“Chamisa has no plan”- An expression of political illiteracy.

 “Chamisa has no plan”- An expression of political illiteracy

The Shona people have a famous saying “mukutanda makudo, ndimo mukunhonga hohwa”. The direct English translation will be that “you may find food, whilst focused on chasing away baboons from the field.” The lesson behind this ancient wisdom is that it is when one is laboring, that they are likely to stumble across something more desirable. Perhaps RnB listeners would link this to the immortal words of Rihanna who sang, “…we found love in a hopeless place”. For me, both best describe political developments post January 24th 2022, when Nelson Chamisa addressed a presser, formally introducing the CCC party to the world. After years of uncertainty, the new was born. I’m sure for many of his ardent followers, it was a bitter-sweet moment as it meant an end of a 22 years long relationship with MDC, while at the same time being the long awaited “signal”. Though a few would admit so, with the benefit of hindsight, it signaled the start of a period of uncertainty. For Chamisa’s opponents, “Mwonzora had won”. I personally belonged to a group that was eagerly waiting for this announcement, yet it would be sheer dishonest on my part, if I claimed to have received the news with total joy. Was equally engulfed by a strong sense of uncertainty. I wondered what was to follow. There was that concern which other terms, the fear of the unknown. My own birthday was just a few hours away. I have never felt many different things, at the very same time, as I did then, watching Nelson Chamisa that historical evening. Yet just two months later, I doubt anyone understood what had transpired right before our eyes, maybe, maybe, with the exception of Nelson Chamisa himself, a man of faith, who always says, God Is In It.

How we got to January 24th.

Realizing that his sun was setting, as his health was sadly failing him, the undisputable godfather of the fight for democracy, Morgan Richard Tsvangirai was faced with a real fear of falling together with the party he led for long, at a time where Mugabe himself was facing his own waterloo. Of particular concern was that as per the “law”, his automatic replacement was going to be an individual who, due to what she offered and cannot offer, stood no chance against ZanuPF. The way out for MT, as he was affectionately known, was using his authority, as he had done for many years before, to influence his succession. As (political) common sense dictated, Morgan Tsvangirai controversially appointed his “blue-eyed boy” Nelson Chamisa (and Elias Mudzuri) into the MDC-T party presidium. To rationalize his decision, Tsvangirai actually argued that he wanted to expose the three to the top office, and allow the party electorate to see what they could individually offer, before a Congress where they would fight it out against each other. What Tsvangirai didn’t deliberately expose when he said so, was his fear of how incumbency would be abused by those at the top then, to disadvantage all other possible contenders. After all, he had been president himself for long, and thus understood how internal processes could be influenced.

With the benefit of hindsight for instance, we eventually saw how Douglas Mwonzora as MDC-T party SG, influenced their EOC to influence his eventual and controversial triumph. For instance, he was deliberately sidestepping the then Organizer, Adbenigo Bhebhe, before firing him altogether. They even baldly suspended the tradition of “nominations”. This is simply how those at the top influence a process, even if they are not popular. Tsvangirai understood this, and consequently, this was the logic behind his madness, especially as it became clear that his health had taken a turn for the worse. Prof Ncube tells a emotion evoking story, of how Tsvangirai had slowly embraced his demise. According to Prof, who had become MT’s closest ally in the MDC-A coalition, even though he publicly wore a brave face during the MDC-A campaigns, before he left for his last medical trip to South Africa, MT requested of him, that he helps Chamisa as much as he possibly could, with Prof attempting to redirect the obviously uncomfortable conversation, asking him instead to focus on getting better, as they needed him for the polls. Tsvangirai’s response was that he was old enough to know that he was not going to be making any return, least of all, as the 2018 Presidential election, for his beloved United MDC, otherwise known as MDC-ALLIANCE coalition.

However, pursuant of their own ambitions, long before Tsvangirai passed on, some amongst his lieutenants, for reasons best known to themselves, couldn’t stomach the bravery of confronting and challenging his decision to appoint two Deputies outside congress, choosing rather to use proxies in court, to challenge him. The ensuing court cases, were eventually brought to finality towards the end of 2020, where the Supreme Court ordered the MDC-T, who remnants where now found in two separate political institutions, to reconfigure, for a congress, for the sole purpose of electing “Tsvangirai’s successor”. Of course, this was not desirable for Chamisa and his allies, as Tsvangirai had long been succeeded, both politically and electorally. The 2018 elections had given Chamisa a political identity, that didn’t need any political time travelling for affirmation. But perhaps mostly importantly, Chamisa understood what Tsvangirai understood himself, when he added him to the MDC-T Presidium. Chamisa could have easily found himself at the mercy of Mwonzora, and Dr Thokozani Khupe who now had so much influence, and a lot of scores to settle with him. What inevitably followed was the ‘firing’ of Chamisa because of his deliberate reluctance to recognize the SC judgement. His allies were systematically recalled, for continuously showing allegiance towards him. The long and short of it all is that by the end of 2020, Chamisa had no power, no party, and no plan, at least in the hopeful eyes of those who hopelessly lack political literacy.

