With Violet Gonda SW Radio Africa

VIOLET: Welcome to you Mr Coltart.

COLTART: Good evening Violet, it’s nice to be with you.

VIOLET: Thank you. Now let’s start with your efforts to try and broker peace between the two factions of the MDC, where are you with this?

COLTART: Since the split started on the 12th of October I have tried to refrain from making public statements regarding either faction and I have been speaking to leaders from either side.
In October and November I had one-on-one meetings with Morgan Tsvangirai, Gibson Sibanda, Gift Chimanikire, people like Job Sikhala and many others in an effort to try and lower the amount of rhetoric. As you recall in October and November there were a lot of very harsh statements made by people on both sides against the other and I was at that stage trying to encourage them to tone down the rhetoric so that we didn’t antagonise things any more.
I had a couple of key meetings with Tsvangirai in particular regarding what I believed to be the central issue mainly violence, and I put forward a variety of proposals to him in the course of November, December and January. But by the end of January it became very apparent to me that the chances of reconciliation were minimal and I realised that as both factions moved towards their respective congresses in late February and early March their positions were becoming rigid and that the chances of reconciliation were almost non-existent and so at the end of February, on the 20th of February, I wrote a long letter to Morgan Tsvangirai in his capacity as President of the MDC, that is the former united MDC, and a virtually identical letter to Gibson Sibanda in his capacity as vice president of the former united MDC.

That letter, contrary to what the Herald put out, did not actually put forward suggestions as to how these disputes should be resolved, all I did was in that letter was set out what I believed the issues in contention were and the process that in my view should be used to resolve those issues. Both letters were hand delivered to Morgan Tsvangirai and Gibson Sibanda on the 22nd of February and the letter concluded by saying that I was just human, I have obviously have my personal views about the reasons for this very sad dispute and that I wouldn’t be human if I didn’t have views but I was at least trying to act as mediator. And I stress that I wanted to act as mediator not as arbitrator, let me explain the difference for you and our listeners this evening.

VIOLET: Mmm.

COLTART: An arbitrator is someone who is given the power to decide on a dispute. He listens to both sides in a dispute and then he makes a ruling. I never desired that role for myself. I wanted to play the role of mediator, to try and get both sides to recognise the issues that were in dispute and to try and mediate an agreement so that both sides could continue to function independent of each other but in a way that would complement each other, in a way that would ensure that the struggle which we are all keen to engage in, mainly the struggle to bring democracy in Zimbabwe was not tampered with or hindered in any way.
And I also in the same letter said that I didn’t think that I was the only person who should be involved in this process. I’m not, I hope, that arrogant and I don’t have a monopoly of wisdom but I was offering myself as an individual and I suggested that other people like Beatrice Mtetwa, Washington Sansole could be drawn in as neutral people to try and resolve what is a very bitter dispute. The congresses came and went with the two national executives elected and in late March — I can’t recall the exact date — the Mutambara faction did reply saying that they had considered my letter and suggestions and were happy to have me play that role and were looking forward to hearing from me further. I had not heard from the Tsvangirai faction at all.

When parliament resumed at the end of March I spoke to a variety of colleagues in the Tsvangirai faction including Nelson Chamisa, Thoko Khupe and a few others and said that I had not received a reply and asked for a reply. Nelson Chamisa in a comment contained in the (Zimbabwe) Independent said that there was no need for an amicable divorce because there hadn’t been any split, that the MDC was united and that just a few people had broken away and I pressed a variety of people to state whether that the official policy. I then got a response from William Bango, Mr Tsvangirai’s spokesman, saying that this was still being discussed and that I should wait.

VIOLET: Now Mr Coltart do you not think that with the large turnout for the Tsvangirai rallies and the recent defections that the Tsvangirai camp has grown in confidence and they may feel that they don’t need to negotiate at this stage.

