Violet Gonda: My guests on the programme Hot Seat today are liberation
war veteran Wilf Mhanda and political analyst Brian Kagoro.
Let me start with Wilf: there’s this avalanche of crises facing
Zimbabweans, what do you say are the main issues that need to be
resolved first in the country right now?
Wilf Mhanda: Yes I think it will be very difficult to pinpoint and
select issues that people can pinpoint – I think there is one central
issue right now; it is a state of complete collapse of government that
is the issue that has to be resolved. It is the mother of all these
crises that are actually a syndrome of decay and collapse. Mugabe
regime has failed and has to go. Full stop that’s what I would have to
say.
VG: Brian?
Brian Kagoro: Well Wilf has captured the collapse of the administrative
structure of government. There’s also the collapse of the moral fibre
of government. Any sense of shame, any sense of responsibility and any
sense of inadequacy that ordinary human beings would express when they
are faced with things that are beyond their capacity. But there is a
third factor; there is now a total collapse of consent and consensus.
Consent of the governed to be governed by the present administration.
You see in amongst arms of state like soldiers who would ordinarily are
expected to be compliant even when administrations fail, you are seeing
that within the Zimbabwean state, that even the soldiers don’t seem to
be consenting to that level.
Then you have the collapse of consensus. Within a government, even an
authoritarian one, it functions on the basis of its ability to marshal
consensus to exert terror and force against its opponents. And what we
are seeing or have seen over the last few weeks is a collapse within
that monolithic structure, or that structure that was seen to be
monolithic, that there are many crevasses and cleavages that have
emerged within the military, and the police and elsewhere. The lower
ranks who have not benefited from the patronage and corruption and rank
seeking and the senior ranks who are the major beneficiaries of
corruption. You have at this juncture now even in the unit that you
call the military.
VG: Wilf, what are your thoughts on the unrest in the military? This is
unprecedented in Zimbabwe. Do you think Mugabe’s power base is under
threat as the soldiers protest?
WM: It is evidently under threat as the soldiers who are least expected
to show disloyalty to the State to the regime actually manifested a
deep resentment of the established order. This is a complete collapse
of trust by the military in Robert Mugabe and in the senior commanders.
So actually it is symptomatic of the extent of the collapse and decay.
It is not surprising. It is just like what we have seen maybe with the
collapse of the health system, cholera and so forth, they are all
manifestations of all this. But now with Mugabe’s trusted foot soldiers
showing signs of readiness to challenge his authority and to challenge
established order, I think I can safely say that actually because
Mugabe’s authority over the military, particularly over the rank and
file soldiers has actually been severely undermined.
VG: But Wilf there are many theories about this issue with the
soldiers, with others saying it was merely a diversion and that it is
overly simplistic to say that Mugabe’s security ministry is shaky when
it was only a few soldiers who participated in the riots.
WM: Talking to people who actually witnessed these events and who
actually spoke to the soldiers, who heard what the soldiers said, there
was no doubt that what they were articulating exactly the same
grievance as everybody else. Actually it would be a disservice for
Robert Mugabe to engineer such a thing that actually undermines his
authority that also depicts the military as being disloyal to him. I
think it would be suicidal. If it was, I think it has been
counterproductive.
VG: Now Brian, I would like to get your thoughts on recent statements
that have been made by world leaders; we have Raila Odinga in Kenya
saying that Mugabe must be removed by force, Condoleezza Rice has also
issued a statement saying that Mugabe must go and so have people like
Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Botswana’s foreign minister has also said
this. What are your thoughts on that when world leaders are beginning
to voice their concerns like this?
BK: It’s not new. I think it has been a popularly held view that has
not been expressed in public because there have been many who have
thought that the failures and excesses of the regime could be
sanitized, could be made more acceptable, then you could structure a
decent exit and that decent exit would also present a good legacy of
sorts for Mugabe. So what you are hearing are expressions in the public
sphere of views that were held in the private sphere.
