Prof Arthur Mutambara with Morgan Tsvangirai (R) both want to lead Zimbabwe but are far apart in strategy
Professor Mutambara’s desperate fight for political relevance http://www.zimdaily.com/news/mutambara27.6747.html never ceases to amaze.
In a bus analogue MDC Economic Advisor Hon Eddie Cross had this to say in an indirect reference to the Mutambara/Makoni harmonised coalition that they boast was detrimental in Zanu PF and MDC failing to dominate the Zimbabwe political landscape albeit falsely.
“Last time someone did that they ended up in the bush, dumped on the side of the road and having to walk back to civilization - they are still walking.”
How apt when Prof Mutambara and Dr Makoni hitherto untouchable academic supremacists turned dismal politicians are the subject matter.
While Dr Makoni has been seen in Buhera on at least three occasions seeking for Morgan Tsvangirai – they are maternally related – Mutambara has been in the media houses seeking the same Tsvangirai.
The academics are in the political woods and desperately need Tsvangirai and the MDC to pluck them out.
They could have avoided themselves the growing political pains by applying their academic minds to the reality that established political parties like Zanu PF and the MDC cannot be wished away in any election in Zimbabwe.
They split and divided the MDC and belittled its leadership but still suffered monumental defeats at the hands of the MDC whose leadership they despise and believe is inferior to them academically and politically.
Of the two political pretenders, none of whom has ever won any contested political office in their lives yet they believe themselves to be first order of merit political strategists, it is Prof Mutambara who stands out as the worst highly educated political buffoon.
In his recent article titled “Laying the Foundation for 2009” Prof Mutambara exposed his political amateurism and inflated academic prowess yet achieved nothing more than the usual scorn and derision reserved for him and his adherents whenever he attempts to lecture them about the values of his education rather than political acumen that they desperately need to confront Mugabe and Zanu PF.
His article is a classic example of a politician swimming against the tide and making a worse fool of himself than the foolish master he tries to emulate.
“Hopelessness and despair characterize and define the national psyche. There has been complete leadership failure across the board, within Zimbabwe, in the region and in the international community,” Prof Mutambara passed the verdict on his leadership capabilities in 2008.
That is exactly the point Zimbabweans have been hammering at him from 2006 when he gate crashed the political landscape as a faction leader of Tribal malcontents whose political ego had been overinflated by successes of a political initiative whose loyalties they were not fully appreciative of.
Accepting leadership of a renegade faction of political renegades who were more concerned with safeguarding their individual political power than advancing the political interests of the people that elected them to lead was and still remains leadership failure of the greatest magnitude on Prof Mutambara’s part.
Failure to realise that to date is the final manifestation of Mutambara’s catastrophic political leadership acumen.
That he is a failed leader is not debatable. What can only be debated is who else is with him in the category of failed political leaders.
Dr Makoni, Robert Mugabe and Thabo Mbeki come close to the level of this failure except the other two have a following Mutambara can never fathom in his entire lifetime.
“In particular we seek to slay that elephant in the national living room: How ignorant and unstrategic external involvement in the Zimbabwean discourse does more harm than good,” Prof Mutambara set out his treatise parameters.
They start from assumptions that discourse on Zimbabwe is only knowledgeable, enlightened and strategic if it is from those in Zimbabwe and anyone outside involving himself with that discourse from elsewhere risks inputting ignorant and unstrategic data into the process.
But such assumptions are merely what they are –ASSUMPTIONS. They rationale is neither valid nor accurate. From the outset Prof Mutambara is out to slay a huge elephant that is only existent in the political wilderness he and his renegades are in.
It is doubtful he has the necessary weaponry and ammunition to achieve that given that he seems to be out hunting for an ogre he has never seen nor understands.
Needless to say that the argument that “in the year 2008, brazen and crass Western shenanigans have actually undermined the opposition and strengthened Robert Mugabe” is scapegoating by a politician who has failed to achieve a political undertaking to lead his party to electoral victory over Mugabe and Zanu PF.
“The 'Mugabe Must Go' Chorus”
“There is nothing new and creative in this 'Mugabe must go' mantra,” argues Mutambara.
This outrageous conclusion by him is premised on his belief that those who belong to this school of thought are lacking in common intellect yet good hearted. They must be both good hearted and intelligent –like you know who- to be allowed to sing that chorus.
