Messages From Zimbabwe

Edward Stourton, Presenter: We’re joined now by the Foreign Office Minister Mark Malloch-Brown, Lord Malloch-Brown.  Good morning.

Lord Mark Malloch-Brown, Foreign Office Minister: Good morning, Edward.

ES: I don’t know whether you heard earlier on the programme our correspondent in Johannesburg speculating about the possibility that the South Africans had been talking to Robert Mugabe and to the opposition about the possibility of some kind of grand coalition.  What’s your view of either the likelihood or the desirability of that emerging in Zimbabwe?

LMB: Well, the South Africans have, or at least President Mbeki has been promoting that throughout this period, and indeed there’ve been talks between intermediaries and the two sides.  But it seems a long way off because Robert Mugabe’s version of it is one where he stays in charge; the opposition’s, very properly, is one where they take power and then invite parts of Mugabe’s party, the reformist part, to join them.  Because, after all, they won the first round and there’s no doubt that the MDC enjoy overwhelming popular support in the country, and if there were a free and fair election - a huge ‘if’ as you rightly report - they’d win overwhelmingly in a second round I suspect.

ES: Well from what you say I take it that you don’t think it’s very likely that that idea is going to fly very far; in which case, we are confronted with the likelihood that the elections will go ahead in some shape or form, but they probably won’t be free or fair and that Mr. Mugabe will win or declare himself the victor.  In which case he’s sort of got away with it really, hasn’t he?

LMB: Well first I, I think at one point both sides in Zimbabwe will have to come together and govern together, so I, I don’t want to rule that out, it’s just a matter of when and on what terms.  As to the election itself next week, you know I suspect, from the fact that there was a 55 per cent anti-Mugabe vote in the first round, and everything he’s done since has only outraged and offended his own people and his African neighbours, that in, that number has increased, say, just modestly by another 10 per cent.  That means he’d have a, the, the opposition would have a two to one lead in the popular vote.  That’s hard to steal and get away with it.  If he does steal it, and he’s obviously on track to try to with all these things he’s doing – throwing out UN workers, stopping local observers deploying, limiting the number of international ones, stopping opposition ads on the TV, arresting the opposition leaders – he obviously wants to steal it.  But he’s going to have to do it so visibly and ostentatiously and outrageously I think the world will, I hope, not let him get away with it.

ES: You, you’ve made a big assumption there about what’s happening in Zimbabwe and public opinion, even if you’re right about people’s feelings do you really think that that will be reflected in the way that they vote given what’s been happening, and continues to happen, in Zimbabwe?

LMB: Well, by the way, not that big an assumption.  I mean for the first time in Zimbabwe we saw the result of votes counted relatively cleanly…

ES: All right, let, let’s grant you…

LMB: …the opposition won…

ES: …let’s grant you your assumption.

LMB: Okay.

ES: In terms of people actually going into polling stations this second time, after all the intimidation, the pressure there’s been, do you really think that, that that sort of figure is going to vote for the opposition in this…

LMB: Well, Ed…

ES: …in this round?

LMB: Ed, I think it’s a very good question.  I mean people must feel disheartened and must wonder whether their votes will be allowed to count, must be making the sort of cost benefit analysis…

ES: Must be frightened.

LMB: …in their own mind, they must be frightened of the risk of going to vote.  Is it worth it if you don’t think your vote’s going to, be allowed to count?  So I’m sure all those things are going through people’s minds.  But, you know, the fact is they, they nevertheless did it in the first round, they took the risk, and my suspicion is, having punctured the authority and invincibility of Mugabe, having seen he could lose, that they will have the courage to come out despite these massive disadvantages.  The issue though will be, can the, the, the integrity of that vote be protected because he’s targeted the observers and is dismantling them in a very, very systematic way, and so that’s the challenge.  I think people will vote…

ES: And, and as ever we can do… we can do very little to influence that.

LMB: No, I think that’s, I hope, where you’re wrong in that, you know, throughout these bitter, difficult years, it’s always tended to be Britain versus Mugabe.  Now it’s really Mugabe versus the world.  His African neighbours are starting to speak out, the, the rest of the world is as appalled as we are by what’s happening.  I think were he…

ES: Lord Malloch-Brown, very briefly, sorry we, we must stop it there, I think we, we got the message, but thank you very much indeed for talking to us.

LMB: No, thank you.

(Source)

Alex Magaisa

April 18, 2008

Morgan Tsvangirai: Because it wanted a taste of life on the other side of the road. It was exercising its right.

Patrick Chinamasa: No. The chicken did not cross the road. In fact we need to verify whether in fact it was a chicken. As far as we know, the chicken is still there. It could have been an eagle. We have to wait until verification is done.

Didymus Mutasa: I do not think it crossed the road. If it crossed the road it’s because the white farmer dragged it. But we cannot allow that to happen. It will have to come back.

Joseph Chinotimba: The kichen, no, chicken is a sell-out against the revolution. The ‘O’ vets will have to eat it!

Robert Mugabe: The chicken will never be allowed to cross the road. Not in my life time! Let those that run away to Bush and Brown do so. Not my chicken! My chicken will never cross the road. It will never be colonised again!

Thabo Mbeki: Er … uhm … I don’t see any chicken at the moment … Er … I think it is right for us to wait and see. Let things take the natural course. If if it did cross the road we will be told officially. If it wants to cross the road we will see it when it crosses. There is nothing to talk about at the moment … Er … I don’t see any problem right now.

Tendai Biti: We have irrefutable evidence from those who were at the road that the chicken has, indeed, without any shadow of doubt, crossed the road. I hereby declare that Chicken Huku Inkuku is now the legitimate resident of the other side of the road.

Bright Matonga: At the moment we know that it has not crossed the road, despite imperialist efforts to push it. We know they will try again and are now preparing to unleash the remaining 75% of our effort so that it can never be pushed again next time.

Nathaniel Manheru a.k.a. George Charamba: How can, a chicken, itself a hapless bird, be expected to cross the road unless it is pushed deviously and surreptitiously by the hand of the vicious and uncouth imperialists? The only chicken that can cross that road is a stooge, a puppet, an instrument of the West that will be rocket-propelled by the loud fart of Brown and Bush … Icho!

Levy Mwanawasa: It knew the ground on that side was sinking like the Titanic. It had to cross.

General Chiwenga: It can’t.

Commissioner-General Chihuri: It can’t cross the road.

Gordon Brown: It was running away from Mugabe.

Jacob Zuma: I think it is important that we be told whether or not the chicken actually crossed road. That should be very easy to do.

Jonathan Moyo: Of course, the chicken crossed the road because it could not stand the nonsense on the other side. But the shameless securocrats will do everything in their power to prevent everyone from knowing that it, indeed, and unequivocally crossed the road.

Judge of the High Court: Whether or not it crossed the road is a matter for the officials to declare at their own time. They have the power to order a re-check and verification as to whether it crossed the road before they can make the declaration.

Zimbabwe Electoral Commission: We are not in a position to say whether or not the chicken crossed the road. There are some people who have complained that it probably wasn’t a chicken at all and others saying it was being pushed or dragged against its will. We are currently considering whether to do a re-check before we can officially declare if the chicken crossed the road. We will take as long as we want to be fully certain that it was a chicken that crossed the road.

(Source: via email)

(Or “Coup By Osmosis”)

A coup d’état (also coup) is the sudden, overthrowing of a government by a part of the state establishment - usually the military - to replace the branch of the stricken government, either with another civil government or with a military government.

Politically, the coup d’état is a type of political engineering, generally violent (hence “strike”, “blow”; French “coup“), but not always, yet differing from a revolution (by a larger, armed group to effect violent, radical change to the political system) in that the change is to the government, not the form of government…

…The coup d’état succeeds if its opponents fail to thwart the usurpers, allowing them to consolidate their positions, obtain the surrender of the overthrown government or acquiescence of the populace and the surviving armed forces, and thus claim legitimacy. Coups d’état typically use the power of the existing government for the takeover. As Edward Luttwak remarks in Coup d’État: A Practical Handbook: A coup consists of the infiltration of a small, but critical, segment of the state apparatus, which is then used to displace the government from its control of the remainder. In this sense, the use of either military or another organized force is not the defining feature of a coup d’État.

(Source: Wikipedia)

When we learn of coups d’etat in the world, it is normally punctuated with the sound of rifle fire and explosions. And some of the most harrowing violence we might ever see.

The coup d’etat carried out by Mugabe and his party with the support of the armed forces is probably the quietest ever carried out on the face of this earth.

Up until midnight on the 28th of March 2008, Robert Gabriel Mugabe was the President of Zimbabwe. Note that I do not describe him as the ‘duly elected’ President of Zimbabwe, as I do not believe that the 2002 Presidential elections voted him back into power.

(And Zimbabwean courts agree with me, finding that the election was influenced heavily by voter intimidation and political thuggery, but that Morgan Tsvangirai had indeed been defeated by means other than a free and fair ballot. The court, however, stopped short of ordering a re-run, or ordering Mugabe from office, as, they ruled, Mugabe has already taken office!)

So this time around, the country’s proletariat went to the polls thirteen days ago, and four days later we were told that the Movement for Democratic Change had won the majority in Parliament.

Since then we have heard little of the Presidential election results. Although we have heard much about the results. Doesn’t quite make sense, does it?

And the war of words have flown thick and fast ever since. The Deputy Minister of Information, Bright Matonga, has continually played up the buoyant spirit of Mugabe’s party, and has even given time to the much hated and vilified BBC. Just this afternoon, Matonga has stated that he does not understand the fuss about the Presidential election result, as the numbers are in the public domain. Not so far as I am aware - because then we would, in all likelihood, be witnessing the swearing in of a new President in Zimbabwe… namely, one Morgan Richard Tsvangirai of the MDC.

Mugabe maintains his stance as President of Zimbabwe, even though, on his own party’s admission, the election is due to go to a second round run-off - and although the MDC has done the mathematics based on the public figures posted outside the polling stations, and consider Morgan Tsvangirai to be the duly democratically elected President of Zimbabwe.

