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.
