Source: Capital’s interest, influence in Zimbabwe’s 2018 polls – DailyNews Live
OP ED by TAKURA ZHANGAZHA 18 March 2018
HARARE – At the risk of stating the obvious, the “ease of doing business”
is an inherently political term. Not merely because President Emmerson
Mnangagwa, is using the term in each and every one of his major speeches.
Locally and internationally.
It is a phrase that is always sweet music to the ears of global capital
and by default, its local mimicking versions.
Not because of their political affinities but because of what it portends.
In keeping with neo-liberal fashion it means that the political leaders of
the country are seeking favours from private capital. Political ones
before they are economic.
And private capital appears to be catching the bait. Economic pundits are
talking about how the number of investors that are enquiring about
Zimbabwe are in their numbers. Even the Zimbabwean Diaspora is setting up
initiatives to cash in on government’s laissez faire policy.
And so far a couple of what the State controlled media refers to as “mega
deals” have been signed or revived with a sense of urgency.
The Russian foreign secretary paid us a visit with such deals in mind.
Other promises of investment also keep popping up especially after
government announced its intention to amend the Indigenisation Act. Or
where the minister of foreign affairs announced a new creature (at least
to many Zimbabweans) called “transactional diplomacy”.
So there is no doubt that the government is on a neo-liberal path. And
that capital likes “free market” environments.
But because there is an election scheduled for this year, we have to ask a
rhetorical question of who needs who more than the other? And why?
The easy reply would be obviously the ruling Zanu PF party is desperate
for capital.
This would be in order to succeed in its quest at retention of power in
the scheduled elections.
Except that it has too little time between then and now to produce the
“jobs, jobs, jobs” that Mnangagwa has been promising in his speeches.
What the government wants is a promise from capital for guaranteed
investment in the event of their electoral victory and therefore longer
tenure in globally recognised power.
And this where the catch is. Because capital loves stability, it is
clearly keen on a government that is talking its language to stay in
power. So any “mega deal” signed in the run-up to the 2018 election is
akin to an electoral support pact.
Private capital knows this.
So they are circling the bait (unlike say the Russian or British
government related capital). But in order to be in with a fairer chance
they will invariably take all sorts of risks to be in good books with the
incumbent administration. And this is in the event that the latter wins
the election.
This leads to the bigger question how much of private capital is backing
the current ruling establishment in expectation of “favours” after the
elections?
In 2013, we know that the Meikles Group helped purchase campaign vehicles
for the ruling party and that went a long way in changing the complexion
and undoubtedly influencing the final result, controversial as it was.
It is from this example that we can get tell tale signs of the
undemocratic relationship that the current establishment has with capital.
As Mnangagwa attends investment conferences, sends his ministers and
emissaries to various countries and global capital events/meetings I would
not be surprised if the whispered request would be, “support us in the
next election and we will support you after with your (ease of doing)
business.”
Again in neo-liberal lexicon this would be what would be referred to as a
“win-win” situation. The ruling establishment wins the election and
private capital is left to roam the “free market”.
This unwritten but likely electoral pact between the ruling establishment
and private capital will soon show itself as the electoral campaign gets
into its rancorous full gear. If you are a neo-liberal (including those in
the mainstream opposition) this is the stuff that dreams would be made of.
If you are to the left of social democracy as I am, you would be aware
what an undemocratic pact between unaccountable private capital and a
resurgent ruling and repressive establishment can bring.
COMMENTS