Rats announcing the death of a lion.

The writing and narration of Chamisa’s political obituary was comical, in the eyes and ears of all students of history. And what made it more ridiculous was that it was announced by men and women who still lack electoral identity, to this very day. How they concluded that a man who had at first trial, garnered an unprecedented 2+ million votes, could suddenly wake up politically irrelevant all because of a printed paper, otherwise known as a court judgement, was preposterous. Anyone who followed our politics knew how much Chamisa was wildly popular, and had long been embraced as Tsvangirai’s heir apparent, even during a time when discussions over this succession were still taboo. Even characters such as Trevor Ncube observed this, unsuccessfully putting into motion a plan to influence his Tsvangirai revolt, and their subsequent “capture” of the man. Perhaps that’s a story for another day. Whereas his actual performance as a Presidential candidate was anyone’s guess, that Chamisa would inevitably step in as the face of opposition politics, was never really in question. Chronicling his rise would deserve more than just a subtopic.

Chamisa forming a new party

Back to the real story, as is now common knowledge, by end of 2020, Nelson Chamisa found himself in a precarious situation. After it became clear that the MDC name and all its variants had been captured by the State and given to Douglas Mwonzora, consensus was on the ideas that the only way for Chamisa to revive his political career, was simply forming or at least formalizing a splinter party. However, it’s not farfetched to think that ZanuPF was equally sensing opportunities as soon as that materialized. Anyone who cares to follow our politics, knows that Mnangagwa has no interest in seeing Chamisa on the ballot, come 2023. This fear has manifested in many ways. From threats on his own life, constitutional amendments, and concerted efforts to destroy MDC-A, or at least keeping the ‘opposition’ internally focused. Forming a new party, although appearing as a simple way out for Chamisa, still created opportunities for ZanuPF continued interference, beginning with running a propaganda narrative that ‘Mwonzora had defeated Chamisa and pushed him away’, yet even before we could abuse the benefit of hindsight, it was clear that Chamisa forming a new “party” was not desirable for Mwonzora and team, even though they sheepishly thought otherwise.

Firstly, one of the many challenges bedeviling the MDC, is that it become a victim of our “Big Men”, politics. This phenomenon results in having individuals stronger than the institution, such that their own names and that of the institution, can be used interchangeably. For long, Tsvangirai had become MDC. Eventually, Chamisa became MDC-A. It’s also noteworthy, that the phenomenon actually benefited the MDC. Even at their lowest, the general sympathy these institutions’ leaders enjoyed from the supporters, would help stabilize them. With Tsvangirai and Chamisa outside the MDC, it became unidentifiable. Consequently, it became a herculean task for anyone to pretend to be leading either MDC-T or MDC-A, outside those two individuals, whose own names had become synonymous with the institutions and their electoral participation. The scenario would have been different, if Mwonzora could truly be characterized as a successor of the two, better still, with their blessings. He just had no relationship with the millions who had followed both institutions, together with their leaders. As currently constituted for instance, Dr Thokozani Khupe and Douglas Mwonzora are factional leaders of a party called MDC led by Tsvangirai, shortened as MDC-T. It’s laughable yet equally unsolvable. They cannot drop the moniker, for their existence and relevance, depends very much on it. What only made it easier for Chamisa when he was MDC-T leader, was that he was genuinely seen as “Tsvangirai’s blue-eyed boy” with a legitimate claim to have been his understudy. Also, Nelson Chamisa enjoys a traceable political identity of his own. Before Tsvangirai passed on, he had long began the process of constructing his own political identity, both locally and regionally.

