Changing the way we do things

WHEN the leaders of Zimbabwe’s three political parties put their signatures to the Global Political Agreement (GPA) on September 15 last year, that was a statement of the intention for change.

The real work begins now with the new cabinet taking charge effectively this week. The most critical task for the government of national unity is to change the culture of work in government. The most difficult part of managing change is “culture” simply defined as, “the way we do things here”. The arrest of Roy Bennett on charges that are changing each time is an example of how desperately Zimbabwe needs to address “the way we do things here”. If Bennett had a warrant issued way back in 2006, the police have had time to consider the charges they want to prefer against Bennett, rather than hold him while they look for charges to prefer.

The challenge when changing culture of work is that you do not simply do it through announcements in the media, government circulars or e-mails. There is always stronger resistance to change especially in the bureaucracy that government is. The wheels of government are slow to turn because governments are big organisation, that is why it is important to break ministries into smaller departments and put tight deadlines on short term projects so that they can deliver or change faster.

Much more has to be done in terms of public sector reforms that will address culture of service and this is what the Zimbabweans are awaiting from our newly-appointed ministers. It will take their creativity, initiatives, and ingenuity.When the Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai announced that the civil servants would be getting their salaries in foreign currency by the end of this month, he might have risked creating a crisis of expectation. However, the doubt expressed by the Progressive Teachers' Union leader Raymond Majongwe over the Prime Minister's promise was clear sign that the union leaders understood that need to be realistic. The devil was to be in the details.

We now know civil servants will be paid $100 tax free. It is not clear whether the civil servants were expecting to be paid a full salary for February since most of them have not been at work for some time now. It is also not clear whether those civil servants who have not been doing any work or who turned up just to register presence at their stations expect to be paid a full month’s salary in forex. This would be accepting “the way we do things”.

My view is that the package promised by the Prime Minister was to be more of a stimulus package for everyone to have a starting point to return to work and the country to start afresh. Civil servants should be paid for the work done and we all know that they have not been at work for good reasons but there are others who have been working and continue to work hard. There should be also evidence of the work done but that was always going to be hard to prove so a stimulus package is the fair way to go.

UNICEF has reported that “the education crisis which started last year saw a marked depletion of teachers in schools, plummeting school attendance rate from over 80 per cent to 20 per cent…” We know that all major hospitals are closed or have been closed for sometime now, do the workers in these institutions expect to be paid full salaries for the work that they have not done? The answer to these questions sets a precedent for the way we do things from now going forward.

It has to be clear in “the way we do things” that “no work, no pay”. Majongwe of the Progressive Teacher’s Union is within his right to fight for the teachers’ rights to have meaningful salaries and tell them no to go to work until their demands are met. However, the government should also be clear about their policy on paying civil servants including those who are not at work. It makes sense that when a worker is on strike, they understand that they are not at work.

Most civil servants in strong economies like the UK do not even earn as much as Zimbabwe’s teachers are demanding. Teachers will need to know that such demands caused a major crush of the Zimbabwe dollar in December 1997 when the war veterans demanded cash from government. We just need to change the we do things in Zimbabwe, the siege mentality will not get us anyway.

It is hoped that civil servants will be realistic in their expectations and that they will understand that forex is not going to be just a substitute for the Zimbabwe dollar but value for the work they do.

Trust in politics: an overstated ideal

ONE can understand a genuine debate on the merits and demerits of the Movement for Democratic Change joining a Government of National Unity (GNU) with Zanu PF because it is healthy for the development of Zimbabwe. I, however, take issue with those people who are obsessed with obstacles because these people are creating a mental block among Zimbabweans and kill imagination, creativity and initiative.

Let us face it, a human mind has enough brains to drill the hardest rock and the highest mountain has been climbed. It is hoped that our experts and analysists such as the civil society celebrities like Dr. Lovemore Madhuku of the National Constitutional Assembly (NCA) could be more useful to Zimbabwe if they employ their energies and brains in finding solutions, rather than explaining or defining problems.

The GNU is for the solution focussed mind-set not problem definition mind-set.

