LIAM TAKURA KANHENGA*
Dear Reader,
Pardon me for not writing in the past months. It has really been a hectic and unpredictable time in politics and I needed to take time to study the arena. Well, in my installment this week, I will break down to you the current events in Zanu PF and interpret to you what they mean. Reader, I would love to remind you that we have been here before. This is nothing new. Seven years ago, just when I was a fresher in college, we witnessed a similar phenomenon occur in Zanu PF—one which consequently led to the removal of longtime strongman and founding President Robert Mugabe.
 |
| President Emmerson Mnangagwa during his meeting with editors on Monday, where he said that he is not intent on running for a third term; reiterating that he will stick to the tenets of the Constitution. [Image: ZBC News] |
The material conditions remain a reproduction of the past and the dynamic shockingly identical. The only difference is that in 2017 we were looking forward to elections the following year but we were still debating leadership in opposition and the economy was performing badly as well. I should also point out that the current material and political conditions are products of the two weeks in November 2017. Let disabuse you from the lengthy recollection and get straight to my matter.
The ongoing succession battles within Zimbabwe’s ruling party, Zanu PF, have once again brought the party’s internal dynamics into sharp focus. While these factional fights may renew the party’s grip on power, they are unlikely to translate into meaningful transformation for Zimbabwe’s political economy. History has shown that dictatorships, no matter how internally divided, rarely reform themselves out of power. Instead, they perpetuate cycles of elite reshuffling, leaving the broader population to bear the brunt of stagnation and economic decline.
The nature of Zanu PF’s factional fights
Che Guevara, the fierce Argentine Marxist revolutionary often associated with the idea of unity within revolutionary movements, once said:
The revolution is not an apple that falls when it is ripe. You have to make it fall. The revolution is not a matter of chance, it is a matter of choice. And if the revolution is to be made, it must be made by the people, not by factions.
This quote emphasizes the importance of collective action and unity among the people, rather than allowing divisions or factions to weaken the revolutionary cause. Guevara believed that a successful revolution required the participation and solidarity of the masses, rather than being driven by smaller, competing groups with differing agendas.
Therefore, ZANU PF’s internal conflicts are not new and are not special. Similarly they cannot be expected to produce any revolutionary outcome. They are mostly about self-preservation with selfish interests in mind.
The party has a long history of factionalism, from the Gamatox days leading to expulsion of Dr Joyce Mujuru, G40-Lacoste conflict leading to ousting of Robert Mugabe in 2017, and to the current tensions between President Emmerson Mnangagwa and Vice President Constantino Chiwenga. Nothing is new, clearly.
Mnangagwa’s ambiguous approach regarding the extension of his presidency beyond the constitutionally mandated two-term limit has fueled these divisions—with Chiwenga’s faction pushing back against what they see as a threat to the constitutional order and truly it is (as if Chiwenga is a doyen of democracy!) But important to note is that life presidency is a threat to democracy and peaceful transfer of power. Gabon and Omar Bongo are a recent lesson and yes you guessed right , November 2017.
These battles are not merely about leadership but about control over resources and patronage networks. I put it to you, reader, that ZANU PF allegedly owns several companies in mining and owns farms situated on gold claims. This is where it is believed a significant portion of their money comes from (but that's a conversation for another day). So the fight to lead the party is also fight to control these lucrative resources.
The Lacoste faction, aligned with Mnangagwa, and the G40 faction, which supported Grace Mugabe, have historically vied for dominance, often resorting to smear campaigns, strategic alliances, and economic patronage to secure their positions. This internal strife, while destabilizing, has paradoxically allowed Zanu PF to adapt and survive, as factions compete to present themselves as the party’s saviors.
Renewal without transformation
The current succession crisis has the potential to renew Zanu PF’s leadership and strategies, but this renewal is unlikely to address the systemic issues plaguing Zimbabwe’s political economy. The party’s factional fights often result in a reshuffling of corrupt elites rather than a reimagining of governance. For instance, the 2017 ousting of Mugabe led to Mnangagwa’s rise but failed to deliver the promised economic reforms or democratic reforms.
Similarly, the current push for Mnangagwa to remain in power until 2030, despite constitutional term limits, underscores the party’s resistance to meaningful change. While some argue that internal struggles could weaken Mnangagwa’s grip and pave the way for new leadership, the reality is that any successor is likely to inherit the same patronage-driven system that prioritizes elite interests over national development.
The limits of dictatorship-led reform
Dictatorships, by their very nature, are ill-equipped to reform themselves out of power. Zanu PF’s reliance on centralized authority, patronage networks, and military support has created a political culture where power is personalized rather than institutionalized.
This culture stifles innovation and accountability, as democratic and civic spaces are repressed while prodemocracy campaigners are kept under lock and key. Since 2018 citizens have been deprived of their rights to free expression , freedom of assembly and subjected to disproportionate acts of violence leading to loss of lives. Let me remind you of Mboneni Ncube, Moreblessing Ali, the victims of August 1 2018, and the undiscussed deaths of January 2019.
Since the removal of Mugabe, state repression has shifted from covert to overt in order to harvest fear and demobilize communities . So what could change after another coup ? Rather will Chiwenga a beneficiary of this change anything?
Crisis of weak opposition
Amidst all this drama in ZANU PF, the opposition has yet to locate its position and play its role as defender of democracy. However, this is not the case. The opposition currently is weak and just like in 2017 paused as lumbering tractor or a hibernating bear.
The opposition has no clear political program of action in removing ZANU PF or presenting an a method of resistance, hence there is a vacuum. To some degree the opposition leaders like former Mayor of Beitbridge and legislator Morgan Ncube are seen taking sides in the ZANU PF factional war. The opposition can not assume or ever convince themselves that they have a stake in this process. They should be the ones leading and reorganizing the masses to resist being used as pawns in succession disputes and most of all campaigning against the 2030 agenda.
Conclusively, Zanu PF's internal fights can renew it and give it another fighting chance for power but they will never translate to any transformation in Zimbabwe's political economy because dictatorships can not reform themselves out of power. A weak opposition without a clear political response or plan makes it more difficult to hope for a frontline route t defend democracy in these times.
*Liam Takura Kanhenga is a human rights activist who writes here in his personal capacity.
.jpg)
.jpg)
0 Comments