Zimbabwe Inclusive Government Keymen Professor Arthur Mutambara (co-Deputy Prime Minister Designate, Morgan Tsvangirai (Prime Minister Designate) Robert Mugabe (President Designate) must answer why they find it appropriate to entrust national responsibilities to the unelected ahead of the nationally elected representatives of the electorate.
Woodrow Wilson long postulated that;
“If you want to make enemies, try to change something.”
But the converse is equally true that;
If you want to make bitter enemies, try not to do something about changed circumstances.
The formation of the Zimbabwe Joint Monitoring and Implementation Committee (JOMIC) tasked with steering the implementation of the 15 September 2008 Global Political Agreement (GPA) between MDC-M, Zanu PF, and MDC-T provides some interesting pointers to that effect.
Appointing the same people to multiple yet critical institutions to manage and spearhead national change stymies innovation.
It is a telling sign of stagnation in leadership development within an organisation when the same mindsets are recycled in various roles demanding different dynamism to produce extraordinary results.
The argument for consistence and experience is no justification for conservativism where versatility and fresh thinking are deficiencies that could be in the way of success.
MDC-T appointed, Elton Mangoma ( Chairman); Elias Mudzuri, Tabitha Khumalo and Innocent Chagonda while MDC-M appointed, Welshman Ncube ( Chairman) Priscilla Misihairambwi-Mushonga, Frank Chamunorwa and Edward Mkhosi and ZANU PF appointed , Nicholas Goche (Chairman), Emmerson Mnangagwa, Patrick Chinamasa and Oppah Muchinguri.
Out of the 12 members of JOMIC tasked with ensuring implementation adherence to the GPA terms 5 were official negotiators of the agreement that seeks to supplant the electorate’s free choice of who should form a government in the country made on 29 March 2008.
Out of those five 3 are chairpersons of their respective party delegation and automatically co-chairpersons of JOMIC.
Only 2 of the initial 5 official party negotiators elevated to sit on the JOMIC were however elected when they contested the29 March elections and the remaining 3 were thus imposed by their parties against national will. A further 4 out of the remaining seven members of JOMIC contested elections in March and lost while 1 did not contest at all leaving only 2 other elected members on board.
Is there any political arrogance by a political party that can beat that? Are we seriously expected to believe that those that carried the respective party mantle in national elections are not competent to represent the people’s interests in undemocratic processes that supplant their will?
MDC-M has retained unelected Welshman Ncube as chairman supported by the equally unelected Priscilla Misihairambwi-Mushonga and Frank Chamunorwa and the electorate mandated Edward Mkhosi. Zanu PF retained the Nicholas Goche (chairman) supported by the electorate mandated Emmerson Mnangagwa and the unelected Patrick Chinamasa and Oppah Muchinguri while MDC-T have elevated Elton Mangoma ( Chairman) supported by the electorate mandated Elias Mudzuri, Tabitha Khumalo and unmandated legal practitioner Innocent Chagonda.
When the processes hit snags or fail to deliver to expectation of the people they will bear this in mind and the parties will pay a heavy political price for their disrespect of followers.
Party Youths will have reason to be dismayed by the confidence their parties have shown in their abilities to play meaningful national roles and they must demand explanation for their exclusion from JOMIC where they could exert significant influence and expedite processes.
Frightened party elders appear to have decided to avoid the Youth because the youthful are more daring and will not be afraid to rock the boat to expedite decisions.
Be that as it may MDC-M and Zanu PF appear to share a common trait of thumping noses at the people favourite representatives and substituting them with leadership favourites.
The reason is clear that Zanu PF and MDC-M leadership is elitist and has little regard for grassroots opinions a label which MDC-M may find difficult to deal with if the inclusive government delivers on its promise to work towards an electoral democratic process where free will and not fear of violence will characterise voting decisions and choices.