But there are a number of issues in his way before he will be sworn in as holder of that prestigious office - indeed, he would be the first democratically elected person to that office… And I have no doubt in my mind, that when all is said and done, Morgan Tsvangirai will hold that office.

First of all, the MDC has to get ZANU PF to accede to the releasing of the results. That, in itself, will be a veritable minefield.

The election administration was overseen by an ostensibly autonomous Electoral Commission - appointed by Mugabe himself. That negates the word ‘autonomous’… Thirteen days after the close of polling stations, we wait for something to give - primarily from the Zimbabwean High Court, where a Justice is due to give a ruling on Monday.

It took the same court four days to acknowledge, after much legal argument, that the application for the release of said results was indeed ‘urgent’… Cast your mind back to 2002, and you will maybe recall that the results were released in just three hours. As at 7pm Zimbabwean time this evening (Friday, 11th April 2008), the results have been withheld for a total of 312 hours. The difference between this time and last equates to something on a par with the current inflation rate!

The Presidential elections are obviously known to ZANU PF, who repeatedly state that a run-off is the next step, but they are not telling…

The function of the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission has been taken over by ZANU PF - well, they will tell you, “the government”, and have dismantled the election command centre and have whisked away the ballot boxes to an as yet undisclosed location. The “government” are now taking any decisions in the stead of the ZEC.

Constitutionally, which obviously does not apply to ZANU PF or Mugabe, any Parliamentary seat recounts have to be requested within 48 hours of the publishing of those seat results. Given that the last seat results were made public on Wednesday last week, and today we discover that 5 seats are being recounted - with a further 9 under consideration - we must question under what regulation, statue or law are these to be reconsidered?

The authority for these recounts is wrongfully in the hands of the “government” and therefore any decision will be based on ZANU PF wants and needs.

They have been stalwart in their resistance to publishing the Presidential election results - their legal representative stating in court that releasing them would be ‘dangerous’.

I also was taken aback this morning to discover that Mugabe had re-appointed his cabinet to office, seven of which are people who lost their seats in the Parliamentary election! The announcement was made by Patrick Chinamasa, now a civilian in every sense of the word, having lost his seat in the Parliamentary ballot… who now masquerades under his former title of Minister of Justice (now there is an oxymoron!).

Or should that just be ‘moron’?

So we have an illegally parked President, and a resident cabinet that is not the people’s choice.

Add this together with the ongoing farm invasions up and down the country - even though the dubious ‘leader’ of the war veterans states that no invasions are taking place - this would then lend credence to the document that was published on the internet this week that the invasions are being conducted by appointed serving soldiers masquerading as veterans.

This would also suggest that the country is, in reality, being run by the military junta of Constantine Chiwenga (army), Perence Shiri (air force), Augustine Chihuri (police) and Paradzai Zimondi (prisons). According to quite a few articles on the internet, and it is very difficult to chose any one that has definitive proof for their stories - not because of their predilection to printing false stories, but because of the wall of silence from the ZANU PF/military fortress - that Mugabe was prepared to stand down and cede power to Morgan Tsvangirai, but this was stopped by the chiefs who do not want to face the music for their actions over the last three decades.

Articles state that Mugabe’s wife, Grace, had attempted to convince him (and the security force chiefs) that it was not worth his children’s sanity to continue. His sons were being bullied at school over their father’s actions.

Armed soldiers and police patrol the streets of the cities and towns, and the election result release has hit somewhat of a lopsided stalemate.

ZANU PF, no longer the ‘ruling party’, maintains control of what little still exists of the economy, and, perhaps, more importantly, the Reserve Bank, seen as an integral part of Mugabe’s rule. Once Mugabe is displaced, I believe that the full enormity of the financial damage of his rule will be uncovered, leaving the new authority with little option but to pursue criminal proceedings against the former President and his hierarchy.

This is why his military chiefs are adamant that Mugabe make a stand.

Their biggest fear is the inside of a prison cell.

We have to admit, that sheer stubbornness and the hunger for power and absolute control, has resulted in the quietest coup d’etat ever in Africa, and possibly ever known to man.

On Saturday, 29^th March 2008, I sat in front of my machine and fielded email after email and read article after article on the internet about the ongoing election in Zimbabwe. It was a tiring but very exciting day for me as I built up a picture of the events in that country.

I felt good as the day passed with little or no reports of the normal violence that accompanies Zimbabwean events of this nature. Indeed, we do not have to look back very far through the history books to confirm that Mugabe normally gets his own way with intimidation, threats, violence and the rigging of the poll.

But apart from one unsubstantiated report that alleged a member of parliament had been caught with ballot boxes stuffed with ZANU PF votes, it all went very quietly. (I have seen no other reports since to lend credence to this story.)

I was not only impressed, but was extremely proud of my fellow Zimbabweans for not only their tenacity in exercising their democratic right, but keeping tempers and tensions at bay.

But not long after the polling stations closed, the shenanigans started.

The parliamentary election results began to trickle through on the Sunday. The supposedly autonomous Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC) - appointed by the then Zimbabwean President, Robert Mugabe - released the results on an almost ‘one for me, one for you’ basis.

Now I haven’t been a freelance political commentator for very long, but I wasn’t born yesterday - or the day before that. For three days I watched the results come through, and it was always ‘neck and neck’ - a choreographed release - probably designed to cause as little political ire as possible, and probably never before seen anywhere else in the world.

Zimbabwe will go down in history for many ‘firsts’ - and this will be amongst them.

It was Tuesday before the final results found air, and the opposition party, the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), led by the erstwhile Morgan Tsvangirai, had indeed secured a majority in parliament. Whilst jubilation was felt, it failed to trigger any celebrations as all of our attention then switched the three way election for the President of Zimbabwe.

We were largely kept in the dark, and today, eleven days after the election, the two main protagonists had people in the Zimbabwean High Court - just to have the result released!

This case has been daily deferred - causing untold tension and suspicion within Zimbabwe - and across the world. Yesterday, the case was deemed ‘urgent’…

The feeling in Zimbabwe is that Morgan Tsvangirai has beaten Robert Mugabe in a straight fight - but Mugabe is playing with all aspects of life in the country in an attempt to cow the people, steal the election and hang on to power.

A number of events have overtaken the legal battle for the results.

War veterans - or at least people calling themselves war veterans - have invaded over 100 of the few remaining white-owned commercial farms in the rural areas of Zimbabwe. We have seen a list of military hierarchy that are responsible for the co-ordination of the invasions, together with instructions to make the people pay where ZANU PF members of parliament lost their seats.

Mugabe’s party - which I now hesitate to call ‘the ruling party’ - have announced allegations that the MDC bribed members of the ZEC to queer the count in their favour - and have demanded the recounting of 16 constituencies. Seven members of the ZEC have reportedly been arrested and will appear in court in due course. The ZANU PF call for a recount is outside the 48 hour Statute of Limitations - but that won’t stop Mugabe having a go.

Interestingly, in the event that any recount overturns the MDC winning of these 16 seats, then the parliamentary majority would slide back to ZANU PF. Morgan Tsvangirai’s majority on paper is just 2, but we have to factor in the ten seats won by the Arthur Mutambara faction of the MDC.

Three seats have yet be decided as candidates died between registration and poll dates. These will be decided in by-elections at a later date.

Although the Presidential results are ostensibly unknown to anyone except the ZEC, Mugabe’s party has claimed that the numbers do not give a clear winner and that a run-off - Tsvangirai versus Mugabe - is needed.

Now this is the point of my article.

Mugabe continues to masquerade as President of Zimbabwe. This is not only unconstitutional, but is against the will of the people. Not that Mugabe has ever worried what his people think, need or want. He hangs on to power with his very fingernails.

The loss of parliament he may be able to stomach, but the loss of the Presidency would be the end of him - in more ways than one. Unless he has a confirmed exit plan and the resignation to live in exile, Robert Mugabe could conceivably spend the rest of his days in a prison cell.

With the rejection of his rule, Mugabe finds himself no longer the loved African leader he may once have been many, many years ago.

Whilst waiting for the election results to come through, I was listening to some music. And I heard the song “The King Has Lost His Crown” by Abba, and thought to myself, how fitting!

Disaster and disgrace

The King has lost his crown

His world comes tumbling down

Suddenly

His world is upside down

The King has lost his crown

But Mugabe refuses to go quietly.

Today in High Court, the legal representative of the ZEC – remember that this is a Mugabe-appointed body - stated that the release of the figures would be ‘dangerous’.

How does the release of election figures - which should have been done by Friday midnight under the Constitution of Zimbabwe - translate as ‘dangerous’? Is this a veiled threat on the judiciary, seen largely as pro-Mugabe - or is this a hint that the election was lost by Mugabe?

As things stand right now, Mugabe rules the country by proxy - by ignoring the Constitution - and certainly not by public choice. And he is massing the war veterans, the youth brigades and the militia, the police and the army to take on the country. And then take over the country.

Mugabe can conceivably use Presidential powers - which I believe are no longer his to use - to delay any second round of voting for the Presidency from 21 to 90 days, but I also discovered that if his party call for, and are granted, a re-run of the Presidential election, he can continue to rule (I use that word advisedly) for 365 days…

Note that I wrote ‘re-run’ as opposed to ‘run-off’…

When do we start calling Mugabe’s actions in the last five days, a coup…?

He is stirring public indignation at and in his actions, and is hoping that somewhere the tensions will snap, and violence will ensue. If it doesn’t happen spontaneously, then he will plan that spontaneity… (go figure). Using that violence as a premise, he will declare a State of Emergency - and the Constitution flies out the window (not that he has paid much attention to it anyway).

Once the military are in charge, Mugabe can relax, knowing that his rule will be in tact and only military force will change that. And who is going to take on Mugabe’s armed forces? Not many people. Not because they are a formidable fighting force - far from it - but because the free world want nothing that Zimbabwe has…

It has no oil. It has mineral deposits but nothing of any attractiveness. It has an economy bare stripped by government greed and inability, a broken infrastructure through government inconsistency and corruption - and a currency which has the rapid and repetitive use of the words ‘million’ and ‘billion’.

