilities? There is so much goodwill and understanding flowing in Mr Tsvangirai`s direction from across the political divide and he does not need to impress by making unattainable promises in the heat of the moment. If this was the case, the Prime Minister should only read from his carefully crafted and considered speeches and try to deviate as little as possible from prepared text.
• What are the modalities and logistics of putting in place such an ambitious and momentous move? Does cabinet need to sit down and discuss the matter? Is it a matter that has already been discussed and agreed by the principals?
The amounts involved are staggering. To pay the 150 000 strong civil service, say the amount suggested in the article of $604/month each for one year is close to $1.1 billion per year. If we are to consider the minimum amount being demanded by the teachers of $2,200, then the amount is close to $4 billion per year.

Cloaks and daggers
If a sustainable source of the money has been identified, the modalities worked on and agreed upon, then well done Prime Minister, you have just hit the ground running!

But I have a sneaking feeling that even if the money source has indeed been identified, ZANU PF would not be happy to see the new PM change things so fast as that would cast them in bad light, and MDC in shining armour. A delay long enough to disillusion the workers will be orchestrated, to bring disaffection to the PM and where possible, ensure it becomes yet another empty promise. ZANU PF is not worried about making empty promises. It has been making them these last 29 years, and it will not look kindly to the kind of efficient delivery the Prime Minister seems to be promising.

This assertion is based in fact. The food distribution to the poor and the vulnerable was at some stage stopped; the fear was credit for the food relief packages would go to the opposition as it was coming from the West.
When Elias Mudzuri became mayor of Harare, tangible positive change became obvious in a very short space of time. Massive roads resurfacing, water losses minimised, refuse collection dramatically improved, and Chombo was not happy with the euphoria that gripped Harare at Mudzuri`s success. We all know what followed.

Indeed the new battle front will be on who steals the thunder from whom, who takes the credit for what. Discrediting each other overtly or covertly will be the order of the day. Booby traps, the Pious-Ncube-type will be snared and entrappings on lucrative underhand dealings arranged. Bugs will be installed on office walls and computers. There may be casualties. This is the sad reality of close-combat; where you were using sniper fire-power, you now need to use a bayonet. Same war, different weapons.

Finally MDC should desist from issuing personal opinions as official position, either in the party or in government. Gone should be the days when Tsvangirai, Biti and Chamisa would all sing from different hymn sheets on matters of grave importance, leaving their PR spokespersons to clean up the mess. Use those mobile phones, come to a consensus before uttering statements for public consumption.

This is a different ball game altogether now where every word you say, every gesture, your very body language are all put under microscope by numerous detractors, hostile press and certain political `analysts/commentators` who will assiduously study and find ways to make mud stick.

At the end of the day, the New Agenda in ZANU PF is to make the MDC`s currently squeaky clean image as muddy as possible by the time of the next election, and in the process, leave the voters heartily disillusioned.
One can only hope the promise to pay the 150 000 civil servants in forex by end of February does not come back and hound you, Mr Prime Minister.

I once wrote a poem on why I am ashamed to be a Zimbabwean, why we all Africans should be ashamed of ourselves. Not that I am very poetic, but you know how anything particularly negative gets most Africans singing. Such was the mood.

On 20th January, I should have been proud to be African as I watched Barak Hussein Obama, a man of undoubted and not too distant African roots take possibly the office most mortals consider to be the highest on earth – that of the President of the United States. But I had a bag of seriously mixed emotions. It was the kind of feeling you have when your son or daughter weds a week after you bury your spouse. You want to rejoice, but you think of how it could have been all the merrier if he/she had been alive to share the joy.

So it was when I saw the triumph of democracy as it uplifted arguably one from the most oppressed race of people on earth – blacks, to the pinnacles of utmost power as it is know to man. The challenge I would have wanted to advance with some indignation is, “Stand up those who would have us believe the black man is no good, and can never amount to much? Raise your hand those that believe the black man is of somewhat inferior intelligence, a creature to be led rather than to lead self and others?”

In the end, it left me with a sour taste in the mouth that at arguably the finest hour of triumph for the black race in politics, we have in our African backyard a myriad of atrocities and political intransigence perpetuated by black men upon fellow blacks. To add insult to injury, other black neighbours who should know better seem at a loss and are indecisive on the course of action to take to guide fellow black leaders on the ‘paths of righteousness’. African leaders have a collective responsibility on how Africa turns out, and so far it’s not looking good at all.

While they are busy convincing themselves that the West is bent on suppressing the black man, the West could not have proved them more wrong by uplifting one of their kind to one of the loftiest seats possible for man on earth, without any signs of rancour.

I therefore could not celebrate much before remorse set in. It is very much like having a feast while raw sewage is running under your table, the pungent smell fighting and drowning the aroma of your food. Those two pictures are difficult to reconcile in the limited human brain – the one part embracing the aroma to satisfy hunger and the other suppressing the nausea to throw up what has been taken in.

So if a man of first generation African descent could be voted by the ‘wicked West’, White and Black alike, to lead such an awesome nation like the United States of America, it must be true that they are committed to democracy. When the West therefore supports democratic voices elsewhere in the world, why is it viewed as an attempt at regime change? Why are democratic movements that espouse the ideals of democracy illustrated no better than in the West labelled puppet movements of the same?

