Mugabe too tired to pull Zimbabwe out of the woods
By Jonathan Moyo
Source: Majaira Jairosi Blog
OF the various problems in Zimbabwe that account for the seven-year-old
political stalemate that has precipitated an unprecedented economic meltdown,
the one that is now looming larger than any other is the chronic leadership
deficit, particularly but not only in the Zanu PF government. So serious is
this deficit that the most fundamental issue that explains the palpable despair
among Zimbabweans today is leadership, stupid.
Take the case of the economic meltdown. Many, not only among economists but
also within the diplomatic community and multilateral bodies such as the United
Nations, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, believe that the
problem in Zimbabwe has to do with the adoption of wrong policies by the Zanu
PF government.
There have been ubiquitous calls to the effect that things could change for the
better only if President Robert Mugabe and his ruling lot adopted correct
policies underpinned by a new democratic dispensation.
While understandable, these calls have nevertheless been misplaced because
those making them have failed to appreciate that policies, including a new
democratic constitution, are not value-neutral commodities that can be traded
with political ease.
Policies are an expression of leadership to the extent that there must be an
ideological connection between the policy and the policymaker. The alternative
is an assured circus.
The Zanu PF government has irredeemably failed to get a policy handle on the
causes of the political malaise and the collapse of the formal economy in the
country not because there are no alternative policies out there that it can
adopt. It’s because there is no visionary leadership within the ruling party
that is both existentially and ideologically well disposed to the pursuit of
alternative national policies capable of getting Zimbabwe out of the woods.
On offer is the self-indulgent leadership of President Mugabe who is now too
old despite his photogenic makeup, has become very tired, visionless and
beleaguered. Mugabe remains in office not because he is in charge of the
goings-on in the wider society but largely if not only because of
considerations of his personal and family security in a world that is
increasingly becoming hostile to former heads of state with unresolved human
rights and corruption issues during their rule.
A leader in this kind of a box in which Mugabe now finds himself tends to
invariably construct his own political reality which in turn blunts his ability
to tell the difference between winning a popular victory and securing a stolen
result at the polls. There is no way such a leader can ever enact correct
policies even if they smack him on his face.
This explains why even with the best of intentions by some within his inner
circle, Mugabe’s leadership has become inherently limited and in fact doomed to
fail. No wonder his associates are now unable to distinguish between defending
their beleaguered boss as a person and defending his principles, human ideals
or policies.
Mugabe’s two deputies are not in a better position than him vision-wise.
Vice-President Joice Mujuru is seemingly content with wanting to become
executive state president by crisscrossing the country in the glare of the
media hoping to win voters by waving “a pigs-and-chicken manifesto” in an
economy whose wheels have fallen off.
Mujuru’s more senior counterpart, Vice-President Joseph Msika, has practically
retired on the job but not from it and is now marking his sweet time in office
incapable of doing anything meaningful.
If this kind of visionless and self-indulgent leadership is bad for Zimbabwe’s
battered economy, what is dramatically worse is that Zimbabweans must for
reasons only known to God endure the policy curse of a do-nothing Minister of
Finance in Herbert Murerwa who has become an ever-sulking crybaby over money
printing and currency reforms as if he has forgotten that it is him who
presided over the economic origins of the present crisis in 1997 when he
printed money to irresponsibly compensate some veterans of the liberation war
and to bankroll the unpopular war in the Democratic Republic of Congo whose
political and economic benefits to Zimbabwe remain elusive.
The situation is no better outside government but is worse within Zanu PF’s
raging succession war in which the acrimonious factions are united by their
lack of a policy.
Meanwhile the crisis continues to widen and deepen despite occasional flashes
of recovery through what some now see as cynical manipulation of apparently
declining inflation figures at a time when prices are skyrocketing like never
before.
History does not have a single example of a nation that has ever pulled out of
the grip of a chronic crisis of the magnitude currently bedevilling Zimbabwe
without following the path of visionary leadership. Failed leadership always
leads to failed governments and ultimately failed states. On this the examples
are too many to mention.
