Zimbabwe has not failed, we are changing

The last decade and half Zimbabwe's recent history has been marked by some dramatic and significant developments on the continent's political terrain. These developments have been as wide-ranging and numerous as they have been contradictory. They have also constituted a major source of contentions to the political discourse as different schools of thought grapple with these challenges in terms of their weight and meaning. As can be imagined, there is no consensus on the most appropriate approach for interpreting the changes that are taking place in the structure, content and dynamics of Zimbabwean politics; indeed, efforts at conceptualising the changes have produced a veritable Tower of Babel, with commentators not only speaking in different episteme, but frequently against one another. The sense of confusion which is prevalent in these narratives is indicative of the complexity of the changes themselves as of the crisis of power contestations continue. The contradictoriness of the changes, at once inspiring hope and generating despair, has polarised the think-tanks and policy communities into nation-optimist and nation-pessimist camps. But for all the insights which they may offer into the problems and prospects of progressive change in Zimbabwe, both the nation-pessimist and nation-optimist frames are far too simplistic and subjective to serve as an enduring basis for capturing the dialectics of socio-political change and transformation. A more careful, historically grounded interpretation of the changes occurring on the country is, therefore, needed and for it to be useful, it should enable us to transcend the narrow and narrowing parameters that currently dominate the discourse on the processes and structures of change occurring in contemporary Zimbabwe.

Dimensions of Political Change in Contemporary Zimbabwe
The changes which have taken place on the Zimbabwean political landscape over the last decade and half have been multidimensional. They have occurred as much at the level of formal politics as in the arena of the informal processes that underpin the political system suffice to say, new ethno power dynamics are emerging and are a threat to progress. They have also been generated by factors internal to the political system and those external to it, necessitating a close attention to the contexts within which the changes are occurring. Furthermore, while domestic, local and national-level considerations are critical to the definition of the process of change, external factors and international actors also continue to play an important, even, at some conjunctures, determinant role in shaping outcomes. Understandably, much of the attention which has been focused on political change in Zimbabwe has been concentrated on the formal institutions and procedures of politics because these are both more visible and measurable. However, as is the case with politics elsewhere in the world, important as institutions and procedures are, they do not, in and of themselves, tell the whole story. For this reason, it is important that attention is paid also to the processes that underpin and mould/remould formal institutions and procedures, including especially the actors and actresses whose actions and inactions give life to the political system. And this can be done without a resort, do, to stereotyping Zimbabwean politics almost as a domain of abracadabra where the more one sees, the more one gets mystified and as opposition would preferably continuously be in denial.

The Re-Structuring of the Terrain of Political Competition and Governance
The past year in Zimbabwean history was ushered in with popular street protests or pressures which in many cases culminated in concerted efforts at reforming the institutions and procedures of politics and governance. Among the most interesting developments which occurred as part of this reform effort were the convocation of sovereign ideas and assurance of nationalist goals pursuing 2013 promises. Much of the contest was who is entitled to the promises first and desperation of dwindled donor funding to pressure groups. We cannot overrule widespread constitutional draft participation that resulted in the adoption of an entirely new one; the existence of multiparty politics and the organisation of multiparty elections; the embrace of the notion of independent electoral commissions; the adoption of widespread electoral reforms such as the new Biometric Voter System, including mixed list and proportional representation systems that have had the like of Priscillah Misihairambwi-Mushonga controversially marching into parliament when their party disapproved of their constituency imposition. Successfully, as was agreed upon attainment of democracy Zimbabwe has had the organisation of repeat elections that have been identified by some as a critical indicator of democratic consolidation. These changes were designed to open up the political space and in so doing, allow for greater competition in the struggle for political power. The ambition has been to create a level playing field for all political actors, make government more representative and accountable, allow for greater popular participation in national governance, and enrich the public space as an autonomous arena for the articulation of popular aspirations and or the canvassing of policy and political alternatives. Nation-optimists have mostly concentrated their attention on the improved prospects for the country around the re-structuring of the political terrain; some early commentators were even to assess the changes in terms which spoke of a second liberation or a Zimbabwean renaissance. Nation-pessimists have, in the main, however, read the changes with scepticism, pointing to their shortcomings and the problems of democratic consolidation that persist, and these are our special people-the opposition.

