Without a legitimate government in Harare, no recovery is possible. And legitimacy is unlikely to be enhanced by the creation of a government of national unity without the MDC: few could be fooled by a different facade on the bones of the same government, even one with apparently more acceptable ex-Zanu (PF) figures, such as Simba Makoni. This is less a third way than a dead end.
For while one can suspend or rig and election, one cannot suspend or rig an economy. Economic reform and rehabilitation for the masses will not happen in the circumstances. Inflation will likely continue at its stratospheric levels, and nearly all Zimbabweans will continue to get poorer. If MDC leader Morgan Tsvangirai had won this Friday, against all intimidation and rigging odds, there was some prospect of recovery . But he would have had to focus his limited time and direct donor resources to three key tasks.
First, to stabilise the economy, probably by issuing a new currency, thereby bringing inflation under control. This would have required carefully managed foreign inflows.
The second task would have been to
re-establish the rule of law, using his leadership and mandate to re-orient the army to external functions and police to the maintenance of law and order  not repression  and thereby reinstate the populace’s confidence in state institutions. This would have been an initial step along the road to depoliticising the civil service.
Third  and most importantly  he would have had to reinstate the productive sectors of the economy, notably farming, on which so much clearly depends. This would have demanded getting together with the farming and donor community to work out a land reform strategy that is orderly, fair and geared towards sustainability. It would of course be politically and administratively difficult to turn back the clock to the status quo before Mugabe started his devastatingly costly land grab in 2000.
But it would be crucial to return skills and capital to the land. New farmers  not party hacks who have been given farms as political pay-offs  could be helped, perhaps through a national trust fund. Dispossessed farmers might be encouraged to return to share their skills through a combination of land restitution, financial compensation and partnership with the new farmers. And donors would have to be kept to their earlier promises in this sector, notably the British government. No doubt a President Tsvangirai would have a very difficult task ahead. But he would have one big advantage. He is not Robert Mugabe.
This scenario might still take place, but apparently not this week. In the interim, the even more difficult short-term scenario has now happened  the aborting of the run-off election. This creates a major crisis for the Southern African Development Community (SADC) mediators, tainting their efforts and standing, and delaying the prospects of stability and recovery. But they  and those African democrats concerned about their continent’s credibility  do possess a few other options.
First and foremost they will need to protect Zimbabwean opposition leaders. This may have to involve the deployment of more than hotel-bound election monitors.
They will need, second, to signal collectively and definitively that Mugabe’s and Zanu (PF)’s actions are beyond unacceptable. Words are unlikely to be enough given Harare’s political autism: Zimbabwe’s suspension from SADC and the African Union would cost Africa little, but could pay much through the restoration of a semblance of African credibility.
And then they should find ways to get
the election process back on track. This is not about pathetic attempts to paper over serious abuses through governments of national unity when this is premised more on continental African than local Zimbabwean needs.
To achieve this, African mediators would have to pull the levers to which Zanu (PF) will be sensitive. International and continental isolation is one. A stipulation of international supervision of central bank inflows and outflows is another.
Outside powers that are interested in change and recovery should involve themselves in working with their African partners to devise strategies to this end. To attempt to do so alone is likely only to inflame sensitivities, not extinguish them. This would not stop them also from ratcheting up the pressure by encouraging multinational businesses to withdraw or open their books to scrutiny.
Failing decisive action, the potential for widespread violence in Zimbabwe has never been greater. And its corrosive effects will not stay at home but will be felt throughout the region in a deteriorating continental image, burgeoning refugee flows, and a pernicious climate of fear and hopelessness.
Dr Mills heads the Johannesburg-based Brenthurst Foundation.
Post published in: Uncategorized