Richard Dowden: If the people want power, they must fight for it
It is clear that Tsvangirai's pleas to the rest of the world have failed
Tuesday, 24 June 2008
While it was always a possibility that the Zimbabwean opposition leader, Morgan Tsvangirai, would pull out of Friday's second round of the presidential election, when I met him in Harare three weeks ago it seemed unlikely. Then he was in a defiant mood, calling on Robert Mugabe to retire to ensure a peaceful transition and the establishment of a broad-based government. Having won a majority in the first round of the presidential election and, with other opposition parties, a majority of seats in parliament, Mr Tsvangirai sounded confident of victory. But he did not unequivocally commit to running and already the first floor of the headquarters of his Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) was crammed with thousands of people seeking sanctuary from Zanu-PF thugs. Many were swathed in bandages or plaster, nursing beaten faces and broken limbs.
Operation Mavhoterapapi (Who did you vote for?) was already under way. It was targeted at known MDC activists who were systematically and brutally beaten. About 80 are reported dead but the scale of the violence was national. Many had their identity cards destroyed or were driven from their areas, making it impossible for them to vote.
What no one knew was whether the nationwide, organised violence against suspected MDC voters would work. It was clear that a shocked Zanu-PF was making sure its own constituency would turn out as it failed to do in round one. But would MDC supporters risk their lives to turn out again to cast their ballots? Inspired by the brutality, would they defiantly march to the polling stations on 27 June? No one seemed sure but many people sensed that ordinary Zimbabweans might be cowed into staying at home and Mugabe might win. Mr Tsvangirai himself left the country immediately after the 29 March poll and stayed away for weeks.
No dictator in Africa has ever been driven out by a mass uprising. Outside intervention, coups, armed rebellions and even elections have provided their exits. It was always inconceivable that after the run-off, Mugabe would congratulate Mr Tsvangirai on his victory and politely step aside. So maybe Mr Tsvangirai was right to spare the lives of his supporters by pulling out.
But would he have strengthened his political and moral credibility by toughing it out? It is clear that Mr Tsvangirai's pleas to the rest of the world to sort out Zimbabwe have failed. If he wants power and the people of Zimbabwe want rid of tyranny and an end to impoverishment, they will have to suffer and fight for it. Taking refuge in the Dutch embassy like a dissident, as Mr Tsvangirai did yesterday, is not the mark of great leadership. The battle for power in Zimbabwe is still to be fought.
Assuming that on Saturday, Mugabe will celebrate winning 100 per cent of the vote, two factors now come into play. Firstly, the economy is barely alive. African economies do not die, they fade into subsistence. There are no buffers or precipices. But the government's ability to pay people to do its bidding is almost at an end. When I arrived, £1 was worth a billion Zimbabwean dollars. When I left it was two billion. Today £1 is worth 40 billion Zimbabwean dollars. What will happen when thousands of soldiers, policemen and spies have to start finding food rather than going to work for Mugabe? The government may have a monopoly of violence at the moment but, as the economy shrinks, so will the government's power to rule.
The second factor is the growing chorus of respected Africans who are speaking out against Mugabe. Presidents Levy Mwawanasa of Zambia and Ian Karma of Botswana have denounced him. Even former close allies like the former presidents of Mozambique and Tanzania, Joachim Chissano and Ben Mkapa, have been critical. So, incredibly, has President Eduardo dos Santos of Angola– a man who also does not believe in elections.
In a continent where African presidential solidarity is, in public at least, rock solid, do not underestimate the importance of these voices in removing Mugabe's legitimacy. Being made a pariah by Western countries is one thing; being made a pariah by other African rulers is something else.
Against this stands the rapidly diminishing figure of South Africa's President Thabo Mbeki, already rejected by his own party and stepping down at the next election. His quiet diplomacy policy on Zimbabwe has failed and it is clear he has no alternative. He treats the crisis in Zimbabwe like a domestic row that needs a mediator, rather than a power struggle in which one side has cast aside any pretence of playing by the rules or restraint.
As his own power wanes, so will his ability to prevent other African leaders from taking on a leadership role on Zimbabwe. That is a necessary shift but, for the foreseeable future, it is in Zimbabwe itself that change will have to happen.
Richard Dowden is the director of the Royal African Society
-
Print Article
-
Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2008 Independent News and Media Limited

Comments
11 Comments
More of the usual chorus of voices calling on the democratic West to intervene... Well, it already did. And has done ever since African states won political independence. What they didn't win was economic independence. Blair and Bush knew this when Mugabe embarked on land reform. Clare Short's refusal to compensate for white-owned land compulsorily purchased, and the 2001 US Congress Zimabwe Democracy Act, which blocked loans and refused any re-scheduling of debt, and the entire policy of punitive financial, economic, political and dimplomatic sanctions designed to bring down Mugabe have not succeeded. What they did was bring devastation, hardening the Mugabe regime against the West and its creature, the MDC. The MDC blames Mugabe, not sanctions. Given the chance it will do what Chiluba did in Zambia: sell off public assets and lins its pockets. Did the MDC ever oppose these punitive sanctions? No, because they know these will only end when they are in power.