Barak Obama’s ascendancy to me is proof that the problem is not the African himself. The problem could be the systems that surround the African, shaped by his culture and history.

Firstly, Africans are obsessed with possession. Mwai Kibaki and Robert Mugabe and many others of their ilk believe the political leadership they have is a God given right, the ‘Zimbabwe is mine’ mentality. Mugabe means it not in the sense that he is a Zimbabwe who belongs to the same, but that he has this large piece of land he took from the whites which is his to do as he pleases. Remember the greatest problem we have with Mugabe is transfer of power, not only to the opposition, but even to his own party faithfuls.

Another African system that must be overcome is mediocrity. Obama is where he is simply because he is the best of what was on offer, not because he is African-American. He is also squeaky clean on character and integrity. In Africa, someone does not necessarily have to be the best candidate, nor must he be clean. Jacob Zuma’s battle to ascend the South African presidency quickly comes to mind. In the West, such a candidate who has such a prima facie case of corruption against would not last the very early rounds of a party’s candidate selection. In Africa, the ANC have now said they are adopting Zuma’s corruption and fraud issues as a party, in defence of their candidate.

Then there is this system of going into politics as one gets into a get-rich-quick scam. Again the reason a person like Zuma cannot countenance anything other than a politically powerful position is that, well that is all he is qualified to do. With his many responsibilities, many spouses and countless children (at least his are official), he would be doomed financially if he failed to land the top job in his country. Can you imagine that? How cruel can that be, most African leaders and aspiring leaders are basically what we would term failures in the sphere of financial and material achievement, yet we entertain such to lead us. I find it very depressing.

In America, a presidential candidate has to be a man of great wealth or at least have great potential to organise and gather it. There is little state sponsored budget to finance a campaign, the candidate has to basically market his ideas and get supporters and sympathisers to support him or her financially, not necessarily on the promise of a return when the candidate gets into power. In fact, Obama was so confident in his ability to organise and mobilise funds from the public that he decided to forgo the ‘paltry’ state grant which would have precluded him from doing so had he accessed this grant. The point is, a man of such abilities could easily make it in the business world outside politics, and would never cling on to politics as a ‘career’ or for survival.

One of the attributes we lack as Africans is frankness. We have a system of see no evil, hear no evil and speak no evil. Our brothers from the West are blunt and very frank, and although I find it very disconcerting at times, I admire that greatly. If I get an unsolicited call from an Insurance salesman, it is not my natural disposition to tell him to go find the nearest tree and hang himself; but not so with my Caucasian friends.

So it is then that, when SADC and AU leaders should simply have told Mugabe he was the loser, to go pack his bags and leave State house pronto, they began to make excuses for him. They cannot tell him straight to his face that he is being unreasonable. Mbeki even found a term for this African shortcoming and called it “quiet diplomacy”. Africans do not tell each other the truth, which is what they truly think and feel about a situation.

This system works closely with another of cowardice and self preservation, where for the fear of making a mistake or for as long as it is not affecting them directly, a person would rather not speak, act or commit on anything. African despots therefore exploit this tendency and make sure there is always a section of the population well taken care of. They operate a serious patronage programme based on this trait and thereby avert popular uprisings. There is no “One for all, All for one” approach by African brothers to their problems.

My sadness is that this political milestone for the black race finds us as the biblical five foolish maidens, unprepared for the bridegroom’s coming. There was a lot of benefit to be gotten for Africa by the momentum of a black president at the helm of the most powerful nation on earth – but alas, our lamps have no oil. Proper self-governance is in the intensive care over most of Africa yet it is the minimum requirement when a nation expects others to engage it for mutual benefit.

This is my first post in over four weeks. In the four weeks, I was also in Zimbabwe for the not-so-festive season for two weeks, from the 20th to the 31st December. I came back through Botswana hoping to catch some sight of MDC bandits toy-toying but had no such luck.

My experience in Zimbabwe was very sobering. You get this sense that there is this Zimbabwe we picture in the Diaspora and that Zimbabwe happening on the ground. The Zimbabwe on the ground is surprisingly in a slumber, except perhaps for the very politically involved.

In the two weeks I do not remember reading the newspaper or really sitting down to listen to the TV. I would therefore try to glean information from the common man and not only did they not quite know what was taking place, they did not seem to care too much. Not to say they are not clear what they want, but they do not unnecessarily want to burden themselves with the nitty-gritty’s of things they cannot influence. Or so they think: let me return to this point later.

I therefore concluded that we in the Diaspora with our access to the news channels online and everywhere, we are our own worst enemies, cranking ourselves into a frenzy. We are constantly checking the email for the next news, anxiously hoping for some movement. My new year resolution is to do less of that.

Those on the ground where the news is happening have only one worry, how to survive the next day (if of course they have not been abducted, which is another story altogether!). With the virtual dollarization of the economy, it can be argued that things are now ‘better’, only in the sense that basics are now widely available and in some cases are getting progressively cheaper. Some towns are madder than others, as I recall protesting vociferously as I purchased one litre of milk in Bulawayo at thrice its shelf price in South Africa. There were of course some pleasant surprises, fuel as a good example, which I was buying in coupon form at prices slightly below South African ones at the time.