The GNU's success will not solely depend on what Zanu PF does, although it is important for the success of the project. A lot will also depend on what the MDC brings into the GNU by way of a repertoire of skills such as administrative acumen, management and leadership skills that will help mobilise political consensus that is necessary for a turn-around. The MDC has a lot of political and social capital through its popular appeal and support that has a strong potential to unlock the economic capital.

So, to dismiss the GNU completely like some civic society celebrities such as Brian Kagoro and his colleagues are doing shows lack of imagination, initiative and creativity. One would think that at this point the debate should be more about which of Zimbabwe's fine minds and best skills can parties in the GNU deploy to help turn things around rather spending the time analysing WHY the GNU will NOT work in Zimbabwe. My hope is that Zimbabwe is not full of experts of impossibility, but experts of creative possibilities and solutions.

I always tell friends across the globe in very influential positions that Zimbabwe is counting on her best skills and brains to turn things around and we must disengage from the endless critiquing mode in favour of stepping forward and be counted. The GNU is not for the faint-hearted because parties are likely to deploy their best resources and personnel in the GNU. The Zimbabwean GNU is expected to unleash its talent and skills to confront the challenges of poverty and disease.

In politics you cannot trust anyone, including President Mugabe or even members of your party for that matter. I am not sure whether President Mugabe trusts social amenities minister, Emmerson Mnangagwa or Vice-President Joyce Mujuru, or vice versa, but this has not stopped them from working with each other.I am not sure how much trust Prime Minister-designate Morgan Tsvangirai has in MDC Secretary General Tendai Biti or that party's organizing secretary, Eng. Elias Mudzuri.

Apparently, the very people who are saying do not trust President Mugabe actually expect the people to trust them, when in fact they are trying prepare to launch their own political parties. It is correct to say that Tsvangirai should not trust President Mugabe, but why should he trust NCA's Dr. Madhuku who is positioning himself to probably launch his own party if the MDC fails? More importantly, why should the people of Zimbabwe trust Dr. Madhuku who led us to believe that there was nothing good about the Draft Constitution in the 2000 Referendum.

Dr. Madhuku is at it again, this time calling this proposed GNU 'a catastrophe' -- suggesting that there is nothing good about it. There is nothing wrong about having different views, but to expect people to try you as a politician is to try and fool people. Just deliver - if you can do something - and the people will judge you. Personally I do not trust someone who has not yet delivered whatever their potential, because people change.

I am sure some people trusted the late President Canaan Banana until he terrorised the late Jefta Dube. Some trusted the late Learnmore Jongwe until he killed his wife. It is common cause that Dr. Madhuku is unhappy with the GNU because the NCA's position is threatened by the creation of the Ministry of Constitutional Affairs which is likely to be responsible for leading the re-writing of the Zimbabwean constitution. Dr. Madhuku himself can not be trusted after he abused the clients' trust funds, but let me end here for now on this issue of trust.

They say that, in politics, especially in Africa, you sleep with one eye open, but perhaps this serves to keep leaders on their toes. Ideally, we should have trust but in life it is hard. Lack of trust is not good enough a reason not to join a GNU; you need other better reasons than that. If you are looking for 'trust' then do not go into politics because I am yet to see a politician that can be trusted, although it is bonus.

The point is that, the MDC will need to do their best and people will judge them on the basis of their performance. Afterall, affairs of Government are public. There will be some teething problems in the implementation of the GNU especially at the beginning, but that should not be the end of the world.

We should never stop trying and never try stopping!

There is no perfect political union, but unity is necessary

Posted to the web: 21/01/2009 21:58:18

THE deadlock in talks between the Zanu PF and Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) formations to push for a government of national unity (GNU) is a sum total of experiences from previous GNUs. It is also an instructive to all of us Zimbabweans about the challenges that lie ahead in terms of consensus mobilisation within government.

It is a shame that positions have become more important than the people’s lives and one can only hope that events will not conspire to take the initiative out of Zanu PF and the MDC-T and plunge the country into unimaginable suffering as Zimbabweans reach their wits end. In a politically volatile and desperate environment, no one is safe and desperate situations are known to call for desperate measures. We are sitting on the proverbial powder keg.

