Prof A Mutambara Loud mouthed demagogue without strategy
There are very few people within Zimbabwe that still care what Professor Mutambara and his renegade MDC –M (PF hereinafter) faction does or says about Zimbabwe politics.
The reason for that is there is consensus in the country that Prof Mutambara is a spineless political demagogue without loyal grassroots following anywhere in Zimbabwe.
His current political visibility in Zimbabwe is courtesy of Sadc’s South African mediator Thabo Mbeki and a desperate Zanu PF octogenarian leader Robert Mugabe.
When in July 2008 then South Africa’s President Thabo Mbeki in his capacity as SADC Mediator in Chief revived the mediation process in response to intense and relentless international pressure on Robert Mugabe we were among the first to question the criteria he used to determine who was to be involved in round 2 of the mediation process.
In particular we expressed unreserved misgivings over the inclusion of March 29 electoral waste Professor Arthur Mutambara, Patrick Chinamasa, Professor Welshman Ncube and Priscilla Misihairambwi as negotiators for Zanu PF and MDC- M (PF hereinafter).
Our reasoning then as it is today was that Prof Mutambara had abdicated national responsibility by choosing to support the presidential bid of Dr Simba Makoni instead of contesting as the chosen party representative.
To that end we held that he had no more legitimate interest in the disputed presidency than any other Parliamentary aspirant defeated in the March harmonised elections.
With regard to the remaining negotiators we contended that it was absurd that electoral rejects were being rewarded with the responsibility to shape the government to preside over the very electorate that had dismissed them and their ideas which they were going to pursue further in negotiations.
The fears we were expressing then, that time has vindicated us was that in any country that purports to be a Constitutional democracy, governments must be left to be formed by those the electorate will have elected to lead them.
Sadly in Zimbabwe this fundamental principle was negated by the UN, AU and SADC.
The international, continental and regional socio-economic and political power brokers in these institutions deliberately failed and or refused to apply their resources, minds and stamina in support of an obviously abused electorate in Zimbabwe.
What they are witnessing today in the impoverished and politically volatile nation are the fruits of their errors of commission and or omission and they need not look anywhere further than what they did after it became obvious that Mugabe had lost elections in Zimbabwe but was unwilling to concede defeat and devising unorthodox means of remaining in power.
By departing from standing protocols governing member state behaviour after elections and satisficing on an unwritten and experimental political path of dispute resolution that entertained losers of elections as determinants of who must lead the SADC, AU and UN had abdicated on regional, continental and international responsibility to guarantee socio-economic and political order and stability in member states.
That is the first point that Professor Mutambara seems oblivious to now that his inclusion in a political settlement he had no legitimate grounds to be involved has promised to richly reward him with a position as senior as Deputy Prime Minister.
Gaining such a position in a government for a country that had in the first quarter of the year under review overwhelmingly rejected his bid for a Parliamentary seat is monumental political achievement by Prof Mutambara.
It is equally a debilitating loss for the people he will preside over and they are unlikely to succumb to that unfairness lying down.
Should the political set up that rewards him and his failures come to fruition, Professor Mutambara and all the losers of the March 2008 harmonised elections that will benefit positions from it must expect nothing more than total repugnancy at their imposition from the electorate.
Professor Mutambara is perceptive of this possibility and has embarked on a deliberate hurdle clearing exercise to pave way for his acceptance which is highly unlikely to follow given the segment of the electorate he has targeted to be on his side when he assumes the Deputy Prime Minister’s role in the inclusive government.
In his unenviable position as imposed Deputy Prime Minister Designate in a flawed regime, any educated, enlightened, discerning, strategic, informed, smart and above all reflective beneficiaries would be working on strategies to endear themselves with local, regional, continental and international institutions that would make his role effective and efficient in pacifying the uneasy electorate he will serve.
But Professor Mutambara is a loud fart nobody cares about and he behaves accordingly.
An unstrategic Prof Mutambara strongly believes that his path to political stardom in Zimbabwe is being sabotaged by an ignorant, unstrategic and intellectually challenged Western leadership who must channel their resources through him without questioning his strategy to gain power.
He pleads that the US President elect Barack Obama will execute an enlightened foreign policy towards Zimbabwe opposition politicians that will not give credence to Mugabe’s puppet tag on them.
To do this he argues that the Western leaders must take a cue on what has to be done to liberate Zimbabwe from the vicious Mugabe regime from African Heads of State instructed by Sadc Heads of State briefed by Zimbabwe opposition political party leaders than sing the discord of the “Mugabe must go chorus” he has been melodiously singing for 20 years without them caring to listen.
