|
Whether CCM has a general election strategy, as a party or parts of it
2005-07-09 07:11:23
By Ani Jozeni
Just what does CCM intend to do on October 30 on the day of the general elections remains the most well kept secret in the country, or perhaps, the worst dilemma they have ever faced.
There is growing tension and inconsistency of language between what the ruling party prefers to do and what it is committed to do, such that its view may depend on a flip of a coin. No one knows what should be done, or what will be done.
A few weeks after a celebrated exchange between the Registrar of Political Parties and the CCM Publicity Secretary, the latter has retreated somewhat, but not before his position was buttressed by the party chairman.
While duly calling for the liaison committee of the two parties to meet, known as ‘peace accord committee,’ the president reiterated commitment to use state organs on trouble makers. That’s a firm view.
Just to indicate how firm the ruling party is committed to the use of state organs in the face of those who routinely clamour for what they say is injustice being done to them, a columnist waxed on this notice.
Mkapa resolve to use state organs on troublemakers fantastic,’ the writer intoned, illustrating just what doesn’t work in what is called democracy in Tanzania at present. Petty hate rules, not faculties of reason.
What the columnist shows isn’t what the party thinks, on the basis of an insider commenting on it, but rather what is felt and said by its support base.
Many are sick and tired of putting up with what are seen as provocations from the other side, especially because it is seen as a Zanzibar conflict and squabbling that a lot on the Mainland would rather do without.
It means ‘permanent’ CCM rule as no other rival party exists.
Were it that the party is seeking to remain true to its support base, the purported attack by opposition sympathisers, definitely not agents, on the household of the CCM presidential candidate would do the trick.
It was a veritable casus belli, cause for war, in the sense of putting aside all gentlemanly agreements as to how politics will be conducted.
The ruling party said precisely that, in urging a full apology from its rivals.
Typical in the way in which countries arrive at civil war, the latter said there was nothing to apologize about, in which case what should have followed is a wave of arrests.
A statement to the effect that some leaders of that party plotted against the life of the CCM presidential candidate would have been adequate to place the Mainland (and the Union as a whole) in a proto-Zanzibar climate. That’s what happened there, back in 1972.
As noticed in the recent nomination congress of the ruling party, it is irrelevant if such charges would be substantial or not, as the public mind is gullible.
The mere mention of charges is an indication of guilt, as the CCM support base will have neither the resources, nor the goodwill, to start putting the motivation to issue.
The result is to sideline CUF and trust that polls would be held, with tear gas canisters for sure, all the same.
The trouble obviously is that it isn’t just the CCM support base that must be pleased but also those who are responsible for cancelling the debt, and giving marks for good governance.
They are harder to convince, if perhaps they mostly aren’t bosom friends of the rival party to CCM, due to attachment with sympathisants of a certain acute radicalism fashionable in some parts of the world.
So they give CCM the benefit of doubt.
Still CCM knows as much as anyone else that there are no-go areas in these days of good governance, and that the test for this year’s general elections is not to repeat 2000, and 2001 in its wake.
Messing up with the polling in 16 constituencies or more, then banning protest demonstrations, shooting down scores of those turning up to demonstrate, or in the streets at that time, is banned.
The US, UK are making it plain and clear.
So, if the donors have banned both 1995 and 2000 techniques, that is, faulty election result announcement followed by a treason trial, or faulty voting followed by banning demos, what can be done?
Holding free and fair elections means ensuring that the opposition has nothing to complain about - not the respective electoral commissions - and that’s neither here nor there. Has CCM abandoned ‘mapinduzi daima’ resolve?
Between the two opposed forces in the CCM sentimental thread at the moment, of acceptability to its rather hawkish support base, and passing a test of good governance put up by donors, the latter matters more.
Certainly the heart of the CCM leadership is with its support base, but while the mind is willing, the body is weak - by which is meant budgetary commitments.
If anything happens here, chances of chaos will multiply.
Another factor that may weigh in the count is the end of reign outlook at the top level, that most of the high government leadership is made up by people leaving the government.
That’s true of all except Vice President Dr Ali Mohamed Shein and Foreign Minister Jakaya Kikwete, who will probably have some explaining to do if he emerges victor in a chaotic mess that dwarfs Mwembechai, Zanzibar West Region, etc. It isn’t so sweet.
With the United States recently issuing special commendation to President Mkapa and Minister Kikwete on their role in cementing the often jittery peace process in Burundi, the last anyone is billing for is that chaos unravels in Dar es Salaam itself.
Yet the recent spat on attacks on the candidate’s home in Bagamoyo had all the ingredients for a carefully orchestrated escalation to renege on peace accords, etc.
It was all too evident. In the US they say ‘follow the money,’ that it is CCM, not CUF, who would benefit by a collapse of ‘muafaka.’
Moods of resignation at the top level may prove conducive for a defence of democracy, that the partisans of muscular handling of electoral issues aren’t in the best of spirits.
Adding that the president may also wish to leave the country in a peaceful state, and himself at peace with donors and without any trouble surfacing within national institutions, he may opt for a Chimwaga style process.
Strict constitutionality, not ‘mzengwe.’
That is perhaps where the dilemma is located, that the proponents of muscle in handling opposition forces trust that the president will stick to his ‘use of state organs’ position.
That’s what the hawkish portion of the media and ruling party, staunch and unmanageable supporters of the ruling party candidate are pushing for.
Only with a victory in both parts obtained with as many votes as possible, can the Union be well defended.
What they don’t realise is that the president may come to the conclusion that all this leads to some blind alley since compared to 1995, and even 2000, opposition groups won’t sit down for lengthy negotiations again.
This much has been more than clear in the past few months, with blood-curdling slogans like ‘men, machetes, sha..sha,’ a genocidal bent of cutting up whoever is on the wrong side of machetes. God forbid...!
Nor have incidents since that period, and particularly the conduct of local government polls, left the ruling party unscathed.
It has a modicum of goodwill left with donors, particularly the European Union, while the US finds it hard to restrain its urge to speak about what is going on here, not just politically but in things like procurement, respect for contract, etc.
Getting into a cycle of electoral violence would snap its patience.
|
