At the doorway to dystopia

ON THE evening of May 15,2015 in Bamako, President Mugabeoversaw the signing of a peace accord between the Mali an government and separatist Tuareg rebels.

President Mugabe was at the time the Chairman of the African Union, using his year at the helm of the continental bloc to passionately espouse a return to the founding principles of the organisation as captured in the life and works of the likes of Kwame Nkrumah and Julius Nyerere. Among those present at the signing ceremony, of course apart from Malian President Ibrahim Boubacar Keita, was President Alpha Condé of Guinea.

As President Mugabe wrapped up a 30-minute off-the-cuff delivery, which included a heartfelt promise to pray for peace in Mali, President Condé was among the dignitaries who roseto emphatically applaud Zimbabwe’ s leader. He walked up to President Mugabe and embraced him.

The world has never been told what words were exchanged as the two leaders dared to dream of a united, peaceful and prosperous Africa. And perhaps we will never know.

What we do know is that President Condé, like millions of Zimbabweans and Africans, holds President Mugabe in high esteem. We do not know of any official interactions between the two leaders between that May 2015 evening and the present. For all we know, they only cross paths at meetings of Heads of State and Government, as they did recently at the 28th Ordinary Assembly of the AUin Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

Even then, there has been no official record of a bilateral or direct engagement between the two. Which makes are mark passed by President Condé on January 31 quite telling.

President Condé had the day before been elected to Chair the AU over this year. As he closed the Summit on January 31, there was a single line in his speech that spoke volumes, if not only for the mere fact that the new AU Chair felt he had to deliver even if it seemed to be in passing.

He said, “We want to thank President Mugabe who is the source of our pride despite what the Western world thinks.”

Beyond being one of 54 African Heads of State and Government, or theirattendance, President Mug abe had no official in steering the agenda and programmes of the 28th Ordinary Assembly.

So why would President Condé feel it important to include him in such a way in his speech? What is it that compelled him to single out President Mug abe, and more so in such a bold manner?

After all, the story of the AU Summit

- or at least one of the major stories of this meeting - was the readmission of Morocco into the bloc.

Much has been said about the French influence in the Morocco-Saharawi matter. There have also been less audible voices speaking of Saudi money doing the noble work of erecting mosques for less than purely Islamic reasons.

Much clearer was the voice of President Mug abe calling for the continent’ s leaders to remember the principles on which the African Union - formerly the Organisation for African Unity - was built. It was ultimately to be a voice that found 13 other takers within the counsels of the African Union. Thirty-nine others went with Morocco. The outcome has naturally elicited competing interpretations.

One is that the forces of reaction have finally found a way of abusing democracy, manipulating the vote to make it a tool with which to overcome in convenient principle. Another is that we are witnessing a generation al shift, entering an era where the ideals and principles of Africa’s political and economic liberation do not resonate as loudly with a new African politician who feel sit is more important to look acceptable to Western power brokers.

This interpretation speaks of an era where the deco loni sat ion discourse must pave way for a new narrative of expediency, where leaders feel that organisations or polities are not steered by principles but by a need to deal with immediate challenges.

Those who hold by that assertion fear that the larger principles on which African politics have for long been organised will give way to expediency and immediate individual financial and political gratification.

They know that the utopia of their principles might never happen, but they rightly dread the dystopia threatened by the politics of individualistic gratification. It is perhaps this that President Condéw as referring to in his singular remark about President Mug abe and his importance to the ethos of being African. But this is not abroad, high-sounding matter only to be engaged inform eta physical or academic purposes.

It is an existential one back home, right herein Zimbabwe. As we prepare for 2018, do we not see these same competing interest s-principle versus individualistic gratification - taking centre stage?

Do we not see this existential battle playing out between Zanu-PF and the opposition, as expected, and indeed between contending viewpoints within Zanu-PF itself?

And are we prepared for the outcomes? On what shall our future lie: principles or expedient gratification?