In a milieu of assumed tranquility, Zimbabwe’s ruling party, Zanu PF, led by Emmerson Mnangagwa, basks in the false notion that a subdued citizenry equates to acceptance of its autocratic rule. This fallacy, however, is not new to Zimbabwean soil. A reminiscent scenario played out during the British colonial era, where the colonisers misinterpreted the Shona people’s calm demeanour as laziness or cowardice, a grave miscalculation that later recoiled on them. The irony is palpable as Zanu PF, in its reign, not only mirrors the oppressive antics of the colonial settlers but further exacerbates them through policies that marginalise and exclude the masses.
The bedrock of Zanu PF’s overconfidence lies in its strategic positioning of loyal military factions, a compromised judiciary, a subservient parliament, and prioritised traditional chiefs—all meticulously orchestrated to override the welfare of the common Zimbabwean. Under this grim backdrop, the party misconstrues the people’s silence for peace.
However, this perceived peace is nothing but a mirage. It does not signify the people’s endorsement of violence, rather it underscores the gaping disconnect between political apathy and peace—two realms of reality that Zanu PF fails to distinguish. The party’s legal retention of power, which rightfully belongs to the people, further fuels this delusion. In its fantasy, the political inaction and indifference displayed by the citizenry are mistaken for peace, a dangerous misinterpretation that betrays the governing body’s fantasies of unending dominance over Zimbabwe’s political sphere.
The narrative of peace, as propagated by Zanu PF, serves as a deterrent against any potential popular uprising. This deterrence is meticulously embedded within the nation’s psyche, where the fundamental constitutional liberty—the right to assembly—is twisted and portrayed as an act of violence against the state. This skewed portrayal is purportedly backed by external foes, chiefly Washington, Brussels, and London, with whom Zanu PF shares a baseless enmity.
Contrarily, the genuine antagonism harboured by Zanu PF towards these Western capitals stems from their advocacies for democratic reforms, a stark contrast to the exploitative ties Zimbabwe is subjected to with China under Zanu PF’s rule. This modus operandi employed by Zanu PF cleverly associates the indispensable right to assembly with the democratic aspirations championed by the West. Consequently, when transparency-seeking citizens expose corruption, as seen in the Draxgate scandal, they are hastily branded as agents of a regime change agenda, a supposed threat to national peace and sovereignty.
Zanu PF’s skewed version of peace aims solely at maintaining the status quo, preserving the power imbalances that have plagued Zimbabwe since 1980. This pseudo-peace serves as a shield for the continued plunder and pillage of the nation’s resources at the expense of its people. When citizens, exercising their constitutional right, voice out against human rights violations and demand accountability, the response is a brutal military crackdown.
State-sanctioned violence has been a hallmark of Zanu PF’s reign, with harrowing episodes like Gukurahundi and Operations Murambatsvina and Makavhoterepi leaving indelible scars on the national psyche. The resultant political apathy and disengagement from politics by a frustrated populace are mistaken for peace, a grave misinterpretation that further entrenches the nation’s divisive and polarised state.
The acute lack of a national peace and reconciliation initiative to mend the wounds inflicted by Zanu PF’s sadistic governance unveils the false calm that shrouds Zimbabwe. The peace so coveted by Zanu PF is but a facade, behind which lies a nation yearning for genuine tranquility and democratic freedom.
About The Author
