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.

Makoni must now choose between the two candidates

CALLING off the blood and thunder Presidential run off in favour of the Government of National Unity (GNU) now appears to be very late in the day and probably against the mindset of the majority of the people of Zimbabwe.

It is now three weeks to go to June 27. While there are serious concerns about reports of political violence in Zimbabwe at the moment, and the expense involved in the run off, Zimbabweans know that violence is a double-edged sword and democracy is expensive. The friends of Zimbabwe could assist with the money to run the election if that is what we need.

It is difficult to expect the candidates who have already committed their resources to the campaign to simply go back home when they are convinced that they can win the elections and wait for uncertain dialogue. President Mugabe and his campaign team feel strongly that some of their members did not vote on March 29 and they would like to do so on June 27, President Morgan Tsvangirai and his campaign team feel that they have to finish the job they started on March 29.

Both candidates in the run-off seem to believe that they need to derive their mandate to rule Zimbabwe from the people of Zimbabwe, and each candidate’s team is using tactics and strategies that they believe will work for them. Simba Makoni, the losing presidential candidate may have a point about calling off the run-off. It appears, however, that the earlier he chooses the candidate to support the better for him and everyone else. The presidential run-off has been irrevocably agreed between the candidates and it is going ahead.

I am one of those who felt that it was best not have a run-off but once the date was set and campaigning started, it does not make sense to call off an election with only three weeks to go. In any case, we do not wish to set a record for calling off an election because of pre-election. How can we call ourselves a democracy thereafter.

This will set a very bad precedent in the world, The Kenyan example should be the last curse of Africa. Simba Makoni is best advised to work towards ensuring that the elections will be free and fair since he recognises the fact that the hope for a free and fair is now next to zero.

While it is accepted that the run-off will not solve the problems that Zimbabwe faces at the moment, an election and negotiations are not mutually exclusive. We will therefore have the election first on June 27 and negotiations later. In any case, some negotiations have already started but violence has not stopped. Reports from South Africa indicate that Ministers Patrick Chinamasa and Nicholas Goche of Zanu-PF met with Tendai Biti the MDC Secretary General in Pretoria last week. We know that previous negotiations between Zanu-PF and the MDC have taken too long and did not solve the Zimbabwean problems.

The presidential run-off is therefore meant to decide the leadership issue, not necessarily to solve all our problems. The negotiations will facilitate power transfer or distribution which ever is required.

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”.

For the sake of national healing, run-off must be avoided

ZIMBABWEANS wanted change more than a popularity contest, and the failure of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) factions to unite before the just ended harmonised elections has proved what Zimbabweans knew –that there is no such thing as a smaller faction when every vote has to be counted. In past unity talks among the opposition forces, reality and rhetoric have tended to diverge before agreements could be signed but this time history might never absolve the opposition if they miss the chance to work together.

At times when the opposition forces demand change from the government, they forget that they should change themselves.From the media reports, it appears that the MDC faction led by Morgan Tsvangirai has realise that the popularity contest manifested in the number seats gained or lost in the just ended Zimbabwean elections is now over, but they are still not in power.
Zimbabweans across the political spectrum have managed to hold their nerve in the most difficult trying moments but we are now in a volatile situation, with President Mugabe now a wounded and dangerous buffalo let-off by vacillating leaders whose egos thwarted all chances of a united front against Mugabe.It now appears that the MDC Tsvangirai did not deliver the vital knock-out blow that they needed to take Mugabe out of the presidential race. By all accounts, and despite varying claims to the contrary, Tsvangirai did not get the required 50% + 1 vote of the total presidential ballots, and now the country is waiting with bated breath for that second round of a very tricky run-off between Mugabe and Tsvangirai.

It is a disaster that the MDC -- fighting a regime credited with 150 000 inflation, 80 percent unemployment and many other economic and political crimes -- is still locked in a tight contest with the same opponent that they would have vanquished, with little less pride.Tsvangirai’s MDC has won most seats in parliament and the combined opposition has the majority, but Zanu PF has a significant minority and access to levers power such as the state security and resources at their disposal.