The sticking point of course is that not everyone is earning the dollar or rand, or the improvised equivalent which has become legal tender, coupons. The dealers meet the hard currency on the streets, but the civil servant is the worst victim, as the government has not devised any inventive remuneration schemes to protect their work force as the private sector has done.

What dollarization has also done is to take away the advantage those with foreign currency had in an environment where local currency operated, where a small bit of currency like USD$10 could be ‘burnt’, literally multiplied, by changing it to local currency at astronomical cross rates. The local currency is now almost redundant.

If Zanu PF could find a way of getting SADC to pour into the economy the rand as official tender, and of course support it by ensuring there is enough for the civil service to be paid, it could effectively complete a coup on the MDC and afford it to completely sideline them as is their wish.

SADC (read as South Africa and others) has shown the appetite to circumvent the demands for fair play by coming up with a SADC vehicle to distribute aid they had vowed could only be distributed after a Unity Government is in place. Others will argue of course that they were thinking of the povo instead of the selfish politicians. One wonders what else they are prepared to do in defence of a brother-in-arms.

Their only worry would be the fiscal indiscipline and endemic corruption in Mugabe’s government; SADC taxpayers would cry foul and lose these leaders support at home.

What I can see is that Zimbabwe has become a test case on the battle of wits between erstwhile ‘Colonial’ Powers and African Liberation Movements. The later are determined to prove that Africans can govern, indeed can resolve their own issues, peer to peer. They are determined to resist the prescriptions of the West and America on who should govern and how they should govern, in their circles such a prescription read as ‘Tsvangirai and the MDC-T’.

No wonder then at Mutambara’s overboard vitriolic in singing from the same pages of Mugabe’s hymn book. The truth of the issue is that this hymn book is the official African Leaders’ song book if they are to be deemed truly African, and to be trusted with carrying forward the gains of the liberation struggle.

On seeing Zimbabwe on the ground, the position espoused by the MDC of hoping that Zimbabwe will ‘crash and burn’ so they would pick up the pieces afterwards, to quote Eddie Cross the Policy Co-ordinator of the party, may be a long way in coming. You ought to remember that Zimbabwe with an estimated seven million people left in the country has a smaller population than Soweto at about thirteen million. As long as South Africa props up this regime, it will never crash, the South African fiscus can uphold it with ease. It is like an average province of South Africa really.

I said earlier that Zimbabweans do not seem to care much what is happening around them, but on closer inquiry, you realise that they have this total faith in the leadership of the MDC-T to bring them the change they hope for. I have read and heard many deride Morgan Tsvangirai for his naivety and not being resourceful as a leader; but I believe it is this apparent simplicity required for Zimbabwean politics in practice. Look how the think-tanks, from Jonathan Moyo and of late Mutambara, seem to trip over themselves.

The average voter in Zimbabwe knows a few simple facts: Firstly Tsvangirai ndizvo! (basically means, he is the man of the moment); secondly Mutambara mutengesi (meaning he is a sell-out); thirdly Makoni is not serious, fourthly Mugabe and Zanu PF are killers and on their way out and finally that hapana chisingaperi, kana muroyi chaiye anofa (Nothing lasts forever, even a witch will suffer the inescapable fate of death.)

As I wrote in an earlier article, MDC Prevarications must stop, this does not mean that peoples’ attitudes are cast in stone and should an inventive politician arise, the ball game could change for Tsvangirai. Makoni was the hope of some if his Mavambo project had not faltered soon after elections. Also, the going of Mugabe is no guarantee of better days with his junta likely to usurp power (he is Legion, as Magora would put it!), so this waiting game to me is not very meaningful. It is on this premise that I have supported the idea of the MDC getting into a Unity Government with any leverage whatsoever. Others disagree, with good reasons too.

The dynamism in Zimbabwean politics is such that nothing is guaranteed; Tsvangirai may actually fail to ascend to that highest office in the land at the end of it all. But to his credit, that does not seem to be the pre-occupation of his mind.

However, no one at the moment has suggested that single action that if it were done, would be the straw that breaks the camel’s back. That action that would create a domino change effect that cannot be halted. What would that be? This leaves us in the domain of needing some Divine intervention in 2009.

(This is written as a sequel to an earlier analysis - MDC prevarications must stop)

I must of necessity point out a matter of great hypocrisy “the Facilitation” on the Zimbabwe Dialogue deflects in the hope of selling Zimbabweans and the whole wide world a dummy. In his infamous letter to Morgan Tsvangirai on page 9, Mbeki states:

“You know that among other things various countries of our region host large numbers of economic migrants from Zimbabwe, who impose particular burdens on our countries.”

“Fair and good”, I thought. The pressures that he describes on these countries’ socio-economic front are not imaginary. But the hypocrisy is evident a few paragraphs further when he writes,

“This particular burden is not carried by the countries of Western Europe and North America, which have benefited especially from the migration of skilled and professional Zimbabweans to the North.”

I winced, and thought, “Please Mr. Facilitation, give us a break!” Yes it is true Zimbabweans have exported their skills all over the world: North, East, West but any number-literate person will tell you that with the estimated four million Zimbabweans in South Africa, a very high proportion of them holding skilled, professional, senior and executive positions in private business, public enterprises and in government departments, South Africa has benefited the most from the Zimbabwean workforce.

