12- My enemy’s enemy is my friend
“Throughout the GNU years, Tsvangirai forgot about the proverb that ‘my enemy’s enemy is my friend.’ Matinenga observes that the problem with the MDC-T is that ‘Everyone wants to be a leader and we cannot have such a thing’. The MDC-T should have worked hard during the GNU years to build a strong pact with the MDC-N (led by Welshman Ncube) and other smaller parties against their overarching enemy, ZANU-PF. Instead, Tsvangirai continued to snub Ncube at every opportunity possible, which made it unlikely that MDC-N would have agreed, at the last minute, to a grand coalition. It is no secret that when the principals to the GNU met, those present at the meeting included Mugabe, Tsvangirai, and Arthur Mutambara, who claimed to have been the leader of the smaller MDC faction. Mugabe included Mutambara because he sought to divide and rule Tsvangirai and Ncube. The former’s decision to exclude Ncube however was, arguably, based on emotion: Tsvangirai excluded Ncube based on his position, his personal distaste for the man, rather than what ought to have been the MDC-T’s primary goal, – winning the election,” Hartwell argues. (Chamisa too failed to agree with Thokozani Khupe and Elias Mudzuri to protect his position rather than the party’s primary goal to win the election. He believes he can win.”
13-Under-promise and over-deliver
“Some business and political leaders believe that one should ‘under-promise and over-deliver’, but the MDC-T has done almost exactly the opposite,” Hartwell argues. “Delivery starts with basic issues, such as following up on discussions with party members to much bigger issues, like election promises. One expert on Zimbabwe remarked; ‘MDC-T officials are notorious for not showing up for scheduled meetings, and when they do, they [are disorganised] … ZANU-PF officials tend to be better in terms of keeping to their time slots or at least rescheduling their appointments …If the MDC-T cannot operate at such a basic level, how can they run a government?”
14-Improvise, adapt and survive
While it is easy to be in opposition, it is much harder to be in government. The reason being that the role of the opposition is, quite simply, to oppose. However, to govern is much tougher, as it entails that the party has to be able to take responsibility, come up with policies, focus on implementation, and administer programmes. If the party fails (or is seen as failing) to deliver, it will lose support, Hartwell argues. During the inclusive government, the NMDC-T was weak because it lacked good analysis of the environment in which it operated and the party leaders did not plan accordingly. But beyond that, they needed to be much more creative in creating opportunities where there were none. Simply put, the MDC-T failed to improvise, adapt and survive. Political parties “must be resilient, adaptable to shifting political circumstances, and sensitive enough to the process of action and reaction to avoid being trapped by their own tactics and forced to travel a road not of their choosing”. Another change that the MDC-T had to deal with was the fact that many of their officials left the MDC-T in order to take up government positions, which in turn left a major vacuum within the party. The party essentially imploded. Suddenly, some party officials had to fulfil several roles at once or they had to assume new duties previously occupied by other party members. This was arguably a big shock for the MDC-T, and they failed to mitigate the consequences.
Continued next page
(1665 VIEWS)
0 Comments