What Zimbabweans need to do to move forward!

Nongovernmental organizations must play essential civic roles. For example, the Zimbabwe Electoral Support Network (ZESN) should channel popular demands for the reform of the electoral commission, and the Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum should campaign to strengthen the Zimbabwe Human Rights Commission and the National Peace and Reconciliation Commission. For their part, civic organizations must integrate with grassroots society; they cannot have impact where – as is currently the case – large majorities of the population do not know what they do13. Most importantly, civil society must end embedded relationships with opposition political parties, which were on open display in the 2013 and 2018 elections. To contribute to nation-healing efforts, NGOs – as well as the mass media — must rise above partisanship.

The public consistently cites religious leaders as the most trusted figures in society; 67% (74% in rural areas) said they trust them in May 2018. Most Zimbabweans are affiliated with one or another of the diverse Christian churches in the country. These religious institutions can potentially bridge differences within their congregations, which include adherents (including senior politicians) from both sides of the political divide. Religious leaders have not so far robustly deployed their national healing aptitude in any systematic way. They need to step up, as do the leaders of educational institutions. As agents of socialization, churches and schools can impart the same message of tolerance, namely that people can differ without being enemies and that there is virtue in unity with diversity.

It is clear that Zimbabwe’s long-suffering citizens constitute a strong and potentially powerful constituency for political healing. They want rival parties to work together, even to share power. In July 2018, 60% of Zimbabweans expressed support for a government of national unity, though only 41% thought this outcome “likely”. On reflection, however, citizens should realize that a standard power-sharing formula does not fit all circumstances; as in the period 2009- 2013, an awkward unity government may even inadvertently lend legitimacy to a disputed election. Thus MDC would be well advised to avoid co-optation into a fullblown governing coalition under ZANU-PF along the lines of the earlier “inclusive government.” Instead, election losers can better serve their country by staking out independent policy positions and acting as a loyal opposition. This route might even increase prospects for an eventual democratic transition.

In the end, the greatest resource available for healing the beloved country is the citizenry itself. In this regard, an observer report on the 2018 elections offered a timely reminder: “The tremendous turnout of voters on Election Day demonstrated their will for a tolerant, peaceful and prosperous country. The country’s political leaders should honor those aspirations and recognize that the divided vote emphasizes the need for reconciliation and inclusive, responsive governance.”

(335 VIEWS)