Arthur Mutambara’s interview with Geraldine Doogue almost passed me by until thousands of miles away sitting in a lonely hotel room sans TV; l went onto the Kubatana website for news of home and came across the extract from his interview. I read with shock his responses to the interviewer. I have always spoken about the need for a different kind of politics in Zimbabwe. Zimbabweans deserve politicians who respond to issues without resorting to the use vitriol, who speak without arrogance and who interact with the outside world in the dignified manner befitting their positions as heads or potential heads of state. MDC-M have sold Mutambara as the kind of leader Zimbabweans would be proud to have. His supposed intellect has been touted as holding the key to our success as a nation, but his utterances on ABC radio have for me dealt a mortal blow to these pretensions. His emotional outburst was for me, reminiscent of Mugabe’s infamous Sharm El Sheik incident, when he almost engaged in fisticuffs with one pesky journalist, as he charged “you idiot! You bloody idiot!”

The interviewer started by reading a summary from the Guardian in which Mutambara was referred to as a “shameless opportunist who has appeared to be currying favour with his former enemies” and asked him to respond. He of course denied this accusation. The interviewer then asked whether all the papers which had made similar assertions had got it wrong. This is when the interview went haywire. Mutambara responded by saying, “because they are stupid, they are very stupid”. Mutambara should have stuck to explaining why the papers have got it wrong in suspecting him of cutting deals with the devil. For MDC-M’s information, a lot of Zimbabweans are just as suspicious of him and his role in our crisis. The concern is not necessarily that MDC-M will cut a “bilateral deal from a three-party negotiations framework”- the concern is more about what clandestine clock and dagger deals he has been making outside of the framework. Deals for instance where MDC-M and ZANU PF sponsor the same candidate to run for the seat of the Speaker of the House of Assembly. That is the suspicion and fear. So no, one does not have to be “foolish” or “sick in the mind” to worry about these things happening.

And so to the next issue- the interviewer next asks about transfer of executive power of executive power from the President to Tsvangirai and this is when Mutambara totally loses the plot. After stating that there are some things he cannot discuss in the media, he goes totally ballistic. “Who are you? How dare you undermine our intelligence, how dare you are so racist to the extent that you can’t guarantee us….” (sic). The interviewer tries to interject, presumably to stop the tirade and Mutambara charges “you are collectively stupid!” “Collective foolishness!”  The interviewer again tries to stem the flow of vitriol but Mutambara hasn’t finished displaying his intelligence. In his wisdom, the imposition of sanctions while the parties are talking is a travesty of justice. Instead, people should have confidence in Tsvangirai, Mutambara and worse, Mugabe. Really Mr. Mutambara? And this is the brilliant rocket scientist? What about Mugabe’s conduct is supposed to inspire our confidence? The brutal murder of over a hundred perceived political opponents? How about driving 4 million of his people into exile? Oh and let’s not forget reducing the country into a pariah state? Should that inspire our confidence Mr. Mutambara?

The interviewer again tries to put Mutambara back on track and wonders whether the opposition could be walking into the same trap as Nkomo in the 80s. This question unleashes the Neanderthal in Mutambara-literally beating his chest he attacks the interviewer for daring to impugn his intelligence. His response is a cross between caveman and Mugabe. “Do you think I’m stupid? He charges. His pride offended. In a Mugabeesque turn he then goes on to claim “we are smarter than Australians, we are smarter than the Americans, we went to better schools than most of these leaders in America, in Britain and in Australia” He finishes by triumphantly crowing “I am coming out of Oxford! None of your Prime Ministers can challenge me intellectually”.

There goes the paradox. Mr. Mugabe and Mr. Mutambara should sit down and compare notes. They both display an identity crisis of Freudian proportion. The very thing they crave (acceptance by the West) is the thing they loathe (or at least purport to). In one breath the intelligent Prof pours scorn on the Americans, the British and the Australians and in the next breath he crows about his quality education at that quintessentially English Institution-Oxford. The standard by which he measures his intellect is a British standard. The irony is lost on the intelligent Prof.  If l were him l would not crow about my supposed intelligence for two reasons; firstly, when you talk about your intelligence but everything you say or do points at the opposite then there is a problem. If l were Geraldine, l would have pointed out that for all their collective intelligence, the three men are still fiddling while the country burns and for all their supposed stupidity and foolishness, the Aussies are still able to feed their country without begging for alms.

