ONE of the most unfortunate consequences of the inconclusive outcome of the March 29, 2008 general election and the subsequent inter-party dialogue which led to the signing of the fragile Global Political Agreement on September 15, 2008, between Zanu-PF and the two MDC formations has been the peddling of the falsehood that Zimbabwe has three political principals, namely President Robert Mugabe, Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai and Deputy Prime Minister Arthur Mutambara.
Whereas President Mugabe and Prime Minister Tsvangirai do indeed represent different and competing political interests in the country, and while they are indeed political principals, only someone from Mars would say the same about Deputy Prime Minister Mutambara, who clearly does not represent anyone other than his confused and clownish self perhaps and who, because he has no principles, suffers from breathtaking irresponsibility.
The height of his irresponsibility was demonstrated for the umpteenth time at the wasteful Cabinet retreat held by the office of Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai in Nyanga last weekend where Mutambara used a government platform to review the Prime Minister’s failed 100-Day Action Plan to theatrically and provocatively claim yet again that the March 29, 2008, general election and June 27, 2008, Presidential run-off election were fraudulent and nullities.
Who does not know that Mutambara would not be a Deputy Prime Minister if those elections he is so wont to deride had been conclusive one way or the other?
Looking back, Mutambara’s tenure in the inclusive government over the last six months has been a catalogue of outbursts that have raised questions about his political sanity.
The questions are important because, whereas there have been plenty of critical appraisals of the inclusive government’s first six months in office, there have been virtually no focused assessments of the leadership quality of the new players in government drawn from the two MDC formations.
Given the previously well-publicised concerns from the public about the leadership qualities of Zanu PF cabinet ministers, some of whom have been described as "deadwood" even by President Mugabe himself, it is fitting to ask whether the new ministers from the two MDC formations have lived up to public expectations of credible leadership and whether their collective and individual performances have demonstrated better management skills than their Zanu PF predecessors.
Advertisement
Even though it might be too early to judge individual ministers, it is nevertheless hard to avoid the conclusion that some of them have already behaved in ways that do not inspire public confidence in their abilities.
For example, as part of his mindless crusade to settle personal scores with the Governor of the Reserve Bank, Dr Gideon Gono, Minister of Finance Tendai Biti has adopted an unsettling and manifestly irresponsible "kiya-kiya" approach to fiscal policies whose consequences on the urban and rural poor has been deadly, with worse to come.
Minister of Health and Child Welfare Henry Madzorera is conspicuous by his lack of presence or initiative to manage the health sector especially now that the nation faces the deadly threat of a swine flu outbreak, let alone the unresolved issues of terms and conditions of service for health workers that have forced doctors to go on strike.
Samuel Sipepa Nkomo, the Minister of Water Resources Development and Management, has been embarrassing himself and his MDC-T party not only by trampling on tender regulations in shady deals with scheming South Africans involving millions of Obama dollars, but also by communicating to local authorities through the media over critical water affairs.
A cabinet minister who thinks he or she can communicate to local councils such as the City of Harare through the media leaves a lot to be desired.
Minister of National Housing and Social Amenities Fidelis Mhashu has been sneaking out of the country into South Africa without the knowledge of the authorities there for clandestine meetings with people claiming to be British businessmen who have undefined interests in Zimbabwe, only to come back home with five stitches and bandages on his head following hospitalisation in Johannesburg after being attacked by alleged criminals under very embarrassing circumstances whose full story is yet to be told.
There are other unsavoury incidents that could be cited involving the shenanigans of new cabinet ministers from the MDC formations but these should suffice to show that there is nothing new or inspiring about the behaviour of some of the new kids on the block in the inclusive Government. It appears that they were deadwood even before coming into life in the inclusive government.
However, it must be said that there are some notable exceptions. To begin with, and notwithstanding that he has been dragging his feet towards standing firm against American and European illegal economic sanctions that are the single most damaging issue stifling economic and political development in Zimbabwe, Prime Minister Tsvangirai has shown that he is capable of national leadership.
In a number of defining moments when his traditional handlers have wanted and pushed him to be reckless and destructive, he has been drawn to the nationalist spirit which has tempered him against cheap populism and the demands of infantile radicals in his party.
In fact, it is now clear to discerning observers that the only thing that prevents Prime Minister Tsvangirai from becoming the true nationalist that he can be is the bad British, American and European company he has kept over the last decade or so because, left alone to his own better judgment, there would no fundamental difference between the Prime Minister and President Mugabe and a new chapter in the saga of national unity would be opened. That unity is now a possibility on the horizon and only time will define its final outcome.
What is unfortunate is that there is a spoiler on the prowl and his name is Deputy Prime Minister Mutambara. One thing that can now be concluded with certainty is that Mutambara has been the major blight on the inclusive government’s reputation.
His behaviour since the formation of the inclusive Government on February 13, 2009, has been grotesque not least because he has used just about every speaking opportunity to present himself as a delinquent clown masquerading as a political principal.
Yet the self-evident fact which Deputy Prime Minister Mutambara has sought to hide through his attention-seeking statements that are manifestly inconsistent and insane is that, while he is a political principal on paper as per his signature on the GPA, he is not a political principal in reality on the ground.
In fact, he is a political nobody who is where he is not because of his self-imagined cleverness, which he has said is the strategy to his political madness, but because of the unfortunate naiveté of ministers Welshman Ncube and Gibson Sibanda whose cowardice to take leadership when it beckoned led them to cynically hire Mutambara in the misplaced if not false name of ethnic balancing.
In a clear sign that he just does not get it, Deputy Prime Minister Mutambara has apparently not understood that he was hired to head his MDC faction not because he had any political clout or constituency but simply because of misplaced tribal politics whose authors saw him as an acceptable ethnic token.
Any other thinking person in Deputy Prime Minister Mutambara’s shoes would have understood this without being pretentious about being a true political principal.
Indeed, anyone else in his situation would have used the opportunity he has to build bridges and to quietly but effectively develop a political constituency by demonstrating technical competence to get things done in the public interest.
Instead, and to his assured downfall, Deputy Prime Minister Mutambara has abused the opportunity he has by displaying a sickening type of unprincipled and irresponsible conduct done in an arrogant manner made worse by his profound ignorance of Zimbabwean politics.
Even children can see that his regular claim that the March 29, 2008, and June 27, 2008, elections were fraudulent and a nullities are naively calculated to win the hearts and minds of MDC-T supporters because he knows only too well that his own MDC formation is now history.
What Mutambara apparently does not know is that nobody in the MDC-T rank and file takes him seriously.
The consensus across the political divide is that Mutambara, who garnered a paltry 400 votes on March 29, 2008, among constituents who rightly saw him as a noisy overgrown baby who has failed to mature, is a laughing stock with no independent political clout or constituency of his own that could add value to any political party.
He has also shown that he is of no use to any government. Witness how he has abused his position by being an irresponsible loudmouth that is always talking hogwash and hosting acrimonious conferences about what he says is Zimbabwe’s need for a new national vision and rebranding.
The sooner the now thoroughly discredited Deputy Prime Minister learns that Zimbabwe’s national vision and brand are rooted in the legacy of the liberation struggle and its gains of independence the better for him.
Otherwise the time has come for him to just shut up and go back to the laboratory and try his luck with unthinking robots.
By Prof Jonathan Moyo
NewZimbabwe.com
31 August 2009
Setting conditions for credible elections
THERE has been a lot of speculation, discussion and questions raised about what transpired at the retreat of the Zimbabwean Cabinet on the 22nd and 23rd of August 2009, in the resort town of Nyanga.
