No way for another GPA

political discourse in Zimbabwe.
Before critiquing the three “myths”, which are meant to confuse people who may have not had sight of the GPA, I would like to inform Zimbabweans that the GPA is not a cast-in-stone instrument.
It was not meant to be there forever or to live longer than it is required by law. The GPA is an addition to our current Constitution and not its replacement.
It is thus hypocritical for anyone to ever think that the current Constitution could not be used for constitutional guidance in the forthcoming elections. Besides, the Inclusive Government cannot be allowed to continue living on borrowed time under the guise of wanting to have a new Constitution which some are using as a tactic of wanting to remain in power.
However, Zimbabweans are now seized with the political gymnastics that take place whenever there is talk of elections. Some academic political analysts go wild using a variety of strong adjectives to describe the situation in Zimbabwe as one in crisis. If people are able to peacefully enjoy the lectures anywhere and to criticise our political leadership, how then can the political situation be said to be in crisis?
There are people who pretend to be proudly Zimbabweans during the day and nicodemously become Western propagandists during convenient times.
Now let me come to the critiquing of Mandaza’s three myths of the political situation in Zimbabwe.
The GPA was never created for any political party to be victorious over the other during the lifespan of the GPA. It was created to allow people to re-discover each other in order to establish a harmonious working relationship. The electorate would then at the expiry of the GNU term of office decide on who to vote for.
The world over, GPAs are never a platform used by partners to emerge victorious during the period of partnership. It is thus naive for Mandaza to be glossy about this point which is not a proven fact.
The other myth, according to this unusual political analysis, is “the louder and louder message about elections happening this year.”
One can understand Ibbo’s fear and may sympathise with him and his coterie of professors from the University of Zimbabwe who think they have the preserve to champion Zimbabwe’s political solutions.
This writer would want to advise them that their insatiable appetite for donor funds will one day curse them. However, people should not mind them for they will not stop hallucinating, as long as there is a call for elections. The idea that the calling for elections is a demonstration of over-confidence of the perpetrators, especially President Mugabe, is a regime change concept.
The fact that Mandaza and his ilk do not quite agree with the lifting of the illegal sanctions imposed by the EU and America makes people think they are enjoying and profiting from the effects of the illegal sanctions.
It is so shameful that an academic like Mandaza, can easily blame the economic meltdown of 2008 on a single factor. It is also unscholarly for him to say that Zanu-PF was, by 2008, a mere shadow of the party of liberation. Zanu-PF as a party that was riddled with factionalism and imposition of candidates still managed to get 99 seats. Put together the seats for the two MDC’s failed to accumulate the two thirds majority that would have allowed them to form a coalition Government of their own without Zanu-PF.
Thus, in that scenario, Zanu-PF cannot be said to have been a mere shadow of its usual vibrancy and chaotic. The failure by Zanu-PF to maintain a 2/3 majority in parliament should be used as a strategic learning point as it repositions and prepares itself for the forthcoming general elections.
In his article, Mandaza continues to demonstrate his weak analysis of what is happening in Zimbabwe.
He said, “And by 2008, the State itself survived on a combination of violence (or the threat of it) and patronage which in turn welded together securocracy into a defensive and reckless solidarity against a pulverised and fearful population.”
He deliberately failed to highlight the fact that the illegal sanctions, were meant to impoverish the population in order for them to rise against the Government as is happening in Libya and the Arab World.
What he failed to conceive was the resolve and resilience of Zimbabweans. Mandaza and his coterie of Western propagandists must blame themselves not Zanu-PF for failing to read the unfolding political and social environment in Zimbabwe between 2000-2008.
Mandaza himself, a former stalwart supporter of Zanu-PF, picked at independence to cover the gap of shortages of technocrats, failed Zanu-PF by proffering unsustainable growth policies.
As a Permanent Secretary and Public Service Commissioner, Ibbo was part of the architects of the failed ESAP. Thus, he cannot today claim to be a problem solver. He has always been a troublemaker and is continuing to do that by making commentaries that continue to polarise and radicalise Zimbabwe’s political institutions. He does this partly by inviting surrogates from the Western sponsored civic organisations to rubbish Zimbabwe. His commentaries on the re-appointment of Service Chiefs, the Reserve Bank Governor and the Attorney General sound like the voice of a messenger of regime change. I would like to refer him to Wikiquote so as to read Washington’s straitjacket philosophy and national symbolism. He should again be referred to the American constitution so as to read the powers of the American president so that he can be schooled on how national security issues are managed by the President.
Besides, all presidents the world-over that are executives have the preserve to declare war, appoint, re-appoint, transfer and promote Service Chiefs.
They only consult with the relevant commissions but the decision remains theirs. These commentaries on public offices only serve to create emotions on the ignorant readership.
The question that rises — who does Ibbo want to be at the helm of these public offices of high security in nature? In his argument he did not give any slightest clue as to how Service Chiefs have become law unto themselves. Which clause, chapter or article of the constitution have they violated to warrant Ibbo’s treasonous attack on them?
His claims are just rhetoric, full of personal hate for individuals, which Mandaza uses to claim funding from the donor community. Ibbo now cherishes to be careless and rabid in his political analysis. He accuses the MDCs of having failed the “Reform Agenda”.
What he forgets is that he is also a political animal that has failed badly in a Mavambo political office. This failure by Mandaza to proffer a sumptuous political solution makes his political analysis skewed.