Zimbabwe: Selling out the Masses in the name of Power Sharing

Zimbabwe: Selling out the Masses in the name of Power Sharing

Written in March, 2009

 

The MDC majority opposition leader, Morgan Tsvangirai has been sworn in as the Prime Minister of Zimbabwe while his minority MDC faction leader Arthur Mutambara has also been appointed the Deputy Prime Minister of the country in a power sharing agreement introduced by the House of Assembly and signed into law by the 84-year old Robert Mugabe, the despotic president of the country. This process brings to some temporary end the wrangling between different layers of the ruling class in Zimbabwe which started as early as year 2000 but reignited after the March 2008 presidential election. Then, the MDC leader and presidential candidate, Morgan Tsvangirai had openly withdrawn from the presidential run-off, the first round of which he won marginally, citing brazen violence and state terror through unwarranted arrests and detention against his party members.

 

While his reason for withdrawing from the elections were genuine, Tsvangirai, rather than start building grassroots’ movement among the working and poor people, including the million of unemployed and the poor peasants, he preferred to hobnob with imperialism and its African lapdogs like the Nigeria’s former civilian dictator, Olusegun Obasanjo. This gave Mugabe the excuse to further attack the rank and file opposition members by portraying them as imperialist agents who want to cripple the country, more so that Mugabe is seen by a section of the population as an independence hero. It is ironic that while Morgan Tsvangirai and his lieutenants in the Mugabe’s cabinet are now to live under the cozy and elitist environments and official perks, cases of the rank and file party members, many of whom are detained or traumatized – upon whose back Tsvangirai and his ilk rode to power – took the back seat in the final power sharing agreements. This again shows the character of the capitalist oriented opposition in Zimbabwe.

 

Morgan Tsvangirai and the MDC top-shots have portrayed the power-sharing arrangement as a landmark despite the fact that power was not totally given to them. Also, the Southern African Development Commission (SADC) – the Southern African ruling class regional organization – and its South African negotiator, Thabo Mbeki, have portrayed the power-sharing as a confirmation of their dubious policy of “quiet diplomacy” and “African solution to African problems”. The ruling western imperialist governments like US, UK and France and the capitalist multilateral agencies such as United Nations, while raising concerns about Mugabe’s sincerity, have commended the power sharing process as a step towards ‘democracy’. However, these various instruments of imperialism are only interested in their selfish capitalist interests, and cared much less about the poor people. Moreover, the power sharing, even if it is popular among some sections of the Zimbabwean masses – who have some illusion in the agreement after unprecedented socio-economic and political attacks, cannot move the Zimbabwean society forward politically and economically, both on short and long run bases.

 

The reality is that aside official perks and opportunity to serve as conduit pipe for imperialist plunder of the economy, the MDC cannot be said to have gained from the power sharing. Before the formalization of the power sharing, the two camps have agreed to five-point Global Political Agreement (GPA) which among others raised the demands for cutting the power of Mugabe and resolve human rights issues; but the power sharing has legitimized Mugabe’s terror and undemocratic power usurpation. In the power sharing agreement, Mugabe is still made the executive president which makes him not a figurehead as is being postulated by the MDC but a major decision maker in the country. Also, while the oppositions have majority in the government’s cabinet, decision making is not by simple majority decision but through consensus which gives Mugabe veto over decision-making in the cabinet and some vital appointments.

 

Though, some balance has been struck on the issue of security with the formation of National Security Council comprising the Mugabe and MDC representatives, the reality is that Mugabe still have the power over the security and coercive instruments – the police and the army. It will be recalled that one of the major issues that had delayed the power sharing is the claim of the opposition to the control of the police, but through the back door, the opposition controlled by Morgan Tsvangirai has been made a junior partner in the security arrangement. Furthermore, while the MDC condemned the land “redistribution” of Mugabe, that claimed to give land to the black Zimbabweans but actually favoured some thousands rich pro-ZANU-PF supporters, the opposition party actually agreed in the GPA that the “land ‘redistribution’ is not reversible”. This is a rebuttal of the MDC’s claim of defending poor peasants.

