The changing narrative of Zimbabwe’s post-colonial history in the making

 End of the ‘Liberation War Narrative’?

By Terence Chitapi

Introduction

The quest for a post-colonial developmental state in Zimbabwe which started in 1980 has delivered mixed results for the country and its citizens. From the early successes in basic social service delivery to the chaotic but necessary land reform exercise, all the positives have been blighted by the general malaise that has bedeviled the country since the late 1990s. This has been the result of cumulative knocks on the economy from the effects of mismanagement, corruption and the disastrous effects of the Economic Structural Adjustment Programme (ESAP) of the Bretton Woods institutions. The contestation for state power coupled with the right to govern and steer development has been dominated by Zanu PF since independence in 1980.

Zanu PF has continuously used the liberation war as a
claim to power.

Zanu PF has won elections on the strength of this liberation war narrative – that it is only those that participated in the liberation struggle as fighters that have an entitlement to govern (rule as they say) Zimbabwe. The narrative has been used as the sole cross-cutting credential in deciding who ascends to state power in Zimbabwe. This argument has been practically cemented through the systematic deployment of former liberation fighters in various arms of government, and not less in the civil service. However, events on the ground with regards the former liberation movement Zanu PF point to a changing of narrative, this in terms of challenging the liberation war narrative that has sustained the party politically to this day. And this new narrative seeks apparently to ride on the new realities of the post-colonial state in Africa where the youth are the emerging dominant demographic majority.

From a socialist state to state capitalism

ESAP delivered a big blow to the
young welfare state.

Zanu PF emerged victorious at the 1980 polls on the back of promises towards building a socialist welfare state based on a redistributive agenda. This was meant to correct the skewed allocation and ownership of the primary resource for production - land – and the adjoining linkages of opportunities driving a modern developmental economy. However, like most post-colonial African states, the Zimbabwean government failed to guard against the intrusion of the Bretton Woods institutions. Zimbabwe was to eventually capitulate to the Economic Structural Adjustment Programmes (ESAP) prescribed by the IMF and World Bank as the panacea to laying a neo-liberal foundation in building the modern developmental state. This, coupled with corruption and neo-patrimonial tendencies led to an inevitable deterioration of the economy. The Willowgate scandal of 1989 was just but the protruding tip of the corruption iceberg that continues to deter meaningful economic development in the country.

The land reform though
necesssary, has been used
 by Zanu PF as a political tool.

The inability of the ruling government post-2000 to satisfy the needs of its citizens in the face of dismal economic performance and shrinking fiscal space has meant decreased popularity and a matching increase in voices of dissent. This did coincide with the emergence of the MDC as a formidable opposition to the Zanu PF hegemony. All this while, the liberation war narrative remained a dominant theme as Zanu PF launched the 3^rd Chimurenga, a necessary but populist redistribution of land to protect its self-imposed entitlement to state power. Zanu PF has however over that time metamorphosed from a government holding onto power by means most foul to more subtle and covert means of coercion. Patronage and clientelism top this list. In an environment where formal businesses are struggling, the government continues to use the allocation of state tenders to entrench its patronage network. The neopatrimonial scourge has also ensured that the state-owned enterprises and parastatals that seemingly survived privatization during ESAP have been virtually run-down amidst state-sanctioned plunder and mismanagement.

The change mantra becomes an illusion

Since the MDC was the first party to really threaten the hegemonic status of Zanu PF, it is no wonder that it has continued to carry the hopes of those that see no future in Zanu PF’s ability to steer the country on a genuinely developmental path. The ‘change mantra’ did resonate with a significant majority of citizens. On March 29 2008 the biggest verdict against the economic plunder and underdevelopment was passed by the citizens and Zanu PF lost its parliamentary majority for the first time. Its presidential candidate Robert Mugabe came second best in the first round of polls, scoring 43% against Morgan Tsvangirai’s 47%.

Service chiefs... subverting the
constitution in the name of Zanu PF

It was in the aftermath of this poll that the nation was practically made to endure the reality of what the ‘liberation war narrative as a claim to state power’ was in reality. In 2002, the late Zimbabwe National Army commander Vitalis Zvinavashe in the company of other service chiefs had blatantly warned, “Let it be known that the highest office in the land is a straight jacket whose occupant is expected to observe the objectives of the liberation struggle. We will therefore not accept, let alone support or salute anyone with a different agenda that threatens the very existence of our sovereignty, our country and our people.” While in 2002 Mugabe won, in 2008 he was defeated and true to their word, the military led a reversal of that first round win by Morgan Tsvangirai. The liberation war narrative was their guiding narrative.

Sadly, the inadequateness of a clear winner in the March 2008 elections necessitated the promulgation of a negotiated government, commonly referred to as the government of national unity (GNU). While others have argued to the contrary, many believe that the period during which the main opposition parties had a flirtation with state power in the GNU overall worked to diminish the people’s confidence in the ‘change mantra’ as a panacea to arresting the Zanu PF-inspired collapse.