While we need to learn from other people across Africa and the world at large about finding solutions to our problems, we know as a nation what we need to do to in order to redeem ourselves in the most trying moments. We should never pretend for a while that a single group or political opinion or formation has ever been enough for our country.

President Mugabe and Morgan Tsvangirai need each other as Arthur Mutambara observed, and more importantly, we need to find each other once more as Zimbabweans. There ought to be room for all of us to develop our country.

The liberation war of the 1960s and 1970s was won by the ordinary Shona, Ndebele, Tonga, Kalanga, Zanla and Zipra forces united to end decades of unjust, white minority rule. We lost that spirit of unity when we started fighting each other for positions soon after 1980, turning the same guns that liberated us against each other. The brutal killings of innocents in Matabeleland and the Midlands, as we know, did not end until 1987 when the late Joshua Nkomo agreed to united his PF-Zapu with Mugabe’s Zanu to form Zanu PF.

Some would argue that the political settlement of 1979 which involved the white supremacist leader Ian D Smith, Nkomo and Mugabe, and the Unity Accord of 1987 involving Mugabe and Nkomo taught Zimbabweans lessons about partnerships in government and the inherent pitfalls of such political alliances. Therein lie the seeds of the success and failure of the current talks between Zanu PF and the MDC -- fear of being swallowed.

However, the idea of letting bygones be bygones after political conflict was a model that South Africans further developed through the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, and that is what might hold the key to the possibility of success for the current talks between Zanu PF and the MDCs.

If amnesty was good for the white Rhodesians in 1980, it should be good for Zimbabweans today. Those involved in Gukurahundi atrocities, Operation Murambatsvina and the June 27 presidential run-off violence are naturally very worried about being made to account at foreign and domestic tribunals, so the talks ought to address these issues to close a chapter as we did in 1980.

The current Zanu PF and the MDC comprise of former Zanla, Zipra and white Rhodesian elements that participated or were in the background of the GNUs in 1979 and 1987. These people know what worked and what did not and they can appraise the efficacy of the GNU that is being proposed in Zimbabwe today through the SADC mediation on the basis of understanding the actors involved.

The only hope for Zimbabwe now is that Zanu PF has not decided to go it alone and form a substantive government without the MDC because that would escalate our problems to a new level. At the same time, the MDC is still available for discussions because they understand that their future is better in a proper GNU than outside.

The stalling of the crunch talks is a nightmare from which Zanu PF and the MDC-T should wake up from before it is too late. What does the failure of the talks mean for Zimbabwe? It means that our leaders have not learnt from those African leaders who have travelled the same path before. And if our leaders continue on this current ruinous path, they may very well both miss out on the top prize as Zimbabweans reclaim their destiny.

A Single Candle is better than darkness

Thursday, 04 December 2008 20:36

ZIMBABWE is at that point in history where the old Quaker proverb, “It is better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness” is very instructive. There is no credit for describing crises without solving them or doing something practical.

There are many people with PhDs on the Zimbabwe crisis, we even have an organisation called Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition yet the situation is getting out of hand.

It is better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness. In times like these Margaret Mead, an anthropologist, reminds us that: “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.”

The few MDC MPs who will make it into the Government of National Unity will make a great difference. These MDC MPs will at least light a single candle and make a difference rather than complain about things getting worse. It is advisable for them to join the GNU rather than describe the situation from the sidelines. It is better to light a single candle than curse the darkness.

As Zimbabweans we should set aside our differences and confront our challenges together. The appeal to the international community for help is a step in the right direction but a misplaced priority.

Our challenges require some creativity, imagination and initiative. At this stage, it important for Zimbabweans to realise that it does not make much sense to ask the world to help us to deal with our crises when we are not even showing any sense of urgency to convene our parliament and set up a sustentative government of national unity to confront our crises.