Zimbabweans have always, Zimbabweans who have campaigned for change in
Zimbabwe had only one slogan, and that of course as you may recall was
not started by the opposition. In the introduction of the debate on the
constitution in the Zimbabwean parliament in 1997, it was Dzikamayi
Mavhaire who said; ‘One thing is evident, the President must go.’ And
that is a slogan the opposition adopted, that Zimbabweans have kept,
that the President must go and the world leaders are just now coming to
agreement with the majority of Zimbabweans.
VG: But you know Odinga and Morgan Tsvangirai are strong allies so what
do you make of his remarks in particular given that Morgan Tsvangirai
has said that he is committed to the power sharing process with Robert
Mugabe?
BK: I think alliance does not mean you necessarily agree on strategy
and tactic 100 percent. Alliance simply means you share values and what
are those values? Those values are that leaders must only sit in power
if they have been democratically, transparently and accountably chosen
by the people.
What are the tactical differences? A person in Zimbabwe or a Zimbabwean
might feel constraints to advocate for a forceful removal of a head of
state because that would be tantamount to treason.
Mind you, Raila Odinga’s views on what ought to happen in Zimbabwe
predate his engagement with Morgan Tsvangirai and the MDC. So the two
views are not related. And also calling for the forceful removal of
Mugabe is something that an external actor may have the luxury to do,
somebody working within Zimbabwe like Morgan Tsvangirai might be viewed
as acting irresponsibly if he did that. Even if he held that view it is
not a view to be expressed publicly given the dire situation the
country is in. Any suggestion to plunge it into further conflict might
be frowned upon even by his friends in the African Union.
VG: Wilf what do you make of the suggestion calling for the forceful
removal of Robert Mugabe and also do you think Odinga is speaking on
behalf of Morgan Tsvangirai who can’t really say the deal with Mugabe
is dead?
WM: I would like to say as Brian is saying, Odinga is a very outspoken
person; he speaks his mind, I don’t think he is speaking on behalf
Tsvangirai; he is just speaking his mind, what he believes in. And I
think he is right to say time to focus on, power sharing I think is
gone, it is long gone. Given the events on the ground, the extent of
the collapse, I think it is a diversion to focus on power sharing which
might take us another six months still arguing on this and that.
What we need is something that addresses the crisis on the ground. What
it means is that we need a popular transitional authority right now to
stop the suffering of the people in terms of the cholera, break down of
health services, and also the looting. What is happening right now is
that Robert Mugabe and his cronies are actually commercialising the
peoples’ miserable plight.
I cannot believe that Zimbabwe can fail to have enough money to buy
chemicals to treat water in Harare when Gideon Gono has actually been
lavishly dishing out largesse left right and centre. So there is enough
money. What is happening to our diamonds? What is happening to our
platinum?
What is happening to our gold? We cannot say we don’t have money. How
can we appeal for more than five hundred million dollars to rescue us
when we actually have more than that ourselves!?
So actually what we need is to put a stop to this misgovernance, to
this looting, to this crisis by making sure a proper accountable
transitional government is in place. Concentrating on power sharing is
a diversion, people are suffering, people are dying, and we need to get
these people out.
Mugabe’s grip on power has to be lifted and they have to go!
VG: But you know many people have talked about this transitional
arrangement, how effective is a transitional government or transitional
authority in Zimbabwe today and would the political parties even agree
to that?
WM: There is a major humanitarian catastrophe in Zimbabwe and we also
know about the ‘responsibility to protect’ which the Zimbabwean
government has totally failed to do. What we now need is for this
matter to be taken to the Security Council. Once a Security Council
Resolution is in place, then they would have to enforce it, they will
have the need to enforce it. What we need is a Security Council
resolution saying that the situation in Zimbabwe is out of hand. That’s
all we need. And then after that the mechanics will be sorted out and
the resolution will then stipulate what needs to be done.
