Zimbabwe’s brand architecture after the downfall of Mugabe through the ‘soft’ coup of 15 November 2017 is hard to define.

The replacement of Robert Mugabe after the seizure by the military and his erstwhile Vice President Emmerson Mnangagwa, contributed to the weakening of an already fragile brand.

Enduring, albeit National Brands are naturally a representation of order strengthened by the consolidation of democratic ethos and values. This explains why the new president is struggling to take brand Zimbabwe on a new and acceptable trajectory.

Zimbabwe, post-Mugabe is facing an existential crisis of creating a brand promise and accompanying experience. This is because the leaders assumed office through force and power seizure rather than through constitutional means. The result of which is supposed to create a social contract, as both the promise by leadership and the ‘experience’ citizens and national stakeholders are supposed to enjoy.

If managed well, the impending 2018 general election is supposed to deal with this dilemma. However, it has become common knowledge that foreign powers like Britain and the European Union seem keen use the electoral process to launder the coup. This will only serve to delay the resolution of the brand crisis of legitimacy and credibility.

It is for the benefit of Brand Zimbabwe if the internal stakeholders engage extensively and build consensus on the electoral conditions that will lead to the plebiscite so that there won’t be any dispute on the outcome. Yet, the prevailing situation is that of an incumbent bent on pleasing outside forces rather than complementing internal stakeholders in building an enduring brand.
We need to examine three major national branding indicators in order assess where Brand Zimbabwe stands after Mugabe’s rule.

Defining the Big Idea

After Mugabe, the new regime seems to be struggling to define a ‘big idea’ that unites the people of Zimbabwe. This has seen the new leaders running around the globe, like proverbial headless chickens, riding on a rather hollow concept: ‘Zimbabwe is open for Business.’ This is a very weak idea, for lack of better phraseology.

It does not mean anything to internal stakeholders. It creates the impression that Zimbabwe is up for sale for pittance. The challenge for the new leadership that emerges from an democratic election which is not disputed would be to craft a big idea that would anchor Brand Zimbabwe. This big idea should become the shining light that will guide citizens in moving the country forward.

United States’ 44th president Barack Obama’s administration was anchored on inspiring its citizens on the promise that the USA could rebuild and reclaim its global leadership through the, “Yes We Can” and “Forward” campaigns. These big ideas served to motivate the citizens to buy into his vision to rebuild America after the debilitating global financial crisis on 2008.

Constant Messaging and Visual Style

Enduring brands are anchored on a constant set of positive messages. The new administration entered office on the promise of a ‘New Dawn! New Era’! This is an ambitiously bold statement which should be made when internal stakeholders are prepared to meet the brand promise.

With more than the definitive 100 days in office having elapsed, a new era is yet to see its dawn! The more things change the more they remain the same. This serves to expose the dysfunctional nature of the team in office. A team that is failing to meet the brand promise for lack of a big idea that will meet the citizens and stakeholders expectations.

Effective use of multiple media platforms

Zimbabwe has a very rich arts, culture, and sports heritage which lies largely untapped because of poor administration. We are home to the likes of World Karate champion Saiko Sensei Samson Muripo; heavyweight boxer, Charles Manyuchi, paralympian Elliot Mujaji; Olympic champion swimmer, Kirsty Coventry along with globally acclaimed musicians and artists who can be effective Brand Zimbabwe ambassadors.
This works if the brand is well managed and is free from the high reputational risk with which it is currently associated with Brand Zimbabwe. When the Big Idea is well defined, the messaging structured, then our media across all platforms can easily carry the message to a global audience.

In many of the instances, countries are focussed mainly on creating an ‘image’ rather than designing and offering a national brand experience. They end up failing to rally the citizens and external stakeholders around a single brand idea.

Countries must be alive to the following experiences that they should subject their citizens and stakeholders to:

Random experiences: Zimbabwe is in the category that delivers sporadic experiences. The citizens are never sure at any given time of what kind of experience to expect when they engage various departments and agencies. Surprisingly the country focuses on tasks and delivery of services, without considering the citizens’ perspective in measuring their impact.

