By Rev. Dr Kenneth Mtata
SHOULD the current leadership succession debate in ZANU PF be a concern for the church and the rest of the population, even those not affiliated to the ruling party or opposition parties, or not?
Zimbabweans find themselves confronted with the question again as the ruling Zanu PF is once more involved in internal debate about issues related to term limits and succession.
The issue of succession in Zanu PF has always been a hotly debated and contentious one, often intensifying as the end of an incumbent’s term or retirement nears.
From party founding leader Ndabaningi Sithole to the incumbent, President Emmerson Mnangagwa, succession has always been a big issue.
Sithole’s succession was also turbulent just like the Robert Mugabe one. We are currently seeing history repeating itself yet again.
We first saw this happening during Sithole’s era in the 1970s and Mugabe’s sunset years before 2017, when it became clear to the party and the nation that leadership transition in Zanu PF was inevitable.
Some argue that this is purely an internal ruling party matter, irrelevant to those outside Zanu PF or even those unaffiliated with any political party in Zimbabwe for that matter.
Various opinions have already been proffered and advanced on this issue. Many more will also be provided I believe.
Fundamentally, I strongly disagree with the assertion that it is an internal matter and offer four key reasons why this issue affects the entire nation, and should be a national issue.
1. Succession in Zanu PF is linked to Zimbabwe’s democratic struggles
Zanu PF has historically operated under a centralised or “guided” internal democracy model, where succession debates are shaped by the interests of the incumbent or top hierarchy rather than by democratic principles and the people.
Parenthetically, this pattern has influenced opposition politics as well, where leaders such as Morgan Tsvangirai and later Nelson Chamisa were involved in succession processes, making controversial decisions that were not necessarily rooted in party constitutions and the law.
The failure to establish strong internal democratic traditions — both in the ruling party and the opposition — reflects a broader national governance challenge.
Zimbabwe’s main problem at the core lies in leadership and governance failures.
In other words, essentially Zimbabwe’s biggest challenge is governance.
If the main political actors are not able to manage succession processes guided by their own constitutions and laws, but arbitrary factors and interventions, citizens ultimately suffer the consequences of undemocratic processes and poor leadership.
2. The role of the military in politics remains unresolved
The last time Zanu PF faced a major succession crisis, it was eventually resolved not through democratic processes but by military intervention, itself a manifestation of failure of internal democracy.
From the Mgagao Declaration in 1975 up to now, the military has always been a factor.
Mugabe’s long-standing assertion that “politics leads the gun” was disproven when the army played a decisive role in forcing his exit in November 2017.
That was also the case with Sithole in 1975 onwards. No one knows what will happen in the future since we have no power of clairvoyance.
Zanu PF’s own history shows the military has always been deeply involved in politics and a major or even decisive factor.
Militarisation of politics in Zimbabwe, which badly impacts of democracy, is basically a legacy of the liberation struggle.
This underscores a critical national question which must be examined and answered: What is and should be the role of the military in our political system?
That was debated during the 2009-2013 Government of National Unity period, but shelved. It must be revisited.
Each succession crisis episode in Zanu PF, dating back to the liberation struggle, and in the post-colonial period revives this unresolved issue, making it a matter of national concern.
It is intrinsically part of Zimbabwe’s national question: what sort of a society do we want to build and how do we do that?
The current nation-building proceas has self-evidently fallen short of the people’s expectations, in other words it has been a failure despite having many good aspects of that can be salvaged and used as of part of the much-needed national reconstruction going forward.
3. The succession issue often highlights disunity, cronyism, ethnicity, and tribalism
Zanu PF’s internal succession struggles often expose the dangers of patronage, cronyism, ethnicity, and tribalism — threats that extend beyond the party and into the national polity.
This problem, which must be discussed openly and tackled in order unite peope in the end, remains the bane of Zimbabwean politics, from the days of the liberation struggle to now.
Towards the end of his rule, Mugabe, for instance, was accused of positioning his wife, Grace, to drive the political agenda, benefit financially and accumulate wealth, while also reportedly favouring a Zezuru successor.
She even presided over political gatherings singing “Zezurus unconquerable” which was unfortunate and divisive.
Sydney Sekeramayi was reportedly Mugabe’s preferred successor.
These issues were manifested during the liberation struggle, particularly through struggles within the struggle.
In the opposition, there were similar reports of ethnicity.
Morgan Tsvangirai reportedly appointed Elias Mudzuri and Nelson Chamisa as co-vice presidents to checkmate the elected deputy Thokozani Khupe to eventually prevent her from taking over from him for ethnic reasons.
These succession debates and limited examples given, reveal a broader and deeper problem —that is appointments based on patronage, loyalty, ethnicity, or personal connections rather than merit and the constitution.
This is a Stage 4 cancer even in government and needs to be addressed.
4. The problem of personalised politics
In both ruling and opposition parties, political loyalty is often tied to individuals rather than to principles, institutions, or policies – personality cult politics.
Personalities – and not ideas – drive our politics. Parties rise and die with individuals in most cases.
Personalisation of politics and blind loyalty stifle open debate and thwart development of strong, institutionalised and sustainable governance.
When political parties and leadership are built around individuals and not ideas, a value system or vision, as well as democratic frameworks, individualism and mediocrity thrive and triumph at the expense of the collective and national progress.
Besides this, Zanu PF is a ruling party which has been in power for 45 years. It was also part of the broad liberation movement; and has been in Zimbabweans’ lives for close to half a century now.
Being the party in government and thus managing national resources, it’s internal politics, decisions and policies affect everyone; be they involved in politics or not.
Why This Matters to the Nation
For these reasons, and many more others, Zanu PF’s internal succession politics is not just a party issue; it is also a broad national matter. It is an issue of all Zimbabweans, especially those concerned about the future of the nation.
How the party’s succession is handled impacts democratic governance, national unity, civil-military relations, and the type and quality of leadership Zimbabweans get in the end.
Addressing these issues thus requires an inclusive national conversation, not just an internal party contestation.
That is why citizens are broadly participating in the Zanu PF succession issue – uninvited in some cases – even if they may not even be members or supporters of the party.
Even the opposition supporters are also interested in Zanu PF politics, particularly its succession outcomes.
Some Biblical Insights on Succession
The Bible offers wisdom on leadership transitions.
Consider Joshua’s transition from Moses:
“Now it came to pass, a long time after the Lord had given rest to Israel from all their enemies round about, that Joshua was old, advanced in age.
And Joshua called for all Israel, for their elders, for their heads, for their judges, and for their officers, and said to them: “I am old, advanced in age… Therefore, be very courageous to keep and to do all that is written in the Book of the Law of Moses…: (Joshua 23:1-6)
From this transition, we learn four key lessons:
1. The incumbent voluntarily initiated and facilitated his leadership succession process, recognising that his time was up and making sure it was orderly.
2. The process involved broad consultation with key national stakeholders, not just a few members of the inner circle.
3. Succession was anchored in the law (constitution), ensuring legitimacy.
4. Unity was built on a shared national vision and equitable distribution of resources.
These biblical principles could inform Zimbabwe’s succession process, transforming it from being a conflict-prone process into an opportunity for renewal and national progress.
Zimbabwe has to transcend the current conflict-ridden, ethnic and toxic politics to embrace new, inclusive and democratic participatory processes to elect leaders and government in the national and public interest for the people to have equal opportunity, work and prosper.
We pray that God guides us through darkness to a new dawn.
🔴Reverend Kenneth Mtata is a Zimbabwean theologian and Zimbabwe Council of Churches Secretary-General.
