By Dumisani O.Nkomo
A few weeks ago the Reserve Bank Governor controversially urged the business community in Bulawayo to engage in non violent protests if ever they wanted to access the Distressed Industries and Marginalized Areas Fund .It is critical to discuss the viability ,probability ,probity and effectiveness of non violent mass action as a tool of delivering economic and political democracy .In doing this i would like to submit that we as Zimbabweans have been reduced to passive spectators in the transformation agenda of the nation .We have delegated the responsibility of bringing about change to S.A.D.C ,Jacob Zuma ,the African Union and the international community .We seem to have invested a lot of energy and time on regional and international advocacy .This strategy has been effective to an extent although it is premised on the imperative of influencing the mediation process facilitated by Jacob Zuma and SADC .Our hopes seem to be pinned on Zuma ,SA.D.C ,the African Union and the international community .Is this hope and belief justified and should we continue to place all our collective expectations on the shoulders of others without pro actively exploring other avenues of effecting democracy and social transformation .I would like to suggest that Zimbabweans need to start seriously exploring non violent mass mobilization as a strategy of advocating for political ,social and economic reform .In doing so the limitations ,advantages and disadvantages of this strategy need to be taken into cognisance .
I have argued previously that Zimbabweans are too fatigued to engage in non violent mass action but then “no condition is permanent “ and different contexts require responses which are relevant to the time and conditions prevailing at a particular period . Non violent mass action cannot therefore be entirely dismissed in the Zimbabwean context .In actual fact the negotiators for the two M.D.C formations will be rendered useless without leverage as the general rule of negotiation is that one should have sufficient leverage to push for issues .In 1979 at the Lancaster House Talks P.F ZAPU and ZANU P.F were able to push their agenda because of the leverage they had in the form of their respective armies namely the Zimbabwe People’s Revolutionary Army ZIPRA ,the ZAPU armed wing and the Zimbabwe African National Liberation Army [Z.A.N.L.A] the ZANU P.F armed wing . I am in no way advocating for an armed insurrection being a proponent of non violence but my point is that negotiations are useless as long as one does not have any leverage .What the two M.D.C’ have to offer at the moment are good arguments and nothing more beyond this the M.D C formations are at the mercy of Z.A.N.U P.F .
Critical issues which may require mass mobilization may be categorized into local and national level issues including reforms before elections ,devolution of power ,the speedy disbursement of D.I.M.A.F ,media reforms and poor service delivery
None violent mass action is an option that could be considered to deal with the government’s template of indifference to the plight of the people .However non violent mass action is a not an end in itself but a means to an end since it is really meant to build pressure and apply leverage in a negotiation process .Poorly conceived mass action can result in more chaos as we have witnessed in Egypt and Libya were the revolution has become a cycle of violence ,anarchy and confusion .Secondly it must be understood that non violent action as articulated by Dr Martin Luther King and Mahatma Gandhi is a philosophy based on solid principles of transformation .Non violent action seeks to free both the oppressor and the oppressed .Thirdly non violent mass action should not be taken as the only viable action to bring change but as an action which supports and complements other actions such as advocacy ,negotiation ,mediation ,litigation and arbitration .
In the Zimbabwean context non violent mass action may have the following challenges :
1.The possibility of apathy and lack of popular support as evidenced in the failed stay away of 2008 .
2.Mass action can be hijacked by sinister political and or criminal elements .
3.This may play into the hands of military hawks who may declare a state of emergency ,suspend all rights ,dissolve the inclusive government and arrest leaders of opposition and civic leaders .At worst this may give opportunity for military hawks to take over under the guise of restoring order and the process could result in an effective end of civilian government .
4.Commercialization of activism which may result in people expecting or wanting to be paid for participating in mass action.
5.Contraction of the economy has resulted in the shrinking of the labour movement which traditionally has been at the forefront of positive direct action.
6.Informalization of the economy may result in people not wanting to participate in activities that affect their daily income .
7.Overdependence on donors and the international community .Civil society has come to believe that action is impossible without donor funding .Whilst resources are critical these should support what people are already doing on the ground .
In spite of all these challenges ,risks and obstacles non violent direct action is still a viable option because of the following reasons :
1.It applies pressure directly on government and service providers
2.Makes ordinary people part of the solution
3.Takes the initiative from the state apparatus .
4.There are over 200 non violent non violent methods to choose from.
5.Non violent mass action multiplies has a contagion effect and multiplies people’s courage
6.Politicians no longer take lobbying meetings seriously .
Timing is however critical in the execution of non violent action as wrong timing ,poor planning and fear can result in total abysmal failure .
Dumisani O. Nkomo is a political analyst and Chief Executive Officer of Habakkuk Trust .he writes here in his personal capacity .He can be contacted on dumisani.nkomo@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment