South Africa

[Crossposted from a much longer post on the Zimbabwe situation at the FPA Africa Blog.] 

While South Africa maintains its wary silence on the elections, the ANC has issued a predictable and unexceptional statement asking Zimbabweans of all parties to respect the results, however they turn out. One hopes this boilerplate does not ask Zimbabweans to respect any results just because the government announces them however. By playing so close to the vest it is tough to determine precisely where the government and the ruling party stand. Finally, Desmond Tutu has weighed in, praising Mugabe’s legacy in a perhaps transparent attempt to soften Tutu’s request for Mugabe to step down peacefully.

Two interesting developments in the Zimbabwe election campaign. The first is that it appears that many of Simba Makoni’s supporters are hedging their bets, quietly supporting the upstart candidate while avowing their loyalty to Zanu-PF and thus implicitly, it would seem, to Robert Mugabe. One can sympathize with the inclination — crossing Mugabe almost always comes at a cost — and yet during a time when Makoni and his supporters are taking a great deal of risk and revealing tremendous courage, it would be nice if some of Zimbabwe’s most prominent members of the political class could do the same. It is this sort of fecklessness that will help Mugabe secure the presidency again by hook or by crook, violence or theft.

The second story is equally telling. Zimbabwe’s economy has gone to hell over the last few years with nary a helping hand from Mugabe and Zanu-PF for any but the smallest, most well-connected cadre of loyalists.  But suddenly Mugabe is demanding faster food imports, particularly of maize, in light of the country’s food emergency, which the president seems a bit late in discovering. It was not all that long ago that Zimbabwe was the region’s breadbasket. Nonetheless, Mugabe’s nakedly self-interested reaction does bring about one question: If the old man wins re-election, which only a fool or an optimist would bet against, could Makoni’s challenge have awakened in him a realization that he is not bulletproof? Or are these merely the temporal machinations of a despot interested only in consolidating power? I would bet on the latter, but assuming that Mugabe is going to find a way to win, we all had better hope against hope for the former.

South Africans, like people the world over, are beginning to take a great deal of interest in the primary campaigns taking place in the United States. According to a story on NPR (Click on the link to hear the full report.):

South Africans have been consumed with crippling nationwide power outages and other issues closer to home, such as a much-condemned racial incident involving four white students and some black university employees. But when asked about the U.S. presidential race, the name they seem most familiar with is that of Barack Obama.

This brief report does not portray the election, or South African views of it, with a great deal of depth. It is a man-on-the-street series of brief interviews. Nnetheless, it is probably not a bit surprising that South Africans a) Do not have much regard for the Republicans, and b) Support Obama in light of his African roots. However, Bill Clinton was a popular figure in many parts of the continent, and one wonders if that does not redound to Hillary’s benefit. In the end, South Africans will almost certainly be rooting from afar for whoever wins the Democratic nomination.

(Zapiro — The Mail & Guardian)

The political contest in Zimbabwe continues to mystify observers. Simba Makoni’s candidacy has legs, which in and of itself is a cause for surprise, and possibly excitement.

A British economist, Professor Gwyn Prins of the London School of Economics, has called for South Africa to threaten to cut off Zimbabwe’s electricity supplies, much of which comes from south of the Limpopo, if President Robert Mugabe’s government continues to intimidate the electorate or otherwise sabotages Makoni’s campaign. This sort of thing (as I predicted yesterday) is all that it takes for Mugabe to accuse any critics, or in this case, Makoni’s candidacy itself, of being inspired by Great Britain. Mugabe’s cynicism is nothing if not consistent, and thus easy to anticipate.

Makoni, meanwhile, has been reaching something of an olive branch out to Mugabe, promising that a Makoni administration will not seek to punish Mugabe for his myriad gross violations of human rights. Presumably Makoni can say little else, lest Mugabe simply crush the opposition candidacy right now (I still fear that this step is coming), but it is still disquieting to realize that Mugabe will likely not be brought to account for his many crimes.

Accusations of Mugabe vote buying continues apace. Meanwhile analysts argue that high-profile Zanu-PF defections sting Mugabe, but should not ultimately destroy Mugabe’s electoral hopes unless the trickle becomes a flood. But the biggest X-factor continues to be both the possibility of violence, especially on the part of Mugabe’s supporters, as well as what role the police will play in either allowing violence to go forward or, worse yet, in fomenting chaos. Police officials insist that the election will be peaceful, but then again, what else can we expect them to say?  