“Some of us have been singing the 'Mugabe must go' mantra for the past 21 years, to no avail. Incidentally, Western governments disagreed with us in 1988 when we turned against the Zanu PF regime. Now they patronize us, as if they understand why Mugabe must go, better than us, his Zimbabwean victims,” he objected.
It is clear Mutambara has lost the plot here. The West was the target of our collective anger over nearly a century of the Colonial hegemony the perpetrated in our country.
That sad chapter was closed on 18 April 1980 when they put their tails between their legs and the British Empirical heir apparent Prince Charles lowered the Union Jack in front of a packed Rufaro Stadium in Harare.
The Zimbabwe flag was simultaneously hoisted in its place signalling the end of Western involvement with our internal politics. If we turned against Mugabe and Zanu PF in 1988, Western governments had no reason to support us as we had unanimously dispensed with their involvement.
That is why they did not intercede in our support over Gukurahundi. We had elected Mugabe to carry out that exercise and we not the Western governments were the foot soldiers in that horrendous act. Why did we not sanction Mugabe and Zanu PF in the 1990 elections if we were opposed to Gukurahundi massacres?
Surely we did not need the West to vote with us against Mugabe and Zanu PF.
Maybe we are the slow learners after all. Are we seriously expected to have shown indignation with Gukurahundi by allowing PF Zapu to unify with Zanu PF and then voting overwhelmingly for a Zanu PF government Professor?
The Western governments took a cue from our voting and honoured Mugabe for the achievements we had approved including his crimes that we had condoned. It is pathetic to now turn against them and say why you failed or refused to support us because if anything they supported us in tandem with how we had voted.
If they had sang the Mugabe must go chorus then when no less than 70%of us had voted for Mugabe’s retention as President Professor Mutambara’s accusation would hold water but they did not.
“While you seek to assist us in our struggles for change, your brazen behaviour effectively undermines us and strengthens our opponents. You must listen to us and not the other way round,” Mutambara lectured.
Sadly the lecture is at variance with reality. If the West rewarded Mugabe with Honorary degrees and international awards after Gukurahundi massacres resulted in us voting for his retention how did they undermine us?
“Every European leader and their grandmother joined in, supporting the “many” voices of African leaders. To crown it all, there was an incompetent dash to the UN Security Council, where everything came crumbling down; what an embarrassing non-event,” Prof Mutambara deduced after alleging there were no African leaders calling for Mugabe to go.
That the Mugabe must go chorus was a 21 year old African chorus which is in his own words “neither new nor creative” seems to have deserted the “intelligent” Professor because it had been sang by a morally repugnant Western leadership.
The call was no longer African led notwithstanding that it has been a 21 year obsession of African leaders like Mutambara and many others before him, living and deceased political opponents of Mugabe and Zanu PF’s vicious hegemony.
Those in Africa who were relied upon by the West to echo the Mugabe must go chorus did not represent any particular African country and where they did they were “usually reckless and unimaginative like Botswana’s Ian Khama” in Mutambara’s own words.
“So when these American and European leaders went into chorus who were they supporting? In a continent of 53 countries, the US and UK could not convince a single African President to be part of their elegant chorus,” Mutambara lashed out.
We can only conclude that Mutambara is not an African leader worth Western support because when they echoed “his 21 year old Mugabe Must Go chorus” they offended him by not adding an African President in their choir.
Pathetic!
Which African leader is more important to Zimbabweans than their own home grown Professor Arthur Mutambara who has been singing the solo chorus for 21 years?
If Prof Mutambara is as true a Zimbabwean African leader as he portrays himself to be and has been a soloist singer of the Mugabe must go chorus for 21 years without securing a single African head of state’s backing vocals for the chorus was it because he did not ask them to join him in singing the chorus or could it be that he has never sang the chorus and does not intent to ever sing it?
“If the Western leaders were indeed just supporting themselves why did they lie that they were supporting voices of African leaders? If they care about what African leaders think, why did they not spend enough time convincing the real African leaders of the correctness of Western positions and thereafter, have the African leaders speak first?" asked Prof Mutambara.
Kindergarten pupils would tell Prof Mutambara that it is him as the opposition political leader who is leading the call for Mugabe to go and for him to take over the reins of power in the country.
If he wants to be led by Mugabe he needs not present himself as a political entity outside Zanu PF which is the established political formation led by Mugabe.
