Morgan vs Bob - The Plot Thickens


As expected, the demonstration called by the NCA did not take off today. The city centre in Harare was "normal" - money-changers were going about their business and the hordes of Zimbabwe's unemployed wandered filled the streets of the Central Business District. I did see a riot police truck parked at Africa Unity Square, directly in front of our Office building around midday. The riot police were lounging around at the back with clearly nothing to do. Mind you, they were parked less than 50 metres from the epicentre of illegal foreign currency dealings, Eastgate and Roadport (Fourth Street Bus Terminus).
Zimbabweans' tolerance levels for evil and pain amazes the world and some out there in the world are getting angry with the population itself now. What the world fails to understand is this acquiescence 
I was going to do a long piece and whys and the like of this, but after discussions with friends in the independent media in Zimbabwe, I have now realised that we all have questions surrounding the "mutiny" by soldiers. We all have questions that no one can answer around the conduct of both Mugabe and Tsvangirai. This is what the essence of the current situation is:
Today, speaking t a friend, an editor of one of the largest independent weeklies, I asked questions that have been bothering me now for two days at a trot:
Regarding the story of the militias being trained by the MDC, a story we ALL believe was cooked up by ZANU PPF (and I am one of those who believe it was cooked up), there are still questions that we fail to answer.
Questions such as: Morgan Tsvangirai, just before the SADC summit that decided he should Home Affairs with the dictator, reportedly moved his entire family out of Zimbabwe and into Botswana. Even the large independent media organisations in the country confirm this (I had to ask, I was sceptical that Tsvangirai would do such a thing because it sends the wrong message to the people - a leader moving his family out of harm's way while the nation faces Mugabe's music, essentially "running away" as one of our readers here put it, "while the majority of Zimbabwe stay put to face the music." Why did he do this.
And then Tsvangirai himself also leaves the country and looks as though he has walked away from the only hope people had: the inclusive government. This is compounded by the fact that people are confused by the "facts"coming out. It is reported that the sharing of the Home Affairs Ministry was a suggestion of Tsvangirai, yet when that request if fulfilled, he says he no to it.  Too many of the people in these talks are confirming this and the MDC, to this day has not contradicted the statement that this was Tsvangirai's request.
Why are 14 of the 15 SADC countries in agreement that it was only the Home Affairs ministry that remained in dispute, even after several presentations by Tsvangirai? Surely that can't all have been "bought"by Mugabe? Is it that Tsvangirai is failing to present his case properly and convincingly to the SADC heads of state? If so, have we placed our faith in an effective advocate for our cause. I say this fully aware that there are people out there who would rather we don't look at the apparent failure of Tsvangirai to argue his case not only at SADC bit also at the African Union. But look at it we must because we must be honest with ourselves here if we are to get any progress or understanding of why we are where we are.
The MDC told us as they arrived for the last SADC meeting that "SADC has finally lost patience with Mugabe." Yet at the end of that meeting, the decision that came out was not to the majority party's favour as they had led us to believe (the MDC, by the way, is indeed the majority party, but not the ruling party. This is a reality we must face, I see a lot of people get worked up about this, saying the party is now the "ruling party". No. They have a majority, but they do not yet have the power because the dictator is denying it to them. Having a majority but no power does not a ruling party make, no matter what we may all think. This is simply reality).
Why, we must ask, is it that the opposition (majority) party is failing to make headway at SADC and the AU? This is the crux of the matter. This is the core of the issue at hand here.
AND PLEASE, ZIMBABWE, WE MUST NOW ASK THESE QUESTIONS AND DEMAND ANSWERS. IF THOSE ANSWERS ARE NOT FORTHCOMING, THEN WE WILL BE LEFT TO OUR SPECULATIONS, WHICH HAVE SO FAR SAVED THE DICTATOR:
These questions are vital:
Regarding what is happening with the "mutiny" because everything now is centred on this: what is it that Mugabe presented to the SADC Organ on Defence and Politics about the so-called MDC militias. What "evidence" was this that seems to have convinced the regional body that there is a case here?
"What is it that Mugabe presented to the SADC heads of state that convinced them that there was a plausible reason for not giving Tsvangirai a passport? What case has been presented by the ruining party, ZANU PF around this issue which seems also to have convinced the African Union that there is more to this story? Mugabe seems to have succeeded with whatever argument he presented, otherwise why would the whole region continue to ignore calls to "read Mugabe the riot act"? They all can't be gullible or stupid, so either Mugabe's case is not only plausible, but convincing, or Tsvangirai has failed to put his case across convincingly. It is easy to simply dismiss this whole thing as "SADC and AU are toothless, afraid of Mugabe, dictators afraid of what will happen in their own countries if they set a precedent with Mugabe" and so on. That would not help Zimbabwe.
I will never apologise for asking all of our people to also ask why it is that Tsvangirai seems unable to present his case convincingly. Is it that Mugabe is better arguer of his own cause than Tsvangirai?
The continual focus on SADC, AU and other outsiders fools the people of Zimbabwe into believing that they themselves have no part to play in their liberation from ZANU PF. It reinforces the poisonous attitude amongst our people that they themselves are helpless without outsiders. It gives them  false hope that there is a solution that does require any action on their part.
Perhaps the outside help should now cut this umbilical cord. I personally do no believe that this would be cruel. t would be tough love. Let the outsider refuse to accept our leaders' phone calls. Let them make a public statement that they are washing their hands of this whole matter. Let them close off that last little delusion of our people so that they realise their fate is in their hands, instead of acting as if we have pact with the world: "We played our part, we voted Mugabe out, now SADC must play its part and get rid of Mugabe for us." This is nonsensical, We have no agreement with SADC. All SADC can and should do is simply say this is a Zimbabwean issue to be solved by Zimbabweans. They should refuse all pleas and tell Zimbabweans that they must, in their totality (not just at the leadership level), take whatever action they deem necessary to save their country. That should force our people out into the streets because they will realise there is no knight in shining armour out there willing to do our dirty job for us.
If Mugabe is ever to go, it will be through our own action and not the action of any other entity outside Zimbabwe, be it SADC or the EU. We should wake up to that fact. Stop appealing to the outside world and start looking within. Without that, my fellow Zimbabweans, Mugabe will rule us until he is 120 years old. If we have made a conscious decision to resign ourselves to that fact, then let us stop bothering the outside world with our problems. If not, then let us show the world that death is better than the life we live now. If it is, the world out there will not stand idly by while machine guns mow us down. But is we are afraid of taking that risk, letus not ask any other country to take it on our behalf
This is our country, not theirs. We will make it or break it. No one else will do this for us. we must face up to that and stop deluding ourselves with false hope coming out of false analyses. Mugabe is willing to outlast all of us, to watch us all die, right down to the man, rather than admit failure.
We must now look inwards, all of us, if we decide to compromise with Mugabe like Tsvangirai had done by agreeing to a GNU, then we must commit to that. If we decide to go the path of resistance, then we must also commit to that and not leave it to a few amongst us, the Jenni Williams, the Lovemore Matombos,Wellington Chibebe's, Simba Makonis, Morgan Tsvangirais and Madhukus. These are but individuals, with no impact whatsoever on the dictatorship. Only by committing to a course of action as a nation, as a body, can we succeed.
Just as I will not go out onto the street knowing that I will be alone, so it is with Morgan Tsvangirai. Why should we ask him die while we slumber in our bed?. Why should he agree to die when he knows that after his death, Mugabe will continue to rule and nothing will change? Why should he and 500 of his supporters be the ones do die for nothing? What about the rest of us?
We are all fence sitters. Yes, all of us. But you should not ask me to come down from that fence if you will not do the same, because, like you in the privacy of your homes and thought, I will simply say, "Munoda kundifuriria".
And I would not blame Tsvangirai for giving us the same message: Munoda kundifurira.

