Preparing the terrain for an out-going generation of leaders

What future is there for African politicians after retirement from public Office?

Some time back I wrote an article titled “Preparing the terrain for a new generation of leaders”. I thought it is only sensible and right to also look into preparing the terrain for our out-going end of term limit leaders.

The first President of independent Zimbabwe Canaan Sodindo Banana was one of the very first government officials to retire after serving a seven year term as a largely ‘ceremonial head of state’ to make way for a new ‘Executive Presidency’ led by then Prime Minister Robert Gabriel Mugabe. After helping broker the signing of the 1987 Unity Accord between ZANU PF and ZAPU, President Banana seemed to spear-head what seemed a panacea for the problem of sit-tight leaders in Africa, although his retirement was presented as a noble way of bridging the strong differences that existed between the two main liberation parties at the time, it also meant that he had to end his political career in active politics at an early aged 51.

President Banana’s retirement package was meant to be designed to give him some comfort and peace of mind after his service to the nation. He doubtless expected to spend the rest of his life comfortably doing what people expect of retired statesmen. Many people look forward to retirement and plan to do all the things they couldn't do while attending to the demands of their careers. Other people look forward to retirement, but do not view it as a time of leisure. They instead look at this life transition as a time to explore a new career. This article will address the issues faced by political retirees or those approaching retirement and the end of their terms in positions of authority.

Although his accomplishments as a Zimbabwean national leader have largely been erased from Zimbabwean history books, Banana had had an honourable career as an opponent of the Smith regime, and as a radical theologian. He is the only leader from Zimbabwe to have progressed to an International Peace broker role serving on the United Nations commission of eminent churchmen (World Council of Churches) investigating business in South Africa in 1989. Furthermore at the end of 1991 he was one of a group of Commonwealth "Eminent Persons" which observed CODESA (Convention for a Democratic South Africa). He also played an active part, on behalf of the Organisation of African Unity, in seeking to broker peace in Liberia.

Besides the Presidential role, notable other retirements were Hon Victoria Chitepo who served in the Ministry of Tourism, Hon Fay Chung Deputy Secretary Ministry of Education and Chikowore as as Minister of Transport and Energy with a few others. Most were either dropped from government or demoted to lower ranks

I appreciate that most African countries are still going through their initial stages of democratic dispensations and as such the mistakes that have resulted in the current dilemma faced by African’s in terms of governance, transparency and accountability should be viewed as lessons and referenced as examples of bad and good leadership for future aspiring leaders. Former President Obasanjo suggested that perhaps heads of governments in Africa should be forgiven for their mistakes and allowed to retire home in peace without being made to face trials for their actions. He believes this would encourage them to exit power; however wouldn’t it also encourage successive leaders to also adopt the same bad behaviours knowing they will be held responsible for their actions?

The former Nigerian president said the fear of being tried for the crimes they committed while in office is largely responsible for refusal of many leaders in the continent to yield power until forced to do so. However I would challenge his statement by asking why did they commit the offences in the first place? Let them be tried perhaps not at the Hague but by an African approved court, composed of experienced African judges and a jury made up of different member’s from the African society, externalising criminal justice to courts outside Africa is an insult to African democracy and self-emancipation.

“When one looks at the political horizon, sit-tight leaders are becoming extinct species,” Obasanjo stated. “Very few of them are left. They should look and see that those who have taken their exit are not worse for it. I am here. I know that ex-President Mbeki is also there. There is life after the State House. And if they know that and also appreciate that there is something they can do to be useful to their country, Africa and humanity, maybe they would be encouraged to vacate.”

“Whatever the challenge of a new age, in the end what really counts is not the years in our lives but the life in our years. It is not about longevity, but the depth of life. Long ago I learned that age does not wither the mind if people remain positive. No one is too old to set another goal or to dream a new dream. It is a mind game. As Churchill suggested, "The empires of the future are the empires of the mind."~ Singapore Retiree JENNIE CHAU

So what plans do we have for retiring leaders? Should it be our responsibility as a nation to reward our leaders with retirement packages that would enable them to continue playing an effective but advisory role to successive governments without them worrying about their welfare needs and well-being? I think much as we worry about who we elect for leadership we should equally look at what opportunities will be there for them after retirement, without planning for future leadership we will continue to have what President Obasanjo calls ‘sit-tight leaders’.

Does the average person understand the meaning of DEMOCRACY?

The way the term ‘Democracy’ is used in various social and academic circles makes one wonder whether the average person really understands the full meaning and purpose of the term. Is it really practically possible to enforce an internationally acceptable standard in all socio-economic and political environments when there are already different classifications of society based on religious, cultural and ideological beliefs?

