On your marks, get set . . .

Not all cartoons have this unique quality, because some scarcely make reference to specific events.

But one editorial cartoon published by the Herald newspaper on May 16, 2008, making reference to a looming presidential run-off between President Mugabe and Morgan Tsvangirai scheduled for June 27, the same year, was spot on.

It shows President Robert Mugabe and his rival preparing to race. The first round of the election contested on May 29, had not produced a winner with the 50 percent plus 1 threshold required by the law, therefore a run-off date for a showdown between the two fierce political rivals was set.

The editorial cartoon used a race track as a metaphorical representation of the run-off.
Similar to an athletic field run, the objective of the run-off was to determine one winner at the end of the race. The ‘athletes’ are depicted squatting in the official starting position, seemingly possessing similar physical attributes and ready to race.

The major difference between the two candidates may be identified in the language and text employed in the editorial cartoon.
A thought bubble above Tsvangirai’s head discloses the opposition leader’s opinions.

He mentions three factors that were in place and supposedly enhancing his chances of winning the election. They are sanctions, BBC/CNN media onslaught and NGO canvassing.

Following the land reform programme, Western countries, led by Britain, the former colonial power, the European Union and United States imposed sanctions on Zimbabwe.

The sanctions were said to be ‘smart’ or ‘targeted’, meaning that they only affected Zimbabwe’s ruling elite. However, several Asian and African countries including China, Malawi, South Africa, Namibia openly opposed the sanctions, insisting they hurt ordinary Zimbabweans.

Meanwhile, 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 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”.
Blair added with a hint of regret that would have loved to topple President Mugabe militarily, but pointed to support from fellow African leaders for the Zimbabwe 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 the sanctions helped Tsvangirai and his party.

By the time Zimbabwe held its harmonised elections in 2008, CNN and the BBC had refused the privilege to report from Zimbabwe for seven years, having been accused by authorities in the country of biased reportage against the Government.

The Government accused the two media houses and other foreign media of fabricating negative stories on Zimbabwe and open support for the opposition.

Representatives of the foreign media showed their open sympathy for the opposition at a press conference in 2008, when MDC senior member erroneously pronounced Tsvangirai as the winner of the presidential election.

They reacted to the claims with rapturous applause.
The two media houses, CNN and BBC, however, continued to report on, and at times under cover from, Zimbabwe. Most of their reports were considered to be complete fabrications meant to tarnish the Government’s image and improve the opposition’s.

The Government also had reservations with foreign-funded NGOs it accused on using a food distribution programme that was under way at the time as a result of chronic food shortages — to solicit support for Mr Tsvangirai.

President Mugabe, specifically referring to the presidential run-off alleged, “Food assistance is required, . . . (but) NGOs were cashing in on that and coming to you saying, ‘We are feeding you so don’t vote Zanu-PF, vote the MDC instead’.

The Government alleged that all of the above were orchestrated with the help and blessing of Tsvangirai.
The words on the extreme right of the composition, taking the ‘athletes’ through the starting rituals but attributed to a figure outside the composition show the source is the controller of the race with the power to start it.

This means they are coming from the regulator of the elections, ZEC. They are a sign to show the start of the race is imminent and reflect the time the cartoon was published.

Tsvangirai’s face is highly animated, with numerously expressive strokes punctuating it.
The caricatures and distortions feed into the stereotypical representations pronounced by the composition. Tsvangirai is seen as an anxious politician, not confident in his own abilities but counting on outside help to help him win.

The anxiety is heightened by the expressive lines on his face. President Mugabe is depicted as a calm and focused politician who keeps cards close to his chest.

Unlike his rival, he is not immersed in deep thought; neither does he utter a word.
He is portrayed as the perfect candidate, hence the idealized personality emphasised by the facial features.
There is no sign of satire or irony in the composition.

It acknowledges the formidability of Tsvangirai’s challenge, though he is seen to have an unfair advantage.
However, the cartoonist, perhaps prompted by the first round results that showed President Mugabe in second place for the first time in Zimbabwe’s political history gives the two rivals identical physical prowess but adds advantage, however, unfair to Tsvangirai.