But that is beside the point. I started off by saying that we need politicians of a different calibre. People who are of sane and sober senses. Level-headed people who are not shaken by a few unfiltered questions from shrewd journalists. Leaders who do not go ballistic at the first challenge that comes their way. We want leaders who do not have an over-inflated sense of their own importance or indeed their own intelligence. We want humble leaders who are willing to listen to criticism however harsh, because they know they cannot have all the answers. We want compassionate leaders who are pained when their people suffer. “Intelligent” leaders who have eight degrees have brought our country to its knees. “Intelligent” men, who hold PhDs (honorary and earned) have decided that it is better to use scarce foreign currency buying commodities to distribute to the populace at sub-economic prices rather than invest in the country’s production capacity. Intelligent men have turned the Reserve Bank into an Agro Equipment wholesale. “Intelligent” leaders who believe that out of a country of 12 million people only one person has the brains to lead this country have presided over the disaster that is now Zimbabwe. Frankly l have had enough of men who think they are intelligent.

I have kept half an eye (and ear) on the power sharing talks between the two MDC formations and ZANU PF.  I would have loved to have kept my full attention on the talks, but l have a living to earn and needs must. In an earlier piece, l spoke about the need for us to draw lessons from history. Now amid rumours that claim that MDC Mutambara has cut a deal with ZANU PF and with Mutambara calling Tsvangirai “indecisive”, l find l must once again refer to history to draw some very necessary lessons for the negotiators. There was a leader of a party called UANC. He went by the name Bishop Abel Muzorewa. During the years that he was most influential, the country that is now Zimbabwe was then called Rhodesia. Rhodesia was reeling under stiff sanctions imposed on the country (as opposed to individual Zim sanctions) as well as an insurgency by Africans determined to secure black majority rule. The then leader of Rhodesia, one Mr Ian Douglas Smith, decided to come to an agreement with Bishop Abel Muzorewa as well as other nationalists who were then viewed as a “moderate” (as opposed to the “hardliners” Nkomo and Mugabe).  The result was the Internal Settlement and a country with a double barrelled moniker- Zimbabwe Rhodesia. The Bishop was made a Prime Minister while the real power remained in the hands of Smith and his merry band of renegades who retained control of the country’s civil service, judiciary, police and armed forces.

I will pause here to draw (somewhat simplified) parallels between our dear Bishop and Mr Mutambara. Over the short history of his party, he has carefully cultivated the demeanour as the cultured, reasonable and educated one. He has tried to sell us the image of one who is leading a group of rational beings (as opposed to the militant and irrational (he would now have us believe) Tsvangirai). I am sure these and other reasons are also why Bishop Muzorewa was perceived as a moderate by Smith and Co. The Bishop spoke the same language that Mr. Mutambara speaks now; broad and lofty phrases that are an attempt by that faction of the MDC to sell the image of a visionary leader who can rise above petty party differences. “All parties must work together and put national interests above petty and personal interests”

Now l am not sure l can believe everything that the Herald says, but if the agreements that were publicised in the Herald of the 14th August are anything to go by, then l am not sure that the public is buying what Mr. Mutambara is trying to sell.  The Internal Settlement was rejected by all and sundry. It was not a legitimate reflection of the will of the majority of the people. I am willing to bet my last dollar (revalued) that any settlement between Mutambara and ZANU PF that does not reflect the will of the people will also be rejected. I am certain that just as Mugabe in his previous incarnation as a nationalist found the prospect of a Smith-controlled army and police force unpalatable, we will also find the continued occupation by Chihuri, Chiwenga et al of their present posts similarly distasteful. If the then nationalist leaders could not stomach the idea of Smith holding the strings while Muzorewa danced like a puppet, then why should they expect Tsvangirai to bend over backwards to  accommodate ZANU PF?