VG: Brian what do you make of this call for a transitional government
and who would head it and also doesn’t it depend on the major political
parties actually agreeing? Do you see this happening?
BK: There’s the tactical question of the intransigence of the political
actors and their fear of loss of control. But I think what Wilf has put
on the table – if you recall my views a couple of months ago the call
for a transitional authority where parties seem to be in substantial
control of both the political terrain there was form of de facto
control seemed an improbable suggestion.
The dramatic alteration of the situation, with the humanitarian crisis
worsening, and the State for once conceding that it neither has the
capacity nor resources to resolve this issue – an acceptance that
Zimbabwean health and other crises are becoming regionalised in the
sense that Zimbabweans are now going to Malawi, to Mozambique, to South
Africa for treatment whether legally or illegally and that the cholera
outbreak or epidemic is now spreading to the region – suggests that
perhaps what you now need is a system, an authority with a capacity to
arrest the decay and the humanitarian crisis.
There will be resistance but that resistance I think is much weaker
than it was eight weeks ago or even six months ago. Partly because
there is no military solution to cholera, there’s no military solution
to hunger, you need effective policy and you need international a
reengagement.
The sort of support we have seen from the international community is
but band-aid to a haemorrhaging economy, a haemorrhaging society, and
that band-aid will not resolve the problem. I think that Wilfred has
characterised the problem in its appropriate proportions. It is a
humanitarian tsunami and I don’t think we have the luxury to play
politics with lives.
VG: Now Wilf has said that the Security Council needs to intervene in
this matter urgently but who would enforce that? How do you get the
issue to the Security Council and also what about Morgan Tsvangirai’s
role in all this?
He has travelled to Europe to ask for humanitarian help but as far as
we have seen it appears he has not asked the United Nations for help.
Shouldn’t that have been his priority since the UN is the mother of all
donor agencies?
BK: No, the Security Council, getting a matter onto the Security
Council agenda is a long tedious complicated process. The triggers and
also the sort of reluctance by China and others to have the matter
discussed, even if it has been placed on the agenda, it is a remote
possibility. So I think that if one were thinking from the MDC strategy
unit, they most probably felt that it is a moment to appear not just
magnanimous but state-like and part of that appearing state-like is
saying that although there are human beings that are suffering, there
is help required, they will appeal to their friends far and wide for
that help to be given to the people of Zimbabwe.
This is in the hope that the people of Zimbabwe do themselves appreciate that Stately behaviour.
But as Wilf has said this does not resolve the problem. You are
tinkering on the edges. You are fiddling while the nation burns. You
need a much more permanent solution and I think his call that you need
– the AU has not intervened, SADC still thinks the situation can be
saved by playing hardball with the opposition, insisting to the two
sides that they must co-share, co-chair the ministry of Home Affairs
and such, I think, such ill-advised political arrangements.
In the absence of any meaningful intervention from SADC and also taking
into account that many of us are reluctant to hand over the fate of our
country to the Europeans and the Americans we’d rather entrust the
country to a multi-lateral system, the UN seems to be the last place of
resort.
So it does not mean that we are not mindful of the complications. We
are mindful also that it is difficult to get anything from the UN
Charter. It takes a long time but worth attempting as a pressure point.
The South Africans are likely to respond in the Security Council that
they have the situation under control, that there is an African
solution that is being structured.
VG: South Africa has already said that it wants to talk to the
international aid agencies and formulate an international response. Now
is this Mugabe’s attempt to reach out to the international community
through South Africa?
BK: It’s reducing a structural practical governance crisis into a
humanitarian crisis. We are in a humanitarian crisis because of the
collapse of the governance crisis. I don’t know what Wilf thinks?
WM: What I would say is that what South Africa is doing by appealing
for this humanitarian aid – how will it be managed, how will it be
channelled when Mugabe is still in control? That is where the problem
is. Everything will have to be channelled through them and you know how
they operate. We all know we have seen it before so it is a non-starter.
