It occurs to me that, for those who keep only a loose eye on African politics, elements of that last post lacked background. Admittedly, this isn’t helped by the BBC’s fairly shoddy coverage of matters - tucked away in corners of the site and only skimming the surface.

I found the easiest way to keep up was to flick through the Economist website occasionally. As incredibly irksome as the editorial line can get, they’re the only mainstream British publication I can find that covers African politics in anything like satisfying detail. Their most recent articles on the topic, here and here, are probably enough to follow events.

And let me know how long it takes to spot the irritatingly blatant slant in parts of the pieces.  Hint: Compare the “young, intelligent, charming, technocratic,” stereotype they apply to Makoni with the “courgageous yet thick” one they apply to Tsvangirai.

Also note that Tsvangirai was a trade unionist, and note the Economist’s typical (negative) view of trade unions and socialists.

Moving on from what risks becoming an annoyed rant about how so excellently detailed a publication is frequently marred by the editorial thrust, I also found some rather useful blogs on Zimbabwean politics. Unfortunately, they’re on another computer (I’m back to my usual machine, which has been fixed).  I’ll link to them later.

And yes, I’m back, and appreciably rested.

From the BBC:

Zimbabwe’s government and electoral chiefs have warned the main opposition MDC it should not declare an early victory in the presidential poll.

Zimbabwe’s government and electoral chiefs are entirely correct in warning the MDC against declaring early victory. However, this has nothing whatsoever to do with the government’s line that:

“Results are being verified and collated” (Mugabe’s election chief) and the MDC are guilty of “speculation and lies” (Mugabe’s information minister)

And everything to do with the following sort of statement:

“A coup d’etat and we all know how coups are handled” - George Chambara, Information Ministry Secretary

This follows a string of statements from the heads of the army, police and prison service over the last few weeks saying they will not allow the MDC to win. The MDC may have won the popular vote, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they have won power.

Indeed, it is almost certain that the MDC have won the popular vote. Mugabe has become massively unpopular in recent years, save among certain rural constituencies, his own Zuzuru tribe and most of all, his own cronies.  Inflation is running at some 100,000%. Farmers are beginning to cotton on to the fact that, when land was redistributed, it was to Mugabe’s chums and not the people. Queues are getting longer and longer, while supplies get shorter and shorter. In the most recent independent pre-election poll, he trailed 9% to Tsvaniurai. Yet more citizens polled declared themselves undecided - generally interpreted to mean opposition votes scared of being targetted by the police.  And so on, and so on.

Makoni’s defection from ZANU-PF further makes a Mugabe victory unlikely. He looks to have dragged a significant number of Mugabe’s old voters away rather than splitting an opposition vote. His remaining friends in ZANU-PF include some who, having previously rigged for Mugabe, are more aware of how to avoid his tricks. If push comes to shove, he may well throw in besides the MDC rather than Mugabe - if nothing else, because there is a significant chance Mugabe will do away with him should he win, regardless of later support.

In many ways, though, this is practically irrelevant.  MDC could win as many votes as they like - but Mugabe is exceptionally unlikely to accept defeat. It’s not so much that he has anything left to do - cleaning up the mess he’s made has never ranked highly in his priorities. It’s more that he’s (very sensibly) terrified of losing power now, as it could well end in trial and hanging for him.

And Mugabe still has the loyalty, as far as we know, of most army and police chiefs - allowing him to keep his grip on power by force. Even accepting that the Zimbabwean people may well not accept this and rise up, that some troops on the ground are discontented, and that Makoni may have the friendship of some army commanders, this means violence is likely should Mugabe fear losing.

Which he does. At the most, full military dictatorship will ensue - and at the very least, civil war seems in the offing.

The MDC have almost certainly won the election - but they haven’t won power yet.

…it occurs to me that, actually, Mugabe’s confidence may not be entirely based in his foreknowledge of repression.  The opposition vote is quite possibly going to be deeply split this election.