And any military intervention would result in the unacceptable death of Zimbabweans - something which must be avoided at all costs.

So the good Zimbabwean people are to be abandoned to the wiles and excesses of Mugabe and his party, ZANU PF. The free world has no intention of swooping in and saving the day.

Now - Abba’s words ring loudly in my ears. It is indeed a disaster and a disgrace…

Robb WJ Ellis

9^th April 2008

So - here we are, nine days after the election - no wiser, no closer to democratic rule in Zimbabwe.

Mugabe is playing all his cards at once, and it is such a fine edge, that his knife has slipped between the ribs of democracy, and we haven’t realised the seriousness of the wound.

I mean - come on! Even Grace Mugabe attempted to put an end to this fiasco. But Mugabe decided to carry on - and at what cost to the good people of Zimbabwe?

At what cost to his own children (reportedly his) who are being bullied at school? Knowing Mugabe, he will send the CIO in to teach a lesson to the children that have been riding his children. You think perhaps not? Mugabe always goes for the jugular - and if that means children, women or the infirm, so be it.

The man has lost all recognisance of law and order. He respects no one but his own skin.

His party have cried foul over sixteen constituencies in the Parliamentary election. The law says a recount can only be called for up to 48 hours after the announcing of the results. So his two-day statute of limitations has expired… but what is the bet that somehow the ZEC weasel out of it?

Meanwhile, the Presidential results have still not been made public, but Mugabe would appear to be privy to them as he is already playing for a second round. And his Presidential powers allow him to declare a 90 day stay to the second round, as opposed to the standard 21 days.

Ninety days is a very long time in Zimbabwean politics.

The damage which he can wreak in that period is truly huge. It sounds difficult that he can make things worse in a country already on its knees. But Mugabe is a determined character, and he will use whatever tools, manipulations and mechanisations at his disposal to achieve his aim - to stay in power.

And he has started already. On Saturday a number of farmers in the Masvingo area were over-run by war veterans. Well, ‘war veterans’ in name alone - some of them weren’t even born at Zimbabwean independence in 1980.

More farms were over-run in the Centenary area.

A policeman lies in jail for questioning the counting procedure. His crime? “Engaging in political activities.”

What has the illustrious Commissioner of Police been doing for all these years? Engaging in political activities!

If they imprison a lowly constable for questioning the counting process, what are we to do with Chihuri? But the powers that be are silent in this regard.

There was a deadline for the results of the Presidential elections to be published. The deadline came and went - the ZEC (an assumedly autonomous body - appointed for the purpose by none other than Mugabe himself) makes the excuse that they have ‘logistical’ problems. Does that mean that they are struggling with reworking the ballot figures to suit Mugabe?

How come he seems to know the result, but no one else does?

The MDC, the party with a majority in Parliament, made application to the High Court for the results to be published. On Saturday, the case was deferred to Sunday. On Sunday it was again deferred to Monday. Today it was deferred until tomorrow.

Every day that the result remains unknown and unpublished is another day with Mugabe at the top of the tree.

But surely it is a simple case of ordering ZEC to publish? Not that easy - you see the judiciary is filled from top to bottom with pro-Mugabe decision makers. Like this, by way of example: “High court judge Tendai Uchena sits on the Electoral Court an extension of ZEC which is made up of Harare justices Antonia Guvava and in Bulawayo, Nicholas Ndou.” It is Uchena that is hearing the case!

A definite conflict of interest.

I preferred it when we were under the impression that Mugabe had skipped the country.

First Lady, Amazing (Dis)Grace would have preferred that Mugabe do not fight the second round, but people like Constantine Chiwenga, Perence Shiri and Augustine Chihuri (army, air force and police chiefs respectively) have argued that they don’t want be left out in the cold if he admits defeat.

Let’s face it - these men (!) are responsible for much of the destruction of Zimbabwe and have no want or desire to face criminal charges for their actions. And they will defend themselves with the excuse that they were just carrying out Mugabe’s orders.

But in the eyes of the law, that will not wash. If an officer orders a junior rank to kill somebody, and he does - both the junior rank and the officer are guilty of murder. Not one or the other. And murder has not statute of limitations. It is a ‘continuing’ crime, so time cannot save them.

These men - and many more besides - are as guilty today as the day that each atrocity took place. They have the blood of Zimbabweans on their hands. And no amount of water will wash it off. Unless Mugabe is able to rule until his death and they die before him (unlikely), they will see themselves in court.

But even if he manages to stay in power, these people will spend every day of their lives looking over their shoulders.

And I don’t just mean for the Gukurahundi, I mean for the death during the ongoing land grab - farmers, workers, activists - and then there are those that perished in Murambatsvina…

What about those who perished because the health delivery service has collapsed?

Mugabe would prefer to buy fighter aircraft to use on his people before he buys much needed medication and medical equipment. He prefers to buy tear gas and pepper spray before he sorts out the educational system which has largely ceased to exist.

He would prefer that his own henchmen grab land - by any means - rather than accounting for the money that his government was handed for the peaceful purchase of land on a ‘willing buyer - willing seller’ basis…

I see nothing ‘willing’ about the besieging of farms in Masvingo these last few days - nothing ‘willing’ when Martin Olds was shot dead by attacking veterans, or when Martin’s mother, Gloria, was brutally murdered…

There was a time in Zimbabwe when we could hear music around us all the time and the happy chatter of children – of all colours – as they amused themselves at play. I see no enjoyment of the children, reduced to eating just one meal a day (if they are luck).

Mugabe has taken the happiness - the very fabric of society - away from the people. And they are the very people that he would steal the votes from to stay in power.

And Mugabe believes that if he puts himself up for a second round against Morgan Tsvangirai - with the assistance of his veterans, his youth militia, the army and the police - he can bully the electorate one more time to return him to power.

No!

Gushongo (Mugabe’s totem) - it is time to leave the political arena. You cannot force the will of the people. Not now - not ever again.

Not only are you bankrupt in the true sense of the word, you are morally bankrupt and without mistake, you are a reprehensible individual. Your legacy is one of destruction, bigotry and suffering.

Mhosva anopera. It is over.

Admit it and go.

On Monday the Herald carried a picture of a “ZANU PF supporter” who had benefited from phase 3 of the government’s farm mechanisation programme in Bindura. The supporter was given a scotch cart and he was “pulling it” home.

Quite tellingly, he had wrapped himself all over his upper body with “Vote ZANU PF” posters. What further evidence of vote-buying can one look for? But like all things that are not properly planned, somebody forgot to give him donkeys to pull the cart.

On a related subject, Gender and Women’s Affairs minister Oppah Muchinguri told an International Women’s Day celebration in Harare last week that government had set aside $38 trillion for empowerment projects. She however said the money was losing value “while lying idle in our offices”. Shall we all go on a looting spree! Is that where money is kept now and what does one need to qualify for the funds? A ZANU PF card and an election!

But the party is not over yet. ZANU PF’s aspiring candidate for Highlands’ council ward 8, Mavis Gumbo is helping residents in her ward access free medical treatment. The residents, mostly gardeners, housemaids and security guards, were reportedly treated for “various ailments” at Highlands healthcare centre.

She said although Highlands was an upmarket suburb where most people could afford to pay for treatment, suddenly she had discovered another group which could not afford it. “Through consultations and idea-sharing with some residents in the ward, we agreed that there was need to invite doctors and nurses to assist in providing treatment to our people as part of community service,” said Gumbo unctuously.

And what is Gumbo’s claim to being elected councillor? She is a permanent resident of the area, she says. Yet she has only just discovered her impoverished neighbourhood.

The voters should seek clear commitment here. How long is this vote-buying trick going to last?

In its campaign adverts, government has been at pains to demonstrate how the “land is the economy and the economy is land”. In this vein, we are told that economic recovery “will be led by agriculture” by “comprehensive retooling of the sector through an expensive and inclusive mechanisation programme”.

There is no doubt that the government has been giving “farmers” cheap fuel, seed, fertiliser and agricultural machinery although all this has apparently gone to waste as there is no evident correlation between these expenses and productivity.

Many people believe most of these inputs have found their way on to the black market for faster returns. Now a reader has pointed out another interesting anomaly as we get closer to the fruits of the “mother of all agricultural seasons”. He says while trillions of dollars are being spent on cellphone farmers selling foreign currency in hotels and on the streets of Harare, has anybody ever thought about the toiling farm workers upon whose shoulders rests the burden of the whole enterprise?

More than that, says the writer, not only are the farm workers getting so-called slave wages, they can actually go for three months without being paid while inflation plays havoc with their pittances. To cap it all, a majority of them are aliens who didn’t benefit from Mugabe’s land largesse and therefore have no stake in its success.

Is it any wonder therefore that all predictions of bumper harvests have always turned out to be a pipedream?

Another advert promoting President Robert Mugabe’s bid says: “The great teacher; the great scholar: Vote Bob for enlightened leadership”.

Do they always believe their claims?

“Tsvangirai flees rally,” screamed this week’s Sunday Mail in its lead story. It turns out that the story concerns a small incident in which a few party supporters protested against a candidate who was “imposed” by the leadership. Muckraker knows someone who is more likely to flee from the Zimbabwean people before the end of the month. There is no guessing who.

Instead the paper had a more interesting story which it chose to downplay. Vice-President Joseph Msika said he had been saddened by ZANU PF politburo member Dumiso Dabengwa’s decision to join Simba Makoni’s presidential bid. He said this was an “ill-conceived” decision but that he did not agree with those who called Dabengwa “a sellout”.

“I am not together with those that say Dabengwa is a sellout,” said Msika. “Others are celebrating because they were plotting against him - I have minutes of those meetings. I can’t go to the extent of saying he is a sellout, the good he has done outweighs the bad,” he said.

Which sounds reasonable enough. But how do those comments fit with his own attack on the same man in the same breath, saying Dabengwa has “lost his dignity” by joining Makoni? He went on to call Dabengwa “dangerous”. How does that differ from calling him a “sellout” we wonder.