South Africa only bears with the other not so productive ‘economic refugees’ for two reasons: firstly the majority migrate back and forth; and secondly a dragnet imposition of bottlenecks on the same would ultimately bite those organizations that desperately need the broader Zimbabwean skills. Those that moved South are indeed more than those that moved in any other direction.

The brain drain in South Africa to the ‘North’, i.e. Europe, America and Australasia is just as bad as that of Zimbabwe. For that reason, South Africa is relying heavily on skilled Zimbabweans from teachers to chief executive officers to keep their forts at home. If there was a sudden turnaround of fortunes for Zimbabwe and people saw hope clearly on the horizon, my considered conclusion is that South African schools, private businesses and other organizations would cry foul, as Zimbabwean and indeed South African professionals head across the Limpopo.

As president of South Africa, Mbeki was confronted with the dire skills shortage in his country. I remember one time on an official visit to London he was chiding the British Prime Minister for their pursuit of South African skills. I thought what hypocrisy, at home he is doing the same on Zimbabwe!

Mbeki is not unaware of this scenario that a totally conducive environment in Zimbabwe is not in South Africa’s best economic interests. Zimbabwe had indeed always been an alternative destination for investment in Africa given its average to good infrastructure, abundant natural resources and the relatively crime-free environment. Mbeki’s strategy for Zimbabwe is that he wants peace to prevail but not a conducive business and political environment as it would rival South Africa for opportunities and reclaim skills they cannot afford to let go.

South Africa’s more pressing concern in this whole charade is therefore the protection of their economic interests, not necessarily democracy in a neighbouring state. Peace and stability in the region just happens to be one precondition for economic progress, but that can happen without democracy. Africa’s wisdom of pressuring the ‘opposition’ into an Inclusive Government to keep the losing ‘ruling party’ in the corridors of power is good testimony to this.

Mbeki’s own brother once likened Mugabe to the school naughty guy who routinely insults everyone including teachers and the headmaster to the cheers of all around. They whistle and clap when this rabble-rouser does his antics, but when discipline time comes, the naughty guy gets all the stripes while the others stand dispassionately by. The ANC made and respect a secret agreement with white business never to disrupt the economic status quo in exchange for political power, yet Mbeki spurs Mugabe on in his ‘anti-western’, ‘Zimbabwe-never-be-a-colony again’ and ‘sovereignty’ crusades.

I was telling a friend that Mbeki is like a man who hears his neighbor beating the daylights out of his wife (or vice-versa!). This is happening at 02:00am everyday and disturbs this man’s sleep such that he cannot concentrate at work. He decides to arbitrate in their dispute. While the abused spouse tries to explain the root cause of the dispute, the self appointed mediator is not interested in the details, but just persuades the parties to agree to and sign a peace order that they should not fight, especially at night.

He extracts an undertaking that any fighting, when it happens, must happen during the day when he is at work. He further prescribes that should one be killed, the funeral should be as quiet an affair as possible. This man is obviously more interested in his own welfare and cares very little about the couple next door. When challenged by onlookers, he snorts defiantly that lasting solutions to squabbling spouses can only be brought about by the spouses themselves.

True maybe, but what the heck are you doing “next door”, then? “The Facilitation” indeed, what cheek!

To prevaricate is “to avoid giving a direct and honest answer or opinion, or a clear and truthful account of a situation, especially by quibbling or being deliberately ambiguous or misleading”.

For readers of my contributions, that I am sympathetic to the cause of the MDC is well known. That sympathy is of course born out of the realization that the MDC’s ambitions represent most closely those of the general, simple povo of Zimbabwe.

For that simple position, that the people of Zimbabwe must get their voices heard, the MDC have become agents of emancipation of the povo from their erstwhile liberators. For that reason, the MDC occupies moral high ground in Zimbabwe politics. And Morgan Tsvangirai and his gallant comrades are the embodiment of that hope the MDC is identified with.

I state the above clearly to put the following criticism into context, and this has been prompted particularly by Hon. Biti’s letter to not-so-honourable Thabo Mbeki of the 19th November and the reply by the latter of the 22nd November, both of which are now in the public domain.

My own worry is that the MDC must not overtrade the currency of moral high ground; and consequently, the support and sympathy of the majority of Zimbabweans and those who care for the sorry state that is Zimbabwe presently.

Let me first say the ten-page letter by the former president of South Africa gives one the impression of a letter written late at night over a whisky bottle. It is a letter of two parts, the first part which warrants some consideration of the issues raised, and the second part where you feel the effects of booze were winning over the writer. The pipe smoke was obviously not helping either, ‘clouding his view’, literally. All reports I have read to date focus on the last two pages where the former president literally goes into a mud-sling onslaught of our Prime Minister designate.

I will only say in the absence of facts where he could point out that after we had agreed point X, Tsvangirai changed after the recommendation of Mr. Brown or Mr. Bush who had said thus and thus. Mr. Mbeki is therefore merely speculating in his insinuations and reveals his leanings on these issues; which are obviously identified clearly with one side to the negotiation.

But then, other issues come to the fore if you assume that since this was diplomatic, personal correspondence, there would be no reason for Mbeki to tell outright fibs and fabrication of facts. Indeed the complains so far have not been that Mbeki told untruths in the letter, but that he insulted Mr. Tsvangirai and the MDC by insinuating that they have an unhealthy leanings to the countries in Western Europe and North America.

