Removing Mugabe will not solve Zimbabwe’s problems

In the past few weeks there have been calls for Mr Mugabe to step down as president of Zimbabwe. The calls are not just coming from the usual Mugabe foes – Britain and America but some Africans are also making the call very forcefully. Much of the cacophony has been instigated by the cholera outbreak in the country which has so far claimed over a thousand lives and is threatening to devastate the whole Southern African region. The calls are not surprising in the least because they only confirm what the Zimbabwe people have already stated using their votes in the elections held last March.

What is surprising is that it has taken this long for some of the world leaders to begin to side with the oppressed people of Zimbabwe. What is also surprising is that the call has not received much support in Africa other than from those like Botswana and Kenya whose views are already known. However it is important to acknowledge that South Africa, long the defender of Mugabe’s rule, have started accepting the merits of the idea that Mr Mugabe needs to go, or more precisely, to be retired. This is a significant move which, no doubt, puts more pressure on the belligerent dictator.

While Mr Mugabe’s departure will be celebrated (when and not if it happens), I have my serious doubts that the event of his departure alone will resolve the many, many problems that now afflict the country. My own view is that the problems have morphed beyond Mugabe into something much bigger and more sinister. Whether Mugabe goes or not, the country is in a very deep hole from which it has to be dug out. My own assessment is that there are three big challenges which Zimbabweans have to tackle to reverse their misfortunes, turn the country around, prosper and once more become a respected member of the international community. These are how to handle the issue of immunity for human rights abuses, how to deal with Mugabe’s power structures and how to facilitate the return of those in Diaspora.

The issue of immunity from prosecution of Mugabe and his henchmen is likely to be the most difficult and controversial. There is a general feeling that Mugabe can be exonerated and allowed to serve the last few years of his life in peace somewhere. That position is also necessitated and influenced by the realisation that there is a need to provide some incentive to him to loosen his grip on and relinquish power. The acceptance of immunity for Mugabe is likely to be a hard-sell to and very bitter pill for the many victims of the abuses of his rule but, in the final analysis, they may just be prepared to swallow it.

However the same cannot be said of immunity for the rest of his henchman and foot-solders who perpetrated the hideous crimes and many of whom are known to the victims. The issue to consider here is how far down the line the immunity should go. It must be remembered that the actual physical commission of abuses took place at the lowest hierarchical levels occupied by youth militias and junior officers of the army, police and intelligence services such as Joseph Mwale. Should all these people be forgiven and allowed to “get away with murder” so to speak? This will not just be unpalatable, it will be unprecedented and undesirable. Historically, justice has been allowed to prevail even it is in some convoluted form such as truth and reconciliation commissions. Even now the perpetrators of the genocide in Rwanda are still being tried for their crimes.

The second issue is how to deal with Mugabe’s power structures so that they do not pose a future risk to the country. It should be remembered that Mugabe is the visible element (or the face) of a military-civilian junta that are controlling the country. From many credible accounts, Mr Mugabe is no longer fully in charge of the country. The Joint Operations Command (JOC) is the de facto authority in the country. They are calling the shots and they are the ones who decided to overturn the mandate of the people following the March elections. They are also the ones who initiated and directed the savage brutality inflicted on the Zimbabwean people in the run up to the farcical June re-run elections.

The departure of Mugabe will not yield anything substantial unless it is accompanied by the disbandment of the JOC and the retirement of its members. Members of the JOC are a real and credible threat to the future of Zimbabwe – much more so than Mugabe has been and will ever be. But so far their blood-socked hand has been hidden behind the image of Mugabe. I recall someone saying to me, not so long ago, that there are powerful forces which are so desperate to keep Mugabe in power that he could be dead for months and they would still pretend he is still alive and in charge. These structures and institutions which have been the power behind the Mugabe throne will need to be neutralised and disbanded so that they do not pose a threat to any future dispensation.

It will also be necessary, in this vein, to address the issue of chiefs who have been so corrupted and compromised by the ruling party. The chiefs have always been manipulated by ruling elites to provide a cloak of legitimacy to unpopular regimes. During the Rhodesian era, Ian Smith used chiefs like Chirau and Ndiweni to try and subvert the Africans aspirations for freedom and independence. Mugabe continued with this policy and went much further. He subverted the chiefs to the extent that they had become integral elements of the ruling Zanu-PF party. In any future dispensation the role of the chiefs will need to be re-examined and there may very well be need to “de-frock” some of the more obnoxious characters.

The third issue is how to attract back into the country the millions of people who have fled abroad. It should be remembered that many of these diasporians are skilled people who are desperately needed in many critical social and economic sectors such as health, education, agriculture, manufacturing, etc. Until the country is able to attract these people back in sufficient numbers there is little chance that the country will recover. It takes more than three years to train a competent nurse and a similar period to train a teacher. There is absolutely no chance that Zimbabwe can meet its skilled manpower needs through training and development and will thus have to put in place a mechanism for attracting them from abroad and retaining the skills that it desperately needs.

In the early 1980s the newly independent Zimbabwe was able to attract many of its progeny from abroad because the economy was generally sound, there were jobs to offer them and the health and education systems were strong. This time it is different. All the fundamentals are pointing the other way – there are no jobs, no medical facilities, a broken education system and no food. It is wrong to believe that just a sense of patriotism will be enough to encourage the people who have left to return. Many of them have now established alternative lifestyles where they have settled. They have started new professions and businesses, bought houses and other property, enrolled their children in new schools and have become full and important members of their new communities.

To attract these people back to Zimbabwe will take strategy, ingenuity and perseverance. They have to be convinced that there is a meaningful future for them in a post-Mugabe Zimbabwe. They need to be assured that what the country offers is much better than what they already have and this is always going to be a tough call. To expect that the people in Diaspora will return to the country simply because Mugabe has gone is either an act of self-deception or misplaced optimism. Of course, Mugabe’s departure will be a useful beginning but nothing more than a beginning.