 

It can however be argued that since Mugabe was forced to agree to power sharing in the first instance, this in itself shows that Mugabe has been curtailed. This will be a superficial analysis. In the first instance, Mugabe and the ZANU-PF ruling clique (and its military backbone) desperately need the power sharing – or a façade of it – that will neutralize the growing opposition at home. It will be recalled that teachers, medical workers and civil servants are currently on strike in defence of their living standards. In the country, which last released inflation rate is more than 231 million percent, there is acute food scarcity while the currency has collapsed; the workers’ salaries could hardly take them to work talk much less of helping them survive. This has made workers to demand being paid in foreign currency especially US dollar and South African rand – a demand that Mugabe has not met, and may not be able to meet without a kind of resolution of the prevailing logjam. Mugabe knows that these industrial struggles will develop into political struggles which can unseat him in a political uprising.

 

Furthermore, the economic crisis that had seen tens of thousands  fleeing the country coupled with growing health concerns especially the outbreak of Cholera that had killed hundreds, can put pressures on pro-capitalist, pro-imperialism African rulers (many of whom get to and sustain themselves in power through brazen despotism or fraudulent electoral means) to isolate Mugabe. It is the summation of these trajectories that have made the power sharing a lifeline for Mugabe rather than a curtailment. With the limited inclusion of MDC factions, Mugabe hopes to get economic and humanitarian supports from the international community and reduce tension at home. It may also afford Mugabe to neutralize political opposition. The power sharing rather than emboldening and building MDC’s strength, will give the Mugabe’s government and its ZANU-PF ruling clique, the opportunity to neutralize the opposition and ensure the continued existence in power of ZANU-PF ruling caste and its military backbone. This is the same way that Mugabe neutralized its former post-independent political adversary, ZAPU – when the latter joined force with Mugabe in a political alliance that led to the neutralization of ZAPU. With MDC commitment to neo-liberal capitalist policies of privatization, commercialization, retrenchment, etc, the MDC will be at some period isolated and lose its mass base. This is what Mugabe is looking and waiting for.

 

Imperialism’s hypocrisy is clearly manifested in the current developmentin Zimbabwe. It is funny that the same western imperialist governments especially British Gordon Brown government and other European ruling class that condemned Mugabe and called for his removal for human rights violations and in fact placed embargos on Zimbabwe (which compounded the suffering of the Zimbabwean poor)are committed to the agreement and the power sharing process. In fact, US and European imperialisms condemned South Africa and SADC for the so-called quiet diplomacy over Zimbabwe, but the same ruling classes were quick to accept the power sharing agreement. This clearly shows the nature of the so-called international community – it is a structure for the continuation of capitalist profit-system – where the interests of the common people come last, if at all. The Zimbabwean political crisis also reflects the rottenness of African ruling classes. While many of African rulers claimed to be committed to “quiet diplomacy”, none of them could even clearly condemn Mugabe neither did they condemn western capitalist imperialisms’ role in the suffering of poor Zimbabweans. The few who muster some gut to criticized Mugabe either did so on behalf of imperialism (like Botwana’s president) or are themselves not different from Mugabe (like Angola’s Dos Santos). In fact, African rulers through SADC actually helped Mugabe to stabilize, because the fear of a latent uprising in Zimbabwe that can inspire other African poor, is the beginning of wisdom for these corrupt, pro-imperialist rulers. This explains why most of African ruling classes are conduit pipes for imperialist plunder of the Africa continent, which despite having huge human and material wealth, harbour the world’s poorest.