COLTART: Well I think that may influence their position on this but I think if that is their feeling it is unfortunate for a variety of reasons. Firstly one cannot dispute the fact that, irrespective of what has happened in the last six months, some highly significant leaders in the MDC have split away. You can’t ignore that Welshman Ncube was the secretary general of the MDC, Paul Themba Nyathi was the spokesman; people like Priscilla Misihairabwi Mushonga were very effective MPs and it’s wishful thinking just to think that those people are irrelevant. It is also wishful thinking in my view to think that this matter can be resolved in any other way other than through one of two means — either mediation or the courts.

Even if the Mutambara faction contained completely irrelevant people who played no role in the MDC, they still have the right to take these issues to court and if these issues go to court then I have no doubt that we are going to hand to Zanu PF the right to do two things:

Firstly to determine how long this dispute will go on for, and secondly, ultimately it will hand Zanu PF the right to determine which faction they want to deal with and which faction should get the assets. The courts in Zimbabwe have been subverted and I don’t believe that it is in anybody’s interests for this dispute to be resolved by the courts. And regarding the numbers, the respective numbers, they are indisputable. It is very clear that the Tsvangirai faction is attracting a great number more people than the Mutambara faction. But that doesn’t help them in court and so I tried to convey this to them that it is in their interests to try to resolve this matter amicably because there are in fact some pretty formidable brains on the other side, that’s not to say the Tsvangirai side doesn’t have formidable brains on its side as well, but the fact is that it is not in the interests of either faction, it’s not in the interests of the public for this unseemly dispute to be perpetuated through the courts because that is the only avenue left now if these mediation efforts are spurned.

VIOLET: But then there are others who say that, and you have also agreed that the Tsvangirai camp seems to be having more supporters, grassroots supporters, and you know observers have said the Mutambara faction is literally falling apart. Now first of all do you agree with this and do you think that since the other party seems to be shrinking, does it deserve the assets?

COLTART: I think there is no doubt that any rational, objective observer who goes to the rallies of the two factions has to agree that the Tsvangirai faction had a lot more people at their congress, something like five times the number of people who attended the Mutambara faction congress and likewise at public rallies they are attracting more people. But that is not the end of the matter. Let me say this that politics is all about marketing, it’s a bit like selling Coke. The Tsvangirai faction has the advantage at this stage that the name MDC is very closely linked to Morgan Tsvangirai and it has been deliberately marketed in that way in the last six years. It had to be the case in the 2002 Presidential elections, it was vitally important that this party be marketed very closely to the person of Morgan Tsvangirai. In the short term, it is inevitable that wherever Morgan Tsvangirai is, people will naturally link his presence with the name MDC and because of the marketing of six years and because this brand has been developed over six years it is inevitable that irrespective of the policies, irrespective of the people around Morgan Tsvangirai that the vast majority of people are going to follow that brand.
And so the Mutambara faction has a huge mountain to climb because it is going to find it very difficult to associate itself with that brand, because it doesn’t have a key element of that brand, namely the name and the person of Morgan Tsvangirai.
But that doesn’t mean the end of this game for the Mutambara faction. The Mutambara faction has assets on its part, some of the real talent in the former MDC, and there is no doubting that it has some formidable people, some people who in the past have established very close ties with their respective constituencies and that can’t be discounted.

VIOLET: So do you believe that they should demand a lion’s share of the party assets?

COLTART: No. I am not saying that at all as my letter sets out very clearly, I did not say who should get the lion’s share of anything. I have never said that and I won’t not say that now, all I am saying is that if people are democrats they will respect the right of other people to exist and these people, like Welshman Ncube and many other supporters, have enjoyed the support of several thousand people at rallies they’ve held, that simply can’t be discounted. I don’t think we can simply say that because one faction had 3 or 4 000 people at a public meeting, the other faction only had 2 000 and therefore that faction which had 2 000 should go away with nothing at all.

It’s a bit like using the example of a divorce; you have a husband and a wife who have been married for six years or 10 years. I as a divorce lawyer often get wives or husbands who come in to say the other side has committed adultery and therefore they should get nothing at all.
That’s not how the world works, even where one party is to blame, people who have contributed to a struggle over a long period of time, contributed to a marriage, are entitled to come away with something. These folk in the Mutambara faction simply cannot be wished away, they are there, they have contributed to the struggle.

