Zimbabweans want a leader who can build a strong economy, create jobs, and provide a decent living

The Zimbabwe elections are set to be the most critical in Anglophone Africa this year, following Nigeria's February polls. Neighboring Southern African countries, including South Africa, are highly interested, as Zimbabwe's socio-economic triumphs or troubles necessarily impact them. Six years after former President Robert Mugabe's ouster from power in 2017, the ruling Zanu-PF party faces an uphill battle to persuade voters of their merits for the election.

Zimbabwe grapples with rampant poverty, a persistent currency crisis, consistent high levels of inflation (especially soaring food prices), struggling health and education sectors, alongside concerns of a diminished democratic space. The IMF's recent report states that a third of the population is food insecure. Other shocks, such as the recent COVID-19 pandemic, recurrent drought, and other natural disasters, add to the nation's suffering.

Mugabe as a scapegoat

Following Mugabe's removal in the 2017 bloodless “non-coup” coup , Zanu-PF attempted to distance itself from his foregoing 37-year reign, touting a "new dispensation" or "second republic." The late former president essentially became a scapegoat, enabling Zanu-PF to rebrand itself and appeal to voters and outsiders through the  "open for business" charm. However, critics have questioned this supposed "newness," arguing that the narrative suggests only Mugabe was at fault, while many current leaders were complicit and facilitated the old regime.

To be fair, some aspects have improved since Mugabe’s exit. For instance, there has been a considerable GDP growth, greater sensitivity to business needs and greater efforts to attract investments than was the case towards the end of Mugabe´s reign. Some practical achievements include dams, highways, airport and boarder rehabilitation programs. Politically, some notable changes include  initiating re-entry into the commonwealth, election observers being  allowed, including the EU delegation which is now in Zimbabwe.  But, since it is the same ruling party, some have argued that many of the attributes of the old dispensation remain present, the frequently mentioned example being the 2018 post-election violence that saw 6 people dying and 35 people injured.

Mugabe took over an apartheid state

It's convenient to see Zimbabwe as a “failed state” which failed only in the hand of it’s own incompetent leaders. But this is only half of the story. If we don’t understand the role of the international community, especially colonial institutions we fail to understand the full causes of Zimbabwe’s situation today.

After gaining independence in 1980, Mugabe initiated economic and social policies intended to rectify the colonial white minority's legacy of exclusion. Colonial Zimbabwe was built on the templet of apartheid that prevailed in South Africa. Majority of Zimbabweans were deprived access and Mugabe had to begin by opening up access. Notably, he initiated universal access to education, primary health care and rural electrification among other programs.

The white-minority colonial rule focused on the white settlers, Mugabe could not turn a blind eye on the suffering of ordinary Zimbabweans with no access to hospitals, clinics and schools. Universal school and healthcare is not cheap, and Mugabe had bigger spending needs than the colonial state with narrow focus on white communities. Like in many other newly independent African nations this led to Zimbabwe being confronted with severe budget and debt issues by the end of the first decade of independence. In order to obtain loans Zimbabwe was like other African countries met with demands of structural adjustment by IMF and World Bank. The overall aim was to liberalize the economy and give the free market more power since state intervention in economic development was deemed to be more problematic during 1980s. This also meant that the very public expenditure on hospitals, schools had to be cut in the name of liberalization.

With much of the promise of transformation undermined by such policies by the late 1990s, and hence the legitimacy of the Mugabe regime itself, political disillusionment set in and catalyzed the rise of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), Zimbabwe´s major opposition party. Simultaneously, the more than 30 000 former liberation era war veterans (who fought for independence from the mid-1960s to 1980) began pressing financial demands and each got a gratuity of Z$ 50 000, putting further strain on the economy. Intended in part to placate one of the significant sets of players in Zimbabwe´s postcolonial politics, giving into these demands was regarded by some as the gravest presidential mistake in Zimbabwean politics.  Adding to this, in the early 2000 war veterans and land-poor Zimbabweans began occupying land owned by white farmers. This was actively supported by the Zanu-PF state.

Land occupation led to widescale evictions of the majority of such farmers (who in 2000 numbered around 6000), affecting in turn hundreds of thousands of black farm workers who were employed on the farms. But the prospects of owning land were more attractive than a lifetime of working on farms with poor wages. Without access to land, Zimbabweans would have continued a colonial way of life without real economic opportunities. In addition, the years of colonial subjugation implies that it is difficult to disentangle the tension between colonial legacies and the anti-colonial /anti-imperial feeling in Zimbabwe. Mugabeism and Zanu PF´s ability to stay in power is partly fueled by anti-colonial sentiments and rhetoric that find expression and practicality in issues such as land redistribution. 