Therefore, you find plenty of ‘very busy people’ but of little impact in delivering value. That’s why the president is all over the map telling whoever cares to listen that ‘we are open for business’, yet few believe him.
At one end the president is preaching free and fair elections, at the other, the military component in the ruling party commissariat are threatening to unleash violence. On one hand the country is pushing the dawn of a new era mantra, and yet on the other, it unleashes soldiers to kick out informal business from the CBD, tear gassing students peacefully petitioning the government to honor fundamental education rights at institutions of higher learning.

Differentiated experience: This is the ultimate approach towards delivering an exceptional citizen centric experience. The countries in this category are few.

Zimbabwe under Emmerson Mnangagwa is a brand without shape and form, mainly because of the means with which the administration usurped power, a military coup. This makes it difficult for it to build consensus through building a brand that appeals to the hearts and minds of a people.

Brand Zimbabwe is without a Big Idea, where citizens endure random experiences.

Tabani Moyo is the national director of the Media Institute of Southern Africa Zimbabwe, a chartered marketer, marketing, branding and reputation management consultant based in Harare. He writes in his personal capacity and can be contacted at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Lenox Mhlanga is a communication specialist and public relations consultant. He can be contacted at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

 

( The Source)

The five months since the fall of Robert Mugabe have been far from easy for his successor, Emmerson Mnangagwa. Zimbabwe’s new government has made all the right noises towards the West and China.

The West has made some noises back, but is waiting on a free election. Despite a show of warmth towards Mnangagwa, China wants assurances that its future investments will be safeguarded and balance of payments support used responsibly – in short, a marked reduction in corruption.

Internationally speaking, Zimbabwe has started to re-enter the fold. But at home, Mnangagwa has yet to make a convincing case that real change is underway.

So far, there is no sign of Zimbabwe’s long hoped-for economic transformation; the same number of people are unemployed as before. But the problems go beyond the economy. Mnangagwa has yet to apologise for (or even plainly acknowledge) the Gukurahundi – a series of terrible pogroms that were inflicted upon the Matabeleland provinces in the 1980s for which Mnangagwa himself has often been blamed.

Taken together, this all means Mnangagwa has yet to earn Zimbabweans’ confidence as he tries to move on from the Mugabe years. And his lieutenants in power aren’t helping.

Mnangagwa’s vice-president, General Constantino Chiwenga, makes a far-from-convincing civilian ruler. Faced with striking nurses who were dissatisfied with a government pay offer, he simply sacked them all – as if he were still in the army and under no obligation to negotiate, or to value key workers in a health system that cannot be allowed to deteriorate further.

Behind the scenes, but surfacing just enough to be annoying, is Jonathan Moyo, a proxy for Grace Mugabe, who tweets incessantly about the illegality of the coup that brought Mnangagwa to power. And Robert Mugabe himself, while essentially impotent, is audibly grumbling. Mnangagwa wisely ignores these irritating background noises – but he could certainly do without them.

Step by step

The one bright spot is the new foreign minister, Sibusiso Moyo. Another former army general, who in fact announced Mugabe’s ousting on television, he recently secured from the British foreign secretary the declaration that Zimbabwe could rejoin the Commonwealth provided its next elections were clean. This he did at the Commonwealth summit in London – perhaps Boris Johnson had carefully pulled together a Commonwealth consensus before agreeing, but the announcement nonetheless made Moyo seem like a statesman who could deliver results.

Instantly, the Harare gossip circuit started touting him as Mnangagwa’s likely successor. That would bypass the hamfisted Chiwenga, but it would still hand power over to a military man, cementing the impression of a full-on military takeover.

Still, none of this looks set to affect the elections mooted for this year. With the death of Morgan Tsvangirai, the greatly weakened opposition has little chance of making headway – at least unless ZANU-PF keeps making unforced errors such as firing nurses en masse.

So what if ZANU-PF doesn’t start getting it right? Will its flustered leaders try to rig the polls yet again? It wouldn’t be all that difficult – and will be highly tempting if the party wants to win big. If the riggers do their homework and massage the results rather than blatantly falsifying them, they might well get away with it. But then again, ZANU-PF isn’t known for its subtlety.

Should he oversee and win a genuinely clean election, Mnangagwa could yet secure new inflows of liquidity. If he does, his next job will be to rein in the country’s greedy oligarchs. Too many in Zimbabwe’s elite still think their mission in life is to accumulate capital rather than circulate it, to buy cars and mansions rather than build industries, employ people and create things. Many think they still haven’t quite stolen enough to fund their indecently ostentatious habits.

The new Zimbabwe has very unpleasant growing pains ahead of it. To get the foreign help he needs to clean all this up, Mnangagwa will have to make iron-clad reassurances to the West, to China, to the IMF. And the IMF will surely demand public sector job cuts. Perhaps the nurses will have to be sacrificed again.

 

Stephen Chan, Professor of World Politics, SOAS, University of London

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Zimbabwe will hold fresh elections at the end of July this year, a sign that, following decades of rule under autocratic leader Robert Mugabe, the southern African nation is on the path towards democracy.

But are the country’s young people ready to get involved in politics?

The signs elsewhere on the continent aren’t hopeful. Given Africa’s youth bulge, in which 39.5% of the continent’s population is aged between 18 and 45, it wouldn’t be unreasonable to expect the majority of voters would be young people. But this is not the case.

For the most part, young people are apathetic when it comes to elections. While they’re the most affected by democratic processes, they appear to be the least interested in them. For example in Nigeria’s 2011 polls, only 52.6% of young people voted while in South Africa’s 2014 national elections, apathy was the reason for a registration level of just 33% for 18 and 19 year olds.

This phenomenon isn’t unique to Africa. Across the world young voters are failing to turn up at the polls. Levels of youth participation are very low in the UK and Ireland and most of the southern European states like Italy, Greece and Portugal.

In my recent study, I set out to explore the level of youth participation (as candidates, voters and activists) in Zimbabwe’s elections and governance processes, what restricts their participation and what can be done to support them. I defined youth as people aged between 15 and 35.

My evidence showed that their participation is low, hampered by restrictive political parties and a lack of three things – interest, information and funds.

To change this, there needs to be an effort to create political, structural and physical spaces that allow for their meaningful participation. This could, for example, include allocating quotas to young people and prioritising youth empowerment. South Africa’s two main opposition parties have done this well – young people lead the Democratic Alliance as well as the Economic Freedom Fighters.

Research findings

A third of the young people I interviewed said that they hadn’t taken part in activities such as rallies, council meetings and meetings within communities. A quarter of them said they didn’t participate often while only a fifth said they did so extremely often.

Political parties were cited as the main reason (67%) that prevented meaningful youth participation. For example, only 17% believed that political parties were creating spaces and making an effort to level the playing field so that they could participate in elections.

This exclusion is driven by what the scholar and expert on young people, Barry Checkoway, calls ‘adultism’ – when adults take a position that they are better than young people and prescribe solutions for them. Young people are seen as potentially dangerous elements that should be kept away from key decision-making processes.

On top of this, poverty makes young people particularly vulnerable to being excluded. About 70% of young people in Zimbabwe are unemployed. And those that work experience extreme poverty, earning less than US$2 per capita per day. This renders them susceptible to exploitation and control – young people who are poor are ready to sell their rights, for food hand-outs and promises of jobs that never materialise.

But it’s not just about the adults. Young people are also to blame for low participation.

In the interviews they showed a lack of interest in a system they felt they couldn’t change. They share this apathy with many other Zimbabweans. The legitimacy of the country’s elections since independence has always been a thorny issue. The opposition has regularly raised accusations of vote-buying, electoral fraud, vote rigging, as well as the intimidation of voters by the ruling party - Zanu-PF. This has led many to question the legitimacy of the electoral process.

Other barriers to young people include a lack of financial resources, lack of capacity, lack of information and the absence of a culture of positive engagement. Most believed that young people were prepared to run for office in the 2018 elections. But nearly half indicated that young people needed more support, such as leadership training, in preparation for running for office.

Increasing participation

When asked what the top five solutions to improving the participation of young people were the answers included:

  • freedom to participate in politics and development without restrictions (71%),

  • provision of leadership training (54%),

  • youth awareness campaigns (42%),

  • pro-youth policies (40%), and

  • effective engagement in productive activities (38%).

Young people should be viewed as a vital source of information which justifies the need for adults to give them space and opportunities to engage meaningfully. This could be done through local campaigns, like the United Nations’ ‘Not Too Young to Run’ campaign. This promotes the right for young people to run for office, creates awareness and mobilises them.

