These predictions of Mugabe’s imminent downfall are wrong. The reason is quite simple: the angry urban social media activists and pro-democracy pundits have failed to absorb two key lessons of the Arab Spring.
The first is that the role of the military in times of civil unrest is pivotal. The second is that social media activism can never substitute for organized political activity on the ground.
Let’s first address the issue of the military. In all of the 2011 revolutions across the Middle East and North Africa, the position adopted by the armed forces was a crucial factor in determining how the popular protests would play out.
In Tunisia, for example, the largely apolitical military refused to act in defense of the reigning dictatorship, thus allowing the revolution to succeed; in Egypt, the army first allowed the removal of President Mubarak, then subsequently intervened to topple the democratically elected Muslim Brotherhood government.
Yet activists in Zimbabwe have so far had little to say about the position of their military on the current unrest — a huge and potentially fateful omission.
The Zimbabwean armed forces are highly politicized, and have a long history of close and friendly relations with the president. Most top military officers fought at Mugabe’s side during the 1970s liberation war.
Since 2000, many senior officers have expressed strong support for the ruling ZANU-PF party whenever it faced a strong electoral challenge from the opposition. Cyber-activists and angry young protesters underestimate the generals’ loyalty to the ruling party at their own peril.
It is true that the Zimbabwean military is deeply divided. Personal enmities, ethnic rivalries, and disputes over the spoils of corruption have fragmented the armed forces. The top officers disagree especially strongly over who should eventually succeed the 92-year-old Mugabe.
Yet the military’s internal divisions certainly do not mean that it will automatically side with the protesters calling for Mugabe’s downfall. In fact, Mugabe maintains his hold on power largely because of the army’s internal divisions, particularly among the senior officers, which prevent them from pulling together to form a united front against him.
Mugabe has also made good use of his position as commander-in-chief to maintain loyalty among the officer corps, using his powers of patronage to ensure the continued payment of salaries despite the government’s empty coffers.
Continued next page
(963 VIEWS)