We had a very focused and productive two-day workshop. I made two separate presentations. On the first day, Saturday, my topic was: The Case for Monitoring and Evaluation: Embracing Global Best Practice. This was executed without any hitches. On the second day, Sunday, I presented on: A Review of the Previous Day and an Update of the Rebranding and Shared Vision Efforts. It was during this discussion that there was an unfortunate misunderstanding over one matter.
Let me state clearly and up-front, that, it was never my intention to insult or to offend my colleagues in the inclusive government. I was giving a review of what had been discussed the day before in what is called the Rights and Interests Cluster of Ministries. This is the group of Ministries responsible for the tasks of supervising the crafting of a new people-driven constitution, national healing, media and political reforms.
One of the challenges that the participants in this cluster identified as impeding progress was the lack of political will within the inclusive government. This was identified as a major constraint, which is retarding progress towards the achievement of the targets and goals of this cluster. In reviewing this matter I sought to emphasise the importance of the work and targets of the Ministries in question, and dramatise the categorical imperativeness of their success.
In particular, I was emphasising the importance of political reforms, media reforms, new constitution and national healing. In my review remarks, I indicated that the core outcome of this government is the creation of conditions for free and fair elections in Zimbabwe. This is critical so that the outcome of our next polls is not in dispute. We do not want an inconclusive and problematic election whose results are challenged. We must build integrity and legitimacy of our electoral processes so that the losers congratulate the winners and the winners form a legitimate elected government.
Part of the journey to this state of affairs requires successful implementation a national healing and reconciliation programme, crafting of a truly people-driven constitution and the deepening of political and media reforms including transparency and accountability in all electoral processes.
Advertisement
In order to buttress and amplify my argument, I emphasised that it is essential for members of the government and the generality of the people of Zimbabwe to understand the history, background, and hence the mandate of this inclusive government. Vana veZimbabwe hatifaniri kukanganwa chezuro ngehope. (Zimbabweans, we should not fail to address the challenges and conditions of our immediate past because of a temporary reprieve in our circumstances).
This Inclusive Government came into being because our elections in March and June of last year were inconclusive and problematic. We had challenges around our elections. This is common cause. This is the reason why we went into negotiations from June 27 2008 to February 11 this year. There was no government in Zimbabwe from June 27th 2008 to 11th February 2009. Why? This is because all the elections of 2008 did not produce a government.
This is profound. Elections must produce a government. It means in Zimbabwe we have an electoral disease to cure. The solution lies in the creation of conditions for free and fair elections. This has to be a key outcome of this Inclusive Government. This was the context of the discussion in Nyanga.
Where the discomfort arose was when I used the phrase “The election on March 29th 2008 was fraudulent and that on June 27th 2008 was a farce and a nullity.” Well, well, every Zimbabwean knows that this is a true statement. There is agreement that this is the scientific description of those polls. The observers, SADC and the AU came to the same conclusions.
With hindsight, one could say maybe I could have looked for more polite language to express this agreed fact. That is a fair comment, but the import and essence of my message on the need for reforms are not disputable. We are in this inclusive government because of the challenges and problems we had in March and June last year.
If the elections were decisive, a government could have been formed immediately after June 27, 2008. It wasn’t. It was only created after protracted SADC-facilitated dialogue. This means everyone in this inclusive government owes their government position and role to the Global Political Agreement. There is no leader in this government who was elected to their position. We are all products of negotiations. Every one of us in this inclusive government is a creature of the GPA. That is a misnomer. That is not democracy.
What we want is to make sure that we use the opportunity of this arrangement to ensure that next time around we have a proper election and the outcome is not disputed by the losers and Zimbabwe can have a legitimate elected government. Our people deserve nothing less.
This is what I was emphasising in Nyanga. Having said that, it is important that I say we must endeavour to accommodate each other and use measured, inclusive and tolerant language. I will try my best to do so in future. However, there is no space for what I call inappropriate politeness. We must make sure we craft a sustainable basis for a new Zimbabwe, and build a peaceful, prosperous and democratic nation on a solid foundation rooted in the truth and history of our country.
It is clear from the context outlined above, that, the walk-out by Zanu PF ministers was a complete over-reaction. As Shakespeare put it in Hamlet; “(he) doth protest too much, methinks”. This was much ado about nothing. It was unfortunate that they chose to express themselves that way.
However, as I have already conceded, we should all try to use measured language. We must all try to be sensitive and tolerant. We must all create an environment where the three political parties work together smoothly and effectively in the Inclusive government. As DPM, I will try my best to do my part.
However, in the course of deliberations if there is a position stated or an issue invoked which colleagues find objectionable, the process should be to raise a point of order. The speaker can then be asked to explain or retract. We must not intimidate each other with walkouts and boycotts. We must not blackmail each other with threats of walkouts and boycotts.
Walking out of meetings or not attending workshops is not part of democratic practice. What we want in the country is robust but rational disputation as an integral part of our democratic discourse. You don’t achieve that by walking out of a meeting. We must talk to each other and find each other. Yes we must exercise restraint, and use measured diction.
We cannot blackmail each other by saying this group will not attend a meeting if such an individual has a role. That is juvenile. No viable government can proceed on that basis. We must agree to disagree without being disagreeable.
As for Patrick Chinamasa’s charge of“seizing any opportunity granted to you to attack Zanu PF, especially, President Robert Mugabe,” this is news to me. I wonder if this is what I did when I introduced President Mugabe at the launch of STERP, or when I defended and fought for Zanu PF Ministers to get visas to attend the re-engagement dialogue in Europe. Or when I berated President Obama for discriminating against a Zanu PF Minister, or took public positions against targeted sanctions imposed on Zanu PF Ministers; has this evidence been considered as well? I rest my case.
I am not a member of Zanu PF, neither am I a member of MDC-T. I am the President of a separate political party. I am not beholden to either of these major parties. Within the context of rational disputation and democratic discourse, I reserve the right to take positions based on principles and values of my Party, and damn the consequences.
As a national leader, Principal and DPM in the Inclusive Government, I have a duty and obligation to ensure the full and complete consummation of the GPA. I have to make sure the agenda and mandate of the Inclusive Government are successfully executed. I also have to rally and unite people, and bring the different constituencies together in pursuit of a peaceful, prosperous and democratic Zimbabwe.
In the process, I will make mistakes. I will learn lessons. However, I will try my best to be a unifier not a divider. I will try my best to build, and not to destroy. In so far as I am concerned, we should all be driven by the national interest. We must subjugate partisan interest to the national interest. Our collective destiny and aspirations must encourage us to tolerate, accommodate and in fact celebrate dissent, difference and diversity. There is dignity in difference.
In all my action I am targeting the task at hand. My job is to make sure that the Inclusive Government delivers on the promise of the GPA. My task is to ensure that Zimbabweans across the political divide work together. We all have to make sure that this government delivers on its agenda.
As one of the three Principals, I must make sure that all the outstanding GPA issues are speedily and amicably resolved. The GPA and the SADC Communiqué of January 27, 2009, must be fully and completely consummated without equivocation or variation. The three political parties through their three leaders signed a GPA out of their own volition. They were not forced.
This GPA was crafted with the assistance and involvement of SADC and AU. It is an excellent example of African solution to African problems. It is a solution by Zimbabwean citizens to their national challenge. Hence, the spirit and the letter of the GPA must be respected.
