Connect with us
Mugabe Mugabe


The 2018 Zimbabwean Election: Will Mugabe Finally Lose His Grip?

 6 min read / 

Fidel Castro once remarked that he would be a gold medallist if surviving assassination attempts were an Olympic sport. If rigging elections were likewise an Olympic sport, Mugabe would also be a gold medallist. In his 38-year rule over Zimbabwe, Mugabe has used every trick in the book to manipulate the polls in his favour, from ballot-stuffing to raw intimidation. However, this time there is a real sense of a changing of the guard as Mugabe’s age catches up with him and the economy again stagnates. 2018 could well be the year Zimbabwe sees its first transfer of power since the end of white minority rule.

The Problems

One only has to look back to 2008 to see just how bad things can get for Zimbabwe. Harassment, detainment, torture, the murder of political opponents and dissidents, blatant election rigging and the use of party faithful to attack opponents were considered de-rigour by Mugabe and his ZANU-PF party, ever-desperate to remain in power. Coupled with hyperinflation, economic mismanagement and a cholera outbreak, this was Zimbabwe’s low point. A nation which had fought white supremacy for equal rights, Zimbabwe had become the very pariah it opposed.

However, in recent years, there has been a sizeable economic recovery. This year, the government increased its growth forecast from 1.7% to 3.7% on the back of higher rainfall providing a bumper crop. Ditching the Zimbabwean dollar in favour of the greenback has also alleviated some of the effects of the 2008 crisis. But there is concern those days could return just as quickly. Panic of a return to a local currency, spurned by the introduction of bond notes (which have fallen in value in a short space of time), has led to a decrease in public confidence. As Zimbabwe is a net importer, this has led to the prominence of a local black market. The unemployment rate is one of the highest in the world, with estimates claiming that it has reached 95% (though AfricaCheck argues that the data is unreliable).

Politically, there are also fears that the repression and election-rigging that marred the 2008 vote could return. Evan Mawarire, a local pastor and founder of the ‘#ThisFlag’ movement, has routinely been harassed, arrested and tried (and acquitted each time), most notably when praying with a group of medical students evicted from their residency at the University of Zimbabwe. It had been argued that former white ruler Ian Smith, who fought to uphold white supremacy, was a better leader than Mugabe. Although it is ironic, Mugabe himself has been accused of using the repressive tactics of the Smith regime, from the imprisonment of protestors to the abuse of process. Confidence in the police has diminished after years of pro-Mugabe policing, a matter that has only gotten worse with officers, strapped for cash, resorting to roadblocks to extort bribes from passing motorists.

Changing Times

Despite the parallels, there is one clear difference to 2008 – the balance of power. Mugabe has historically relied on a cadre of loyalists, many of whom fought alongside him during the war of liberation in the 1970s. This got him over the line in 2008, however, there have been prominent rank and file desertions across the board, most notably Mugabe’s former Vice-President Joice Mujuru. The wife of the deceased army commander and prominent politician, Solomon Mujuru, was expelled from ZANU PF after allegations of disloyalty. Soon after, she formed her own party, Zimbabwe People First, before quitting after a disagreement with several former allies and forming the National Peoples Party. Mugabe has also had problems with another formerly loyal bastion, the Zimbabwean National Liberation War Veterans Association, which has denounced Mugabe, even dumping him as its patron.

It is not only allies jumping ship that Mugabe must contend with. Like the rest of the world, social media has changed how people access the news and current affairs. Whereas historically, Mugabe has been able to silence opposition journalists and shut down newspapers in order to give the Zimbabwean Broadcasting Corporation and government-aligned broadsheets a monopoly on information, social media makes such a thing a lot harder to do so. Evan Mawarire’s ‘#ThisFlag’ campaign reached thousands in Zimbabwe and millions worldwide. It has spawned widespread use of social media by opponents across the country, including prominent opposition figures. The Rural Teachers Association started the ‘#HomwePanze‘ campaign to protest the economic crisis, encouraging people to walk with their pockets out. Naturally, as this threatens Mugabe and ZANU-PF’s grip on power, they have responded vociferously, threatening to monitor any SIM card while warning them not to ‘abuse’ social media.

Does the Opposition Have a Chance?

For any onlooker, it would seem that the stars have finally aligned for Zimbabwe’s opposition. The leader of the Movement for Democratic Change, Morgan Tsvangirai, signed a memorandum of understanding with Mujuru, both agreeing to work together to bring down ZANU. Mugabe has also had to deal with factional problems. It has long been alleged that he is priming his wife, Grace Mugabe, for the leadership. However, there is a sizeable group within ZANU who support current Vice President Emmerson Mnangagwa for the top job, which has, at times, become violent. As the anger increases, it becomes increasingly clear that Mugabe’s position is fragile.

