Baby steps to peace

THE memorandum of understanding signed by the protagonists in the Shakespearean tragedy that is today’s Zimbabwe is clearly a significant advance. For the first time in years of violent politically motivated conflict, there is cause for hope that meaningful negotiations can at last take place, and that democracy could ultimately triumph. However, only those with short memories will be celebrating the end of Robert Mugabe’s tyrannical rule and Zanu (PF)’s prolonged grip on power just yet. What has been happening in Harare over the past few days has laid the groundwork for substantive talks between parties that have a long history of distrust and confrontation. To use the parlance of SA’s negotiated settlement almost two decades ago, these were “talks about talks”. Agreeing on the basic rules to be followed when the real talks take place is unquestionably an important step in the right direction, but should not be elevated to something they are not. As SA’s own painful transition demonstrated, there’s many a slip twixt cup and lip and relationships of trust are not built overnight, especially when there is a history of false starts, leadership failure, bad faith, betrayal and outright duplicity emanating from both sides in the conflict. Overcoming these obstacles will demand a degree of goodwill and statesmanship that has not been evident, from Zanu (PF) in particular, for a long time. It would be naive to believe that Mugabe has somehow mellowed overnight, that the hawks that dominate Zanu (PF) have been converted to doves, or that the two factions of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) do not harbour at least some bitter souls who will be unable to resist the urge to either take revenge or take advantage. Although optimistically set down for two weeks starting in SA this week, the negotiation period will inevitably be difficult. Setbacks should be expected: you do not make peace with your friends, and some of the compromises that will be required to make the hoped-for settlement a lasting one are likely to prove a step too far for some. The past decade of gross misgovernance in Zimbabwe has allowed corruption to become a way of life, and there are individuals in influential positions who will not easily give up their privileges and ill-gotten gains. Let there be no doubt that Mugabe was a reluctant signatory to the memorandum, and that he did so only because he was under immense pressure. Notwithstanding his “victory” in the farcical presidential runoff poll, what little credibility he may have retained as a national leader evaporated, especially in Africa, due to the blatant manner in which Zanu (PF) mobilised every remaining state resource to rig the process. With the country’s economy and infrastructure in an advanced state of collapse, the threat of intensified international sanctions hanging over his head, African leaders distancing themselves from him and nobody but President Thabo Mbeki prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt any longer, Mugabe had little choice but to agree to a formal negotiation process. Critically, Mbeki was no longer the sole mediator by the time the agreement was signed, otherwise it is unlikely the MDC would have agreed to participate in Monday’s event. It is surely no coincidence that the breakthrough came shortly after representatives of the United Nations and African Union joined the mediation team, giving it a credibility that was evidently lacking before. IT COMES as some relief that the prolonged debate over the merits or otherwise of Mbeki’s “quiet diplomacy” approach has been rendered irrelevant. What matters now is that the mediators stick to their task during the critical few weeks ahead. There will be setbacks, and posturing from both sides will test everyone’s patience, but Mbeki in particular will have to be meticulously even-handed if he is to come out of this with his reputation enhanced. It is common cause that he has Mugabe’s respect, but the MDC has had good reason to doubt Mbeki’s impartiality over the years and will need to see a conscious effort on his part to show that he is willing to take a firm line with any signatory who does not respect the rules of the game, no matter the role they may have played in the liberation struggle. Perhaps most importantly, Mbeki will have to brush up on his communication skills, an area that has frequently let him down . The memorandum of understanding includes a secrecy clause, which is par for the course during the horse-trading stage of such negotiations when it comes to the substance of specific sessions but should not be taken to mean that a backroom deal can be concluded and foisted upon the world. After all they have gone though in recent years, ordinary Zimbabweans deserve to be kept in the loop every step of the way, including in the event of talks collapsing. This week’s agreement speaks of constitutional change, the restoration of the rule of law and measures to halt the decline of the Zimbabwean economy, but there is no specific reference to new, free and fair, elections. That is a potential flaw that needs to be corrected during the negotiations to avoid this process mirroring that of Kenya and establishing a precedent of unity governments being formed in Africa as an alternative to the will of the people expressed through the polls. Ending the violence and repression is obviously a priority, but this cannot be at the expense of basic democracy.