Zimbabwe State’ Capture – Fact or Fiction?

Mutumwa Mawere, 10/02/2021

Mark Heywood, editor of the DailyMaverick which published a report on the alleged state capture in Zimbabwe asserted as true and fact that this untested report ‘provides a post mortem of the cancer that killed the Zimbabwean dream of freedom and independence’.

To what extent is this report based on empirical evidence is a question that cannot easily be answered but it is clear that like sanctions, its impact on Zimbabwe public policy choices will always be a subject of disputes.

The mere fact that this report has been cited by the US Senate is problematic on its own as further international spotlight on Zimbabwe from external sources is unlikely to change the attitude of Zimbabwe’s public officer bearers especially when the facts supporting the conclusions of the report are speculative at best.

Against a backdrop of a divided nation, the risk of this report being regarded as a regime change project is high especially having regard that the South African government is not convinced that corruption is the driving force behind the Zimbabwean crisis

Is it not ironic that SADC and the AU have not recognized and accepted that state capture is a real problem as was the case in South Africa in relation to former President Zuma’s administration?

What if in Zimbabwe the approach to the state capture issue is that it is a ploy sponsored by white monopoly capture to take control of the state under the guise of restoration of the rule of law through partisan anti-corruption campaign?

It is unmistakable that there exists no shared understanding of what state capture is and is not in South Africa to allow this new morality to be exported to a country like Zimbabwe.

The identity and personality of cartels in Zimbabwe as is the case in South Africa has taken a partisan approach and this is not helpful where people are divided and polarized.

Has state capture been weaponized to achieve regime change?

It has been argued that a project to unconstitutionally unseat Zuma as President was couched as an anti-corruption enterprise but regrettably the frontiers of corruption have not been reduced in the post-Zuma era.

Does this report whose release has opened new wounds on the future of Zimbabwe and South Africa, truly and impartially expose the alleged destructive effects that elite cartels play in robbing the country’s future or it is yet another misguided project to build walls between citizens?

It is significant that Mnangagwa, who credits himself as an anti-corruption champion, is himself fingered in the report as being one of the bosses who run lucrative cartels in a wide range of commodities at the expense of the average Zimbabwean.

Does any rational mind think that in the quietness of his time, Mnangagwa considers himself as a villain in relation to the Zimbabwean economic and political quagmire? Obviously not.

On Tuesday, 9 February 2021, the report was raised by Republican US Senator Jim Risch, member of the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee retweeted a Daily Maverick tweet on the Zimbabwe report.

 “State capture and corruption in #Zimbabwe continue to be a concern of mine. A timely report released by @dailymaverick exposes the destructive effects that elite cartels play in robbing the country’s future. Our partners, the Zimbabwean people, deserve better. #DemLoot,” is very unhelpful to the Zimbabwean cause.” Risch tweeted.

It is also self-evident that the report comes at a time when there exists no domestic voice that is speaking to the reality of the facts contained in the report and it is significant that businessman Zunaid Moti’s former adviser, Mr. Peter Hain, a British Labour peer, also retweeted the report, saying: “Zimbabwe: Explosive cartel report uncovers the anatomy…@dailymaverick.”

What is remarkable is that people like former DA leader Mmusi Maimane, whose locus standi to poke his nose into Zimbabwean matters is controversial and questionable, tweeted as follows: “This exposé by the @dailymaverick is very important for every Africans to read.”

Mr. David Coltart, a Zimbabwean, joined the chorus by tweeting as follows: “If you are puzzled why such a wealthy country, with such intelligent, well educated people can be so poor, then read this report published today in @dailymaverick. It explains how and why a network of cartels is plundering #Zimbabawe.”

The mere fact that the report was authored in Zimbabwe and published in South Africa creates its own political dynamics.

This is true especially having regard to the reality of the real divisions in the ANC between two extreme narratives that speak to radical economic transformation as the panacea to lift the country out of its challenges and the alternative narrative that speaks to neo-liberal policies as the only promise.

If the authors of the report cannot speak on their feet to substantiate their serious allegations, what should be the probative value of this report?

“It would appear that the report has a defined audience and agenda,” said one analyst who is perplexed that this report is trending when the reality on the ground is dire.

Common sense, logic and reason would inform a rational view that corruption by nature is allergic to transparency and openness.

In the premises, where would authentic data be sourced from to substantiate the claims of graft and real smuggling operations?

Gossip that Mugabe was surrounded by a cabal of criminals informed the coup but since 2017, no cogent evidence has been produced to confirm this allegation.

No one has been successfully prosecuted and the so-called anti-corruption have yet to provide any evidence supporting or disputing the allegation that Mugabe was the fulcrum of corrupt activities.

Equally, the Zondo Commission has exposed the fact that corruption was democratically distributed and although the agenda to nail Zuma and humiliate him was the goal, the reality is scary.

Even the Zondo Commission is unlikely to impact on this vice and interestingly, accusations are already galore that it is a project to annihilate certain political actors who are deemed to be undesirable.

If Trump was African, he would not be one in concluding that when one is a populist, the risk of being removed based on trumped up charges is real and high.