If there is anyone in need of supporting vocals for the Mugabe must go chorus it is the Professor and not the Western heads of state.
Instead of chiding newly found backup vocals to his chorus he should be chiding the African heads of state he has been singing to for refusing to echo him.
That is what Zimbabweans expect from intelligent politicians. They expect, for example, Presidents Kgalema Motlanthe, Armando Geubuza, José Eduardo dos Santos, Jakaya Kikwete and Mwai Kibaki to be international statesman who are as open to receiving Mutambara and his followers with the same open hand of solidarity and friendship they extent to Mugabe and Zanu PF.
Zimbabweans expect Prof Mutambara to forge meaningful, beneficial and lasting foreign relations with anyone who sympathises with their plight under Zanu PF misrule.
Such friends must be prepared to resound Prof Mutambara’s Mugabe Must go chorus within reasonable time of realising the representations justifying that call from Prof Mutambara and certainly not wait for 21 days to stand up for trampled human rights.
“But no, the Western powers chose to create their own pseudo African leaders, (including Prof Mutambara who has sung the chorus for 21 years we must add) and then force a 'world chorus'” deduced Mutambara {with my insert}.
Surely if Mutambara can sing a chorus for 21 years and then when it arouses interest lash back at the interested he is leading a lost cause. “This was sure to fail,” as he correctly observes.
Not because of lack of support but because the preferred supporters are detested.
“There are three ways Mugabe can be removed from the Presidency and leadership of Zimbabwe: (1) use of violence or arms of war (2) peaceful mass uprising or demonstrations (3) free and fair elections,” we must concur with the Professor.
We also agree that suggesting forceful removal without structures to carry out the threat is wishful thinking that is demoralising.
But we must dispel these Mutambara fears. “Of course they can get rid of Mugabe that way. However, Western forces will have to bleed on Zimbabwean soil in the process. It will not be a walk in the park.”
The Rhodesia front army was much more portent and better trained, funded and nourished than the Colonial Liberation Movement army and certainly the current national Army.
We all know which army triumphed in the final analysis don’t we.
The resolve, determination and dedication in the Colonial Liberation army leadership is what Prof Mutambara sadly lacks.
There will be no war fought to remove Mugabe with frightened leaders like Mutambara at the helm.
That today’s Iraq is democratically worse off than Saddam Hussein’s Iraq can only be sold to foolish academics not real politicians.
Could a journalist have attempted throwing shoes at Saddam Hussein’s guest and live to see the sunset of the day he/she committed such a courageous expression of public dissent?
“Only two African countries, Botswana and Kenya have expressed an appetite for physical confrontation with Zimbabwe. We will not even dignify Botswana’s posturing with too much discussion. They have no army, but an incompetent police force which has no capacity to invade a desert much less a country with Zimbabwe’s military experience,” concluded Mutambara.
That then settles issues for Mutambara. Zimbabwe is a military powerhouse in Africa no Western nation will stroll past in combat let alone impoverished African country armies.
Hungry, disillusioned, demoralised, absconding Zimbabwe soldiers are in Mutambara’s opinion likely to prosecute a war in support of their oppression than well fed, motivated and free armies volunteering to end human abuses in Zimbabwe by a despotic Junta establishment.
We can only deduce that Prof Mutambara lacks in-depth understanding of what armies fight for and what drives them to victory in any battle.
We would urge him to watch the Football World Cup and determine why rich nations have time and again fallen to poorer contestants of inferior training and technical aptitude.
“How many of us join their brave marches? How many Zimbabweans joined the soldiers when they went on the rampage on the streets of Harare? It is clear that the appetite for an 'orange revolution' in Zimbabwe has still to be developed, before a mass uprising becomes a realistic platform to drive Mugabe out,” deduced Mutambara on prospects of a civil uprising.
According to the Professor the reason Zimbabweans are yet to develop an appetite for mass uprising is because politicians within the opposition movement are not yet ready to assume the sacrifices that this option entails.
“Where political leaders go into hiding at the slightest threat of persecution, we fail to see how this option can be brought to fruition,” he stated.
We must disagree with Prof Mutambara on this one. He is being prosecuted for an opinion he published late 2008 in the Zimbabwe Standard but is not in hiding.
No less than 30 MDC activists are currently in remand prison after being kidnapped and held incommunicado for several months between the Months of October and December 2008.
They are not in hiding or are they?