President Mugabe is still the head of state with some legitimate power and authority still vested in him under the Presidential Powers Temporary Measures Act, which he can use to override the Zimbabwe Electoral Act, the part relating to the run-off in particular, to neutralise the opposition.

It will be very difficult for Mugabe to sustain any form of victory that keeps him in power. His best security now is to take a rest. Most Zimbabweans hope that Mugabe will listen to his conscience and do what is best for Zimbabwe with the Presidential Powers and Temporary Measures Act which gives him sweeping powers to positively change the rules. It should be recognised that Mugabe also has the burden of convincing his generals and party die-hards that it is best for him to negotiate a transition or his exit and take a rest, but the behaviour of the opposition and other outsiders should be measured. Those of us who have always felt that the opposition forces needed to unite before the elections if they were to win now feel that the need for unity among opposition forces is even greater more than ever.

Arthur Mutambara’s MDC faction and independent Jonathan Moyo with their 10 seats in parliament seem to be in the “king making” position and probably the best unintended outcome of the just ended election.

A lot now depends on how Mutambara’s MDC and Jonathan Moyo will vote in houses of parliament and senate.A fractured society like Zimbabwe does not need a party with an absolute majority; political power should be distributed evenly across society to allow people to regain confidence in themselves without any over-bearing influence of one group on matters of governance.

Zimbabwe needs government by consensus and it might be the best model for Africa. With 99 seats for MDC-Tsvangirai, 97 seats for Zanu PF, 10 seats for MDC Mutambara and 1 seat for Jonathan Moyo, Zimbabwe is now in a situation where political parties need each other more than before.The fears and anxieties of the losers and winners can be best addressed if the defeated can be humble and the victors are gracious and magnanimous. The challenge for Zimbabwe is to come up with a government that can govern for the country for everyone else not just its party members, as Dr Nkosana Moyo once said. The just-ended elections might have given Zimbabwe a chance for a non-partisan government in that no-one has an absolute majority.The opposition now simply has to be disciplined and measured in their approach and the ruling party has to exercise restraint. Zimbabwe is now at its most delicate stage in history. The media, especially the foreign media, is naturally desperate for news on the painfully slow Zimbabwe election process and they can inflame situations.The African Union and SADC have an important role in helping us manage and conclude our delicate election process but the Western media have to be careful in the way they portray Mugabe, it is humiliation and denigration that he will not accept and which gets Africa on his side. It is rare to have peaceful elections in Africa that Zimbabwe has had. In fact, although elections are a democratic way of deciding leadership, they tend to be divisive in most Third World countries.

A run-off will certainly raise political temperatures in Zimbabwe to a boiling point which might unnecessarily leave the country more divided than before.

In light of the above, I strongly feel that a run-off will not be good for Zimbabwe. The House of Assembly and Senate should be allowed to vote for the next President of Zimbabwe.
In my view, the most ideal situation would be if Mugabe is persuaded to avoid a presidential election run-off and asked to use the Presidential Temporary Powers and Measures Act to override the Electoral Act, do away with a run-off and swear in Members of Parliament and senate into office and constitute them into an electoral college to decide the next President of Zimbabwe.

The candidate would be probably sponsored by parties whose MPs and Senators are in parliament since they are the ones who will vote. It would be expected that the MPs would consult on which candidate to vote. This candidate does not need to be in parliament or senate.The above theory is based on Constitutional Amendment No. 18 which might yet turn out to be stroke of genius with the effect of achieving national healing, and ushering a unique leadership by consensus in Africa and smooth transition in Zimbabwe.
Prior to Constitutional Amendment 18 coming into play in 2007, in terms of section 28(3) of the Constitution, if a President died, resigned or was removed from office, an election was to be called within 90 days.

