The fugitive Jonathan Moyo made a bold step in Mnangagwa’s heart with guns blazing accusing ED of nepotism and Tribalism. He took no prisoners in his twitter accusing ED of sidelining the Ndebeles from security ministries. He purports to suggest that there is an agreement to have one person from ZAPU to be appointed in one of the security ministries. As a former propaganda chief Jonathan Moyo thinks every twitter must be propaganda.
The tweet by Jonathan Moyo blasting the cabinet reshuffle by president Mnangagwa was pregnant with tribalism. Jonathan Moyo declares that this was unprecedented to have no one from Matebeleland in the security ministry. Jonathan Moyo intimated that it was constitutional to put any one from Matebeleland in one of the security portfolios. This suggested that any of the three ministries at least one person should be from Matebeleland.
This sentiment by Jonathan Moyo is misleading and meant to cause a tribal conflict. Jonathan Moyo is an autistic old man who needs help.
The agreement between ZANU PF and ZAPU did not suggest a tribal setting. It was a political agreement which suggested that in any appointment the second Vice president must be from former ZAPU. The ministry of Home affairs was set aside for a former ZAPU cadre.
Now the arrangement changed when ZAPU and ZANU became ZANU PF. The agreement became a loose agreement. So it is not true that this is the first time the ministries were all given to non ZAPU cadres. If Jonathan Moyo remembers very well ignatious Chombo was the minister of Home affairs while the other two ministries were safely in the capable hands of ZANU cadres. So the twitter is misgiven.
Jonathan Twitter Moyo who is not Ndebele himself is preparing the ground for Ethnic conflict. An ethnic conflict is a conflict between two or more contending ethnic groups. While the source of the conflict may be political, social, economic or religious, the individuals in conflict must expressly fight for their ethnic group’s position within society. This final criterion differentiates ethnic conflict from other forms of struggle.
Academic explanations of ethnic conflict generally fall into one of three schools of thought: primordialist, instrumentalist or constructivist. Recently, several political scientists have argued for either top-down or bottom-up explanations for ethnic conflict. Intellectual debate has also focused on whether ethnic conflict has become more prevalent since the end of the Cold War, and on devising ways of managing conflicts, through instruments such as consociationalism and federalisation.
Tribal conflicts have weathered Zimbabwe’s history for years and a complex tribal justice system has arisen as a result. Although today illiteracy eradication and development projects have played an important role in reducing tribal disputes, much remains to be done to address long- standing truces and other unresolved tribal arguments. There a daylight demonstration by a pocket of people in Bulawayo demanding the Shona councillors and workers to vacate Bulawayo.
This demonstration was repugnant to common sense. It was an insult to Ununtu. The minister of Local government did not make a public show that Zimbabwe will not tolerate tribalism. Zimbabwe must be blind to tribe. Tribalism is not patriotism. We must embrace our neighbours regardless of their ethnic background. There is indeed tribal tensions in the country and the government must not ignore this.
Ongoing tribal conflict has stalled the implementation of decentralization measures in many governorates. Security concerns prevent government institutions from functioning effectively in certain areas and hamper participation in activities of local governing bodies. Furthermore, citizens of the effected areas are increasingly alienated from the state and educational and medical staff is fearful of serving in tribal areas.
Not only do tribal disputes impede proper development on a district level, but they also extend out of the tribal frame to reach A mediator carries the belt and the state, its interests and foreigners. For Jonathan Moyo to try and incite a tribal despondency in Zimbabwe is very unreasonable and mischievous. The whole professor who served in government, to try and settle his personal grudge with ED in unfortunate. Jonathan Moyo needs to grow up and leave Zimbabwe alone.
His Twits are always divisive destructive inciting and indeed treasonous. He always wants to refer to Gukurahundi as if he is so emotional about yet he is invoking Gukurahundi memories to his own end.
This childish mentality must be scorned and never to be encouraged. Zimbabwe expects the president to make decisions on who is fit to serve as a minister. This decision must not be motivated by tribal links or nepotism but entirely on the ability of the selected to serve in the capacity appointed for. It is an insult to conclude that the president is a tribalistic pig. This shows that Jonathan Moyo is plotting a tribal conflict in the country and he indeed wishes to see blood oozing in the streets of Zimbabwe.
Source – Dr Masimba Mavaza