What I’m saying is I don’t think the South Africans cannot afford to be
indifferent to what is happening here after they’ve seen the cholera
incidents. And much more will happen, they’ve seen what the soldiers
have done, much more is going to happen. I don’t think even the
Russians and the Chinese will simply say we will stop this when the
rest of Africa is actually crying. Zambia, Mozambique, Botswana and
South Africa will be directly affected.
At the end of the day the African Union has also got a voice. We should
not limit ourselves to South Africa and SADC. The African Union must
pick up this matter as well, it is a major, major security in practical
terms and also in health terms it is a security risk to the region.
What we need is to address the issue of who controls the State
machinery in Zimbabwe. That is the key issue. Everything else, people
are still dying in their hundreds from cholera because Mugabe is there
and he is taking his time.
Right now he is appealing for hundreds of millions of dollars. How do
we know how it is going to be disbursed? The aid will not get to the
people who need it. That’s what I’m saying. We need to address this,
because this is the core of the problem.
VG: But on the other hand, critics say there is a general failure of
leadership and actually blame all three political leaders saying that
they are holding Zimbabwe hostage. Should Morgan Tsvangirai just enter
into this government of National Unity to prevent a national tragedy?
BK: In order to end cholera? As though Morgan Tsvangirai’s entering
into the government ends cholera and the conditions and misgovernance
and mismanagement that has resulted in this catastrophe.
Listen, the South Africans and anyone for that matter can formulate any
view they please about what is good for Zimbabwe, those of us who are
Zimbabwean know that that deal is a poisoned chalice, that Morgan
Tsvangirai might as well go and drink a bucket full load of
cholera-infested water than enter that arrangement. It is neither in
the interests of Zimbabwe, it is to save the egos of those regional
powers that have fiddled whilst they are being told by Zimbabweans that
all was not well. They denied there was a crisis in Zimbabwe and this
is a face-saving gesture from them. They cannot bring themselves to
accept that they were wrong in their judgement of the Zimbabwean
situation and in its characterisation. That they must eat humble pie
and accept that they have been as responsible as Robert Mugabe in
allowing the country to degenerate to the level that it has.
If Morgan Tsvangirai has any good sense left in him he should stay away
from that. There is one difference, he can show his responsibility as a
leader by assuring that there’s aid or help that is targeted to the
victims of the humanitarian crisis. That doesn’t necessarily mean he
must enter a governmental arrangement that will not transform how
governance and politics is done in our country.
VG: How would you answer people who say that we know of Mugabe’s
failures but what about the MDC? Now from what you have seen, what is
their resolution beyond rhetoric to stop the spread of cholera and
starvation for example?
BK: They are not in government. We cannot place on people who are not
in government the obligations that are expected by people of its
elected government. That is irresponsible talk. We don’t sit around
when there is crime in South Africa and say what has the DA done to end
crime? We look at the governments in power. It is neither intelligent
nor a sign of honesty for anybody to say an opposition political party
can end only that which an elected government which has full charge of
the arms of state is obligated to deal with.
VG: Wilf, what are your thoughts on that? Because people are saying
Zimbabweans are suffering and that the time for campaigning has gone
and that it’s time for governance. Do you see the political leaders
having what it takes to govern – all political leaders involved in this
power sharing agreement?
WM: Like Brian has been saying, I think the responsibility lies with
those who hold the reins of power. These are totally untested and how
can they show what they are capable of when they are not even anywhere
near the levers of power. What I would expect of Morgan Tsvangirai and
the MDC is actually to lead the people in demanding that these issues
be addressed because they don’t hold the key to the solution. What he
can do is to mobilise the people to demand that services be restored.
That we get a transitional government – that is what we need. He should
just move out of that power sharing agreement which I think is a
diversion.
People are dying and suffering. We have no time to think about that.
What we want to talk about are the practicalities of addressing this
crisis, outside the framework of that defunct arrangement, that power
sharing arrangement!