The bottom line is that when a nation finds itself in the woods, it simply
cannot get out without the guidance of a visionary and capable leadership that
first and foremost knows what is going on; is confident that it knows for sure
and is able to make it abundantly clear to everyone else that it indeed knows
not only what is happening but also what must be done and why.
Once despair takes hold of a nation in some unprecedented fashion, in the way
Zimbabweans today are suffering the indignity of living from hand to mouth in a
land of plenty, it becomes necessary for society to produce leaders who are
dealers in hope to checkmate the merchants of despair. This happens through
either having the incumbents in government reinventing themselves and
discovering new visions and new skills or having a new generation of previously
unknown visionary and capable leaders emerging to show the way.
When Britain was in the woods during the Second World War, the way out was
through Winston Churchill’s leadership. And when the Great Depression battered
the American economy, Franklin Roosevelt provided pivotal leadership in the
form of his “New Deal”.
The remarkable success of the civil rights movement in the United States was
made possible by the visionary leadership of Martin Luther King Jr. Closer to
home south of the Limpopo Nelson Mandela’s leadership was decisive in moving
South Africa from the apartheid woods to the promise of a new democratic
dispensation.
In our own country, visionary leaders such as Joshua Nkomo, Ndabaningi Sithole
and Herbert Chitepo were instrumental in laying the nationalist foundation for
Zimbabwe’s liberation.
But since Independence Mugabe’s leadership has tragically failed to lay the
foundation of a vibrant, dynamic and prosperous nation. While there are a
number of explanations for this, the main one is that Mugabe is given to using
high-sounding words to put his ambition over and above any enduring human
principles or ideals.
During the Tsholotsho saga in 2004 Mugabe demonstrated to the whole world his
hostility to democracy as an enduring human principle and ideal even within his
own party when he invoked false allegations of a coup in order to prevent his
party membership from freely electing leaders of their choice in accordance
with Zanu PF’s constitution.
Earlier in 1980 no human principle or ideal informed Mugabe’s rhetorical
declaration of national reconciliation which stands in retrospect as cynical
propaganda never intended to achieve any racial harmony beyond consolidating
Mugabe’s political power. Witness how today Zanu PF is prone to shocking
racism. In the 2005 parliamentary election campaign, Zanu PF political
commissar, Elliot Manyika, had no qualms about singing at rallies and in the
electronic media “Musha une Bhunu ndewani tibhombe?” (Whose house has a white
man so we can bomb it?)
Similar trappings are evident in Mugabe’s claims to national unity that are all
about self-preservation without any lasting principles or human ideals.
Zimbabweans will never understand how a leader committed to national unity
could have allowed the madness of Gukurahundi in which over 20 000 people were
massacred while many more had their homes and livelihoods destroyed.
The fact that Mugabe has done absolutely nothing of national significance to
heal the Gukurahundi wounds even after rhetorically acknowledging the madness
speaks volumes about his disdain for enduring human principles and ideals. It
is this disdain that has left the door wide open to such evil deeds as
Operation Murambatsvina whose victims numbering at least 18% of the population
are still trapped in untold misery to this day.
In the same vein, the disastrous failure of the otherwise necessary land reform
programme undertaken in 2000 is defined by its lack of grounding in enduring
human principles and ideals that can withstand the prejudices of the moment.
Mugabe’s self-indulgent propaganda that Constitutional Amendment 17 brought
finality to land reform remains dangerous nonsense because, as a trained
lawyer, he should know better that there can never be such finality through a
law that bars people who lost land during the chaotic reform process from
approaching the courts.
Against this backdrop, and given the breadth and depth of the current crisis
that has left Zimbabweans in total despair, one does not have to be malicious
or mischievous to understand that Mugabe simply does not have the leadership
vision and capacity to pull Zimbabwe from the woods. He is just not that kind
of leader.
No comments:
Post a Comment