Comments

  1. this has been my view all along that we should not look top Obama to remove Bob for us, the man has a load of problems such that Zim is the last thing on his mind. As it is now we have no other options but to pray that the army and the CIO turns against Bob guaranteeing these guys some form of immunity for helping us oust this mad man. The other likely course of action is mass protests in view of the whole world but I know us Zimbabweans we lack cohesion.....100 people plan for demo but only 20 attend. If the demos can be in full view if the world via satelite then maybe we won't be killed by Bob's army & police. Right now we are giving mixed signals that things are OK but our unwillingness to participate in events to oust Bob including NCA demo etc.

    ReplyDelete
  2. 100% correct . The outside world has been wondering for a long time now why ordinary Zimbabweans do not take matters into their own hands. Do they expect the AU or the UN or the EU to send troops to oust Mugabe ?
    As your article states , Zimbabweans must accept the fact that the future is in their own hands and stop waiting around for someone else to do something .

    ReplyDelete
  3. Whilst I agree with the abive views, I'm of the view that the reasons why people can not take to the streets like in the olden days of 'ZHII!' is due to three things all experienced during e.g. Gukurahundi, various post election violence, murambatstvina, presidential campaigns etc; fear, poor leadership and having been let down in the past after making sacrifices. The fear is derived from the draconian way in which Mugabe and co. have gone about their business of crushing resistance whenever it has shown its ugly face and this is bound to get worse as the regime becomes more and more desperate. Poor leadership by the MDC leadership is now common knowledge and you can't tell if they are coming or going or if they are fighting to replace ZANU PF or to change the current draconian system. Lastly, people have been let down before by the those claim to have their interest at heart. You get beat up but get no medication, get arrested but no legal representation, score some small victories but not share on the rewards. So we all then ask ourselves this question, Is it therefore worth dying for Zimbabwe if at the end of day I still not be a stakeholder in the end? Something needs to give, particularly on not tolerating mediocre leadership and not belonging to organisations that use you not give you any stake or say!

