How do political leaders measure the effectiveness of their strategies?
How do they feedback the perceived success of any strategy back to citizens?
Since I started having an interest in Zimbabwe politics in 2009, I am still to be convinced that 'opposition politics' is contributing to the developed of Zimbabwe besides being credited for having contributed to the writing of the new constitution of Zimbabwe which extended Mugabe's term as Executive President but is yet to play a significant role in redefining Zimbabwean democracy so it truly represent's the will of citizens and their aspirations.
I have seen a lot of 'public petitions' circulated by various individuals and groups seeking to pressurise government to make decisions that favour their requests but are yet to hear of any successful outcomes. I have seen many demonstrations by the largest opposition party and other groups in Zimbabwe representing certain demands from government but are yet to see the fruits of those efforts. It seems like we keep doing the same thing expecting different outcomes.
More recently we saw the social media campaign by now celebrated Pastor Evans Mawarire which had some very sincere and genuine demands from government but nothing positive was achieved in terms of government response to address those issues. Some argue that the campaign managed to inspire citizens to face their worst fears and stand together as a collective, but the crust of the matter is the demands were not achieved but rather further repressive tools were created and applied to stifle democratic process by government
Are we using the right strategies to find answers to our current situation? I mean even if we go back a few years where the opposition with the help of international sympathisers successfully imposed the so called 'targeted sanctions' on the Zanu PF Government, leaders and affiliated companies. If truth be told those so called targeted sanctions did not affect Zanu and it's leadership alone as the intended consequences were simple cushioned by being transferred to citizens in various forms and has now became more of a burden for the majority disenfranchised citizenry.
As I see it the only time confrontational methods work is when one knows they have fair chance to overcome their opponent as they would be more prepared in terms of resources and tools to face their enemy which in all honesty Zimbabwe opposition are not equipped to do at this particular moment.
The alternative and most utilised strategy since independence from the Lancaster House, the 1987 Unity Agreement right up to the 2009 GPA agreement is negotiation. Ultimately in the words of the late President of South Africa Nelson Mandela "Negotiation and discussion are the greatest weapons we have for promoting peace & development".
You can not have peaceful protest in an arena where your opponent is willing to use any means necessary including State instruments and violence to suppress citizen discontent. This is why in the end the Rhodesian government had to try and repel a more fierce liberation war that led to the loss of lives of thousands in search of freedom.
Surely we have far more in common than our differences? We are all Zimbabweans belonging and why can we not seek ways to bridge our differences through respectable dialogue? This culture of self importance, entitlement and self righteousness does not build but tear us apart.
We simple can no longer continue promoting divisive sentiment like them and us when we are all mortal human beings of one global village merely defined by international rules that recognise us as Zimbabweans.
How long can we sustain the current strategies that are becoming more and more like a merry-go-round? Ultimately compromises will need to be made on all sides if ever we are to find an amicable way forward as citizens of the same nation.
No comments:
Post a Comment