Alex T. Magaisa

 

In the weeks leading up to the July 31 elections in 2013, unbeknown to most people, there were frantic efforts behind the scenes, to forge a grand coalition of opposition parties. Meetings went on for long hours, sometimes deep into the night as parties worked out a possible deal. I even recall drafting offer terms to our counterparts. In the end, however, there was little movement. It was disappointing, but some effort had been made.

 

When the elections arrived the only significant opposition leader to join with Morgan Tsvangirai and the MDC was Simba Makoni and MKD. Reketayi Sengwayo of Zanu Ndonga also came in, but there seemed to be some division in that camp, too. Dumiso Dabengwa and Prof Welshman Ncube went on to contest separately, representing their respective parties. The reality is there had been no real coalition of the opposition.

 

Everyone who cared for or sympathised with the opposition thought the best chance came from a coalition. This view was shared in the African diplomatic circuit. It was encouraged by all concerned stakeholders and partners, but regrettably, it did not work out.

 

We have previously said in these pages that the opposition’s best chance against Zanu PF is if they can form a Grand Coalition and, therefore, compete as a single unit. We also explained in two parts, the factors that lead to so many splits in the opposition parties. On this occasion, we want to analyse the factors that usually stand in the way of a coalition.

 

In so doing, I draw on my own observations of the process prior to July 31 and why it failed to produce a stronger and more broad-based coalition of opposition parties. If there is to be a coalition in future, those challenges would have to be overcome.

 

The Leadership Question

 

We start with what might be regarded as “turf issues”, the main question being who takes leadership of the Grand Coalition. Each of the opposition parties has a leader who has ambitions to be President. The primary question that they must all face if they are to form a coalition is who leads it. The obvious fact is that there have to be sacrifices by some leaders, giving up their ambition in favour of a single candidate and the greater good. In this regard, whoever is chosen has to have the capacity to pursue collaborative leadership.

 

The question of numbers is important – the leaders who have the most people behind them will command greater claims to leadership of the coalition. However, having the numbers is by no means the only factor and many other critical factors would have to be put into the mix. Each of the leading contenders will have something that they can bring to the table and therefore, everything is worthy of consideration in choosing who can best steer the coalition. From my observations, the question of who leads the coalition is always going to be a fundamental question that could either make or break the coalition.

 

Bad Blood & Lack of Trust

 

Splits in opposition often come at great cost to personal relations between erstwhile colleagues in political parties. There is serious acrimony and bad blood often develops between them. Usually, this stands in the way of coalition talks as some cannot even stand the sight of former colleagues, let alone negotiate. Getting them in one room is often a great feat in itself. The fact that they split from each other in the first place can be a huge handicap in reconciling them.

 

Prior to July 31, the relationship between the MDC-T and the MDC-N was an uneasy one as there was a perception that the leadership of the MDC-T had not treated the leadership of the MDC-N fairly during the tenure of the coalition government. There was a view that Mutambara’s faction had been favoured over Ncube’s faction especially in the meetings of the Principals’ of the GPA. Ncube’s group felt they had not received adequate protection and backing from their colleagues in the MDC-T. They felt this had allowed Mugabe and privilege Mutambara’s participation over that of Ncube. In addition, a group of MPs from the MDC-N had defected to the MDC-T, where they had been accepted and co-opted. Likewise, the acrimony arising from the split in 2005 had remained – it was apparent that some of the relationship challenges were very personal indeed. All these circumstances had caused mistrust to develop between the parties and stood in the way of talks.

 

The most recent split in the MDC-T, which saw the MDC Renewal Team breaking away has also been accompanied by much acrimony. Bad words have been exchanged between the parties. This bad blood has led to the expulsion of MPs who had moved to join the MDC Renewal Team and this will only have raised the levels of bitterness and animosity. This too, will stand in the way of a coalition.

 

In regard to a coalition with the Mujuru group, if it ever morphs into a fully-fledged political party, the same problems will arise as members of that camp are formerly of Zanu PF. They were part of a political machine that tormented the MDC leadership and its members. Some of them may not hold Tsvangirai in high regard, while on Tsvangirai’s side, they may find it difficult to drop their animosity towards former members of Zanu PF which they are not willing to forgive on account of their injuries and personal losses.

 

All parties would have to overcome this bad blood, and perhaps let bygones be bygones, if they are to succeed in forging a Grand Coalition.

 

Ideological Differences

 

Differences in ideology between the different political parties can be a serious impediment to forming a coalition. This can be an important factor where parties have well-defined ideological standpoints from which they are unwilling to depart or compromise in favour of the common good.

 

This might not be such a big issue where parties come from the same school of thought. The different MDC formations, for example, cannot be said to have fundamentally different ideological positions, which means this would not be such a big factor between them. Nevertheless, there may be important ideological differences between the MDCs and the Mujuru group, given its Zanu PF background, which they may be unwilling or unable to shed off. These are people who were born and bred in Zanu PF. They supported its ideological position and policies until they were unceremoniously sacked late last year. They might be out of Zanu PF in a formal sense, but their mind-set could still be stridently Zanu PF. These ideological differences might prove to be an impediment if parties cannot put them aside and pursue a pragmatic approach.