Young people also need to be equipped to participate in politics. This includes getting support through leadership training and training in elections and governance processes. Finally, resources and support must be given to youth-led initiatives that are reaching out to young people.

 

Hillary Musarurwa, Postdoctoral Researcher, Durban University of Technology

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Retired army chief Constantino Chiwenga, who led a de facto coup last month that ended Robert Mugabe's 37-year rule, was installed as Zimbabwe's vice president in Harare on Thursday.

Chiwenga, who led the military in a de facto coup that brought Mnangagwa to power, is the latest in a string of military leaders to be elevated to government positions. President Mnangagwa, who did not give a speech at the swearing-in ceremony, ,told journalists that his deputies will have to drive the performance of the new ministers.

"They have to drive the ministers. The performance of ministers will be reflected by the supervision they give," said Mnangagwa.

Chiwenga also told journalists that: “What I can tell you is that there will be teamwork . We are going to work as a team and we will deliver.”

Mnangagwa, who is under pressure from opposition parties and the public to implement political and economic reforms, has ordered his new ministers to come up with 100-day ‘quick-win’ plans.

Hefty pension for Mugabe

On the Thursday, Mnangagwa granted Mugabe full diplomatic status and a staff of 23 as part of his pension.

In a government gazette, Mnangagwa said former presidents who have served at least one full term will have six security personnel, two each of drivers, aides, private secretaries and office attendants as well as a fully furnished office.

Mugabe has been living at his private home in the plush Borrowdale suburb even while he was president and his new pension entitles him to "payment of a lump sum which is equal or equivalent to the value of the private residence,” according to the gazette.

The former leader has a reputation for extensive international trips, but his pension allows him four trips outside the country travelling first class at public expense. He will also be provided with a diplomatic passport. He visited a hospital in Singapore for his first trip outside Zimbabwe since he was ousted from office, apparently for medical checks, two weeks ago.

 

- The Source

Zimbabwean President Emmerson Mnangagwa has revealed how he walked for more 30km to cross the border between Zimbabwe and Mozambique in an apparent escape from his assassination by former President Robert Mugabe's "hunting dogs", reports said.

Mnangagwa said this in Pretoria where he addressed Zimbabwean nationals, who fled economic decline and political turmoil in the southern African country.

"I came here to pay homage to my brother President Jacob Zuma. I spent a good 16 days as a 'Diasporan' here in South Africa after walking some 30km crossing the border into Mozambique. After I had been fired around 4 o'clock (on November 6), intelligence had made me aware of the next move intended to eliminate me," NewsDay quoted Mnangagwa as saying.

"Fortunately, I found a [business] card in my wallet which bore the name of a colleague here, (Justice) Maphosa, whom I phoned and he picked me. I came here and I was well-looked after."

Mnangagwa fled to South Africa after Mugabe dismissed him during factional fighting in Zimbabwe's ruling Zanu-PF party. The firing prompted a backlash against Mugabe and Mnangagwa returned to Zimbabwe, where he was sworn in as president.

Mnangagwa's finance minister Patrick Chinamasa said that the president had been stripped of his security "both physically and at his house" immediately after his sacking from government.

"This showed his security was not guaranteed, hence, he had to become a refugee here [South Africa]," said Chinamasa.

Mnangagwa also revealed that he had been in "clandestine" communication with President Jacob Zuma during his stay in South Africa, a New Zimbabwe.com report said."I had good communication with the leadership here, not openly, you understand," Mnangagwa was cited as saying.

 

Source: News24

Botswana President Ian Khama says Zimbabwe has potential and capacity to recover quickly following the fall of Robert Mugabe, its autocratic ruler for 37 years seen as an impediment to foreign investment.

Khama who has always been a vocal critic of former president Robert Mugabe told the BBC in an interview that the country could turn around in a short space of time if the incoming president Emmerson Mnangagwa demonstrated that the country is stable.

The 93-year old Mugabe quit on Tuesday, after the military took over the country and his party sacked him.

“Zimbabwe has got the potential of being an economic powerhouse and even though it took Mugabe 37 years to bring it down to chaos. It will not take that long to bring it back up again because there is so much potential the people are so innovative and hardworking,” said Khama.

