Last month, the President of Zimbabwe, Robert Mugabe, was ousted after a 37-year grip on his country. The army coup also prevented the eventual takeover by Mugabe’s wife, Grace. Instead, Emmerson Mnangagwa was sworn in as the country’s third President.
After Mugabe’s fall, Zimbabwe’s streets were packed with people rejoicing.
Yet, there is little to rejoice for.
In one of his customary annual interviews Mugabe – now 93 – claimed that “avoiding a full-tummy” is the secret to reaching his venerable age. The tragic irony of Mugabe’s comments is not lost.
In a nation where approximately 2.2 million people are at risk of famine, many do not have a full stomach. Indeed, most are lucky if their basic dietary requirements are met.
Children suffer the brunt of the famine; one in three suffers from chronic malnutrition and 12,000 die each year.
Life expectancy stands at roughly 58.
During a recent birthday banquet, Mugabe’s purported austere dietary habits were conspicuous by their absence as 20,000 guests were treated to a sumptuous dinner off the Victoria Falls. Elephants, lions and buffalos were said to be on the menu.
Mugabe’s foray into the political arena was far removed from the luxurious surroundings he has become accustomed to.
He first entered politics through the Zimbabwe African National Union – Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF) to counter both the British colonial administration and the white-minority government of Rhodesia led by Ian Smith. He was arrested for his political activities between 1964 and 1975.
Upon his release from prison, Mugabe was elected to lead ZANU-PF.
He became a much-admired figure – both in Zimbabwe and internationally. He was hailed as a symbol of revolutionary resistance and a popular national hero. This image was cemented following the ratification of the Lancaster House Agreement and the cessation of conflict in December 1979.
Following the 1980 elections, Mugabe was appointed Prime Minister.
He pledged to foster national reconciliation, encourage economic growth and establish an equal society. In the ensuing 37 years, he reneged on all promises.
Mugabe consolidated his stranglehold over the apparatus of State; tribal and political dissent was crushed through the North-Korean trained Fifth Brigade, and an executive presidency was established encompassing within its remit the roles of head of state, head of government and commander-in-chief with powers to declare martial law.
Economically, Zimbabwe experienced a radical reversal of fortunes. In 2000, Mugabe confiscated farms belonging to white people. The confiscated lands were transferred to loyal ZANU-PF officials. This policy proved to be disastrous, as the production of wheat and corn fell drastically, and hyperinflation rendered the Zimbabwean dollar worthless. Zimbabwe plunged into a crisis of unprecedented levels.
In 2008, his tenure seemed to be in jeopardy when he was narrowly defeated in the first round of elections by his long-term rival Morgan Tsvangirai. This victory for the Opposition proved to be short-lived.
The supposed post-colonial dream is now a veritable nightmare
Amid accusations of fraud, violent intimidation and vote-rigging, President Mugabe won the second round of elections with 85 per cent of the popular vote.
During his 37-year reign, Mugabe turned from hero to villain. In the end, he was defeated by those who were supposedly loyal to him.
His regime exemplifies the tortuous road of post-colonial politics. All this unfolded in a region which often served as the backbone for various empire-building projects.
During the Berlin Conference of 1884, the prospect of exploration for resources led to a “scramble for Africa.” In the three decades that followed, only Liberia and Abyssinia maintained their independence. The latter surrendered to Italian troops in 1935.
When the cost of maintaining empires became unprofitable, and demands for independence could no longer be quashed, various colonial powers divested themselves of their colonial possessions.
The emerging political class, often populist figures educated in well-established foreign universities, managed to foster revolutionary fervour through popular discontent.
Mugabe and other leaders such as Julius Nyerere in Tanzania, Kwame Nkrumah in Ghana, Teodoro Obiang of Equatorial Guinea and Muammar Gaddafi in Libya embraced ideologies which blended revolutionary ideas with nationalism and pan-Africanism.
Their ideology was held together by autocratic leadership, corruption and nepotism.
In a speech to the Conservative Central Council in 1986, Margaret Thatcher made a pertinent remark which can be applied to a popular rhetorical flourish used by revolutionary leaders: they “cry power to the people, and raise the clenched fist as they say it.
We all know what they really mean – power over people, power to the State.”
It is worth engaging critically with this remark. In Zimbabwe and other nations, the apparatus of the State became the goal in itself rather than the means through which real progress could be achieved.
The emphasis on nationhood sought to lessen tribal and ethnic divisions – and yet in some cases, these divisions were exacerbated.
Institutional reform and the strengthening of checks and balances remain a prerequisite for further development. However, these reforms need to be matched by an increasing scrutiny of the operations of multi-national organisations and the diplomatic activities of some States, particularly the People’s Republic of China.
As for the future of Zimbabwe, the situation is still fluid.
However, the prognosis is bad. Mugabe’s regime robbed the country of its ability to regenerate. The supposed post-colonial dream is now a veritable nightmare.
andre.deb@gmail.com
André P. DeBattista is an independent researcher in politics and international relations.