Online Reporter
Gibson Nyikadzino
Zimpapers Politics Hub
THE Preamble of Zimbabwe’s 2013 Constitution commits that “we the people of Zimbabwe, united in our diversity by our common desire for freedom, justice and equality and our heroic resistance to colonialism, racism and all forms of domination and oppression, exalting and extolling the brave men and women who sacrificed their lives during the Chimurenga/Umvukela and national liberation struggles…”
This collective statement was made by at least 94 percent of the voting population which also in section 3(1)(i) of the same document agreed that among the founding values and principles of the state of Zimbabwe lies the “recognition of and respect for the liberation struggle”.
Zimbabwe’s national aspirations, foreign policy engagements and security interests are all inseparably tied to the provisions that underpin the ethos of the liberation struggle which brought the country’s independence.
Valuing and upholding the ethos of the liberation struggle have been the characteristic elements of the criterion used to measure one’s ability to lead the nation and steer its interests by safeguarding and holding sacred the sacrifices made by the liberation fighters.
This is where the nation has its formulation of its strategic culture, which is an investment in the anti-colonial and anti-imperial struggles, that Zimbabwe shares with other regional peers like South Africa, Mozambique, Namibia, Angola and Tanzania.
The colonial experiences of the peoples from these countries have a shared homogeneity, hence a failure to recognise the monstrosity of colonialism and how it exploited, killed, maimed and brutally plundered resources for European gain disqualifies any desire to aspire to take the helm of the country because it has a sacred foundational premise.
This premise is espoused in what has over the years come to be known characteristically as the Zvinavashe doctrine, after the late national hero and Commander of the Zimbabwe Defence Force (ZDF), General Vitalis Musungwa Gava Zvinavashe.
In laying the doctrine that also speaks to the country’s strategic culture, Gen Zvinavashe in 2002 said: “We wish to make it very clear to all Zimbabwean citizens that the security organisation will stand in support for those political leaders that will pursue Zimbabwe’s values, traditions, beliefs for which thousands of lives were lost in pursuit of Zimbabwe’s hard-won independence, sovereignty, integrity and the national interest.”
From the sacrifices that were made to free Zimbabwe from the clutches of colonialism, the same have been of evidential significance in guiding the nation on the trajectory to take. These values inform the country’s strategic culture.
For Zimbabwe to survive, its strategic culture, implemented by politicians and secured by the people’s army, is best understood by looking at occurrences around its security environment, whether they threaten the State or not.
The colonial powers might have physically left Zimbabwe in 1980, but they have paths they left which they have used to try and destabilise the nation and its regional allies ideologically as proxies under the umbrella of “expanding democratic values to the former colonies”.
If custodians of Zimbabwe’s strategic culture sniff a threat, internal or external, they are expected to act to neutralise the threat as informed by the liberation ethos that informed and guided their execution of the armed struggle against colonialism.
What has emerged as the biggest threat, which Zimbabwe is ready to deal with and neutralise, is the emergence of globalist, nascent and renascent politicians who on many occasions have pledged to be missionaries of values that seek to upend the liberation values.
In the national body politic, globalists who emerged since the 1990s have ideologically aligned themselves with the West, without remorse on the unfortunate historical deeds that the West rolled out on the people.
The same people have been willing clients of regional destabilisers like the now defunct Oppeinheimer’s Brenthurst Foundation which closed doors on July 16 this year after more than two decades of instigating instability. To its aide have been organisations like the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and other USAID funded movements to sponsor what they termed “colour revolutions” against Zimbabwe.
On a regional scale, this funding to undermine Zimbabwe’s interests and allies has been the factor in guiding sister Liberation Movements to coalesce around the doctrine of sovereignty, self-rule and scaling up their solidarity against schemes of interference through external sponsorship.
The policy that informs Zimbabwe’s national stability and security interests is a multi-dimensional set of ideational factors that shape collective understandings of how to serve and protect the nation and influence other actors or groups to advance state priorities.
Also, despite the Zvinavashe doctrine being two decades old, the current ZDF Commander General Phillip Valerio Sibanda, in May 2022 made a statement that displayed continuity of the doctrine and its everlasting relevance as if its inscribed on stone tablets.
“It remains a challenge to us all to defend the values that the liberators stood and fought for. We must always remember that to be who we are today, it is because somebody shed their sweat or blood as the late Major-General Chanakira and many others did. Let us never lose sight of this important fact, no matter kuti tinenge tadziigwa sei (how comfortable we have become),” said Gen Sibanda.
It is key to always remember that Zimbabwe’s strategic culture is a military dimension of political culture influenced mainly by socially constructed values, beliefs and actions that have a place in Zimbabwe’s constitution.
At the heart of this intended national and regional stability are inseparable factors tied to Zimbabwe’s geography, which salient issues such as ethnicity and migration entail the force of geography on influencing security. Almost every ethnic group in Zimbabwe is found in one or more neighbouring countries; hence, its ties with neighbours do not warrant any cause of instability.
Other factors include shared colonial histories, similar ideologies used to defeat colonial or apartheid governments and the urge of solidarism from key elements to explain why Zimbabwe is itself a stable country. These elements are important in exposing the country and its regional preference for a pathway towards peace and security.