In the run up to the March parliamentary elections the MDC offices were invaded and ransacked by State Police and many leaders were detained for months without charge only to be released when trumped up charges of terrorism training in South Africa collapsed when the training camps could not be located.
Hon Chamisa was viciously attacked at the Harare International Airport by known armed State Security operatives while enroute to a Government sanctioned meeting.
He did not go into hiding and his assailants are still at large. In March 2007 most MDC leaders were arrested in Highfield and all except Professor Mutambara were savagely assaulted while in police custody.
They did not go into hiding and were there to win an unprecedented Parliamentary majority 12 months later.
Morgan Tsvangirai has been detained and accused of terrorism more than any other opposition politician in Zimbabwe but has always been there to lead democratic resistance against Mugabe and Zanu PF.
At one point he was barred from returning to Zimbabwe because Party intelligence had discovered an assassination plot against him.
In June he took refuge in the Netherlands embassy after withdrawing his candidature from the illegitimate Presidential runoff poll and being visited by armed assassins at his house.
As soon as the threat was exposed enough and the Junta gave undertakings they would not arrest and detain him he was back with the people that adore and respect his leadership.
Currently he has been out of the country for 3 months because the Junta government in place had refused to show seriousness about forming the SADC mediated inclusive government.
Meanwhile there is an extensive dossier of terrorism training activities by his party before SADC and many of his key staffers have been abducted and held incommunicado for periods ranging between 1-3 months.
Tsvangirai would have been among them had it not been that he remained in South Africa after the circus SADC gathering in Sandtown that ordered co-ministering of the Home Affairs Ministry and formation of the inclusive government as a solution to disputed power sharing initiatives by Mugabe and Zanu PF.
Professor Mutambara acceded to this foolishness and to date the process has not moved an inch forward despite him telling us that SADC were the movers and shakers of the Global Political Agreement (GPA).
We all know why there has been no movement don’t we.
Sadc cannot determine the nature and form of our government. They can only influence it politically, economically and socially.
The electorate can and they are at present behind Tsvangirai and not Mugabe or Mutambara. That is why the rejects are resorting to a military inspired solution and determined to hang onto power by whatever means they can do so legal, moral or otherwise.
Obviously Professor Mutambara is not ready to lead an uprising because that uprising will sweep him aside and restore Tsvangirai’s legitimate claim to the country’s Presidency.
Zimbabweans are being taken for a ride by this Prof Mutambara whom Mugabe is grooming to lead Zanu PF.
How else can they explain why Mutambara does not want the Mugabe must go chorus to be sung louder than his solo hum and certainly not by anyone other than the 53 disinterested and reluctant African heads of state.
How else can we explain a Prof Mutambara who publicly rallies Zimbabweans to “drive the dictator out of office” and the one who believes no workable political solution is possible in Zimbabwe if the same dictator is not made part of that solution and rewarded with the Presidency he urges his supporters to strip him of?
How can any sane and peace loving Zimbabwean believe and trust a Professor Mutambara who condones Mugabe stealing an election using the state military establishments to retain power yet at the time offer to lead them to triumph over the despot using an informal agreement which is of no legal consequence whatsoever if Mugabe shreds it and trashes it in the waste basket?
How can Zimbabweans believe in the leadership of a Professor Mutambara who of the firm belief that they are not election ready months after they have braved a gruelling and vicious election campaign that saw hundreds of their relatives butchered in cold blood by the same Mugabe they rejected at the polls?
Why would Zimbabweans want to ditch a Mugabe who leads them out of the economic woods, nurtures national healing and restores democratic constitutional democracy unless they are myopic?
Is it not discontent with Mugabe’s failure and or refusal to lead them to economic prosperity, uphold equitable rule of law, and allow them to elect leaders of their choice, stamp out corruption, and uphold their fundamental rights as humans and citizens that is driving opposition for Mugabe and Zanu PF?
What sort of political creativity informs Professor Mutambara that helping Mugabe and Zanu PF clear their past record of failed leadership will revile them in the eyes of the electorate rather than endear them to the electorate that yearns for the prosperity that has so far been denied them by the same Zanu PF and Mugabe?
“How do we achieve a free and fair election in Zimbabwe? Certainly not through demanding harmonized elections today which will be conducted under June 27 conditions. Needless to say in such a plebiscite Mugabe will capture the Presidency and the current combined opposition majority in Parliament will be completely reversed,” believes Mutambara.