    Langa

    ReplyDelete
  4. There are a couple of thing which I think are not immediately obvious in your analysis:

    The first is; I would compare the Zimbabwe situation to the French Revolution. Basically the people are so hungry they can't do anything. You can’t expect the vulnerable people who are being ravaged by hunger and disease to do anything.

    The second is in the 21st century uprisings, things like picking up arms are now taboo. The moment you start talk like that you become a terrorist - even in this obvious case that you only seek to liberate yourselves. You need to be a Nobel Laureate to call for war.

    There are thousands (I speculate – maybe a good poll for this site?) of willing Zimbabwean out there who will step forward at the click of a finger if it was an acceptable practice to pick up arms. This is no longer the case after things like September 11. You will be internationally condemned for it. We also rely on research which tells us that military does not benefit as much as we think it does.

    To put the two together we are in an 18th century situation in the 21st century...

    ReplyDelete
  5. Darlington, you misunderstand completely. This article is NOT calling for people to take up arms. In fact, if it is calling for anything, it is calling for the opposite of that.
    What I am saying is that, should people come out, unarmed, to protest in the streets in their numbers, refusing to leave the streets even if the regime should fire on them, they would succeed because as they are mowed down, the world would surely then intervene.
    You also contradict yourself by saying hungry and diseased people can't do anything, but weren't the French people (whom you say you compare the Zimbabwe people today to) also hungry and ill? Yet did they not stage a successful revolution? have never bought that argument about people being too hungry to protest.

    The real problem is that Zimbabweans are too selfish. That is all there is to it. They want lierty but they do not want to go out onto the streets. We like to think we are too educated and therefore the logical thing for this reasoning is that we do not fight, we negotiate. We appoint a man to negotiate for us, Morgan, and yet when he is outwitted at the negotiation table we blame Mbeki, SADC, African Union etc.
    Basically, we are saying that the whole world (or Africa at least) is wrong and we are right. I find that difficult to accept.
    Kenya is at peace today because Odinga negotiated with a man who stole an election from him. There are many other examples like that.
    Yet we seem to want to have our cake and eat it.

    WHAT DID WE EXPECT FROM THE NEGOTIATIONS? Mugabe stole an election because he wanted to continue in power. Did you think that he would then simply surrender that power after he had killed for it as he did in June? Did you think that we would get a fair deal as the people when we went in to negotiate with this Commander-in-thief?

    If Tsvangirai thought so then he is more naive thn I thought. Mugabe was going to try and keep as much power as possible in these negotiations, we should have known that, either that or we should have not started the negotiations at all.

    Tsvangirai has surprised me by the amount of concessions he has managed to get from Mugabe. He has reduced the dictator's powers incredibly and the people of Zimbabwe realise that. This is now the end game.

    If we say we do not want this deal, we know exactly what will follow. We should then shut up and stop complaining to the world for teh enxt fiv years. We know what will happen if we walk away from the biggest climbdown by Mugabe since he was forced by Machel to go back to Lancaster House and accept Lord Carrington's deal in 1979.

    If we think we can get a better deal, then we should go onto the streets to demand that better deal. Right now, the route we chose, negotiations, has played itself out. Either we accept the humiliation we have inflicted on Mugabe, go into government and strategise from there on how we will disable his machinery at the next election(a much better prospect from within government than from Harvest House) OR, cut or losses and hunker down, prepared to die like flies for teh next five years because we all know exactly what walking away from this deal entails.
    It's compromise. It is the definition of negotiation. Give and take. Either we accept that or we shut up and suffer in silence for the next five years, instead of botherinf outsiders with our own self-inflicted injuries!
    Thanks for the interaction!

    ReplyDelete
  6. we only have ourselves to blame for letting bob be were he is right now........it's our own ignorance & selfishness that has allowed bob to ruin our country & no-one but us can liberate us from this heartless dictator. The sooner we realise this the better otherwise time is not on our side.....do you want to wait until thousands of people die of hunger or cholera or when the economy has stopped functioning. No one wants to start war but mass protests, as I see it, is the answer.....we don't have any other option...GNU is getting us nowhere...the next election isn't coming anytime soon....

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Comments from Anonymous Users will NOT be published

Popular Posts