How the Diaspora can drive the regime change agenda in Zimbabwe

In my last article I proffered that Zimbabwe is completely in the hands of ZANU PF and that there is no hope for a free and fair election as long as the current cabal is intact. It seems however that many who read the article found it logical to conclude that if elections would not present a change in government, then an armed conflict would be the only way to institute structural changes. I believe there is another way that could be effective, clean and constructive.

Remember I talked about an attempt by ZANU PF at creating a new State that has foundations on its ruling elite. What ZANU PF’s inner circle is primarily seeking to do is to build an empire that has the ability to control both the national resources and the government. In controlling the national resources this group will be able to freely operate and multiply its wealth. They know they will not be able to freely operate in future if they do not have security, thus they romped in the core of the military into the inner cabal. What is left now is to ensure that they have the ability to influence who gets into government and who does not. This will be easy for them in future but not now.

If the inner cabal which revolves around Mugabe, Munangagwa and Mujuru is left unchecked by 2020, all major companies in Zimbabwe will belong to them. Right now all productive land in Zimbabwe belongs to them. They now control the primary mode of production. They now literally control the raw resources of Zimbabwe including minerals. What they are doing now is to take control of all other companies in the country. They talk of indigenization when they know that in 2008 they reduced all Zimbabweans to paupers by literally freezing all the money that they had in banks.
The plot from 2004 was to print paper money which they would use to buy foreign currency on the black market and stash it somewhere else. They allowed inflation to spiral because it was necessary to have all other Zimbabweans as beggars so that they would not in future pose as threats in the competition for resources. What we are seeing now is an attempt to clean dirty money and make it acceptable into the economy whilst asserting their influence over all other people in the country.

Indigenization demystified

The inner cabal through its banker Gideon Gono managed to collect money though the black-market at virtually no cost because they bought it with worthless paper. It is estimated that they amassed approximately US$ 2 billion over the four years. Since 2006 ZANU PF through proxy companies has been mining diamonds and secretly selling them to the Chinese and other eastern countries. The money did not go into State coffers but straight to ZANU PF. It is estimated that they make about $1.7 billion annually through the diamonds. That is about $6.8 billion over 4 years. What this means is that ZANU PF has about $8.8 billion stashed somewhere outside the official economy of the country. This money is dirty money which they can easily lose for example if for some strange reason China’s policy towards Zimbabwe changes assuming the money is in Chinese banks.

So the next stage is now to spruce the money, make it clean and send it into the official market as legit. They know that it will be a very tough decision for United Kingdom to impulsively freeze the operations of companies like Anglo American Corporation, Rio Tinto, Barclays Bank and Standard Chartered Bank which have their origins in that country. Zimbabwe has about 600 of such foreign companies. ZANU PF came up with the controversial indigenisation law which requires all foreign companies to shed 51 percent of their stakes to indigenous Zimbabweans.

ZANU PF knows that every other Zimbabwean who was not within the ZANU PF system in 2008 is now a pauper. They have $9 billion waiting to be used in the crusade. By law, all the 600 companies will cede 51 percent to ZANU PF. This time they are not going to seize companies without compensation, they are legally going to pay for the 51 percent using dirty money. If applied with speed ZANU PF will be controlling all the land and all the companies in Zimbabwe very soon.

So the concept of indigenization although very attractive to poor Zimbabweans is not meant to benefit them but to assert the authority of an inner cabal of ZANUPF. We have helped to build this empire through our sweat which was bought through worthless paper.

The toothless government in 2020

When the dust settles, sanctions will not make much sense. Production will grow. ZANU PF will now be able to invest in agriculture. This will be simple, ZANU PF will now be controlling the chain of wealth creation. They will be able to farm tomatoes on their farms, instead of selling them at Mbare Musika , they will now be able to make rich pickings at Unilever which they would own. The tomatoes will be made into Royco which they would sell and again make rich pickings through OK Zimbabwe which they will also own.

Eventually the issue of running around in parliament and government will become too tedious and dirty for the inner cabal. They will then be willing to shed offices of the government to other acceptable individuals who will be screened so that they would not put the cabal’s interests at risk. The State will then be able to pacify general Zimbabweans through fringe benefits associated with a reviving economy. Eventually jobs will be available as the companies grow and reinvest in other sectors.

When people begin to get food they will begin to worry about who is ruling them. So the final stage will be to create another political party that is again controlled by the inner cabal. This party will challenge ZANU PF in elections and win. It will be acceptable because it will in other words be another ZANU PF although with a different name and different personalities. The net effect of development is that the inner cabal’s interests will still be protected. Eventually we will have a bi-partisan country run and controlled by monsters.

Building an alternative to the ZANU PF State

I have gone to this length so that we can all appreciate the seriousness of ZANU PF. At face value the only way to stop ZANU PF is to take up arms and topple them. This is not attractive neither is it feasible because Zimbabweans are fresh from war and they know how destructive and painful it is. Secondly, for an alternative army to be built there is need for resources. Already MDC and NGOs in Zimbabwe have milked western donors since 1999 and signs of donor fatigue are showing as it becomes apparent that it is improbable for MDC to rule Zimbabwe. Lastly, there is minimal immediate gain for the West in Zimbabwe. War in Zimbabwe will be a liability to them as they would also be expected to bear the burden of rebuilding a ravaged country. Smart regime change remains the only acceptable option for them.

The hope for smart regime change lies in the Zimbabwe Diaspora. Zimbabwe has approximately 2 million people who are outside the country. This body of people is very important economically. There hasn’t been a strategy to harness the economic power of the diaspora especially from the pro-democratic side of the political divide. The importance of Diaspora remittances in propping up economies cannot be understated. Phillipines received about $16 billion from it Diaspora in 2008 whilst Ethiopia received about $780 million in 10 months in 2010. It is this strength that we ought to harness for us to create an alternative and rival State in Zimbabwe.
There are some assumptions that we have to make before positing the alternative solution. We are going to assume that of the 2 million people outside the country only 25 percent are formally employed or are productive. We will also assume that on average only 200 000 are able to spare a minimum of $1000 which can be used for investment purposes.

What we need is a Collective Investment Trust that has the ability to raise capital, engage in business, create and multiply wealth. If initially 1000 people are found who are willing to invest at least $5000 each into the CIT over a period of a year (2012), the Trust will be able to raise $5 million over that period. This money would be spun through short-term , high-turnover investments coupled to startup of sustainable businesses that need limited capital injection in the diaspora.

There is a lot of untapped business potential in the world that the Trust can exploit. A lot of brilliant business ideas are dying because we do not have access to capital. The Trust would act as an investment vehicle for its beneficiaries which are primarily the 1000 people. As the empire of the Trust grows it begins to initiate formation of other investment vehicles be it other Trusts, companies or corporations which would be under its wings but whose drive would be to harness the financial power of the diaspora through providing a platform for Zimbabwe-centric investment opportunities. Let’s assume that 200 000 people decide to invest at least $1000 into business entities controlled by the CIT. It means the Trust will have access to $200 million in raw capital. We will assume this process takes a year.

We have to remember that every human being wants a return on his investments. So for avoidance of doubt I am not suggesting an ujamaa or a compassionate entity. I am suggesting a complete profit-making empire whose primary objective is to make income for its beneficiaries but aiming at taking over the economic structures in Zimbabwe.
Investment after 2014 would be two pronged in that; the external investment will be solely to make maximum profit whilst internal investments would be aimed at starting up business along politically strategic but profitable lines. For example, Zimbabwe does not have an efficient payment gateway that has the capacity to support online transactions. We ought to look at the relationship between PayPal and Ebay to get an insight. Ebay provides a platform for people to sell and buy merchandise all over the world . PayPal processes the payments that happen so that if one buys something in Thailand yet resides in Uganda, he can send money easily by the click of the computer button. Ebay owns Paypal and most of the $2.5 billion profit made in 2010 were driven by business done through PayPal.

Zimbabwe does not have any company that has been operating these services and because of sanctions Ebay and Paypal are not accessible to inland Zimbabweans. This is just one of the many fields that are awaiting exploitation. How strategic is both Ebay-like and Paypal-like business in Zimbabwe? Introduction of these technologies will provide employment to a significant number of people which is a positive to our people. In terms of the overall political objective it means a significant angle of influence will be in progressive hands.

We will need investment into all sectors that would allow us to exert an influence in future. Investment within the country will be limited in terms of company size but expanded in terms of sector coverage. This will be done so as to avoid loss due to the possibility of expropriation by ZANU PF. The drive will be through proxy entities that are wholly owned by Zimbabweans. We need to get insight and advice from business people who have managed to stay afloat in Zimbabwe despite their opposition to the system for example Strive Masiiwa who owns Econet Wireless.

