No matter which way you look at it, there are intriguing questions which arise after President Cyril Ramaphosa’s unannounced – and seemingly hasty – visit to Zimbabwe over the weekend, where he sat for hours in closed-door discussions with his counterpart, Emmerson Mnangagwa.
It was described by Ramaphosa’s office as a “working visit”, although the president’s decision to dress casually seems at odds with that, especially considering he was met by Mnangagwa, who was formally dressed.
Then again, Ramaphosa was hosted at Mnangagwa’s farm, where he looked at his host’s Ankole cattle and fish breeding ponds.
Veteran Zimbabwean journalist Hopewell Chin’ono posted on social media that the visit was to send out a clear message to opponents of Mnangagwa that South Africa would not tolerate the Zimbabwe president being removed from office through “unconstitutional means”.
That is ironic, given that Mnangagwa’s predecessor, Robert Mugabe, is widely regarded as being removed with military help in a “soft coup” in 2017, which paved the way for Mnangagwa’s ascension to power.
With Ramaphosa’s backing – and the implied support of the Southern African Development Community countries, which Chin’ono claimed Ramaphosa was representing – is a message to those, like Zimbabwe Vice-President General Constantino Chiwenga, that, yet again, an African forum supports the reigning “Big Man”.
That is support committed, regardless of the fact the Big Man may be well past his sell-by date.
That support by South Africa was what kept Mugabe in power for so many years – an appeasement approach begun by then president Thabo Mbeki in 2000, when he effectively condoned an election stolen by Mugabe, refusing to publish the findings of the SA election monitors.
As long as African leaders look after each other long into their doddering old age, then true democracy and freedom will remain an unattainable dream.
