Dialogue: Act of progressive governance, leadership

Tafadzwa Mugwadi Senior Writer

When President Mnangagwa assumed office following Operation Restore Legacy, the hallmark of all his speeches anchored on dialogue.

Dialogue is a key ingredient in establishing and sustaining a peaceful and tranquil society.

During his campaign trail in the run up to the 2018 harmonised elections, he underscored the need for the country to never relegate dialogue, but rather, make it a culture for our people across the spectrum of society.

The President emphasised that even in victory, he would create a platform for political players to dialogue on pertinet national issues.

Again, one could have easily dismissed that key message as political chitchat, but he did not end there.

Following his victory, he called out for dialogue across political players, and in particular to Nelson Chamisa, who was the runner-up in the presidential election.

On Twitter, the President said “my hands are stretched out to Chamisa as a brother to sit down with me on the table of brotherhood and discuss our differences in a harmonious manner in order to keep our people united and focused on the economy.”

While the majority heeded the President’s call, one contestant did not join others and is still to do so.

The President has not ended there, but makes it unequivocal on every relevant platform that the Political Actors Dialogue (POLAD) platform which was created for such dialogue is still open for others that are yet to see the wisdom of doing so.

However, the President’s call for dialogue was misconstrued by some opposition leaders as a sign of weakness.

A whole lot of unscrupulous and nonsensical demands were echoed from Morgan Tsvangirai House (formerly Harvest House) such as issues of illegitimacy and so-called neutral mediators.

Every Zimbabwean and the whole world woke up to Chamisa claiming that he had glaring evidence of vote rigging saying, “the evidence that we have is not only overwhelming, but embarrassing.”

He, however, had himself to suffer from self-humiliation of monumental proportions after embarrassingly failing to produce the evidence during the famous Concourt proceedings where V11 forms could not come-by.

In Zimbabwe, now the word V11 has become part of common talk as a substitute for evidence.

As the Concourt closed the case and ruled against the opposition with heavy costs, rejecting Chamisa and the MDC-A argument as baseless, the question of legitimacy concluded with finality, to the extent that even President Mnangagwa himself is not allowed to subject his legitimacy to any form of discussion whatsoever, otherwise he risks violating the Constitution which he swore to uphold, defend and protect.

That Constitution, whose supremacy is known to the MDC-A places the Concourt as the final arbiter of such matters and when it rules over them, it’s the end of the story.

One would have expected for soberness to prevail in the opposition MDC-Alliance after this ruling which could have allowed the nation to focus on real issues of economic recovery, reconstruction and development through dialogue.

Unfortunately, the “jecharist” gangsters have embarked on a systematic bartering, bastardisation and adulteration of the nation’s image which had been on course towards repair since November 2017 through stage-managing violent demonstrations.

These violent campaigns through weaponising constitutional rights such as Section 59 of the Zimbabwean Constitution are aimed at coinciding with the United States’ timeline for annual sanctions review sessions. Theatrics by Job Sikhala and his factional band of followers in the MDC-A come into mind.

The EU has made a huge statement by removing part of the sanctions in a clear show of its change of attitude towards Zimbabwe, courtesy of the re-engagement agenda and the reform process currently in motion.

It was not by mistake that the EU emphasised and commended dialogue among all players in its statement over sanctions removal.

This is because the great nations of this world, the rich and peaceful have emerged from tumultuous conflicts of higher magnitude compared to what we might have seen here.

Talk of Rwanda which has become one of the leading hubs of economic development in Africa and how the country emerged from the dark gallows of genocide some two decades ago.

How about Israel, one of the greatest powers today and how they magically regrouped from loose fragments of scattered Jewish families and individuals after the gloomy days of the Holocaust and anti-Semitism.

The Republic of Kenya is a contemporary example of how a nation can unite and become a marvel of many following seasonal turmoil and tenacity.

The great handshake between President Uhuru Kenyatta and Mr Raila Odinga who even once declared and sworn himself a street president has changed the image of Kenya globally, although it came against the backdrop of unnecessary loss of innocent souls which could have been avoided.

At the end of the tunnel, dialogue has always been the end game.

The cardinal point being put across here is that there is no nation that has found the road to greatness an easy one like a walk in the Garden of Eden.

There is no nation whose people just emerged a happy people out of no collective effort towards creating an ideal society that is an anchorage for generational transformation.

Indeed, there is no country that has skied the heights of political, social and economic progress through aid or benevolence from other states or group of states, but by the sweat, determination and unshakable collective will of its people and its leadership.

There is no country that has managed to overcome conflict antagonism and all forms of polarisation without an appreciation of the essence and imperatives of dialogue among divergent viewpoints in order to ensure that its people pull in one direction, knowing fully well that the country comes first.

The President is a patient and determined man who wants to see Zimbabweans closing ranks for posterity and a fresh culture of engagement where diversity is celebrated.

The biggest challenge, however, has been that the call for dialogue has been misinterpreted as a sign of weakness or vulnerability.

Just as a piece of advice! How much better could it have been, that those operating on such fake intelligence reorganise their conscience and realise the real fact of the matter?

The Job Sikhalas of this world need to tread cautiously and reflect on his Trojan-confrontational behaviour before it is too late.

Making pleas and appeals for dialogue daily to suddenly throw spanners when an opportunity for such dialogue presents by way of conditioning it with ridiculous demands is not smart at all.

Those who think that they can force the President to dialogue with them exclusive of others through stage-managing violent demonstrations and riotous behaviour will have themselves to blame when the law is stretched out to them.

It is high-time soberness prevails among the opposition MDC-A.

The Zimbabwe that President Mnangagwa is carving is one that must appreciate the reality that politics and elections are seasonal because they come and go, but the twin evils of poverty and unemployment needs concerted efforts.

The call for dialogue, therefore, is not a sign of weakness, but an act of progressive governance, good team work, strong character.

Dialogue is meant  to detoxify, de-escalate and depolarise Zimbabwe’s political environment towards Vision 2030.