Why is Zimbabwe denying ‘rumours of an imminent coup’?

A COUP or no a coup?

That is the question presently doing the rounds among Zimbabweans following a bizarre Press conference in Harare on Wednesday at which the National Security Council issued a statement denying rumours of a military coup. The statement, entitled “concerning widespread rumours of an imminent coup d'etat in Zimbabwe”, said the government had noted “a recent upsurge in rumours suggesting an imminent military coup d'etat in the country”. The government said it wanted to “unequivocally debunk and dismiss these rumours with the comet they deserve”. The statement did not blame anyone in particular apart from a socalled “purveyors” of the rumours. .

The claims were perplexing because there was no evidence before the statement of the so-called “widespread rumours of an imminent coup”. Besides, the mere fact that the national security organ convened a Press conference to deny a mere rumour was rather odd. Even if there was a rumour of a coup, it wouldn't have been the first time that such a rumour had done the rounds in Zimbabwe. But the security agency had never felt compelled to publicly deny it, let alone convene a Press conference at the seat of government. Now, there wasn't even a “widespread rumour” but they still came out to deny it. It took many people by surprise and left tongues wagging.

When they deny, it’s probably true One theory is that the statement is an admission that there is or was a coup brewing. Observant Zimbabweans who are used to their government's ways say whenever it denies something, it's usually because it's true. This, they have learnt from experience. If they are denying something, it's because they want to cover up. Why, many have asked, would the national security agency come out to deny rumours of a coup, especially when the claim that the rumour is “widespread” is patently false?

Many Zimbabweans on social media attest to hearing of the rumour for the first time when Home Affairs minister Kazembe Kazembe read the statement and social media is natural habitat for purveyors of such rumours. They had no idea there was such a rumour. How did it escape them? Now, instead of believing their government, they are busy trying to find out what's really happening in the barracks.

According to this view, the statement betrays the government's fears of a coup. If so, the regime is describing the intelligence it has gathered as “rumours”. The government has reason to be scared of a coup. After all, it is the product of a coup and it knows that a coup begets a coup. The terrible performance of the regime, the increasingly fragile economic situation and the widespread levels of corruption have raised the levels of poverty and desperation and danger across the country. There has indeed been talk of a national transitional authority but this is hardly new. It's a concept that has been discussed since during the days of Robert Mugabe.

If there is no coup, the government is responding to real threats of one from disgruntled juniors. Perceptive observers warned after the coup that toppled Mugabe in November 2017 that the new regime would always be haunted by the ghost of the coup. The military elites may have enjoyed the spoils of that power heist, but juniors have seen their lives worsen just like the rest of the citizens. They have nothing to show for their efforts, while the political elites and their children have amassed great amounts of wealth through corruption. After the last coup, we warned that soldiers who had tasted power through a coup now had a precedent to grab power by the gun. If the regime is indeed facing a coup threat, it is having a dose of its own medicine.

The regime has over-relied on the apparatus of force to thwart citizens since it came into power. However, over-dependence on soldiers has a boomerang effect. By relying on the apparatus of violence to enforce his rule, the ruler creates a moral hazard because the soldiers become emboldened by their ability to use force as an acceptable way to take power. Therefore, while the use of force may be useful to the authoritarian ruler, it is also a threat to his rule because the soldiers can turn against him. The government may deny it, but the threat of a coup remains an ever-present danger. The present rulers set the dangerous precedent and they cannot be shocked if it comes back to bite them.

Deception

Another theory is that the denial of a rumour is part of a strategy of deception, creating a false scenario as a diversion or simply to forewarn perceived enemies. It is based on the thinking that if you fear something might happen, you create an imaginary scenario to pre-empt the actual events. If anyone was minded to plan a coup, they would think their plot is already known. According to this view, the regime is manufacturing rumours of a coup to deceive enemies. It's part of the performative aspects of power.

The strategy of deception is also useful as a diversion from the multiple crises that the regime is facing on the social and economic fronts. This view is that the Press statement is nothing but a sideshow generated by the regime to draw public attention from its failures. Suddenly everybody is discussing the coup. The issue of rampant corruption which has been exposed at the very heart of the government is sidelined. In this regard, the denial is also part of performative aspects of power — actors on the stage, creating sideshows and keeping the audience occupied.

 This article first appeared on www.bsr.com.

 Read full article on www.newsday.co.zw