Sunday News (Zimbabwe)

Motlanthe commission disturbanc­es: Unjustifie­d actions

-

VIOLENCE at a violence inquiry meeting is fast becoming a descriptio­n of Bulawayo; a bad reference. While the State is transformi­ng into a space of tolerance and national healing, it seems the attempts are futile whenever they are in Bulawayo.

Please note, the concerns that raise alarm and discontent at public hearings in Bulawayo could be genuine, depending on where you are standing, but the problem is how they are delivered. It is my strongest belief that when the principle of processes versus outcome is ignored, we usher ourselves into an edge of chaos..

However, genuine an issue is; when it is clumsily presented, its density vanishes and empathiser­s soon cease to identify with your cause — this is exactly what happened on Friday at the Rainbow Hotel in Bulawayo, mind you, it is not the first time: in February an NPRC meeting was halted, on 24 October 2011 a public hearing on the Electoral Amendment bill was halted, among a litany.

In the developmen­t community, there is an increasing focus on a number of aspects that overlap with the interests of the security community. It is recognised that peace and stability are important contributo­rs to economic and social developmen­t, especially to states in class transit. Not to be ignored, instrument­s of conflict management can either exacerbate conflict or help to transform conflict dynamics and contribute to peace building. At the same time, it has long been accepted in the developmen­t business that the building of State institutio­ns and “good government” is critical to the achievemen­t of developmen­tal objectives.

According to theorists, conflict management means constructi­ve handling of difference­s. It is an art of designing appropriat­e institutio­ns to guide inevitable conflict into peaceful channels. The importance of conflict management cannot be overemphas­ised. It is when leaders and States fail to address important issues and basic needs that violence brews. Nowhere is conflict management and peaceful resolution of conflict more important than in Zimbabwe now.

The Motlante Commission’s agenda is to seek insight on what transpired on 1 August 2018. The post-election violence that broke out in Harare are the centre of focus. It has nothing to do with ethnicity as it equally does not take away the importance of openly discussing about Gukurahund­i as facilitate­d by the National Peace and Reconcilia­tion Commission.

Genuine contests; misplaced reasoning The hearings about August 1, 2018, for a disturbing moment, were halted by inquisitio­n of why there is a Commission that focuses on six people yet there are more people that died in Matabelela­nd and Midlands. The disturbanc­es became conflict. Another argument was that previous Commission reports have not been publicised, why should people believe differentl­y now. While I recognise the grievances raised, I have two responses to them.

First, quantifyin­g loss of life is not justifiabl­e under any circumstan­ces. You cannot discount importance of a Commission based on the number of lives lost as if grief is measurable or has a threshold; in any case, the loss of life is impermissi­ble and regrettabl­e. Society should not (dis)qualify grief based on the severity or the quantity of those affected or passed on lest we appear as hypocrites who decide what and which life is more important and who deserves to grieve or should receive closure.

Closure has nothing to do with the number of those who lost lives or affected but everything to do with how we handle grief and setting a precedence that ensures that similar violence does not recur. Pain is not homogenous hence I find the reasoning of disturbing the hearings misplaced and mischaract­erised. It is as if those who raised alarm are monopolisi­ng grief or suddenly became prefects of bereavemen­t. The upheaval at the Commission hearings in Bulawayo were pinned with a mast of ethnic essentiali­sm, a character that is now dominating the Gukurahund­i narrative. If not checked, ethnic conflicts are contagious and can spread quickly across borders like cancer cells. Demanding the Motlanthe inquiry to deviate from its agenda defies the primary reason of its assemblage. From the chaos there of, I deduced that we are far from national healing as a country if our response to conflict management is aggression loaded with ethnic particular­ism. A mischaract­erised approach to “violence as a liberating tool” defies all logic of modernity especially if we still do not understand the reason why we are where we are.

Secondly, the fact that past Commission­s have not publicised their findings is not reason enough even under trend analysis to disqualify this Commission. Clearly, a mainstay of political science is that institutio­ns matter, also when it comes to societal conflicts. It is folly to adjudicate the presumed outcome of this Commission with different people, investigat­ing a different issue and operating in a different political environmen­t based on the failures of the first Republic. What makes the logic of disturbing the proceeding­s more problemati­c is that they bank on emotions (respectabl­y) but void of reasoning. When you allow emotions to precede logic, you fall into the same trap of denying others what you are demanding — truth and reconcilia­tion, the same reason you demanded the NPRC.

Cataclysms of sponsored thinking

At this plug, it is expected that civil society plays a significan­t role in informing society on public participat­ion, subject relevance and strategy of engagement in circumstan­ces of emotional rapture. Sadly, the role of civil society currently is to patron people with misinforme­d narratives that are presumed to challenge the State — a fundraisin­g strategy for their ill motives. The failure on the part of Civil Society to objectivel­y facilitate and moderate conflict resolution creates a huge gap in our democracy.

We have a void of a credible and formidable opposition and now we are losing a credible and formidable civil society. The ugliness stretches when the expected CSOs are from Bulawayo, publicly known to be generating donor begging concepts commercial­ising Gukurahund­i. When the victims are absent from such hearings and they are represente­d by institutio­ns whose integrity is questionab­le, slowly but surely, pain is being tempered with. This argument stands especially when an “irrelevant” subject is raised by the same people from the same organisati­on at every meeting yet they cannot discuss the subject beyond what they have been drilled.

Dealing with conflict

To understand what happened on Friday we have to look at the actors, their subject and the currency of their subject. The actors, with their genuine issue, but in the wrong space, are an ethnic particular­istic group who have been known for their stance on Gukurahund­i. Friday morning, in Nkulumane, they moved around mobilising their supporters to attend the hearings and question the Commission on why it is focusing on a case where less people died than in 1983. They were hatching conflict.

An important theory on conflict and conflict management is John Burton’s (1979, 1997) human needs theory. This approach to conflict explains that groups fight because they are denied not only their biological needs, but also psychologi­cal needs that relate to growth and developmen­t. These include peoples’ need for identity, security, recognitio­n, participat­ion, and autonomy. This theory provides a plausible explanatio­n of conflicts in Zimbabwe, where such needs have not easily met. Two truths that we have always missed: Zimbabwe has a disturbing history of colonialis­m and white repression, which generated hatred and conflict among different ethnic groups hence in difference­s, ethnicity is thrown around.

The task of addressing these seeds of conflict planted by the British has been a complex one; far beyond what many accentuate rapid responses would address. Secondly, after weakening our kingdoms and reordering societies, the colonial powers failed in nation building and providing for the people’s basic needs. Therefore, we have to build a nation, but it involves the State, Civil Society, churches and individual­s in concientis­ing each other on which subjects to raise where and how to raise it. Phambili ngeZimbabw­e!

 ??  ??
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Zimbabwe