 

The MDC’s involvement in the Mugabe’s government again underlines the fact that the working and poor people need an independent working class political alternative with a socialist orientation. Tsvangirai’s excuse that there is need for stability is unfounded and fraudulent. The same Tsvangirai fought for almost one year in order to secure most viable positions, especially finance ministry, in the cabinet for his party, without a consideration for the so-called stability. Really, Tsvangirai’s concern for stability also reflect their morbid fear of the growing radicalization of the working class as reflected in the spontaneous growth of strikes. Moreover, MDC’s and Tsvangirai’s interests, aside the crass struggle for power and official perks, is mainly to satisfy the interests of imperialism and emerging lapdogs in Zimbabwe. This explains why it was ready to accept participation in the government immediately some ‘juicy’ positions like finance minister (which could allow it to implement the neo-liberal capitalist policies, that will again put the agricultural and natural resources of the country to multinational vampires and their local collaborators) were granted. As a matter of fact, the spokesperson of MDC and Deputy Information minister, Bright Matonga was quoted to have said: "We will respect property rights (read capitalist rights of wealth ownership – K.I); we will respect the issue of declaration and repatriation of dividends (read profit-maximization – K.I),...So really we are inviting people (read big capitalist businesses, both local and foreign – K.I) in manufacturing, in tourism, in farming, in mining." This is another euphemism for privatization, commercialization, liberalization, etc which are being implemented by various African leaders but have led to more suffering and political instability.

Tsvangirai himself was quoted in a post-swearing in rally to have committed himself to neo-liberalism. Though he promised to start paying workers’ salaries in US dollar and called on them to resume; but this is just a stop gap measure and has nothing to do with the real living standard of the poor. In the first instance, what caused the demand for dollar salary is the collapse of the economy engendered in the first instance by Mugabe’s implementation of WTO/World Bank-inspired neo-liberal policies – the same policies which Tsvangirai and both factions of MDC have committed themselves to. Tsvangirai also promised to seek for humanitarian support from multilateral agencies to resolve the health and food problems. While some minimal support may come the way of Zimbabwe in this direction, the reality is that adequate resolution of the health and food crises can only be resolved when the agricultural and natural resources of the country is put into public ownership and used for the interests of the poor people. The promise of humanitarian supports by multilateral agencies, especially big business and western governments’ controlled agencies will only be implemented as a bargain for further opening up of the economy and Zimbabwe’s resources to the big business.

The Zimbabwe’s crisis has further exposed the limitation of the so-called progressive or leftist intellectuals in Africa, many of whom either support imperialism and MDC in the name of fighting for democracy or blindly support Mugabe’s despotic rule under the guise of fighting imperialism, without giving a working class political alternative that will defeat imperialism and despotism – which will come together at some critical point when their interests merge, as currently exemplified by the current agreements. All this point to one thing – the working people need their own mass party that will be democratically built from the grassroots to the national level. Such a party will link the immediate demands of the people – vis-à-vis end to despotism and poverty with the ultimate need for a system change. This will mean a struggle for genuine land distribution for the millions of poor peasants and provision of adequate facilities for them to work on, massive public works programmes that will provide jobs for millions of youth and unemployed, nationalization of the commanding height of the economy under the democratic control of the working poor themselves coupled with agro-inspired industrialization that will develop the country on an environmentally friendly and sustainable bases. To achieve these, public office holders will be made to live on the salaries of skilled workers, while their families will utilize public facilities (public schools and hospitals, etc) just like every common man. Furthermore, decision making on central issues will be determined by the people through referenda and open debates.

 

While the central trade union, ZTUC vaguely condemned MDC collaboration with Mugabe, it has also tacitly given a nod to the power-sharing in a defeatist manner without building a working class alternative. This placed enormous tasks before the Zimbabwean working class activists to start building a mass working poor political alternative. Of course, there may be some illusions in the power sharing for now, but political development will further shows to the mass of people, the frauds of Mugabe’s anti-imperialist propaganda and MDC fake commitment to people’s welfare. The coming period will provide the working mass of people of Zimbabwe and indeed Africa (where neo-liberal capitalist has held sway) with the necessary lessons needed to build a political alternative for socialist-oriented revolution.