I will  try not to explore too much on the democratic argument in my article for the simple reason I do not believe there is a universally accepted standard definition that can be measured or proven as a successful example. Not even the so called champions or inventors of democracy can make claim to having democratic societies. I believe there is a close link between democracy and human rights that makes even economic rights a necessity in order to have a global democratic society that fairly addresses the needs of all communities.

"Democracy is the most valued and also the vaguest of political terms in the modern world." ~D Robertson, 1986

Robertson went on to stress that the word ‘democracy’ only starts to mean something tangible in the modern world when it is prefixed with other political words, such as direct, representative, liberal and parliamentary.

This belief is based on the right of every citizen over a certain age to attend political meetings, vote on the issue being discussed at that meeting and accepting the majority decision should such a vote lead to a law being passed which you as an individual did not support. In almost every democracy a common observation is not all the citizens of a country are fully aware of the political scenario in their environments. The majority masses usually with a limited standard of education may not be aware of the political issues in society and this may result in them making the wrong choices during election periods, this is what is termed voter 'education'. Perhaps voter education should be something that is taught from primary education, so that citizens grow up understanding their rights and the role politicians, justice, security and the private sector plays in nation building.

In most countries the government is subject to change after every election term, as such the authorities may work with a short-term focus. As they have to face an election after the completion of each term of office, they may lose focus on working for the people and rather focus on winning elections. In their attempts to secure election victories they may use mobs to influence people as has been the case in Zimbabwe. Sometimes citizens may simple vote in favour of a party under the influence of the majority not because they understand their election manifestos but because they feel compelled or influenced by the philosophies of those around,  such persons may not voice their true opinion. 

There is little argument today about whether or not there is a relationship between capitalism and democracy. The essential nature of capitalism is social harmony through the pursuit of self-interest. Under capitalism, the individual's pursuit of his own economic self-interest benefits the economic self-interests of all others. The system means the complete separation of economy and state, just like the separation of church and state.

The reasons for this side of looking at things are also justified, and in most cases, completely accurate. The major drawback here is that bigger and richer capitalists can then exploit their workers, and can prohibit other competitors from entering the market by monopolizing resources. If this happens, the entire purpose of capitalism is destroyed, but sadly this is a very real occurrence.

Moreover, a capitalist economy becomes very materialistic and money-oriented in nature, and this affects the people of that country morally and spiritually. The impact here is not a direct and explosive one, but more like a mild poison, slowly corrupting the minds of people. Economic disparities begin to rise, and this leads to a rise in many social evils and the crime rate. Overall, the society suffers some negative consequences which it could have surely done without. The biggest drawback though is that of exploitation, which stems as a natural result of wanting to earn more and more. People and resources are exploited ruthlessly here, and this leads to severe consequences in the long run.

The answer to whether capitalism good or bad lies firmly in the manner in which capitalism is embraced in any country. No matter what system of economy one employs, there will always be certain bad seeds and corporations that will try to take advantage of the weak and helpless. This is an inevitable evil of society, and even socialism is not excused from this. In Africa because of a long history of oppression and poverty, the opportunity to capitalise on access to wealth by  both political and business leaders makes building democratic societies a much more difficult challenge especially taking into account the fact that most of the structures of governance were adopted from their predecessors who used them to manipulate the majority disadvantaged, they find the election periods too short to set  their development goals, that they end either changing their terms of office or simple rigging elections to remain in power.

I think for Africa the key to good governance would be having none partisan Justice & Security Officials. A mixed economy approach that combines the best of all ideologies and focuses on helping a largely disadvantaged in society by at least ensuring that basics rights to education, health and economic sustainability are easily accessible would be a good starting model. As we live in an ever changing world, ideology should also be flexible based on the best proven examples of success. In the long run it will be the most innovative economies that will constantly have an advantage over their competitors. We must never be afraid to try out new strategies.

Preparing the terrain for a new generation of leaders

“I am a product of Zimbabwe, uNcube , Mukanya(my African totem), mfane khaya, mwana wevhu, son of the soil, that’s one of the reasons I created a public profile!”

However being a product of Zimbabwe, does not translate to blindly following Zimbabwe’s leaders for the sake of being on the right side of history.  I never forced myself to be a part of the history of Zimbabwe nor to be born into a political leadership family.  I also do not subscribe to the politics of polarization as it is a waste of time, the more you wrestle with the devil, the more he loves it, just because of my previous family links with the ruling party or because I am historically linked. I prefer to base my arguments in public debates from experience and knowledge of the topics of discussions that I participate in. I am also not a fan of  personality politics as it focuses too much on petty leadership gossip rather than real matter’s affecting society. I have noted through various discussions and media publications that focus has been on leader’s political positions rather than discussion of economic, political and security sector reforms. Our opposition politics focuses on public campaigns discrediting Mugabe and ZANU PF rather than presenting alternative solutions capable of addressing the problems faced by society or more ideal creating environments that promote economic growth and development.