Still, it is important that finally some people in ZANU PF are beginning to see the light. It is no longer the monolith it used to be. And how dare that hired fool Coltrane Chimurenga call Dabengwa and Makoni sellouts and charlatans. What role did Coltrane play in the struggle for Independence? And now he sings for his supper. He is nothing more than a charlatan himself scavenging on the rubbish tip that his fallen hero has spawned.

Chairman of the National Incomes and Pricing commission Godwills Masimirembwa has decreed that employers must meet 80% of workers’ medical expenses. The reason, he says, is because specialist medical practitioners have been “defying the NIPC directive by raising their fees every month. We are aware that some service providers are still increasing fees - especially specialist doctors - almost on a daily basis.”

So what solution does the chicken farmer dream up? Set the workers against their employers. He says the employers can incorporate the increased medical expenses into product pricing.

Fantastic idea. That is until you realise that this is the same guy who has caused terror in industry by directing the arrest of company chief executives for increasing the prices of goods to meet costs. Medical cover is not the only cost that employers must meet good comrade. If companies were allowed to operate profitably they would probably pay high enough wages for workers to meet their own medical expenses without Masimirembwa trying to play Robin Hood.

We were relieved to read ZANU PF chairman John Nkomo’s impassioned denial that Mugabe had “rigged” his way to be the party’s sole presidential candidate. This was not true, said Nkomo, according to the Herald.

“President Mugabe was nominated and when I asked for other nominations, there was dead silence,” Nkomo said. “So let me correct this: President Mugabe never rigged to become the party’s presidential candidate and it is me who should have rigged for him, but I do not rig.”

He is probably right. But can anybody imagine him saying: “Mugabe rigged the nominations process?” That would be news.

‘Forget the dollar,” says expatriate Herald columnist Peter Mavunga. “The majority of our people have not got the dollar neither do they have a bank account, let alone savings or pensions.”

It is always good to hear President Mugabe’s publicists making a virtue of necessity. But now they are actually boasting of the privation his policies have wrought.
And of course they are making wild promises of improvements in the lives of ordinary people when they have sat back and done nothing for years.

Mines minister Amos Midzi urged people “not to look at challenges being faced by the country but to remember that ZANU PF was a family…”

A pretty dysfunctional one at that. But Midzi was advertising the role of his own family by “drumming up support” in Mt Pleasant for the ruling party candidate, Alice Midzi. ZANU PF was the party that had brought development to the country, he claimed. But not much later he was promising the residents of Epworth that government had a package to develop Epworth to match standards in other residential suburbs. That probably means they can expect more potholes.

Government had started drilling boreholes at clinics, he told them. But why, if ZANU PF was the party of development, did it only embark upon this project now?
And when he was in Mt Pleasant, did Midzi refer to the state of the voters’ roll?

Alice Midzi’s rival for the seat, Trudy Stevenson, who unlike the Midzi’s has a record of bringing development to the people, has discovered the name of Desmond Lardner-Burke on the roll. He was born in 1908 and was for many years Minister of Law and Order. He imprisoned many in our leadership today. But they want his vote, even though at 100 he may have difficulty getting to the polling station!

We liked the Herald picture of the president road-testing a bus, one of several the government is distributing in areas where it needs support.

But our question is: Can he drive? In the 1920s it was not unusual for parents to be photographed sitting in the driving seat of their son’s new car. They would pretend to be driving it. It didn’t fool anybody.

The way in which Zimpapers have prostituted their newspapers to the incumbent’s tattered cause will surprise no one who has followed their suborned record over the years. But last Sunday the Sunday Mail took this shoddy performance a step further by telling a whopper of gigantic proportions.

The newspaper’s editor claimed that the head of the 2002 Commonwealth observer team, General Abdulsalami Abubakar, “had decided to vest all his trust in a secretariat that wrote a damning report which the team leader had never read… It was embarrassing for the general to later admit that his team had betrayed him by writing a false report.”

In fact it was the Sunday Mail writing a false report that had no doubt been concocted by the usual suspects. When this scurrilous lie first appeared in the state media General Abubakar was asked by the Zimbabwe Independent whether there was any truth in the story. He promptly issued a statement repudiating it. He fully endorsed the Commonwealth’s report, he said. He wouldn’t have signed it if he didn’t agree with it, he pointed out.

Nothing could be clearer than that. At no stage did he “admit that his team had betrayed him”. But Zimbabwe’s state media continued to be fed the lie and dutifully repeated it without bothering to seek the general’s views. It remains an emblematic case of journalists being told to mislead the public on behalf of their political masters.

The same of course goes for the report on “MDC violence” that government newspapers carried extensively last year without once asking themselves why nobody had been successfully prosecuted.

In this connection we were interested to note the comments of Angolan External Affairs minister Joao Miranda. “People who are going to observe the elections on the ground are the ones who should make the pronouncements on elections and not people from outside,” he declared.

But it hadn’t occurred to him that people who are “outside” are being kept there because the government doesn’t want them making unwelcome discoveries, like the EU and Commonwealth teams did in 2002.

And by the way, when was the last time Angola held an election? It is one of the most corrupt countries in the world and hardly a paragon of democracy.

Have you noticed a number of stock phrases cropping up in the government media?

These include something soon becoming “a thing of the past” now that government is addressing the problem. What invariably happens is no sooner has the Herald or Sunday Mail made this confident forecast than the problem resurfaces. It can be applied to wheat production, electricity supplies, transport problems or just about anything.

The current hot favourite is the president having his audience “in stitches”.

This is supposed to imply that he has said something really funny. He has “a witty way of spicing his speeches with a bit of humour”, we are told.

But sometimes the joke falls a little flat.

For instance, last week he was briefly reunited with pupils he taught at Mapanzure primary school in Zvishavane. Some of the pupils are now walking with difficulty, “a stark contrast to their teacher’s swift gaiety (sic)”, the Herald reported. It probably meant gait.

But we can see why they were having difficulty walking. The president called for a cane so he could discipline the pupils in a reenactment of scenes from 1944.

Very funny. Except when you consider that is what he’s been doing to the country!

No doubt some of those on the receiving end are not just former pupils. We can imagine cabinet ministers lining up at Munhumutapa Building for “six of the best” when they have broken school rules - like talking to the independent press.

Still with the government papers, we understand that the president has asked them to stop translating his Shona into English. This is because he feels some statements have not been correctly reported from the vernacular.

Have you noticed how the front page of the Herald is looking increasingly like Kwayedza?

(Source)

I found this within the comments on an article on the Roy Bennett interview on SW Radio Africa. Mr Mawere has taken the transcript and had dissected it into tiny pieces and then systematically tore into it.

Not very long ago I read an article written by Mutumwa Mawere and it impressed me to the point that I wrote that Mawere should be rewarded for his forward thinking and his vision beyond the elections.

Unequivocally, I withdraw that comment. In light of the comments in this column/comment, Maware has sought to break down any good that Bennett’s interview may have done. And I believe that a lot of good was done by this interview.

I make no apology for the length of this dissertation, but it is necessary to understand the three standpoints. Bennett’s, Mawere’s and the unnamed commenter…

I have no idea as to the identity of the individual chose to comment on Mawere’s comments, but I do think that he is on the right road - the road where the truth will out.

-o00o-

At 28, the country has come of age and yet the political discourse even at this eleventh hour of change suggests that more effort needs to be exerted to locate the change agenda in broader context than the political actors that may be on stage. (The more contenders the better. However, it is a well known fact that ANU PF won’t tolerate serious contenders to their power - history has proved beyond any doubt that ZANU PF uses brutal violence on any opposition perceived as a threat. The Tsvangirai MDC is a classic example where ZANU PF uses state organs and structures to violently crush opposition. ZANU PF only tolerates opposition that is ineffective, such as the Mutambara splinter faction which calls itself the MDC. Time will tell whether it sees ZANU PF-Makoni as real threat.)

Zimbabweans will make a choice about who should become their President for the next five years on 29 March 2008. However, it is evident that an investment is urgently required to improve political literacy of not only the registered voters but all interested parties who must and should play a part in helping shape the destiny of the country. (Political literacy? Is Mawere inferring that Zimbabweans are illiterate and need re-education? One would need justification to prove such an outrageous statement. Are Zimbabweans that stupid that they don’t understand how to vote? It is a well recognised fact that Zimbabweans are the most educated and literate people on the African continent. Which planet is Mawere coming from? Where does he get such bland and unfounded pronouncements? This is Zimbabwe, not some underdeveloped backwater in eastern China.)

Over the last 8 years, the political landscape of Zimbabwe has been dominated by two major political groupings i.e. MDC and ZANU PF. (Absolute and complete rubbish - Mawere is playing the ZANU PF game. The truth is that the political landscape has been dominated and driven by ZANU PF violence. The victims have been, in the main, the MDC under Morgan Tsvangirai.) ZANU PF inherited the colonial state and it is evident that the members of MDC would not be satisfied with any post-Mugabe construction (what about using “destruction” because there absolutely no evidence to suggest that there was any “construction” under the ZANU PF. If there was, it was the construction of huge bank accounts for chefs) in which they will play second fiddle to anyone. (Which makes Mawere’s last statement ludicrous in the extreme. If you look around Zimbabwe, where is the proof of any “construction”? Mugabe has destroyed every structure of colonialism, good or bad, including inherited infrastructure and driven Zimbabwe backwards by over half a century. So in a sense, Mawere is right to assume that “the MDC would not be satisfied with any post-Mugabe “construction” because there isn’t any. But then who, in their right mind would? Mawere?) At independence, the attitude of ZANU PF was not dissimilar to the attitude of MDC (Mawere is now taking the readers on a journey of fantasy. Although he fails to explain or substantiate his dream world of Disneyland. In fact there are definite ZANU PF tendencies in the tenor of what he is saying - say it often enough and people will believe it! However, Zimbabweans know better than that. So who is his audience? The West? Or is it China? And it is not farfetched to suggest that if ZANU (Mawere was a loyal ZANU PF member for many years so maybe he knows something that we don’t know. It would be nice if he would explain further as there is no point in playing a game of semantics or supposition.) did not win the 1980 elections; the liberation struggle was going to continue.

