Tendai Biti is the secretary general of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) faction led by Morgan Tsvangirai and Paul Themba Nyathi is the secretary general of the MDC led by Arthur Mutambara. The Mail & Guardian’s Percy Zvomuya speaks to both men about the future of the party.
Mutambara spoke of one candidate sponsored by the MDC. Now he is saying the MDCs will contest the elections as different parties. What has brought about this change?
TB: I cannot speak for Arthur nor can I explain his volte-face. Suffice to state that it is imperative for every democratic Zimbabwean to think outside the box and to see the bigger picture. Parochialism and self-serving myopia belong to the students’ unions.
PTN: Arthur Mutambara had made an undertaking on the understanding that his stance would be reciprocated by the other side.
Unfortunately it was not. If anything, the other side showed that they have no respect for our quest to strengthen democratic forces against Robert Mugabe by working for a common objective. Mutambara is on record talking about the need for a single opposition presidential candidate. On the other hand, Morgan Tsvangirai has not been quoted anywhere saying he subscribes to the same principle.
Does Zimbabwe need a divided opposition now?
TB: Zimbabwe needs the united chemistry and symbiosis of all democratic forces in both a united and popular front against dictatorship. The task of bringing about that united front is a process that will meet many challenges. If you are genuine, you don’t squirm and withdraw the minute you come across the first hurdle. At all material times, commitment to the cause and belief in the bigger picture must be the overriding principle. We must all think outside of the box. Sadly, this is easier said than done.
PTN: Of course it doesn’t, but it takes two to tango. If the other side has spurned the opportunity to work together, what can we do? It is unfortunate, but that is the reality on the ground. There is absolutely no reason to mourn about it. We just have to look ahead. There is going to be a struggle for legitimacy where Zanu-PF and the two MDCs will struggle to attract voters to their side.
There has been talk that this split has been brought about by personal, not national, objectives and ambitions. Please comment.
TB: I agree. To me, it’s a tragedy when people are driven by hate and personal antipathy. It is even a bigger tragedy when people cannot see beyond their narrow issues … that is, do I have a job, will I be an MP or I am targeting City X held by faction Y? To me in particular, the tragedy of this process has been the fact that narrow, individual, Machiavellian interests have subordinated the common good of Zimbabweans in both camps.
The coming together of the two MDC formations is critical, but unity beyond the two MDC formations is not impossible. Either of these formations has the capacity, if not the obligation, to construct a matrix of unity based on progressive forces in the country, including workers, students and broad civic society. Such a construct based on a genuine desire to see the complete democratisation of Zimbabwe might be more lasting than a boardroom process predicated on narrow positions of interest.
I do not believe that there are major differences of principle but rather subjective issues of personalities, power and ambition.
PTN: There is nothing personal about our position. We wanted to approach the election as two equal entities. We should recognise the legitimacy of both formations … We can’t force the other side to see the need for unity if they are not interested. People are too quick to read personalities and ethnicities into this. Of course, in any formation you will have personalities who sometimes don’t agree. But the reality is the other side didn’t adhere to the basic principles of equity. If you have two formations that have fully-fledged structures that want to enter into a coalition they should enter as 50-50 partners.
The general feeling is that the MDC (AM) is stronger in MatebeleÂland and the MDC (MT) faction is stronger in Mashonaland. How many votes do you think this split will cost the opposition?
TB: The debate about which formation is stronger and where is destructive. It is a debate that is as exhausted as it has been abused. Furthermore, it is dangerous in that it traps us into that paradigm of regional and tribal politics. I personally have no time for that. Of course, any three-way presidential campaign is a disaster and hopefully all of us will grow up.
PTN: We are going to move forward and we intend to field candidates in every constituency. We are not at all constrained by geographical regions. It is a fallacy to say that our formation is stronger in Matabeleland and weaker in Mashonaland. That view comes from people who want to see our split as premised on ethnicity.
How will this affect regional efforts at mediation?
TB: It would be a tragedy if the regional dialogue is mulcted by recent developments. We have no right to piss on that process. However, from the MDC side we, as negotiators, are fully cognisant that if these negotiations are to fail they will not fail because of us.
PTN: Those two are not related whatsoever. The MDC has one delegation negotiating with Zanu-PF. They will continue. You will remember that the Patriotic Front [a merger of Zanu and Zapu in 1979] negotiated as one entity at the Lancaster House talks. However, the two parties fielded separate candidates at the 1980 elections.