ED presented himself as a liberal pro-business leader.
His assumption was if you open Zimbabwe to investors, Capital would flood in and economy would automatically grow in same pattern as most African countries that have opened up.
By Shoneboy Nembaware
Concurrently he was given a political test. External Stakeholders set out clear conditions that would show government is serious about reforms.
The manner in which ED & Co took over power makes it difficult for them to open up political space. Firstly democracy reforms would mean ED is open to criticism. Real challenge is taking over power results in imaginary enemies and threats. The legitimacy question still hangs around ED’s presidency.
Zimbabwe may be a rundown country, but Zimbabweans have not forgotten how things should run. ED has failed to give confidence that Zimbabwe is taking a new direction.
Personally, I see these failures around ED:
- He has failed to be a leader in control of key government institutions.
- He has presided over a governance where citizens are shot and killed by army, something against the founding principles of Zimbabwe, citizens also fought in liberation struggle, they were one with liberation army, so how come army is now being send to exterminate citizens.
- ED has failed on leading Economic Transformation. He is tinkering with taxes and price controls, all ingredients of creating a hyperinflationary economy.
- ED has failed to negotiate with opposition. This reveals a stubborn streak to his leadership, and that is worrying because ED is not acting in interests of citizens but to retain power.
The world can see through ED’s charm, and Davos will see through ED’s semantics.
He should talk and walk political reforms, then Zimbabweans and the.
Copyright ©www.thesolutionstower.com , 2018 All Rights Reserved. The Solutions Tower Article may be published or reproduced on condition of acknowledging the publisher and writer.