Zimpapers Logo

Qhubani Moyo
Two important issues ignited my writing of this article. The first one was the provocative debate about Gukurahundi which was started by Nathaniel Manheru, a columnist in our sister paper The Herald who sought to nationalise the debate and that take it from those who felt they had sole ownership of the issue whose sustainable solutions can only be found on building national consensus and not sectional approaches.

Manheru in his usual talented wordsmith analysis hit a raw nerve and as was expected and obviously as was his intention he drew the ire of those who wanted the debate to remain within the small confines and in most cases for use in whipping political emotions than construction of permanent solutions that would be useful to the current and future generations. In putting the debate in the public fora the talented wordsmith has done what should have been done way before, allowing the huge national problem to be thrown into public discourse and thus debated by all who have a view and ultimately having it go to a position of exhaustion in terms of practical solutions.

In so doing, the debate will enable those tasked with national healing and reconciliation to have a defined point of entry of dealing with this dark phase of our national history. Allowing for sustained debate by both the victims and those viewed as perpetrators could be useful in that it can lead to a national consensus so that the generations to come will have a full knowhow of the kind of teething problems that the country went through.

This can serve well as an important lesson and reminder of what we should not do to each other and how important it is for us to cherish peace and unity through provision of equal opportunities for all as well as respect and reward all Zimbabweans regardless of tribe and thus take pride in the celebration of our diversity and different identities and the colourful reminder of the beauty and rainbow nature of what constitutes nation state Zimbabwe. The debate that Manheru raises is fundamental in that it pinpoints at the real elephant in the living room and thus seeks to find the practical ways of ensuring housekeeping is done to allow for a new beginning.

In opening the debate and allowing for extensive national discourse and taking it out of those who feel they own the process and are the only ones with solutions, Manheru is making a huge national statement that the time for building a solid future foundation is now as the country works on finding collective national positions to the issues that create a gulf amongst us.

Again in so opening up the debate which I am sure will be joined by all, it will assist us find localised solutions to the problems because the one-size-fits-all solution might not work in our context. The idea that we can just copy solutions from one country and they can just work here may not be sustainable.

National debate on the subject will be the only way of ensuring that we find the real and workable solution. However, it is not my intention to get into that Gukurahundi debate as yet, I do commit that I will sooner than later make my own contributions but for now let me be a beneficiary of the front runners in the debate at least until the emotional arguments are vented out.

But it was the second issue that also got me thinking of writing this piece, an issue that came out in both The Herald and the Chronicle on the challenges of the unification of the MDC Ncube-Holland/Biti formations which came out on Monday January 5, 2015 written by my good friend Ranga Mataire.

It is not my intention to get into a debate about that reunification as I have made my views known in my previous public engagements but it is the presentation of the challenges of leadership of the proposed political party that struck me as worth taking note of.
Quoting unknown sources the writer cited that one of the problems faced by the coalition process is the rift between Tendai Biti and Elton

Mangoma both who want to lead at all costs. He presents the second one as a much bigger challenge, the perceived liability status of Professor Welshman Ncube because of what he calls his “tribalistic” tendencies.

And for me the writer just crossed the red line because in there lies the very foundation of what bedevils us a people and the challenges that we face in addressing such challenges as the divisions that happened way back. While ordinarily I would not have responded had the article stated that Ncube’s problem could be viewed to be weak leadership or anything related to that it is the issue of tribalisation of Ncube’s leadership which creates a polarised and stigmatised as well as a dangerous environment for all of us.

Why the man should be judged as a tribalist without qualifications of his actions warranting that title boggles the mind just like how it finds so much prominence in a national newspaper.

The conclusion is simple that because you are Ncube and therefore a Ndebele and therefore a tribalist. It’s as basic as all that. But if you were to ask about those things that Ncube has done to get that label none will point that, it is used loosely by people to label him or any leader from Matabeleland as tribalistic and therefore not worth of national leadership.

While my intention is not to get into the merits of Ncube’s leadership capabilities, it is the usual easier retreat to the issue of tribalism that has caused some of the big problems for the country. It would just be ethical for the man to be judged on the basis of his actions and deeds not a blanket stereo type tribalistic painting of him on the basis of his ethnic origin.

This kind of behaviour should not be given space in the new order and future of Zimbabwe as it is the breeding ground for the divisions and disharmony that bedevil us today. In that regard and consistent with the desires to create a more coherent Zimbabwe there should be blanket condemnation of anyone who attempts to use the trivial card to denigrate others or to use it to their advantage.

In fact the country needs to criminalise any behaviour and actions that are aimed at promotion of tribalism. If in soccer they have criminalised and imposed heavy sanctions for racist behaviour, why should it be difficult for us to impose punitive measures against anyone who promotes tribalism.

It should be the responsibility of all Zimbabweans regardless of political affiliation to heavily condemn such utterances like speaking of Welshman Ncube as a man of tribal tendencies without indicating why. If someone thinks that he is indeed a tribalist then let it be mentioned with qualification that he has tribalistic tendencies because he has done this or behaved in a way consistent with tribalism. But to just label him a man of tribalistic tendencies without qualifications fuels hatred in the country.

You don’t have to love or hate him, you also don’t have to be his voter but you need to be a nationalist Zimbabwean who has love for the country and feels pain at denigration of some people simply on the basis of their tribe and what that does in creating disharmony. Why all other political leaders from Mashonaland should be judged on the strength of their political performance no matter how useless they are to the nation and Welshman Ncube or any other political leaders from Matabeleland be judged on the basis of tribe and not character or skills.

Hayi bo madoda! we can do better as a nation! In so saying i am not doing any public relations job for Professor Ncube, my brother Nhlanhla Dube does that job well, but all I am doing is to attack an evil national ill which has come to be seen as something normal when it is in fact destroying the very fabric and foundation of our nationhood.

Equally and in line with the discourse that has been raised by Manheru it makes no sense to continue imagining of the existence of a fictional state called Mthwakazi to which the Ndebele people should live alone in perceived prosperity. The problems affecting the region which are well documented and have been said over and over again cannot be solved by escapism of a demand for cessation.

In fact it is the compartmentalisation of other people like is done to Ncube which has led to discrimination of people of Shona origins in some parts of Matabeleland. In reality there should be embracing of our rainbow status and diversity as a nation because for instance how does one claim that someone born here in Bulawayo is not a person from Matabeleland just by virtue of having a long surname, it make no sense to treat some people in Bulawayo as foreigners because they are of Shona origin.

What some people seem to ignore is that there are some people here who are Zimbabwean and have Shona surname but were born here and no other home than Bulawayo and have had remarkable contributions to the development of this city and region. Even those who were not born here but have chosen to settle here should be applauded for their desire and interest of wanting to be part and parcel of the region’s future. There should be no discrimination for what so ever.

In fact continuation of labelling of some people with blanket accusation of tribalism without qualifications is retrogressive for the region and the country. Let all Zimbabweans be judged on the basis of their quality and capabilities and not their tribal stigmatisation.

The entrenchment of respect of each other on the basis of our capabilities could be a good starting point for creation of a conducive environment for opening of sustainable dialogue and discourse on how to