Although the liberation struggle was prosecuted with the sole objective of restoring sovereignty to the people, it is instructive that only ZANU was advanced as the only authentic custodian of such sovereignty. (And who, might one ask, was “advancing” this scenario? Was it the MDC? Or was it those in the politburo of ZANU PF? And who was in the politburo at that time and who is now doing a rear flank action to fool the people of Zimbabwe?) In such an environment, elections do not really matter and yet Zimbabwe finds itself in 2008 at the crossroads and painful choices have to be made. Fatigue is evident but hope is missing in action. (How surprising? Mawere refuses to say why? For the benefit of Mawere and others who don’t know, it is because of violence, murder, rape and other abuses perpetrated by ZANU PF. Mugabe declared war (ever heard of the 3rd Chimurenga?) against the innocent people of Zimbabwe. He has brutalised Zimbabweans, with such impunity and to such an extent that some 4 million have fled their homeland and a further 2 million remain as internal refugees in their own country. What’s worse, Africa’s leadership have supported Mugabe to the hilt, giving him the space and protection to fulfil his genocidal dreams. So saying glibly that Zimbabweans have lost hope without explaining why is a further example of Mawere’s bland epistle.)

When a new beginning is about to come it is normally evident as it was after the Lancaster House constitutional talks were successfully completed. What is different about 2008 is that the two political actors President Mugabe and Tsvangirai who have dominated the political scene for the last 8 years are not prepared to accept the inevitable that Zimbabwe needs to turn a new leaf. (Mawere is trying desperately hard to apply linkages between ZANU PF and the MDC. Oh, and by the way, Mawere’s “New Beginning” has been conveniently borrowed from Tsvangirai’s MDC slogan. Is he perhaps seeing the light here? Whatever the case, Zimbabweans are simply not so stupid as to swallow such Mawere assertions. They already know what they want.) The country’s future has regrettably now been reduced to the fate of these two individuals. (Mawere is trying to shift blame, yet again. He’s wrong in every respect - it’s one, Robert Mugabe and his corrupt regime. Let’s not beat about the bush. Who else was a senior member of the politburo who won’t accept any responsibility for the destruction of Zimbabwe? Don’t keep us in suspense, Mr Mawere.)

Rationality has now been subordinated to political expediency. (By who Mr Mawere? If Mr Mawere was forthright and said ZANU PF, he would be correct and would be in line with what most Zimbabweans believe. But he doesn’t or won’t say who and one would have to wonder if he really knows.) President Mugabe cannot imagine a day in which he would call Tsvangirai his commander-in-chief (neither can any Zimbabweans - given what Mugabe has done already) and at the same time, Tsvangirai regards President Mugabe as illegitimate. (It’s not only Tsvangirai who thinks that Mugabe is illegitimate - most Zimbabweans do. Tsvangirai is not alone. In fact Tsvangirai is just one of the majority of Zimbabweans who share this view. As for commander-in-chief, does Mawere not read the news? And anyway, who in their right mind would want to be Mugabe’s Commander-in-chief?) The MDC has accepted that the outcome of the forthcoming elections has been predetermined (It is not only the MDC who think way. A wide range of respectable organisations and countries share this view. The outward signs are there for all to see. The MDC is simply partaking to expose the extent of the rigging) and yet no consensus exists on how to respond. (That’s not correct - Mr Mawere really needs to speak to Zimbabweans to get a better understanding of how they think and feel.) The polarisation of the Zimbabwean politics is largely a reflection of the architecture of the colonial state where no democratic avenue existed for change. (Another trait that seems to be inherited by ZANU PF is the constant use colonialism as an excuse for every single failure of ZANU PF. It’s quite clear where the polarisation exists. It exists in the violent ZANU PF party. They have no tolerance whatsoever. It has nothing to do with colonialism!)

President Mugabe has not accepted that there is no better Zimbabwean than him to preside over the state (At last we can agree on something - then Mr Mawere falls to pieces again…) and equally Tsvangirai has made the point that real change must situate him in the statehouse. (Prove it Mr Mawere, show us where he has said this? You are using words here which are simply misleading and character assassinating - you are wrong in your assumptions Mr Mawere.) The Rhodesian economy (it’s now called Zimbabwe Mr Mawere - where have you been all these years?) is on its knees and President Mugabe is not convinced that he may be a liability, rather he genuinely believes that the future of Zimbabwe is brighter under his watch. (It’s surprising Mawere hasn’t shared the blame with Tsvangirai. Was this an oversight?) On the other hand, Tsvangirai is convinced that he has paid his school fees and the scars that have been inflicted on his body must be rewarded with a new address at statehouse. (Dream on Mawere, dream on… Where does he find all his machinations?)

Whether the people of Zimbabwe are tired of this kind of political bickering (Mr Mawere’s?) is no longer an issue for the two opposition parties. Until recently, the two individuals were the only principal political actors but this has changed with the emergence of Simba Makoni as a candidate. (Da da!… ENTER Mawere’s hero to his fairy tale. Why did it take so long? The audience has been waiting all evening for this.) Many have associated the world view of President Mugabe with his political party and yet the reality may suggest that ZANU PF has failed to establish itself as a party of principles and a shared political morality. (Do I see a deliberate attempt to take ZANU PF out of the equation and dump all the blame on poor old Mugabe? Just because we killed 20 [thousand] people in Matabeleland and Midlands, it’s not our fault. Murambatsvina? Not us either, he screeches - it was Robert Mugabe. The buck stops with him, he shouts. The truth is that there will one day be a truth and reconciliation and ALL those thugs in ZANU PF who have brutalised the people will be prosecuted. Get used to it because as sure as the sun shine, it’s going to happen and it has been well documented as to who has carried out these crimes.) President Mugabe (with a little help of his friends) has dominated the party for too long to the extent that his personality has now become part of what many people perceive to be ZANU PF. What President Mugabe thinks usually becomes the order of the day. (ZANU PF is Robert Mugabe, Mugabe is ZANU PF, ZANU PF are ZANU PF and true justice will prevail one day soon.)

At independence, Zimbabweans adopted a Republican constitution underpinned by a shared desire to create a new society founded on republican values. Although the colonial state was founded on the premise that it was irresponsible to give natives civil rights, it is not evident after 28 years of independence that Zimbabweans notwithstanding the election rituals are any more free to shape and define their destinies than at independence. (Yawn, another revelation comes forth.)

The Movement for Democratic Change was expected to introduce a new culture in Zimbabwean politics and on the eve of the forthcoming defining elections it is significant that Mr Roy Bennett, Treasurer of the party, shared his insights on the kind of Zimbabwe he and his party wants to see. Mr Bennett was a beneficiary of the colonial system that Mugabe fought against and yet at independence, Mugabe was magnanimous enough to embrace his former adversaries. (Ah! A beneficiary, says poor Mr Mawere? How many degrees has Bennett got? Does Mr Mawere have intimate knowledge of Bennett’s background or is he doing what most ZANU PF stalwarts do - guess or make it up in the hope that he can sell a false impression. Or is it an assumption based a racist premise that because Bennett is white, he must have been a beneficiary? Zimbabweans need proof here Mr Mawere, not political image work.)

Having carefully read Mr Bennett’s interview with Ms Violet Gonda of SW Radio Africa, I thought it is important to capture some of the significant issues (good idea Mr Mawere, let’s do it!) that he addressed so as to enhance the quality of conversations that are taking place among not only Zimbabweans who have a direct interest in the outcome of the elections but friends of Zimbabwe who may have an indirect or remote interest in the future of the country.

Although the interview covered a whole range of critical issues that help define the kind of thinking that informs the MDC, I thought it is important to locate Mr Bennett’s thinking in a broader context of key construction and foundational principles that I feel were overlooked by all concerned in the enterprise of post colonial nation building. (What’s your point Mr Mawere? What has this got to do with Bennett?)

Article 28 of the Constitution of Zimbabwe provides as follows in relation to the qualification and election of the President:

(1) A person shall be qualified for election as President if:

(a) he is a citizen of Zimbabwe by birth or by descent; and

(b) he has attained the age of forty years; and

(c) he is ordinarily resident in Zimbabwe.

(2) The President shall be elected by voters registered on the common roll.

(Subsection as amended by s.2 of Act 15 of 1990 - Amdmt No.10).

(3) An election to the office of President shall take place within ninety days:

(a) before the term of office of the President expires in terms of section 29; or

(b) after the office of President becomes vacant by reason of his death or his resignation or removal from office in terms of this Constitution; as the case may be.

It is evident that there is nothing in the constitution of Zimbabwe that says that an interested citizen must belong to a political party for him/her to be eligible for the highest office in the land. (Agreed) Any democrat who believes in the supremacy of the constitution would find it hard to criticise any Zimbabwean who registers and whose nomination is accepted by the Court to run for the office of President.

However, nomination of Simba Makoni has exposed not only ZANU PF but MDC’s lip service (MDC lip service? Does Mr Mawere understand the meaning of the words “lip service”?) commitment to the constitutional order that ought to have informed the post colonial democratic regime. President Mugabe has already made his comments about Makoni preferring to label him as a prostitute (What’s your point Mr Mawere? As a past member of ZANU PF, you should know that name-calling is a ZANU PF hallmark.) only because he chose to offer himself as an independent candidate after being dismissed from the party following his decision to offer himself as available for nomination as a candidate for the post of state President. (So why even use the word MDC in the above paragraph? Is this another attempt to demean the MDC? Because, if it is, it’s not working Mr Mawere. Most Zimbabweans won’t buy your fantasy.)

If America was Zimbabwe, (it is not Mr Mawere, you’re fantasising again) it is not difficult to imagine how Obama would have been treated for imagining that the Zimbabwean promise included satisfying his aspiration to lead his people to a new destination. (Really?) There is nothing that would have stopped Makoni from being nominated as a candidate for the state Presidency under the ZANU PF ticket because for anyone to be eligible for the post, the Nomination Court has the final say. There is no provision in the constitution that a candidate has to be the President of a political party to be eligible for nomination. (What’s your point Mr Mawere?)