The first issue that Mbeki articulates clearly throughout the letter is insinuations of divisions and intra-party wrangling. It becomes clear from reading the letter that there are two sources of decision making, which are not in tandem.

There are for example suggestions of a decision agreeing to a meeting for a review of Constitutional Amendment No. 19 (CA#19) for the 19-20th November by all parties, only to be cancelled because Hon. Biti could not attend. The MDC-T, because it was the party in breach to this agreement, then suggested a meeting on the 25th November when ostensibly Biti would be available.

The next thing, Biti is writing the Facilitator to say the position of the MDC-T is that because the SADC decision regarding the way forward on the Zimbabwe Dialogue was “a nullity not yet rescinded”, there would be no sense in meeting as this would only legitimize what the party had categorically disagreed with.

Whereas disagreement with the SADC ruling seems unanimous within the MDC-T, there seems to be no agreed strategy of reacting to it, indeed there seems to be no considered way forward. The simple fact of whether to pursue CA#19 separately as part of the overall strategy of the talks agenda was obviously not agreed upon within the Party prior to the diplomatic faux pas of the past week.

The people of Zimbabwe and all their friends deserve better leadership from the MDC-T, I suspect important meetings at National Council level to timely discuss these developments so that a collective position is taken after arguing out different approaches are being neglected.

The second issue that comes out clearly is that the MDC negotiators and Mr. Tsvangirai have not held a consistent line in their demands. When some of those demands have been met, Mr. Tsvangirai and company renege on the same suddenly realizing they could have bargained for more. On page 4, Mbeki writes “You will remember your own insistence that in the context of the agreement that there should be two Ministers of Home Affairs, these should serve in rotation, with the MDC(T) appointee taking the first slot.”

He continues to say, “You affirmed that if this were to be agreed, it would mark the conclusion of the negotiations about the distribution of the Ministerial portfolios, and therefore enable the establishment of the Zimbabwe Inclusive Government, with your endorsement and support”.

Although Zanu PF and now Mbeki are convinced from examples such as the above that the MDC are taking instructions from other sources such as USA and Britain, I am kinder and suggest that it’s more a sign of internal divisions on strategy and inconclusive decisions on positions to take in the negotiations. I dare not imagine that there is bitter in-fighting among the senior leadership of the party as I have heard some detractors suggest.

My point is not whether MDC-T should accept co-sharing of the Home Affairs portfolio. What I find as a serious allegation, un-challenged at the time of writing, from the Facilitation is that this suggestion originated from MDC-T, who when it was finally agreed to by Zanu PF, the Facilitator and then SADC, they later come to the masses and whip up our emotions into a frenzy about the intransigency of Zanu PF and Mbeki. With the benefit of hindsight, Mbeki’s decision that these talks be kept secret was not so great after all, as parties to the talks can change their positions as a chameleon changes his skin without reprisals from the public gallery.

What is clear is that the MDC-T feel, and maybe rightly so, that they have technically under-negotiated their position. I have always wondered how these negotiations are conducted, but I would suspect when they get to higher levels where they involve heads of state, they become very technical. If you have followed court procedures you may appreciate my thinking. The prosecution must outline its case in full. The defense, when it is their turn, must do likewise, clearly addressing and rebutting any material aspects of the charges against the defendant. From there, witnesses are cross-examined on each side. The magistrate, jury or judge must then decide on the ‘merits’ of the case as presented.

The defendant cannot raise his hand on a latter date and say, “Excuse me Your Honor, but I have just remembered that on the day in question, I also had a drink with my friend, who can testify to my innocence.” The moral of my story is, the MDC presented a bad case for arbitration: for example surrendering the other security ministries too early without being guaranteed they would get Home Affairs because of that surrender. That was a bad piece of negotiating, and in all honesty it cannot be put squarely on Mbeki, vile as he may be, or on SADC for that matter. They were merely arbitrating on sticking points as presented.

Mbeki therefore argues successfully in his letter that in the circumstances, he has been ‘transparent’ as a facilitator. It is the circumstances themselves that are flawed, and whereas MDC-T is of the opinion that Mbeki should have pushed Zanu PF into some positions, my own understanding of the art of negotiating is that the MDC compromised too early and consequently presented an outlook of weakness, exploited by Zanu PF, the Facilitation and SADC.

How then does the situation resolve and can the MDC technically gain the upper ground in the negotiations that rightly belongs to them? Fortuitously, the drunken diatribe (there is no other way to understand the outburst) by the Facilitator in the second part of the letter may have provided the way out. Now the MDC can conclusively prove the bias of the Facilitation as he sang loudly from his mentor’s hymn book, barely avoiding using the word ‘puppet’ of Western Europe and North America. Now the MDC can justifiably demand the replacement of the Facilitation from SADC and stand their ground on that.

But having said that, in perhaps his last contribution to the talks, the Facilitator raised numerous issues that must call the MDC to account to the masses trusting it to decide and deliver only in their best interests, without regard to personal feuds and jockeying for positions and power within the party. He makes interesting observations that the formations of the MDC must stop considering themselves as the opposition but rather part of the ruling coalition, chillingly reminding them that once consummated, the success or failure of the Zimbabwe Inclusive Government would equally be on their shoulders as it would be upon Zanu PF’s.