The need to have small companies scattered across sectors is to provide competition to ZANU PF where it already controls and to lay an early claim to stakes in areas it has not explored. In future, we will be able to inject capital into these companies so that they can effectively compete and possibly outwit ZANU PF owned companies in these sectors. In niche areas we will be able to silently and covertly exert our dominance.

External investment will also be aimed at capacitating the movement in areas that may become important in future exertion of force. These include military technology, satellite technology and general advanced technology. This may not be important today as this thrust is none-physical and non-military. In future we may need to counter the aging ZANLA/ZIPRA influence through provision of substitutive military influence that would enable the army to move away from obsolete methods to professional and modern methods. This will allow us to exert our military mighty on the security apparatus in the country.

The advantage that the Diaspora has over ZANU PF is that they are not subject to sanctions. They have the ability to exploit the global village without restrictions related to the current political situation in Zimbabwe. This means that the pace of growth emanating from external engagements will be much faster than that of ZANU PF . Assuming that the return from investments is 100 percent per annum then the empire can reach a $1 billion mark in 4 years.

This growth is important only if it is not coupled to a growth on ZANU PF’s empire. So it is important to maintain the economic pressure on ZANU PF so that they do not have a chance to trade meaningfully. Political pressure will be piled too to foreign companies operating in Zimbabwe either to scale down or leave. It will also be important to forge an alliance with the owners of these multi-national companies so that once ZANU PF begins to release the dirty money into their coffers they can alert the international community so that we can reclaim the money.

Is MDC necessary in this

The purpose of MDC in all this is to hold fort and continue to stall ZANU PF progress. We need MDC so that we continue to have meaningful retardation of ZANU PF’s cruise to total control. We need the MDC also to provide hope to those within the country even though it will be hard for it in its current form to wrestle power from ZANU PF. We will need to bring on board those within the MDC who have the mental and financial aptitude to sustain the crusade. It is anticipated that if MDC does not gain power in the next election donor fatigue will creep in meaning that the fluidity of the party will be compromised. The MDC would be encouraged to invest in the project so that over time it will be able to derive from the return on investments to fund its operations. This would allow us to exert a Zimbabwe-centric agenda on the party and to build on certain ideas that would have been unpopular with the current party donors. The relationship with MDC will be dependent on how open the party is to visionary leadership otherwise we will run the risk of having the economic thrust being tainted by controversies that may not be needed especially in the early years. In the event that MDC does not provide a desirable platform then an alternative vehicle will be formed that will be able to assert its power in due course.

Who Organises the Diaspora
Organising people to initiate idea is difficult given that naturally human beings have a fear of being pioneers. It will take a few willing individuals to commit themselves to the initial stages. An attempt to launch one such Investment Trust in Botswana attracted 45 Zimbabweans in 2009. This goes to show that people are willing to commit their funds to anything that will generate wealth for them. Organisations that have been formed to represent the Zimbabwean Diaspora should be approached so that they can influence their organized networks towards investment. These include the Global Zimbabwe Forum and the Development Foundation for Zimbabwe (DFZ).

In conclusion
What I have proffered here is an attempt to build a capitalist approach to toppling a dictatorship. The question that many who have a leftist inclination will ask is; what difference exist between the state that we will seek to build and the state that ZANU PF is building since both have no inclination towards the masses? The answer is simple; we will be doing this in good faith. We cannot bring all humanity to a point where they own equally but we can create an environment that allows humanity to flourish. Remembering that we are targeting 200 000 people initially, it is our hope that with the growth of the trust more people within the empire will be empowered to explore other business avenues thereby ensuring an evolution of a ruling class from a working class. The policies of the emergent government will be protecting the rights of workers and all the people of Zimbabwe.

No hope for free and fair elections in Zimbabwe

Recent events in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya elicited calls for a non-military and mass-based revolution in Zimbabwe. These calls were largely by Zimbabweans living outside of the country. The Movement For Democratic Change (MDC) despite calls for its participation did not call for nor support the action then called for the 1st March 2011, rather the party said it remained committed to the Government of National Unity willing to pursue a yet-to-be-announced Zuma roadmap to free and fair elections. It is this stance that drew this article. What are chances of a peaceful, free and fair election in Zimbabwe? Given the history of violence and intimidation in past elections, what are the chances that this will not recur?

State Security vs The People
In March 2008 elections MDC made significant parliamentary gains. On paper they became the ruling party. Mr Mugabe lost to Mr Tsvangirai in the presidential elections. Reports indicate that Mr Mugabe had lost by a margin that allowed Mr Tsvangirai to become the president of the country; however after a long delay official results showed that although Mr Tsvangirai had won, the margin warranted a run-off election. The election was set for June 2008 but what followed was a horrific run of terror by all state security organs and ZANU PF supporters. 183 MDC supporters were killed during that time. None of the perpetrators were brought to book; rather Robert Mugabe in Clemency Order No. 1 of 2008, issued in June 2008 offered amnesty to perpetrators.

It is important to analyse the civil-military relationship in Zimbabwe. Civil-Military Relations broadly describes the relationship between the general population and the military authority of the country. The civil population is usually represented by a given civil authority preferably chosen through an election. In an ideal democracy, the military although autonomous in function is largely under the control of civilian authority. In this state, the civilian authority recognizes the supremacy of the military in the use of force whilst the military willingly submits itself to civilian authority. What this means is that; the military, even though it knows that it has the ability to forcibly rule over defenseless civilians agrees to be controlled by them. Core to this is professionalism and neutralism.

In Zimbabwe, there is a military structure that was derived from partisan entities that include liberation forces like ZANLA and ZIPRA. These were armed forces that had strong allegiances to political parties ZANU and ZAPU respectively. Today, the top structure of the Zimbabwe Defence Forces is dominated by former combatants of these liberation forces. The same applies to the police, intelligence and prisons. General Constantine Chiwenga, Lt General Phillip Valerio Sibanda, Air Marshall Perrance Shiri are all former ZANLA/ZIPRA veterans. Commissioner General of the Zimbabwe Republic Police, Augustine Chihuri is a former ZANLA combatant. Happyton Bonyongwe, the Director General of CIO and Rt Major General Paradzayi Zimondi, Head of Prison Services are both former ZANLA combatants. Commanders of all the Brigades of ZNA are former ZIPRA/ZANLA combatants.

This scenario serves the interests of ZANU PF best. The relationship between ZANU PF authority and the security apparatus is amicable. The trend seems to show that after retirement most of the senior members of the security system enter mainstream politics on the ticket of ZANU PF. Examples that come to mind are Air Chief Marshal Josiah Tungamirai and Rtd Lt General Vitalis Zvinavashe who are both late. They were both in the ZANLA High Command before independence.

Given this blatant partisanship of the security apparatus will any future election win by MDC be recognized by the security system of the country? To help us understand the skewed civil-miltary relationship let us revisit the statement by Rtd Lt General Zvinavashe on the eve of the presidential election in 2002.

“Let it be known that the highest office in the land is a 'straightjacket' whose occupant is expected to observe the objectives of the liberation struggle. …We (the military) will, therefore, not accept, let alone support or salute, anyone with a different agenda that threatens the very existence of our sovereignty, our country and our people."

The constitution of Zimbabwe states clearly the qualification of a President. Nowhere are the expectations as pointed out by the Generals written in the constitution. The statement clearly showed that the military had become larger than the people. Any choice that did not fit the description by the generals wouldn’t have been accepted regardless of the support by the people.

This was a testimony of the partisanship of the security forces in Zimbabwe. It did not come as a surprise then when Mr Tsvangirai won elections in March 2008 that the security forces were not amused.

ZANU PF has always labeled MDC as a puppet of the west with no ability to maintain the sovereignty of the country. The army seems to believe the same to be true. Is this belief genuine or it is just an excuse to continue hanging on to power? What are the chances that former ZANLA combatants would ditch their fellow pre-independence leaders for a man of little anti-colonial struggle credentials like Morgan Tsvangirai?

It is known that all commanders of the army are appointed by the president. Logically the president appoints people who will be loyal to him. The constitution is clear on these appointments, what is critical however is that even though the commanders are loyal to the president, they have a moral obligation to respect the citizens of the country. In this regard, despite individual political beliefs, they are expected to execute their duties professionally without discriminating anyone of different political beliefs. This is where the security services are lacking.