It is inevitable that one of these days, in the very near future a new generation of Zimbabweans will have the opportunity to take over leadership of Zimbabwe. When that moment presents itself, few will want to keep wearing the same shoes as those who fought the struggle for the simple reason of change as we live in constantly changing environments where the needs of society require new innovative ways of developing stronger social bonds that can help strengthen our socio-economic and political environments.  Maybe some may enjoy hero worshipping leader's for what ever reasons but I'm sure most do not want to be seen in the same light of negativity that has haunted our leaders from our own people and the rest of the world, but rather to remember them for their more positive achievements that have continually challenged a global perspective of the rights of an AFRICAN as an equal global partner. This is not to say no good has come from current leadership of the country, but the good that has been done is recommendable and should be used as a foundation to help strengthen the weak areas where they failed to achieve.

So what can a new generation of leaders do differently? Few can argue the desperate need for change of leaders with the ability to smoothly take over the process of independence from the liberation heroes of Zimbabwe’s independence, to the development of more community embracing entities and platforms that should ensure freedom, justice and economic empowerment become reality in our fast changing global socio-economic and political environment.

“The fear by current leadership is the thought of losing what they fought for(liberation values) to opposition parties or a new generation of leaders who may unknowingly embrace neo-colonial policies that will adopt a bulk of western injected policies that may in the long run see the means of production and control of investment in the hands of western dominated interests leaving Zimbabweans with very little control of their own resources.”

The challenge ahead needs innovative leaders and members of society with a good knowledge of Zimbabwe’s history and an appreciation of the values of the struggle that led to independence. We should seek more effective ways of addressing the bread and butter issues of unemployment, access to education and health, with the intention of creating stronger institutional foundations for future generations to develop on.

Our challenges are related to the way we develop our economic structures, political structures and social structures so that they provide equality and respect for our diverse cultural history. Some of the more important issues are a serious need to try and bridge the strong differences that exist because of tribalism, reverse-racism, political affiliation and more importantly the growing gap between the rich and the poor.

“Building capacity to resolve conflict and any past unresolved differences in communities requires programmes that can contribute to building a society in which security is assured for all of Zimbabwe’s people. Security means freedom from violence, poverty, inequality, exploitation, and exclusion. Security ensures fair access to resources and decision-making processes, and accountability, based on a system of social justice which respects fundamental human rights.”

I believe these challenges require a more open handed approach that can give opportunity to voluntary exchange of important information affecting our past or debate those issues rather than one that seeks confrontation of those alleged to have committed any crimes, as that approach in most cases results in the perpetrators going on a defensive or out rightly refusing to participate in any public discussion they feel may vindicate them or their families in future. We should aspire for tolerance with the hope of eventually coming out with more progressive outcomes that build rather than destroy our nation and values of Ubuntu/hunhu.

“Africa requires its own Human Rights Charter that embrace’s it unique cultural history, it may draw much of its guidelines from the United nations Human’s Rights Charter but should not be influenced by external forces but rather by consensus based dialogue between African people.”

Freedom and Justice through a united people

I guess everyone has been taken by the wave of people change taking place in North Africa. It is not easy to keep telling people that western sanctions and policies are affecting service delivery and the creation of employment opportunities when you as a leader are busy glob trotting and selling the country’s raw materials for personal benefit and to bribe senior officials responsible for law and order into supporting biased and unfair policies that only benefit a few in society closely linked to the leadership and a particular political party. I’m not sure anymore what type of world people want to live in, but it seems some are happy to see these long serving leaders enrich themselves and commit acts of violence against their own in the name of freedom and empowerment.

The Egypt and Tunisian public protests have probably taken world leaders by surprise. The already struggling global economy may face renewed recovery challenges as the price of oil ($90/Barrel) is pushed up by this uncertainty surrounding the out-come of the very unstable oil producing regions. As we watch men and women across the Arab world demonstrate for freedom and basic rights, we must point out that these matters are no less urgent in Zimbabwe and many other African countries where leaders have refused to accept the outcome of elections.

What further baffles and infuriates me is the selective application of law enforcement. In 1998 during the election campaign run leading to elections so many supporters of the opposition movement for democratic change were murdered by ZANU PF militia and youth but none were arrested and charged for the crimes committed. Violence, aimed at opposition members, civil society actors and the population in general, has continued to escalate in varying amounts with the most recent one being the arrest of 68 Activists alleged to have been planning to topple the Zimbabwean government through protest action incited by the Egyptian peace protests.

Looking at the two scenario’s, the foiled alleged peace protest (2011) and the bloody election violence of (1998) leading murders of hundreds of innocent supporters, who should be in prison? Where then do we draw the line to freedom of expression? What then should people do if their election requests have not been met and their views acknowledged by  leadership?