By Madibeng Kgwete: posted on 27 June 2008
With every passing day, the political and economic crisis in Zimbabwe goes from bad to worse. It is obvious that President Robert Mugabe is the problem; and it is also clear that Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) leader Morgan Tsvangirai is not the answer.
The MDC and its allies in the international Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO) sector believe in problem-solving through the media. They will not succeed in their efforts to find a solution to the crisis if they continue to pump money into expensive newspaper and other media advertisements, hoping that this will swing public opinion in their favour.
Having observed the MDC’s media campaign in South Africa over the last couple of weeks, it has emerged that, in an average week, there are at least eight full-page newspaper advertisements in the newspapers, all trying to discredit Mugabe.
Discrediting Mugabe through the media is a total waste of time, energy and money. The 84-year-old discredits himself with every public appearance he makes. The MDC and its allies must instead channel their money (and they seem to have it in abundance) into more strategic political campaigns.
Whilst Mugabe proves everyday that his time has passed, the MDC, under Morgan Tsvangirai, does not seem to be ready to govern. The MDC is not an authentic African opposition party. It is not comparable, in any way, with, for example, Raila Odinga’s Orange Democratic Movement in Kenya.
The MDC has more political allies in Europe and the United States than it has in the entire Africa. This at times gives credence to Mugabe’s hollow claims that the MDC are agents of imperialism. Zanu-PF terrorises the very nation it leberated from colonialism. The MDC fails to prove that it is a credible alternative. Zimbabwe is in a dilemma.
Perhaps it is time for both Mugabe and Tsvangirai to step aside and allow a new crop of leadership, preferably under a government of national unity, to take Zimbabwe out of the political and economic crisis that it now finds itself in. Simba Makoni could be suitable to lead such a transitional government.
Friday, June 27, 2008
Friday, June 20, 2008
Book review: Legacies of Power
Book Title: Legacies of Power: leadership Change and Former Presidents in African Politics
Editors: Roger Southall and Henning Melber
ISBN: 91-7106-558-X
Reviewed by: Nelson Kgwete
One of South Africa’s biggest knowledge centres, the Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) Press, has published an insightful book on the role of former African heads of states.
Entitled “Legacies of Power: Leadership Change and Former Presidents in African Politics”, the book is a compilation of scholarly articles by various notable authors.
The book critically evaluates the roles, both positive and negative, that former presidents such as Nelson Mandela of South Africa, Sam Nujoma of Nabibia, Charles Taylor of Liberia and others play after their terms of office expire.
There is also a chapter on Zimbabwe; but, here, the authors focus not on former Prime Minister Ian Smith. Rather, and perhaps quite fittingly, the focus is on President Robert Mugabe.
Titled “When I am a century old: why Robert Mugabe won’t go”, the chapter on Mugabe instantly pulls one’s attention, particularly in view of the current volatile political and economic situation in that country.
The writer of the chapter on Mugabe, David Moore, explains why the 84-year-old president won’t leave office. Moore quotes Mugabe as having told a rally as far back as July 1977 that: “The Zanu axe must continue to fall upon the necks of rebels when we find it no longer possible to persuade them into the harmony that binds us all.”
In the chapter, “Politics and presidential term limits in Uganda”, author Roger Tangri begins with a quote by Ugandan president Yoweri Museveni during his January 1986 swearing-in address when he said: “The problem of Africa in general and Uganda in particular is not the people but leaders who want to overstay in power”.
Curiously, Museveni is still in power today, 22 years after making that bold statement. Tangri outlines two reasons why Museveni, previously in favour of change of political leadership, has joined the ranks of those leaders “who want to overstay in power”.
Firstly, it is argued that, being the dominant political figure he is in Ugandan politics, Museveni does not see anyone else filling his shoes. Related to that, Tangri says there are some in Museveni’s so-called inner circle who want him to stay so they can continue to enjoy proximity to political power.
Secondly, Tangri argues that Museveni wants to stay on as President because he fears that a new political administration will uncover corruption committed by him or close allies under his leadership. Museveni “fears that his erstwhile political allies, now leading the political opposition, could attain political power and seek to settle old scores,” writes Tangri.
Not surprisingly, the chapter on Mandela is full of praises, except for the assertion that Mandela was not quite as effective in his mediation efforts in Africa as many would have thought. Mandela’s failed bid to stop then Nigerian President Sani Abacha from killing critic Ken Saro Wiwa is cited as an example.
Other chapters are no less enlightening. The writers rely on thorough research and their writing ranks amongst the highest in their academic quality.
Editors: Roger Southall and Henning Melber
ISBN: 91-7106-558-X
Reviewed by: Nelson Kgwete
One of South Africa’s biggest knowledge centres, the Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) Press, has published an insightful book on the role of former African heads of states.
Entitled “Legacies of Power: Leadership Change and Former Presidents in African Politics”, the book is a compilation of scholarly articles by various notable authors.
The book critically evaluates the roles, both positive and negative, that former presidents such as Nelson Mandela of South Africa, Sam Nujoma of Nabibia, Charles Taylor of Liberia and others play after their terms of office expire.
There is also a chapter on Zimbabwe; but, here, the authors focus not on former Prime Minister Ian Smith. Rather, and perhaps quite fittingly, the focus is on President Robert Mugabe.
Titled “When I am a century old: why Robert Mugabe won’t go”, the chapter on Mugabe instantly pulls one’s attention, particularly in view of the current volatile political and economic situation in that country.