Why should Zimbabweans deserve more help than the Congolese or Sudanese when they are not showing any urgency to form a substantive government? It is high time parliament convened and agreed on a process to make constitutional provisions to fast-track amendment No 19 so that Morgan Tsvangirai and Arthur Mutambara take up their posts in the government of national unity and start helping in the management of the crises and save lives.

Zimbabweans are not a special case and it makes no sense to go around the world asking for help when we are not ready to set aside our differences and work together. The world does not agree on how to confront the Zimbabwe crises. We have seen this at Sadc, the AU and the UN and nothing will change unless we change our attitude and approach.

It is clear that there is no “best way” to solve the multi-layered Zimbabwean crisis which is caused by governance issues and economic sanctions imposed by the United States and Europe.
There is no point in trying to discuss whether sanctions or governance issues are the cause of our suffering because it is like the chicken and the egg debate, it does not end. The point is that Zimbabweans are suffering because of both sanctions and governance issues which should be addressed. Delaying the formation of the Government of National Unity is causing further and unnecessary harm.

The blame game will not help Zimbabwe unless either party can show that what you are doing is helping the situation. We have to realise that Zimbabwe does not operate in a vacuum and the environment is changing fast. Sadc has recommended that a Government of National Unity be formed in Zimbabwe and the Ministry of Home Affairs be co-managed by Zanu PF and the MDC-Tsvangirai.

This is thought not to be the best solution but one that has to be a chance for now. In essence, this decision means that Zanu PF and the MDC-Tsvangirai have to agree on decisions and policies in this ministry like in any other ministry.

It has to be clear that what Zimbabwe needs are not handouts but capacity to do things for ourselves. We have our resources in terms of minerals like diamonds, gold, tourism facilities and a large diaspora skills base and market.

So the only aid we need for now is the humanitarian aid to address the urgent needs of hunger and disease. This will work best if there is political consensus that comes with the government of national unity.

There is a reckless saying that in every struggle there are casualties and that does not exonerate those responsible and it does not mean that it is right for any person to die anyway. We need a struggle where all Zimbabweans will be winners.

It is therefore important for the world to encourage Zimbabweans to set aside their differences and give the GNU a chance as soon as possible. Anything else will divide us and cause more suffering. The critics of the GNU tend to wrongly compare the GNU and the Unity Accord of 1987. It is common cause that in 1987 Zanu and Zapu became one as a party.

In the GNU the parties will remain distinct entities. I do not believe that comparing different political situations will help Zimbabwe. I prefer to quote Admiral Lord Nelson on the eve of the battle of Trafalgar, October 20, 1805 “…now that we have decided why it cannot be done, let us determine how it will be done”.

The Zimbabwe Diaspora Interface http://www.zimdiasporainterface.org/ believes that we can do it together through consensus and non-partisanship and that could be another way of doing it.
The problem Zimbabwe faces is that irresponsible behaviour by the different political actors, especially in the name of the MDC against Zanu PF, is treated as gallantry. In another country the crisis we currently face would lead to a closing of ranks and collective action across the political divide. In shameless Zimbabwe, dead bodies are turned into political capital by the opposition.

They are a sign of the failure of the government and the total collapse of the health delivery system. A question never asked is what positive role the opposition is playing to alleviate this humanitarian tragedy? Where are the MPs we voted for in March? The long and short of it is that Zimbabweans are on their own. There is no one to light the candle for them.

By Msekiwa Makwanya and Joram Nyathi

GNU Must Communicate Its Vision to Gain Public Support

THE Government of National Unity being formed by Zanu PF and the two Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) formations will, in essence, be change managers.

Zimbabweans have suffered for so long and probably become so disillusioned that it might take time for them to appreciate real prospects of change.

In management change people look for quick returns in order to win over cynics and sceptics and build on their quick wins to convince followers that they can do it. However, media and communication will be the key to the change we seek.

Most failures in change management are grounded in people’s emotional attitudes to change, which are not necessarily rational which is why communication is extremely important.

