By Hopewell Chin’ono
Yesterday, war veterans leader Blessed “Bombshell” Geza called for a shutdown protest as a tool to help push Zimbabwe’s corrupt dictator Emmerson Mnangagwa to step down.
What can a shutdown protest achieve in pursuit of seeking change in Zimbabwe?
Shutdown protests have become a powerful form of political resistance across the world, they have been used effectively by Morgan Tsvangirai before.
The last shutdown of March 31 forced the Zimbabwean corrupt dictator to drop his 2030 March extension campaign and go back to the drawing board.
Shutdowns are a dramatic political show of public anger against a corrupt or repressive government.
When streets are empty, businesses closed, and public transport halted, it sends an unmistakable powerful political message that citizens are fed up with the prevailing political order.
It is a form of non-violent mass defiance that governments cannot ignore and are scared of because they speak out loudly without an opportunity for governments to clamp down. The silence of a shutdown speaks louder than the noise of a march that can be infiltrated.
So expect a lot of cheap and angry propaganda against the proposed shutdown from the regime’s social media trolls, intellectuals for hire, and Nick Mangwana because Mnangagwa can’t afford another international embarrassment after the March 31 shutdown, and the shambolic independence event in the Midlands.
Shutdowns hit where it really hurts for corrupt politicians by bringing key sectors to a halt. This creates pressure on the regime to respond to the demands of the citizens as divisions within the regime itself start to widen.
While shutdowns are disruptive and costly, that disruption is precisely the point, it forces political leaders, investors, and even foreign governments to pay attention to the issues at hand.
The last shutdown on March 31 forced regional leaders to make phone calls asking those close to Mnangagwa to plead with him to drop the 2030 term extension.
They said it was destabilising the region.
Shutdowns also unite a fragmented opposition if those in the opposition are genuinely opposed to Mnangagwa’s corrupt rule.
All one has to do is stay at home as this gives opposition forces a common platform, allowing for strengthening the voice of the resistance without putting citizens in harm’s way.
Geza is now a central figure of resistance because there is no viable structured political opposition and the trade unions have collapsed. Zimbabwe has 95% unemployment.
Mnangagwa has also moved to offer trinkets to a section of so called opposition members of parliament making Geza the centre of resistance.
Successful shutdowns always tell a powerful resistance story. When a nation voluntarily stops functioning for a day or more, it expresses collective citizen defiance and deep frustration that can’t be arrested, jailed or ignored.
The images of deserted roads and closed shops challenge the government’s claim to authority and political legitimacy.
They also draw international attention to Zimbabwe’s deepening crisis of corruption, dilapidated healthcare, 95% unemployment, the highest inflation in the world, collapsed national infrastructure, and more.
International media pick up the story, diaspora communities mobilise in solidarity, and foreign governments are forced to diplomatically speak out or act.
A shutdown creates a spotlight that corrupt and repressive regimes like Mnangagwa’s would rather avoid.
However, shutdown protests are not without risk. If poorly coordinated, they can lose credibility and momentum.
If they lack broad citizen support, they can be dismissed as insignificant.
If they drag on without a clear goal, they can cause fatigue. But when well organised and widely supported by the citizens, shutdowns can severely weaken the political grip of Mnangagwa.
Shutdowns are not just about halting daily life, they are about citizens reclaiming political agency and influencing the political direction of their country.
If the two-day shutdown does not materialise, Emmerson Mnangagwa will emerge stronger than before. If it does happen, he will be terribly weakened and his undemocratic capture of state institutions terribly exposed.
So the decision on whether to weaken him or make him stronger lies in the hands of citizens of Zimbabwe.
The proposed shutdown is the last peaceful tool in the political kit box for Zimbabweans because public protests will be met with police violence, and the courts and parliament are fully captured by Mnangagwa and his corrupt cronies.
Some are saying this is a ZANUPF affair, while others say they prefer the traditional opposition to organise rather than a disgruntled ZANUPF war veteran.
Both views highlight a catastrophic weakness in the opposition. Yes, it is a ZANUPF affair, but it extends beyond that, because dilapidated hospitals, violation of the country’s constitution and rampant corruption affect every ordinary citizen, regardless of party affiliation.
Secondly, in the absence of an organised traditional opposition, resistance can only be internal within the ruling party. So, internal divisions may help loosen the grip of the corrupt dictator, both within ZANUPF and in national politics.
The failure or success of the proposed shutdown will either help Mnangagwa if it fails, or it will help the citizens pronounce that it is not business as usual if it succeeds.
The weakening of Mnangagwa and his corrupt criminal cartels could lead to some change that gives the nation breathing space and helps genuine opposition groups regroup.
This may result in a hybrid government comprising ZANUPF elements opposed to Mnangagwa and genuine opposition voices.
The danger of failure is not only that Mnangagwa may be politically emboldened, but that the opposing faction in ZANUPF may take drastic action out of political desperation. If they prevail, it will be a winner-takes-all situation, sidelining the citizens in determining how the country is governed.
A collective victory brought about through shutdowns would force the ZANUPF elements opposed to Mnangagwa to reach out to the people for the sake of international and political legitimacy.
Those pointing to the economic effects of a shutdown are ignoring the fact that the current economy has already shut out ordinary citizens, denying them basic healthcare, jobs, a decent and dignified life, and the basic necessities of life.
So the success or failure of the proposed shutdown will determine whether Zimbabweans will see any form of change, or whether Mnangagwa will be emboldened, making corruption and suffering a daily lived reality for the foreseeable future.
It is sad that it has taken a 74-year-old liberation war veteran to force Mnangagwa to notice the unacceptable face of his corrupt rule, while the youths have reduced themselves to social media commentary from the comfort of their homes.
Whatever happens, Blessed Geza will be remembered for trying, whether he fails or succeeds.
Any derogatory insults or comments about his attempts to help the country recover from seven years of massive looting and plunder simply reflect the ungratefulness of people who are suffering but have no plan beyond social commentary.
