Zimbabwe: Time to regroup, re-energise, restrategise and confront the devil with his spear!

A movement that fails to renew and regenerate its ideas in line with the demands and expectations of its people risk becoming redundant. This could become the case in Zimbabwe unless we reorient ourselves.



There was a time when I was so convinced that a change in government could be achieved without confronting Mugabe's physical mighty. When we voted in 2000, I thought ZANU PF would be removed by the cumulative strength of our ballot. We failed. Lesson 1: ZANU PF could not be removed through the ballot.



In 2002, having noticed the euphoria across the nation in anticipation for change I was compelled to believe that indeed change was just a matter of time. I still vividly remember how I stayed awake the whole night as Mudede announced the results. It was a shock. My first reaction as Mugabe's numbers ballooned was to call the guys at Harvest House and told them that this could not be tolerated; but they too were as shocked as I was.



They decided to go to the courts, I thought otherwise. All they would say to me: "we are in search of democratic change". This was the same Morgan Tsvangirai who once said "if you do not go peacefully, we will remove you violently!" Why was MDC playing with precious time like that? I was however soothed by the fact that patience sometimes pays.



We managed to force the aspect of direct confrontation on MDC leadership in 2003 when they decided to force Mugabe out through civil disobedience, or I thought they had realized Mugabe's intransigency. We organized the "final-push".



I was under the impression that MDC was serious about taking over regardless of the challenges we faced. Then MDC had a strong network of activists at any level across the whole country. In Harare for instance, we had militant cell-groups even at ward level. It was easy to organize and discharge any activity without having to hunt for people or pay them to be part of it. The country was ready.



The sight of more than 5 000 University of Zimbabwe students marching towards the State House on 2 June 2003 was an inspiration to me. I was under the impression that thousands were also making their way towards the State House from all angles. Intelligence information indicated that Zimbabwe had only fourteen Israeli Water Cannons and very limited supply of teargas which obviously could not work against the thousands spread out across the city.



I was disappointed. The response from the state was emphatic. Students were brutalized and battered. They were shot at as if they were armed. Many later died from these injuries, others still carry the cicatrices. To my surprise, the then spokesperson for MDC, commented on BBC from South Africa, yet it had been made clear to us at a meeting in Harvest House that everyone would be in the thick of things. We were beaten into submission. Lesson 2: Mugabe could not be removed through peaceful civil action.



Every possible action outside physical confrontation had been tried but with failure. There was general agreement that if nothing radical was tabled then that was the end of it all. I still remember the sentiments passed at numerous Broad Alliance meetings that I attended. We had to change our approach to the struggle.



Whilst the general populace felt we needed this change in physical orientation- which we never hid even to Morgan- the party never seemed to take heed. By 2005 many were becoming frustrated by the apparent lack of decision by the party and feelings against the leadership were beginning to simmer. I still remember telling Ian Makone and Gandi Mudzingwa on our way to a BA meeting in 2005 that the idleness at the party would simmer into wildness. Sadly a few weeks later, violence broke out as camps fought for power. Eventually there was a split.



There was panic, even Morgan was overwhelmed. I remember finding the whole of Harvest House deserted save for Gandi, Dennis Murira and Nelson Chamisa. The advice that I remember giving these guys was that this was a chance for the party to regenerate itself. The challenge then was to allow for change within the party based upon loyalty to the party, commitment, competence and popular will and not loyalty to individuals. Unfortunately, the congress in 2006 was not conducted on these terms.



I am still of the opinion that the popularity of Morgan Tsvangarai cannot be doubted but the blunders, poor judgement and lack of impetus that are characteristic of MDC today is because of the blunders of March 2006 congress. Like ZANU PF today, there is no challenge of the ideas of elite. The elite itself does not sharpen each other. At the end of the day even the dullest of ideas may sail through simply because of loyalty to individuals and not loyalty to the cause.



Having said this, MDC remains the biggest player in the pro-change side of the struggle. Even some of us who do not entirely subscribe to its ideology cannot just ignore the fact that indeed MDC has played a key role in transforming our political landscape. In short, MDC is still important as a vehicle for change.



Who then fuels the vehicle? This is where we need to appreciate the dynamics of our struggle. We have reached a point where we are all convinced that indeed ZANU PF will use force to remain in power but for obvious reasons our leadership is hesitant to challenge this force in a decisive showdown.



This hesitancy is typical of any people-based movement. The only way the idea of force has been appreciated is when a dynamic front is opened that has an independent leadership but with a clear subscription to the cause of the broader movement. Dare ReChimurenga never called itself ZANU but subscribed to the ideas of ZANU. Umkhonto weSizwe never called itself ANC yet subscribed to the broader agenda of ANC.



I do not wish to dwell much on why MDC would never openly support the use of force to institute change in Zimbabwe, but I am more than convinced that deep down they too are contemplating this. What is needed now is for the committed within and without MDC to seek an alternative entity that at the beginning has independent leadership which loosely subscribe to MDC's broader agenda. This entity would operate independently with silent support of the MDC leadership.



As of the status quo, it remains MDC's responsibility to handle the GPA diligently but given Mugabe's behaviour it is high time that MDC goes on the offensive. A decision should be made, but frankly Mugabe is not willing to work for Zimbabwe.



Yes, I am a fervent critic of MDC's policies but MDC is better placed to bring down the dictatorship than anybody else. What is needed now is to build upon where MDC is and work together to provide the momentum and cutting edge that is currently lacking in this struggle. SACP and ANC taught us that minor differences can be put aside to achieve a broader goal.



We have reached a point where I think we need to confront the devil with his spear.



May we begin now!