The Herald
By Tichaona Zindoga
OVER a fortnight ago, the leader of South Africa's ruling African National Congress Youth League, Julius Malema, was in Zimbabwe for a solidarity visit to the sister revolutionary movement, Zanu-PF.
The visit by the firebrand leader, who has ruffled the feathers of right-wingers in South Africa and abroad, received mixed, if not obvious reactions.
One reaction was that of welcoming the strengthening of the traditional relations between the continent's oldest pan-African revolutionary movement with its Zanu-PF counterpart whose struggle against Western imperialism began about half a century ago.
Under the leadership of President Robert Mugabe, Zanu-PF has arguably become Africa's most ardent and exemplary anti-imperial force after it embarked on the historic land reform programme, which benefited about half a million families previously condemned to arid and inhospitable areas by Rhodesian settler regimes.
Zimbabwe played a significant role in South Africa in upstaging the racist colonial order by, among other things, housing South African liberation cadres.
The other reaction has been that of people who are not comfortable with not only Malema's radical stance against the continued marginalisation of black people in South Africa.
The fiery youth leader has been in the limelight for calling for the end of the marginalisation of black South Africa by singing the song "Kill the Boer" as a symbolism for the long overdue redress of imbalances which the 1994 "Independence" seemed to festoon.
Those who are not comfortable with Malema's South African stance have also not been lost to the significance of his Zimbabwe visit, which basically is but the axis that every capitalist and neo-colonial being would vehemently wish away.
The ANCYL leader's visit was aimed at exchanging notes and sharing experiences with Zimbabwe whose indigenisation and economic empowerment policies, including the just land reform programme, could prove crucial examples to a South African nation whose economy is saddled with apartheid inertia.
Estimates are that, for example, it could take 100 years for equitable land ownership making the situation decidedly anti-black, which successive administrations have failed to reverse since the official end of apartheid in 1994.
Opponents of popular historical justice in South Africa have been trying to silence Malema, including through the courts.
A High Court judge barred the singing of the inspirational anti-apartheid song, which move has been construed as trying to delete history and to muffle the movement for justice.
Another ploy to frustrate Malema's lead in the reclaiming of the humanity of people bogged by apartheid inertia has been trying to play Malema against President Zuma.
Some people have even maliciously touted Malema as the more powerful of the two, which trick of course is predicated on the hope that President Zuma reins in Malema and effectively kills the swelling movement for redress.
In Zimbabwe, some quarters are unhappy with the ANCYL's association with Zanu-PF.
Said one party: "Malema's pilgrimage and his chanting of Zanu-PF slogans represent gross interference in Zimbabwe's internal party politics to prop up the fortunes of the rejected Zanu-PF."
An official said Malema's visit was designed to "poison" the country's political climate and that the "people who invited him were not only malicious and mischievous."
The underlying basis for thinking that a revolutionary who comes to exchange notes and share experiences with others of a similar orientation is up to "poisoning" the country's climate comes in the very reason why a party that purports to have the people at heart could identify with the oppressor.
It is the desire of the said party to deny revolutionaries audience and company at the same time as oppressors have vast synergies that aim to flood out opponents.
In a word, Zanu-PF, in this case negatively labelled as "rejected", should not have friends, even among its traditional allies.
The "poison" is in its being befriended while one party and its external supporters resolutely pray that it becomes "rejected".
Malema stands accused of "gross interference in Zimbabwe's internal party politics to prop up the fortunes of the rejected Zanu-PF."
At face value, this appears a sound and impartial statement from puritans of fair, sovereign politics.
This view seems to be informed by the view that if the ANC under President Jacob Zuma is to be trusted, it must have no affiliations in Zimbabwe politics (this is despite the fact that the ties are undeniably deep, anyway).
The ANCYL is viewed as an extension of ANC, despite the fact that the later has no say in government policy. If one looks at the partners and friends of MDC-T and their activities in Zimbabwe, one realises the party cannot try and play the anti-interference puritan.
First, MDC-T's friends and partners in the West have worked round the clock to undermine, punish and isolate Zanu-PF via a raft of measures that criminalise and subvert the party and the people of Zimbabwe.
These friends and partners have continued to do the same in the inclusive Government era by maintaining their illegal economic sanctions.
Second, MDC-T's friends and partners provide financial and material support for the party and its acolytes in the media and civil society.
On the other hand, it is known that when the MDC-T calls for "international" supervision in local elections or even local dialogue, it is calling for its friends to interfere in Zimbabwe.
The same goes for the party's calls for the "opening of media space" in the country.
The party is simply calling for the regularisation of the flotilla of anti-Zanu-PF media, currently in the murky pirate domain, which are supported by the party's friends and partners in the West.
The party, of course, says this is democracy.
Knowing that democracy has been used as a cover for Western attempts to subvert Zanu-PF and its historic achievements on indigenisation, one understands that Western proffered "democracy" in Zimbabwe is but called interference.
MDC-T's discomfort with Malema is also understandable due to its links with South African white capital of Rhodesian stock.
First, the South African white capital is undeniably strong as the country is home to those many whites who could not embrace Independence in 1980, and the land reform in 2000, and have been supporting the MDC to have their unjust way round.
Second, the last vestige of colonialism, which MDC has been made to defend, is under threat from the dedication of none other than Malema, who as the leader of the powerful youth constituency could well become the country's leader one not-so-distant day.
Malema's axis with Zanu-PF can only expedite the coming of this day.
So MDC-T could cry "interference!" only as an effort to cut the axis and muffle revolutionaries.
On the other score of sovereign politics, nay, the party has thrived on it and cannot be trusted to oppose it.
No comments:
Post a Comment