The land reform temporarily devasted Zimbabwe’s economic supply chains

In combination with sustained political violence and mass (informal) emigration in the 2000s, there was a devastation of economic supply chains, causing upstream industries to shut down, leading to unemployment and a general loss of goodwill from the international community. The eviction of land-owning white farmers brought temporary disruptions to the agricultural supply chains and markets that also affected food and other upstream industries. In the short run, the eviction of white farmers meant a necessary period of adjustment that created teething problems as new Zimbabwean farmers needed time to consolidate farming skills and establish financial networks, leading to economic slowdown. In addition, the sanctions and backlash from the international communities also caused capital flight from Zimbabwe. Many donors withdrew.  In 2002, Denmark notably closed its embassy, citing no real political interest and unproductive trade relations with Zimbabwe. Sanctions and donor withdrawals did not bring political reforms but caused further isolation of the country and widespread suffering of the ordinary Zimbabweans.

Fiscal issues significantly escalated from around the year 2000, culminating in 2008 with hyperinflation reaching astronomical levels and a currency crisis that led to the circulation of $100 Trillion (Zimbabwe) dollar notes. Stability was temporarily restored in 2009 through a power-sharing agreement between Zanu-PF and the MDC, when the latter won the general parliamentary elections, but Mugabe simultaneously won the Presidential vote. During the power sharing deal, the Zimbabwean dollar was abandoned in favor of a multicurrency system anchored by the US dollar. In the 2013 elections, Mugabe's Zanu-PF party regained full control, and the country deteriorated again leading to him being ousted four years later in 2017. Over the years, and regrettably, chronic economic mismanagement has meant that proceeds from Zimbabwe's abundant natural resources, such as  platinum group metals (PGM), chrome, gold, coal, and diamonds  tended to enrich the small political-military-business elite, while the majority of ordinary Zimbabweans have reaped little benefit.

Who has best chances for the 2023 elections?

In the current election there are two main contesting major parties, namely Emmerson Mnangagwa ´s ruling Zanu PF and the main opposition, the Citizens Coalition for Change (CCC) led by Nelson Chamisa, which is itself a descendant of the original Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) formed in 1999 under Morgan Tsvangirai.  A an opinion poll by Brenthurst Foundations published in February showed that 53%  would vote for Chamisa`s CCC and only 40% for Zanu PF´s Emmerson Mnangagwa.  A more recent poll (published July 10) put Zanu PF at 35% and CCC at 27%. This poll had about 27% who refused to answer, and people have speculate that they were likely CCC supporters since allegiance to Zanu PF hardly create any potential victimization.

The main opposition (CCC) and civil society groups have continued to express strong mistrust in the electoral process. This includes not only the electoral conditions on voting day itself but also concerns the period leading up to election day. Only a minority of the citizens consider the last 2018 elections to have been free and fair. Some of the most important issues relate to electoral reforms to level the playing field. Main issues being access to the voters’ role, freedom to hold public rallies and receive state media coverage, and both direct and indirect harassment of opposition party supporters.  All these issues jeopardize free, fair and credible elections. Opposition leaders also complain that their leaders are unfairly locked up in jail as a means of excluding them from participating in the election processes.  On 4 August, an opposition (CCC) supporter was allegedly stoned to death by a Zanu PF mob. 

What can the 2023 election winners do for the nation to move forward?

The winning party in these elections will face overwhelming challenges. Years of economic and political challenges have eroded national cohesion and trust. Confidence in state institutions is low, and there is a need for national healing to propel the nation forward. The winning party has duty to unify the country Below are some of the areas that will demand attention:

• Tapping into the skills and resources of Zimbabweans living abroad most of whom left in the 2000s due to economic hardships. These can contribute to critical economic sectors and public institutions such as universities where the brain drain has been felt most.

•   Addressing the persistent debt problem by managing debt arrears more effectively to facilitate economic recovery. The hardest part will be to cut wasteful spending and reduce budgets in non-developmental spending, to focus on essential sectors such as infrastructure and health and education.

•    Redefining the roles and practices of the army and police to become non-partisan in order to rebuild public trust in these two crucial institutions.

• The international community has a role to play, especially former colonial powers. They have a duty and moral obligation to work with Zimbabwe. It is convenient to blame the post-1980 leaders but Zimbabwe´s political and economic challenges are very much connected to colonial sins of commission and omission.

Despite persistent challenges in the 43 years of independence, Zimbabweans remain peace loving and are willing to embrace democracy. It would be regrettable if this trust were betrayed by their elected leaders and left behind by the international community and the former colonizers. One critical question is whether the opposition, Zimbabweans at large and the international community, can accept a 2023 Zanu PF victory. But if electoral and political reforms are really necessary for free fair and credible elections, as suggested by the opposition and international community, will Zanu-PF reform itself out of power? For now, we wait for the 23 August´s election outcomes.