The new ZANU PF State
It is also important to evaluate the structure and composition of the state and government for us to predict whether ZANU PF will be able to accede to free and fair elections. Firstly, it is important again to differentiate the State and the Government. In short the State is the people, the systems, the laws, the resources, the territory and the intangibles like sovereignty. The Government is the set of individuals who run, manage and execute the programs and policies of the State.
The State in Zimbabwe owns the military, police, judiciary, jails, hospitals, schools, companies etcetera. The government of the day is supposed to run and manage these. The logic here is that; the state comprises of people and the government is chosen by the same people to administer their interests.
We have situation in Zimbabwe where the State and the government are hard to differentiate. The people in the government have become more powerful than the people. In other words, we now have a new State that recognizes only a few privileged people and serves only the interests of those privileged few. The laws of the country are being applied selectively depending on preferences of people in the government. The people are unable to remove offending representatives.
This State has the ability to exploit national resources without prior approval of the people as long as the ZANU PF politiburo agrees to it. For example, a finite national resource like land is being used to pay musicians for singing praises to the government. We have a minister like Ignatious Chombo who has amassed wealth through illegal exploitation of finite natural resources. When the people demand his investigation, the police is unwilling to because it is owned and run by the kith and kin of Chombo.

What then is the probability that someone who is not willing to protect the interests of the new owners of the State would be allowed to take over the government?
Critics will point out that already MDC is part of the government. Reality however shows that MDC is not part of the government that runs the new State, rather it is being allowed to run the remnants of the old State. For example, the police that is usually under the minister of Home Affairs is now reporting directly to the President bypassing Theresa Makone who is an MDC minister. She does not have power to direct the police to investigate the owners of the new state. The nominal power she wields is only for purposes related to the old State.

Tendai Biti runs the ministry of finance. He administers only that part of government that controls the proceeds of the old State. The financial muscle of the new State is controlled by Gideon Gono. That is why Gono sits in the JOC and not Biti.
Given this scenario it is clear that ZANU PF will not accept a free and fair election in Zimbabwe because it would accelerate the disintegration of the State that it is building. Given the vast wealth they have amassed so far, the ZANU PF stalwarts are willing to sacrifice unimportant people in the old State for them to cling on to power.

The Zuma Roadmap
MDC is banking on a roadmap that is being prepared by the South African President Jacob Zuma. What are the chances that ZANU PF will abide by the recommendations?
In 2002 a Commonwealth troika comprising of Thabo Mbeki, Olusegun Obasanjo and Tim Howard announced the suspension of Zimbabwe from the Commonwealth due to the violence and human rights abuses in the run-up to the 2002 elections. In 2003 Mugabe pulled Zimbabwe out of the Commonwealth.

In 2004 SADC Adopted the Mauritian Protocol on Elections. Zimbabwe held its Parliamentary elections in 2005. These were supposed to be held in line with the SADC guidelines but a lot of irregularities were noted. South Africa however declared the process free and fair despite glaring flaws.

When 79 white commercial farmers approached the SADC Tribunal in a bid to stop compulsory acquisition of land by the Zimbabwe government and the tribunal ruled in their favor, the Zimbabwe government responded by pulling out of the Tribunal.
These examples show how arrogant the ZANU PF government is. Whenever the government comes under international scrutiny it responds by unilaterally ending any relationship that could have given credence to such scrutiny. Secondly, the South African government has an amicable see-no-evil relationship with ZANU PF as shown by their “silent diplomacy” even in the presence of compelling human rights abuses.
Given the demonstrated arrogance of ZANU PF and its biased relationship with the South African government, what are the chances that any roadmap will be followed when it seeks to limit the intransigencies of ZANU PF?

A glimpse of the current GPA might give us insight. ZANU PF has maintained its dominance over MDC by dictating what is and is not implemented. The issue of the governors, issue of Roy Bennet, appointment of permanent secretaries, issue of Gono and the issue of Tomana are evidence of clear ZANU PF supremacy over MDC in government. What has been the response of South Africa- the supposed guarantors of the GPA?

The Election Commission
Elections in 2000, 2002 and 2005 were presided over by Tobaiwa Mudede who many allege to have played a part in rigging all of the elections. He remains the Registrar General even up to today as an affirmation of ZANU PF’s supremacy.
Robert Mugabe appointed Justice George Chiweshe as chairman of the Zimbabwe Election Commission. He presided over the 2008 elections and declared them free and fair despite the atrocities. What more did Zimbabweans expect from a former ZANLA combatant, ZANU political commissar and a former Brigadier General of the partisan Zimbabwe National Army?

His loyalty to Mugabe was unquestionable and he was rewarded in august 2008 when he was promoted by Mugabe to the rank of Rt major general. He was further promoted by Mugabe to be the Judge President of the High Court despite protestations by MDC .
The current Zimbabwe Election Commission retained Joyce Kazembe and Theophilus Gambe from the previous commission that dubiously allowed the re-election of Mugabe. The loyalty of the current chairman Simpson Mutambanengwe is hazy. All we know is that he was a member of ZANU’s Dare Rechimurenga before he fled for his life to Malawi after supporting the Nhari rebellion in 1974. He later joined the UANC and became a member of the Zimbabwe-Rhodesia government. He was part of the Zimbabwe-Rhodesia delegation to Lancaster House Conference in 1979. After independence he was appointed by Mugabe to the bench. He was later seconded to Namibia by Mugabe. When Justice Paradza was arraigned before the courts in 2006, Mugabe called on Mutambanengwe who had already retired to come and preside over the case.

Without insinuating that Simpson may be loyal to Mugabe, we know that rarely does Mugabe allow the appointment of a person of questionable political loyalty to such an important commission. It remains to be seen if the commission will be able to resist political manipulation.

In conclusion, the stance that MDC has taken to commit itself to upcoming elections is tantamount to political suicide. The structures that have retained Mugabe to power over the past decade are still intact. The army, police, intelligence and prisons are still in total control of ZANU PF. A few individuals in ZANU PF still maintain a firm grip of the State. There are doubts on the impartiality of the Election Commission. It is safe therefore to say that until such a time when Zimbabwe opposition has the power to dismantle the structures of power built on ZANU PF loyalty; there won’t be any free and fair elections in Zimbabwe.

It Is Possible To Remove Mugabe Through Popular Mass Demonstrations!

I write this in solidarity with the ISO-Zim comrades who are in detention in Zimbabwe. Their crime being that they met to discuss events in Tunisia and Egypt. This has prompted me to interrogate the feasibility of non-military and non-violent street engagement with the Mugabe regime.

I have read a number of discouraging articles speculating that it is impossible to remove Mugabe through popular demonstrations. I would like to posit the contrary.
Zimbabwe has a rich heritage of organizational ability towards political and non-political mass engagement. We have a people that have, from the time of the 25th July 1960 Bulawayo Mass demonstrations, through the 1973 Chimukwembe demonstrations to the 2002-2005 mass action been able to organize and against all odds challenge the system of oppression. This alone gives us the assurance that either by genetics or by conscious will Zimbabweans are predisposed towards rejecting any form suppression through mass engagement.

Others will point out that the mass action called by MDC were largely ineffective against the regime. Here people should note that, there is no mass action in Zimbabwe that was ever called by MDC to specifically topple the regime except the 2 June 2003 “Final Push” which was aborted and renamed at the last minute.

I remember one of our most successful mass protest was the 18 March 2003 Mass Action that shut the whole of the country for at least 2 days. Indeed it was a mass action but one that was ‘mass’ in the sense that many people took part but rather lacked on the ‘action’ part because most people resorted to staying at home. With a bit of hindsight we can see some of the weakness of the Stayaways. Firstly, they were time specific but without specific measurable outcomes of success. We wanted the Mugabe regime to feel the power of the people. Actually MDC then issued 15 demands to Mugabe during this Mass Action which were supposed to be met by the end of that month or risk an all out mass action to remove him.

To me, this was the highest point that the people of Zimbabwe reached in their peaceful struggle against the Mugabe dictatorship. We had put the government in a tight corner. ZANU was smelling an end as witnessed by the numerous pleas for people to return to work. What we lacked was a specific announcement of a clearly spelt action to remove the regime. Had the energy we wasted in sporadic battles in Chitungwiza, Budirio, Kadoma, Mbare, Glenview etc been channeled towards a single well-organised action towards the centre of Harare we could have achieved far greater results although I think at some expense of human life.

Spurred by the successful response to the 18th March Stayaway, the MDC decided that it was ripe to tackle the regime in a penultimate showdown dubbed the “Final Push” on the 2nd June 2003. This action was supported by the traditional allies of MDC- labor and students. I still remember the zeal that students showed when they attended an all-night prayer at a church in Avondale just across the police station. We wanted change and were willing to die for it. Ironically as we left the church there were fireworks at Celebration Center and we all thought the soldiers were mutineering at the State House. We wanted to run there at that moment. Such was the zeal and preparedness for change.

On the eve of the demonstrations Mr Tsvangirai received a court order barring MDC from participating in the Mass Action. This is where things began to go wrong. We began to receive mixed signals on what we were supposed to do next. We were told MDC had resolved that the demonstrations were no longer about going to the City Centre then the State House. They were now supposed to be localized in different suburbs. We were heartbroken but as students we resolved that we were going to continue with the march.

On the 2nd June we woke in zeal and resolved not to march to town but to take a shortcut to the State House. Indeed we were confronted by helicopters, water-cannons , dogs and guns. We lost the battle. There were lessons to be learnt. The mighty of the army was all concentrated against the University of Zimbabwe and a few others in isolated areas like Budiriro and Mabvuku.

These events show that Zimbabweans have the capacity to challenge the regime. Some argue that Zimbabweans have been beaten to submission. I would like to say that there is no better time than now. We have a youth that has so far not yet experienced the brutality of the Mugabe regime. Most of the youths in the age range of 16-22 were about 8-14 during that time making them too young to have been part of these demonstrations. These are the crucial factor in any demonstrations especially in the initial stages. They have not much in terms of property and less responsibility coupled to enthusiasm of youth. Once we are able to harness this energy then Zimbabwe will be ready to explode.

But the soldiers! Indeed the army and police in Zimbabwe are not neutral. They are controlled by the regime. Some of them are very overzealous as witnessed by the verve with which they carried out Operation Murambatsvina . I have two incidents that have shaped my thinking on this issue.

It was in December 2002 at Makoni Shopping Center in Chitungwiza. About 500 Border Gezi Youths descended on the place beating people randomly. They were housed at the notorious Madzibaba Nzira’s shrine. We re-organised ourselves and began to fight back. We were joined by the local police and we managed to drive them back before the arrival of riot police. Actually the police were the ones at the forefront of mobilizing beer-drinkers and vendors to retaliate. We knew most of these policemen because they stayed with us.

In another incident, I was put under room arrest when we wanted to go and address the students in 2004. I was with Arthur Masuka. A senior police officer from Avondale Police Station entered my room holding a revolver. He told us that he wanted to arrest us but because he was sympathetic with our cause he would not. After about 15 minutes he said “You know what just go and demonstrate but make sure you don’t get arrested!” This policeman later became one of us and would give us information on students on the wanted list.

These two incidents give credence to the fact that there are many within the force who are willing but unable at this time to support the popular will. This may not be easy but where there is a concerted and coordinated effort to remove the regime the army and the police would be left with no option but to join the people or risk being left to the mercy of the people. A few weeks ago this statement would have been dismissed as wishful thinking but events in Libya today give it weight.

The biggest question is how to bring Zimbabweans to protest. Everyone is putting an eye on Mr Tsvangirai but I know that neither him nor MDC leadership are in a position to. Firstly Tsvangirai is Prime minister of the same government that we want to remove. Secondly, he is an easy target for persecution and lastly his involvement may polarize the protests and affect the neutrality that such action may demand. The same applies to the party he leads.

What they can be are just tacit supporters of the initial moves by availing their structures and resources towards the buildup. We have a civic movement in Zimbabwe that used to be vibrant. There used to be a ZCTU and a ZINASU that could rally people at any level to resist the regime but incessant economic , political and physical battering has left these organizations a shadow of their selves. Do they still have the capacity to organize? I would say no but they have the capacity to influence.
So who can organize? I would say there is no demonstration that can be called purely spontaneous. All demonstrations have an element of organization. The responsibility lies on all of us. The major voices of Zimbabwe’s oppressed should agree on a date on which the protests should begin. This date should be publicized to all and sundry. They should avail their structures towards the organization of the movement unconditionally.

Once a date has been set, the duty falls now on the media and other communication agents. The power of the internet should not be overlooked as statistics show that about 22% of adult Zimbabweans may have access to it. We would expect online news platforms like NewZimbabwe, Daily News, Nehanda, Zim Diaspora, Zim Online and others to be on the forefront in publicizing the event. On the ground all pro-people newspapers like NewsDay, The Standard, Zimbabwean and The Independent should be found in the fore front of beaming positive messages towards action. Finally we would also expect mobile operators like Econet to avail their facilities through sms towards the movement. The media is the ignition of resistance.

Finally the demonstrations should not be central to Harare alone, rather I envisage a situation whereby Masvingo , Bulawayo, Mutare and Gweru are taken simultaneously even before Harare. This allows the regime to be stretched. Secondly we have a cunning system that deploys soldiers born in Matebeleland to Mutare and those from Masvingo to Matebeleland. Usually these soldiers would be ruthless towards these people because they are not related to them, but a situation of simultaneous uprising may force conscience on soldiers because they would realize that their mothers and fathers too could be subjected to the same ruthless treatment as that they would be intending to subject other protesters in areas away from their origins.

There is no better time than now. Mass Demonstrations are appealing in that they are shorter and less destructive as compared to civil war. There will be casualties. It could be me, it could be you but that should not discourage us because death is a definite end which we all have to go through. To me, death in the line of national duty is more honorable than life in the shackles of self-pity.

I am convinced more than ever that if Gaddafi; he who troubled Americans, he who evaded assassinations, he whose army we called invincible, he whose entourage can jam cellphones wherever he goes can be so shaken by a people whose only weapon is determination; then even Robert Mugabe is just a flea on the thumb of people’s destiny!

In the mean time I salute ISO-Zim- they inspire Zimbabwe!

Your Truly

Africa can do better with less rhetoric and more action

I write to you on Africa Day; the day we put aside to celebrate our unity as Africans. Our problems are there for everyone to see. There are many academics who have built their standing from the study of African politics and economy. We have a vast array of literature that deals on African economy; but why is it that despite all that knowledge at our disposal Africa is not progressing?

Politically, we have witnessed coups, civil wars, electoral fraud, violence and an increased emergence of dictatorships. Economically; even though Africa’s GDP is expected to grow from 5.5 to about 6% in 2010; there are millions of people living in extreme poverty and as it stands there is a chance that Africa is going to miss the Millennium Development Goal of halving the number of people living on less than US$1 per day. Africa is still struggling to cope with the burden of HIV/AIDS pandemic which in developed countries is no longer regarded as a killer disease yet in Africa millions die every year.

These are manifestations at a macrocosmic level. We know that we can blame the West for colonialism, we can blame USA for destabilizing Africa through its regime change policies that claimed the lives of people like Patrice Lumumba and plunged DR Congo into this crisis they have up to today. Indeed, we can blame whites for apartheid and colonialism that has left many of our people marginalized but the question we ought to ask ourselves is: assuming that colonialism had not taken place, would we as a people been any different today?

Let us take Ethiopia as an example. Save for five years under Mussolini, Ethiopia was largely uncolonized. Under Haile Selassie, the distribution of wealth was skewed towards the ruling elite, the landowners and elements of the clergy. The plight of the peasants is well documented. Upon the deposition of the emperor, the Derg adopted Marxism and communism as their working ideology. Hundreds of thousands were killed due to red terror, forced deportations, or from using hunger as a weapon. Despite the egalitarian rhetoric of the Derg, high-ranking government officials retained privileged economic positions. Even today under Meles Zenawi government officials and a few high-ranking professionals control the country’s mode of production.

There are many people who give colonialism as an excuse for Africa’s failure to thrive. Here is a country that has never been fully colonized, a country that had African rulers from time immemorial- a typical African country that we fantasize about in our excuses. Why is it that we still find oppression and suppression of voices in such a country? Why are Ethiopians amongst the poorest in the world? Why isn’t there such camaraderie as that punctuates our rhetoric when we speak of “WE AFRICANS”?

We give excuses that we had limited access to basic education thus our failure to engage in meaningful economic activity largely due to colonialism and apartheid. Let us look at a country like Zimbabwe which has the highest literacy rate of 92% in Africa. If educating an African was such a factor why do we find such levels of poverty and oppression in Zimbabwe? Why don’t we see Africans in Zimbabwe sitting down in true “African spirit” to discuss amongst them how to lift each other from poverty?

Is it really that “WE AFRICANS” are victims of history or we have inherent characteristics that predispose us to poverty?

