The Sunday News
Vincent Gono
ZIMBABWEAN political history is full of aphorisms. The colonial history was defined by historians as the familiar story of the flag followed the bible, and then it was the pen followed the gun at independence and after independence. Unlike in other democracies that we see today as the case with our neighbour just across the Limpopo the pen (media) played a big role in mounting pressure on the apartheid regime. It was more pressure from the pen rather than the gun that led to the political independence of South Africa.
In Zimbabwe however, it was vice-versa. It was the gunpowder that was released from the nozzles of AK 47 rifles that brought about political independence. The role of the media in Zimbabwe’s political history was subtle. The mainstream media was against the revolution.
The media supported rather than admonished the settler regime. The forces at war had no voice at all and any other pen that was seen inking something that goes against the grain of the Rhodesian regime was descended upon with a heavy hand with its personnel either prosecuted or persecuted.
The pen therefore, in the Zimbabwean political context never led the gun and this probably defines our media’s lack of power and authority in defining the national question. It was never part of the political essentials in the struggle for independence and therefore the struggle owes the media nothing, something that makes our media very different in character from the South African media.
Well, that is a topic for another day. What is essential at this point is to state that our politics even after independence took that course, where the pen is never ahead of the gun — the struggle. Not that it is always good, neither it is in Zimbabweans’ genetic make-up but it’s usually a result of failure of peaceful political avenues, more so because politics is a game of power. It is all about an attempt at defining who tells who what to do and at what time.
It is part of politics that on Tuesday last week, saw the country commemorating the 28th anniversary of the signing of the historic Unity Accord of 22 December 1987. The late Vice-President Cde Joshua Nkomo who was leader of PF Zapu signed the accord with President Mugabe of Zanu-PF and it marked the end of Zapu as a political party although it lived and remained important as part of the country’s liberation history.
The peace treaty was between the two revered political forces who despite their largely different constituencies came together and fought a racial oppressive regime, disposed of it and renewed their antagonism after victory.
The first real pointer to contention was the failure by the two parties to contest as one in the 1980 general elections.
And Vice-President Cde Emmerson Mnangagwa was quoted in Turmoil and Tenacity by former President Canaan Banana as having said the question of leadership was at the forefront.
“Mnangagwa principally chronicles events. For instance, in explaining why Zanu-PF and PF-Zapu contested the 1980 elections separately, he has this to say, “Whatever explanations may be offered. The true and plausible explanation should be found in the history of the struggle itself. One of the most burning and outstanding issues . . . was that of leadership and relative popularity of each party. It was the earnest feeling of many . . . that the question of party leadership could only be decided upon and resolved by the masses of Zimbabwe . . . at home,” he is quoted as having said.
And in his book, Nkomo: The Story of My Life, Cde Nkomo puts forward the argument that he wanted the parties to run jointly as the Patriotic Front, precisely because he foresaw a possible civil war in Zimbabwe (whether started by Zipra or by Zanla).
And yes, it was after the political disturbances that the unity accord was inked, the pen following the gun.
The Unity Accord did not come easy as has always been said. It was a strenuous process that was replete with emotive negotiations because it was about power, about leadership and about control. It was also about the contribution that was made in the liberation struggle by the two parties that even now is a cause of a splitting headache. But as Mao Tse Tung would put it to his army that, “You are the fish and the masses are the water,” there was no Rambo who, like President Mugabe puts it, . . . brought the country’s independence single handedly, it was the people’s struggle and the people of Zimbabwe won.
It however, needs to be stated clearly and now that the Unity Accord although there were counter accusations at some point, was the only best and sustainable solution to bridging the ethnic or political divide and bring about stability in a young sovereign state that the country was.
Also important to point out is that although the parties entered into the agreement as two equal partners there was display of great humility on the part of Cde Nkomo. There were egos to protect, tribal dignity to safeguard and most importantly there was pressure from within and outside forces but he sacrificed all that on the altar of peace and unity which are the most important facets of development.
It was a meeting of two great minds, two great leaders with a nationalist thinking who wanted to see the nation moving forward without the tribal and ethnic divisions that had earlier on characterised the period prior to the accord.
The bloodletting disturbances in Matabeleland and the Midlands referred to as Gukurahundi threatened the young democracy that Zimbabwe was and almost derailed what the two liberation forces of Zanla and Zipra, the military wings of Zanu and Zapu respectively fought fearlessly and tirelessly for.
Yes, in the Zimbabwean political history as earlier said, it was the gun more than the pen that did most of the talking. And it was after the gun that the pen found expression and its ink defining the political course that the country has followed since then.
Although there were and still are attempts to rubbish the Unity Accord after the death of Cde Nkomo by some of his lieutenants branding the internationally revered Father Zimbabwe a sell-out, the efforts have not bore any meaningful fruits.
An attempt by Dumiso Dabengwa who was perhaps in line to get the Vice-President’s position secured by the Unity Accord to resurrect Zapu from its grave and give it another breath of political life has failed.
The trial trump card and the evocation of the Gukurahundi memories did nothing to win him the hearts of the population in Matabeleland and the Midlands, much because the old generation is slowly but surely diminishing. It is being replaced by a more liberal youth that is seized with exploiting the opportunities brought about by the stability brought by the humble and dedicated Father Zimbabwe and President Mugabe.
That the franchised youths have nothing to do with Zapu but just see it as an important part of their history incapable of shaping their future is evidenced by the voting patterns in Matabeleland and Midlands that have until 2013, always been biased towards the MDC formations and not Zapu.
Perhaps it is time for Zimbabweans to realise that there is more development and peace in a united political environment than there is in divisive politics characterised by internal fights and power struggles.