Some of them have suffered greatly. For example some of the have been abducted – someone like Abednigo Bhebhe, MP for Nkayi, has been abducted twice, he has been severely tortured. Do we say that someone like that should just be written off? Absolutely not, and the same applies to people in the Tsvangirai faction and that’s why I believe so strongly that there needs to be mediation. No-one is suggesting that anyone should have the lion’s share; all that’s being suggested is that we need to sit down as sane, rational sober adults and avoid the unseemly sight of these former comrades battling it out in court. And let me tell you, no-one is going to win in court in the minds of the people, the people are not interested in these battles, the people want both factions to concentrate on the real enemy, namely this regime which has been responsible for the destruction of the Zimbabwean economy, the destruction of human rights and dignity of the people.

VIOLET: Speaking about the people, you have been studying the two factions, now if we were to ask about your views about the Mutambara faction how long do you think it will take this group to find the necessary support and has Zimbabwe got that kind of time to wait?

COLTART: Well I don’t think Zimbabwe has got the amount of time needed to establish a new party, certainly given the collapse of the economy. But let me say this, that the Mutambara faction believes in certain principles, that they have more of a long term view of the struggle. And let me say this, that I think that everyone, every patriotic Zimbabwean in his or her right mind hopes that this timetable that Morgan Tsvangirai has set out will be achieved. He has spoken about a winter of discontent, that by the end of this winter the Mugabe regime would have been forced to come to the negotiation table. I think if you ask anyone in the Mutambara faction they would say they hope that is achieved; any patriotic Zimbabwean should hope that.
But on the other side, they would say this is not the first time that such an ambitious goal has been set. The tragedy of Zimbabwe is that statements have been made in the past – that Mugabe will be gone by Christmas and other statements like that, and it hasn’t happened. And I think that there are some in the Mutambara faction, if I understand them correctly, who say ‘we are committed to non-violence, we are committed to democracy, to respect for the rule of law and we recognise that we may have to be the opposition’. It may not just be opposition to the Mugabe regime, but they may end up being in opposition to the Tsvangirai faction of the MDC if it comes to power. But they nevertheless have the right to hold that view. One of the things that has deeply concerned me in this dispute is the extreme intolerance shown by many Zimbabweans about the right of the Mutambara faction to believe in what they believe. They have that right and all democratic people should respect that right.

Keywords:

Zimbabwe Independent
Muckraker

Finally, we were rather amused by a story in the Sunday Mail’s business section. It proclaimed that Zimbabwe was back in ARSO and had even attended an ARSO meeting in Cairo last month. The meeting was hosted by Egyptian ARSOs.

In case you are wondering, ARSO stands for the African Organisation for Standardisation, according to the Sunday Mail. The acronym would more likely suggest the African Regional Standards Organisation. Whatever the case, it is rather unfortunate that this august body did not contemplate the consequences when it devised its appellation.

Meanwhile, David Coltart may have been alarmed on Tuesday to hear ZTV referring to “Cde Coltart Chimurenga”. !!!!

Zimbabwe Independent
– Clemence Manyukwe

MDC MP David Coltart, who is trying to play arbiter in the party’s feud, has given anti-senate president Morgan Tsvangirai a deadline to respond to his proposals to negotiate the party’s formal split. The rival faction led by Arthur Mutambara has given the nod to Coltart to work out a deal.

In letters written on February 20 to Tsvangirai and pro-senate vice-president Gibson Sibanda, Coltart proposed a five-point plan for possible negotiations for reunification or an amicable divorce of the feuding parties.

In his latest letter dated April 8 addressed to Tsvangirai, the former MDC secretary for legal affairs who has tried to remain neutral, said if Tsvangirai fails to respond in the next few days, he would assume that the faction does not want to take up his offer.
“I believe that every day this dispute is allowed to fester the chances of reaching an amicable settlement are lessened. In the circumstances I would be grateful to hear from you within the next few days. If I have not heard from you by then I shall assume that you do not want to take up my offer,” said Coltart.

He added that Mutambara’s faction had responded positively on March 28 to his proposals.

“It is now over six weeks since I wrote to you. I believe that the current dispute needs to be urgently resolved so that both entities can get on with the job of confronting the serious problems facing Zimbabwe,” he said.