Firstly, we as Africans lack the drive for scientific adventure, neither are we inclined towards innovativeness. Have we ever asked ourselves why it is almost everyone’s dream to be a medical doctor? It is because of job security. We are more worried about failing to get employment than our ability to be our own employers. No one wishes to study natural sciences like Physics in Zimbabwe because all of us are afraid of ending up as secondary school teachers somewhere in the deserted lands of Dzaramba. None of us ever think that we could be the Isaac Newtons of our time.
I remember one day being fascinated by a toy bird made by the Chinese which could balance on anything solid using its beak. There were no electronics used, nor expensive material, just plastic. It took me a while to figure out that whoever made that toy applied see-saw physics that we learn in the first few years of secondary education. When we are learning that, do we ever think that this could be harnessed to generate wealth?

In contrast, the level of research in the field of sciences in Asia and the West is so advanced to the extent that we sometimes feel that they major on minors. What we fail to realize is that we are the ones who drive these researches as we are the ones who end up buying finished products from them feeding their inventors with royalties from patents.

Maybe this also has to do with our lack of vision and our acute inclination towards consumerism-without-production. How many of us look into the future and plan for it? We seek instant rewards without investment. It is our expectation that one can miraculously wake up with a bank account pregnant with money without working for it.
There have been efforts by some Africans especially those in the diaspora to bring together their few resources in various collective investments schemes. This was after a realization that what we earn from a regular job will never be enough to cater for our ambitions and secondly that access to capital is limited in Africa. Unfortunately not many of our people understand the power of collective investment. This is usually because as human beings we desire to be powerful. We desired to be on top, thus the aspect of collectiveness- where we rise together as a group- is not attractive lest we may not have those to whom we can show off. Secondly we do not want to start small. We feel that by saving a dollar and investing it to get a cent is not worthy it; rather we hope to start after we have saved a thousand dollars. Unfortunately, we rarely manage to reach that stage when we have a thousand at our disposal; thus we die hoping and blaming.

We blame the Americans for what they do to us; but do we ever stop to think about our own inadequacies when it comes to money and power? If we are as morally upright (botho, unhu, ubuntu) as we always claim to be why is it that the Americans always find people amongst us willing to be paid to do mercenary work for them. People like Mobutu and Savimbi. Even amongst us right now we have people especially in destabilized economies like Zimbabwe and Eritrea who go about preaching things that do more harm than good disguised as Civic Society at the instigation of donor agencies whose agenda in most instances is to propel American Foreign Policy. It is again this love for riches without sweat that drives us to lose our conscience.
Perhaps we need to first look at what power means to an African. I think from time immemorial power in Africa meant proclamation of self and total submission of others. Power to us means influence to expropriate and not inspiration to nurture. Many of us at individual level do not appreciate that our children can teach us to be wise. Many still believe that women are objects for suppression even within marriage. It is because of this bigoted behavior that we find geriatrics like Mr Mugabe looking with contempt at people of younger age. It is again because of this wrong understanding of power that we find people like Joseph Kony, Charles Taylor and Al Bashir using death as a means to prevail over others.

The big reason why we as Africans fight each other every day is usually because of our wish to expropriate things that do not belong to us. We have a severe failure of positive imagination. When a man builds his house out of his own sweat, we find it worthwhile to seize and own it. This behavior dates back beyond the times of Shaka. Idi Amin, chased Asians from Uganda because he was jealousy of their hard work. What did he do; expropriated their possessions to the same African man whose poor vision drives him to make drums out of his own house’s roof forgetting that rain will one day pound him. Out of sheer vengeance and jealousy Mugabe did the same in Zimbabwe; the people he gave land found it sensible to sell pipes instead of using them for irrigation.

So if “WE AFRICANS” are like this, what should be done? This is the question that we need to explore to its fullest extent, apart from that we have to go beyond mere rhetoric and work towards tangible results.

We have to primarily change our focus. Let us educate our children to be productive. African education should not just be academic but should reflect empowerment. Beyond elementary education, a student should be allowed to follow his career out of passion not as a product of how much she can recall in an examination. A student who is able to tend to two pigs until they multiply to six in a year should be graded better than one who sits in an examination and recalls the theory of tending pigs without practically showing that indeed she can do that. Likewise we do not expect a person to graduate from a University without showing that beyond the theory he can actually harness it to produce a gadget or product that can be useful to society. This should not be misconstrued to mean that arts and social sciences should to be sacrificed. Summarily, the education system should be changed.

It does no good however to change the education system of a society that does not understand the value of such education. Doing so is tantamount to giving a torch to a baboon. Thus as Africans we should begin to teach our children to strive to be innovative, self-sufficient, independent and dignified. When your kid makes a wire car that is a stage above those made by his peers, reward him for that so that he appreciates hard work and inventiveness. Our children should know how to create and multiply wealth from a tender age. Give him a stone and tell him to carve something of better value out of it, pay him and tomorrow he will sell you purified oxygen! In all that he does tell him to value his conscience; tell him bloody money is dangerous. Teach him to do good.

Why put emphasis on the individual? We know that by concentrating on the atomic make up of a substance we may as well influence its gross appearance. If we build a generation that knows how to work and create wealth; who knows maybe we will be able to choose our member of parliament from them.

It is only when we have people who have been groomed to work hard, to respect others and to be innovative that we can possibly have a government that protects Intellectual Property Rights, General Property Rights and Human Rights. A government that can do away with the so-called Development Aid and use home-grown and less-expensive solutions to wiggle out of debt and poverty. We cannot expect a child soldier who eventually grows into a head of junta to respect the power of a mere ballot paper. To him it is only a bullet that matters and indeed; in Africa the bullet is still mightier than the pen.

These few thoughts are by no means exhaustive. It is my hope that we can build upon the rich history that we have; use it as pool of knowledge that can inspire us into a more successful people without marginalizing each other. Africa can do better with less rhetoric and more action!

INDIGENISATION: A mosquito seeking to treat malaria

There has been a flurry of activity following the gazzeting of the Indigenisation and Economic Empowerment (General) Regulations. A lot of emotions have been expressed: joy, dismay, anger and indifference. These have been the typical responses to most of the sensitive issues that have challenge our country and it is expected in such a highly polarized country. This divergence has done a lot of disservice to our country in that public opinion is usually dictated by voices wearing political and therefore blinkered voices. Indigenization and Economic Empowerment are issues that need to be looked at holistically as they are the cornerstone of justice and ultimately peace in any country.

There are number of facts that we need to note before probing the status quo. It is true that prior to 1980 non-white Zimbabweans were discriminated against economically, socially and politically. Economic discrimination took root on inaccessibility of Education, mode of production and business freedom. Blacks in Rhodesia were restricted from economic activity. Commercial agriculture was skewed towards whites as they alone had unfettered access to commercially viable land. Blacks had other restrictions too which included bottle-necking at schools. One had to be exceptionally brilliant and lucky to reach university while whites found comfort in numerous whites-only schools, scholarships and government assistance. In short; historically blacks were disadvantaged.

Independence brought with it freedom and schools. People could now walk freely in Harare’s First Street. People could now drink brown bottled beer and whisky which used to be a criminal offence prior to independence. Primary and Secondary Schools mushroomed all over the country and education was opened up to every Zimbabwean. In 2000 Zimbabwe had more than six universities as compared to one in 1980. Zimbabwe had reached a milestone in education.

Did political independence bring with it economic independence to blacks? This can be answered by examining the distribution of wealth and resources across races.

The Land Apportionment Act of 1930 prohibited blacks from owning land in the lucrative “European Areas”, it even prohibited them from owning land in Tribal Trust Lands which were of ecologically poor. This act guaranteed that less than 1% of the nation owned approximately 80% of arable land in Zimbabwe. Very few blacks managed to purchase land in urban and commercial farming areas where private ownership of land was allowable. Most of them had to be contend with life in the communally owned Tribal Trust Lands. The implication of this Act on black empowerment can never be overlooked as it unfairly disadvantaged blacks especially regarding access to capital. Communally owned lands cannot be used to guarantee loans whilst title deeds from private ownership of land are major collateral. Secondly, this Act forced blacks into marginal areas where economic activity was minimal reducing them to cheap labor and not a people capable of economic activity.

Let us look at the distribution of industrial and commercial enterprises in Zimbabwe after independence. In a report done by OTM Consultancy for IBDC in 1994 it was noted that blacks who happened to be 95% of the population owned only 1% of these. Whites who were 3% of the population owned 30% of the industries and commercial enterprises whilst the Zimbabwe Government owned 4%. The rest was owned by foreign multinational companies. These figures show us that despite their huge population, blacks in Zimbabwe were owned very few businesses.

It is clear therefore that political independence in Zimbabwe did not come with economic empowerment of those who had for long been marginalized. The question we now ought to examine is whether this lack of economic power was all due to historical injustices or some other causes. This interrogation can help us approach the issue of Indigenization with an open eye.

