The Irrelevance of the Dialogue Talk in the Zimbabwean Crisis 

The dialogue talk in Zimbabwe is very irrelevant because of its shallowness, lean and mean in terms of defining and addressing the Zimbabwean crisis.

First before talking of the word dialogue and Zimbabwean crisis one should understand the meaning of the two.

The conclusion I want to come at is that, a real dialogue in Zimbabwe must evolve around citizens (Zimbabweans locally and in diaspora) since all have a story to tell. ZANU PF and MDC Alliance have a politically biased perception of the dialogue and the Zimbabwean crisis.

Definition and etymology of dialogue and its rationale

For the following passages I will draw directly from the Mirriam Webster dictionary. Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dialogue. Dialogue is broadly described as: “2a: a conversation between two or more persons also: a similar exchange between a person and something else (such as a computer). b: an exchange of ideas and opinions organized a series of dialogues on human rights. c: a discussion between representatives of parties to a conflict that is aimed at resolution.”

In a dialogue there should be an individual playing the midwifery role between the two disagreeing factions with an aim to make them discover for themselves the true reality and not to dictate. This is how the pioneers of dialogue (Socrates and Plato) used it. It worked for them because Greece (Athens) became the first democracy as well as developed city in the world.

“Plato’s famous dialogues frequently presented Socrates playing a leading role, and dialogue comes from the Greek roots dia-(“through” or “across”) and -logue(“discourse” or “talk”). Dialect and dialectic come from dialecktos (“conversation” or “dialect”) and ultimately back to the Greek word dialegesthai, meaning “to converse.”

This means that as Zimbabweans we are ready to have South Africa playing Plato’s Socrates role. There is no problem with that under a dialogue as seen above.

“Conversation or dialogue was indeed at the heart of the “Socratic method,” through which Socrates would ask probing questions which cumulatively revealed his students’ unsupported assumptions and misconceptions.” Mirriam Webster Dictionary.

 The purpose of the above Dialogue was to “elicit a clear and consistent expression of something supposed to be implicitly known by all rational beings,” Mirriam Webster Dictionary.

The implication is that those involved in a conflict will have moved out of their rationality. Hence, they need to be assisted to find each other and clearly see the reality. Thus there is need for the intermediater to stand at the centre of the two factions and to understand the real problem between the two.

“Asking a series of questions was considered by Socrates a method of “giving birth” to the truth, and a related word, maieutic, defined as “relating to or resembling the Socratic method of eliciting new ideas from another,” comes from the Greek word meaning “of midwifery.” Mirriam Webster Dictionary.

From the above we can understand that the Zimbabwean crisis can be only solved by the dialogue. Dialogue is the only key to fling-wide-open the doors that blur us from finding each other.

The Zimbabwean Crisis

 The question to ask in the first place is; what is the Zimbabwean crisis?

It’s not an easy task for one to stretch a hand and categorically point to anything s/he can call a Zimbabwean crisis.

The reality about the Zimbabwean crisis is that it have been shrouded into the present day politics. Hence, diverting the attention from the Zimbabwean crisis to the political individual crisis. This have become a product of the present day political noise, populist politics, apartheid politics and the propaganda machinery in form of social media.

In house problems facing political parties have been nationalised to take a nationwide shape, hence they have been wrongly defined as National / Zimbabwean crisis.

Thus, focus in the eyes of the politicians of the day is given in the attempts to reconcile the Warring Political parties. The parasitic Zimbabwean problem continue sucking the blood of the innocent souls.

The Zimbabwean crisis can be better understood and unearthed using the PESTRELIC Model:

• Political (P), the nation is facing political polarization, violence, foreign interference and neocolonialism, democracy and election crisis.
• Economic (E), inflation, corruption and financial balance, sanctions and budget deficit.
• Social (S); health, food, education, beauty and happiness, marriage and sex, employment, shelter and divorce, xenophobia, apartheid, nepotism, racism and ethnicity.
• Technology (T); cyber phobia, cyber backwardness and cyber bulling.
• Religious (R); doctrines, posts and positions, orthodox, prophets, Satanism, miracles and professional gospel.
• Environmental (E); climatic change, droughts, floods, scorching sun and winter, pests and diseases.
• Legal (L); constitutionalism, law, judiciary, courts, prisons, security, law enforcers.
• Information (I); propaganda and social media.
• Culture (C); values, norms, morals, ethics and history.

