May 1, 2012
Posted by Dale Pfeiffer
Unraveling the legacy of three decades of
Robert Mugabe's political misrule and economic
mismanagement will not be easy. But it
can be done. Democracy can be put back on
track and the economy can flourish. At
present the economy is distorted and the
potential wealth deriving from the country's
resources – minerals and agricultural land – is
being lost through corruption and
mismanagement. Human talent is being
stifled by the lack of opportunity and
oppression. Millions have fled
abroad. At home the population suffers
from poor education, health and social
services, a situation made worse by one of
Africa's highest rates of AIDS. And its
democratic institutions have been seriously
damaged. The coalition government
installed at the insistence of Zimbabwe's
neighbors has had to struggle against the
elements of the old regime still gathered
around Mugabe, who can be expected to want to
hang on after he has departed. Many are
culpable of directing the violence and terror
the regime used to hold on to power and also
are deeply involved in corruption. The
people have tried through democratic means,
using the ballot box, to end the tyranny and
failed and they will fail again if left to
contend on their own. Mugabe's cronies
control the instruments of oppression including
the military, police, intelligence agency and
the judicial system, which does not dispense
justice.
The international community
must make preparations now to step in to assist
the transition to a new beginning for Zimbabwe.
Rather than wait for the event and then react,
those countries and organizations interested in
Zimbabwe's future should consider forming now a
working group to prepare a plan of action which
can ensure timely and coordinated
interventions. Likely members of the
group would be the European Union, some of its
member states, the U.S. and crucially southern
Africa states because they have the most to
gain or lose from how the succession
goes. They also probably have the
greatest influence. The EU and South
Africa are possible leaders of such an effort.
A primary task at the point
of Mugabe's departure from the scene will be to
isolate and remove those in his cabinet and
security network likely to make a grab to
retain power. The field needs to be
cleared of these elements if democracy is to
have a chance. Quiet but strong messages
can be delivered before the event by southern
African political, military and intelligence
contacts. And, if persuasion fails,
threats of judicial process for crimes against
humanity, corruption, or whatever could be
invoked. Force might be a last and
necessary, but least favored, option.
What is wanted is a peaceful departure.
Other members of the working group can be
prepared to use their own diplomatic tools to
back up the southern Africans. The
difficulty and importance of this need to
remove from the political scene these
individuals cannot be underestimated.
Failing to do so and letting events take their
own course would allow them to cling to
power. It would also likely result in a
succession marked by conflict, more violence,
and perhaps decades more of the type of rule
Zimbabweans have had to experience to
date.
Assuming Mugabe's retainers can be
removed successfully from interfering in the
transition, the train of events as a result of
the death or departure of a sitting president
normally then would involve a three month
inter-regnum in which the Vice President (one
of the retainers) moves up while elections are
organized within a constitutionally prescribed
three months. These elections, unlike
those that Mugabe fought using fear, could be a
real turning point. Zimbabweans showed
their willingness to stand up for democracy by
voting in recent elections and if the threat of
violence is removed, they can be assumed to be
prepared to do so again….with enthusiasm.
Preparing for how to help ensure
the election is truly free and fair puts a big
burden on Zimbabweans and their friends.
The working group's plan should extend to how
to guarantee the election process is devoid of
fraud or intimidation of voters. It is
also necessary that the inter-regnum not be
used to try to consolidate power for the old
guard. The ruling party, which is well
organized and funded, should be allowed to
contest the election, but fairly.
Hopefully it would use the change at the top
and the defenestration of its worst elements to
reorganize and fight this and future elections
as an honest competitor. Having
competition by at least two parties is healthy
for democracy. The working group can
examine how to use the sanctions imposed on
Zimbabwe and its current leaders in a carrot
and stick way to try to ensure the elections
are conducted as desired and the interim
president and possible successor adhere to
expectations of performance. Continued
dirty tricks or replacing repression with
retaliatory repression cannot be
accepted. The working group should map
out how to best use sanctions such as linking
suspending or lifting them in return for
specified steps and performance.
The
election of a new president, who can function
with broad support, whether one party or a
coalition, allows the clock to start running
again for democracy and growth. To assist
this new beginning, two other suggestions are
put forward - the establishment of a clear
vision and the conduct of an intensive
reconciliation program. The first is that
Zimbabwe needs a vision to work toward after
the change that reflects the people's
perceptions of the kind of country they want
for themselves and their children.
Drafting such a vision can be done by anyone
who understands development. That would
miss an opportunity, however. Bringing
Zimbabweans back together after the internecine
events of the past, which started even before
Mugabe, is necessary if it is to evolve into a
peaceful country in which differences, whether
regional, tribal, political, racial, etc., are
to be sources of strength and not
division. The poor also have to be given
hope and most of all opportunity.
A tool
to achieve this was done in South Africa in the
1980s. This was termed 'scenario
planning' which used experts, mostly local, to
examine the situation facing the country then
and presented the results of possible 'futures'
based on their findings of their analyses of
the choices to be made. The results were
widely shared through media and face-to-face
encounters with interest groups, political
parties, and businesses (which in fact funded
the exercise). One future made the most
sense and it was the one which brought the
minority apartheid government and the ANC and
others together to agree upon the peaceful
change to majority rule. It built
consensus and reassurance for all groups
allowing them to accept change and work
together.
A similar exercise in
Zimbabwe could help the government and its
successors by giving pointers on what is needed
and wanted by the population. A slight
alteration in approach for Zimbabwe would be to
conduct it even more intensively in terms of
consultation with the people. This would
give its results more validity and broad
owners
hip and in effect directly involve
ordinary people in the democratic process.
And it would be part of the
second suggestion which is the conduct of a
well designed and financed program operated
outside the government, perhaps by a public
commission, to achieve reconciliation among
Zimbabweans. Considerable divisions were
perpetrated over the past decades resulting in
hatred, fear, suspicion and self-interest being
widespread. Anyone who doubts the
severity of the wounds and thus the difficulty
of this task can obtain a small taste by
reading Peter Godwin's book, Fear. The
people of Zimbabwe need to be brought together
again which means a lot of forgiveness is
needed. Those known to have committed
illegal acts need to be called to account, but
stuffing them into jails is not the best
solution. Other solutions need to be
considered so people can live together in
peace.
Key to these two suggestions
succeeding is that the Zimbabweans be in
charge. And, as far as is possible,
financial support should be sought in the first
instance from private sources such as
Zimbabwean business and, only if necessary, but
with no strings or direct involvement, from
international donors. Ownership is
important to the legitimacy of the vision that
emerges and the resolving of divisions
fracturing Zimbabwe's society.
The next blogs to this series on
Zimbabwe will be on such subjects as
land/agriculture and health and
education.
The views expressed in this blog are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Center for National Policy.
Printable Version