Firstly let us look at the government’s policies towards private business. When the Marxist government of Robert Mugabe took over, it adopted a socialist approach towards business. More emphasis was placed on formation of cooperatives and not private business. A lot of Ujamas erupted across the country. These flourished for a short while but because a cooperative is usually tedious and full of mistrust and suspicion many crumbled. Those who dared to enter into private business found the environment hostile to capitalism. The government introduced price controls between 1980 and 1981 which made it economically unviable for emerging business people. These restrictions stifled growth.

The financial system that the government inherited and adopted was risk averse with more emphasis on conservatism than business adventurism. What this meant was that most financial institutions demanded high collateral for any loans that they would issue. Despite the knowledge of the handicaps that blacks faced, the government did not intervene to assist; rather it left everything in the hands of institutions like Small Enterprise Development Corporation (SEDCO) which issued short-term and long-term loans which obviously were guaranteed by collateral.

This is the issue that led to phenomenon that was then called “Institutional racism”, where blacks failed to gain loans from financial institutions whilst whites seemed to easily secure them. Blacks had no collateral, whilst whites could afford it.

Not all blacks didn’t have start-up capital; some did have but why did they fail to start thriving businesses in Zimbabwe? Let us again examine the Zimbabwe Government’s hand in this. There were pieces of legislation in Zimbabwe that made starting up a business tedious rather than exciting. Let us for example consider the processes that were involved in starting up a company. First there was Company Name Search, followed by Memorandum and Articles of Association, then Certificate of Incorporation. This alone could take up to a year to complete even though officially it was projected to be a month. If one wanted to then enter into Hotel and Catering, he would have to apply to the Zimbabwe Tourism Authority which was under Ministry of Environment and Tourism, if he intended to then ferry his clients around in a bus he would have to apply for another license from the Ministry of Roads and Transport. His premises had to be inspected by the Local Government and he also needed a clearance from the Ministry of Health. All this could take another two years. How on earth did the government expect its people to participate in economic activities under such strenuous and unfriendly demands?

The government knows about these restrictive laws that are present because in 1994 the Deregulation Committee set up by the government to look into the laws identified 28 Acts that were impediments to business and therefore needed to be amended urgently. Unfortunately very few were amended and even today the government still uses these shamed laws to act on its citizens.

We need not look further than Strive Masiiwa’s battle to set-up Econet wireless to identify the hypocrisy of the Zimbabwean Government. In 1993, Masiiwa secured a US$40 million loan from Standard Chartered Bank to launch his telecommunication business. Here was a black man with a brilliant idea, who approached a foreign owned-bank in Zimbabwe and secured a loan. He approached Post and Telecommunications Corporation (PTC) for licensing but they told him that only PTC could do such a business under the Zimbabwe PTC Act. Initially he had approached them for a joint venture but they declined saying that there was no immediate demand for mobile technology in Zimbabwe. He appealed to the High Court and got a favorable verdict from Judge Gibson. PTC appealed to the Supreme Court and they won.

Masiiwa then made a constitutional challenge which ruled in his favor in August 1995. Unfortunately, President Robert Gabriel Mugabe invoked the Presidential Powers Act to issue a Presidential Decree requiring private parties to obtain a license from the Ministry of Information, Post, and Telecommunications before setting up a cellular network effectively overturning the decision of the Supreme Court and restoring PTC’s monopoly. The battle took another two years and it was only after the intervention of Joshua Nkomo to force Rejoice Mujuru then the Information minister and currently the Vice-President to license Econet.

Masiiwa is not the only black businessman who has been persecuted by Zimbabwe’s government and its horrendous laws. Many names come to mind, Mushore, Muponda, Kuruneri, Makamba and many minor ones like Daniel Chingoma whose dream of flying his helicopter will never see light of the day due to restrictions imposed by the aviation laws.

Let us not forget the then emerging black businessmen like my brother Tobias who owned five tuckshops in Chitungwiza which were all razed down during the infamous Operation Murambatsvina in 2005. I have no doubt that if the ZANU PF government had not destroyed his tuckshops he could be having a decent supermarket maybe employing ten more people. Today he is a pauper selling matches and cigarettes at Makoni Bus Rank.

The question we ask today as Minister Kasukuwere gazettes his regulations is whether the Government of Zimbabwe is being truthful in its quest for indigenization or it’s another ploy to empower a few using the guise of futile populism.

Let us not forget that this is the same government that has presided over Zimbabwe for the past 30 years. It is the same government that has presided over the demise of the country. It is the same government that been brutal to its own people and it is the same government that has grabbed and expropriated land amongst itself. What has really changed today that this brutal government has suddenly become sensitive to its people?

I ask these questions not because I want to scare people away from riches. I am only saying; let us not develop a tendency of expropriating wealth. Let us create wealth. Historical injustices are not made right by just multiplying the people that eat the cake but by multiplying the cake and the people who eat it.

If ZANU PF is serious about black empowerment I challenge it to walk the talk and begin by accepting that most of the damage to black entrepreneurship in the past 30 years was due to its bad governance and impunity. After that we share its proceeds of corruption and plunder before we demand the 51% from foreigners!

What it means to be Zimbabwean: A search for identity

I have stayed in foreign lands for some time now. I have seen Zimbabweans being killed, I have seen them being segregated and I have seen them living worse than dogs. Back home I have seen my people degenerating into thieves, fraudsters and murderers; our once righteous women turning into nocturnal body-sellers. Out of pain, I decided to undertake a dialectical journey to the core of our existence; to explore what it means to be Zimbabwean, what it should mean and why it means what it means right now to be a Zimbabwean. This could be the works of a troubled mind but my hope is that someone would find sense out of it.

Sometimes I sit wondering why some people behave the way they do. I wonder why Robert Mugabe is that arrogant, why General Zvinavashe agreed to pronounce that infamous statement on the eve of the 2002 Presidential elections, why Jonathan Moyo keeps vacillating like a pendulum and why Morgan Tsvangirai overruled a democratic consensus that later led to the split of MDC. Most of the times, I end up indifferently concluding that maybe that’s how human beings behave. This time I decided to interrogate the source of these behaviors even deeper without giving myself a chance to resign.
The first question that I asked myself was; “what makes a man a man?” Apart from the physical how can we differentiate between a man and a dog? This question came about because of some things that we have seen happening in Zimbabwe that we would normally say; they are not fit to be done by human beings but by dogs or savages. So what is it that makes a man a man and a dog a dog?
There are certain characteristics that are common between a man and a dog which compel us to conclude that a man is primarily an animal. They both desire food, water, shelter and other basic needs. They both have the five scientific senses. They are both calculative- a baboon may bury wild fruits in sand to facilitate ripening just like a human being. Most importantly, they both act instinctively in the face of danger to avoid death. But still a baboon is a baboon and a man is a man- why?
Somebody argued that a man is a man because he can differentiate between good and bad. Again we ask; is good universal to all men? Why is polygamy good in some societies but bad in some? Who defines good? If we can follow the dictates of society on good and bad can’t that be said of a dog that is conditioned to know what is acceptable and what is not acceptable to its master?
However, even if good or bad is not universal to all men the concept of goodness and badness is common across all people. But even this concept derives from a deeper intrinsic awareness in man which is I prefer to call the consciousness of value. It is therefore arguable that apart from the physical and the genetic make-up, human beings also share a common characteristic- attaching value to nature.
Notwithstanding the fact that animals also attach value to things out of instinct, it is only man who has the ability to attach value and defend it on worthless material and on non-material things. For example, man fight to defend religion, they fight to defend their rights because they place value unto these things and they are willing to risk death for things that are intangible.