However, it has to be questioned whether the opposition has the capability to even challenge. Mujuru’s new party has itself been subject to significant defections, and in the MDC itself, ego problems and ideological differences have caused major splits. Arthur Mutambara quit the party in 2005 over differences with Tsvangirai, forming the MDC-Mutambara. This, and the failure to co-operate, was one of the reasons Mugabe held on in 2008. Tsvangirai’s leadership has also been called into question for his indifference to violence committed by his own supporters, to the point where people have accused him of being worse than Mugabe. Prominent Zimbabwean Lawyer and Senator David Coltart even cited this as the main reason why he backed Mutambara in 2006. The fact Tsvangirai even agreed to powersharing with Mugabe in 2008 has also tarnished his name.

The memorandum itself also leads to disunity over issues such as leader, policy, the name of the coalition, and has put the memorandum on thin ice, with suggestions claiming that it is finished. When it comes to Mugabe, he must be thinking he can hold on. One of his tactics is to divide and rule, much in the vain of the former British colonisers. The opposition will also have to contend with an electoral system which is effectively biased against them, giving rural regions loyal to Mugabe a disproportionate voice to opponents largely in the cities.

The Verdict

The 2018 Zimbabwean election will be the most unpredictable election in the nation’s history. While many Zimbabweans know where to point the finger for their woes, and the signs of change are good, the opposition is too deep in infighting to sweep to victory in a landslide this point of time. However, if the opposition can unite and use tools likes social media to their advantage, they will easily win.

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Investing in Zimbabwe – Gamble or Jackpot?

 6 min read / 

Investing Zimbabwe

After nearly four decades of rule, Robert Mugabe finally stepped down as president of Zimbabwe late last year. A nation that has been crippled by corruption, plagued by poverty and ostracised from the international community now has an unprecedented opportunity to reform its economy and re-establish itself as a major African power. President Emmerson Mnangagwa has already announced his intention to revive the country’s flagging finances, open up to foreign investors and crack down on corruption.

The first signs are encouraging. On January 15th, South African tycoon Robert Gumede pledged to invest $1.2 billion in the country to develop IT and infrastructure projects. But Mnangagwa and his new government must learn from past mistakes if Zimbabwe is to realise its potential. Otherwise, the country will almost certainly lapse back into the stagnation, inequality and squalor that came to define the Mugabe era.

Is Zimbabwe a bull market?

If history is any guide, foreign investors would be wise to play it safe. This is not the first time a hopeful figure ousts an ageing African dictator after decades of misrule, promising reform only to prove themselves equally unfit for the task. The most notable example is perhaps the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), which spent three decades under the thumb of its own Mugabe-like figure: Mobutu Sese Soko. Mobutu, a textbook totalitarian, embezzled substantial amounts of state aid, played minority groups against each other and ruled with an iron fist.

After his ouster in 1997, hopes were high that the DRC’s new leader – Laurent Kabila – would steer the country in a more judicial direction. Instead, Kabila maintained the same power structure as his predecessor and ramped up the violence. His forces slaughtered thousands of Rwandan refugees within months of taking the presidency. Assassinated by one of his own bodyguards just four years into his regime, Kabila was replaced by his son, Joseph, who is still clinging to power today.

Though Joseph Kabila has proven to be slightly less bloodthirsty than the father, he appears to be every bit as addicted to his position. Despite agreeing to step down in December 2016, Kabila has repeatedly delayed elections, citing logistical obstacles and financial deficiencies. Protests at his continued reign have become increasingly violent – seven were killed at the turn of the year – while his most popular political opponent, Moïse Katumbi, has been hounded out of the country on entirely politically motivated fraud charges.

Recent polls suggest Katumbi would replace Kabila with ease, though the former provincial governor and current opposition leader is reluctant to return to his homeland as he fears for his life. Katumbi is asking for international protection and is leveraging his time abroad to maintain global pressure on Kabila’s regime.

Unsurprisingly, foreign investment in the DRC has cratered. Most outside commercial interests in the country are concentrated in the mining sector – itself embroiled in international scandals involving Dan Gertler, an Israeli tycoon added to the U.S. sanctions list for his ties to the murderous leadership in Kinshasa. Economic development has stagnated and the country’s GDP per capita stands at around half of its 1970s levels.