Simba Makoni’s comments last week that “South Africa has not offered any support, and I didn’t ask for it” probably reaffirmed in the minds of many people Thabo Mbeki and the rest of the South African government’s unwillingness to stand up to Robert Mugabe. And yet it seems from where I sit that Mbeki must be aware that he is in a no-win situation. Any word from him of even tepid support for Makoni and  Mbeki runs the risk of opening the floodgates of Mugabe’s considerable and well-rehearsed rhetorical flourishes about Zimbabwean sovereignty and imperialistic outside interference.  And in  giving Mugabe, who is already tightening his grip on power in advance of this month’s elections,  an outside bogeyman  Mbeki almost assuredly would be playing into the hands of Mugabe who would love nothing better than to play the role of beleaguered defended of Zimbabwean autonomy in the face of an outside onslaught. Best for Mbeki to remain silent and hope for change to come than inadvertently to fuel Mugabe’s victory by giving him an outside influence against whom to rally.

(Simba Makoni — UK Telegraph)

Worse news than Mbeki’s possibly welcome silence has hit Makoni’s camp in any case. Joyce Mujuru, Mugabe’s deputy president (long-rumored to be Mugabe’s likely successor), has announced that she is backing Mugabe for another term. This scuttles many of the hopes that Makoni’s supporters had developed in which Mujuru would throw her support behind Makoni as other prominent Zanu-PF members have done in recent days.

This is not the run-up to glory that Robert Mugabe anticipated when he surprised everyone by announcing that Zimbabwe would hold elections at the end of March. Mugabe expected a coronation. He expected that the short timetable for the polling and the fact that he had cowed or crushed most all viable opposition would surely mean that he would cruise to another victory, and since there is no such thing as a tainted election win in the political world of Robert Mugabe, he would be able to claim that the people had spoken, their will enforced. This victory would allow him the pretense to crush his opposition under the pretense that they were subversive agents of the imperialists. It must have made the old tyrant smile to think of how cleverly he had gamed the system.

But perhaps Mugabe was too clever by half. He did not anticipate the challenge posed by the rise of Simba Makoni. He probably did not anticipate that Bulawayo would run out of money or that numerous civic organizations in South Africa would engage in nearly daily protests at the Zimbabwean Consulate in Johannesburg.

This is not to say that Mugabe is especially worried. And why would he be? He still controls the armed forces and the police. And in controlling the men with guns he can control not only large numbers of votes, but also can terrorize the dissenting factions in his country. After all, the state media announced that Zimbabwe’s police forces are ready to use force to crush any disruptions that might occur through election day. It does not take a lot of foresight to imagine that the police will not be especially nonpartisan when they mete out their particular brand of justice.

Nonetheless, Mugabe has experienced a February that he never could have imagined. He will almost certainly win the election, or at least “win” the election, because that is is will, and the fruits of his will tend to come to pass in the state he so controls. But he had to think that it would all be so much less difficult. It is not always easy being a dictator in a state that puts on the pretenses of being a democracy.

Robert Mugabe turned 84 on Saturday, and the wily old tyrant was in a typically feisty mood, announcing in the face of his increasingly emboldened opposition that “There will never be regime change here … Never.”

Simba Makoni, Mugabe’s challenger in the March 31 election, is unbowed by Mugabe’s intransigence and continues to forge ahead with a candidacy that at times seems Quixotic, at other times mad, and always brave. He continues to be optimistic about his chances of unseating Mugabe, speaking of “renewal” and healing the wounds that Mugabe has opened.

One wild card in this election might be the support Makoni is beginning to draw from members of the military, police, and security forces, a development that I have for some time argued might change the political calculus in Zimbabwe. Mugabe owes his status to the loyalty that he still inspires from the men with guns who surround them. If those people suddenly refuse blindly to follow him, if they choose to pursue democratic change, or simply opt for a new dispensation, democratic or not, Mugabe will find that “never” is not as long a time as he imagines. Security forces can easily wreak chaos. Perhaps they also can help bring about peaceful change in Zimbabwe. Now that would be a change that most of thought would happen, well, Never.