The Emergence of Media Pluralism
Almost without exception, and as an integral part of the pressures for the opening up of the political space, the monopoly on media ownership alleged on the state was broken during in 2015 through the licensing by the government of private newspapers, radio stations (mostly FM stations), and television stations, we are now proud listeners of Skyz Metro FM and Breeze FM. Inroads have also been made by digital satellite broadcasters and private internet service providers despite Econet pulling an Evan on its customers this past week, in Ndebele they say "sobohla MaNyosi". Apart from representing a radical departure from the situation that prevailed previously, the development has marked a new and important element in the promotion of political pluralism, governmental accountability, and popular participation even when opposition desperate rhetoric is schizophrenic. Don't blame them, they have run out of excuses.

The Demise of the Last Vestiges of Colonial Rule and Institutionalised Racism in Zimbabwe
The persistence of settler colonialism in the greater part of Zimbabwe and the institutionalised racial discrimination that went with it constituted the most important challenge to Zimbabwean nationalism and its agenda of the total liberation of the country from foreign domination. Beginning with the independence of our country in 1980 the end of colonial rule and its collapse unleashed new political forces and possibilities in our country; within rest of Zimbabwe; this development also unleashed new processes and alliances. If there was a perception that the unfinished business of national liberation prevented Zimbabweans from giving full attention to the challenges of overcoming their underdevelopment and dependence, the end of colonial rule has been interpreted as marking the end of an important phase in the history of the country and the beginning of a new one in which concerns about Zimbabwean unity and development would pre-dominate. Our land redistribution, indigenisation and empowerment policies truly reflect liberation, unfortunately when you have special people like Morgan and Joyce who conspire to take you back, you have to give them special attention. which is what they have got so far, so good.

In seeking alternative interpretative frames for understanding the new patterns of politics in Zimbabwe, it is important, as a starting point, to keep in mind that change is a continuous process. Change is also not always radical - indeed, in most cases, it is gradual, often incomplete, certainly far from being total, and is sometimes even imperceptible but nevertheless occurring. It is precisely because of the permanence of change that much of the processes integral to politics, economy and society across the world constitute pieces of work in progress, arenas where, whether it be the management of diversity, the construction of the state, the negotiation of citizenship, etc., the best models which are available or which correspond to the social equilibrium of the moment still represent, in a historical perspective, an unfinished business. That is why, wherever there is change, elements of continuity also abound: change is more often than not unfolded in the womb of one form or another of continuity. The forces that serve as the bearers of change are the makers of history but they may sometimes be so immersed in the tasks at hand or the demands of the moment as not to be fully aware of the epoch-making nature of their actions or omissions. In other words, change is not always the product of a consciously defined project and even where an element of deliberation and planning is involved, outcomes are not as predictable as might be imagined.

What all of this calls for, is a historical perspective and methodology which is able to locate isolated events and episodes in their proper place in the flow of a welter of events. Only such an approach can enable us fully to grasp the significance of change that is occurring and to develop a process based understanding of history. As i have said above, the process of change is, by definition, a contradictory one; assessing the process cannot be helped by intellectual swings from pessimism to optimism and back according to the pressures and contradictions thrown up at different moments.

Zimbabwean politics, as indeed politics elsewhere in the world, is in a permanent state of evolution. The current phase of the process of change in the politics of the country is one which is by definition contradictory and far from being uni-linear or unidirectional. Indeed, considering that it is a process of change that is occurring at a time of a massive decomposition and recomposition of social relations, it can be rightly argued that the country is in a state of flux that is, at once, both confusing and ordered - often an admixture of both at one and the same time. The immediate context of the change that is taking place can be located in the collapse at the end of the 1970s/beginning of the 1980s of the post-colonial framework of accumulation on the basis of which various players within the polity constituted themselves and were constituted. It was a framework in which the state took a frontline role in the key socio-economic and political processes of the polity; it was also organic to the social contract on the basis of which the nationalist anti-colonial coalition that ushered Zimbabwe to independence was constructed. So far the Zimbabwean project is not complete the successes of the nationalists are yet to be more experienced, let's vote wisely.

Micheal Mhlanga is a research and strategic communication specialist and is currently serving Leaders for Africa Network (LAN) as the Programmes and Public Liaison Officer.