Inside Zimbabwe
Sometimes it is good to watch the world go by before you comment. It is also instructive to touch base with any situation you wish to analyse, so I was happy to get the opportunity to be in Zimbabwe the other weekend and experience first hand the sorry state of affairs.

To my amusement, I discovered that we in the ‘Diaspora’ may be more worried about political events concerning Zimbabwe than those on the ground. They hardly bother to keep track of events, not least because it’s expensive and almost impossible.

Take this example for instance. I wanted to get into an internet café to try doing an article. I was told that for a minimum of 30 minutes in an café, I would need to pay ZWD80,000 cash. Fair enough I said, but on going to the bank, the maximum withdrawal at that time was ZWD50,000. I needed a couple of hours on that queue to get the money. Needless to say, I walked away, grumbling.

On the food front, for those that have the means, the Spar chain and other stores now have all the provisions you may care to buy denominated in foreign currency, at twice or thrice South African prices. A 10kg packet of mealie-meal was going for USD7. A few people with good jobs are being paid in foreign currency or foreign currency denominated goods such as petrol coupons. Some are paid in company shares.

Then of course are the dealers, some of whom I am told have yet to find time to ‘list’ their assets; “They have made it,” – I am told as a matter of fact. Some of these dealers confided in me they wanted the talks stalemate to persist a few more months.. just a few more months, they plead.

I talked to friends that do not know what need is like, they are earning well and can keep afloat. But I also talked to friends living literally by begging, who for the first time in their lives have gone for a day or two without food, until someone came to their rescue. And this is in Harare.

The story in the rural areas was a bit grimmer. The usual aid was not flowing and therefore putting together a descent meal is a challenge. You are no longer ‘offered’ a meal, ‘tikubikireika sadza?’. The harvest was generally poor and the hacha and zhanje trees have suddenly become critical to the survival of the rural population. Anybody who lets loose their animals such that they get the fruit humans so desperately need is hauled before the village court where the fine is at least a goat.

Obama mania
On another note, it was good to watch the Americans elect the first President “of colour”, as they say. The question would be: of what significance would his presidency be to Africa? What I could only think of is; if the allegations generally believed among African leaders that America sponsors rebels like Nkunda in DRC, the late Savimbi in Angola and others to destabilise African countries so as to plunder resources, surely a President of African descent would put a stop to such policies?

Further to that, if that is the belief of African ‘Liberation’ leaders which has seen them block democracy on the assumption that ‘democratic’ leaders would lead to neo-colonialism, surely a president of African descent would not deliberately promote re-colonisation of Africa as a policy of the USA? And as we all know, what America decides, Britain and other allies follow. Could this be the end of the rhetoric by the likes of Mugabe about the ills of the West?

Another thought that crossed my mind was, how long will it take Africa to be ready for a white president? It took America 232 years. Assuming Jesus tarries, with the kind of demonization between fellow black politicians where others claim to be more patriotic than their compatriots, I approximate at least 600 years before a white president stands anywhere in Africa and takes an oath of office.

Begs the question, does Africa deserve the pride and joy they felt at the election of a black man to the US Presidency? Indeed is Africa ready for the possible spin-offs in policy and governance issues likely during Obama’s term of office while it is busy in silly and stupid power games amongst ‘black’ brothers?

“Yes we can!” we all shouted, the not so hidden meaning being, “Yes we can rule dem Whiteys.” Fair and good, the whites will say, let us see how you take advantage of the gilt-edged opportunity. I dare say this momentous occasion finds us not ready as a continent and as a people, from the champions of African Renaissance like old Thabo Mbeki to the least of us.

And the man Obama can speak! He managed to captivate a nation to notch an undisputed victory in a flawless campaign. His leadership is inspirational, maybe too much so. It had a few men of the cloth I know scramble for their bibles to check if at all he could be the Antichrist! Their consternation was premised on the charisma of the man, whom some claim is the only US president whose victory was celebrated world over, even by terrorists! Nevertheless, everyone I know is praying for January 20th for the consummation of this historic feat.

I then also made a prediction. If Obama goes on to take office and do his first 4 year term, he will do a second term. After that term, black contenders for the presidency of the USA will become commonplace. Now with the gift of the gab inherent in this race, presidents of color will not end with Obama.

SADC bungles on
Then there was the damp squib of a SADC summit in Sandton, South Africa this last weekend. The outcome was largely predictable, except that the optimists had hoped the ‘new broom’ called Mothlante would impose itself and sweep the SADC house clean. But alas no, as Chairman, I understand he could not even get Mugabe to excuse himself for the deliberations! What weakness is that, please?

Question is, are these talks even worth pursuing? I get the feeling that both sides know the talks have broken down and even should the current impasse be overcome, the absence of goodwill and paradigm shift on the part of Zanu PF surely indicate that an inclusive government is unworkable.

The issue that now remains is who will effectively pull out of these talks. If Zanu PF proceeds to form a government at the behest of its SADC friends, they would be the instigators and carry the relevant condemnation along with their government. Or is SADC prepared to bolster and financially buttress a Zanu PF government? Will they represent it to the International Community for support? If this is their thinking, MDC should dust their feet and say, ‘thank you very much, and goodbye..see you another time’.

The fact of the matter is, the MDC could accept what is on the plate and work, hoping for the best. Hope would be their only ingredient in such a government. Nkomo was given the Ministry of Home Affairs at Independence, in an ‘inclusive government’. As Nkomo found out within two years, controlling Home Affairs Ministry is neither here nor there.