It is therefore vital for the new government to address the issue of communication and information through a thoroughly professional manner so that Zimbabweans are on the same page and can buy into the change agenda. Every voice matters and it comes with the territory in a GNU because without adequate communication there won’t be unity of purpose and common vision. People will pull in different directions, support individual leaders or players in the team.
It was such a shame that while those of us in the Diaspora could watch the proceedings of the signing ceremony live on BBC and Sky channels on September 15, 2008 some Zimbabweans did not even know that there was such a historic occasion going on.

It is also possible that details of the agreement will remain scant because not enough care was taken to ensure information filters down to the remotest of our villages and is translated into indigenous languages to enable every Zimbabwean to understand what was agreed upon. There is still an opportunity for the new government to re-run the proceedings of what happened at Rainbow Towers in Harare.

Media practitioners, some of whom are imbedded in party politics, may need reorientation so that our change efforts as Zimbabweans are articulated satisfactorily at all times. This will include areas where the new inclusive government will be failing and areas where they succeed and where the responsibility for outcomes lie. Point-scoring and partisan support for individual players is one thing that we need to guard against as Zimbabweans but accountability should be the cornerstone of the new beginning. It is important to avoid declaring victory too soon even if we need to secure short-term wins in order to inspire the people.

The quick wins that the new government could achieve include issues that may not need resources but just political good will. Such issues include, opening up the media which is part of the agreement signed between Zanu PF and the MDC formations.

The media can promote a battle of ideas if run professionally and it is important for community development. In the past our politics has been focusing too much on individuals and personalities. Local newspapers and community radio stations will help to build vibrant communities from which change should actually start in the first place, otherwise the change agenda will only cater for the elite.

The new inclusive government can win over the Diaspora by a stroke of a pen by simply changing the law to allow the Diaspora to enjoy dual citizenship which is the case with most democratic countries like South Africa or United Kingdom, and even Nigeria that understand we are now global citizens or transnational citizens.

The new government is therefore encouraged to quickly communicate its vision through the appropriate media for respective audiences in the rural, urban areas and even the Diaspora.
There should be no room for spin because it will simply make people despair. So, may the work begin!

Tsvangirai's Role Must Not Be Underestimated

IN my discussions with patriotic Zimbabweans across the globe, I have discovered that there is a very strong view that if Morgan Tsvangirai’s signature is the one that will save the country then he should be accorded the power that is commensurate with the power of his signature.

Tsvangirai appears to be asking for clarity of his role in a Government of National Unity. This is necessary to avoid unwarranted conflict in a situation where tension will be inevitable -–– in any change process –– because people are resistant to change.

The idea of a ceremonial role is understandably viewed as an insult by both President Robert Mugabe and Tsvangirai because you do not fight an election to have a ceremonial role. People do not elect leaders to have a ceremonial role. In a situation that Zimbabwe finds itself in since March 29, it makes sense for Zanu PF and the MDC to share power equally.

Arthur Mutambara of the smaller MDC faction has been a subject of serious criticism for tipping the balance of power in favour of Zanu PF, and misusing his king-making position. Zimbabweans hope that Mutambara has good reasons for his decisions.

Mutambara lives among Zimbabweans and it is the mark of a transformational leader to listen to the people who follow him lest he is accused of being arrogant and out of touch with reality. This would be a cardinal sin that any leader can ever commit in politics. For a person of Mutambara’s intellectual ability it should be easy to gauge and ascertain the people’s wishes and feelings.

Change is about people’s feelings and emotions and if you cannot connect with people then there will be no buy-in and change. Tsvangirai has been referring to the March 29 election as a measure of ascertaining the people’s feelings. In that election he was ahead of President Mugabe.
Mugabe told the nation in the period leading to the June 27 run-off election that the pen will never defeat the gun. In the on-going talks between Zanu PF and the two MDC formations, it is clear that the pen and the gun should co-exist. In any case, it was the signatures of Mugabe, Joshua Nkomo and Ian Smith (and even Bishop Abel Muzorewa) that brought the Independence of Zimbabwe at Lancaster House in 1980.

It is true that Zimbabwe will not move forward without Tsvangirai.

The question for Tsvangirai is: Does he go into the theatre without enough tools or go in and ask for the tools once he is inside? He has many people who support him who are ready to work with him in these difficult circumstances. Some of these people have risked their jobs and lives and there is no such thing as a perfect moment.