The elevation of GPA negotiators to supervise adherence to terms agreed has the greatest potential to rekindle differences at negotiation level and cause a stalemate given entrenched beliefs the initial negotiators have from negotiation discord.
It is also a proven fact that familiarity kills ingenuity. What difference should we expect from a committee that negotiated the agreement they have now been elevated to oversee implementation of and clear roadblocks in its way?
At the most we can expect differences that were there at the start of negotiations to persist throughout implementation and at the min bulldozed implementation.
It’s a frightening prospect that we must live with and do the best we can to caution against.
In those fears about imminent changes we are not alone.
Robert Mugabe’s official spokesman George Charamba aka Nathaniel Manheru is in worse predicament.
For far too long he has abused his position to speak rather authoritatively on Government and Zanu PF issues without any challenge being officially launched against his bad mouthing of Zanu PF’s political opponents.
But lately he appears to have chewed more than he can swallow when he falsely accused MDC Secretary General Hon Tendai Biti of mooting a replica of the infamous 12 October 2005 split of the MDC over Senatorial elections participation in the current MDC-T over participation in the inclusive government before certain conditions entrenched in the GPA have been met .
Incensed Biti sought retraction from the Herald that published the outrageous libel but it failed and/or refused to retract or more precisely was barred from retracting by Charamba.
Hon Biti who is by no means a legal lightweight in his own right promptly slapped the Herald and its features and political editor Mabasa Sasa and reporter Sydney Kawadza, authors of the libellous articles, with a defamation suit.
The foolish scribes who have allowed themselves to be used by Charamba to falsely label anyone who dares oppose or criticise Mugabe and Zanu PF but had hitherto never been sued for their malfeasances were shocked and scampered to Charamba’s office for help.
Charamba was equally shocked at the turn of events given the political stature of Hon Biti.
He had held that political mud flung in Biti’s direction would either be politically rebuffed by Biti and the MDC but never in the form and manner of a libel claim to the tune of US$500 000.00 as it turned out to be.
He hurriedly referred his stooge reporters to the Attorney General’s wife Josephine Tomana who is the Zimpapers legal affairs manager for legal counselling and reassurances that their case is in good and loyal Zanu PF cadres sphere of influence and will bring no harm to the scribes in their individual capacity.
But the scribes as well as Charamba have deeper running fears from this suit than meets the eye.
Charamba in his latest Nathaniel Manheru instalment in the Herald chose a headline that reveals his innermost fears.
“Tsvangirai: Between wild gale and prosperous winds,” led the article in the herald 31 January 2009. Substitute name “Charamba” in place of Tsvangirai and the fear factor is located in the right place.
“Largely, Zanu- PF gives, MDC gets, never mind with what amount of noise this transition takes place,” he cynically jibed in reference to the power position between Zanu PF and MDC in the GPA which is analogous to the power position between himself and Zanu PF except that MDC can force Zanu PF to change against Charamba’s will and advice to the contrary.
But the point was not about the balance of power between Zanu PF and MDC per se. Rather it was about Charamba’s fears of possible consequences of MDC-T assuming power at a time he was facing litigation over abuse of State privileges against one of Tsvangirai’s top strategists.
To understand this you have to see through how he invokes Mugabe’s power by disclosing the strategy that supposedly “won” SADC hearts and minds at the 26 January 2009 meeting of Heads of SADC States.
He advances the trump card was the “mature representatives from Zanu-PF and BDP” meeting in Kasane, which was beyond the intelligence of the MDC.
All lies of course because Zanu PF won nothing at the SADC meeting and if anything the party lost the desired leeway to form an exclusive government when concessions it thought were minor were enough to cause the MDC to accept positions in the government thereby diluting it to be inclusive.
With that acceptance came the real threat on Charamba. He will have to report to Tsvangirai the “prosperous wind” advised by a litigious Biti the “wild gale.”
Any discerning senior Civil servant at Charamba’s level would want a brighter looking relationship with politicians in government than this.
