admin
Joram Nyathi Group Political Editor
WHENEVER I can avoid it, I have avoided writing about MDC-T. It looks like all the goodwill in the world cannot compensate for its many inherent weaknesses; and they are many, of a very elementary nature politically, but devastating in terms of brand image.
I am not even talking about lack of a serious policy. There is just too much childishness and lack of strategic thinking at the leadership level. Ordinary members, and even donors, have apparently given up.
But of late the party has started talking about the need for dialogue with Zanu-PF. I am not sure if it’s just Morgan Tsvangirai speaking for himself or if he is speaking on behalf of the party. There are many senior members of his party who want him gone. They say he has failed to remove Robert Mugabe from power and has also soiled the party brand.
Tendai Biti has joined in. His problem is that he gets apoplectic once he is on the podium. In the process he tends to mix student-cum-party activism with serious national debate. He has this irritating manner of talking about national issues as if he had just landed from Venus. It’s always “they this, they that” and never “we”. He only becomes part of Zimbabwe when he wants to claim victimhood against “they”.
In his so-called state of the nation address recently, Tsvangirai said there was need for dialogue to resolve the country’s challenges. He compared this to 2008 where he says “we engaged in dialogue and we carved out a home-grown solution to the problems bedevilling our country.”
Enter bitter Biti: “The starting point (for the dialogue) is on the side of Zanu-PF to accept that it has failed. To accept that they cannot lead us on their own; to accept that they are men of the past …”
That is certainly not the way to broach dialogue if you are a loser and the weaker party in a contest. But if you are in MDC-T leadership, it grabs news headlines in these desperate times.
Soon after the July 31 harmonised election results were announced, Tsvangirai declared them a nullity. He said the election had been stolen, rigged. He declared that he would not recognise Mugabe as president. He told his winning members to boycott the opening of Parliament and not to accept appointments to any posts in the ‘illegitimate’ government. He threatened to take his Nikuv dossier to the Constitutional Court, to Sadc, to the AU and possibly the United Nations.
Classic wananchi Biti: “Tongai tione.” Since then both have been gloating over national challenges, declaring: “You can rig elections but you can’t rig the economy.” They have been egged on by friendly media which have been generous with the rope it has given to Tsvangirai to hang himself.
In classic, infantile impulsiveness, they underestimated the arrogance of Zanu-PF’s so-called hardliners, which made Mugabe’s task of selecting his cabinet ministers that much easier. Why bother inviting into your government people who have not only refused to recognise your victory but have already rejected an offer not yet extended? Why even call their bluff? That is if such an invitation were ever contemplated!
Now they want dialogue with Zanu-PF leading to GNU-2.
The problem with Tsvangirai’s call for dialogue is that it comes at a time when he is at his weakest point; he is out of government, he lost the elections, he is not wanted any more in his own party. He is desperate and sounding it too.
It is one thing to appeal for inter-party dialogue to build consensus on key policy issues; it is quite another to want to use such talks as a ruse to sneak back into government. It sounds so cheap.
I have no doubt that most Zimbabweans would be amenable to sincere dialogue; an all-stakeholder dialogue to come up with parameters for a shared national vision. Even Zanu-PF needs support for its policy blueprint, Zim-Asset and would welcome input from fellow Zimbabweans in the MDC formations.
Herein lies the challenge: MDC-T was a key factor in the dysfunctionality of the GNU. It went in with a mindset to change the regime from within. It carried with it a baggage of complaints which made it almost impossible for the parties to agree on policy matters. Up to now one is not quite certain where they stand on the land issue, indigenisation and economic empowerment.
MDC-T disingenuously tried to cast itself as a reincarnated but wiser PF Zapu which would not allow itself to be swallowed up by a treacherous Zanu-PF. To that extent, it would seem that even in cabinet, some of its ministers became listening posts for all manner of media, to prove that they were in but different.
That destroyed all trust between rival party members and created a situation of two administrations in one.
Tsvangirai is very wrong if he believes 2008 is “similar” to 2014. The crisis in 2008 was mainly political and MDC-T had the upper hand. Today the key challenge is financial resources to implement Zim-Asset and there are no indications that MDC-T suddenly has billions of US dollars which it failed to produce in almost five years in government.
Who are the friends with deep pockets? What is their agenda when they have declared that they don’t recognise the current government?
In a nutshell, MDC-T is asking for a 49 percent stake in government but can’t produce its share of investment. The only merit in Tsvangirai and Biti’s calls for talks, a transparently self-serving merit at that, is that after they are rejected, they can then piously move around claiming to have tried but that their efforts were snubbed, spurned even. Anybody can see through these selfish, personal overtures which have not been openly endorsed by the party. Why are they being made via the media?
After all the posturing about a stolen election, MDC-T leadership now seeks to feather its freezing nest while leaving the rest of their followers high and dry. What has happened to recent calls for fresh elections? Where is the policy consistency; or is this opportunism spurred by an instinct for self-preservation?
Surely with all the corruption being exposed in government-linked enterprises and the public anger these have stirred up, one would expect a serious opposition to be mobilizing supporters in readiness for the next elections! But then that’s asking for too much. It’s an intellectual hinterland.
Online Reporter