Mugabe’s ‘success’ in turning his country into a de facto one-party state is to blame for last weekend’s election fiasco, argues Iden Wetherell
The state-owned media tried to put a brave face on it. “Landslide win for Mugabe”, trumpeted The Herald after the final tally in Zimbabwe’s presidential poll was in. But nothing could disguise the truth: the result was a humiliating blow to the nation’s 72- year-old ruler.
Robert Mugabe had been anxious to crown his fourth term with what his Zanu PF party had forecast as “a crushing victory”. Over his 16 years of iron rule, “landslide” and “crushing” have become common epithets to describe Mugabe’s carefully managed electoral triumphs. All that is history now. Last weekend’s contest may indeed have seen the incumbent raking in more than 90% of the votes cast. But with a 30% turnout of eligible voters, this was hardly the unambiguous mandate he had sought.
The result is all the more remarkable given the pressure on voters to return the president to power. Rural voters were left in no doubt that the distribution of maize and seed packs was dependent upon their continued obedience. And village headmen were given the task of delivering their communities to the polling stations. White farmers, who had received the usual drubbing from Mugabe during the campaign, were also told to transport their workers to the polls. They dutifully obliged.
In the townships, bands of Zanu PF youths were despatched to find reluctant voters. Although Mugabe didn’t repeat the scarcely veiled threat he made in April’s parliamentary poll, that people not voting might be mistaken for opposition supporters, his officials did make it clear they expected people to vote in large numbers so there could be no doubt at home or abroad as to where the country stood.
When his two lightweight opponents, Ndabaningi Sithole and Bishop Abel Muzorewa, withdrew from the contest, Mugabe went on TV to declare their withdrawal invalid, exhorting the nation to go to the polls. For once, Zanu PF’s formidable propaganda machine failed.
In a sense, Mugabe has been the victim of his own success. Having established a de facto one-party state which discourages dissent of any sort, he has been left in solitary possession of a vacant field.
Zanu PF secretary for administration Didymus Mutasa reflected a view widely held in his party when he told British journalists that “Mugabe is our king. A king like Mugabe is not contested.” He added disarmingly that “this exercise we are only doing to satisfy outside interests”.
The president recently declared his opposition to reform of the Constitution which was tailored for a presidential dictatorship. But this latest hollow contest will now push reform to the top of the political agenda. In particular, attention will focus on media regulation, electoral laws, the sweeping Presidential Powers Act, and the Political Parties (Finance) Act which benefits only the ruling party.
Whatever is proposed, one thing is certain: Mugabe will no longer be able to claim the mandate of the masses in resisting change.