The involvement of political parties in the nomination process has tended to undermine the constitutional order in that the process used has been fraught with problems to the extent that in the case of both MDC and ZANU PF, there is no consensus on the candidates nominated. (Who knows about ZANU PF but Mr Mawere is guessing when it comes to the MDC and he’s wrong.) It is unlikely that the test used for Makoni will be applied to all the parliamentary candidates who elected to challenge the parties and proceeded to get their names nominated as party candidates outside the party list. (Mr Mawere, you are simply hanging out ZANU PF dirty washing. Zimbabwe and Tsvangirai don’t for any part of your complaint. Talk to your friends in ZANU PF - surely they can help you.)

To the extent that President Mugabe purports to be a democrat, it is ironic that he would have a problem in Makoni exercising his democratic right to offer his name to be considered by the people. (Ask any Zimbabwean and they will tell Mr Mawere that Mugabe is certainly not a democrat, so there is no irony whatsoever.) The President took an oath to respect and uphold the constitution of the country and yet he is the first person to criticise Makoni for doing what the constitution entitles him to do. (It’s most rather odd that Mr Mawere doesn’t seem know that Mugabe has trashed the constitution of Zimbabwe time and time again. Why is he so bogged down with this when the whole of Zimbabwe already knows? Hasn’t anyone told him? This gives new meaning to “being completely out of touch”.) If the President’s views are contrary to the provisions of the constitution (“If” he says?) as they appear to be, then surely he has disqualified himself from being the head of state. (Does one get the impression that it is slowly sinking in? Is Mr Mawere touching on the raw nerve of legitimacy here? Let’s read on and find out…)

There must be something about Simba Makoni that would make President Mugabe and Tsvangirai agree. He has been condemned by both parties (No, he hasn’t Mr Mawere. Mugabe has called him names in the good-old ZANU PF tradition and Tsvangirai has welcomed his coming forward. Where did you dream up such fantasy? The fact that Tsvangirai welcomed Makoni doesn’t mean he has to fall under Makoni as everyone seems to be demanding. Quite the contrary. Makoni is a contestant in the same race.) and what is ironic is that even Bennett finds the participation of Makoni as treacherous (Where did Bennett say this? Mr Mawere is taking extreme pain to put words into Bennett’s mouth. It didn’t happen, Mr Mawere, and it is disingenuous to say that it did.) leading to many observers asking the question about what kind of Zimbabwe people who support Tsvangirai want to see. (Really, is that what Mr Mawere thinks? How odd!)

In the afore-mentioned interview, the exchange between Violet and Bennett on the Makoni factor (“The Makoni factor” is hitting box office in Disneyland! Buy your tickets now and watch how ZANU PF re-invented itself and fooled the west!! OR is Mr Mawere the brand manager of Makoni Inc, or did Max Factor?) went as follows:

Violet: In your view who is the Diplomatic Community trying to impose?

Bennett: They are trying to impose Simba Makoni right now.

Comment: While it is accepted that only Zimbabweans are eligible to nominate a citizen who qualifies for the post of President, (Correct and that is why Bennett is angry about it.) it is significant that Bennett presumably representing his party has come to the same conclusion that Mugabe came to when Tsvangirai also decided to throw his name in the ring before that for anyone to even imagine being a President that person must necessarily be a puppet of the west. (Mr Mawere presumes? Does Mr Mawere mix with the diplomatic community? So all we can go on is Mr Mawere’s presumptions or better still, guesses. Give is facts Mr. Mawere.).

Yesterday, it was argued that Tsvangirai was a puppet of the West (It wasn’t argued Mr Mawere and is the person who said this to be taken seriously?) and now Bennett, a person who purports to be a democrat is now arguing that Simba Makoni is not a principal rather is a creation of the diplomatic community. (No, he didn’t say that Mr Mawere. He said that certain western countries were supporting Makoni and by doing so were trying to foist Makoni on Zimbabweans - there is a big difference and he could well be right.) It is significant that Bennett fails to expose the names of the culprits but it is evident that the USA, EU, Australia, Canada and New Zealand not forgetting the Nordic countries would be on top of the list. (Why wait for Bennett when Mr Mawere already seems to know? Thanks for enlightening us Mr Mawere.)

After 8 years of struggle for change in Zimbabwe, one would have expected a person like Bennett to appreciate the need for more players to enter the political space so that voters can have more choices rather than seek to condemn the country into the politics of division and acrimony. (Bennett is only interested in a free and fair elections where the people can vote for the person of their choice. He never said he was against more contestants. Is Mr Mawere trying to mislead us here?)

Violet: Can you talk a bit more about that? What is your assessment on the emergence of Simba Makoni, and what makes you say that the Diplomatic Community is supporting him?

Bennett: Well, basically all you have to do is to look at the chattering class, look at the internet that is not available to the average people and listen to the Diplomats and pick up on their communications between each other that’s very, very easy to see. What people don’t realize Violet, is that everybody wants a solution to Zimbabwe and they want a quick solution and they want a solution that they believe will happen and that ZANU PF will have to be part of that solution. It’s not going to happen.
The people of Zimbabwe want change, they want rid and gone of ZANU PF and they will settle for nothing else. Again it was the same with the entrance of Arthur Mutambara into the whole issue of the President of the MDC. How and where in the world does someone parachute into a Presidential position never having addressed a branch meeting in the rural areas? And right now as we watch Simba Makoni, we see Simba Makoni walking with three people from his house into a room and making press statements. He tells us he is not alone, we’ve seen nobody else come up and stand next to him. There are rumours of that person and this person but at this stage how can we take him seriously? Have we seen him standing in front of a gathering of people, have we seen him addressing a branch? He throws a manifesto and puts out a manifesto without a political party. Just say by some fluke chance he gets elected into government and you’ve got the MDC with so many seats and ZANU PF have so many seats, one obviously being in the majority of the other, we have got a Westminster system of government, so how now do you form a government? He has to go back to that party and ask them to form a government. What does this manifesto stand for if he is going to either go to one of them to form a government? Surely it’s their manifesto that is going to count. We have to look a lot deeper into this to understand the dynamics of what is happening. And will not settle for a stooge to be pushed forward to be given a soft landing for the very people who have committed atrocities right across the lengths and breadths of Zimbabwe.

Comment: Mr. Bennett believes that ZANU-PF is not going to be part of the solution. (After what ZANU PF have done, can you blame him?) If President Mugabe had taken the same choice at Independence that Bennett is proposing now that all white settlers should be rid of and nothing short of this was going to be satisfactory, I do not believe that he would be relevant today in the affairs of Zimbabwe. (Mr Mawere is rushing off at tangents trying hard to build fictional outcomes.) Bennett is of the view that: “The people of Zimbabwe want change, they want rid and gone of ZANU PF and they will not settle for anything else.” (If Mr Mawere bothered to do his homework and talk to grass roots Zimbabwe, he would soon learn that the people are in harmony with Bennett’s thinking. ZANU PF have caused the problem and now they cannot extract themselves from the problem.) When Bennett talks of the people of Zimbabwe it is not clear who he is referring to. (To clarify Mr Mawere’s lack of knowledge of who Bennett is referring to. It is the grass roots ordinary people of Zimbabwe.) Does he speak for all the people of Zimbabwe? (Not necessarily and he doesn’t profess to. Does Mr Mawere speak for the people of Zimbabwe or is he speaking for Simba Makoni?) How did he come to establish that the people of Zimbabwe have reached this conclusion (because he is more in touch, Mr Mawere) and yet accept that elections are important for Zimbabweans to decide on who should govern them? (He never said that or inferred that Mr Mawere. Listen to the interview again and learn.)

When Bennett says that the people of Zimbabwe want ZANU PF to be eliminated what precisely does he mean? (Being ex-ZANU PF, it doesn’t mean what you think Mr Mawere. Bennett is using a euphemism that ZANU PF will be decimated at the polls. You are looking for something that’s not there Mr Mawere. Did you not listen to Bennett saying that the MDC was against all kinds of violence?) Does it mean that ZANU PF as a body corporate will be de-registered or banned under the Tsvangirai era in as much as ZANU and other parties were banned during the colonial state? (Dreaming again, Mr Mawere. You are beginning to think along ZANU PF lines.) Does it mean that a victory by MDC will return Zimbabwe to its colonial past where participation in political activities was criminalised? (The MDC manifesto is available to everyone - get a copy and read it Mr Mawere. Your machinations are beginning to get out of control. It’s almost as if you are getting as paranoid as most ZANU PF stalwarts. Get a grip of your imagination Mr Mawere and get back to the real world.) If Mugabe could accept that the Rhodesia Front was as Zimbabwean as ZANU at independence, what are we to make of Bennett’s views? (Make what you like Mr Mawere, but you are painting a picture out of thin air.) Is it the case that when the MDC is talking of change it means that only Tsvangirai and his colleagues’ views will be the gospel in the new Zimbabwe? (You’re still dreaming and fantasising, Mr Mawere. Where are the facts to substantiate this drivel?) It is important that Mr Tsvangirai clarifies his position on this defining nation building issue. (Wash your ears Mr Mawere, he has given a position statement in many public forums and the media. Where have you been Mr Mawere? There is nothing to clarify?)

Again Bennett, like Mugabe, (Here we go again - Mr Mawere, you are becoming beyond boring with your concocted drivel. When has Bennett ever said this?) believes that it is wrong for Makoni to have entered the race as an independent when he said: “How and where in the world does someone parachute into a Presidential position never having addressed a branch meeting in the rural areas? Was it the intention of the founding fathers of Zimbabwe that for any citizen to be eligible for nomination to the post of President they need to belong to political clubs? If this was the case, then surely the constitution should have provided for this. (Mr Mawere is now becoming totally confused. The parachute was worn by none other than the rocket scientist, not Makoni. You weren’t following it were you Mr Mawere?)