The MDC has been split for a while now - since 2005, more or less.  That, rather obviously, benefitted Mugabe.  Not only was the opposition vote split, but its support dropped.  Disastrously so.  Even then, a prominent MDC Mp felt that:

“In the next presidential election where every vote counts, we face a Zanu PF victory without them having to resort to rigging.”

And now the opposition vote faces being split even further.  No-one, as far as I can tell, really knows how Simba Makoni’s candidacy will affect the election.

Originally, Makoni had stood as a Zanu-PF candidate claiming to run for change, rather than against Mugabe.  With allies in and outside the party, he’d been painted as a compromise candidate who could challenge Mugabe from within.

But he’s been expelled now - as was expected.  With that, he now is running against the Zanu-PF candidate in Mugabe, whatever he claims.  If he’s able to retain the support he had within the party while existing outside it, that may not be a problem.  He may still be able to siphon votes from Mugabe, weakening him.

But if that’s not going to happen - if he can’t persuade people that, despite the party expelling him, he still stands for their values - then he simply becomes another opposition candidate.  If that’s the case, then he’ll either sink - or siphon their votes instead.

The opposition vote could be dangerously split at this point.  Perhaps conditions are so bad by now that it doesn’t matter - people just want rid of Mugabe, and want that soon.  But it’s a risk.

Of course Mugabe’s, “confident,” of winning a sixth term.  He knows the polls are rigged.

Really, if the BBC is going to attempt any form of reportage on Mugabe planning to win the election, that needs to be mentioned - and not just as the statement of the leader of the opposition.  The last presidential election in 2002 occured in a climate of heavy imtimidation and arrests.  Amnesty suggested that as many as 1400 opposition agents were arrested during the election period.  It was neither a free nor a fair election.

Similar doubts have hung over almost every recent election in which Mugabe has been involved.  Logically, this should be stated alongside Mugabe’s stated intent to win: he has stated this intent before every election, and has taken them all in a similar way.  There is no reason to suspect why he should not do so again.

Mugabe’s party rival, Makoni, launched his manifesto today.  He looks to be trying to act as some sort of unity candidate - he’s said that he’s not against Mugabe, yet describes the situation in Zimbabwe as one of fear.  He says he’s hoping for a renewal rather than a revolution.  In short, he’s trying to pick up votes both in and out of the party.

Unfortunately, it may no longer be possible to pick up many votes from the party, if it ever was.  The Guardian told me this morning that he’d just been expelled from Zanu-PF.

I worry.

Brave man. Expect: arrests, beatings, torture, rigged elections and finally a bloody and brutal death. If he lives that long.

The starvation, hyper-inflation and increasing age of their despot may convince the Zimbabwean people to take action. But equally, the starvation, hyper-inflation and election-rigging skills of their ageing despot are doing a tragically good job of keeping them down.

A more realistic prospect is that enough people in power will wake up to Zimbabwe’s impending doom and support Simba here. Although I worry there that Simba, having come to power on the backs of the party-powerful, will remain on the backs of the party powerful. As a dictator.

We can only hope, I suppose. That is, if he last more than a month anyway.

It looks as if the England and Wales Cricket board might cancel the 2009 Zimbabwe cricket tour.  The government is currently in talks with them.  Brown seems to be trying to cut ties with Mugabe (more than Jack Straw, at any rate).  Two questions need to be asked.

Firstly, does hosting a nation’s cricket team signal support for that nation’s government?  I don’t think so.  A precedent would be set here that would indicate an Olympics in 2012 that had certain participants banned simply because of who their leaders happened to be.  By all means, don’t bring Mugabe over on a state visit, but the Zimbabwean cricket team should be allowed to tour without being seen as an agent of a tyrannical dictator.

If the tour is cancelled, the England and Wales Cricket board will pay Zimbabwe £150,000 for the bother.  So I ask, if the tour is cancelled on a matter of principle as an objection to the disgusting government of Zimbabwe, why on earth should the ECB pay Zimbabwe for the privilege of not flying over here to hit a few balls?

This looks suspiciously like shallow, cynical political maneuvering.  Any outcome will be hypocritical, so the whole idea should be left for dead now before it becomes an international embarrassment.