“I am sure investors will be tripping over themselves to come back into that country and I think in a very short space of time if he can demonstrate to investors and to the people of Zimbabwe the confidence that they have achieved in that country there will be a turn around.”

 

- The Source

 

November 2017 will go down in the history of Zimbabwe as the beginning of the end of Robert Mugabe’s 37 year tyranny. A tumultuous week finally culminated in his resignation on November 21st. One cannot understate the widespread jubilation at the demise of Mugabe and his desire to create a dynasty for himself through his wife Grace.

But the optimism is misplaced because it doesn’t deal directly with the dearth of democracy in Zimbabwe.

First, contrary to popular sentiment that the coup was meant to usher in a new era of political liberalisation and democracy, the takeover is actually meant to deal with a succession crisis in Zanu-PF. The military made this clear when it said that it was dealing with criminals around Mugabe. And the party’s secretary for legal affairs Patrick Chinamasa indicated that removing Mugabe from the party’s Central Committee was an internal party matter.

Secondly, I would argue that the military resorted to a “smart coup” only after its preferred candidate to succeed Mugabe, Emmerson Mnangagwa, was fired from the party and government.

The way in which the military has gone about executing its plan upends any conventional understanding of what constitutes a coup d'etat. It’s a “smart coup” in the sense that the military combined the frustrations of a restive population, internal party structures and international sympathy to remove a sitting president. It thereby gained legitimacy for an otherwise partisan and unconstitutional political act – toppling an elected government.

This begs the question: Is the military now intervening for the collective good or for its own interests?

Why the military intervened

It is baffling to imagine how the military has suddenly become the champion of democracy and regime change in Zimbabwe.

It’s clear that what motivated the military commanders was a fear of losing their jobs and influence after their preferred successor was purged. They launched a preemptive strike against Mugabe to safeguard their own selfish interests as a military class and the future of their careers.

Given the symbiotic relationship between the Zimbabwean military and the ruling Zanu-PF party, it was inevitable that the top commanders would be embroiled in the party’s succession crisis. After all, the military has been the key lever behind the power of both Mugabe and his ruling Zanu-PF since 1980.

In the past they have acted as part of the Zanu-PF machinery, openly campaigning for Mugabe alongside other security agencies.

And they have played a key role in neutralising political opponents. Back in the 1980s the military was responsible for the massacre of thousands of civilians and Zapu supporters in Matebeleland. More than two decades later in 2008 they were responsible for the torture, death and disappearance of 200 opposition activists and the maiming of hundreds more.

In addition, the UN has implicated Mnangagwa and the generals in the illegal plundering of resources in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. They have also been fingered in the disappearance of diamond revenues from Zimbabwe’s Marange diamond fields.

On top of this the military and Zanu-PF share a special relationship that has its roots in the liberation struggle. The Zimbabwe African National Union (Zanu) was the political wing of the Zimbabwe African National Liberation Army (Zanla) during the liberation war. They therefore have vested interests in the survival of the party.

After independence, the relationship remained intact as the military became the guarantors of the revolution. Some of the same surviving commanders of Zanla are still senior high ranking officials. The commanders are also bona fide members of the ruling party and guarantors of Zanu-PF power.

The same securocrats are also members of the Zimbabwe National Liberation War Veterans Association. This quasi paramilitary group is an auxiliary association of the ruling party and has fiercely opposed Mugabe’s attempt to create a dynasty.

Military must step aside

Zimbabwe goes to the polls next July to choose a new president and parliament. The elections – if conducted in a credible way – will provide the next government with the legitimacy it needs to take the country out of its political and economic crises.

Now that Mugabe has resigned the hope is that the military will allow a genuinely democratic transition to take place. All political players, including opposition parties, would need to be incorporated into a broad-based transitional authority pending credible elections.

But for the elections to be credible, the transitional authority would need urgently to reform the electoral system. This would ensure Zimbabweans can freely and fairly choose their leaders. Without this, peace and prosperity will continue to elude Zimbabwe.

The ConversationIn the long run, the military would do well to get out of politics instead of continuing to view itself as “stockholders” in the country’s political affairs because of its liberation struggle credentials.

 

Enock C. Mudzamiri, DLitt et DPhil Student in Politics, University of South Africa

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

  1. Opinions and Analysis

Calender

« October 2018 »
Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31