The military should be treated as a single unit

In my last blog post, I concluded with the remark "Without willingness on the part of Zanu-PF members especially those in the military, there is very little chance that a stable and peaceful transition will be possible"

A fellow Zimbabwe responded to that particular comment about the military as follows.

James Chikonamombe - One point on the military though: this is not a monolithic military, but rather, a deeply divided military split into antagonistic factions. I'm reliably informed that on the one hand, you have certain members of the top military brass who actually consider themselves to be Presidential material, and yet, on the other hand, certain members of the same military top brass are vehemently against these same military "manouvres". 

It those divisions within the military which make it most dangerous. Take a look at the Arab spring. Where the military has remained united such as in Egypt and Tunisia the country has remained stable. Where the military got divided and suffered 'defections', such as Libya and Syria, the countries are faced with serious instability.

What we know in Zimbabwe is that large sections of the military are definitely pro-Zanu-PF, with many of them being described as hardliners. While there has been a constant stream of rumours about this or that general being sympathetic to the MDC, or being 'moderate' there is no real evidence of who will throw in their lot against Zanu-PF once the chips are down.

In any case, the pro-Zanu-PF faction is likely to have the greater numbers and is likely to dominate any proceedings barring outside intervention. Even if outsiders intervene, do not forget that most of the pro-Zanu-PF are hardened guerilla war veterans. Zimbabwean terrain is also more suited for guerilla warfare than say the Libyan desert and it will take years to subdue them, if it is at all possible. They can easily be to Zimbabwe what the Taliban has been to Afghanistan.

As far as I am concerned a bean count of which soldiers are pro-Zanu-PF and which are anti-Zanu-PF is practically useless, or even which soldiers belong to which faction of Zanu-PF is practically useless. The more important think is to prevent them getting at each other's throats. In fact I consider the intra-faction fault-lines within Zanu-PF to be far much more dangerous to Zimbabwe's stability.

Once the Zanu-PF intra-faction fight starts even the MDC will be a little more than a toddler watching its parents fighting - utterly helpless to stop the fight but very much liable to be caught in the crossfire.

James Chikonamombe - Zimbabwe's military, like militaries elsewhere, is a virtual "state within a state". But, we should not put too much stock in the active serving officers; the ones we read about in the papers every day. Conversely, there are retired officers who carry much clout, and it is these officers that the opposition should be embracing. If any democratic change has to take place, then Zanu's "old guard" should be embraced by the opposition. They are actually very progressive, and keen to see Zimbabwe move forward -- believe it or not! -- and should be part and parcel of any post-ZPF scenario.

The retired officers are only important in as much as they can act as intermediaries with the serving officers. It is the serving officers in charge of brigades and platoons who give orders directly to the rank and file of the soldiers who matter most. It is fallacy to think that the retired officers command so much respect that they will be able to immediately take over command of platoons.

Even to imagine that they will have stronger bonds with politicians than they have with the men they once commanded and then handed the baton to, is also fallacy. Yes they may make noises sympathetic to certain politicians every now and then, but when the chips are down it may well be a different story. The man who says, 'Mudhara I covered you during that fire-fight at that mountain' will certainly be more likely to sway the retired generals in his favour. I am not saying it is a given, I am just considering the balance of probabilities.

In short any strategy by the opposition that is centred around corralling a few generals from the rest of the herd, is at best unpredictable in outcome. What is almost certain is that it could lead to dangerous instability. It would be better for them to try and not make a distinction between the generals and just treat the military as a unit. Even the individual soldiers are as important as the generals and their contribution and sacrifice for the country should never ever be trash-talked.

I know that the generals themselves have not been particularly tight-lipped and have said things that are meant to rile to the opposition. What is required is for the opposition to show maturity and avoid tit-for-tat verbal exchanges that will further pollute the atmosphere.

The most important thing is not to divide the military. They should be treated as a unit, not as a patchwork of hardliners and moderates. The best chance of keeping the country stable lies in keeping the military united.