Following the change in law, that power has been transferred to Parliament and the Senate. The law says an election to the office of President shall take place (a) on the day or days fixed in a proclamation in terms of section 58(1) as the day or days on which a general election is to be held for the purpose of elect-ing members of Parliament; or (b) in accordance with the Electoral Law by members of the Senate and the House of Assembly sitting jointly as an electoral college within ninety days after the office of President becomes vacant by reason of his death or his resignation or removal from office in terms of this Constitution; as the case may be.

May the Lord's will be done in Zimbabwe

The count down in the long awaited Zimbabwe’s March 2008 harmonised elections is over, and whatever the outcome of the elections I hope that peace will be the ultimate winner. There is so much passion and self belief that anything is possible.

Morgan Tsvangirai’s MDC has red card metaphor for Zanu Pf; he will not have old wine in his new bottle, which is an understandable feeling given the way he has been treated. President Mugabe and his security chiefs have not been outdone either; they warn that they will never ever allow the MDC to rule Zimbabwe. This is dangerous and gets Zimbabwe to a boiling point as the election fever grips the country. The country needs a moderate approach, for a change.

Elections sometimes divide us rather than help us to determine our future together. The reason for this could be that some people come into politics for power and wealth rather than to serve. Winners do not have to take all, and Zimbabwe is more than the sum of its political parties. Makoni’s proposal to put together a National Authority representing all sectors of our society to administer affairs of the state appears to be the middle of the road approach, and answer to both Mugabe and Tsvangirai.

There is a danger though, everyone is likely to claim victory, and claims of rigging will be inevitable. The security hardware is already on the streets and the prayer is that people do not loose their nerve. Candidates should encourage their supporters to be disciplined to avoid any excuses for security intervention.

While candidates or leaders may feel that they are in control, the only control that may be guaranteed is self-control on everyone’s part; once action becomes spontaneous you cannot tell how it will end. Statements referring to the Kenyan scenario uttered by various candidates in the run up to the Zimbabwean election might come back to haunt us.

As for now, hakuna musi usingasviki! Is it going to be Morgan Tsvangirai, Simba Makoni, or Robert Mugabe? May the Lord’s will be done in Zimbabwe. The general peace enjoyed so far is a good sign, but for development we need formidable peace. It is said that Zimbabwe will never be a colony again but another question is emerging, will it be a country again? It's in the Lord's hands now.

Makoni a progressive force

SIMBA Makoni, a progressive force, reformer, former Zanu-PF cabinet minister and member of Mugabe’s politburo could be the stone that the builder rejected which could become Zimbabwe’s cornerstone.
Something has been whispered about how Makoni performed as SADC’s secretary general and head of the Energy and Finance ministries. But if past failures are the only reason to prevent Makoni from standing for the presidency then no candidate would qualify.
As Makoni steps forward to present himself as a presidential candidate without responding to insults directed him by his detractors, he breathes fresh air into Zimbabwean politics. Makoni has been silent since the speculation on his political intentions started in the media and those of us who were not sure of his approach asked why he had been so silent. There is no smoke without fire. It might now be concluded that he was listening and calculating his moves.
In politics a day is too long, as long as you do your maths right. Makoni certainly made some wine from the political grape vine and his reputation preceded him indeed.
Makoni waited for the Movement for Democratic Change factions to announce their strategy (or lack of it as we know) to avoid being accused of causing divisions within the opposition. He comes at a time the MDC cannot blame anyone, even Mugabe for dividing them, apart from their greed and self importance. Eddie Cross strangely thinks Zimbabweans will find some solace in knowing which MDC faction has a bigger following rather than win the elections. Talk of the pot calling the cattle black.
There is always enough space for all Zimbabweans who wish to help their country yet the space has been shut out to those extra pair of hands who could make a difference. You cannot have any significant role in the MDC or Zanu-PF unless you were there when they formed the parties or went to war. We cannot all be born at the same and same place, and God has a purpose for each and every one of us when the time comes.
It is my view that in Zimbabwe we have people who have now personalised the available political and civic space, call them power sharks and these power sharks are preaching one best way to bring about a new Zimbabwe, or maintaining our sovereignty. What eludes the power sharks is the simple fact that, change cannot come about when the same old people are doing what they have always done because they will always get what they have always got.
Simba Makoni offers a new beginning and opportunity for all Zimbabweans locked out by the power sharks of Zimbabwean politics. The good thing about Makoni is that he is not into politics for money and he has never been a career politician. Zimbabweans will not be surprised with cheap shots at him by the usual suspects.
Structural thinkers will argue that the Makoni initiative has no structures, even though it is clear that the ground work was done sometime ago that is why the rumour circulated anyway, what has happened now is just an announcement of the state of play. When the MDC was formed it went into elections in 2000 with no functional structures, in some cases candidates were simply appointed to stand.
As Makoni offers to work with people across the political divide he has assured a new approach to Zimbabwean politics. It is not about where you were or where you come from. It is about what you bring to serve Zimbabwe and it is this servant mentality which we now need not the chef mentality. Zimbabweans across the globe are already asking how we can help to bring about positive that is inclusive, tolerant, and accommodating and a change which will put the people first.
With Makoni joining the race, the March 2008 Zimbabwean elections will never be the same again.

