IRIN Interview with opposition leader Morgan Tsvangarai

The following is an interview with Morgan Tsvangirai, the leader of Zimbabwe's main opposition party, the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC). The interview took place during Tsvangirai's visit to South Africa this week, in the run-up to key legislative elections in Zimbabwe in which President Robert Mugabe and his ruling ZANU-PF party face their sternest political challenge since independence in 1980. Q: What is the difference between MDC and ZANU-PF? A: First of all ZANU-PF has been in power for 20 years and has messed up the economy through what I would call centralisation of power, and has totally marginalised the whole society to the extent that there is no input from civil society. MDC is providing a transparent alternative, a participatory alternative, and a prioritisation of the economy as a way of pulling the country forward. Q: Is there a problem over what has been described as an imperial presidency and a de facto one party state in Zimbabwe. How do you build a democratic culture? A: Well, that's what you need to build. You build it through the participation of civil society. We have already built that culture in the trade union movement, in the student movement, the church movement, the human rights organisations. There is a base for a democratic culture in Zimbabwe. The only thing is that the environment that has been created by government is autocratic. Q: But presumably because Zimbabweans have voted for ZANU-PF and President Mugabe time and time again, they have enjoyed the kind of political leadership they've had in the past? A: Yes Q: Why have things changed now? A: Well I think that one lives beyond his welcome. The difficulties arise when there is no change ... While Mugabe would appeal to an older generation based on his liberation (war) credentials there's a young generation that is looking at job creation, economic opportunities, which he is not able to provide. Q: Have we reached a watershed in Zimbabwean politics, and is it based largely on the fact that the economy is in trouble? A: I think it's dependent on a number of factors. One is the overstaying in power, the staleness of ideas from ZANU-PF. A lack of vision for the future of the country, only a vision of the past - that preoccupation. And the demographic change among the electorate, that's very, very important in motivating people. Apart from the fact that there is economic failure. Q: How would you describe Zimbabwe today, it seems politically highly polarised, and there has been talk of anarchy. Is this hype or is there some truth in that? A: There is some truth in that, in so far as the outbreak of violence, and lack of police action on perpetrators of violence indicates that maybe there is a break down of law and order. And yet the general society goes about its business as if it is business as usual. Q: You talked today about cohabitation if the MDC wins a majority in parliament in the forthcoming legislative elections. But do you think that is possible given the level of bitterness, and especially if there is the possibility of impeachment as an opposition strategy if the opposition wins a two-thirds majority? A: Well we don't put that as the top strategy. The top strategy is a peaceful transition. It may include giving in on some of the stated policies to accommodate and to ensure that we have this smooth transition. But in the case of intransigence, obviously we may have to go for other (measures); bring forward presidential elections by amending the constitution, ensure that the right of the president to appoint 30 (parliamentary) seats is removed. Q: After 20 years of ZANU-PF rule we have allegedly seen the politicisation of the civil service, a politicisation of the military, don't you feel that if you come in, there would be significant problems to deal with in the transition? A: I think that goes without saying - Mugabe inherited a highly politicised civil service. So in all transitional mechanisms, one has to inherit that administrative mechanism that was there. But I think one hopes to appeal to the greater sentiment of national commitment. And always emphasise the professionalism of these institutions, ensuring that a change of government doesn't necessarily mean changing and adjusting and being vindictive to these national institutions. So you need institutional stability if the state is to be stable, to deliver on the most critical issues. Q: How important are the upcoming legislative elections? A: Very, very critical. They're the window of opportunity that Zimbabweans have to effect change and to look towards a new direction in the future. Q: Under the current constitution President Mugabe still retains significant presidential powers, and if you don't win a two-thirds majority, how then do you foresee Zimbabwe being governed? A: Even in circumstances where the MDC doesn't win an outright majority, you have a significant opposition presence to make government accountable to parliament, and not parliament accountable to the executive. So it's a big contribution. That step alone would actually ensure that you have a live parliament, that parliament is not reduced to a level where it is of no consequence, I think that is very, very healthy. Q: If you don't win an overall majority in parliament would you take that as a significant loss, given the momentum that has been built up around the MDC challenge? A: Well I think it would be a significant loss as you allow Mugabe to have certain powers that he shouldn't retain and it may inhibit your ability to effect change. Q: So you're looking for a two-thirds majority in parliament? A: Exactly Q: And the rural vote? A: That is not a problem. We've been out in the rural areas. I think the support for the MDC cuts across the urban and rural divide. Q: The question of experience within MDC. It's a very broad church, are you worried about that lack of political experience? A: I think that any government that comes out of transition as an alternative will always face the problem of inexperience. We have no experience in governing, but we have a wide collection of experience in our various fields. Q: The route out of Zimbabwe's problems are partly economic, but is it the same reliance on World Bank/IMF formulas, or is there a third way? A: Well the third way is - of course while the World Bank ADB and some of the multilateral institutions will be welcome - the real solutions to the country's problems are internal. It's internal as to what you define as the programme, how you follow up the programme, how you deliver it to the people. The country has got a resilient economy. Given the battering by ZANU-PF, it has still survived, so you need to capitalise on that and build from there. That initiative has to come from government, although of course part of that solution would be the IMF and World Bank. Q: On the issue of people being held accountable for past crimes, would you like to see that happen? A: Of course, why not. I mean past crimes, there are two types of crimes. One is human rights abuse and then there is corruption. We need to establish the individual level of culpability. We cannot just give a blanket amnesty. So you need to set up a truth and justice commission to investigate, do a national audit, establish the level of culpability, and then also ... amnesty can be considered for those who come forward and explain their involvement. Q: But you don't think that could jeopardise some kind of political deal that may be reached? A: Well, if there's going to be a political deal struck, that's very important because what you are ensuring is an admittance on the other part, of their culpability, and then the magnanimity on the part of us to engage in a national consensus to move forward. You don't want to be paranoid and obsessed with the past, because how far back can you go?