There are eerie parallels – not to mention unsavoury connections – between the Congolese and Zimbabwean political ordeals. When Robert Mugabe came to power as the first prime minister of the newly liberated Zimbabwe in 1980, his appointment was greeted with rapturous optimism by the world. Mugabe was even nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize the following year. Unfortunately, the ‘freedom fighter’ rapidly showed his true colours, using intimidation, bribery and, at times, outright slaughter to maintain his grip on power. The Matabeleland Massacres alone which claimed between 10,000 and 20,000 civilian victims between 1983 and 1987.

Mugabe prioritised military endeavours and total control over society, famously proclaiming in 1998 that “countries don’t go bankrupt!” when sending troops to the Congo in support of the elder Kabila. At the same time, he oversaw the decimation of his own country’s economy. Mugabe’s continued threats to nationalize the nation’s best performing industries has discouraged foreign direct investment (FDI). In 1992, the Land Acquisition Act decreed that the government could lawfully strip white landowners of their property and redistribute it among the indigenous population.

This bill was forcibly enacted in 2000 when 4,000 white farmers were forced into giving up their land. Mugabe then gifted the assets to friends, relatives and assorted cronies instead of promoting the interests of impoverished Zimbabweans. Agricultural output plummeted immediately. The resulting food shortages prompted the need for increased imports, financed by an unsustainably zealous attitude towards money-printing.

Predictably, inflation spiralled out of control. At its peak in 2008, monthly inflation reached 7,900,000,000% and prices doubled overnight. Gross national income (GNI) per capita fell from $890 USD in 1990 to just $300 in 2008; only in recent years has it returned to the previous levels. Even now, inflation remains at 348%. The industrial sector is operating at below 30% capacity and unemployment remains above 90%. Clearly, reform is needed – and fast.

Can Mnangagwa do it?

Fortunately for him, Zimbabwe’s economic opportunities are still there for the taking. The country was formerly known as the “breadbasket” of Africa, but a glance at its natural resources makes such a description seem positively miserly. With the world’s third-largest reserves of platinum, the fifth-biggest lithium production output and plentiful mines of coal, copper, diamonds, gold and iron ore, the country is a veritable cornucopia of resources. Mnangagwa hopes to harness that potential with a raft of measures designed to boost the economy by 4.5% in 2018.

Among other incentives, Mnangagwa has pledged to repeal the indigenisation law (so crucial to Mugabe’s regime and so damaging to the economy) from all industries except platinum and diamonds. He has also indicated that local businesses will be granted a tax amnesty on interest and fees, allowing them to clear debts and concentrate on the future. Additionally, he will also need to introduce a stable domestic currency in order to combat cash shortages that currently result in Zimbabweans queuing outside banks for days on end. Only then will the target of 4.5% become feasible.

Democracy just as important as the dollar

Even if Mnangagwa is successful in enacting his proposed measures (in itself a tall order), all that will mean nothing if he can’t get his own house in order. Corrupt political institutions will not encourage FDI or catapult the country out of its current pariah state, and if Zimbabwe is to flourish, it will need the help of the international community.

The signs thus far do not seem encouraging. New Justice Minister Ziyambi Ziyambi has dismissed calls for electoral reform, claiming they are not needed. Mnangagwa’s opponents say that the new president – and longtime Mugabe lieutenant – will turn out to be a carbon copy of his predecessor. Unless Mnangagwa can banish such anxieties and demonstrate a real desire to reform, Zimbabweans could come to face the same Sisyphean fate as their Congolese counterparts.

Keep reading |  6 min read


Zimbabwe’s President Announces the Country’s First Free Elections

 1 min read / 

Zimbabwe’s President, Emmerson Mnangagwa, has declared a clean break with the past by announcing the country’s first post-Mugabe elections.

The elections, which are expected to take place in the next four to five months, will be completely free and fair, according to the new president, Under his predecessor, Robert Mugabe, elections were rigged, opponents were intimidated and calls for electoral reform were either ignored or silenced.

The move is expected to form part of a charm offensive for Mnangagwa to attract much-needed investment into the country. Under Mugabe, the once-prosperous Zimbabwean economy went into freefall with land forcefully reallocated to party cronies and the imposition of a harmful indigenisation law which curtailed potential investment from abroad.

Some remain cynical over the President’s bon homie. Up until the coup in November, Mnangagwa was Mugabe’s longstanding ally and henchmen. The opposition has said Mnangagwa’s Zanu PF has already made moves to win the rural vote by gifting all-terrain vehicles to tribal chiefs. Something the President has refuted.