Bennett finds it wrong (No, he doesn’t, when did he say he was wrong?) for Makoni to have a small circle of friends and supporters and then uses this to suggest that he should not be taken seriously. (Did he say that Mr Mawere? Are you dreaming it up? There is no evidence in the transcript to substantiate a word of what you are saying.) I would have thought that a person who purports to be a democrat would find no offence in Makoni becoming a candidate in an open race. (Bennett has no offence whatsoever but in politics, an adversary is an adversary. Does Mr Mawere expect Bennett to cower before Makoni or what?) It should be left to the voters (That’s exactly what Bennett said…) to make their choices but it is evident that there are some Zimbabweans who believe that the constitution was written for a select few. (It is presumed that Mr Mawere is thinking of Mugabe here.) On this point, it appears that President Mugabe’s views are not entirely different from those of Bennett suggesting that the kind of change that the MDC may be seeking for may be more dangerous than what is prevailing now. (Now Mr Mawere is talking completely unsubstantiated rubbish and trying to denigrate a political adversary on pure assumptions. How shallow and naïve does he think his audience is? Does he think Zimbabweans will believe these rantings? If he does, then he must have some issues to attend to.)

It is true that Makoni like Mugabe and Tsvangirai have been nominated in a similar manner and it would be wrong for anyone to suggest that Makoni should have been disqualified in violation of the constitution necessarily because he has not addressed a rally. (That’s a mouthful, does anyone know what he is getting at?) We should tell Bennett and President Mugabe that the constitution is clear and deliberate on the question of the qualification of the President. (Who is “we” Mr Mawere? Are you not the only one writing this article? If there are others, are you not playing the same smoke and mirrors game as Mr Makoni? I hear he has ZANU PF strongmen backing him. Are you in the same boat? If so, let us know who “we” are.) To my knowledge the four candidates whose nominations have been accepted by the Court are equal before the law and should be treated as such. It would be contemptuous to then suggest that there should be another litmus test that MDC and ZANU PF should impose outside the constitution. (You really are mixed up Mr Mawere. The MDC has no say whatsoever. It is politely suggested that you point your questions to the ZANU PF dictatorship. They are the ones running things downhill at the moment.)

Like Bill Clinton who referred to Obama’s foray into Presidential politics as a fairy tale, Bennett has the audacity to say: “Just say by some fluke chance he gets elected into government and you’ve got the MDC with so many seats and ZANU PF have so many seats, one obviously being in the majority of the other, we have got a Westminster system of government, so how now do you form a government?

Bennett is wrong (No, you are wrong Mr Mawere. Bennett is referring to the style of government - not the monarchy) to suggest that Zimbabwe has a Westminster system of government. The constitution of Zimbabwe has no provision for a monarchy rather the head of state is elected directly by the people. It may be the case that the President and the majority of the members of Parliament come from the same party but the constitution of Zimbabwe contemplates a situation where a President could be an independent and yet still have a parliament dominated by people from different parties. The ZANUfication of Zimbabwean politics may have distorted Bennett’s understanding of the constitutional order obtaining in the country. (Not at all, Mr Mawere, it has distorted your understanding. The problem you have is that you are reading into things that are clearly not there. If fact this is getting unbelievably boring.)

The President has a different mandate under the Zimbabwean constitution from that of the legislature and will have to select his cabinet from among the elected parliamentarians thanks to the Constitutional Amendment No. 18 that now makes it difficult for a President to select his cabinet from outside Parliament. In fact, this amendment may make it difficult for a President to find suitable cabinet members if parliament is dominated by people who may not have much to offer to any government. It does not necessarily mean that being elected as a parliamentarian necessarily makes one a suitable candidate for the executive branch of the government. However, the same system applies in the case of the UK but it is significant that the President is directly elected rather than coming from the majority party.

Bennett then makes a number of factual errors on construction issues like suggesting that if Makoni won the elections he would need to go back to the party and ask them to form a government. The constitution of Zimbabwe does not impose such obligations on a President. All Makoni would need to do is simply to identify parliamentarians who may wish to be considered for appointment to cabinet. The cabinet will have to reflect the choice of the President rather than the choice expressed in an election. I have no doubt that if Makoni were to emerge as a President, then all the parliamentarians who like the majority of Zimbabweans have been yearning for change would be prepared to bury the past and join forces to advance the interests of Zimbabwe. (You hit the nail right on the head Mr Mawere although Bennett was alluding to it but you never picked it. If, and it is a huge IF, Makoni was elected President, it would be natural to assume that he would select his colleagues in ZANU PF. After all, he said he is ZANU PF. He never resigned and he has never spoken out about the horrific human rights violations perpetrated by his party. That’s why so many people can’t trust him. They believe that he is simply re-inventing ZANU PF by giving it a face-lift to gain international acceptance. It a very clever tactic but Zimbabweans weren’t born yesterday - they see what’s going on here - hence the huge “IF”.)

What is worrying is that people like Bennett who purport to be change agents would rather have President Mugabe and ZANU PF remain in power rather than open their minds to another alternative that may involve ZANU PF and MDC parliamentarians. (When did Bennett say this - or are you persisting in talking rubbish, Mr Mawere? This is not even pie in the sky analysis Mr Mawere, you are moving past fantasy into the bizarre.) While it is acceptable that Bennett like many South Africans have invested heavily in one individual, Tsvangirai and President Mandela, respectively, it should not be the case that if Tsvangirai were to lose the election and Makoni were to win then Zimbabweans reject the outcome when it is common cause that the real agenda for change is to get someone other than President Mugabe in statehouse. (Bennett has invested heavily in the people of Zimbabwe and the country as a whole. He is deeply respected by many Zimbabweans and no one with even half a clue is going to believe a word of Mr Mawere’s accusatory dribble.)

I would like to believe that the people who support Makoni’s candidature are as patriotic as the people who have supported Tsvangirai and continue to do so. However, it would be wrong for the post-Mugabe era to be reserved for only the MDC as was the colonial state reserved for settlers with no respect for the rule of law and property rights. Zimbabwe needs a new beginning and it is evident that Bennett and his principals are not ready for the new Zimbabwe electing to remain locked in the politics of yesterday. (But Mr Mawere, where is you evidence? You are talking from a position of weakness. There is no substance in what you say. In fact, maybe you should take a good look at what you have written. It’s an embarrassment to put it mildly.)

Bennett makes the case that MDC will not settle for a stooge while not accepting the ZANU PF position that it equally will not settle for a stooge. (Mr Mawere, would you settle for are stooge? Here’s a question which is surely on people’s lips. Are you a stooge Mr Mawere, and do you know what a stooge is?) It is evident that the stalemate will continue while the people of Zimbabwe will continue to be condemned to poverty. ZANU PF members are convinced that Tsvangirai is a stooge in as much as Bennett believes that Makoni is a stooge - so the circus will go on. What a shame that people like Bennett do not have better judgment. (Judgement? What on earth are you trying to say Mr. Mawere? You are losing the plot. The poverty in Zimbabwe is caused by ZANU PF voodoo policies. It’s their judgement that you should be questioning, not the MDC or Bennett. They didn’t create the mess. It was your party that did it all. So talk to them.)

The views of Bennett confirm the widely held view that the new Zimbabwe under the MDC may take Zimbabwe back to Rhodesia. (Mr Mawere has clearly placed himself in the minority of Zimbabwe’s political groupings – ZANU PF. It is there that the view is widely held. But if you talk to any ZANU PF member out of earshot of the rest, they’ll tell you that they don’t believe a word of it) Bennett makes the statement that people who have committed atrocities right across the length and breadth of Zimbabwe should not be given a soft landing as if to suggest that all the white settlers should be subjected to the same standard for similar transgressions. (Oh, so it’s okay to commit atrocities or do two wrongs make a right?) Given the history of Zimbabwe, Bennett of all people, should be the last person to hold such views particularly in view of the fact that like Makoni, Tsvangirai and many others, he was also a member of ZANU PF. (Until they saw what was really happening - then they got out. But Makoni has been there all the way and he won’t even acknowledge what ZANU PF have done. Neither have you, Mr Mawere. Can we take it that you and Simba are supporting quiet diplomacy too?) President Mandela has been credited for putting South Africa above his personal injuries and it is regrettable that people like Bennett would want a new Zimbabwe that is divisive and less tolerant. Imagine Mugabe reading about Bennett’s interview and what would go through his mind? (No problem, that is why they had a Truth and Reconciliation [Commission] and that is exactly what the MDC is going to implement. They took the lead from Mandela.)

Violet: So what do you think are the implications of Makoni’s candidature?

Bennett: Well I think when I give it some deep thought and look into the whole issue, I can only think of one thing, Violet. I can think that having no party, standing as an independent President, he is going to have to form a government. …he is only banking on ZANU PF because he is a ZANU PF man he’s banking that ZANU PF will win the highest number of seats within parliament. Mugabe will be very, very embarrassed because they have won the highest number of seats and he will have been defeated as President. So he will have to stand down or they will have to have a vote of no confidence and remove him, in which case they will call a congress and then appoint Simba Makoni as the President and therefore he can take off as President of Zimbabwe.

Comment: Is it the case that Makoni is a ZANU PF man? (There is no evidence to suggest otherwise.) If so, what would stop people calling Bennett a racist only because he was part of the colonial system that excluded the majority from political and economic participation? (Nothing. It’s a free world - so go to it, Mr. Mawere. But calling the kettle black might just blow up in your face.) This raises the question about the key constructional issues of the post colonial state. If it was founded on principles of forgiveness, then surely that must be evident in the language of the political actors. Is it ironic in the case of the US that in as much as there may be disagreement among the various political actors about the reasons for going into Iraq, there is no suggestion that after a new President is elected his mission would be to eliminate Republicans from America and also seek to disqualify any republican from running for office. (This is Zimbabwe, Mr Mawere, not Iraq. You are going into a blind alley.)