Secondly, MDC-T which Mwonzora excitedly captured, is not just the party that has been defeating ZanuPF for 22 years. It’s also the party that has been failing to dislodge ZanuPF for 22 years. MDC-T supporters and sympathizers alike, had slowly and surely been growing disillusioned with opposition politics, even when their party has been churning the convenient propaganda that “it’s a marathon and not a sprint”. This 22 years long marathon has just dragged on so for long, leaving its trusted leaders appearing fatigued and clueless. This equally explains why some comrades have either retired or “joined ZanuPF”, while supporters on the other end turned apathetic, becoming either uninterred or uninvolved in electoral processes. It’s not an easy task keeping millions invested and hopeful, after 22 years, more so using the legacy of a giant who has now long slept. Douglas Mwonzora, to his credit, has been valiantly trying to counter this, claiming on social media, especially post his poorly attended March 26th by-elections rallies, that they are “building the movement”. This draws deserved ridicule. If you are still building after 22 years, at best, you’re a terrible builder.

The political option for Mwonzora, perhaps a way out of that first hurdle, was to also capture the “MDC-ALLIANCE”, the coalition of 7 parties which gave ZanuPF a real fight for its money in 2018. But then, optics are critical in politics. Without the most dominant faces that crafted and built this Alliance, who remain politically active, such as Prof Welshman Ncube, Tendai Biti, Jacob Ngaribvume, even the most naïve person wouldn’t be made to believe that this Mwonzora theatrics, is the “MDC-A of Tsvangirai”. It just isn’t. Even if Mwonzora could brave it off, and claim that he had succeeded the other MDC-T leaders, Tsvangirai and Chamisa, he equally needed to explain what had happened to the likes of Ncube, Biti, Mutambara, who had been Principals when the ALLIANCE was formed. In the build-up to the by-elections, there was no mention whatsoever, of the new principals who may have succeeded those individual party leaders. Even at rallies, only MDC-T officials spoke. This was terrible optics which continued to expose the death of the MDC-A coalition. To make matters worse for Mwonzora, Chamisa the presidential candidate, absolutely outperformed the institution in the 2018 harmonized elections. Whereas it may perhaps undesirable, Chamisa was, during the 2018 elections, a brand bigger and more attractive than the MDC-A coalition he led. What Mwonzora and team felt was a “tactic”, that is pushing Chamisa away from the MDC name, was no victory at all. As some have explained, Mwonzora will only be remembered as the MDC Undertaker. We saw the MDC under Chamisa, then Dr Khupe, and now Mwonzora. The differences are clear and exposing. Whereas Dr Khupe by and large turned her faction into a regional party, Mwonzora can’t even gather a hundred locals, in any town, let alone rural constituencies.

History will inevitably record that Chamisa was underrated by his political opponents. They misunderstand his deliberate exuberance (something which makes him relatable with the younger electorate especially) and characterize him as a tactless orator. I’ve had enough conversation with him to understand that he’s fully conscious of what’s at play. Watching visuals of party meetings at some unnamed place in Harare, and Fadzai Mahere’s subsequent communiques, at the height of ZanuPF counter-narratives, ridicule and propaganda, some of us knew something huge was brewing. I recognize his underrated ability to survive these political terrains without underestimating the brains around him. Bottom-line is, the PLAN was always there, and those who doubted it the most, are now its heaviest victims.

Behold the new

After explaining how Chamisa ‘forming a new party’ spelt doom for Mwonzora, prematurely doing the same would have easily left Chamisa and the new, falling into set ZanuPF traps, something which they were banking on. They had many traps they hoped Chamisa would fall in, as he embarked on the next move. Some amongst those who wanted Chamisa to simply form a new party where either naïve, or simply mischievous in their advice. One line of argument was that “Chamisa should rebrand”. Had this been pursued, we would be having a MDC-Chamisa, or any other moniker to the MDC name. The challenge was that this simply played back into ZanuPF hands, forget about Mwonzora. Take rebranding as a decision to repaint or even renovate a house whose ownership is in dispute. Does it then make it yours? If CCC was a rebranded MDC-A, the threats of recalls would have ensured after the elections, as the former would be treated as just an electoral name for MDC, which for all intent and purpose, belongs to Mwonzora. The recalls had little to do with Mwonzora, but ZanuPF which used its captured courts to allow this. The ultimate plan being to have an internally focused opposition.