Free fair and credible elections are a fundamental right for every Zimbabwean wishing to participate in them in terms of the country’s current flawed Constitution.
Professor Mutambara being one of the people at the forefront of wanting to lead the country must be asking why his preferred African heads of state democratic vanguard must be trusted to deliver on that fundamental right if they sit back with folded arms when Mugabe and Zanu PF uses military force to vitiate those rights with impunity of the pre- June farcical presidential runoff.
Instead the professor runs at a tangent and attacks the Western leaders for not supporting these docile African leaders in perpetuating Mugabe misrule.
This kind of strategy is beyond the comprehension of most Zimbabweans and is without precedent.
“Let us be strategic. Our people and country are not election ready at the moment,” deduced Prof Mutambara.
We agree only if he means the people that are behind his leadership bid who confirmed that belief beyond any shred of doubt in March 2008.
The same cannot be said about the 3 million voters who in their majority voted for Tsvangirai and his MDC leadership ahead of Mugabe and his Zanu PF.
They do not need any transitional period to express their free will. Rather they need Professor Mutambara to persuade his dependable and informed African heads of state to guarantee them safety from Zanu PF electoral violence and repression before and after any election in the country and they will show Mutambara how election ready they are.
They need professor Mutambara to persuade his trusted African heads of state to sing the democratic chorus loudly that whoever looses in elections they pass as credible, free and fair must go including Mugabe and Mutambara something he does not seem to realise he is in complicit defiance with Mugabe.
He lost the Zengeza East Parliamentary bid in March and must respect that for this parliament his services were not required.
By exploiting a flawed SADC inspired rescue plan for Mugabe and negotiating himself back into parliament with less than 1000 votes to back him Mutambara is acting no different to Mugabe who looses the election by a wide 5% margin and invokes violence to remain in office.
For Mutambara to negotiate not just an ordinary Member of Parliament but a Deputy Premiership accommodation in the evil Sadc rescue plan for Mugabe is as violent on his part as Mugabe who defies the electorate using State militia and African heads of neighbouring states.
Professor Mutambara must never lose sight of that.
What guarantees does Prof Mutambara hold that the GPA of 15 September 2008 he signed with Tsvangirai and Mugabe is more legally and militarily binding on Mugabe to allow free and fair elections than the Constitution of Zimbabwe he has been custodian of for 28 consecutive years but breached with reckless military abandon each time elections were held and escaped recrimination?
Whoever wants to believe this political tomfoolery by Professor Mutambara is free to do so but they must be prepared for disappointing outcomes in banking their trust in his illogical vision.
“Why Mugabe Cannot Go Away Through Talks”
“The election results from March 29, 2008 produced no outright winner both in Parliament and at the Presidency. The June 27 re-run was an illegitimate farce, so we are stuck with the March inconclusive outcome. As democrats, we must accept that this means that Mugabe and his party are as much a factor as Tsvangirai and his Party are.
Short of a new set of elections or change of leadership by their parties, it means neither Tsvangirai nor Mugabe can be negotiated away. On what basis can we have a negotiated agreement that excludes Robert Mugabe? If we accept the March results as legitimate, he is a leader of a party which won 99 MPs vs. 100 for MDC-T, 30 Senators vs. 24 for MDC-T. He came second to Tsvangirai, 43.2% vs. 47.8%. More importantly Mugabe currently possesses the Presidency of Zimbabwe, yes illegitimately. Well, at law they say that possession is 90% of ownership.
The fact that Mugabe has this power of incumbency is the reason why Arthur Mutambara is still on trial in the Supreme Court, Tendai Biti has treason charges around his neck, activists are being abducted, and Morgan Tsvangirai, the Prime Minister-Designate, had a torrid time getting a passport.
This means Mr. Mugabe is in charge of the Zimbabwean State. Given this reality on the ground and the electoral outcome of March 29 2008 (which because of our lack of strategic thinking we have all sanitized as a legitimate outcome), it is foolishness to think that you can negotiate Robert Mugabe out of power, and somehow miraculously achieve a power-sharing arrangement that excludes him,” Mutambara concluded.
First it is not true that the March 29 elections did not produce an outright winner. They did. Even the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission, the Sadc and AU observers and Mugabe’s own Chief election Agent Emmerson Mnangagwa conceded that Mugabe was beaten into 2nd place by Morgan Tsvangirai.