The above are just typical examples under the PESTRELIC Approach to the Zimbabwean problem. Looking at this large scale of the Zimbabwean problem, one can conclude that the Dialogue Discourse in Zimbabwe is not only nullifiable but ridiculous and malicious. A real dialogue involves Zimbabweans represented in the PESTRELIC Model.

ZANU PF as a ruling Party

ZANU PF have its own definition of the Zimbabwean problem and the dialogue.

For ZANU PF the real solution to the Zimbabwean (POLAD) problems stems from a dialogue with all concerned citizens who are eager to work with ZANU in trying to fight for the fulfilment of the aspirations of the Vision 2030.

This POLAD (Political Actors Dialogue) is selective because it involves only those who contested in the July 2018 election as Presidential candidates. Hence, such an approach renders the whole scope of the dialogue and the Zimbabwean crisis shallow, lean and mean, hence, malicious. 

The unfortunate part of it is that, some members began to pull out of the dialogue, worse more, MDCA one of the contenders, refused to join the POLAD. Worse more MDCA have insisted in a dialogue that involves only ZANU PF and MDC Alliance.

For ZANU PF seating on the same desk with MDCA simply means:

1.  POLAD is no longer binding and they have given up to the calls of MDCA.
2.  ZANU stole the 2018 election and there are now giving the child his jiggis (surrendering Executive Power / Presidency to MDCA’s Nelson Chamisa who claims his victory was stolen from him)

Only madness can compel one to insist on thinking that ZANU will renounce the above position and surrender to the MDCA but common sense tells us the opposite. The only platform for negotiation, open to all forces serious about solving Zimbabwean woes according to ZANU is the POLAD. Again according to the ZEC and ConCourt results, ZANU won the 2018 election.

So what other role will ANC play?

About the Zimbabwean crisis

The ZANU PF government insist, there is no crisis in Zimbabwe but destabilising forces led by the G40, United States and other forces. These destabilising forces have roots in the year 2000 when the ZANU PF embarked into the land reform program. It grew large with the operation restore legacy that saw ZANU PF removing the former President Robert Mugabe and replacing him with E. D. Mnangagwa.

Forces arose against ZANU PF including the imposition of sanctions as a campaign against the land reform. On the other hand, the ‘criminals around President Mugabe’ left the country in 2017 and began to mobilise against the ‘New Dispensation.’

 This have seen White Terror against suspected criminals culminating in the arrest and detention of Chin’ono, Ngarivume and Sikhala among others.

So what role will ANC play? Forcing ZANU to admit that there is a crisis? Will ZANU accept that? Never. It’s only possible under madness

About abductions

ZANU PF have insisted on fake abductions. On 9 September Nicky Mangwana had this to tweet;

“We have always maintained that these abductions are fake. I have just seen a disgusting video showing how that trio set out to malign their country through fakery. How many of these so-called abduction are nothing but #AtrocityPropaganda?”

So what is the purpose of ANC? To tell ZANU PF that the abductions are real? Never. Only madness will drive us to think that ZANU PF will change its position.

The Opposition Movement

Opposition movement began before independence with leaders such as Sithole and Muzorewa in the 1980s. Then came Dumbichena, Dongo and Tekere in the 1990s. The final result was the formation of the MDC led by Tswangirai in 2000. All this was indicative of the Zimbabwean crisis.

However, a new wave beginning 2018 have deleted all the above history and came to define the Zimbabwean crisis as beginning 31 July 2018 with the elections.

It must be boldily mentioned that 23 opposition parties contested the 2018 elections and each had it’s own share. The election was not between ZANU PF and MDC Alliance. That understanding can help one rightfully define the Zimbabwean crisis.