Let me dramatise the meaning of our failure to fully implement the GPA. How credible am I as the Deputy Prime Minister of Zimbabwe when I say to an investor, “Come and invest your money in Zimbabwe, I am going to respect my agreement with you,” when I cannot keep my own agreement with myself? Who can have confidence in a government that does not respect its own laws and agreements? Where will credibility of such a regime come from?
Furthermore, what does failure to implement the GPA mean to the legitimacy and efficacy of the doctrine of African solutions to African problems? What are the implications to the credibility of SADC and the AU?
So when I speak out on the outstanding GPA issues, the problems on our farms, shenanigans in our courts, violation of human rights, and the slow pace of media and political reforms, I am only doing my job. I am being a responsible leader. I am being a national leader.
Sometimes leadership is about going against the wind, making unpopular decisions popular. The measure and integrity of a leader is defined by where they stand during invidious moments of crisis. I am not driven by partisan or personal interest, but rather by the collective agenda of serving Zimbabwe. This is the urgency of now. The future will take care of itself.
The primary drivers of change in our nation should be the Zimbabweans themselves. We must become the transformation we seek to see in our country. Foreigners can only help us help ourselves. We must all gather the political will and determination to resolve the outstanding issues.
President Zuma and SADC’s role is ostensibly a facilitative one. This is why some of us have been outspoken on the need for convergence on these matters that are separating us. It is actually embarrassing and demeaning that we should be waiting for Zuma or SADC to encourage us to implement things that we agreed to do six months ago. It is a travesty of common cause.
Having said that, it is my hope that the involvement of President Zuma, SADC and AU will spur our sense of patriotism and self-respect so that we can do what is right for our country and in the national interest of our people. The sooner we realise that we are going to sink or swim together the better. We must unite and work together.
Arthur G.O. Mutambara is the Deputy Prime Minister of the Republic of Zimbabwe
NewZimbabwe.com
We had a very focused and productive two-day workshop. I made two separate presentations. On the first day, Saturday, my topic was: The Case for Monitoring and Evaluation: Embracing Global Best Practice. This was executed without any hitches. On the second day, Sunday, I presented on: A Review of the Previous Day and an Update of the Rebranding and Shared Vision Efforts. It was during this discussion that there was an unfortunate misunderstanding over one matter.
Let me state clearly and up-front, that, it was never my intention to insult or to offend my colleagues in the inclusive government. I was giving a review of what had been discussed the day before in what is called the Rights and Interests Cluster of Ministries. This is the group of Ministries responsible for the tasks of supervising the crafting of a new people-driven constitution, national healing, media and political reforms.
One of the challenges that the participants in this cluster identified as impeding progress was the lack of political will within the inclusive government. This was identified as a major constraint, which is retarding progress towards the achievement of the targets and goals of this cluster. In reviewing this matter I sought to emphasise the importance of the work and targets of the Ministries in question, and dramatise the categorical imperativeness of their success.
In particular, I was emphasising the importance of political reforms, media reforms, new constitution and national healing. In my review remarks, I indicated that the core outcome of this government is the creation of conditions for free and fair elections in Zimbabwe. This is critical so that the outcome of our next polls is not in dispute. We do not want an inconclusive and problematic election whose results are challenged. We must build integrity and legitimacy of our electoral processes so that the losers congratulate the winners and the winners form a legitimate elected government.
Part of the journey to this state of affairs requires successful implementation a national healing and reconciliation programme, crafting of a truly people-driven constitution and the deepening of political and media reforms including transparency and accountability in all electoral processes.
Advertisement
In order to buttress and amplify my argument, I emphasised that it is essential for members of the government and the generality of the people of Zimbabwe to understand the history, background, and hence the mandate of this inclusive government. Vana veZimbabwe hatifaniri kukanganwa chezuro ngehope. (Zimbabweans, we should not fail to address the challenges and conditions of our immediate past because of a temporary reprieve in our circumstances).
This Inclusive Government came into being because our elections in March and June of last year were inconclusive and problematic. We had challenges around our elections. This is common cause. This is the reason why we went into negotiations from June 27 2008 to February 11 this year. There was no government in Zimbabwe from June 27th 2008 to 11th February 2009. Why? This is because all the elections of 2008 did not produce a government.
This is profound. Elections must produce a government. It means in Zimbabwe we have an electoral disease to cure. The solution lies in the creation of conditions for free and fair elections. This has to be a key outcome of this Inclusive Government. This was the context of the discussion in Nyanga.
Where the discomfort arose was when I used the phrase “The election on March 29th 2008 was fraudulent and that on June 27th 2008 was a farce and a nullity.” Well, well, every Zimbabwean knows that this is a true statement. There is agreement that this is the scientific description of those polls. The observers, SADC and the AU came to the same conclusions.
With hindsight, one could say maybe I could have looked for more polite language to express this agreed fact. That is a fair comment, but the import and essence of my message on the need for reforms are not disputable. We are in this inclusive government because of the challenges and problems we had in March and June last year.
If the elections were decisive, a government could have been formed immediately after June 27, 2008. It wasn’t. It was only created after protracted SADC-facilitated dialogue. This means everyone in this inclusive government owes their government position and role to the Global Political Agreement. There is no leader in this government who was elected to their position. We are all products of negotiations. Every one of us in this inclusive government is a creature of the GPA. That is a misnomer. That is not democracy.
What we want is to make sure that we use the opportunity of this arrangement to ensure that next time around we have a proper election and the outcome is not disputed by the losers and Zimbabwe can have a legitimate elected government. Our people deserve nothing less.
This is what I was emphasising in Nyanga. Having said that, it is important that I say we must endeavour to accommodate each other and use measured, inclusive and tolerant language. I will try my best to do so in future. However, there is no space for what I call inappropriate politeness. We must make sure we craft a sustainable basis for a new Zimbabwe, and build a peaceful, prosperous and democratic nation on a solid foundation rooted in the truth and history of our country.
It is clear from the context outlined above, that, the walk-out by Zanu PF ministers was a complete over-reaction. As Shakespeare put it in Hamlet; “(he) doth protest too much, methinks”. This was much ado about nothing. It was unfortunate that they chose to express themselves that way.
However, as I have already conceded, we should all try to use measured language. We must all try to be sensitive and tolerant. We must all create an environment where the three political parties work together smoothly and effectively in the Inclusive government. As DPM, I will try my best to do my part.
However, in the course of deliberations if there is a position stated or an issue invoked which colleagues find objectionable, the process should be to raise a point of order. The speaker can then be asked to explain or retract. We must not intimidate each other with walkouts and boycotts. We must not blackmail each other with threats of walkouts and boycotts.
Walking out of meetings or not attending workshops is not part of democratic practice. What we want in the country is robust but rational disputation as an integral part of our democratic discourse. You don’t achieve that by walking out of a meeting. We must talk to each other and find each other. Yes we must exercise restraint, and use measured diction.
We cannot blackmail each other by saying this group will not attend a meeting if such an individual has a role. That is juvenile. No viable government can proceed on that basis. We must agree to disagree without being disagreeable.
As for Patrick Chinamasa’s charge of“seizing any opportunity granted to you to attack Zanu PF, especially, President Robert Mugabe,” this is news to me. I wonder if this is what I did when I introduced President Mugabe at the launch of STERP, or when I defended and fought for Zanu PF Ministers to get visas to attend the re-engagement dialogue in Europe. Or when I berated President Obama for discriminating against a Zanu PF Minister, or took public positions against targeted sanctions imposed on Zanu PF Ministers; has this evidence been considered as well? I rest my case.
