Tsvangirai no better

PEOPLE are seldom better than those they criticise!

The Movement for Democratic Change (MDC-T) is not as democratic as it wants to portray. Neither does it uphold the change philosophy it asks of others, recent developments have shown.

One west-African political commentator, Abdi Guled, made an observation in 2009, that almost all of Africa's despots have been in power for extended periods, suppressing freedom of political expression... and negating the possibility of peaceful, democratic transition of power in their countries.

By all accounts, it would appear Morgan Tsvangirai is fast joining this rank and file. He has led the party for 14 years and is not about to let go the reins of power.

But the MDC-T's raison d'être was to effect change and inject democracy where it wasn't. Change was in the party's DNA, so we were made to believe. Apparently we were misled!

Formed in 1999 on the back of a working people's convention, the MDC, long before it split into the MDC-T, the MDC and MDC99, set itself up on a quest for democratic change in a Zimbabwe whose economic and political fortunes had ebbed to almost ground zero level.

Since its inception, the 14 year-old movement has preached democracy and change with these messages directed mostly at the ruling Zanu-PF which it has sought to dislodge out of power and usher in change for the people.

However, following the third time defeat of the MDC-T president, Tsvangirai to President Robert Mugabe at the polls in 2000, 2008 and the recently held July 31st harmonised elections, there have been increasing calls within the party's ranks for leadership renewal.

While the campaigns of MDC-T have by and large sought to provide a foil by way of criticism of Zanu-PF's lack of leadership renewal, it appears the very medicine the movement has been prescribing for others, it cannot itself take.

There have been some efforts to thwart the calls of dissension within the party with reports that Tsvangirai himself is unwilling to step down. Not only is the idea of change - as in change of leadership - being resisted but the very discussion of it will not be brooked - a situation that paints a picture of intolerance - a vice traditionally associated with Zanu-PF, but one which the MDC-T is playing out in the full letter and spirit.

One of the first people to call for leadership renewal was party treasurer-general Roy Bennett, soon after the MDC-T lost to Zanu-PF in the July plebiscites.

Following Bennett's remarks party spokesperson Douglas Mwonzora was quoted saying the self-exiled MDC-T treasurer-general would be called on it by the party to explain what he meant.

Ian Kay then also added his voice, before Engineer Elias Mudzuri, the current secretary for economics and finance in the MDC-T openly called and introduced debate on leadership reconfiguration in the party.

But Tsvangirai wants to continue on as leader and has been on a countrywide tour, meeting like-minded MDC-T supporters or rented crows who are urging him to stay on.

A directive is in effect in the MDC-T that leadership renewal not be discussed, at least not in public. How different this is from Zanu-PF's situation is anybody's guess. Observations, therefore, show that the MDC-T is in fact not any better than the party it seeks to displace.

Although dynamics in the two parties, Zanu-PF and the MDC-T, may mirror each other in a number of instances, at this moment in time, those in the ruling party fare better than for those of the movement.

The people of Zanu-PF, from whatever side of the warring and fractious party recognise that President Robert Mugabe is their leader. They may look forward to him retiring because of age, but in essence they are not calling for his removal. Neither are they speaking of replacement. But in the MDC-T people want to replace Tsvangirai. There are those who would want to retire him before he is old.

Yet, Tsvangirai is clinging on.

The possibility of yet another split in the political movement cannot be ruled out. While Tsvangirai may feel he has no reason to step down and there are those within the party that want a status quo, he must also listen to those calling for leadership renewal, and they are many of them.

Tsvangirai has his job cut out for him. One may be forgiven for concluding that this scenario point to a personality cult building around Tsvangirai among his supporters, much like it is in Zanu- PF around the president and others of considerable clout.

On the basis of this supposed support, Tsvangirai may stay on and keep his MDC-T party, which may leave those spoiling for new leadership moving out to form a splinter group.

Outside of the party, there are as many questions as within. To the ordinary man on the street, the accusation remains: Tsvangirai did not bring the change he promised! A sense of betrayal tinged with disillusionment reigns supreme.

Surely, how many attempts at the polls does the man need before change can occur? Many question.

Yet, the man is clinging on to power.

Were this a football game, the coach would be relieved of his duties. What makes this any different?

But, Tsvangirai wants to persist on.

How the party maneuvers on from the recent electoral defeat to the next polls is going to be the litmus test for the party, and the following specific question will beg answers: Is the MDC-T any different from Zanu-PF or is it as intolerant as that which it criticises?

But perhaps a bigger question which should enter the fray is: in the event that Tsvangirai becomes president, will he want to leave? Already evidence on the ground shows he has a major problem with stepping down. He has a seemingly unquenchable thirst for power.

Is Zimbabwe any better off with him? We doubt it.