Smith’s deal with Muzorewa was also an attempt to divide and conquer the nationalists. I am also certain that the reason why ZANU PF and the Herald have been speaking so glowingly of Mutambara and his faction’s co-operation and decisiveness in the talks is an attempt to divide and thereby conquer the opposition. With the Internal Settlement the two major leaders of the nationalist movement Nkomo and Mugabe were united in their rejection of the settlement. Muzorewa accepted the offer that was dangled in front of him. We all know what happened to him. If Mr. Mutambara wants to go ahead and cut deals and secure positions for himself and his team within a Mugabe-controlled government, then l have three words for him; “Josiah Zion Gumede.” He was the President in Muzorewa’s ill-fated government. He held that office from 1st June 1979-12 December 1979. Good luck Mr. Mutambara. Really.

The point of this paper is not to talk about Darfur or Rwanda, but to talk about learning from the lessons that history holds for us in Zimbabwe. The report of the Legal Resources Foundation and the Catholic Commission for Justice and Peace should be mandatory reading for every Zimbabwean. It details what has been euphemistically described as the “Matabeleland Disturbances”. But “disturbances” doesn’t begin to cover the deaths of over 20 000 people. A disturbance is when a dog barks in the night, waking you up form your sleep. It’s annoying, but hardly fatal. It could even be when two neighbours exchange words over the cutting down of a tree on a common border. At worst, in these days of accommodation shortages, it might your landlord telling you he now wants his rentals paid in hard currency resulting in an argument. It’s nasty, it’s uncomfortable, it’s inconvenient (when you get evicted) but it is rarely life threatening. It is not a “disturbance” when 62 people are lined up and shot-execution style as happened at Cwele River in Lupane. It is not a disturbance when a government to flush out less than 200 so-called dissidents, brings nearly 400 000 people to the brink of starvation by banning all food relief activities and imposing a strict curfew on the movement of food supplies. All this in the third successive year of a severe drought where people had no food apart from drought relief from donors and what they could buy in stores.

Read more here

Some food for thought given the current abductions, torture and murders:

First they came for the Ndebeles and Shonas of the Midlands and Matabeleland and I didn’t speak out because l wasn’t an Ndebele and l didn’t live in Matebeleland.

Then they came for the white farmer owners and their black farm workers I didn’t speak out, because I was neither a white farm owner nor a farm worker.

When they came for the poor urban, so-called slum dwellers, I didn’t speak out, because I was not a slum dweller.

When they came for trade unionists and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

Then they came for MDC activists, and I didn’t speak out because I was not an MDC activist.

Then they came for the Anglicans and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t an Anglican.

Then they came for the human rights defenders and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a human rights defender.

Then they came for me and by then there was no one left to speak out for me.

Credit to Pastor Martin Niemöller (I892-I984), the German anti-Nazi activist.

International Women’s Day (IWD) has just come and gone and after the fanfare, we are left to reflect more somberly on the issues still confronting us as women. In reflecting on our collective situation, l have decided to take a very different and very personal look at issues affecting women in Zimbabwe. Very often as activists there is the temptation to quote oft quoted statistics, to repeat phrases and slogans that while true, are now trite. Their over-use has somewhat desensitised people to the very important issues that we are confronted with. In most instances, we have removed the human face from the statistics and made them just numbers that we trot out. This IWD is especially important to me because a little later on in the month we are going to the polls to hopefully vote our next batch of leaders into power. I am sharing my story as a challenge to my fellow activists in civil society and to these would be leaders. To my fellow activists, the question is a simple one – are you asking the right questions of your friends who are running for political office? To the would be leaders; what are you going to do to address the problems that women face because they are women? For the full article please visit this link

As we approach March 29, l find myself in the grip of something that is fluttering in my belly, like hope. That maybe, just maybe our time has come. But just when l start thinking of the possibility of change in Zimbabwe, l am gripped by a relentless sense of apprehension. I dare not hope, because that hope has been dashed so many times before. But a part of me refuses to simply subside with a whimper into hopeless resignation. In thinking about this uncharacteristic ambivalence, l recall this passage from Alan Paton’s book;

Cry, the beloved country, for the unborn child that is the inheritor of our fear. Let him not love too deeply. Let him not laugh too gladly when water runs through his fingers, nor stand too silent when the setting sun makes red the veld with fire. Let him not be too moved when the birds of his land are singing, nor give too much of his heart to a mountain or a valley for fear will rob him of all if he gives too much.