That the declared margin of Tsvangirai’s victory did not meet Constitutional requirements for him to be declared President elect is a legally contentious issue that will never be resolved because the military intervened on behalf of the defeated Mugabe to suspend the declaration being made by the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC).
Professor Mutambara knows that the results were tempered with but still makes a political statement that casts aspersion on whether or not Tsvangirai indeed won the March 29 elections.
For what purpose we wonder? Could it be to lay foundation for justifying his stealth re-entry into Parliament via the diabolical Sadc inspired GPA of 15 September 2008? We are sure of that.
Secondly in first past the post election models the world over such as the ones we subscribe to in Zimbabwe the margin of the win is not of material consequence. The one with the most votes in his favour is duly elected notwithstanding the narrowness of the victory margin.
That is why Professor Mutambara is not contesting the defeat of his fielding in Tsholotsho North by Professor Jonathan Moyo by the narrowest of margins.
That the Constitution prescribes a runoff Presidential election where the initial winner does not command an overall majority in the initial contest does not invalidate the initial win.
It only gives a second chance for the initial winner and the first runner up to square up in a runoff which will produce an overall winner unless they garner a dead hit in that round whereupon parliament will sit as an electoral college to separate them and determine the ultimate winner.
That process is strictly pre regulated in the country’s electoral laws but we have a situation where a stood down and defeated former Justice Minister was re-engaged by a defeated presidential contestant to override Parliament and change the critical statute in favour of a runoff claimant who was clearly out of time with his demand for a runoff.
Professor Mutambara uses that flawed process to justify a clearly illegal runoff that turned out to be a sham of unimaginable proportions and yet still hopes to be seriously considered to be in opposition to the person who used possession of power to invalidate standing statutes.
Mugabe’s command of 99 Parliamentary seats as opposed to Tsvangirai’s 100 means Mugabe lost the Parliamentary control to Tsvangirai by the one seat and Prof Mutambara must know that.
How else does he explain his failed bid for the Parliamentary speakership after Zanu PF threw its weight behind his nominee for the post?
If it is it is “foolishness to think that you can negotiate Robert Mugabe out of power, and somehow miraculously achieve a power-sharing arrangement that excludes him,” then Professor Mutambara must be the most foolish political demagogue in Zimbabwe.
His signature is permanently appended to the GPA of 15 September 2008 which he believes is the only workable and efficient means to exclude Mugabe from future Zimbabwe governance.
How, if negotiations will not work against Mugabe, did he extract the GPA and how will he use it to out manage Mugabe from a government in which Mutambara is happy to be his subordinate?
These are issues that expose Mutambara’s political naivety which he sadly flaunts as creativity.
If Mugabe cannot be negotiated out of power we can safely conclude the GPA process will not achieve that desirable and therefore does not require our support.
“In terms of democratic practice it will be unjust, and in terms of real politick it will be impossible. Oh yes, on the basis of the March 29 harmonized results, Mugabe should be part of any power-sharing transitional authority in Zimbabwe, since he is President of a Party well represented in both legislative houses, and he came second in the inconclusive Presidential race,” Mutambara eulogised.
With political competitors like this does Mugabe really need supporters?
The only democratic injustice inflicting Zimbabwe at the moment is Mugabe’s refusal to abide by the preset electoral rules and use of the State militia to achieve that.
To argue that Mugabe is a likely victim of undemocratic practice if he is forcibly dispossessed of a Presidency he has forcibly expropriated is utter political stupidity by Mutambara.
To add that Mugabe deserves leadership of a power sharing deal in Zimbabwe because he the President of a well represented Party in both legislative houses rather than a winner of elections for posts in those houses is repugnant politicking by Mutambara.
Most opposition political parties are well represented in Parliaments the world over but does that give them the mandate to form governments? No. Why then must Mugabe be treated any differently when his party loses elections?
“We might not like these democratic circumstances, but we have to live with that reality. Politics is an art of the possible,” Mutambara declared.
Utter rubbish.
Politics is the art of using cocktails of unorthodox and orthodox means to outmanoeuvre political rivals from powerful leadership positions.
Only those with the steel to lead such initiatives must be in leadership positions for such initiatives not deceitful lily livered demagogues like Prof Mutambara.
In the current Zimbabwean political landscape, the possibilities belong to the people not both Robert Mugabe and Morgan Tsvangirai as Mutambara would like us to believe.