Dissidents were created and arms’ caches ‘discovered’ and coup plots alleged under his watch; and the persecution that followed is a matter of history. Does the ‘training of MDC militias in Botswana since 2002’ sound a familiar plot? It does to me. It would have been a good idea to be far away from security ministries, were the MDC not looking ahead to the next elections.

This tussle for control now makes me doubt the ‘transitional’ nature of this arrangement; I thought there were more important things to be gained in the transition, such as a new constitution, which would ensure a more levelled playing field in the politics of the next few years.

By the very nature of Zanu PF’s double standards, however, any participation in this government will not leave MDC untainted. Already, there are circles that feel MDC are equally intransigent insofar as this agreement remains unfulfilled. Not everyone understands what type of animal Zanu PF is, so some wrongly believe things will eventually work out if the MDC ‘commits’.

Because of a lack of alternatives however, MDC would be harm-strung to manoeuvre. Hanging in the talks should be a strategy to force other outcomes, such as frustrating Zanu PF to the point of going ahead with the formation of a government unilaterally, or going all the way to the UN and forcing the holding of fresh internationally supervised elections. Unless Zanu PF repents and recants its old ways, which is highly unlikely, working with them in any government was always a bad idea that was born out of sheer desperation. It would always be fraught with problems. Politics is a winner takes all game, period.

An avenue which has not been explored which SADC may help with seeing their affinity for erstwhile freedom fighters is to form a fund, domiciled in a neighbouring friendly country such as Mozambique, South Africa or Namibia. They can find a nice name for it that makes them feel good, like Southern African Liberators’ Fund, complete with an acronym ‘SALIF’, and pour in a few million rand therein. They would then invite any of the ruling elite and opposition figures who want to retire permanently from politics to apply to this fund for support.

These individuals, former ministers, army generals, police commissioners and their ilk included would be invited to take up these life pensions on the condition of total retirement from politics and relocation from the countries they persecuted. My logic is that these people are already costing their countries badly; officialising some loot for them would at least have the advantage that the amount is known and somewhat fixed, and the rest of SADC contributes. Further, their movements are monitored, very much like a leper colony. Sooner than later, they will die out anyhow.

Another few years and we will be free of these leeches that moonlight as liberators when they are oppressors of the worst kind. A new crop of progressive, democratic leaders is surely rising and taking root.

Most Zimbabweans are saddened by the protracted, drawn out negotiations that are obviously leading nowhere. As an occasional marriage counsellor, I am inclined to advise young lovers to avoid taking the step if they see their conflicts are too many, too heated and leave them regretting how they ever came to know each other.

Some are under the false impression that things will improve after marriage, but the truth is new conflicts await them as they adjust to each other’s character and personality.

Chemistry is therefore that platonic bond that makes lovers overcome odds that arise later as these adjustments are taking place.

African culture, however, encourages accommodation between partners even where there are deep-rooted incompatibilities ‘for the sake of the children’. In fact, in African culture ‘love’ is not a concept strong enough in itself, one cannot walk away from a relationship because they have lost their ‘love’ for the other party.

But this advice is for those already committed to a relationship, which over time has produced ‘children’, the parties only realising their incompatibilities at a later date. Usually, incompatibilities arise because of either party’s failure to defer and submit to the other.

For that reason, a marriage relationship has a defined power structure, the defined head being the husband. It does happen that you get reversed roles where a husband submits to his wife for all intents and purposes, all as a dynamic for the marriage to work.

The power sharing agreement in Zimbabwe is supposed to be a marriage of equals. Zanu PF went into the agreement assuming they are to be head in the marriage; the remarks of Chinamasa that a wife cannot go calling mediators at the first sign of a fight are instructive to the regime’s thinking. The ‘wife’ is none other than MDC in both its formations.

Mbeki as mediator is of the same conviction as Zanu PF’s thinking. How else can you explain his mediation position which is mostly aimed at persuading MDC to accept what is on offer with the hope of consolidating on their gains with time? Mbeki’s facilitation position in the last round of talks leaked to the press has dispelled all suspicion that he is indeed a spoiler, a fly in the soup of a genuine power-sharing deal.

In his proposal, he deliberately avoids Ministries MDC has already kind of ‘ceded’ as not too critical in their quest to revive Zimbabwe, but are all the same very key power ministries. Typically, he ignores the fact that Defence, Information & Publicity and Foreign Affairs are also ministries in dispute which MDC may be prepared to forgo if they got finance and home affairs, among others. Mbeki proposes the sharing of the ministry home affairs, ignoring the fact that Defence is already with Zanu PF.

My own insight is that the MDC may have deliberately opted out of the discussions in Swaziland hiding behind the passport façade because they believed the Troika and SA would gang up on them to accept Mbeki’s lame proposals, threatening them with isolation and pledging support to Mugabe if MDC refused to comply and got dumped in formation of a new government. That would explain Biti’s call for a full SADC summit instead of a determination at this dubiously comprised Troika.

For the same reason, they may wish to boycott the October 27 Troika meeting in Harare on the ‘spurious’ issue of the passport; but like in any marriage, it is the small issues that reflect the true heart of the other party. It is such straws that ultimately break the proverbial camel’s back.