What we need now is leadership to mobilise the people to demand a transitional authority to address these issues.
This has been doing genocide all along for the past 28 years. This is
real when you consider the rate which people have been dying in the
last 10 to 15 years from AIDS, of all preventable diseases, hospitals
have been closed, people can’t access their funds to buy medicine –
this is all genocide.
There is no actual reason why Gono should restrict people to paltry
amounts of money that cannot afford them food that would make them
survive, that would make them afford the medication that would make
them survive – so this is genocide left right and centre.
VG: Brian the regime argues that the sanctions have caused this crisis.
Is the ruling elite merely denying any responsibility here or there is
an element of truth?
BK: What the sanctions have also caused them to steal money from the
diamonds and platinum so they have absolutely no cents to invest in
chemicals that they can even buy from Zambia? It’s absolutely
ridiculous!
They are totally irresponsible; they are totally callous and reckless!
I think that they need, even when there were sanctions, we lived under
sanctions before, under the illegal regime of Ian Smith, the racist
regime; how many times did our people die of cholera when there were
sanctions? How many times were our people reduced into the laughing
stock of this region?
How many times were Zimbabweans reduced into famine, into not just the
laughing stock, into the lowest of the wretched of the earth? How many
times? We have lived under sanctions before; it is an alibi by an
irresponsible, reckless regime! Of people who have looted and
shamelessly continue to loot! Even in Somalia, they are not dying of
cholera. There is a war in Somalia. Liberia which was at war for a long
time, they did not get reduced to this state.
VG: In a final word briefly both of you, let me start with Brian and
I’ll end with Wilf, what do you want to see happen, realistically what
should happen?
BK: I think there is a need for an urgent system of intervention by the
African Union and SADC and not tinkering on the edges, not massaging
Robert Mugabe’s ego and intervention must be total. It must have a
political dimension and Wilf has talked about a transitional
arrangement – I’ve previously insisted that the only way the country
will return to normalcy is to buy time where we normalise going into an
election and select leadership.
I abide by that view, that we will not negotiate our way out of the
present moral and political bankruptcy that we witness, number one.
Number two, there is need for a comprehensive turnaround strategy that
is fashioned by all Zimbabwean actors, Zimbabweans of different
political shades of opinion and you need a peoples, if you like, a
stakeholders, not just forum but platform constituted into different
commissions to handle various aspects of the crisis. It will not be the
business of a few wise men, you need an entire marshalling of resources
and the international community should lend support to that effort of
reconstruction without imposing policy conditions that will be harmful
to our ability to turn around.
And we must stop the resource outflow. Wilf has alluded to platinum,
gold, diamonds and other resources that are being pillaged in this
moment whilst the country is pleading for international help. I think
there needs to be something done immediately to stop the plunder of the
very precious resources of the country.
VG: And Wilf?
WM: What I would say finally Violet the people are suffering and people
might say they have no access to food, no access to healthcare, no
access to their cash but most importantly they no longer have any
access to their life, they have no access to life. It is as bad as
that, people no longer have access to life. And we must address this
issue by mobilising all democratic forces in Zimbabwe. Civil society
together with the political parties to demand, to apply sufficient
pressure, not only to Robert Mugabe – Robert Mugabe is not that
powerful, he is very vulnerable. He had his one-man election on the
27th of June and he had himself sworn in and everybody said ‘to hell
with that’ and he didn’t argue with that. He didn’t challenge.
What we need is a principled stand by everybody – SADC, African Union
and us Zimbabweans taking the lead. That way we mobilise Africa, we
take the issue to the United Nations because this is too serious, it’s
about the lives of people. We have no time, no luxury to tinker around
this power sharing agreement, this minute when people are dying. We are
long gone past that.
VG: Wilf Mhanda and Brian Kagoro, thank you very much.
WM: Thank you.
BK: You are welcome Violet.
SWRadio Africa
Post published in: News