Latest News Editor's Choice


Opinion / Columnist

Secession or Consolidation: A Phronetic Matabeleland Reflection

29 Apr 2011 at 10:18hrs | Views
The itchy and stinging debate about Matabeleland secession and sometimes devolution keeps coming back. I must applaud those who have written about the subject and those who have maturely contributed to the debate in various ways.

It is through these debates that we can thrash out issues and demystify myths. Having read most of the debates, it is fair to say that most of the writers sleep walked into ethnographic discourse dilemmas by attempting to address the subject through in-depth historical accounts.
 
In order to have a factual debate the scope of ethnographic discourse should be calibrated. What's more is that some historical sources, social and cultural interpretations have their shortcomings which challenge and continue to challenge some historical accounts.

Against this background this article focuses on the real facts and misconceptions underpinning the Matabeleland disgruntlement. It there thereby deploys a phronetic approach. The article concludes by briefly discussing secession or devolution. The author uses the term "the people in/of Matabeleland" to describe all the people living and originating from the discussed locality. In short it is an inclusionary term. With this in mind let's start by dealing with the factual concerns and misconceptions of the people in Matabeleland. These have been summarised into four broad categories:

  •  1980s Atrocities,
  •  Political Tokenism,
  •  Regional underdevelopment and
  •  Opportunities.

1980s Atrocities

It is right and responsible for the people of Matabeleland to pile pressure on the government about the 1980s atrocities. It not only right for the people in Matabeleland but it is also good for the whole country (Zimbabwe). Evidence of the 1980s atrocities shows that it was a deliberate and systematic process; to be precise it was genocide. What's more is that it should not be compared with recent political violence in Zimbabwe. However one might argue that there is an affinity on the grounds that the masters of the 1980s atrocities may be part of the current administration.

However alongside the need to address the 1980s atrocities a misconception or conspiracy theory has been developed on tribal lines. The misconception attempts to totalise the responsibility of the dreadful 1980s atrocities tribally. The atrocities happened under the watch of a Zimbabwean government which means the decision makers of that administration should held responsible. It is not difficult to find out from those responsible then, who did what and who gave what order.

Political Tokenism

The position of Deputy President after the unity accord offered a balance to the two political parties which merged (ZANU PF and ZAPU). It is important to note that this position was based on the merit of political party membership. However with Joshua Nkomo as the Deputy President there was a bonus of regional representation.
 
Informally the position became a strategic one in that people assumed that it would rebalance regional inequalities. After the death of Joshua Nkomo people automatically assumed that someone from Matabeleland would fill the post for regional representation purposes. However the political decision based on party membership replaced Joshua Nkomo with Joseph Msika from Chiweshe.
 
This further developed into another theory that Matabeleland lacks political clout because it's not represented. Where represented its representatives are given tokenistic positions and are diluted in all sorts of ways behind the scenes. In some way this seems to stake up because one would struggle to point at someone from Matabeleland holding the real levers of power. On the other hand we have not seen any politician of high calibre with a great charisma from Matabeleland like Joshua Nkomo.

Regional underdevelopment
 
Regional development is one area which should be easy to measure provided the figures for indicators of development are available. Some of the indicators include micro economics, life expectancies, educational standards, standard of living and disposable income. Zimbabwe is one country which is either bad or deliberately discreet on micro development figures. Although national figures are available they paint a standard picture. Without these figures, development is open to all sorts of interpretations.

Some have used the visibility of flashy and tall buildings as development indicators while the exodus of companies to the Capital City and the failure of projects such as Matabeleland Zambezi Water Project as underdevelopment indicators .Dealing with the first misconception is absolutely difficulty but what might have been seen as the exodus of companies to the capital is probably the contraction or downsizing of operations during the economic down turn. Having worked in Bulawayo and Harare it's fair to say most companies were headquartered in the Capital, so they are bound to retract their operations to their headquarters. As for the Matabeleland Zambezi Water Project it's political, less transparent, ambitious and unique.
 
Opportunities

One way of describing opportunities in Matabeleland is by saying "it's about who you know, what you want and how much you are willing to pay". Employment and educational institutions in Matabeleland were infected by corruption a long time ago. The full blown symptoms and impact were evident in the early 1990s on wards. People who finished their secondary education and "A" Levels during this period would testify to this but they are always exceptions. However those who have benefited from the employment and educational institutions and those who luckily made it would naturally defend the indefensible to protect the image of their institutions and the credibility of their statuses.
   
There is real concern on how Matabeleland Colleges and Universities conduct their intakes. Priority and Merit are obviously not married because evidence shows that Matabeleland institutions are being flooded by people from other regions. Some would try and level the filimsy argument of grades but it does not stake up because there is compelling evidence that it is all about pulling strings and oiling wheels. Furthermore there are students from Matabeleland with equally the same grades as those outsiders who don't make it because they don't have inside tracking. The same is true with employment.
 
While these concerns are real there is a tribal misconception that one tribe is losing. The reality is that the people of Matabeleland are losing as a whole; however I have to acknowledge that the context of those parachuting into Matabeleland Colleges and Universities has been dominated by people from a certain region.
 
Secession or devolution

My assumption is that the proponents of secession and devolution know what they are advocating for. However for the benefit of everyone let's untangle the two by lightly defining them.

 Secession simply means the withdrawal from the main unit or union (where there are states) to form an independent town, state, city and even a country. Good examples can be drawn from the United States, Soviet Union and the Republic of the Congo.

Devolution is the granting of statutory powers and the transfer assets and resources from the centre to sub national/local government within the boundaries of national law. Good examples are Scotland and Wales in United Kingdom.
 
The argument for Matabeleland secession and devolution does not stake up for four reasons;

1) What they seek to achieve through secession and devolution can be achieved by the current unitary system through decentralisation and good governance,

2) Size matters (Zimbabwe is a small country) and the distribution of resources is disproportionate,

3) Its expensive to start setting up new governance structures and laws,

4) It creates top down heavy structures.

In conclusion misconceptions about Matabeleland are deliberate and based on manipulating facts. However  It is evident that the minds of many are using the powers to reason and conception in pursuing justice.

Indeed the people of Matabeleland have handled the 1980s Atrocities correctly by pursuing justice through non violent channels. This broadly reflects a strong national identity as it is known that Zimbabweans are non violent and peace loving people. The emergence of extreme political groups calling for division and hatred not only tarnishes the patience and fortitude of the people of Matabeleland but it also trivialises their efforts. What's more is that it distorts the important message for the younger ones, future generations and generations of generations that justice can be achieved peacefully. In many ways there are indications that justice is now around the corner but those who lack vision still find it easy and comforting to believe in the violent misconceptions that have been preached to them a million times in private. The painful truth is violence only destroys what it claims to achieve...............

 Farai Chikowore: is a Local Governance Reader who graduated in Strategic Public Management (MSc) and in Public Policy Government and Management (BA, Honours) at De Montfort University. He likes to evaluate the contribution of political discourse to understanding government policies. His main areas of interest are in Research in: Partnership Working, Local government, Local governance, Democratic renewal, Policy process and Strategic Management.He can be contacted through Bulawayo24.


Source - Farai Chikowore
All articles and letters published on Bulawayo24 have been independently written by members of Bulawayo24's community. The views of users published on Bulawayo24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Bulawayo24. Bulawayo24 editors also reserve the right to edit or delete any and all comments received.
More on: #Farai_, #Chikowore