We cannot throw away a view that the aftermath of 2018 election have its own share in the Zimbabwean crisis. However, it must be mentioned that two positive political moves for the opposition to mitigate this new crisis were tried and failed.

They include The position of the opposition leader in the Parliament and the POLAD

Why were the two rejected?

 1.  The 2018 Election: The MDCA was the one that rejected the two above. Politically it was the one reserved for the first because of its majority in the Parliament which is second to ZANU PF.

MDCA rejected POLAD again as other opposition parties joined. The question is why MDCA rejected?

MDCA rejected because she believes that she is the one who must be calling ZANU PF. MDCA believes she won the 2018 election through its candidate Nelson Chamisa. As such they believe they are supposed to be the ruling party and ZANU PF’s position is in the POLAD and Parliament as an opposition party.

So what is the role of the ANC? To tell ZANU PF to renounce power to MDCA? Is that possible? Never

MDCA failed to defend its case in the ConCourt due to failure to present the V11 forms. However, because of the madness of the day, the issue of V11 forms is down played.

People are made to believe that the courts are captured. Courts works with reality not what is in the mind or on the ground but by evidence presented to it on paper. Hence, the issue was not on whether the election was stolen or not but on the V11 to defend the vote. Hence, by failure to do so, MDCA shoot self on the foot. So will ANC abide by the ConCourt ruling and ZEC results or by Political noise? That’s madness!!!!

 2. The Jecha (Sabotage) kind of thinking: The opposition set to reject everything brought to it by ZANU without considering the rationality as a means of sabotage (kudira jecha). All the rationale and great thinkers of our society including the likes of Eddy Chros believes that by rejecting the above offers MDCA shoot self on the foot. If so, the question is; what is the purpose of ANC? To force MDCA to reconsider and accept the two positions? Never!!! That means acceptance by MDCA that they lost the 2018 election!!! Then they will be looser and lier!!! Will the MDCA do that? Then is the ANC delegation necessary? I say no because I’m not mad!!!! Only with madness we say yes!!!!!

 3. Belief by MDCA that she is the only opposition party worth talking about: Is it real that the MDCA is the only opposition party worth talking about? Is that mentality constitutional and politically welplaced? I say no!! 23 parties contested the election. We faught and defeated apartheid system. We can abide by the constitutional principle of equality. Hence, all opposition parties are equal and must be treated equally.

 4. Opposition infights: Decision making in the opposition formation is marred by factionalism and internal fights that leads to acts of sabotage.

There is no way by which big politicians in the MDC formation such as Mwonzora, Komichi and Mdzuri advice Chamisa whom they regarded as illegitimate, to take a rightful decision. Never!!!! They would always lead him astray only to attack him at a weekest point. At one point Komichi himself declared, if he turn against Chamisa he will cease to be self. But he is the same Komichi who changed automatically with the Supreme Court Ruling.

Contrary, there is no way Chamisa would listen to the big party carders whom he regarded as rebels who intended to topple him. Even in his ConCourt challenge he left the bigwigs on constitutional matters such as Mwonzora opting for Thabani Mpofu and the Foreigners. So even if they advised him to take the decision he could not listen to them.

Again, there is the third force in the MDC formation. These are the G40 the likes of Bhasikiti and Jonathan Moyo among others. They openly declared that they sponsored the 2018 election. Will they allow Chamisa to seat on the table and negotiate with ZANU? Never!!!

Then looking at the four opposing forces within the MDC camp; what role was the ANC going to play? Uniting the forces? Separating the forces? Is any of the options possible? The answer is no!!!! So why do we think of the ANC playing a significant role in our crisis?

Then finally, the opposition believes in the transitional government. Then my question is; what’s that? Is it there in our constitution? Do we have an anarchy? Isn’t it elections were held in 2018 and the government declared? Does ANC have any power above our constitution? Are we really normal?

I conclude by saying, mentioning ANC as an arbiter in our crisis is a clear sign of madness. We should renounce the mentality of listening to political madness. Politicians must tell the people the truth. I rest my case.

Don’t forget to follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn and Tamblr @mygokwe.