NELSON Chamisa’s alleged “big-headedness” and refusal to
join the Political Actors Dialogue (Polad) has hampered much-needed national
dialogue to help resolve Zimbabwe’s myriad challenges, presidential
spokesperson George Charamba has said.
Speaking in an interview with the Daily News on Sunday this
week, Charamba also insisted that President Emmerson Mnangagwa would not hold
private talks with Chamisa outside Polad — as “this would amount to privileging
him” above other opposition players.
This comes as the country’s political and economic crises
are deepening, amid growing local and international calls for inclusive
national dialogue to lift Zimbabwe out of its quagmire.
“The essence of dialogue is not about re-visiting the 2018
election results, it is to move forward in a co-operative environment — seeking
to solve the country’s economic challenges.
“So, really, you
cannot revoke the 2018 results because if we were to use that logic, then the
president has no reason to invite him.
“If the Constitution says with 50 percent plus one vote you
govern and the opposition opposes, this means that the measure of the
interaction with them (the opposition) is extra-constitutional and its basis
cannot be founded on the results of the elections,” Charamba told the Daily
News on Sunday.
“It just doesn’t make sense. What we are refusing is this
big-headedness on the part of Chamisa, to say I’m the second biggest brother
after the president, and to also bring to the table his squabbles with his
peers in the MDC,” he added.
This comes after Zanu PF stalwart and politburo member,
Tshinga Dube, recently re-ignited the inclusive dialogue issue, telling the
Daily News on Sunday last month that a government of national unity (GNU) was
the panacea to the country’s political and economic crises.
In the same vein, South Africa’s International Relations
minister, Naledi Pandor, revealed last week that her country was making all
efforts to persuade the country’s political protagonists to find each other —
adding that Zimbabwe’s solution to its crises required its leaders to engage
each other.
But Charamba insisted that in the case of Chamisa, his
biggest stumbling block that was hindering him from participating in Polad was
that he did not want to share the stage with the MDC’s interim leader,
Thokozani Khupe.
Khupe is part of Polad, a platform for political parties
which fielded presidential candidates in the 2018 harmonised elections to
contribute to social, economic and political progress in the country. It was
launched in May last year.
Chamisa has refused outright to be part of the platform,
arguing that it is there to further Mnangagwa’s political interests — whose
leadership of the country he also disputes.
“The biggest stumbling block in Chamisa’s participation in
Polad is not Polad. It is the fact of sharing the seat with Thokozani Khupe.
That’s what he can’t countenance.
“He doesn’t want Khupe to appear (on the same stage) at
all. He has no difficulty working with the likes of Welshman Ncube who got far
less votes compared to him or Tendai Biti.
“But he has a problem with sitting in the context of Polad
with Khupe, whom he acknowledges got the most votes after him. What is the
logic here?” Charamba further told the Daily News on Sunday.
He added that Chamisa was hoping that his interaction with
Mnangagwa would be an “extra string in his bow, so that he shoots better at
competition within his own party”.
“That can’t be our basis for dialogue. We have no reason
absolutely to oblige him on such a motive. That’s not our purpose.
“We want to unite Zimbabweans across the political divide
and tackle welfare issues, not so that we help a besieged politician to settle
squabbles in his political party.
“Zanu PF doesn’t bring its personal issues to Polad,”
Charamba said. He also dismissed
claims that Mnangagwa and Zanu PF were behind the ugly factionalism bedevilling
the MDC — which has spilled into the courts.
“First of all, people must not pretend like they don’t know
the rules of litigation. Zanu PF is not a litigant (in the MDC’s wars).
“So, how then does it become party to a legal dispute that
it has no stake in? The whole idea is that pitting Chamisa against Khupe
doesn’t resonate with the donor community.
“You need to have ED as an opponent for you to become a
sympathy figure and for you to be worth investing in because the world out
there will not be appeased by anything short of ousting Zanu PF,” Charamba
further told the Daily News on Sunday.
“So, if you oust Khupe it has no political value to the
donors. You have to be seen fighting Zanu PF which is the arch-enemy of the
Western countries.
“So, what better way to gain that sympathy than to drag in
a non-party to a legal process who happens to be the enemy of your donors.
“They took each other to court on their own,” Charamba
added.
He also said MDC
leaders had brought misfortunes upon themselves when they decided to take their
battles to the courts, instead of resolving their differences internally.
Therefore, Charamba added, they could not blame Zanu PF
which had managed to deal with its own internal challenges on its own.
“They (Chamisa and his allies) appealed and brought
misfortunes to themselves. When they lose they blame others for their loss.
“The fact that judges dealing with their cases are arriving
at different positions is a vindication of the autonomy of the judiciary
system, because a judge is allowed to treat a case individually and interpret
the law.
“So, really, the long and short of it is that there is
never going to be a separate platform to accommodate Chamisa,” Charamba said.
“If he feels nationalistic enough to want to participate in
national processes, the Polad door stands ajar for him to walk in.
“Thankfully, he is so slim and the door is so wide that he
doesn’t have to squeeze in. He can walk in freely.
“Also, as he walks in by the door step, could he leave his
party’s problems so that he comes on to the table with a mind which predisposes
him to focus on solving national issues,” Charamba further told the Daily News
on Sunday. Daily News
0 comments:
Post a Comment