I REFER to Tafirenyika Wekwa Makunike’s article titled “Zimbabweans should look beyond Mugabe” (Independent, October 3). I agree with much of what Tafirenyika wrote. However, there are one or two
phrases in his article that might benefit from a second opinion.
Makunike states …”if he (Mugabe) intends to cling to power until beyond 2005 there is a possibility that his role will be critically re-written in our nation’s history”.
Really, is there only such “a possibility”? From any informed perspective, outside of the internal victims’ fish bowl, this has been a “dead cert” since the 2000 election (and even a decade and more for those really in the know). Come on Makunike, history concerning Mugabe has long ago begun to be re-written. It is currently only pencilled in and history editors will ink it all in when he is gone. Quite how badly that indelible record becomes seems increasingly commensurate with the time that the Mugabe regime continues to both criminally and obdurately cling to power.
Unless Makunike aspires for a job with Jonothan Moyo’s lot, he really should be careful to write factually and correctly in all parts of his articles. Makunike’s article should have read: “… Mugabe continues to cling to power until 2005 and beyond, perhaps (?), his (so-called) “liberator” role in our nation’s history continues to be negatively re-written; a re-writing that has already become very close to total erasure of anything positive or noble associated with the name Mugabe, Zanu PF, or anything or anyone else tainted therewith. For how can a true peoples’ hero and liberator transmute into their tormentor, dictator and destroyer?”
Always remember that “quiet diplomacy” simply amounts to “empowerment” in the collective jongwe mind. In short, tell it always like it is Makunike. Tell it precisely, tell it bluntly; for anything less is wasted effort – worse, it may even be twisted into approval of the status quo.
Secondly, Makunike writes: “We have already lost two vice-presidents to natural causes and we cannot leave the creation of vacancies in the national hierarchy to fate.”
Perhaps I am critically out of context, but what is wrong with … “leaving the creation of vacancies in the national hierarchy to the electorate” as is the norm in any real democracy? In short, we do not need to find ways to repair or facilitate a jongwe means of “fixing” our problems in Zimbabwe. These bankrupt and dishonest Zanu PF methods point to 23 years of criminal failure and national theft, and cannot possibly contribute to any valid long-term or real solutions for our nation’s current terminal state of wellbeing.
Our nation certainly does need to think clearly ahead, of a new post-jongwe era in a truly free Zimbabwe; without the overbearing, overweening power and all-pervading presence of Zanu PF. For it is clear that jongwe has long since not only become irrelevant to Zimbabwe’s wellbeing. Their very continued existence in power gravely threatens the very survival of our dear nation.
I do not believe Zimbabwe will survive a second “unity-style-accord” which continues to wed the nation to jongwe.
When Zimbabweans are able once more to think, write and associate without the all-pervasive jongwe false horizon clouding their thinking, writing and association, then our nation will start again to learn of true freedom. To become free indeed, once again.
Ikwoyo pamberi, tichazosangana ikwoyo,
John V Austin,