He said he had noted the press statement by the Tsvangirai faction spokesman Nelson Chamisa, published in the Zimbabwe Independent on March 24, dismissing the offer.
“However, on the 3rd April Eddie Cross forwarded me a note sent to him by William Bango which states that “the matter is still under consideration” and that “I was advised to wait”, said Coltart.

In his statement Chamisa said: “We are aware of Coltart’s plans but we do not know what he is talking about when he talks of reconciliation and amicable divorce of the two parties. The MDC is united. We only have party officials who left to form another party and we will not discuss that.”

In an interview yesterday, Tsvangirai’s spokesperson Bango said the opposition leader was not aware of Coltart’s letter. He referred all questions regarding the talks to the faction’s spokesperson Chamisa arguing that the issue was not personal but party business.

However, Coltart who last week said chances of reunification were now minimal, yesterday said the letter had been handed to Tsvangirai on Sunday.

Zimbabwe Standard
Letter to the Editor

I AM disturbed by the antics of Arthur Mutambara. In the few weeks he has been in mainstream politics, Mutambara has already messed up big time.

This is surprising coming from someone who is very educated. Maybe this is proof that true leadership is not based on intellectual prowess but on good character. A good leader must be consistent, honest, humble and respectful. Indeed it is these traits that have made people like Mother Theresa and Nelson Mandela icons.

Unfortunately, Mutambara has patently exhibited lack of these qualities since he was appointed leader of the MDC pro-Senate faction. He has positioned himself as a unifier of the two MDC factions. I expect this role to be carried out by neutrals such as church organizations, Crisis Coalition of Zimbabwe and the National Constitutional Assembly.

Mutambara is far from being an honest broker, for he harbours an intention to become President of a united MDC. Therefore, to him the pro-Senate faction is a mere stepping-stone to the fulfillment of his dream. Viewed this way, his association with Welshman Ncube and others is not sincere. It is actually opportunistic.

The clean man here is David Coltart, who has chosen to remain non-aligned so that both camps can hear him. In his acceptance speech, Mutambara publicly distanced himself from his benefactors. It is on record that the faction he now leads has been lampooning and vilifying Morgan Tsvangirai since the 12 October fallout.

Now, for him to describe Tsvangirai as his hero and, furthermore, to declare his anti-Senate stance on a pro-Senate stage is as good as biting the hand that feeds him. I would have expected Mutambara to privately convince his colleagues of his position so that they speak with one voice.

At the Bulawayo congress there was no such unison taking into consideration Gibson Sibanda’s vitriol against Tsvangirai. If Mutambara had consulted his colleagues first, he would have demonstrated the sincerity of his claim that had he been a member of the then MDC National Council, he would have tried hard to convince fellow members of the weight of his position and, on failing to do so, he would have stuck with the majority decision at the expense of his own opinion.

It therefore appears that Mutambara conveniently uttered that statement in order to project himself as more democratic than Tsvangirai.

Mutambara calls himself “untainted” and hence suitable to take over the reins of opposition power. This is a “holier-than-thou” attitude. It smacks of total disrespect for those who went ahead of him in fighting against the oppressive system in Zimbabwe.

I find Mutambara’s anti-imperialism rhetoric nauseating, especially coming from someone with such international exposure. His stance is anachronistic at a time of globalisation and international partnerships such as Nepad. I quote Dr Simba Makoni: “The world does not need Zimbabwe. It is Zimbabwe who needs the world.”

Once again, it is obvious that Mutambara’s obsession with imperialism is personal and hence not representative of his constituency. So much for his democratic credentials! The pro-Senate faction should rein in its President now to avoid further embarrassment.

I have also read that Mutambara was recently on the rampage, vowing to “destroy” Tsvangirai. This is the height of inconsistency further entrenching the view that the man is arrogant and power-hungry. Why spew venom against your own “hero”?

We have had enough of people like President Robert Mugabe and Professor Jonathan Moyo who use their intelligence for self-aggrandisement. History must not keep on repeating itself. Taneta!

Max Makoni
Harare