Indulging politics of the GPA (The Herald)

By Reason Wafawarova

02 November 2009

WHILE most people would view the so-called Global Political Agreement as the modus operandi for Zimbabwe’s inclusive Government, the reality of the matter is that classical realism will show that the GPA is suffering self-serving manipulation by politicians whose motivation is far divorced from matters of good or effective governance — diligently seeking to amass as much power as their greedy quest can allow.

Thomas Hobbes was a 17th century classical realist who explored the weight of human nature in international relations, and in the domestic politics of nations. The Hobbesian state of nature was based on three simple assumptions.

-Men (people) are equal

-They interact in anarchy

-They are driven by competition, diffidence and glory.

Human history has shown that the conjunction of these three conditions leads to a war of all against all. The conflict between Zimbabwean politicians in particular and that between Zanu-PF and MDC-T in general is based on the political realities behind the selfish interests of politicians and not on the idealistic goal of putting the national interest ahead of party or individual aspirations.

The idealistic side of the GPA is that politicians from all the three political parties in the inclusive Government should amicably work together for the good of the nation and that compromises that are in the interest of the nation should be made without any hesitation. This is what Sadc will repeat regularly as they have been doing all along and this is what the African Union will always emphasise. It is our collective wish.

The MDC-T backers in the West believe that the biggest and most important compromise that can ever be made through the GPA is the sight of the back of President Mugabe, and they have openly said they will not have respect for the GPA for as long as the man they loath most is still in charge of Zimbabwean affairs.

While the MDC-T cannot openly back this provocative and incensing Western interference, their obnoxious conduct as a partner in the inclusive Government is a serious attempt at implementing the Western bidding on Zimbabwe.

Prime Minister Tsvangirai does a non-event staging of bravery by pretending to be outing a partnership he so much cherishes and cannot afford to dissolve, and his party spokesman, Nelson Chamisa, warns that his party will be going for elections if their pretences as obstinate characters are not taken seriously.

Then we have leaders of the white-dominated Democratic Alliance in South Africa announcing a "recommendation" that the election to come out of the MDC-T fake withdrawal from Government should go ahead without the participation of President Mugabe. They clearly and unambiguously gave the reason for this. Another Mugabe win will not be good enough an election result for the kind of Zimbabwe they prefer to see.

Zanu-PF has responded by emphatically declaring that the very man the MDC-T backers want out of the election race is the only one who can call for an election, and most certainly; that he will never do so on the motivation and cause of an MDC-T "disengagement" piece of drama.

The Prime Minister is advised that the crisis of his party dearly clinging to Government privileges while preaching an outing from the same Government is "a constitutional crisis" and that position has frankly made the Prime Minister look lamer than what anti-MDC-T hacks have often said he is.

The only crisis in the country is in the MDC-T camp where they will have to show the country where they stand. The current posturing between two opinions is less than impressive to most Zimbabweans and the reality is that the longer the MDC-T says it is out of a marriage it is enjoying the quicker they show all and sundry what immaturity reigns at Harvest House.

The Hobbesian assumption that men are all equal is based on an "equality of ability" where men are equal in the elemental sense that "the weakest has strength enough to kill the strongest, either by secret machination or by confederacy with others".

The equality of ability results in the equality of hope and this is what makes people declare that I am as good as you are and thus ought to have as much as you.

We have enemies because scarcity prevents each from having as much as they desire.

There can only be one president in Zimbabwe at a time and for now that person is Robert Mugabe. Those who claim to be equal to him through the GPA are only doing so on the basis of their assumed ability and hope and not on the reality on the ground.

This is why the call for another election or the removal of Dr Gideon Gono and Mr Johannes Tomana from their appointed offices will remain a call of wishes and not reality. This is classical realism where power resides with those who are not victims of scarcity and are privileged enough to occupy the scarce positions of power that may be available.

If we take the political environment that preceded the GPA we can see that the three political parties co-existed in a state of political anarchy and this is the environment in which they have sought interaction.

According to Hobbes’ classical realism this kind of interaction is driven by competition, diffidence and glory. He asserted: "The first maketh men invade for gain, the second for safety and the third for reputation."

The GPA contest between Zanu-PF and the MDC-T is for political gain which is why there are no policy matters being raised by the MDC-T in its efforts to wrestle more political positions from Zanu-PF. It is a competition to oust President Mugabe and his colleagues so that the MDC-T can occupy the position of power currently held by Zanu-PF.

As Chamisa declared at the formation of the inclusive Government, the MDC-T’s idea of the inclusive Government is that it is a platform to wrestle power from Zanu-PF.

The MDC-T and their backers in the West have caused safety concerns for Zanu-PF inasfar as the liberation legacy is concerned. They look back at the 14-year war of attrition that led to the end of colonisation for Zimbabwe and they see right in their faces the same colonial powers staging a committed comeback wearing Tsvangirai’s face.