Decimating the liberation war narrative

Professor Moyo argues that
G40 is not a faction but a
demographic issue.

The events in Zanu PF, in particular the factional wars over succession are telling when looked at from the perspective of a singular narrative playing a major part in deciding our national politics. What is clear since that party’s last congress in 2014 is how the claim to power on the basis of the liberation war narrative is slowly but surely being decimated. Professor Jonathan Moyo, widely seen as a leading figure in what is commonly referred to as the G40 faction argues that the moniker G40 is not a faction, but rather “a purely demographic issue that seeks to describe the generation from where the political future of the country is expected to derive shape.”

The faction said to be led by former Vice President Emmerson Mnangagwa using the moniker Team Lacoste has made clear their views and intentions viz succession. They want Mnangagwa to succeed Mugabe and their choice’s entitlement to govern is based on the liberation war narrative. On the other hand, the faction referred to as G40 is firmly focused on outdoing and undoing the liberation war narrative, instead pointing to the inescapable narrative of generational succession, based on the simple reality of succession by or through age or the passage of time. The roping in of Sydney Sekeramayi by G40 into the succession rate is an indirect admission to the relevance of the liberation war narrative to succession politics. That the G40 faction is itself fronted by younger politicians who took no part, at least directly, in the war of liberation is itself telling of the project to dismantle the liberation war narrative.

For those that have pursued the liberation war narrative as their sole claim to political power and legitimacy, a lot of naivety has also been exposed of their thinking. If the truth be told without fear or favour, it was always really unwise of the war veterans who found themselves enjoying state power to invoke the liberation war narrative each time they faced constitutional challenges to their political power. The 2002 press conference by Zvinavashe and his ilk was a nauseating and sad chapter in the history of electoral politics in Zimbabwe. The very same ideal to self-determination of a people that necessitated the liberation struggle is what this liberation war narrative attacked.

The liberation war remains
all-important as it birthed Zimbabwe.

This is not to say that the citizens do not acknowledge and respect the liberation war, its ideals and what it brought for the country. To the contrary, the citizens are really frustrated with how erstwhile liberators have turned out to be worse oppressors and plunderers than the preceding white colonial minority. For the record, the liberation struggle was against the very virtues that seem to drive Zanu PF as a party and political system currently. After all, so many lost life and limb in that struggle, and these were not just Zanu cadres; in fact more civilians lost their lives than Zanu cadres in the trenches. Those are realities of open armed conflict. And to want to monopolize such a collective narrative as a claim to political power for a rogue few, is the height of hypocrisy, it does not come any worse.

Passing on the baton only way on both sides

2018 main battle will be between the MDC and Zanu PF.

As we face another plebiscite in 2018, it is worth pointing out a few issues. As with previous elections since 2000, we again will witness a binary contest between the MDC and Zanu PF. Never mind the coalition dynamics, they are really inconsequential to that binary contest. Yes, some may argue that coalition dynamics will influence numbers and have already written on that.

Heading to 2018, Zanu PF despite holding the advantage of incumbency has to grapple with factionalism over succession and as well battling the electoral verdict of an imploding economy. For President Mugabe and his G40 faction, his battles will include retaining (a semblance of what remains of) the liberation war narrative. Whatever remains of his tattered revolutionary legacy borrows a lot from the liberation war narrative. He also has to acknowledge the new reality of the youth demographic dominance, with no liberation war credentials. Hence you have the youth interface rallies and the revisionist narrations and counter-narrations of the liberation war history. Besides the fight over the liberation war narrative, the fight is as well very much about passing on the baton to a ‘younger’ leader.

On the other side, the MDC-T (and its potential allies in the opposition) will have to find common ground in confronting Zanu PF electorally. This is their best if not only chance to victory. The MDC (even when considered with its ‘Alliance’ partners) seems also very much faced with the same question of the old giving up space for the young. Yes, the party might have succeeded in the past, like Zanu PF, to stifle debate on issues of incumbency and succession at the top echelons of its political structures but again it is a basic tenet in political organization that can never be wished away. In the process, the opposition has unwittingly become a carbon copy of, as it has mimicked the very same antics it has pointed out Zanu PF for. Passing on the baton to a younger leader again remains the most viable option for Morgan Tsvangirai and the MDC-T/Alliance. 

What is apparent is that even if Zanu PF does retain the liberation war narrative in its scheme of politics, the same narrative has had its potency diluted by virtue of the acknowledgement of the importance of the present generations of young people to the political matrix of Zimbabwe. It however remains the duty of every Zimbabwean to guard the liberation war legacy jealously and never again allow a clique or political movement for selfish reasons, to monopolize it in legitimizing oppression, theft and plunder.

The writer writes here in his personal capacity and can be contacted at tchimhavi@gmail.com