There is lots going on these days across the continent, so without further palaver, I’ll point you in the right directions to catch up.

Your first stop should probably be the latest Pambazuka News, which has useful articles on Chad, Zimbabwe, lots on Kenya, and other important issues. From there you can go to the latest AfricaFocus Bulletin, which casts its gaze on Chad and makes clear that the crisis in that country represents far more than merely a subsidiary crisis of the turmoil in Darfur.

Kenya will likely continue to dominate the news cycle from Africa. Kofi Annan has clarified — some might say backed down from — his “grand coalition” proposal to solve that country’s political crisis. At the Mail & Guardian Kwamboka Oyaro wonders whether the Grand Coalition, or whatever one chooses to call it, really is the viable solution to the problems that underlie Kenya’s fractured political culture. Meanwhile with an eye toward the future, some Kenyans are preparing for a Truth and Reconciliation Commission to address the recent violence and other human rights violations. But the devil is in the details, and the question of amnesty will surely prove to be a serious sticking point.

At IOL Chris Chikana tries to figure out whether or not Simba Makoni poses a serious threat to Robert Mugabe’s leadership. He elides giving any real conclusions. I maintain that the challenge, whether fruitless or not, is necessary.

Finally, Richard Cornwell, a senior research associate at the Institute for Security Studies, reminds readers of The Mail & Guardian not to overlook Swaziland’s upcoming elections, which he believes run the risk of being as beset by violence and perfidy as those in Kenya and which we ought to worry about as we do what may come in Zimbabwe.

My initial response to this article asserting that Simba Makoni has quite a challenge ahead of him was to wonder what sort of moron might argue anything to the contrary. Fortunately, though, the reporter goes deeper than the “no tea party” argument:

Makoni’s real challenge is to show he has the clout to attract enough grassroots support to fend off an already dirty campaign against his candidacy, and to prove he can forge the difficult alliances with senior Zanu-PF officials and elements from the opposition that he needs to weaken Mugabe.

There are two factors involved, of course: One is whether or not Makoni can drum up the necessary support. I believe that he can. Between dissident Zanu-PF members and the existing opposition groups, most notably the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), makoni should be able to draw a great deal of potential voters. This all assumes that someone in the MDC, such as Morgan Tsvangirai, does not choose to run as well, which will split the vote. (It would also tell us anything we need to know about any MDC member who pursued the presidency during this period of cautious optimism for Makoni.)

The second factor is probably more important: Even assuming Makoni poses a serious challenge to Mugabe, will he really be allowed to run a campaign without the threat of violence, without facing trumped-up charges, and without general interference from Mugabe and his henchmen? Furthermore, even if Makoni is able to pursue the presidency, will his supporters be allowed to vote, will those votes count, and will all votes be tabulated fairly? The odds, I fear, are not good on this front.

Kofi Annan seems optimistic that he can broker agreements in Kenya that will allow for that country to begin to heal. One of the key elements to any solution appears to be the establishment of a coalition government that will sit until the country can hold new elections, which would probably not take place until 2009. In the meantime an independent panel would investigate what went wrong in the recent polls that have led to the disputed reelection of President Mwai Kibaki and that fueled the political violence that has engulfed parts of Kenya and has resulted in at least 1000 deaths. In the end, Kenya’s is a political crisis, and thus requires political solutions.

Not all observers are thrilled with Annan’s intervention. Justice Minister Martha Karua, the head of the government team at Kenya’s crisis talks, has been critical of Annan for allegedly misrepresenting the state of the complex and fragile negotiations. Nonetheless, if Annan can help to broker peace and establish the parameters for future elections and maybe even political transformation in a country that until recently seemed a like a model for post-colonial, post-Big Man politics in Africa, he surely warrants a great deal of praise and respect. As one who had serious problems with the United Nations during Annan’s tenure there, I nonetheless admire his efforts today. It remains to be seen, however, if the efforts will translate into results. For the sake of the Kenyan people and their country’s future, let’s hope so.

Update: Today’s New York Times op-ed page has two pieces on Kenya, one from  Simiyu Barasa, a writer and filmmaker, the other by Maina Kiai, chairman of the Kenya National Commission on Human Rights and  L. Muthoni Wanyeki, the executive director of the Kenya Human Rights Commission, a nongovernmental organization.