Prof Mutambara raises many questions about his capability to lead a successful struggle for the liberation of Zimbabwe by making such crass public pronouncements.
The first and most obvious of which is whether or not he appreciates the causes of the current Zimbabwe morass.
If he does what is his strategy for resolving it?
He fortunately provides us with glimpses of how he intends to resolve the crises in Zimbabwe.
First he wants everyone to accept that the flawed agreement he signed with Robert Mugabe and Morgan Tsvangirai before SADC mediators is the only means to resolving the political impasse in the country.
The reasons for that are he is afraid that free and fair elections under international supervision will sweep him and Zanu PF aside while elections under the Zanu PF Junta conditions will sweep him and Tsvangirai aside. Either way he will be rendered irrelevant by such a process.
The other alternative of an armed struggle is not a feasible alternative because not only does he lack the stomach to lead the armed struggle but also there is no traction for it in that AU and SADC and in particular South Africa will not support that.
Additionally the Western leaders have no stomach for such a route either as they will lose lives for no apparent benefit. Finally the Zanu PF Junta’s army is no pushover and will put up a formidable resistance which will cause more agony for the people than solve their problems and even after defeat there are no guarantees democracy will prevail in the country as a consequence.
The other alternative to unseat Mugabe through leading Civil disobedience, he rules out on the basis that Zimbabweans have been battered long and hard by the Junta and have no courage to come out of their shells and expose themselves to dangers posed by the Zimbabwe law enforcement agents and Zanu PF Militia.
Even if they have the nerve there is no leader currently prepared to lead such uprisings in the country reckons Professor Mutambara.
By closing other alternatives in this manner and pedantically pursuing a flawed alternative on the stupid argument that politics is the art of the possible when time after time history has provided practical examples that politics is the art of combining orthodox and unorthodox means to gain power Prof Mutambara confirms fears of those that did not vote for him that he lacks strategy and the grit necessary to gain political power
Further he automatically rules himself out as a serious alternative leader for the country with capabilities to generate alternative solutions for its many challenges.
We differ with Prof Mutambara that the most effective means to resolve the country’s crises is the Global Political Agreement GPA) signed between Mugabe, Tsvangirai and himself.
We contend that the most effective means is an internationally supervised election where contestants and their supporters will be given equal guarantees of legal and security protection.
Whoever opposes that is not representative of Zimbabwean thinking.
If the opponent is prepared to resort to force to have his way we contend that cocktails of international forceful invasion in support of the internal revolt will be the next best alternative.
The GPA ranks last in our assessment of effective and efficient resolutions for the Zimbabwe crises.
Secondly Prof Mutambara believes that the strategy to achieve democratic change in Zimbabwe will only work if Mugabe is retained in leadership and South African leverage is secured.
These ingredients are present in the GPA but it is stalling and teetering on the verge of collapse.
The reason is because losers like Prof Mutambara and Robert Mugabe are on a vindictive repression mission against the electorate and will not be allowed to have their way on a platter simply because they enjoy South Africa and SADC support.
The only people that matter in Zimbabwe are the electorate and for as long as Mutambara, Mugabe, Mbeki, South Africa and Sadc enter into unholy alliances to impose a Zimbabwe political leadership on an unwilling electorate the project will fail.
Blaming Western ignorance and unstrategic involvement will not wash either. Zimbabweans see through leadership pretenders who speak with forked tongues like Prof Mutambara.
If the West has nothing to gain from invading Zimbabwe then it follows that they will have nothing to gain by sponsoring any other regime change initiative in Zimbabwe.
Why would they want to have puppets in charge of a worthless Zimbabwe?
The view that Zimbabwe is no place for a military stroll in the park and Botswana is a weak military force to be relied on in an invasion strategy on Zimbabwe is a fallacy that Prof Mutambara must be disabused of.
The military capabilities of Zimbabwe are over exaggerated and its ability to fund a serious war is at its weakest at the moment.
If Mugabe was as sure about his army’s capabilities and capacity to prosecute a war as he was when he ordered them into Mozambique and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) he would not have wasted his time abducting unarmed political activists to make a case of banditry training by the MDC in Botswana.
He did not seek Sadc permission to invade Mozambique and the DRC then. Why is he now seeking SADC support over a Botswana clearly threatening Zimbabwe security stability more directly than DRC and Mozambique rebels were.
Here is a difference between suppressing a civilian protest and repelling an armed invasion.
Mugabe knows that better than a cowardly professor Mutambara and his bunch of unelectable advisors.
And our advice for Mutambara is stick to Robotics. Politics is an indeterminate science way beyond his intellectual capabilities.
No comments:
Post a Comment