I am not a member of Zanu PF, neither am I a member of MDC-T. I am the President of a separate political party. I am not beholden to either of these major parties. Within the context of rational disputation and democratic discourse, I reserve the right to take positions based on principles and values of my Party, and damn the consequences.
As a national leader, Principal and DPM in the Inclusive Government, I have a duty and obligation to ensure the full and complete consummation of the GPA. I have to make sure the agenda and mandate of the Inclusive Government are successfully executed. I also have to rally and unite people, and bring the different constituencies together in pursuit of a peaceful, prosperous and democratic Zimbabwe.
In the process, I will make mistakes. I will learn lessons. However, I will try my best to be a unifier not a divider. I will try my best to build, and not to destroy. In so far as I am concerned, we should all be driven by the national interest. We must subjugate partisan interest to the national interest. Our collective destiny and aspirations must encourage us to tolerate, accommodate and in fact celebrate dissent, difference and diversity. There is dignity in difference.
In all my action I am targeting the task at hand. My job is to make sure that the Inclusive Government delivers on the promise of the GPA. My task is to ensure that Zimbabweans across the political divide work together. We all have to make sure that this government delivers on its agenda.
As one of the three Principals, I must make sure that all the outstanding GPA issues are speedily and amicably resolved. The GPA and the SADC Communiqué of January 27, 2009, must be fully and completely consummated without equivocation or variation. The three political parties through their three leaders signed a GPA out of their own volition. They were not forced.
This GPA was crafted with the assistance and involvement of SADC and AU. It is an excellent example of African solution to African problems. It is a solution by Zimbabwean citizens to their national challenge. Hence, the spirit and the letter of the GPA must be respected.
Let me dramatise the meaning of our failure to fully implement the GPA. How credible am I as the Deputy Prime Minister of Zimbabwe when I say to an investor, “Come and invest your money in Zimbabwe, I am going to respect my agreement with you,” when I cannot keep my own agreement with myself? Who can have confidence in a government that does not respect its own laws and agreements? Where will credibility of such a regime come from?
Furthermore, what does failure to implement the GPA mean to the legitimacy and efficacy of the doctrine of African solutions to African problems? What are the implications to the credibility of SADC and the AU?
So when I speak out on the outstanding GPA issues, the problems on our farms, shenanigans in our courts, violation of human rights, and the slow pace of media and political reforms, I am only doing my job. I am being a responsible leader. I am being a national leader.
Sometimes leadership is about going against the wind, making unpopular decisions popular. The measure and integrity of a leader is defined by where they stand during invidious moments of crisis. I am not driven by partisan or personal interest, but rather by the collective agenda of serving Zimbabwe. This is the urgency of now. The future will take care of itself.
The primary drivers of change in our nation should be the Zimbabweans themselves. We must become the transformation we seek to see in our country. Foreigners can only help us help ourselves. We must all gather the political will and determination to resolve the outstanding issues.
President Zuma and SADC’s role is ostensibly a facilitative one. This is why some of us have been outspoken on the need for convergence on these matters that are separating us. It is actually embarrassing and demeaning that we should be waiting for Zuma or SADC to encourage us to implement things that we agreed to do six months ago. It is a travesty of common cause.
Having said that, it is my hope that the involvement of President Zuma, SADC and AU will spur our sense of patriotism and self-respect so that we can do what is right for our country and in the national interest of our people. The sooner we realise that we are going to sink or swim together the better. We must unite and work together.
Arthur G.O. Mutambara is the Deputy Prime Minister of the Republic of Zimbabwe
NewZimbabwe.com
19 August 2009
Tribalism Caused MDC Split?
THE 2005 split of Zimbabwe’s main opposition Movement for Democratic (MDC) party was likely fuelled by strains caused by Morgan Tsvangirai’s treason trial and TRIBALISM, an unpublished report compiled by the party reveals.
The MDC split on October 25, 2005, after a national council meeting at which party leader Tsvangirai was accused of dictatorially vetoing a vote to field candidates in Senate elections due later that year.
But the report compiled by a three-man commission comprising Dr Tichaona Mudzingwa, Moses Mzila Ndlovu and Giles Mutsekwa into violence that erupted at the party’s Harvest House headquarters in May of that year suggests the party was inexorably heading towards a split anyway – plagued by tribal mistrust and competing political ambitions.
The report says fears that Tsvangirai would be jailed at the end of his treason trial split the party, with one group of senior officials unprepared to have Tsvangirai’s deputy, Gibson Sibanda – a Ndebele – leading the party.
A “vigilante group” of 25 MDC youths camped at the party’s headquarters was used by this group of politicians “in a deadly game” to forcibly drive out party workers seen as aligned to secretary general Welshman Ncube and Sibanda – just days before Tsvangirai was acquitted.
The commission interviewed 15 people, who included workers and members of the vigilante group, and concluded that the violence was caused by fears that “Ndebeles” would take over the party in the event of Tsvangirai being convicted of the treason charges.
Peter Guhu, who was the MDC’s director of security at the time, told the commission that the violence was fanned by party leaders who wanted to get rid of Ncube, Sibanda, and their “Ndebele surrogates”.
Guhu named Isaac Matongo (chairman), Lucia Matibenga (Women’s Wing National Chairwoman), Gandi Mudzingwa (director of presidential affairs), Dennis Murira (coordinator in organising department), Ian Makone (chairman elections committee), Dr Mudzingwa (secretary for security) and James Makore as the leaders behind the anti-Ndebele crusade.
Asked “what holds this group together in your view?”, Guhu replied: “Ambition. Political ambitions as you notice that this is a tribal clique of people from Masvingo.”
Told that this was a serious allegation, and asked if he would be prepared to repeat it in the presence of the named officials and party leaders, Guhu replied: “Oh yes! I would also add that Matongo’s group strongly believed that the president (Tsvangirai) would be convicted (of treason charges), leaving a leadership vacuum which in their view must never be filled by a Ndebele person, contrary to the MDC party constitutional provisions.
Advertisement
“Their argument was that even if the vice president (Sibanda) were to take over, the fact that he stays in Bulawayo, the effective job of president would fall into the hands of Prof. Welshman Ncube.
“This imagination frightened them because for a long time they have been working on a programme to eliminate the secretary general and those deemed as his surrogates.”
Guhu told the commission that the group had lined up Matongo for president, Gandi Mudzingwa for vice president, Matibenga for chairwoman, Murira for secretary general, and Makone for treasurer general.
He added: “The elaborate plan, supported by the likes of Remus Makuwaza, James Makore and (Timothy) Mubhau, is still under investigation by my department but what we already know for certain is that two days before the treason trial verdict, Matongo’s group mobilised 100 youths to carry out a vicious attack on Renson Gasela and Prof Ncube and take control of Harvest House.”
Former Chimanimani MP Roy Bennett was also a target of the group, Guhu told the commission.
Guhu, however, said he was “not absolutely clear” if Tsvangirai was involved in the plan, but the group had succeeded in presenting itself to him as his loyalists who would hold power while he was in prison, then hand it back to him upon his release.
“The reality,” Guhu said, “was that the group was working for their own selfish interests.”
Some of the MDC employees held hostage and assaulted by the “vigilantes” included Aaron Mthombeni, Zwakele Sayi, Nkanyiso Maqeda, Khazamula Chirilele and Guhu himself. They were accused of either being Ndebele, or supporting Ncube.
And Guhu claimed Tsvangirai had not acted on his recommendations to drive away the group from Harvest House.
