Addressing national questions with cartoons

editorial cartoon by Innocent Mpofu that appeared in The Herald on 26 May that year.
It showed the then opposition leader; Morgan Tsvangirai walking in the direction pointed to by an election signpost facing the crowd and says, “Sanctions are in place . . . Price hikes are in place”
The time preceding the Election Day was characterised by pro-Zanu-PF allegations that sanctions imposed on Zimbabwe by the United Kingdom, the European Union and the United States were at the instigation of Morgan Tsvangirai and his MDC-T party, and were meant to put pressure to effect regime change.
Tsvangirai and his party supported the move and the Western countries insisted they would only act otherwise on the insistence of the opposition party.
The British government too also gave credence to Zanu-PF accusations that the sanctions were less about punishing it for human rights violations, but more about effecting regime change in Zimbabwe.
In 2004, then British prime minister Tony Blair told the House of Commons that, “We work closely with the MDC on the measures that we should take in respect of Zimbabwe, although I am afraid that these measures and sanctions, although we have them in place, are of limited effect on the Mugabe regime. We must be realistic about that. It is still important . . . to put pressure for change on the Mugabe regime”.
And after his retirement from active politics, Blair added with a hint of regret that he would have loved to topple President Mugabe militarily, but pointed to support from fellow African leaders for the Government as the major impediment.
Blair’s assertions challenge the view that imposition of sanctions on Zimbabwe were solely meant to address human rights issues in the country.
Whatever the reason for their imposition, however, there is little doubt that they gave Tsvangirai and his party an upper hand on the Zimbabwe political landscape as travel and funding restrictions placed on Mugabe and his close associates were not applied to the opposition.
Another factor alluded to by Tsvangirai in the                 editorial cartoon, as an electioneering tool is price hikes. Zanu-PF, and in particular President Mugabe was incensed at the increase in prices he deemed artificial.
Speaking at a rally exactly three weeks before the publication of the editorial cartoon and quoting from the Bible, the Zimbabwean leader said, “They keep raising and raising prices and, we wonder whether they want to raise the prices until the prices reach heaven. Some are doing it for the elections saying: Let’s make life hard for the people so that they cry and blame it all on Mugabe’s government. They’ll get 1 000 percent profit. That’s not profit. That’s profiteering which is condemned in the Bible.”
President Mugabe’s claims that the Zimbabwean situation was artificial are supported by the fact that by October 2008, Zimbabwe’s inflation had officially reached 231 000 000 percent a figure not matched by any country in history.
Even war ravaged states such as Iraq with 8,11 percent, Somalia with between 110 and 375 percent and Afghanistan with 22 percent had far better inflation figures than Zimbabwe.
Historically, before the post-Millennium Zimbabwe developments, the highest inflation figures were triggered by acts of war.
Tsvangirai, however, disassociated himself from the price hikes plot, instead blaming the economic woes on the Government.
The editorial cartoon instead does not necessarily pin the sanctions and price hikes blame on Tsvangirai, but suggest he is acutely aware that their existence enhances his political aspirations.
The cartoon is devoid of any metaphors or irony, it is a serious reflection of Zimbabwe’s politics questioning the credentials on the main opposition leader in Zimbabwe.
The cartoon exaggerates the size of Tsvangirai’s head in comparison to the rest of the body.
Unflattering caricatured face of the opposition leader looks directly towards the audience as he confidently walks towards the elections with clinched fists.
The above mentioned caricatures and distortions appear to be a plea to the viewers who formed part of the electorate to reconsider voting for Tsvangirai.
A question the cartoon poses is, “Will you consciously vote for this politician who even before he assumes office has caused untold suffering to the general public?”
The cartoon though showing a boastful and confident Tsvangirai, is in fact a campaign against his candidature.
The cartoon does not in any way suggest that the other side is better or desirable.
It succeeds in casting doubts on the credentials of Tsvangirai by questioning his role in creating an artificial situation that negatively affected the general public while boosting his political position.
From the campaign period, it was apparent that the state of the economy and external forces affecting it were the main national questions guiding the campaign strategies.
Results of the election and subsequent run-off are indications on how much the electorate believed either side’s view.
During elections, editorial cartoons may indeed be partisan; reflecting specific editorial views of the paper they are published in, but always give a true reflection of the topics that the electorate is likely to consider before settling on a preferred candidate.