The MDC-T’s quest for regime change and Zanu-PF’s safety concerns for the loss of the gains of the liberation struggle have worsened conflict and enmity between the politicians and some of their supporters.

The quest for power on the part of the MDC-T is the sole reason they say they will not pull out of the inclusive Government. Not even one among the party’s politicians that secured Cabinet posts and other offices of privilege can afford to let go of the aspect of power so far gained.

Equally, the only reason Zanu-PF will not agree to the appointment of the MDC-T’s preferred choices for Reserve Bank Governor and Attorney-General is that the party cannot afford to show diffidence in the wake of pressure from Western governments and their auxilliary forces in the NGO community.

Of course, the MDC (lead by Mutambara) can only hope that the protagonists do not burn down the political shelter their party is enjoying under the GPA, a lifetime opportunity that thrust greatness on the least expected at the least expected time.

Mutambara postures as an angry man against Zanu-PF when it suits him and does the same against MDC-T when he reckons almost everyone is blaming Tsvangirai and his party.

One wonders what Mutambara would do if Zanu-PF was boycotting Cabinet and the meaningless Council of Ministers until economic sanctions are removed and until hostile propaganda radio stations in the West stop churning out the falsehoods they dish out on a daily basis.

Would he lead his troops for Cabinet meetings each Tuesday while lambasting Tsvangirai that without the GPA he is not the Prime Minister of Zimbabwe? By the way, President Mugabe is the President of Zimbabwe with or without the GPA. That is incontestable by the admission of those who negotiated and drafted the GPA, not least by the June 27, 2008 election result.

The reality is that Mutambara has reached the apex of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and all he is doing is being prurient for the longevity of his current political acquisition — his deputy premier office. That makes sense and is understandable given the options, or is it lack of such, available.

It is a natural instinct that every man desires that all others should value him at the same rate he sets upon himself and this translates to organisational institutions like political parties as well. It is the quest for reputation or glory.

The MDC-T wants to force it down the throats of all else that they are a ‘‘democratic movement’’ just because they named their party as such. They want to portray their politicians as stalwarts for democracy and fighters for freedom and liberty.

This writer is told that some four or five of his former colleagues at the University of Zimbabwe have decided to immortalise the ‘‘legacy’’ of Learnmore Judah Jongwe through a foundation after the late politician, who was to this writer a friend and a colleague as well.

The truth of the matter is that the immortality of Learnmore Jongwe’s political achievements is no more significant than the immortality of his brutality as will be remembered by the Muusha family.

No manner of foundation or awarding can ever sanitise the sin and crime of murdering a defenceless woman who expects from her murderer the protection of a caring husband.

The efforts to honour Jongwe are partly out of a genuine memory of the late politician’s contribution to student and national politics and also partly motivated by the illicit desire to prop up the reputation of the political party to which he belonged.

The MDC-T feels they do not have as many dead heroes as Zanu-PF can point to and they want to contrive political greatness for all publicly known dead MDC-T members, Tonderai Ndira included.

Zanu-PF, on the other hand, also has its expectations based on reputation and the quest for glory. They believe all Zimbabweans must realise and appreciate the role the party played in liberating Zimbabwe from colonial rule.

The party expects others to value its legacy at the same rate as it sets upon itself and this is a problem with the under-30s who were born just before or after independence.

The only reputation or glory that Zanu-PF can successfully achieve with this generation is through meeting the needs of these young people. These are social, economic and political needs. They come by way of opportunity and not free handouts.

The expectation is that there should be opportunity for one to develop themselves socially, economically and politically. This translates to such rights as the right to education, employment, health, food, shelter, and the power to decide who governs the country.

For the MDC-T, the claim of being a democratic party has nothing to do with democracy but with political branding meant to hoodwink voters and perceived simple minds.

There is no democratic movement that would ever call for economic sanctions against the same voters it expects support from. The philosophy of forcing voters to vote away sanctions by succumbing to MDC-T demands is by every means undemocratic and that is the way it is; bluntly undemocratic.

The reality is the MDC-T disengagement has nothing to do with governance or with the welfare of Zimbabweans, it is basically a war for political power for the sake of its unaccommodated colleagues who are still looking for jobs, inasmuch as it is an attempt at fighting for enough political power to meet the expectations of the party’s backers in London and Washington.

Zanu-PF is clearly under no illusions about this agenda and there is no chance that they will ever capitulate to the Western bidding.

It is incumbent now upon Zimbabweans to decide to move forward without having to follow every whim from the community of politicians. The apparent lack of public interest in the latest MDC-T boycott is the best way to handle politicians who take the public for granted.

Zimbabwe we are one and together we will overcome. It is homeland or death!