He said: “… he (Tsvangirai) by-passes me to listen to my juniors and yet the same juniors tarnish his name by spreading lies about his private life. Bodyguards such as Ganga are spreading rumours about his extra marital affairs and visits to traditional healers …
“Matibenga told an informant of mine that I was sell-out, that I was selling the party to the Ndebeles and the attack (by the group of 25) served me right.”
Maqeda, Sayi, Mthombeni, Chirilele, Maxwell Zimuto and two other party officers only identified as Mkashi and Majekuza were assaulted by the group, forcing them to either stop coming to work, or work from Ncube’s law practise.
Maqeda told the commission that the youths promoted a sectional agenda, and top officials did not want them reported to the police.
The report details an incident in which Mthombeni was chased around by knife-wielding vigilantes at Tsvangirai’s house who wanted to stab him – because he was Ndebele.
Mthombeni said he was saved by screams by Thokozani Khuphe, who witnessed the incident. Khuphe became Tsvangirai’s deputy after the party split into two factions.
Chirilele told the commission that whenever he had problems with the youths, no-one wanted to help him because he was “neither Ndebele nor Shona”.
He added: “Sometimes I can’t help feeling that because I am neither Ndebele nor Shona, leadership is unwilling to solve (my) problems. I have become an easy victim in the bitter wars to control the party but what I can say with confidence is that the violent youth behaviour is designed to frustrate the secretary general (Prof Ncube) so that he could resign.
“Tribalism is rife in the MDC and one person I would not hesitate to mention as a champion of this is Dr (Tichaona) Mudzingwa who hates the SG with a passion. He has a bad attitude towards the Ndebele and he can’t hide it.”
Told that Dr Mudzingwa was chairman of the commission, and asked if he was prepared to repeat the allegations in his presence, Chirilele said: “Yes I am. Dr Mudzingwa says openly that the SG is a sell-out, accuses him of being too ambitious saying ‘arikutengesa msangano’. The national chairman is of the same view.”
Chirilele said he was also called a sell-out.
“My own interpretation of selling out though is that because I report to the SG, I am seen as a sellout to the Ndebeles and ZPF (Zanu PF).”
Christine Zengeni, a receptionist at Harvest House, told the commission that the vigilantes came to the office daily and abused the phone – usually calling Tapiwa Mashakada, Tichaona Mudzingwa and a Musekiwa.
One of the youths fingered in the attacks, Ishmael Kauzane, told the commission that he joined the party in 1999. He had no permanent residence and distributed flyers for the party as well as assisting with campaigns – including mobilising for MDC-led nationwide job boycotts.
Kauzane said the “top leadership uses us to deal with difficult situations”.
He also revealed that at one time, he grabbed a printer from Ncube’s secretary, only identified as Busi, after which Ncube phoned him over the matter.
“We had an exchange of harsh words,” Kauzane said.
Asked what his position in the party was, to justify such behaviour towards his seniors, Kauzane retorted: “I have told you that I am a founder member of this party whose main agenda is to remove Mugabe and many people know that.”
Another interviewee, Samson Nerwande, told the commission that Kauzani punctured the front tyre of Guhu’s car with a home-made knife “similar to that carried by spirit mediums”.
“Kauzani insisted they wanted to beat up Welshman, Mthombeni, Biggie and Itai,” he is quoted as saying in the report.
The commission said after talking to interviewees, it came up with the perception that “the party chairman (Matongo) and certain named individuals have constituted themselves into a faction of conspirators who seriously threaten party cohesion by targeting the secretary general on ethnic and tribal lines.”
The commission also observed that while Ncube was a strict administrator, “the party chairman does not observe laid down procedures for making momentary claims, thereby encouraging the vigilantes to make unwarranted demands for unproven expenses and that he is susceptible to making extremely reckless anti-Ndebele statements with far reaching consequences for party stability … mere removal of the vigilantes from Harvest House will not solve the problem.”
The commission also established that there was a perception that Ncube was “insubordinate” to Tsvangirai; was working to launch a new party and that he discriminated against Harare-based party employees by paying them long after those in Bulawayo.
The commission also established that there were perceptions “that there are Shona people betraying the cause by supporting Ndebeles. Guhu, Nerwande, Christine are amongst them and must, therefore, be dealt with severely.”
The commission also established that there was a perception that “the party always has money but the secretary general is deliberately stingy just to frustrate the Shonas.”
In a key conclusion, the commission said it had “established beyond any reasonable doubt that there is a strong anti-Ndebele sentiment that has been generated, fanned, orchestrated and marketed to innocent party members by a senior party leader under the guise of sheer hatred for the secretary general at a personal level.”
It added: “Kauzani’s group (vigilantes) could just be ignorant actors or pawns in a deadly game whose main agenda initially was connected to the president’s (Tsvangirai) treason trial and the subsequent judgment, but has since shifted focus to concentrate on the next MDC congress.”
The party would not survive as a united body until that congress as it split in October 2005. The split largely followed tribal lines – although officials from both sides have always insisted it was over principle.
Tsvangirai, now Zimbabwe’s Prime Minister, leads the bigger MDC faction while Deputy Prime Minister Arthur Mutambara leads a rival formation
NewZimbabwe.com
The MDC split on October 25, 2005, after a national council meeting at which party leader Tsvangirai was accused of dictatorially vetoing a vote to field candidates in Senate elections due later that year.
But the report compiled by a three-man commission comprising Dr Tichaona Mudzingwa, Moses Mzila Ndlovu and Giles Mutsekwa into violence that erupted at the party’s Harvest House headquarters in May of that year suggests the party was inexorably heading towards a split anyway – plagued by tribal mistrust and competing political ambitions.
The report says fears that Tsvangirai would be jailed at the end of his treason trial split the party, with one group of senior officials unprepared to have Tsvangirai’s deputy, Gibson Sibanda – a Ndebele – leading the party.
A “vigilante group” of 25 MDC youths camped at the party’s headquarters was used by this group of politicians “in a deadly game” to forcibly drive out party workers seen as aligned to secretary general Welshman Ncube and Sibanda – just days before Tsvangirai was acquitted.
The commission interviewed 15 people, who included workers and members of the vigilante group, and concluded that the violence was caused by fears that “Ndebeles” would take over the party in the event of Tsvangirai being convicted of the treason charges.
Peter Guhu, who was the MDC’s director of security at the time, told the commission that the violence was fanned by party leaders who wanted to get rid of Ncube, Sibanda, and their “Ndebele surrogates”.
Guhu named Isaac Matongo (chairman), Lucia Matibenga (Women’s Wing National Chairwoman), Gandi Mudzingwa (director of presidential affairs), Dennis Murira (coordinator in organising department), Ian Makone (chairman elections committee), Dr Mudzingwa (secretary for security) and James Makore as the leaders behind the anti-Ndebele crusade.
Asked “what holds this group together in your view?”, Guhu replied: “Ambition. Political ambitions as you notice that this is a tribal clique of people from Masvingo.”
Told that this was a serious allegation, and asked if he would be prepared to repeat it in the presence of the named officials and party leaders, Guhu replied: “Oh yes! I would also add that Matongo’s group strongly believed that the president (Tsvangirai) would be convicted (of treason charges), leaving a leadership vacuum which in their view must never be filled by a Ndebele person, contrary to the MDC party constitutional provisions.
Advertisement
“Their argument was that even if the vice president (Sibanda) were to take over, the fact that he stays in Bulawayo, the effective job of president would fall into the hands of Prof. Welshman Ncube.
