Details

Written by: John Burke and GROK3

Category: Zimbabwe

Published: 13 March 2025

Hits: 1164

Assessing President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s tenure as Chairperson of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) requires evaluating his leadership in advancing the bloc’s objectives, particularly in fostering regional integration, economic development, peace, and security. His term, which began in August 2024, has been marked by significant regional challenges, including conflicts in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Mozambique, energy poverty, and climate-related issues. Below is an analysis of his tenure, considering both achievements and shortcomings, while critically examining the establishment narrative.

Achievements

1. Focus on Peace and Security in the DRC
   Mnangagwa has prioritized addressing the ongoing conflict in eastern DRC, a major security crisis in the region. He has chaired multiple extraordinary summits, including the virtual summit on March 13, 2025, to discuss the deteriorating security situation. His leadership has emphasized dialogue, calling for adherence to ceasefire agreements like the Luanda Process and condemning attacks on SADC peacekeeping missions, such as those by the M23 rebel group. SADC, under his chairmanship, has also collaborated with the East African Community (EAC) to push for peace, as seen in joint summits like the one held in Dar es Salaam in February 2025. These efforts demonstrate a proactive stance on regional stability, though tangible progress in resolving the DRC conflict remains limited.
2. Response to Post-Election Violence in Mozambique
   Mnangagwa’s tenure has seen SADC respond to post-election violence in Mozambique following the October 2024 elections, where the ruling Frelimo party’s victory was contested. He has called for dialogue and respect for judicial rulings, such as the Constitutional Council’s decision, to restore stability. SADC’s readiness to assist Mozambique in consolidating democracy, as expressed by Mnangagwa, reflects an attempt to uphold the bloc’s principles of peaceful dispute resolution, even if the effectiveness of these interventions is still unfolding.
3. Infrastructure and Security Enhancements
   Mnangagwa has overseen significant steps to strengthen SADC’s operational capacity. A notable achievement is the groundbreaking ceremony for the SADC Standby Force Regional Logistics Depot in Botswana in December 2024, aimed at improving the bloc’s ability to respond swiftly to crises. This addresses past failures, such as delays in deploying forces during the 2021 Mozambique insurgency, and signals a long-term commitment to regional security, though funding challenges remain, with only $15 million of the required $45 million secured.
4. Energy Transition and Regional Development
   Under Mnangagwa’s leadership, SADC has pushed for a just transition to sustainable renewable energy, addressing energy poverty, particularly in rural areas. A summit in February 2025 saw over 500 participants from SADC member states discuss accelerating this transition, highlighting Mnangagwa’s role in advancing regional development agendas. This aligns with SADC’s broader goals of economic integration and sustainable development, though implementation challenges persist.
5. Symbolic and Diplomatic Engagement
   Mnangagwa’s chairmanship has been symbolically bolstered by gestures such as the dedication of the Africa’s Hall of Faith at the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem, recognizing his leadership and that of other SADC leaders. While symbolic, this reflects efforts to elevate SADC’s international profile and foster unity, though it has little direct bearing on policy outcomes.

Shortcomings

1. Limited Progress in Resolving DRC Conflict
   Despite Mnangagwa’s focus on the DRC, the security situation has continued to deteriorate, with ongoing attacks on peacekeeping missions and violations of ceasefires. The establishment narrative, as reflected in SADC communiqués, emphasizes dialogue and peace processes, but critics argue that Mnangagwa’s leadership has not translated into concrete results. The complexity of the DRC conflict, involving external actors like Rwanda (accused of backing M23) and internal governance issues, may limit SADC’s effectiveness, but Mnangagwa’s tenure has yet to demonstrate decisive action or innovative strategies beyond convening summits.

   Read more: As SADC Chair a progress report

Details

Written by: Jessica Garland, Director of Policy and Research, Electoral Reform Society

Category: Zimbabwe

Published: 02 March 2025

Hits: 1039

A Zimbabwe Centric Introduction

Just listen to what the Electoral Reform Society in the UK demands for their voters - then compare their demands to the vote rigging & disenfranchisement of ZEC and the Zanu PF charlatans. It's not so dissimilar. Big Money influence, Too much Influence by a small group of individuals, and a lack of Transparency!

But ultimately a LACK of any of the Independent (and honest) Vital Institutions for a Democratic Republic.

All too familiar within the context of the Zimbabwean Voting debacle - let alone a Diaspora Vote! It's another "read this and weep (for the real Zimbabwe)" - Again

This is how IT SHOULD be - in Zimbabwe, we are still a million miles from a democratic government - see our other articles for details LINK HERE - Is Zimbabwe a Democracy?  and Electoral Reforms are Vital (by Charles Kanyimo) and More The Illusion of Democracy (in Zimbabwe) - an AI Study 

Instead in Zimbabwe, the POLITBURO runs the ship, with a {mainly} impotent "Parliament" in name only.

Introduction written by John Burke, ZHRO

Article belowis a reprint with web source links by Jessica Garland, Director of Policy and Research; Electoral Reform UK

"Earlier this month the Electoral Commission heads appeared before a House of Commons select committee with stark warnings about the dangers of failing to address the problems with political finance. Commenting on the existing rules EC Chair John Pullinger said that the system has “a series of weaknesses that do need to be addressed now, if we are not to face some even more damaging consequences for public trust in the system.”"

It’s time to tackle big money in politics

At the Electoral Reform Society, we have long argued that big money is a problem for politics and the current political finance rules are in desperate need of updating.

We agree with the Electoral Commission’s call for reform, particularly in three key areas:

1. Preventing foreign profits from influencing UK politics – companies shouldn’t be able to donate money not made in the UK.
2. Closing donation loopholes – increasing transparency, especially around donations from unincorporated associations
3. Introducing ‘know your donor’ checks – so parties properly screen who’s funding them.

But it shouldn’t stop there, it’s important that we prevent impermissible donations from overseas and guard against foreign influence, but we also need to address the impact of legal but potentially damaging, large scale donations.

A handful of donors are holding too much power

Party funding remains dominated by the big spenders – in the two decades between 2001 and 2021, a fifth of all major political came from just 10 individuals. That’s not healthy for our democracy – so few voices shouldn’t carry that much power.

That is why it is so encouraging to see this issue raised in parliament last week with a new Private Member’s Bill tabled on political donations. This bill, put forward by the MP for Stratford-Upon-Avon, Manuela Perteghella, seeks to place a cap on political donations. Introducing the bill they said, “Introducing a cap on political donations is not about limiting participation; it is about making sure that every vote, every voice and every citizen matters equally in our political system.”

We couldn’t agree more. A donations cap is a crucial tool in ensuring our politics cannot be bought by the highest bidder.

Voters want action

Our research shows that voters are deeply concerned about the impact of money in politics. In fact, big money is the top electoral integrity concern among the public. And it’s easy to see why – Electoral Commissions data reveals that confidence in financial transparency has been in long-term, steady decline. Last year, only 15% of people agreed that political spending and funding is transparent.

When people believe that money can buy influence, it damages trust in our democratic institutions. And right now, that trust is already running low.

It’s time to fix the system. We need bold reforms to political finance – because democracy should work for everyone, not just the wealthiest few.