Man in as much as he places value on other things also places value upon himself. He believes that he is worth a certain value. This is what is called self-worth. The product of this self-evaluation is called dignity. Because man is naturally a social being, that is he desires to be desired by other man. He expects other man to evaluate his worth by other man, he expects other man to evaluate his worth to its real value. When they undervalue him, he gets angry and when the evaluate him to his real worth he feels pride. This desire to be recognized by other man, is the one that drives man to behave in ways that defy natural animal instinct.
Let us look at Zimbabwe. On one hand we have a ruling class that is unwilling to recognize other ordinary Zimbabweans as people amongst other people, on the other we have a people that is yearning for such recognition. This ruling class which is mainly ZANU PF , behaves in a manner that seeks to undo history.
I say ZANU PF is seeking to undo history because it is taking the human philosophical function back to the primitive state when man , although social beings, interacted with each other violently. A period in history when man’s worth was evaluated on how much one was willing to risk death for pure prestige. Remember Alexander or Chaka .
Unfortunately, other Zimbabweans are unwilling to engage ZANU PF in such a primitive manner which to some may appear as cowardice. In circumstances, where one part is willing to engage in violence and another is unwilling there is greater possibility that their relationship terminates in lordship and bondage in which as is in Zimbabwe, ZANU PF gains the recognition of being the master and everybody else looses the dignity of being a man and becomes a slave.
But is the unwillingness of Zimbabweans to engage in violence a symbol of cowardice? The answer could be both YES and NO.
YES in that, cowardice itself begins when a man fails to overcome the fear of death and let his animal instinct of self-preservation override the human characteristic of seeking recognition. So out of cowardice, Zimbabweans decided to forfeit their worth for a chance to live.
NO in that, a human being is also calculative and can temporarily forgo his human desires for a particular reason. For example a man may choose not to eat even if he is hungry because he is on hunger-strike. So there could be a reason why Zimbabweans chose to forfeit their worth. One of which could be that they know that most of the primitive members of ZANU PF are close to death due to aging. From their calculations, they can do without dignity for a few years until this generation is wiped out. They can derive hope from the fact that a number of younger ZANU PF members have been attracted to the idea of change like Simba Makoni, Daniel Shumba, Walter Mzembi and others.
What is certain in Zimbabwe however is that the ZANU PF regime is not evaluating its people’s worth justly. Zimbabweans are conscious of this, unfortunately; as in all dictatorships, two groups of slaves arise. One that feels unjustly evaluated and is willing to regain its dignity and another that knows and feels theindignation but is content to live like that as long as they are alive.

The first group knows that an honest reason for its situation is simply that they are cowards but because they deem themselves to be of certain worth they can’t accept that they are after all mere animals whose fear drives them into submission. So, instead of confronting their fears, this group devices methods by which it can fool itself that it is still capable of functioning as human beings. They feel the anger because firstly they lost dignity in the eyes of the master and secondly because they have been reduced to ordinary amongst the ordinary. They begin to seek to be recognized again as extra-ordinary by their fellow ordinary peers.
They know that they can never be recognized as extraordinary by acts of bravery because already their peers know that they are mere cowards. They are left with no option but to be industrious. They now relate their value to the value of their ability and what they own. Their motive becomes to amass as much as they can so as to attract attention and recognition from primarily their peers and eventually the ruling class. This is what happened in America after independence where those who had not participated in the revolution ended up also part of the ruling class because the ruling class was rational enough to recognize these people’s dignity through their ability and what they owned.

The driving force behind this kind of man is the will to be free- to be a dignified human being capable of unrestricted moral choice. But this kind of man is also caught up in the conflict of desire to be recognized and the desire for self-preservation. It is this man who becomes capable of defining what is good and what is bad because he has consciousness of slavery and a will to be a master. He is capable of defining good because he feels that all things that lead to perpetuation of life (self-preservation) represent morality and good whilst those that lead to violence, war, animosity and death (out of the need to be recognized) are bad. It is this group that is dangerous to TYRANY and ZANU PF knows it.

ZANU PF knows that a man who is unwilling to fight may become even more dangerous if he becomes prosperous because prosperity without freedom is not satisfying to man. They know that man derive satisfaction from owning property not because of necessity but because other man recognize it as theirs and they have made sure that nobody owns property beyond necessity. To them a slave should not be capable of being industrious and if by chance he does so; they are more than happy to grab and expropriate.


Under these circumstances it becomes totally impossible for the ordinary to be extraordinary. Two realities now exist for this group; they are no longer a people amongst people and there is no chance to redeem their dignity through work. Only two options remain: to leave the country altogether or to revert into the lower group that survive as if they do not exist.
When the desire to live supersedes the desire to be human, men begin to drift towards primitiveness. He loses his dignity; he also loses the consciousness of being human. Survival becomes the primary object of his existence. He loses the basis of morality and ultimately the basis of humanness.

When the whole society loses the basis of morality it becomes hard to differentiate or dictate what is good and what is bad. Corruption for survival becomes good, so becomes prostitution, theft, fraud and murder. The feeling of guilty is gone because we are no longer able to evaluate ourselves to our real worth; rather we become worthless and therefore incapable of understanding justice or even to judge ourselves.
This is what happened in Zimbabwe. We had a people that earned less than one dollar a day but survived on five dollars every day. It did not matter where the money was coming from because EVERYBODY was doing it. We celebrated thieves and fraudsters because they were the symbol of survival.

Now, let us turn our sight to those who decided to leave Zimbabwe. These people had lost dignity but not the ability to evaluate themselves. They hoped to transfer their perceived value in Zimbabwe to other societies. They hoped that those societies would assess their worth justly.

What most did not realize was that dignity is built through interaction. They hoped to be given back their dignity in foreign lands through work since these foreigners respected and recognized each other’s property. But what happens when those in the foreign lands realize that you are mere animals running away from death. You lose the basis for just evaluation and revert to being less than the ordinary of that society.
Eventually it becomes hard to get dignified work. It becomes a matter of survival. One needs to eat, drink and shelter. So even in foreign lands we then sacrifice our dignity for survival. Teachers become housemaids, Nurses become child-minders and accountants become gardeners. Those who had hope become prostitutes. This becomes the basis of xenophobia. We become animals, as worthless as a wild dog which can be axed to death in the townships of Alexandria.

Logically, it becomes easier to define who a Zimbabwean is and what it means to be a Zimbabwean today. A Zimbabwean is an animal which is nothing, owns nothing and is ever loitering in search of survival! This is what ZANU PF has reduced us to.
So when I evaluate the so-called Government of National Unity, I have to base my assessment on whether this government has restored dignity to its people. Are Zimbabweans now man amongst man? Do they own something or are they free to own something? Have they gone beyond scavenging for survival?
A friend called me and said “man the shops are full, everything is there”. The first question to strike my mind was- if everything is there, is everything there for everybody?

If a slave master opens a shop at his farm to sell sugar which was not locally available at the farm, if he sells unto them at wild prices so as to confiscate their meager savings and orders them not to buy anywhere else; should we call that freedom? Should we call that prosperity? Is it a change in history? No, the slave is still a slave and the master still the master only that the slave is able to point at the grocer and say, “ A long time ago we had to scavenge as far as South Africa but we now have our own dumpsite here!”
If the slave was able to build the shop, sell his sugar and multiply his wealth without restriction from the master then that would be significant because the slave would have regained his dignity firstly by having the master recognize his rights to private property and freedom to be industrious and secondly because he would have re-ignited and re-calibrated his consciousness of value to that which reflects the progress in history.

So abundance in Zimbabwean shops does not necessarily reflect a gain in dignity rather it only assures Zimbabweans that if they commit their labor to their slave-master they will be able to buy food and survive. Other than that they would die.

The challenge we have s to differentiate between the appearance of freedom and the reality of freedom. For how else can we explain the phenomenon in Zimbabwe: you are only free as long as you are willing to live like an animal but that freedom ends when you decide to be a human being- when you begin to interrogate the truth and seek your worth? So yes Zimbabweans are free today as is a dog that is only free when it is willing to track behind its owner who would not hesitate to shoot it if it decides to challenge him.

Having sacrificed a lot of time on what is and has been happening in Zimbabwe; we have an obligation also to enquire on ways that may help us be human again. That, I hope will become the object of my next article but as it is let us think clearly about whom we are , what we want to be and build ourselves for the future battles to regain our dignity!

Exploring the possibilities of non-violent reform in Zimbabwe

When Morgan Tsvangirai was sworn in as the Prime Minister of Zimbabwe in a loose coalition with Robert Mugabe, there was hope that his presence could influence reform in the country. This government is only a few months old but it has become clearer that ZANU PF is not willing to give up its autocratic hold on power. It has become necessary again to take a closer look at past and present events and try to predict the likely course of future events. This way, pro-democratic forces in Zimbabwe may live conscious of what may become of them or may be required of them when such events begin to unfold.

There is substantial evidence that MDC holds minimal power in the current setup. Examples that quickly crop up are the continual invasion of farms at the instigation of ZANU PF leadership despite calls by the Prime Minister for them to stop. MDC members continue to be persecuted and harassed by ZANU PF supporters with no action from the police. The Reserve Bank continues to engage in quasi-fiscal projects despite Finance Minister Biti’s order. Reserve Bank Governor Gideon Gono and Attorney General Johannes Tomana are still occupying their positions despite MDC’s protestations. Robert Mugabe continues to make key appointments to government unilaterally and most of those appointments have stood. So, it could be argued that ZANU PF is still the core of the Zimbabwe Government with MDC coming in as auxiliaries.