The writer of the chapter on Mugabe, David Moore, explains why the 84-year-old president won’t leave office. Moore quotes Mugabe as having told a rally as far back as July 1977 that: “The Zanu axe must continue to fall upon the necks of rebels when we find it no longer possible to persuade them into the harmony that binds us all.”
In the chapter, “Politics and presidential term limits in Uganda”, author Roger Tangri begins with a quote by Ugandan president Yoweri Museveni during his January 1986 swearing-in address when he said: “The problem of Africa in general and Uganda in particular is not the people but leaders who want to overstay in power”.
Curiously, Museveni is still in power today, 22 years after making that bold statement. Tangri outlines two reasons why Museveni, previously in favour of change of political leadership, has joined the ranks of those leaders “who want to overstay in power”.
Firstly, it is argued that, being the dominant political figure he is in Ugandan politics, Museveni does not see anyone else filling his shoes. Related to that, Tangri says there are some in Museveni’s so-called inner circle who want him to stay so they can continue to enjoy proximity to political power.
Secondly, Tangri argues that Museveni wants to stay on as President because he fears that a new political administration will uncover corruption committed by him or close allies under his leadership. Museveni “fears that his erstwhile political allies, now leading the political opposition, could attain political power and seek to settle old scores,” writes Tangri.
Not surprisingly, the chapter on Mandela is full of praises, except for the assertion that Mandela was not quite as effective in his mediation efforts in Africa as many would have thought. Mandela’s failed bid to stop then Nigerian President Sani Abacha from killing critic Ken Saro Wiwa is cited as an example.
Other chapters are no less enlightening. The writers rely on thorough research and their writing ranks amongst the highest in their academic quality.
Thursday, June 12, 2008
Why Helen Zille's idea will not materialise
By Madibeng Kgwete: posted on 13 June 2008
The leader of the Democratic Alliance (DA), Helen Zille, was quoted in the media recently suggesting that opposition parties such as her own, the DA, the United Democratic Movement (UDM) and the Independent Democrats (ID) form a formidable coalition to challenge the African National Congress's dominance of the South African political landscape.
In response to the idea, the leader of the UDM, Bantu Holomisa, did not reject the idea, saying there was a need to explore ways of uniting South Africa's opposition political parties. ID leader Patricia De Lille said she would not comment on whether her party will be willing to join such a coalition. De Lille said it was up to members of her party to decide.
Holomisa seemed to have looked at Zille's idea innocently and, as a result, he seems to have overlooked some critical factors that will hinder the success of any coalition of united opposition parties. There are at least two critical reasons why Zille's idea will most likely not materialise any time soon.
Firstly, any coalition of opposition parties will have to deal with the question of leadership. And, here, at issue will be the racial group to which the leader belongs. Realistically, the majority of black people opposed to the ANC's rule may be reluctant to accept a white person as their leader. The same may apply to white people: they may not trust a black leader to represent their interests.
We are now 14 years into our democracy, but, despite talk of a "Rainbow Nation", we still have two South Africas - one white and another black. President Thabo Mbeki was criticised for pointing to this reality in the early years of his presidency, but the fact remains: South Africans are still divided along racial lines.
Secondly, the idea of the coalition may be seen as a plot by the DA to swallow the smaller opposition political parties in the same way that its predecessor, the Democratic Party, tried to swallow the now-defunct Nation Party. DA supporters, both black and white, seem to be having very little confidence in the ability of black people to lead an effective government.
The combination of hostile race relations and power mongering will make Zille?s dream of a united opposition movement remain just that - a dream. South Africans of different racial groupings and varied interests must respect and trust each other before attempting to jump into a political coalition.
The leader of the Democratic Alliance (DA), Helen Zille, was quoted in the media recently suggesting that opposition parties such as her own, the DA, the United Democratic Movement (UDM) and the Independent Democrats (ID) form a formidable coalition to challenge the African National Congress's dominance of the South African political landscape.
In response to the idea, the leader of the UDM, Bantu Holomisa, did not reject the idea, saying there was a need to explore ways of uniting South Africa's opposition political parties. ID leader Patricia De Lille said she would not comment on whether her party will be willing to join such a coalition. De Lille said it was up to members of her party to decide.
Holomisa seemed to have looked at Zille's idea innocently and, as a result, he seems to have overlooked some critical factors that will hinder the success of any coalition of united opposition parties. There are at least two critical reasons why Zille's idea will most likely not materialise any time soon.
Firstly, any coalition of opposition parties will have to deal with the question of leadership. And, here, at issue will be the racial group to which the leader belongs. Realistically, the majority of black people opposed to the ANC's rule may be reluctant to accept a white person as their leader. The same may apply to white people: they may not trust a black leader to represent their interests.
We are now 14 years into our democracy, but, despite talk of a "Rainbow Nation", we still have two South Africas - one white and another black. President Thabo Mbeki was criticised for pointing to this reality in the early years of his presidency, but the fact remains: South Africans are still divided along racial lines.
Secondly, the idea of the coalition may be seen as a plot by the DA to swallow the smaller opposition political parties in the same way that its predecessor, the Democratic Party, tried to swallow the now-defunct Nation Party. DA supporters, both black and white, seem to be having very little confidence in the ability of black people to lead an effective government.
The combination of hostile race relations and power mongering will make Zille?s dream of a united opposition movement remain just that - a dream. South Africans of different racial groupings and varied interests must respect and trust each other before attempting to jump into a political coalition.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
