From the late 1990s, Zimbabwe’s
economic policies became dominated by radical nationalist politics, that
purported to smash the residues of colonial property relations that dominated
its body politic. Zimbabwe implemented a very radical Fast Track Land Reform and
nationalist economic indigenisation programme that excited many in the Global
South and unsettled the citadels of capital in Washington, Paris, Berlin and
London. This happened, at a time when the world was becoming flat and at the
ascendancy of neo-liberalism. The
question, that has always begged: how sustainable is the path? It seems almost
in the 17th year after Zimbabwe purportedly asserted its sovereignty
through the Fast Track Land Reform, she has been disciplined by Capital. The
U-turn in economic policy signal a silent neo-liberal revolution that has been
taking place either as a result of the whip from Washington or a default
process of de-statisation due to limited fiscal space. The net result is
default privatisation and commodification of previous perceived public goods
and services despite the radical rhetoric of 'indigenise, empower, develop and create employment'.
President Mugabe’s message to
Blair, to keep his England while he keeps his Zimbabwe became a hit with many
people in the Global South and Developing world who have had to live with the legacies
of colonialism and un-transformed societies. President Mugabe became the Last
Man standing and for once many believed that the unfinished business of
independence will get finality. Some Africanists claimed that Zimbabwe had
become a radicalised state
or taken back its land
and those that opposed the events in Zimbabwe were labelled a polluted and
liberal urban based class worried about the privileges of political rights.
When Zimbabwe enacted the Indigenisation and Economic Empowerment Act in 2007
and Minister Kasukuwere sought its religious implementation after the
establishment of the Government of National Unity (GNU) in 2009, it further
cemented the arguments of the Africanists.
The GNU became defined by strong
ideological contestations where the Zimbabwe African National Union Patriotic
Front (ZANU PF) presented a strong nationalistic policy orientation and the
Movement for Democratic Change(s) (MDCs) argued for liberal economics. ZANU PF,
tactfully or by default conceded the economic policy making ministries to the MDCs
and retained the security related and resources distributing ministries. The
Government of National Unity came with the Short-Term Emergency Recovery Programme
(STERP) and later a Mid-Term Plan (MTP) economic blueprint managed by the
Ministries of Finance and Economic Planning respectively. This represented a thawing
of the radical politics that had begun in the late 1990s and marked the beginning
of a ‘Silent Neo-Liberal Revolution’ as the ‘Ship of State Sails On’. The government’s
policy somersault was further rooted through the policy of dollarisation and
re-engagement of the West. To deceive its supporters and mask its policy U-turn
ZANU PF, used the Ministries of Land and Indigenisation to present a radical
nationalist position, but trapped by the politics of the GNU. The MDC became
the Evangelist of Neo-liberal policies in the GNU, a position that they heavily
paid for in the GNU. ZANU PF had perfected the art of ‘Talk Left and Walk Right’.
The defeat of the MDCs in the 31st
of July 2013 elections (Warts and all), led to the domination of the state by
ZANU PF and naturally, it was expected that more radical economic policies
would follow. In addition, ZANU PF’s 2013 elections campaign message, “Taking
Back the Economy: Indigenise, Empower, Develop and Create Employment”,
presupposed the deepening of radical nationalist politics. However, the need
for capital to inject into the economy to continue and maintain the economic
stability experienced during the GNU called for pragmatic politics. The defeat
of the MDCs had taken away the bogeyman for ZANU PF, yet at the same time to openly
advocate for market economics became a bitter pill to swallow. This culminated
in policy clashes between the ‘Gamatox’ faction that was perceived to push for business-friendly
policies whilst the ‘Weevils’ faction pushed for hard-line and nationalistic
economic policies. The expulsion of the ‘Gamatox’ faction didn’t lead to a
congruent ideological policy position as the ‘Weevils’ popped into Generation
40 (G40) and Team Lacoste. The fight between Indigenisation Minister Patrick
Zhuwao and Chinamasa over the implementation of the Indigenisation policy
signified the continuing ideological battles in ZANU PF. Interestingly,
Chinamasa’s pro-business position and proposed Lima Debt restructuring got the upper-hand
as government desperately sought for new lines of credit to inject capital in the
ailing economy.
President Mugabe’s 10-point plan
of 2015 on the ease of doing business marked a brief end to ideological ambiguity. This was followed
by Supreme Court ruling
affording employers common law rights to terminate employment on notice without
compensation, thus liberalising labour laws. In addition, the government
introduced a 5% excise duty on airtime in 2014 and followed this up with 5% Health
Levy in the 2017 Budget Statement as the anticipated international lines of
credit and financial support increasingly become illusive. The irony of these
policy instruments has been dwindling revenue base as voice call generated
revenue declined due to consumers resort to data and social media usage that
provided cheaper alternative communication. For instance, Econet’s profits after
tax declined by 42% in 2016 as voice call revenues fell against the backdrop of
an increase of Broadband revenue’s contribution to its profits. To address the low revenue base for the
government and profiteering margins for the companies, the Postal and Telecommunications
Regulatory Authority (POTRAZ) gave a directive to effect floor prices for voice
and data. This policy directive gave rise to cost of data by exorbitant
margins, causing an outcry that has led to a policy reversal. Yet, the true
story behind all this predatory policy practices is the collusion between the
state and telecom companies. The state had interest in raising revenue to
create more fiscal space given the seemingly endless wait for new lines of
credit and cash injection, while telecoms companies had seen an opportunity for
profiteering as the logics of neo-liberalism deepens its roots in Zimbabwe. In
addition, the government has relaxed its ‘No to Whites on Fast Track Land’
policy and accommodating ex-commercial farmers back onto the land. Anecdotal evidence
speaks to black farmers in partnership with Whites getting more inputs under
the Command Agriculture scheme. Also, there has been an increasing role of
Chinese farmers on the former commercial farms a government shifts from the ‘only
blacks on farms’ position. The creation of special economic zones where labour
laws have been relaxed signify Zimbabwe’s Damascus moment and return to
neo-liberal economics.
These policy positions need to be
read in tandem with various policy instruments and positions being adopted by
government ever since the establishment of the GNU. Silently and slowly we are sailing towards neo-liberalism as the state keeps rolling back and previously
public goods are becoming private. Our health services, water services,
passports, current debates on urban tolling, education among the many public
goods have become com-modified by default as only those who can pay more can
access the services. In all this neo-liberal fiasco, the citizen has retreated
to the informal and lost voice giving impunity to the state. Slowly, Zimbabwe
has become a private limited company that extracts income from citizens but in
return is increasingly privatising almost all public services either deliberately through policy or by default through the government's limited fiscal space.