The question to answer then is can a marriage of equals work? Some would argue yes, with enough pre-nuptial contracts in place, particularly if the marriage is for a short, defined time. Such a relationship would be purely professional, almost like legitimised prostitution; therefore the benefits must be categorically identified upfront before consummation of the same.

Others will argue that equals need a winner takes all contest. I like a football cup final because you can bet your last dime that come end of the game, one set of players will be riding high with joy while others will be reduced to tears, as their defeat will be sinking in. Does anyone remember John Terry’s tears after this year’s UEFA Champions League final? He was inconsolable.

If SADC and AU leaders believe this marriage can work, they should take the bull, read as RG Mugabe, by the horns and explain to him what they meant by a 50-50 power sharing arrangement. They should then help the two leaders do a clean divide of the security ministries, the natural resources ministries, the industry & finance ministries and the rest of the ministries.

There can be a moratorium on political prosecutions for the duration of the marriage, the next government after that can decide what to do. A lot will also depend on the goodwill displayed during the inclusive partnership.

If SADC and AU leaders know that power sharing will not work, they must organise a rematch for these political foes in a “winner takes all” contest that they also referee and supervise. Mugabe must be given these options, a fair inclusive Government or new internationally supervised elections? We need strong leadership in Africa.

The fact is that were it not for Samora Machel who took a hardliner stance on the Patriotic Front, they had refused the Lancaster House Agreement. Machel told them plainly he was not going to support their war a day longer if they snubbed the ‘good’ deal. Who today can read the riot act to our wayward leaders? If Zimbabwe cannot get decisive guidance at this juncture, prospects of a peaceful settlement are dwindling.

While African, Zanu PF and MDC leaders are bickering, they ought to remember that people still reserve the right to take up matters into their own hands when they feel that “enough is enough”. I see another Mbuya Nehanda arising.

I have my suspicions about why Makoni has suddenly become vocal
again. I have at least two schools of thought on what this might portent.

The press conference last week at which Makoni spoke boldly against Mugabe, now another high profile platform organised by Centre for Peace Initiatives in Africa, where he auspiciously gives a speech, apparently aimed at re-polishing his political credentials and reminding people he may yet be relevant to the politics of the Country.

All this happening at a time when there is a political logjam over Cabinet posts, in which one Cabinet post is curiously being bandied around as contentious; the ministry of finance.

Mugabe would want to control this post, either directly or indirectly.
Makoni did a fantastic job of splitting the opposition vote, by smoothing out (albeit only slightly) the spike of popular opposition vote by luring that constituency in every election which, while it is decidedly anti-establishment, is not so sure it wants to throw its all with opposition main-bodies. That 8 % was crucial to deny Tsvangirai an outright 52% of the vote, and I can imagine Makoni being privately congratulated for an assignment well carried out.

Could it be that the recent speeches in which he appears to rubbish Mugabe’s 28 years of misrule are part of a well choreographed grand plan, in which he re-asserts himself as an independent politician in his own right, even as the second part of the plan is being worked out on a different platform?

A platform at which options such as choosing a man of integrity acceptable to both ZANU and MDC (and by extension the World community), with extensive high level financial experience may be the best compromise to fill the post of Minister of Finance? Who would doubt Makoni fitting that bill, especially when his strongly
worded sentiments of Mugabe`s dismal failure are still echoing in our minds?

My other suspicion on Makoni is the timing for the launching of his political party. Admittedly he has vacuously hinted at launching a full-fledged political party in the aftermath of the presidential election, but the new found zeal and impetus with which he is now moving may have to it more than meets the eye.

Recently, ZANU PF has been on record as expressing displeasure at the article in the Deal that provides for at least 12 months during which any constituency falling vacant will not be contested, but filled by the party which would have lost its representative, in anyway it deems fit. The article provides for a period of healing during which it is hoped the Deal will take root, without the confrontation and division conducting by-elections is likely to bring.

ZANU PF vultures who lost in the last election are impatient, 12 months is too long, they whine. Besides the party realises it has no time to loose, it needs to recover as much lost ground as possible in the shortest possible time. One wag even went on to suggest the vultures are looking hungrily at all opposition MPs, especially those
whose health looks frail in this age and era of HIV and other health problems!

The argument that will be used in the coming days as the issue is dragged through the courts, (and possibly up to the supreme court) is both ZANU and MDC cannot monopolise political space, other political players should feel free to contest any constituency that falls vacant. The constitutionality of that article will then be brought
to question, and the judge, (with his generator-powered-42” plasma-TV; after parking his all terrain vehicle, on his way from a newly expropriated farm) will find it in his heart to find against the constitutionality of the article.

The fact that this was part of a transient political settlement by the three main gladiators presently occupying more than 99% of available political space at the moment will be conveniently set aside, and as the vile professor would say, it will not need a rocket scientist to spell out Makoni and his new party their latest brief.

Hitherto, I would have denied that there exists political mercenaries hired to accomplish or channel political outcomes for a hefty sum, but the more one examines the opportunistic, insencere and half-hearted committment of Dr. Makoni to the Zimbabwe political space, it gives one good ground to wonder loudly.

Sadly, the doctors of Zimbabwean politics have not lived up to their billing and promise, and should Zimbabweans expect different from this doctor?

Article contributed to African Agenda by Phillip Huni, writing from the United Kingdom