Stewart Crehan
Posted by Stewart Crehan | 26.06.08, 12:23 GMT
All African pleas to the world fail. Somalia, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, the Congo (where they are so barbarous they actually torture and mutilate gorillas to make political points), Kenya, Darfur, Zimbabwe: What is the world supposed to do to help the unfortunate millions stuck in these hell holes? Western "idealists," who might be expected to call for intervention to save the victims, tend to be pacifists, so military intervention is off the table. The United Nations is irrelevant; ditto African organizations. It's tragic and pathetic, but the African mini-Hitlers have free reign to torture, murder, commit genocide, whatever. And the West will never do a damn thing.
Posted by jeanrenoir | 25.06.08, 04:09 GMT
Sadly, I have to agree that if the Zimbabweans want a better life, they may need civil war to get it. As the saying goes, you get the government you deserve and if you don't change things, no-one else will. Whatever our personal feelings, International law says we may not interfere in another country's internal affairs. If we break international law, the country invaded has every right to label the invader an illegal aggressor. Highly inconvenient in a case like this one and very distressing too. I don't see what more we can do. It's up to the African neighbours?
Posted by R.W. | 25.06.08, 00:00 GMT
History shows nearly all despots & their regimes have to be removed by force. But as already commented - much easier said than done.
Posted by RG | 24.06.08, 16:52 GMT
It is obvious now that Mugabes regime has been hollowed out so comprehensively by the economic crisis and the violence that no one in or out of power believes anymore in the official narrative of a great man resisting the attacks of the spiteful Colonialist West. And yet the media continues to recycle these seemingly gratuitous lies. Why?
In part because they are gratutious. What could be more terrifying than a public discourse which proceeds as before in a regime where no one has any faith in the words anymore? Orthodox public communication has been reduced to the enactment of a ritual of power in which those talking and those listening rehearse a sham discourse. In so doing, they attest in their utterances to the power of a regime that can force people to go through the motions of communicating, when in fact everything that is said is meaningless. There is a nightmare quality of absurdity to it. Read more by searching my blog, Just who the hell are we?, at wordpress.com.
Posted by Adam McNestrie | 24.06.08, 15:42 GMT
Will you please leave Nelson Mandela out of it. If George Bush and Tony Blair paid him no mind on Iraq, why do you presume that Mugabe will listen to him about Zimbabwe?
Sweet old guy that Mandela is, let's all face it, not many people pay attention to him now, at least not in Africa and certainly not the Mugabe's of this world. More's the pity.
Posted by Mwangi Githahu | 24.06.08, 14:32 GMT
We lived in SA for over 25 years . I do not think people really understand the African philosophy or psychology. Do you really think Jacob Zuma (who is a seriously devious character ) will make any difference, and how can you possibly fail to see why Thabo and Nelson and ANC etc say very little about Zim or Mugabe.?
Anyone expecting more than a tap from Nelson is deluded about African ideals and the vast problems in SA itself.
Who is Morgan to fight with? .The starving population??? Mugabe has Military Rule in all but name.
Posted by Duncan MacGregor | 24.06.08, 09:22 GMT
It's very easy for Mr Dowden to sit there and criticise Tsvangirai and his supporters for not picking up thier starved, brutalised and unarmed bodies and picking a fight with Mugabe's henchmen.
In the face of a shameful lack of practical action from the UN, Europe and his African neighbours, Tsvangirai has taken the difficult decision to risk of abandoning hope to the future of the country he loves in the hope of saving lives - at least in the short term.
Now that Mr Tsvangirai is out of the running, perhaps Mr Dowden would be so good as to book himself a plane to Harare and be his own martyr to the cause.
Posted by John | 24.06.08, 08:05 GMT
hang on I'm lost - if it is ok to bomb Libya, Serbia and Iraq in the 1980's and 1990's, then why not give Mugabe 1 week to leave or face annihilation of the military structure he so depends on - gurantee him immunity from prosecution and then leave a loop hole so he can extradited to the Hague for War Crimes.....actually do the same to the rest of the murderous officer clique
I'm sure some of the youger officers who want to command a modern army need a nudge ...and the targets are not rich but obvious - headquarters, senior officers mess, troops concentrations loyal to Mugabe, Mugabe palace or whatever he lives in ....MUgabe's offspring, Mugabes offsprings houses, villas, factories, plantations etc etc - make the place unliveable for him and his family - in fact when finished take a left turn and do the same to Burma.
the UN and African leaders are gutless.
Posted by Whatsittake ... | 24.06.08, 07:44 GMT
It's a pity the growing chorus of respected Africans speaking out against Mugabe doesn't include Nelson Mandela.
Posted by Michael Petek | 24.06.08, 07:34 GMT
11 Comments