Reporting to a Prime Minister advised by one’s litigant is a frighteningly daunting prospect especially when past relations with the Prime Minister to be have been frosty.
Charamba therefore had to throw wild punches at perceived Tsvangirai advisors that convinced him to accept the Prime Minister’s job that he thought he had done enough to dissuade him from ever taking up.
But Tsvangirai is reputed for reckless political courage. Against Charamba’s insider advice he and his party decided its time to take the Zimbabwe democracy struggle into the comfort zones of Zanu PF in government circles.
It is a frightening decision for the Zanu PF compromised senior Civil servants. Where does the courage by the MDC and Tsvangirai to plunge into Zanu PF territory derive from?
Is it Botswana, Tanzania and Zambia’s or America’s presidents? Even if they are not involved it is necessary for Charamba to place a wedge between them and the MDC and its leader so that they will know what Mugabe thinks of them but can never say in public but through Charamba.
In the likely event these SADC leaders were not behind influencing Tsvangirai then it is his those aides that accompanied him to the 26 January SADC meeting and mobilised the impromptu 3000 morons that converged at Harvest House to show support for this horrendous development and the best way to deal with that is to create fictional dislocation between those in MDC that were in South Africa and those in MDC that remained at home.
This is the divide and rule that worked in 2005 and it is likely to produce similar results before Tsvangirai is sworn into office.
But the 2005 renegades are now languishing in political wilderness they have been condemned to by Tsvangirai and unless their stature is spruced up then the chances of motivating another revolt against Tsvangirai will be remote.
So Charamba reasons that Prof Mutambara went to Davos to exact revenge of his electoral losses and political discord with Tsvangirai as if he is now both Mugabe and Mutambara’s spokesperson.
But fact remains these are all divide and rule antics Charamba is employing ostensibly to defend Mugabe and Zanu PF when in reality it is for his own protection.
Zanu PF conceded that the appointments of Mr Johannes Tomana as Attorney General and Gideon Gono as Reserve Bank Governor and the 10 Provincial Governors are subject to JOMIC review and possible nullification.
What would be the implication of such a possibility on Charamba and his libellous stooges at the Herald?
Charamba is frightened to the marrow about this defamation suit from Biti.
That was the real issue in his instalment this week.
He urges Biti to break ranks with Tsvangirai form another opposition party and access waiting British sponsorship in league with imagined Rhodies with an axe to grind with Mugabe and Zanu PF over repossessed farms and supported by foreign sponsored NGO’s, intellectuals and the ZCTU.
The development would leave Tsvangirai to dry at the mercy of Mugabe and Zanu PF.
Such naivety on Charamba’s part is unbelievable.
Why would the ZCTU align with intellectuals when its membership is the downtrodden undereducated workers?
Secondly why would Biti of all people in the MDC entertain thoughts of abandoning a Party he has strenuously rebuilt from the ashes of the 2005 split at a time when he is likely to gain rewards for his sterling efforts and consolidate a party with a claim to a significant State political financing grant that he has operated without for nearly 4 years now?
If anything Biti would relish leaving Zanu PF in the sun to dry and beg him for mercy for their abuse towards him over the last decade.
Charamba would be the last suitable advisor for Biti in that regard.
Mugabe is the one who has shown that he is nothing without Tsvangirai and that position is unlikely to change because they will be together in an inclusive government which would collapse and trigger the frightening prospect of a Zanu PF unwinnable election the very moment anyone from Zanu PF misbehaves.
If anything Charamba is in the same position with Zanu PF in that Biti’s suit against the flagship herald he has routinely abused to advance Zanu PF interests may be forced to close shop by the suit in which case he may be sacrificed by Zanu PF to save the publication.
The wise words from Stanislaw Lec are instructive for Charamba in this instance.
“When you jump for joy, beware that no one moves the ground from beneath your feet.”
No comments:
Post a Comment