President Mugabe has been nominated and he is a candidate like Tsvangirai and Makoni and, therefore, he has no choice but to abide to the will of the people. Zimbabwe’s sovereignty resides in the people and it should be left to the owners of Zimbabwe to pronounce their opinion on who should govern the country. (That is not a revelation Mr Mawere, we all know that. The problem is that ZANU PF has got completely confused as to the meaning of the word. ZANU PF think that sovereignty means ZANU PF Inc. And given that Makoni says he is ZANU PF, it can be safely assumed that he thinks the same.)

Violet: What I also don’t understand and maybe you can give us your thoughts on this. Many people say that Makoni is just an extension of ZANU PF and that if the goal is to keep the regime in power, so why not just have Makoni stand as the ZANU PF candidate instead of him becoming and independent candidate?

Bennett: Well for exactly the same reasons as what happened in our split. A minority decides that they want to be President and it’s not being endorsed by the majority. So they connive and make plans to defeat the majority in order to achieve their goals. He was defeated at the presidency of ZANU PF, but now he has come in, and he said that he has people behind him and he is hoping to pick up votes across the board because he is an opportunist and right now it’s ripe for the picking in Zimbabwe because, as I said to you earlier, an incumbent loses an election and an opposition never wins an election.

An incumbent loses the election by his policies. Every man and his dog today in Zimbabwe want change. Why do they want change, they want change because of their life and difficulties that they face on a day-today basis. There is not a single person who cannot see the failure of ZANU PF and they have lived under the violence and distraction for the last 28 years so they want change. Simba Makoni through his cohorts realized this so they have like opportunists tried to jump in to take advantage of that change in order to then go back to ZANU PF when he is the President and install himself as the President of ZANU PF, and for those that are with him to protect the ill-gotten gains, to protect the human rights abuses and not to face the people of Zimbabwe. That’s the way I see it and that’s the way I believe it Violet.

Comment: It is not accurate for Bennett to state as fact that Makoni was defeated at the Presidency of ZANU PF. (How come?) My understanding (Let’s get it right. Mr Mawere says “not accurate” and then he says “My understanding”. Which is right Mr Mawere? Understanding does not imply accuracy either Mr Mawere. Or am I to understand that whatever you understand is 100% correct, Give us break, Mr Mawere.) is that President Mugabe’s terms as President of the Party is due to expire in 2009 and the national elections just happen to occur when he is still the head of the party. Accordingly, as head of the party, he was endorsed as a candidate at the December special congress. No elections were held or called for otherwise all the other office bearers of the party would have been recalled.

Whether Makoni has people behind him or not is irrelevant (What are you trying to hide here Mr Mawere? We know he has people already hidden in the closet and we understand that they are strongmen. It is relevant, Mr Mawere, because Zimbabweans don’t like hidden agendas. You should know this.) as the voters will be the jury. I should like to believe that even the so-called ZANU PF political heavyweights have not been given more than one vote each. If this is the case, then the people who can tell Makoni that his time is not now, are the people in Zimbabwe. (One has to wonder if Mr Mawere honestly believes a word of what he is saying.)

Bennett then labels Makoni an opportunist (Of course he is an opportunist! If he really and truly cared about Zimbabwe, he would have left years ago. Makoni can see the writing on the wall as clear as anyone else can.) while accepting that it is highly unlikely that the opposition will win. If Bennett concedes that victory is remote should he not be open-minded instead of pre-empting what may emerge as a surprise for the people of Zimbabwe? (No surprises for guessing, Mr Mawere. It’s all hypothetical.) If change is the primary agenda for the opposition then surely the MDC must be the first to embrace Makoni for taking the courage to run as an independent. (Why should they embrace a candidate who is clearly ZANU PF? This is politics, not a singles club, although Makoni appears to be in that category.) While it is unjustified to call Makoni an opportunist, I am sure that Bennett would take kindly labelled as such. (Really?)

It is a historical fact that Bennett and his fellow settlers were allowed to protect their gains acquired through non-market forces during the colonial era and now would want to suggest that the same policies applicable to beneficiaries of the colonial state be restricted only to ZANU PF. (Ignorance is bliss as far as Mr Mawere is concerned, especially as far as Bennett is concerned. History starts in the morning with Mr Mawere and he makes it up as he goes along. This is obviously something he learnt from ZANU PF. One has to wonder what opportunities ZANU PF gave Mr Mawere in gaining his empire.) He wants ZANU PF to face the people of Zimbabwe instead of all perpetrators of injustice to face the people of Zimbabwe without favour or prejudice. (Really? Did he say that?)

Violet: What about the fact that Mutambara MDC is waiting to throw its support behind Simba Makoni?

Bennett: I think that clearly explains that the split in our MDC and that is the way it always has been. They are going home. They are joining ZANU PF where they belong.
Comment: The fact that Mutambara elected not to offer himself for the Presidency was his personal choice based on his own assessment about his chances of success. (A wise decision because his only constituency was within the leadership of the splinter faction. He had no other constituency in Zimbabwe and he was desperate to find a way out of his dilemma. Makoni fitted perfectly.) It is not correct for Bennett to allege that Mutambara played any part in the October 12 split of the MDC. What would be helpful is for Bennett to record historical events accurately rather than to opportunistically seek to shade the truth for political expediency. (Mr Mawere, are you trying to call the kettle black? You are getting lost in detail that isn’t there!) The leadership challenges that MDC faced were as natural as the challenges facing many political organisations. ZANU PF has its own history of such challenges and, therefore, the maturity of any movement is measured by its ability to resolve such challenges. However, it has become a habit for the opposition to blame ZANU PF even for personal differences that occur between party members. (This is a superficial, shallow analysis - if you can call analysis. It pure hearsay like most of this long and drawn out missive.)

To allege that Mutambara is ZANU-PF is political mischief at its best. I do not think that Bennett is fair to seek to undermine Mutambara who was invited by senior members of the MDC who sought to assert their rights in a party they genuinely believed was betraying the democratic values on which it was founded. (Bennett has not undermined Mutambara in the least and it is mischief to allege that he has.) I would like to believe that Mutambara has played his part and history will be kind to him. (What part Mr Mawere? It would be nice if you would tell us.) His input was useful in the Mbeki-led initiative and credit must go to Tsvangirai for accepting the fact that there were two formations of the MDC and the opposition parliamentarians had divided loyalties. (Mutambara was not involved - neither was Tsvangirai. It was Ncube and Biti.)

It would be wrong to suggest that the parliamentarians and members of the MDC who chose Mutambara to be their leader are fools. (No one is assuming anything, Mr Mawere.)

Surely, if change is the motive behind Bennett’s activism then respect of the choices made by others must be the starting point. (What are you assuming, Mr Mawere?) Mutambara has never been a creature of ZANU PF and his record speaks for itself. It is always easy to criticise other people (Well, Mr Mawere, you are trying but it’s not working for you at all.) but it is important to imagine how different the history of Zimbabwe would be if Mutambara had not accepted to lead the leaderless formation that had chosen to differ with Tsvangirai. It is also important to imagine what would have happened if Tsvangirai had been elected President and the differences of opinion had emerged while he was in office. Would Tsvangirai have accepted and respected the right of Ncube, Sibanda and others to differ with him without using the state machinery to discipline them? (Try asking him, Mr Mawere. You might be surprised with his answer.)

The manner in which the MDC has resolved the differences between its members should be a cause for concern especially given the propensity of Africans to abuse state power when they seize it. I can appreciate Bennett’s views on power given his colonial heritage and it may well be the case that Mugabe also inherited the strategies and tactics used by the colonial state to handle his opponents. (Dream on, Mr Mawere, dream on.)

To the extent that Bennett is a senior member of the MDC one has to carefully evaluate his comments because they may have a bearing on key foundational principles of the post-Mugabe era. Anyone with interests in the future of Zimbabwe like me has to factor the Bennett equation in the construction of a new Zimbabwe and implications thereof on the rule of law and black property rights. (Black property rights? Don’t other Zimbabweans of other ethnicity count Mr Mawere? So you want to conveniently leave out anyone else’s rights and at the same time you talk about law and order. You have just blown your cover Mr Mawere. You are a racist!)

Could it be the case that Bennett supports Tsvangirai because a deal on property rights has been cut? (This is interesting. Mr Mawere is trying to paint a picture here. Let’s turn it round. Has Simba Makoni offered Mr Mawere a gold mine? The reason why this question is asked is that Mr Mawere is trying really hard but going nowhere. What is very clear is that his mindset must have been completely ZANUfied to the extent that his logic tells him that Bennett is doing secret deals? It’s almost like the unfaithful husband thinking that because he is unfaithful, then naturally so must his wife. Let’s get back to earth and look at the real world for a moment. In Bennett’s case, surely Mr Mawere would know that there are Zimbabwe High Court orders which say Bennett is entitled to his land. Mr Mawere talks about law and order but conveniently ignores High Court orders. Interesting to say the least but it clearly confirms that Mr Mawere is like the rest of ZANU PF. They don’t respect the Zimbabwe judiciary or Zimbabwean citizens’ rights. They are partisan and racist.)

Why would Bennett not be open to allow Zimbabweans to make their own choice in an electoral process without prejudging the outcome? Even if Makoni were to win, it appears that Bennett will still find a reason to manufacture conspiracy theories forgetting that in 1980 the incumbent Muzorewa/Smith lost to ZANU. Equally, ANC won in 1994 in an election where the balance was tilted in favour of the status quo. (It’s rather rich of Mr Mawere to accuse anyone of conspiracy theories. It is abundantly clear from this missive that Mr Mawere’s mind is bristling with crank and bizarre theories. He’s clearly suffering from the unfaithful husband syndrome.) Zimbabwe deserves a new chapter and it is evident that Bennett would rather take the country back and lock it into the polarisation that transformed the Zimbabwean promise into a nightmare. (But Mr Mawere, Zimbabweans are already living a nightmare. They don’t [need] Bennett’s help to get there and it is very much doubtful that Bennett would oblige anyway.)

Violet: But wasn’t the ethos of the Mutambara camp - wasn’t it to destroy ZANU PF from within and that included working with refor