Zimbabwe: Signatures and Dictators

‘I am in exile because I hate to live under a dictatorship,’ I answer the man. He laughs, but probably gets serious since he is also in another country, under the shadow of another form of exile.

The dictatorial President, an aspiring nanogenarian, has proclaimed elections dates without consulting his so-called ‘partners’ in a government of national dysfunction. The world knows that Mugabe tries to charm foreign audiences by telling untruths about the ‘functioning government of national unity’ yet as soon as he arrives home, he declares it a ‘still-born government’, ‘dysfunctional.’

He assumes the international community does not follow the news of his absurdities back home. And he knows there are many warm handclaps from desperate Africans in dire need of some kind of ‘African hero’ who can challenge the ‘white world, the white imperialist forces of British and American colonialism.’ Mugabe knows some Africans need some kind of verbal bravado although they would not volunteer to go and volunteer to serve him with their skills which they gladly give to the same ‘imperialistic colonialists.’

The Chinese are our new, ‘saintly’ colonial masters. Somehow, African rulers don’t seem to manage without some kind of colonial master above their shoulders and inside their underground resources.

For all intents and purposes, the Zimbabwean Government of National Unity has always been an illusion that was supposed to entrance the world into believing that the Zimbabwean problem was on its way to the cemetery. Mugabe has never respected his official signature. He has never claimed publicly to be a man of his word. In other words, he can clothe a hyena and sell it to your as a goat without feeling any notion of guilt. He is a governor, just like the colonial ones, without a conscience. And if he has it, I am sure it is constructed on false bricks.

But then, a dictator who is about 25 years past any retiring age in any profession cannot be estimated to have an inkling of what is happening in the country he claims to rule. Even his friends, and the general public, know that he is sleeping most of the time, with observers wondering if he will manage to wake up and walk the next minute. His series of collapsing sessions are well recorded all over the world.

Many years ago, I argued that Zimbabwe has had a military coup since 2002, but some Zimbabweans thought I had gone out of my mind despite the fact that the military had openly told the nation that they will not allow anybody else to rule the country except their paymaster, Robert Gabriel Mugabe. Some people can just not recognize a hyena until it starts to eat their goats!

Zimbabweans have to understand that military coups come in many different forms, shapes, and sizes. Their accompanying dictators come likewise. Some dictators come with a chain of academic degrees. Others come wielding handkerchiefs and pretend to cry at every national day. Brutal ones bring guns to State House and tell the nation in crude language that they are the new rulers and everyone who says No will be shot on the spot. There are sweet, sour, bitter and brutal dictators, bloodthirsty ones like Idi Amin, the Butcher of Uganda. Political chameleons are packed differently according to the colour of the vegetation of their political surroundings.

Mugabe employed the army to stage a silent coup on condition they are also allowed to plunder the country without anyone asking questions. How else would anyone explain the presence of senior military officers in all government institutions, including tourism and national railways? It is clear the army simply tells Mr Mugabe to appoint military men and women in all government positions in order to ensure that their military coups are visible in all sectors of the economy.

If Sadc and the African Union have failed to see this all these years, then they cease to be relevant in all aspects of the daily life of citizens of the African continent.

But then, what is Sadc? What is the African Union? These two regional and continental organizations are mere show-off clubs where the leaders meet on a regular basis to show off their latest limousines as well as their latest fashions worn by their wives or mistresses. They always generally agree about everything, singing unending praises which actually invoke more sleep than thought among their fellows. They meet, dress glamorously and compose glorious speeches in praise of their imaginary achievements despite the poverty knocking hard on the outside door of their Chinese-built political theatre halls.

These two bodies make so many well-written and composed rules which, when read without historical assessment, seem impeccable. The codes of conduct, the human rights and electoral charters, everything that any academic would want in their desk drawer. But there is, surprisingly, no single mention of any punitive measures against those who fail to obey the rules. If a game has rules without punitive measures against transgressors, it is surely not worth any interest from any self-respecting man or woman.

President Mugabe will ignore Sadc with contempt, and not many will stand up and force him to respect his signature. No one wields a stick which can force Mugabe to obey the obligations of his signature. Those who dare to stand up and shout, like President I an Khama of Botswana, soon realize how lonely they are made to feel. They are soon pushed into the corner of silence.

So, what is the use of having a dog which can rarely bark, while it is killing its owners, the citizens? An effective institution has laid down rules which are accompanied by harsh punitive measures for any transgressors. Without punitive measures, the institution is as good as a dead horse.

Sadc and the African Union, should, if they want to represent the citizens of the African continent, have punitive measures well in place to wield in the face of transgressors like Mugabe. Trade boycott. Travel bans. Freezing of accounts of government officials.

Trade embargoes. Border closures. Cut in diplomatic ties. Military intervention. Boycott of goods. These are practical threats which can make any landlocked dictator and his cronies come to their senses, punishments which can hurt a dictator under any sky. We all know that an aged dictator does not want to live the last days of his reign in the smallest pain.

But African organizations will buy the myth that such measures will affect the ordinary citizens more than the leaders. It is a myth because no ordinary, struggling citizen has spare money to stash into an idle account in South Africa or Botswana or Zurich while his family is starving in his dilapidated house. No ordinary citizen of Zimbabwe has enough money to take a holiday in the luxury hotels of Cape Town or Durban or some corner of France. No ordinary Zimbabwean has spare cash to pay for mountain climbing trips in Switzerland, or wine-tasting festivals in France.

If they want to be respected and have some kind of relevance to ordinary citizens, African organizations have to be seen to act in defence of ordinary citizens. For now, they are just holiday excursions for the African elite who continue to oppress their own people while making glorious speeches for paid audiences.

Zimbabweans should know that in this current constitutional crisis, Sadc leaders will insist on praising Mugabe ‘heroic deeds of defeating the colonialists. And they are polishing their shoes and purchasing brighter handkerchiefs to wave him a huge standing ovation in the next ‘Summit’ which will be ‘summitting’ about absolutely nothing to do with solving the current constitutional crisis.

We are on our own, I think, as ordinary Africans.

© Chenjerai Hove, June 13, 2013.