The other whispered option was holding a congress to “formally dissolve MDC-A” and then form a new party, even with a new name. Again, this was a poisoned chalice. How do you hold a congress to dissolve an institution whose ownership was in contest? Some proponents of this thought even argued that Chamisa would navigate any litigation by proving his own MDC-A was a party formed after 2018, different to the MDC-A coalition, formed in 2017. Again, even in this presence of indisputable evidence, the best option for Chamisa was always to avoid legal fights which only benefit ZanuPF and the opposition they constructed through their captured courts. There is no wisdom whatsoever, in accepting an invitation to a fight which you cannot win. This too had to be avoided at all costs, something which Chamisa totally understood.

Perhaps to navigate the aforementioned hurdles, Chamisa simply had to form a new party, divorced from the MDC name, yet he still didn’t. What many fail to realize, is that Citizens Coalition for Change is not a political party in the orthodox sense. Because of a clear reading of what’s at play, and what needs to be done, Chamisa and his core team, are building and leading something bigger, brighter and better. Chamisa’s plan, is advised by an understanding that the best way to handle the theft of your old party is not forming a new party, rather, forming and leading a citizens’ movement that can’t be owned by an individual or group of individuals, such that it can be claimed by a few, or worse still, captured and stolen. Parties, by nature tend to exhibit narrow mindedness. Focus is on the institution and its leadership's interests, more often than not, to its own detriment. It's not by chance that Chamisa, at all his rallies, was acknowledging the liberation struggle, liberation war fighters, traditional leaders, and many past and active Zimbabwean community leaders. The same attitude is being communicated to state institutions, particularly the security apparatus. The proverbial olive branch is being extended to 'all citizens', including those not very popular amongst Zimbabweans aligned to the democratic struggle. The idea is, a vehicle that can bring change, wherein the next Zimbabwean leader has a social contract with all citizens, has to be appealing not only to ex-MDC supporters. I've previously communicated communicated that I've grown to understand Chamisa as not just being interested in leading a strong Opposition party, but a functional Zimbabwe. That mindset motivates the brand of politics he is determined to introduce.

To survive and usher in the change we so desperately need as country, CCC cannot be political party, in the orthodox sense. It has to behave otherwise, to stand a chance at survival on one hand, and dethroning one of Africa's oldest and ruthless dictatorships. Political parties can only grow and thrive in a democracy, wherein space for electoral contestations is allowed. Sadly for our situation, we are an authoritarian state, a military state, wherein before 2017, we were led by a party that had captured the army, to an era where the military has captured a party and use it as a façade of a representative democracy. The way through which Mnangagwa enjoys governing through statutory instruments, most of which infringe on civil rights, otherwise protected by the constitution, expose the “rule by pronouncement and command” nature of military rule.

Zimbabwe just doesn’t have a political environment in which parties can exist and thrive. It’s not accidental that the founding ideology of CCC (laugh when some not so bright minds, say Chamisa doesn’t have an ideology) is “putting citizens at the center”. This disruptive model wants to do away with unconstructive party politics which inevitably lead to leadership capture, creating career politicians, intra-party polarization, and ultimately the surrendering of political authority to a few, by the millions of citizens. This philosophy creates political contestation not between competing parties, but citizens beyond party allegiances, and the politician(s). The idea is to say, representation at any level should be, by a citizen, for the citizens, through the consent of the citizens. The philosophy will attract the attention of any well meaning citizen because of its disruptive nature. It equally attracts traditional “non-voters”, who though lacking interest in party politics, are conscious of need to be involved in governance issues, by virtue of being citizens too. ZanuPF cannot use its old ways of fighting CCC, because it’s actually a fight against citizens themselves. It’s an inclusive political model. 

Properly implemented, Chamisa’s vision will birth transformative politics. Chamisa envisions (also laugh at those who say Chamisa doesn’t have a vision) a devolved political system where communities (and not just the party), have visible structures, capable of congregating on matters that affect the individual community. In the current set-up, its only parties that congregate, for the sole purpose of entrenching our polarization. Chamisa on the other hand wants the citizen to envision a departure from that old system where because of party allegiance, you vote for an individual you do not even know. Imagine exclusionary party primaries, being replaced by community consensus, where as a community, you agree on a candidate who is not only capable to perform required duties, but also naturally has your community at heart, by virtue of being one of you. Chamisa wants the citizen to imagine a devolved brand of politics where candidate(s) selection is the preserve of all interested stakeholders such as women groups, traditional leaders, religious leaders, youth groups, among many other structures of each individual communities. If properly implemented, how does a party candidate defeat a community representative?