“This imagination frightened them because for a long time they have been working on a programme to eliminate the secretary general and those deemed as his surrogates.”
Guhu told the commission that the group had lined up Matongo for president, Gandi Mudzingwa for vice president, Matibenga for chairwoman, Murira for secretary general, and Makone for treasurer general.
He added: “The elaborate plan, supported by the likes of Remus Makuwaza, James Makore and (Timothy) Mubhau, is still under investigation by my department but what we already know for certain is that two days before the treason trial verdict, Matongo’s group mobilised 100 youths to carry out a vicious attack on Renson Gasela and Prof Ncube and take control of Harvest House.”
Former Chimanimani MP Roy Bennett was also a target of the group, Guhu told the commission.
Guhu, however, said he was “not absolutely clear” if Tsvangirai was involved in the plan, but the group had succeeded in presenting itself to him as his loyalists who would hold power while he was in prison, then hand it back to him upon his release.
“The reality,” Guhu said, “was that the group was working for their own selfish interests.”
Some of the MDC employees held hostage and assaulted by the “vigilantes” included Aaron Mthombeni, Zwakele Sayi, Nkanyiso Maqeda, Khazamula Chirilele and Guhu himself. They were accused of either being Ndebele, or supporting Ncube.
And Guhu claimed Tsvangirai had not acted on his recommendations to drive away the group from Harvest House.
He said: “… he (Tsvangirai) by-passes me to listen to my juniors and yet the same juniors tarnish his name by spreading lies about his private life. Bodyguards such as Ganga are spreading rumours about his extra marital affairs and visits to traditional healers …
“Matibenga told an informant of mine that I was sell-out, that I was selling the party to the Ndebeles and the attack (by the group of 25) served me right.”
Maqeda, Sayi, Mthombeni, Chirilele, Maxwell Zimuto and two other party officers only identified as Mkashi and Majekuza were assaulted by the group, forcing them to either stop coming to work, or work from Ncube’s law practise.
Maqeda told the commission that the youths promoted a sectional agenda, and top officials did not want them reported to the police.
The report details an incident in which Mthombeni was chased around by knife-wielding vigilantes at Tsvangirai’s house who wanted to stab him – because he was Ndebele.
Mthombeni said he was saved by screams by Thokozani Khuphe, who witnessed the incident. Khuphe became Tsvangirai’s deputy after the party split into two factions.
Chirilele told the commission that whenever he had problems with the youths, no-one wanted to help him because he was “neither Ndebele nor Shona”.
He added: “Sometimes I can’t help feeling that because I am neither Ndebele nor Shona, leadership is unwilling to solve (my) problems. I have become an easy victim in the bitter wars to control the party but what I can say with confidence is that the violent youth behaviour is designed to frustrate the secretary general (Prof Ncube) so that he could resign.
“Tribalism is rife in the MDC and one person I would not hesitate to mention as a champion of this is Dr (Tichaona) Mudzingwa who hates the SG with a passion. He has a bad attitude towards the Ndebele and he can’t hide it.”
Told that Dr Mudzingwa was chairman of the commission, and asked if he was prepared to repeat the allegations in his presence, Chirilele said: “Yes I am. Dr Mudzingwa says openly that the SG is a sell-out, accuses him of being too ambitious saying ‘arikutengesa msangano’. The national chairman is of the same view.”
Chirilele said he was also called a sell-out.
“My own interpretation of selling out though is that because I report to the SG, I am seen as a sellout to the Ndebeles and ZPF (Zanu PF).”
Christine Zengeni, a receptionist at Harvest House, told the commission that the vigilantes came to the office daily and abused the phone – usually calling Tapiwa Mashakada, Tichaona Mudzingwa and a Musekiwa.
One of the youths fingered in the attacks, Ishmael Kauzane, told the commission that he joined the party in 1999. He had no permanent residence and distributed flyers for the party as well as assisting with campaigns – including mobilising for MDC-led nationwide job boycotts.
Kauzane said the “top leadership uses us to deal with difficult situations”.
He also revealed that at one time, he grabbed a printer from Ncube’s secretary, only identified as Busi, after which Ncube phoned him over the matter.
“We had an exchange of harsh words,” Kauzane said.
Asked what his position in the party was, to justify such behaviour towards his seniors, Kauzane retorted: “I have told you that I am a founder member of this party whose main agenda is to remove Mugabe and many people know that.”
Another interviewee, Samson Nerwande, told the commission that Kauzani punctured the front tyre of Guhu’s car with a home-made knife “similar to that carried by spirit mediums”.
“Kauzani insisted they wanted to beat up Welshman, Mthombeni, Biggie and Itai,” he is quoted as saying in the report.
The commission said after talking to interviewees, it came up with the perception that “the party chairman (Matongo) and certain named individuals have constituted themselves into a faction of conspirators who seriously threaten party cohesion by targeting the secretary general on ethnic and tribal lines.”
The commission also observed that while Ncube was a strict administrator, “the party chairman does not observe laid down procedures for making momentary claims, thereby encouraging the vigilantes to make unwarranted demands for unproven expenses and that he is susceptible to making extremely reckless anti-Ndebele statements with far reaching consequences for party stability … mere removal of the vigilantes from Harvest House will not solve the problem.”
The commission also established that there was a perception that Ncube was “insubordinate” to Tsvangirai; was working to launch a new party and that he discriminated against Harare-based party employees by paying them long after those in Bulawayo.
The commission also established that there were perceptions “that there are Shona people betraying the cause by supporting Ndebeles. Guhu, Nerwande, Christine are amongst them and must, therefore, be dealt with severely.”
The commission also established that there was a perception that “the party always has money but the secretary general is deliberately stingy just to frustrate the Shonas.”
In a key conclusion, the commission said it had “established beyond any reasonable doubt that there is a strong anti-Ndebele sentiment that has been generated, fanned, orchestrated and marketed to innocent party members by a senior party leader under the guise of sheer hatred for the secretary general at a personal level.”
It added: “Kauzani’s group (vigilantes) could just be ignorant actors or pawns in a deadly game whose main agenda initially was connected to the president’s (Tsvangirai) treason trial and the subsequent judgment, but has since shifted focus to concentrate on the next MDC congress.”
The party would not survive as a united body until that congress as it split in October 2005. The split largely followed tribal lines – although officials from both sides have always insisted it was over principle.
Tsvangirai, now Zimbabwe’s Prime Minister, leads the bigger MDC faction while Deputy Prime Minister Arthur Mutambara leads a rival formation
NewZimbabwe.com
04 August 2009
Is Joseph Msika Dead
There has been some unconfirmed reports in the media that one of the true national leaders of of the struggle for Zimbabwe's liberation Joseph Msika has died. Others (Denford Magora on his blog is) saying he is on life support. I decided to put this extract from NewZimbabwe about him.
1957, National Treasurer, African National Congress
1962, Secretary for Youth Affairs, ZAPU
1963, Secretary for External Affairs, PCC
1974, Member of Central Committee, ANC
1975, Secretary General, ANC
1980, Minister Natural Resources
1999, Vice President of Zimbabwe
Joseph Msika was born on December 6, 1923, in the Chiweshe Reserve, Mazoe District.
His father, a Shangaan, was a polygamist whose first wife bore him several daughters. Joseph was the first son born to the second wife, a Zezuru woman who, like her husband, was a staunch member of the Anglican Church. Msika remained a practising Christian up to his death on Tuesday, August 4.