They need us more than they need each other. We need not debate the specific role that Mugabe should play any other way than through free and fair elections
To fool himself that “for now that debate was settled by Mugabe, Tsvangirai and Mutambara when they signed the Global Political Agreement (GPA) on 15 September 2008 when the people are clearly frustrating the implementation of the agreement is revelling on political embers by a political novice.
Robert Mugabe may be President Designate, Morgan Tsvangirai is Prime Minister Designate and Professor Mutambara Deputy Prime Minister Designate in the GPA agreement but when it comes to real exercise of power the mandate has been given to Tsvangirai by the people and unless the implementation of the GPA acknowledges and reflects that people position it will fail and Professor Mutambara will be as much accountable as those of his ilk.
That the GPA is not the only show in town nor means to the desired end in our politics is not debatable and Mutambara knows that without any doubt.
“A lot of debates and thinking have gone into crafting alternatives to the Agreement of September 15 2008. Unfortunately, it has been a comedy of errors and unsophisticated hallucinations,” brags Mutambara.
We need not remind him of the fate that has befallen previous proponents of such supremacists’ political absolutes. They were proven wrong in time and Prof Mutambara’s views are not an exception.
He may yet live to have a political CV that reads Deputy Prime Minister Designate Inclusive Government of Zimbabwe agreed on 15 September 2008 that was never implemented unless he changes course and supports the people’s wishes not Mugabe and Tsvangirai’s wishes and need for each other.
“None of the proposals from the ICG, the civic society groups (both national and regional), or the arrogant and ignorant international community has addressed this simple challenge: How are you going to ensure that both MDC-T and Zanu PF will embrace your new grand proposal? If one or both of them do not accept your framework what are you going to do? Please, this is commonsensical,” Mutambara lamented.
We can only remind Mutambara that the reason why Mugabe and Zanu PF have failed to lead the country to the promised prosperity they always make a priority in elections is because they have lost arrogant and ignorant international good will and he will be no exception to that rule if he continues on the self destruct path that Mugabe has walked in the past without realising any joy.
The issues at centre stage are not MDC and Zanu PF embracing each other but who is willing to work to resolve expressed people problems in Zimbabwe. That is the only commonsensical position to support.
Anyone seeking to resolve the Zimbabwean crisis democratically and within the laws of Zimbabwe must apply their mind to this critical success factor not MDC/Zanu PF convergence of thinking.
We should not waste time justifying the utility of a flawed GPA Professor Mutambara acknowledges to be flawed in resolving people’s politically prescribed economic and social trials and tribulations in the country.
Our imagination should focus on achieving power structures that ensures draconian use of prerogatives is put in check once and for all.
Mugabe deserves all the condemnation he is getting because he has been in charge of our country for the past 28 years and all its successes and failures are his to account for.
Mugabe does not need to negotiate peace with anyone within or outside Zimbabwe. All that is required of him is to abide by the country’s laws and he will have more friends than enemies on his side.
The minute he disregards certain fundamental laws and principles of democratic governance he will create a swell of opponents which will oppose him and the result will be wasteful negotiations that lead the country to nowhere.
Whoever told Mutambara that “South Africa is the only country with leverage on Zimbabwe” is a shallow analyst.
If that was the case why is it that the country is in a political and economic malaise when the South African presence is visible in every facet of its structures?
Surely someone elsewhere is causing the malaise for it is inconceivable that South Africa would be using its leverage to cause the problems the country is facing.
“To bring any kind of change in Zimbabwe you have to work with SA, and not insult or humiliate them,” Mutambara declares.
Is Zimbabwe a South African province or colony Professor Mutambara?
Change will come to Zimbabwe with or without South African leverage. The respect that Mutambara wants to be shown to South Africa must be earned by the corresponding respect it accords our leaders and in particular Morgan Tsvangirai.
Indeed “anyone serious about the Zimbabwean agenda must grasp this,” including Mutambara. Attacking Jendayi Fraser, the USA and the British will not solve our problems.
Respecting Tsvangirai and his political wins will get the ball rolling for the country. You cannot seriously reduce yourself to the role of defending Tsvangirai from Western abuse as if you are his Party’s public relations manager or Foreign Affairs Secretary.
Let him burn from his alleged association with the West if it such a dreaded political alliance by Zimbabweans.