Banning Zim cricket tour to England a terrible mistake

The decision by the British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, to ban Zimbabwe cricketers from touring England next year as reported in The Sun newspaper of January 2, 2008 is very unfortunate and a terrible misunderstanding of African politics.

Cricket is not the people’s sport in Zimbabwe. It is just some form of employment for a few (formerly mainly whites until recently). Banning a cricket tour to England would not have any significant impact in the conduct of politics in Zimbabwe. It is however unfair punishment of those Zimbabwean cricketers on account of political activities in which they have no control. President Mugabe would probably gain some sympathy from some people who might consider Brown’s latest move as an attempt to isolate Zimbabweans not just their President.

Sport is actually meant to provide a front for people to present themselves in other forms, look at Benjani Mwariwari, and Didier Drogba telling the world what Africans can do. One can even conclude that banning sporting denies the Zimbabweans an opportunity to express themselves at the Lords. Just like Gordon Brown was afraid of being photographed sitting next to Mugabe, it is possible that his real difficulty is the English team being beaten by Zimbabwean cricketers like they did the Australians.

Gordon Brown suffers the problem of the worst case scenario arising from the recent Kenyan and Nigerian elections which makes it ridiculous to isolate Zimbabwe on the basis of disputed elections. While I do not intend to argue that any flawed election is acceptable, it makes no sense to single Zimbabwe for special mention. The only difference between political developments in Zimbabwe and other African countries like Kenya and Nigeria is the radical land reforms and it appears that Zimbabwe’s main sin was the land reforms. The death of Black Africans fighting each other, as is happening in Kenya, is not a big issue as long as they do not hurt a white man. One can conclude that there is something bordering on racism in Gordon Brown’s dealings with Africa.

Zimbabweans are beginning to realise that there is more than what meets the eye in Gordon Brown’s approach towards Zimbabwe. We know things are not going well in Zimbabwe at the moment, but we also know the turning point between the British government and the Zimbabwean government, the 2000 land reforms and the disputed elections. Since elections are disputed all over Africa let alone the world since then, the land issue appears to be the major point. Russia held disputed elections in 2007 prior to Alexander Litvinenko murder row with the UK government leading the British government expelling four Russian diplomats.

The point is simple, you may not agree with President Mugabe’s government but we should accept that the British government’s policies are hurting innocent people. It is clear that we have some illegal sanctions in place, this time against the Zimbabwean cricketers. The Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) needs to adopt a position on such matters of national interest if it is to dispel accusations that it panders to the wished of western countries. No country has ever succeeded under sanctions and Zimbabwe is not exception. We clearly have overt and covert sanctions against Zimbabwe.