Msika once said his father was well off in terms of cattle – as a small boy, he herded more than 100 at a time. It was only the most progressive farmer who, in the 1930s, understood the importance of using the disc plough and cultivator, and his father adopted these innovations.
He supplemented his income with a wagon transport business between Mazoe and Salisbury (now Harare). For the price of six eggs, Msika was admitted as a day scholar to the nearby Howard Institute, a Salvation Army mission school.
In 1937, he became a boarder and remained there until he passed Standard VI. It was his wish to become a teacher but his father sent him to Mt Selinda (run by the American Board Mission) to train as a carpenter. He made a success of his training and while at Mt Selinda, passed his Junior Certificate by correspondence.
Joseph, as the oldest son, was obliged to help with the payment of school fees for the younger members of the family and for this reason he took up part time work with a transport firm in Bulawayo during the holidays.
In 1951, his employer persuaded him to take up a full-time job as a cabinet maker. He remained with the firm until 1953 when he was offered a better job with a new clothing firm from Johannesburg. When the firm got into financial difficulties, the owners arranged for Joseph to be transferred to Bulawayo. Here, he worked as a supervisor and then as a “leading hand”.
Advertisement
Finally, he became the equivalent of a personnel officer, dealing with problems arising between management and staff. This led to an interest in trade unionism and shortly afterwards, he became president of the Textile and Allied Workers’ Union.
The path from trade unionism to politics was a straightforward one and it was not long before he joined the old African National Congress, becoming chairman of the Bulawayo branch. On September 12, 1957, the ANC merged with the African National Youth League (ANYL) in Salisbury to form a new ANC and Joseph Msika was appointed National Treasurer.
Msika was heavily involved in the negotiations that gave rise to this new grouping. Six men – James Chikerema, the late Paul Mushonga and George Nyandoro from Mashonaland, and three from Matabeleland Jason Ziyaphapha Moyo, Francis Ndawali and Msika himself – agreed not to contest the leadership but to support the man who would come forward and take up the risky task of spearheading a demand for majority rule, hitherto never even considered in the country.
Aidan Mwamuka, Stanlake Samkange, Enoch Dumbutshena and Joshua Nkomo were each invited to lead the African National Congress. Mwamuka, Dumbutshena and Samkange declined but Nkomo stated that, if it was the wish of the nation that he should come forward and lead, he would do so.
“Since then,” Msika once said, “he did just that. The intellectuals – Ndabaningi Sithole, Robert Mugabe and others – came after Nkomo in their decision to identify with the objective of majority rule and the struggle to achieve it.”
In 1961, Msika was involved in the organisation of a successful strike. This led to his dismissal from employment and he decided to set up his own business – a grocery and fish and chip shop.
He was first arrested and detained in February 1959. He was sent to Khami Maximum Security Prison where he met nationalists from Nyasaland (Malawi) and Northern Rhodesia (Zambia). His reaction to a prison sentence was one of shock. His background had not prepared him for this experience but he gave profound thought to his condition and soon adjusted to his new situation.
He reflected that the struggle in the early stages of nationalism had been one to obtain justice and equal rights for Africans in a series of individual battles. However, with independence coming rapidly to other African countries, the realisation that the real battle was for the political control of the country through a demand for “one man-one vote” became to grow among nationalist leaders in Rhodesia.
“The spirit of nationalism, long dormant since the rebellions of the previous century, was resuscitated – people have an inherent right to decide how they should be governed, and to choose their own government,” Msika said.
Determined to face his sentence as “an innocent man: I had not committed any crime; my conscience was clear; I had been imprisoned for my political views” – he retained his self-respect and was able to face the realities of prison with a calm mind.
From Khami, he was transferred to Selukwe and then to Marandellas. After his release from Marandellas, he was elected Councillor for the National Democratic Party (NDP). Later, when ZAPU was formed, he became Secretary for Youth Affairs.
When the split in the movement came in July 1963, Msika was in Dar-es-Salaam with other members of the ZAPU executive. When the Rev. Ndabaningi Sithole, Moton Malianga, Robert Mugabe and Leopold Takawira proposed a resolution deposing Nkomo from the leadership, Msika walked out of the meeting.
In the People’s Caretaker Council (PCC), which was formed shortly afterwards and which he considers to be synonymous with ZAPU, he was elected to the post of Secretary for External Affairs.
In 1964, Msika was arrested in Josiah Chinamano’s house and sent to Gonakudzingwa for a period of one year. Together with Chinamano and his wife, Ruth and Joshua Nkomo, he “opened up Gonakudzingwa”. After his release in 1965, he enjoyed only two weeks of freedom in Salisbury before being re-arrested. He returned to Gonakudzingwa and in 1967 was sent with Joshua Nkomo and Lazarus Nkala to the remote Camp, where they spent the next three years with only wild game and each other for company.
These stringent conditions were lifted in 1970 and they were then permitted to receive regular visits from their wives and younger children. In May 1974, they were transferred to Buffalo Range where they remained until their release in December. Immediately following his release, Msika accompanied Joshua Nkomo to Lusaka for talks on unity and détente.
Under the Lusaka Declaration of December 1974, Msika was chosen as one of the four men to represent ZAPU on the Central Committee of the ANC. In August 1975, he attended the Victoria Falls talks as a member of the ANC negotiating team.
When the split occurred shortly afterwards, his loyalty to Nkomo was never in doubt. He was convinced that the decision to call a special congress on 27 and 28 September was strictly in accordance with the constitution of the organisation. At the Congress, he was elected Secretary General under the presidency of Nkomo. It was announced on 10 December that he had been appointed a member of the ANC delegation to the constitutional conference convened for 15 December.
Following the breakdown of the Smith-Nkomo talks in March 1976, the ANC decided to publish its own story of what occurred. In early July, Msika went to London to release the publication and to answer questions at a press conference.
He told reporters that the ANC “might consider whether there was anything to be gained by once more sitting down with Ian Smith”.
“But,” he was reported as saying, “it would not be negotiation – the time for that is long past. It would be to discuss only the mechanics of an immediate transfer of power to the majority”.
Msika was, however, at pains to point out that the ANC was not “fighting the white man”. “We are,” he said, “fighting a racist system”.
It was announced on 13 October that Joseph Msika would be a member of the ANC (Nkomo) delegation to the Geneva Conference.
Msika expressed the greatest admiration for the way in which his wife, Maria, whom he married in 1946, raised their family of six children and looked after his business during his time in detention.
Msika attended the Lancaster House talks in 1979 which led to Zimbabwe’s Independence in 1980. After independence, he served in various ministerial portfolios – starting with the Natural Resources portfolio he got in a shaky coalition government soon after the first elections.
A new crackdown on ZAPU supporters by government troops forced Nkomo to quit Mugabe’s government in 1983 and he fled to England. After thousands were killed in the crackdown, Mugabe and Nkomo signed the unity pact in 1987, Nkomo immediately becoming Vice President.
Msika’s successor is likely to come from the former ZAPU leadership. Zanu PF national chairman John Nkomo is favourite.
(Most of the above work is an extract from Robert Cary and Diana Mitchell's book: African Nationalist Leaders in Rhodesia - Who's Who)
NewZimbabwe.com
1957, National Treasurer, African National Congress
1962, Secretary for Youth Affairs, ZAPU
1963, Secretary for External Affairs, PCC
1974, Member of Central Committee, ANC
1975, Secretary General, ANC
1980, Minister Natural Resources
1999, Vice President of Zimbabwe
Joseph Msika was born on December 6, 1923, in the Chiweshe Reserve, Mazoe District.
