Mercedes Sayagues
Judging from President Robert Mugabe’s body language during his State of the Nation address on Tuesday, he was in shock. Stiff and aloof, albeit in a father-of-the-nation magnanimous style, he conceded defeat in the referendum over his draft Constitution.
It was a far cry from the fist-waving, cocky Mugabe of earlier weeks. At rallies, he dismissed the opposition as “puppies” and threatened to unleash violence. But this was before nearly 700E000 people (55%) voted No against 580E000 (45%) who voted Yes in Zimbabwe’s most important electoral event since independence in 1980.
The No rejected a charter that did not reflect people’s wishes and entrenched Zanu-PF in power. It was fuelled by anger at Zanu-PF’s corruption, misgovernance, cronyism, arrogance and economic mismanagement. This is the third chimurenga, or liberation war, say many. The first, 100 years ago, was against settlers; the second, in the 1970s, was against white minority rule. This one was against Zanu-PF rule.
Mugabe must be smarting. The No vote is his most serious reversal in a 20-year career of successful management of public discourse.
“In a normal democracy, a government that loses a referendum loses its power to rule. The honourable thing would be for Mugabe to exit,” said Morgan Tsvangirai, leader of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC).
If he exits in a father-of-the-nation style, Mugabe could regain stature. “If he stays, he risks humiliation,” said human rights defender David Chiminhi.
If Mugabe persists in ruling, he could go down in history like Malawi’s Hastings Banda and Zaire’s Mobutu Sese Seko – elderly anachronisms who hang on to power through corruption and repression.
Mugabe is no fool. He may be realising he cannot be at the helm forever. Accepting defeat, he demonstrated a statesmanship he has not shown in years. He did not insult the opposition or blame a foreign conspiracy. Instead of lambasting whites, he thanked them for voting in large numbers.
“We were pleasantly surprised with his lack of arrogance and hope it is not a one- off example,” said MDC representative Welshman Ncube. He called for both sides to show maturity and re-engage in negotiations.
Despite Mugabe’s dignified speech, many fear a government crackdown on civil society.
“Unpopular regimes react repressively when they feel threatened,” says human rights lawyer Tendai Biti. He and eight other Natinal Constitutional Assembly (NCA) activists were arrested last Sunday while campaigning in a township for the No vote, and jailed until Tuesday without charges under Zimbabwe’s draconian Law and Order (Maintenance) Act, used by Rhodesia against black nationalists.
Zanu-PF has a history of violence, ranging from urban thuggery to the Gukurahundi massacres in Matabeleland in the mid-1980s. Mugabe is increasingly dependent on the army and the intelligence services for survival. Sweet deals in the Democratic Republic of Congo bolster the alliance.
But the No vote shows the end of Zanu-PF’s yoke over the country. Zimbabweans have become citizens who exercise their right to choose, instead of being docile subjects of the party that led them to independence 20 years ago.
The vote shows people are no longer open to populist promises, deceit and manipulation. The government counted on its traditional rural power base to win. It promised free and plentiful land to be confiscated from white farmers, through a section added at the last moment to the Constitution that allows the government to seize land without compensation, except for improvements. But rural folk didn’t buy it. They know that land redistribution has favoured chiefs, not communal farmers.
Even in Zvimba, Mugabe’s home turf, 3E400 people voted No against 12E558 Yes votes. The urban vote was a solid No by a three or four to one margin, in both affluent suburbs and black townships. The Yes vote won in four provinces, albeit not by large margines.
Eighty percent of voters voted by staying at home. “Twenty years of Zanu rule have taught them there is nothing in voting,” says Biti.
Licking its wounds, Zanu-PF’s central committee was due to meet on Friday. The search for scapegoats is on. “MPs didn’t campaign enough,” said constitutional representative Jonathan Moyo. He also accused white Zimbabweans living in South Africa of voting in the referendum – conveniently omitting the solid No vote in black townships and a Yes victory in Beitbridge.
The NCA, the loose coalition of civic groups that launched the reform process and led the No vote campaign, calls for an elected constitutional assembly, preceded by a stakeholders’ meeting to agree on the terms.
For the parliamentary elections in mid- April, political parties demand, in the words of Tsvangirai, “rules of the game that are acceptable to all”: an independent electoral commission, equal access to the media, and removal of the Law and Order (Maintenance) Act and all laws that block popular participation.
The opposition needs to consoliate structures, maintain unity, and get four million people to vote. “We need to go from boycott politics into pro-active [politics],” says Biti.
Zimbabwe’s cash-straped opposition battled against all the odds, against police intimidation and exclusion from the government-owned airwaves. Only in the last week was the NCA allowed to debate on TV, after a court battle. “Mugabe had everything and we had nothing and we won,” sobbed Grace Kwinjeh, an NCA activist, when the reults were out.
Authoritarian regimes seldom lose referendums. It happened, in a quiet Zimbabwean way, this week.