Tsvangirai should not underestimate his power. His presence in the theatre will make a difference to the lives of the people of Zimbabwe. It cannot be disputed that Tsvangirai’s role in the future government is of great importance if the country is to rebuild the future of all its citizens.

There is more to government than power and positions

AS THE Zimbabwe crisis talk reach the half time phase, speculation is rife on the question of where the actual power of running the country will reside. Some of the discussions appear to wrongly suggest that power resides in one body. I find it problematic to go along with that argument.

President Robert Mugabe does not have absolute power, because it is simply not humanly possible and it follows then that Morgan Tsvangirai can expect no absolute power.

It is worth de-constructing the notion of power at this stage for the benefit of fellow Zimbabweans because there is a strange understanding of what people mean by power. Foucault, (1979:93) asserts that, "Power is everywhere: not because it embraces everything, but because it comes from everywhere.... Power is not an institution, nor a structure, nor a possession. It is the name we give to a complex strategic situation in a particular society." In short power is multi-directional and has many sources.

Power has many sources, and to fight over this office or post is a waste of time and it does not make much sense for talks to break down for that reason. Sources of power include but are not limited to: resources e.g. money or wealth; knowledge or information which includes your level of education; legitimacy e.g. power to sanction, networks which includes the people around you that you can mobilise to influence things; track record or reputation which makes people know what you can or cannot do.

In fact the sources of power are also known as levers of power which the political players could either have or at least access but not necessarily possess. For example, having the support of Strive Masiyiwa "aka the Bills Gates of Africa"; Rupert Murdoch the global media mogul or General Constantine Chiwenga can make you more powerful than having thousands of friends in one part of the world. The current talks between Zanu PF and the two MDCs will miss the target if they focus on a particular office because it is not necessarily the position that wields power but your attributes and access to levers of power stated above.

The media calls Tendai Biti the MDC-T number two, yet he is the Secretary General and Emerson Mnangagwa the Zanu PF strongman, yet he is only Minister of Rural Housing in the official capacity. Some people are powerful regardless of their positions in the formal structures. That is why the late Edison Zvobgo once said you do not make great minds small by giving them small roles when he was given what was thought to be a lesser cabinet post, yet even on his death bed people were giving more weight to what he said. Many members of the Cabinet and even President Mugabe lamented his absence – for the sheer quality of his contributions during cabinet meetings.

The point above illustrates that power should be understood in terms of its operations, techniques, tools ("What does power do?") rather than in terms of simply what it is. If Zimbabweans are expecting change, then they should not see political influence only in terms President Mugabe’s current post.

President Bakili Muluzi was not able to do much with the same post he took over from Banda who was thought to be so powerful, and President Mwai Kibaki has clearly failed to do better than the former President Arap Moi in terms of accumulating absolute power.

In the final analysis, power is not owned by the state, nor is it specific to any particular organisation either Zanu PF or the MDC. It is a machinery that no one owns. Its application points are multiple, dispersed throughout all social institutions like the ordinary people who voted Justice Minister Patrick Chinamasa out of office in March 2009.

Individuals like President Mugabe or Tsvangirai are the vehicles of power, not its points of application. Power is never localised here or there, never in anybody’s hands, never appropriated as a commodity or piece of wealth so it is not correct to say that President Mugabe will never give power Tsvangirai because he simply does not have the power to give. Once he goes, he goes with his power. That is why Jesus told Pilate, "You would have no power over me unless it had been given you from above…" (John 19:11).

Even if Arthur Mutambara may not be seen by some as powerful, he is also a vehicle of power in Zimbabwean politics; he leads a party with a group of 10 MPs who will wield a crucial vote to decide legislation in parliament whether we like it or not. An inclusive government in which players will be team players bringing their best is all we need, not this over emphasis on power talk.

Tsvangirai, who is now a subject of power talk, has made it clear that it is not the post that is important, he needs to serve the people and it is for that reason that we expect the negotiations to go well. The power dynamics will evolve naturally once an inclusive government is in place.