 

Internal Party Dynamics

 

The internal dynamics within political parties, in particular, the leadership ambitions and aspirations of internal actors in political parties can prove to be an important stumbling block to a coalition. Every political party has its internal structure and hierarchy. The top leaders are known and they like to protect their spaces. They have ambitions and would most probably have already mapped their way to the top. A coalition arrangement affects these plans and visions. It disturbs the status quo. They may have to give up their roles in favour of newcomers.

 

This can be problematic if there is a regional element to it, where leaders see themselves as leaders in particular regions and such leadership might be challenged by the entry of new actors through a coalition. If those coming into a coalition in senior positions had previously left the main party, giving them senior roles, is likely to be viewed unfavourably by those who stayed. It could be seen by them as a reward to “betrayers” and a snub to those who remained faithful.

 

It is very difficult to convince everyone in the MDC-T for example that those who left the party can come back especially if their return will displace those who stayed. People will often resist coalition talks that are likely to threaten their own positions. They will argue that the party can go it alone and does not need those who left. When leaders place personal interest ahead those of the greater whole, this can impede coalition talks. The great challenge is persuade internal actors in a big party like the MDC-T, that it is for the good of the party and the country at large to forge a coalition. In other words, the party must convince itself and its members first that a coalition is necessary, before it even begins to persuade external parties. The party may have to create greater incentives to internal actors to persuade them of the benefits of a Grand Coalition, even if in the immediate term it results in loss of their positions.

 

Baggage from the Past

 

The past always haunts political actors and this can also stand in the way of a coalition. Each leader has things from his or her past that can make it difficult for the others to accept them as credible coalition partners. It’s not unusual to hear MDC supporters say that they cannot trust Joice Mujuru and her crew from Zanu PF as they were part of a system that terrorised them in the past. There is animosity towards people like Didymus Mutasa, Webster Shamhu and others who showed hostility towards the MDC during their Zanu PF days. This reputation can prove too hard for many to accept that they can now work with them in the same group.

 

On the other hand, it’s not unusual to hear Mujuru supporters criticise the MDC ad its leaders over moral issues and leadership inconsistencies or generally that their ineptitude has caused failure to dislodge Zanu PF. Critics of the MDC leadership often say that they have failed in their primary task and should give way to others.  All this causes serious problems in trying to bring the parties together as there is essentially a lack of trust and confidence between the parties. In order to succeed, each of the parties would have to persuade their members to ignore the past and to focus on a future in which they pool their resources together with others.

 

Political arrogance

 

There are a lot of big egos in politics and egos often get in the way of political compromise, which is necessary in coalition talks. Few are prepared to yield to the other’s position. Those who think they are bigger than the others may not see the value of the smaller political actors. The smaller political actors feel that they are not given due respect and recognition. There can be an air of arrogance around those who think they are stronger, believing that they can go it alone and would not need the smaller actors.  In these circumstances, believing that their small voices matter, the smaller actors might dig in and refuse to be ‘swallowed’ by the bigger actors and will instead be happy enough to spoil the party for the bigger ones and demonstrate to them that even small actors do matter. Small issues like this can derail otherwise noble coalition talks. A little humility and an ability to see the bigger picture are important attributes for politicians seeking to build a coalition. There has to be an appreciation that no party is too small and that everyone matters.

 

An Honest Broker and Organisational Capacity

 

For coalition talks to be initiated, there is need for an honest broker, who is trusted and respected by at least the majority of the parties. There also has to be a coordinator/s to work with the broker in promoting and facilitating the negotiations. These people have to be honest, fair and professional. They cannot be seen favouring one party over the others. Secondly, there has to be great organisational capacity to carry the cost and burden of negotiating a coalition. This needs credible leaders who have the capacity to see the bigger picture and to accommodate the different political actors.  The lack of organisational capacity to coordinate coalition talks has been an impediment in the past.

 

However religious leaders have tried, in very difficult circumstances to broker peace and a coalition between the parties. They are the ones who took the challenge before July 31, although it was rather late in the day. In the end, their efforts failed to yield a result but this was by no means an indication of their lack of trying. They were honest and genuine but time was limited and the political actors were by that time busy on their own political campaigns. With greater organisational capacity and resources, they might have started earlier and perhaps, made some gainful yield.

 

Conclusion

 

In conclusion, it is clear that there are various impediments to opposition political coalitions, as discussed in this article. There are no doubt, a number of other factors which are not covered in this paper but it covers the main ones which I observed at play in the run-up to the July 31 elections. Everyone who cared knew and urged the opposition formations to unite and form a strong coalition against Zanu PF. The political leaders knew that too but somehow, the efforts to get them to unite yielded no result. Some of the explanations are covered in this piece. In the end however, it seems to me that the first moves towards a coalition must come from the bigger parties. It is they that must demonstrate that they value everyone else. It is they that must demonstrate leadership.

 

waMagaisa