Beyond these elections, under the new, Chamisa is attracting the interest and attention of the general citizens, to governance and political issues in general. Any manipulation of these political process will have to pit the disrupter, against the community as a collective. When you illegally and controversially recall the Citizens Councilor, you’re attracting the rage of the citizens. When you rig, you’re not rigging Chamisa, you’re rigging the citizens. Consequently, it is the citizens who should feel a need to engage in corrective measures, whatever that may be, because it’s their voices, decisions and programs that would have been shortchanged. The ability of CCC to address countrywide rallies during the by-elections campaigns, without any funding, or particularly organizing the Epworth rally, thronged by thousands, in less than an hour is an expression of the agency Chamisa has challenged citizens to possess, in as far as running the party is concerned. Without giving too much away, I remember a conversation with him some time ago, when he was appreciating something I had ‘assisted with’, where, against my attempt to be modest, he thundered “..No, no, no my brother. That’s the new way of doing things my brother. We are past the era of leaving everything to the so called leaders or position holders…”. It’s equally not coincidental that social media influencers and some extremely talented artists have become part of CCC commissar department. The way #YellowFriday took over the weekend after January 24th, shows a renewed interest from citizens to actively participate in the building and ownership of the new. I equally get goosebumps seeing citizens without any party posts, parting ways with hard earned money to fund agents, candidates, and even the ongoing voter registration drive, so that CCC wins come 2023. All these uncoordinated actions by citizens, are an expressions of the foundational strength of CCC, and how it has disrupted orthodox politics as we know it. 

Of course, it’s inevitable that CCC would need to have a clear leadership, structures and so forth. These allow for political organization, and an ability to respond to different political developments as well as plan for important political activities, for instance having electoral agents and so forth. For idealists, its understandable why there are questions are on the full leadership of CCC. The other crazy narrative has even been that “Chamisa dissolved his party leadership and left only himself in charge”. How do you dissolve the leadership of a new party? If Chamisa was running CCC as a fiefdom, how is it managing to have candidates and even plan and host rallies countrywide? Bottom-line is, CCC has a functional system that is sustaining it. Those obsessed with party posts, congresses and so much stuff, miss the complete picture. In an ideal world, a functional democracy, CCC would afford to focus on those. Yet in light of the election season, such internal focus only create opportunities for ZanuPF involvement. Some of the concerns are not warranted anyhow, as CCC is not even three months old. But if there was a need to properly contextualize this issue, one needs to observe that it’s not by chance, that Chamisa went on a countrywide tour, to consult citizens and community stakeholders, not ex- MDC-A structures, on the “way forward”. Those consultations, are the very foundation on which CCC was born, consequently explaining its survival and supersonic growth.

In a normal democracy, even concerns on why the current (and temporary) CCC logo has the face of Nelson Chamisa would be relevant. But ours is not a democracy. It’s a strange world where George Charamba sits in his office and forms another party also calling itself CCC in the hope of creating confusion. How best then do you handle a situation where the ruling party threatens to form their own bogus party with your party initials, beyond challenging them to also form another Nelson Chamisa look-alike, and put him on the logo of their bogus party to ‘confuse the voters’? How else do you handle the mushrooming of other bogus parties also using the yellow color, and ZEC sticking to black and white ballot papers, so as to continue hiding color distinctions, besides using the one thing they can’t fabricate, that is the face of the leader of the movement? All those asking questions that can only be relevant in an ideal democracy, firstly need to embrace that ours is not. Pretending otherwise is just self-serving.

Conclusion

Who could have scripted this? Who could have seen this peening out the way it did. Citizens across generations were braving threats to personal security to attend Chamisa’s rallies. There is a genuine feeling of citizens’ ownership, of the new. It feels like 1999 all over again, perhaps respectfully, with a little more flavor. Artists, who had never expressed allegiances to opposition parties, have become part of its commissar department. The theft of PPFA which previsously belonged to MDC-A party, has almost become irrelevant. Diasporians, who had long been deliberately disfranchised by ZanuPF, have found their role in the struggle, and are funding the movement. Citizens, uncoordinated, have used social media, which has become a key political constituency, to turn patrician state media moribund. The most famous CCC slogans such as “ngaapinde hake mukomana; wazadzaa” among others, were crafted by unnamed citizens. Apathy has turned into a renewed yellow hope. I’m totally convinced all this momentum could have never been generated under MDC-A. In the midst of hopelessness, citizens found love. Love with a movement that represents their interest. Love with the fight for change and the realization of a New Great Zimbabwe, One People, One Nation, One Vision, in our lifetime.

enkosi!!