Professor Mutambara must desist from earning cheap political points by attacking Tsvangirai whose win made it possible for him to have a sniff at power in Zimbabwe in the first instance.
He obviously believes it was the South Africans who defeated Mugabe on 29 March 2008.
The attempt to bring Tsvangirai into confrontation with the USA was to say the least Herdsmen fight spoiling tactics by professor Mutambara that need no further comment.
Why is it right for Mugabe to rely on Pan African support to retain power and improper for Tsvangirai to counterbalance that with Western support if the power Mugabe has is being abused with African blessings?
“We seriously hope that incoming US President Obama and his new team will depart from this ignorant, ruinous and ineffective foreign policy that effectively undermines its intended beneficiaries, strengthens the targeted villains, while blighting the US standing in the World,” Mutambara pleaded.
Are we right in the deduction that the “we” means the Pan Africanist Zanu PF and MDC PF axis since Tsvangirai is already in allegedly in the USA and the Western fold?
If we are correct then the plea will fall on deaf ears as Obama is unlikely to be happy to be associated with politicians who insult his predecessors as ignorant to buy his heart and mind.
If anything we expect Obama to lead an American foreign policy that compels Mugabe and Mutambara to subscribe to democratic practice in Zimbabwe not farcical and vile leadership epitomised by leadership elitist pacts.
"Things have to change in 2009. We are not naïve."
The only changes necessary in Zimbabwe is not USA or western foreign policies towards the country. Rather it is the country’s foreign policies towards the West and its internal policies and political management that must be upgraded to world class levels.
It is clear that unless such changes are taken on board even the rich Zimbabweans like Mutambara will be subjected to demands by the poor masses they unilaterally abuse for humane treatment.
“All Zimbabwean leaders must understand this. We must collectively take responsibility for the calamity afflicting our country. In particular, Professor Arthur Mutambara, Robert Mugabe and Morgan Tsvangirai are equally culpable for the failure to work together. They are effectively working against the interests of their supporters and the generality of our citizenry. The tthree leaders are more concerned about a misguided power play executed at the expense of Zimbabwean lives. They have blood on their hands.”
I have purposefully included Prof Mutambara in the above citation he made beut excluded himself when at every other turn he claims to be Zimbabwean political kingmaker to make him realise that he is not as saintly as he thinks he is.
“There is absolutely no way Tsvangirai and his Party will be the beneficiaries of the collapse of Robert Mugabe. Quite to the contrary, the Zanu PF regime will make sure they collapse together with Tsvangirai and MDC-T,” declares Mutambara.
Why must we then join him in an alliance from hell with Party leaders who are prepared to take us down with them if they are voted out of power?
Who then is the chief saboteur of the GPA the West or the signatories of the agreement?
“Do the current abductions, confessions and dubious trials of activists mean anything to anyone? MDC-T will not exist after the demise of Mugabe. I hope Mr. Tsvangirai understands this in no uncertain terms. I wish our brazen and unintelligent Western friends will do more listening and thinking. This Mugabe must collapse strategy is not in the best interest of Zimbabwe. A regime change agenda achieved through a scorched earth policy is not what we need in our country. It will not benefit anyone” said Prof Mutambara.
Shall we then accept Mugabe misrule because military rule is waiting in the wings if his rule collapses?
We are tired of living in fear of our leaders and they can do whatever to intimidate us but we are no longer left with any options but to make a last stand against tyranny from Mugabe, Mutambara of the Zimbabwe Army commanders.
For that reason Mugabe must go into the retirement that the 29 March election determined. That position can only be reversed by another credible election and not Prof Mutambara, Robert Mugabe and Morgan Tsvangirai in secretive negotiations before SADC.
Conclusion
“The year 2009 presents us with an opportunity for a new beginning”.
There is nothing new or creative that can come from a Mugabe led inclusive government.
Mugabe is old tired and must retire or be retired.
We must invite anyone caring for our country’s recovery from the political, economic and social malaise to join us in singing that chorus and acting towards its successful execution.
We must never show respect for a political despot who has outlived his usefulness and deserves to be cared for by the State for his past sacrifices and chided for his past misdemeanours.
The days of silent acceptance of the wanton violation of our rights as Zimbabweans are well and truly over and we must state that loudly and unambiguously.
Mugabe Must Indeed GO.
That agenda has long been set and no agenda is necessary before we accomplish that initial objective.