Mnangagwa, nicknamed ‘the crocodile’ for his political cunning, has said he plans to attend the Davos Economic Forum later this month. He has also expressed interest in reforging close ties with Britain, its former colonial power.

Keep reading |  1 min read


Standing Defiant: African Countries Respond to Trump’s Comments

 5 min read / 

Africa Trump

Trump’s recent bout of racism has given African states the opportunity to exert considerable agency on the world stage and also take the moral high ground of dignity and respect. Though Trump’s comments are of a vulgar and vile nature, they represent nothing new: African countries are severely misunderstood and misrepresented in mindsets and media, in particular by those of some western publics.

This is to everyone’s detriment, as African countries are strategic partners in trade and security and will only grow more vital to the state of global, economic and political affairs – it is estimated that the majority of the world’s population growth will take place on the African continent.

The African Union’s Response

Trump’s comments are an opportunity for the African Union, or AU, and for individual African states to exert agency and also strengthen their moral standing. Trump’s outright racism and the ensuing African diplomatic response and the strong voices on social media represent a key moment in recognising Africa’s all too often under-appreciated importance to global affairs. The African Union condemned Trump’s comments in the strongest of terms, and issued a statement declaring that:

“The African Union Mission wishes to express its infuriation, disappointment and outrage over the unfortunate comment made by Mr. Donald Trump, President of the United States of America, which remarks dishonor the celebrated American creed and respect for diversity and human dignity.” The comments were further characterized by African envoys as “outrageous, racist, and xenophobic.”

Botswana has been a major voice in this response, describing the comments as “irresponsible, reprehensible, and racist.” Among the larger African states, Nigeria has not issued an official response, though South Africa is issuing a diplomatic protest over the comments, stressing that “relations between South Africa and the United States, and between the rest of Africa and the United States, must be based on mutual respect and understanding.” US diplomats were summoned in Ghana, Botswana, and Senegal – more African countries are expected to follow suit.

American Views on Africa

The racism and ethnocentrism inherent in labelling “distant” countries (such as Haiti and nations in Africa) pejoratively is nothing new. Though most Americans would not express their worldviews in such crass and vulgar terms, there is widespread ignorance about African countries, with little recognition that African countries represent strategic trade and security partners, not to mention their vast cultural wealth. This problem lies in all facets of American society, from predominantly negative and homogenising news coverage about the African continent to the Eurocentric focus of the education system.

These comments were made in a larger context of domestic demographic change within the US, in which white people will enter minority status by 2044, in addition to the global power shifts of the wider world. Not only are Trump’s comments steeped in racism and ignorance, but they represent the uncertainty and deep discomfort many white Americans feel in the midst of the changing domestic demographics and a world order in which the US is no longer the lone superpower.

Africa is the Future

The African continent is the future, as African population growth will account for the majority of the world’s global population with half of the world being African by 2100. African countries are already strategic partners in trade and security, and will only become stronger players in global political and economic affairs.

Though it is certainly a desired goal for public opinion – the worldviews of western publics in particular – to recognise and appreciate the importance of African countries in their right and their integral significance to international relations, in some respects it doesn’t matter what Americans might think about a massive continent of 54 countries. As John and Jean Comaroff have written in ‘Theory from the South‘, “Lagos is not catching up to us. Rather, we are the ones catching up to Lagos.” African countries are not waiting on Western publics’ enlightenment.

Due to the rise of emerging powers changing the global landscape of power relations, African countries have more opportunity than ever to exert agency in selecting their partners and leveraging relations for national gain. Though the US is a key economic partner for much of the continent, African countries have many other options and it is well known that the approach of China and other emerging powers are, in many respects, regarded more positively than traditional western approaches. Relations between the US and African countries have been marked by longstanding goodwill, but Trump’s comments may complicate relations, ranging from security cooperation to trade ties.

Most important is African ownership of African development, in which the harmonisation of external partners aligns with domestically articulated goals and aims in respect to the continent’s nations. African countries, and all of the diversity within them, must be appreciated in their own right and understood on their own terms.


African countries have their own visions and national development plans and are charting a course marked by innovation and holistic strategies aimed at meeting both human and environmental needs. It is time African countries are recognised and respected for the leaders they are on the world stage and that western publics realise that society’s global future is very much an African one.

Trump’s comments are of course vulgar and crude, but should make people think very seriously about society’s own failings in how people portray – and learn about – Africa, an incredibly diverse continent of 54 countries, from our media to our classrooms. Africa is the future, and – following Trump’s comments – African countries have taken the opportunity to exert agency on the world stage and take the moral high ground.

Keep reading |  5 min read


Send this to a friend