It is also evident that little reform to the political and economic systems of the country has occurred since the Unity Government was formed. The constitution-making process has stalled amidst claims that ZANU PF is sabotaging the process. Draconian laws like AIPPA and POSA are still being used to maintain the state’s grip on civil liberties. Government-assisted hostile takeovers of businesses are still common in the country. There has been a noticeable change though in the economic climate of the country since the introduction of the United States Dollar as the official trading currency. Most notably is the massive decrease in inflation and an end to shortages of basic commodities in the country. There is little hope that substantial reforms will be instituted in the near future given the public contradictions in beliefs held by the two parties.

Given the little influence that MDC seems to be holding in the GNU, it is also evident that its presence in this government is unlikely to bring much positive reform to the country. Changes in ZANU PF on the other hand seem more likely to bring considerable reform in the political and economic terrain of the country. Let us explore such changes, their likelihood and their likely impact on the country:

Voluntary reorganization of ZANU PF

This explicitly refers to change of leadership within ZANU PF. People have discussed the need to revamp and restructure the party particularly the succession of its geriatric leader Robert Mugabe. A wholesome change of leaders in ZANU PF might result in the party being led by reform-minded young people who appreciate the need for contemporary reforms and modernisation of the political and economic systems of the country.

Are there people like that in ZANU PF? This question is hard to answer when looking at the current crop of the party’s leadership even from its youth ranks. There are a number of people who were nurtured by ZANU PF who eventually decided to leave it because of its unwillingness to embrace change. This can point to the presence of people within its system who may not be averse to reformist ideas.

How likely is this change? Succession in ZANU PF is not an idea that can be thrown around without scars and scalps. When Eddison Zvobgo brought the issue of Mugabe’s succession in 1990; the results were not pleasant. He was sidelined from government and his closest ally Dzikamai Mavhaire was suspended from the party for 2 years. The infamous Tsholotsho Declaration was allegedly hacked by some senior members in ZANU PF to influence the structure of the presidium. The results were not pleasant; six provincial chairmen were suspended from the party and eventually Jonathan Moyo had to leave ZANU PF. Currently, there is commotion over the successor to Joseph Msika with the old guard again throwing spanners to ensure that another geriatric takes over.

As convenient as it may sound, there is no indication that the executive of ZANU PF is willing to retire and leave power to younger and competent people. Moves by certain sections of ZANU PF to declare Mugabe the Supreme Leader of the party may as well signal that Mugabe wants to die in office.

It can therefore be concluded that the possibility of ZANU PF reorganisation in the lifetime of Robert Mugabe is close to impossible.

Forced reform of government

There are situations where a government can be forced to reform due to unsustainable internal and external pressure. The reformation of the Soviet system in the 90’s was a result of both the constraints that the global economy was placing on its government and the overwhelming reformist sentiments shown by the massive support that Boris Yeltsin got when he became president in 1990. Pressure from within and without also helped bring down authoritarian rule in Hungary, East German and South Africa.

Is domestic pressure feasible in Zimbabwe? In 1989, Arthur Mutambara and Munyaradzi Gwisai led University of Zimbabwe students in protests against ZANU PF’s intention to impose a one-party state in the country. They were arrested and brutalised. So was Morgan Tsvangirai when he wrote to the Herald newspaper in support of the two.

When food prices rose by about 40% in 1998, people decided to take to the streets in protest. There were reports of a massive crackdown is high density suburbs of Chitungwiza, Budiriro and Glen View by the army and police to quash any dissent.

From 2000 to 2003 ZCTU and MDC led a number of successful boycotts to force the government to reform. Successful in terms of popular response but rather ineffective in forcing the government to change. It appears as though, these earlier demonstrations and boycotts served to sensitize the regime towards the use of brutal force as a means of containing dissent. The response with which the regime quelled the June 2003 Final-Push goes to show that the system had completed its mutation into a senseless, brutal and unashamed dictatorship with no respect for life at all.

To cap this revolutionary mutation, the establishment went own to disintegrate the social and economic livelihood of its people through operation Murambatsvina. This was clandestinely aimed at silencing the opposition’s powerbase although hidden behind claims of cleaning up the Harare.

If this was under disguise, then the ruthlessness that was blatantly shown in June 2008 run-off elections was a show of how the regime was prepared to kill those who did not submit to its existence.

Despite the culture of resistance that Zimbabweans had developed in the first five years of this decade, ZANU PF managed to beat them into submission. The globalisation of world economy did not help matters too as the middle-class which is usually the most vocal in such situations was the first to flee the country followed by a massive exodus of the generally populace into surrounding countries.

Only a people that had been brutalised into submission remained of Zimbabwe. Their only hope was elections. They voted overwhelmingly for change but their vote did not count. Today they are again stuck with the same violent regime with no hope whatsoever.

It seems as though it is impossible to challenge the system with bare hands. Any further challenge to ZANU PF seems to require that people arm themselves or that they totally lose the fear of death. These are hard choices.

International pressure through disengagement and sanctions has been instituted on Zimbabwe by USA, The EU and Australia. Sanctions are designed to force the targeted government or institution to change. Sanctions on Zimbabwe although designed to target specific individuals had other far reaching consequences on the general populace of Zimbabwe.

Instead of forcing the regime to bow out, sanctions actually gave them an excuse to act irresponsibly and ruthlessly. One example is when Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe diverted about $4, 5 million from Global Fund on HIV, TB and Malaria towards other unknown activities. The result was that donors found it hard to channel resources into the country resulting in massive starvation and health crises.

The government seemed to respond to sanctions by sanctioning its own people too. In 2008 at the height of food shortages, they barred relief agencies from operating in the country. They further barred World Vision, Care International and Catholic Relief Services from moving food from Zambia into Zimbabwe.

What could have contributed to the ineffectiveness of sanctions in forcing reform was the inability by Zimbabwe’s neighbours and other African states to augment western efforts. Only Botswana, Kenya and Tanzania seemed willing to apply pressure on Mugabe.

So, can international pressure force change in future? Sanctions can hopefully bring change in Zimbabwe if they are a concerted global initiative which every country is obliged to observe. The ideological differences amongst members of the UN Security Council remain an impediment. The unwillingness of Zimbabwe’s neighbours to support sanctions is based mostly on reluctance to commit resources to sustain the burden of refugees who would be anticipated to cross into those countries.

Apart from sanctions, international pressure can indirectly be applied on the current regime by constantly and lucratively supporting alternatives in the country. As an example, students’ relief schemes can be put in place to assist those students persecuted by the regime. This would not only assist courageous students but would also serve as incentives for more students to come out and challenge the regime.

It has become hard to find people who are willing to challenge the government through non-violent means; but with proper education and assurances of alternatives people of Zimbabwe may rise again but not within the foreseeable future.


Circumstantial changes in ZANU PF leadership

What will happen if Mugabe dies today? There are many scenarios: The Vice President Amai Mujuru can constitutionally be elevated to the post of President and take care of the transition. A rational woman with limited ego could be what Zimbabwe needs to manage the pressures that may arise from such a situation. What if Emmerson Munangagwa - the current Minister of Defence- decides to challenge her? Remembering that The Tsholotsho Declaration was meant to impede the rise Joyce Mujuru, their rivalry is documented.

If Munangagwa decides to challenge Joice Mujuru, two things may occur; she can give in or decide to fight. If she gives in then Munangagwa becomes the President and given his history of brutality; from the persecution of the Hamadziripi group in the late 1970s, his involvement in the Matebeleland massacres and his subsequent involvement in the 2008 elections, then Zimbabweans would most probably have to brace for a tougher time.

If Joyce Mujuru decides to fight on then we can expect a split of ZANU PF along factional lines. Both factions are guaranteed substantial military support. Solomon Mujuru was the commander of the Zimbabwe National Army until 1992. He still has substantial influence in the army and can be the pillar that his wife can rest on. Not to be outdone, Munangagwa was the Minister of State Security from 1980 to 1988, he is currently the Minister of Defence sealing his control over the military and intelligence of the country.

A civil war may occur. The impact and duration of such an event is beyond the scope of this article but suffice to mention that a civil is the last thing that Zimbabwe needs right now.

It has become clearer that reform in Zimbabwe is dependent more on events within ZANU PF that other things. With Mugabe unwilling to retire, it remains logical that Zimbabweans wait for his death for reform to occur. Unfortunately his death may also signal a cascade of events likely to cause more pain than happiness to Zimbabweans. Finally, let it be known that no condition is permanent- change may as well be on the cards for Zimbabwe.