Zimbabwe on the verge of a civil War- State divisions and Post Mugabe Era
In the past few years, Zimbabwe has witnessed politics of hate speech, power jostling and factionalism mainly in the ruling ZANU PF and the main opposition MDC. In the ruling party, the war has escalated to name calling, violence and expulsions of senior political leaders that had been in government since independence in 1980. In the MDC, the talk of leadership renewal to replace Morgan Tsvangirai who has been at the helm of the party for 17 years, resulted in the sacking of 21 MPS aligned to the former secretary General Tendai Biti. The MDC of Professor Welshman Ncube which broke away from the MDC T in 2005 had its own divisions and the list is endless. Simply put, the state is fragmented, divided and antagonistic to itself.
To many Zimbabweans and scholars of political science, the divisions in the political cockpit sign posted a disgruntled people, fed up by the establishment and seeking ways to deal with Mugabe dictatorship, but differing on the modus operandi. In some sections, tribalism and regionalism have been cited as part of the divisionary nature of Zimbabwean politics. This school of thought posits that the fight for hegemony between the Ndebele and the shona, the zezuru and the Karanga etc is at the fulcrum of the political divisions. It suggests that the divisions within the main political parties’ boarders on tribe and region hence the fallout of Tsvangirai and Khupe in the MDC T and Mugabe and Mnangagwa in Zanu PF. Really!
While there have been reckless tribal proclamations from the political leadership of different political parties, tribalism and regionalism does not adequately provide an answer to the root cause of the political fragmentation particularly within ZANU PF where succession is central to the divisions. Tribalism and regionalism is being used to mobilise people for political scores in the succession race. It is therefore myopic to look at Zimbabwe’s polarised situation with regional and tribal lenses. In fact, it is to miscue the broader context of Zimbabwean politics but that’s a discussion for another day.
The power struggles in the ruling ZANU PF presents a threat of war based on factional and tribal differences. Across the continent, various examples can be cited where tribalism has been used to mobilise people into a violent conflict to settle political agendas. The South Sudanese conflict speak volumes to how power struggles and hatred in the presidium can escalate into a civil war and ultimately into a tribal or ethnic conflict. The fall out between SPLM-IO leader Riek Machar and incumbent president Salva Kiir on ethnic and political lines as well as the involvement of the army, culminated in the civil war that has killed thousands and displaced millions. The central factor to the South Sudanese conflict is a fight for political power using ethnicity to mobilise people to engage in violent conflict. The narrative reverberates with the current political environment in Zimbabwe hence the need to make an analysis and envisage the dark future that awaits Zimbabwe if the political brawls within ZANU PF and citizen concerns are not addressed.
Factionalism in ZANU PF
The recent and ongoing purging on VP Mnangagwa and members aligned to his lacostse faction is a manifestation of the depth of divisions that characterises the ruling ZANU PF. The Mujuru paging seems to be repeating itself targeting the Vice President Mnangagwa who through proximity to the president is thought to be the heir to the throne, albeit in a democracy. Some have suggested that the purging seeks to get rid of Mnangagwa who is seen as an impediment to the creation of a Mugabe dynasty.
The Vice President Mnangagwa who has been a close ally to the president and Minister in various portfolios including the powerful defence and Legal ministries is said to be enjoying huge support from the security sector. The war veterans have thrown their support behind the VP based on their shared revolutionary pedigree. The commander of the Defence forces Constantine Chiwenga has also recently gone out of his constitutional dictates to prescribe post Mugabe presidency, claiming those without liberation credentials must sit down. This rhetoric has been going on since the late 1990s but it carries different meanings at different times. Back then it pointed at opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai who had garnered huge support posing a threat to ZANU PF hegemony. The current rhetoric targets opposition leaders but more specifically it is aimed at the G 40 faction of ZANU PF which is dominated by the 1980 generation. The open support for the VP by the military generals who by law are supposed to be non-partisan points to the nature of divisions and the degree to which they can go in defence of a fellow comrade; force being an alternative.