His father, a Shangaan, was a polygamist whose first wife bore him several daughters. Joseph was the first son born to the second wife, a Zezuru woman who, like her husband, was a staunch member of the Anglican Church. Msika remained a practising Christian up to his death on Tuesday, August 4.
Msika once said his father was well off in terms of cattle – as a small boy, he herded more than 100 at a time. It was only the most progressive farmer who, in the 1930s, understood the importance of using the disc plough and cultivator, and his father adopted these innovations.
He supplemented his income with a wagon transport business between Mazoe and Salisbury (now Harare). For the price of six eggs, Msika was admitted as a day scholar to the nearby Howard Institute, a Salvation Army mission school.
In 1937, he became a boarder and remained there until he passed Standard VI. It was his wish to become a teacher but his father sent him to Mt Selinda (run by the American Board Mission) to train as a carpenter. He made a success of his training and while at Mt Selinda, passed his Junior Certificate by correspondence.
Joseph, as the oldest son, was obliged to help with the payment of school fees for the younger members of the family and for this reason he took up part time work with a transport firm in Bulawayo during the holidays.
In 1951, his employer persuaded him to take up a full-time job as a cabinet maker. He remained with the firm until 1953 when he was offered a better job with a new clothing firm from Johannesburg. When the firm got into financial difficulties, the owners arranged for Joseph to be transferred to Bulawayo. Here, he worked as a supervisor and then as a “leading hand”.
Advertisement
Finally, he became the equivalent of a personnel officer, dealing with problems arising between management and staff. This led to an interest in trade unionism and shortly afterwards, he became president of the Textile and Allied Workers’ Union.
The path from trade unionism to politics was a straightforward one and it was not long before he joined the old African National Congress, becoming chairman of the Bulawayo branch. On September 12, 1957, the ANC merged with the African National Youth League (ANYL) in Salisbury to form a new ANC and Joseph Msika was appointed National Treasurer.
Msika was heavily involved in the negotiations that gave rise to this new grouping. Six men – James Chikerema, the late Paul Mushonga and George Nyandoro from Mashonaland, and three from Matabeleland Jason Ziyaphapha Moyo, Francis Ndawali and Msika himself – agreed not to contest the leadership but to support the man who would come forward and take up the risky task of spearheading a demand for majority rule, hitherto never even considered in the country.
Aidan Mwamuka, Stanlake Samkange, Enoch Dumbutshena and Joshua Nkomo were each invited to lead the African National Congress. Mwamuka, Dumbutshena and Samkange declined but Nkomo stated that, if it was the wish of the nation that he should come forward and lead, he would do so.
“Since then,” Msika once said, “he did just that. The intellectuals – Ndabaningi Sithole, Robert Mugabe and others – came after Nkomo in their decision to identify with the objective of majority rule and the struggle to achieve it.”
In 1961, Msika was involved in the organisation of a successful strike. This led to his dismissal from employment and he decided to set up his own business – a grocery and fish and chip shop.
He was first arrested and detained in February 1959. He was sent to Khami Maximum Security Prison where he met nationalists from Nyasaland (Malawi) and Northern Rhodesia (Zambia). His reaction to a prison sentence was one of shock. His background had not prepared him for this experience but he gave profound thought to his condition and soon adjusted to his new situation.
He reflected that the struggle in the early stages of nationalism had been one to obtain justice and equal rights for Africans in a series of individual battles. However, with independence coming rapidly to other African countries, the realisation that the real battle was for the political control of the country through a demand for “one man-one vote” became to grow among nationalist leaders in Rhodesia.
“The spirit of nationalism, long dormant since the rebellions of the previous century, was resuscitated – people have an inherent right to decide how they should be governed, and to choose their own government,” Msika said.
Determined to face his sentence as “an innocent man: I had not committed any crime; my conscience was clear; I had been imprisoned for my political views” – he retained his self-respect and was able to face the realities of prison with a calm mind.
From Khami, he was transferred to Selukwe and then to Marandellas. After his release from Marandellas, he was elected Councillor for the National Democratic Party (NDP). Later, when ZAPU was formed, he became Secretary for Youth Affairs.
When the split in the movement came in July 1963, Msika was in Dar-es-Salaam with other members of the ZAPU executive. When the Rev. Ndabaningi Sithole, Moton Malianga, Robert Mugabe and Leopold Takawira proposed a resolution deposing Nkomo from the leadership, Msika walked out of the meeting.
In the People’s Caretaker Council (PCC), which was formed shortly afterwards and which he considers to be synonymous with ZAPU, he was elected to the post of Secretary for External Affairs.
In 1964, Msika was arrested in Josiah Chinamano’s house and sent to Gonakudzingwa for a period of one year. Together with Chinamano and his wife, Ruth and Joshua Nkomo, he “opened up Gonakudzingwa”. After his release in 1965, he enjoyed only two weeks of freedom in Salisbury before being re-arrested. He returned to Gonakudzingwa and in 1967 was sent with Joshua Nkomo and Lazarus Nkala to the remote Camp, where they spent the next three years with only wild game and each other for company.
These stringent conditions were lifted in 1970 and they were then permitted to receive regular visits from their wives and younger children. In May 1974, they were transferred to Buffalo Range where they remained until their release in December. Immediately following his release, Msika accompanied Joshua Nkomo to Lusaka for talks on unity and détente.
Under the Lusaka Declaration of December 1974, Msika was chosen as one of the four men to represent ZAPU on the Central Committee of the ANC. In August 1975, he attended the Victoria Falls talks as a member of the ANC negotiating team.
When the split occurred shortly afterwards, his loyalty to Nkomo was never in doubt. He was convinced that the decision to call a special congress on 27 and 28 September was strictly in accordance with the constitution of the organisation. At the Congress, he was elected Secretary General under the presidency of Nkomo. It was announced on 10 December that he had been appointed a member of the ANC delegation to the constitutional conference convened for 15 December.
Following the breakdown of the Smith-Nkomo talks in March 1976, the ANC decided to publish its own story of what occurred. In early July, Msika went to London to release the publication and to answer questions at a press conference.
He told reporters that the ANC “might consider whether there was anything to be gained by once more sitting down with Ian Smith”.
“But,” he was reported as saying, “it would not be negotiation – the time for that is long past. It would be to discuss only the mechanics of an immediate transfer of power to the majority”.
Msika was, however, at pains to point out that the ANC was not “fighting the white man”. “We are,” he said, “fighting a racist system”.
It was announced on 13 October that Joseph Msika would be a member of the ANC (Nkomo) delegation to the Geneva Conference.
Msika expressed the greatest admiration for the way in which his wife, Maria, whom he married in 1946, raised their family of six children and looked after his business during his time in detention.
Msika attended the Lancaster House talks in 1979 which led to Zimbabwe’s Independence in 1980. After independence, he served in various ministerial portfolios – starting with the Natural Resources portfolio he got in a shaky coalition government soon after the first elections.
A new crackdown on ZAPU supporters by government troops forced Nkomo to quit Mugabe’s government in 1983 and he fled to England. After thousands were killed in the crackdown, Mugabe and Nkomo signed the unity pact in 1987, Nkomo immediately becoming Vice President.
Msika’s successor is likely to come from the former ZAPU leadership. Zanu PF national chairman John Nkomo is favourite.
(Most of the above work is an extract from Robert Cary and Diana Mitchell's book: African Nationalist Leaders in Rhodesia - Who's Who)
NewZimbabwe.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