Socio-economic concerns
On the other front, the rage against the government by the citizens is so huge that it needs a spark to manifest itself violently or otherwise. Various political analysts have ruled out the possibility of a citizen driven violent conflict labelling the Zimbabwean population passive. Past experiences have however proven that passivity of the citizens is either absence of grievance, opportunity or both. In the peace and conflict discourse, grievance and opportunity forms the foundations of most violent conflicts on the globe. The contentious debate on these two as key factors to the onset of conflict is a debate on the degree of causation not causality. I will therefore not delve much into the debate but rather put emphasis on the detriment of an enraged citizenry to peace, a characteristic of what obtains in Zimbabwe.
Unemployment of the youth in Zimbabwe has reached alarming levels. Standards of living for the citizens continues to fall and money shortage has worsened despite introduction of the bond notes. Inequality as measured by the Gini coefficient has widened, itself a recipient of conflict. Zimbabweans on the land and in the diaspora, have lost trust and confidence in the incumbent and the antagonism between the two continues to worsen. Higher education needs redress both in access and its quality to meet demands in the industry.
War veterans and war collaborators on the other hand feel jettisoned. They have not enjoyed the fruits of the promised land decades after independence. The Canaan they fought for was privatised by fellow comrades. The elders feel disappointed despite their hold of the rural vote on which ZANU PF’s very existence is premised on. They form the greater part of the small holder farmers in the resettlement and communal areas who are struggling to produce enough food for their families. The veterans pose as an alternative military in case of a violent conflict. Their ability to wedge war can be doubted but their capacity to marshal the rural populace against the establishment if need be is substantial. I therefore, posit that they pose a threat of war based not only from the analogy of their rhetoric but the abhorrence between them and the young turks within the governing party. They are fed up too.
August Incident
The August clash between the members of the military and the police in the city of Harare is a tip of an iceberg. It informs the nation of what to come in the case of Mugabe departure. World over a clash of security institutions of a same government raises concerns on national security. It signals unprecedented break down in law and order and fissures in the political field. It’s not an ordinary happening; its indeed far from the simple act of the police throwing a spike on a military vehicle; the roots are more wide and deep.
The clash of the security forces in Papua New Guinea early this year which left an officer dead was handled with high attention and described as a sign of lack of political leadership and a country “falling apart”. In the Zimbabwean case it’s a case of a country that has already “fallen apart”, at least from the view point of the economy and leadership failure. National security is indeed under threat.
Dictators always present a threat of war in the end essentially because of unresolved succession, divisions within their parties and more importantly the expectations of the ordinary citizens after years of oppressive rule. Even where strong leaders have governed well, their departure is associated with political anarchy as parties compete to introduce new political systems or to continue with the legacy of the departed leader. The ongoing Venezuelan crisis which began as student protests and graduated into a national protest by opposition supporters is a case that must inform Zimbabwe of the likelihood of a violent conflict. Hugo Chavez governed Venezuela from 1999 to 2013 in which case he improved the living standards of the ordinary citizens. His death in 2014 has seen the country plunged in a political crisis partly because of the failure by Maduro to deliver and continue with Chavez’s Bolivarian ideological legacy. More significantly, it has origins in Chavez’s economic policies that culminated in the current economic crisis. Currently weakening of the state and post Mugabe era will open a void for citizens to demand their rights after years of state repression. Ordinarily the demands surpass what the state can offer presenting a conflict of interests.
The post Mugabe government will have to deal with the economic crisis and corruption which has been deeply rooted over the years. It will have to deal with the huge national debt that hangs over the country, and to correct the socio-economic blunders made by the Mugabe regime. Presidential hopefuls must therefore raise consciousness in the citizenry that the departure of Mugabe presents a huge task that needs unity and patience to avoid the Venezuelan case.
Lastly authoritarian regimes rely on repression to thwart their perceived enemies and in so doing building more resistance not only outside of the party but even within. Repression is not exclusively exercised outside of the party, it becomes a tool for suppressing voices of dissent. When opposition emerges from within, the same tool is generally ineffective, for it works against the very people who constructed it. It is met with heavy resistance and reliance on security apparatus is a common phenomenon.
The succession disputes with ZANU PF, the reckless tribal and regional statements combined with citizen anger against the government provides enough threats of war. From the peace and conflict discipline, they provide enough grievance and opportunity to engage in a violent conflict. Across the continent, case studies can be drawn. We are not unique.
Avoid Masiraha is a Peace and Conflict Researcher based in Norway. He is a former student leader and he writes in his own capacity.