Political crises are normally resolved by political processes worked out by politicians and their supporters. But the failure of Zimbabwean political parties to find a way through the maze where we have lost ourselves, induces one to look in other directions. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) have become a major force in our society - could they not show us the direction and lead us back to political sanity?
NGOs are the direct descendants of charitable and welfare organizations, but they have evolved in different directions so that they now present a wide variety of programmes and structures. For the sake of clarity we can group them into three broad categories. First we have what can still be referred to as welfare organizations, devoted primarily to assisting individuals who have failed to achieve the basics of a decent life on their own - orphanages, old people's homes, soup kitchens, feeding programmes and shelters for the destitute and street kids, and AIDS and counseling organizations. Secondly there are the development organizations, engaged in income generation and capacity building for communities to promote sustained economic growth. Examples of these are Plan International, ORAP, and micro-finance lending organizations such as Zambuko Trust. Third, and generally more recently on the scene, are the civil society organizations. These concern themselves in one way or another with issues of governance and policy formation and implementation. Some focus on specific interest groups. Here we find the human rights groups, civic educators, the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU), those promoting democracy or specific policies such as the Women and Land Lobby Group or the Community Working Group on Health.
Just as the animal kingdom encompasses both insects and elephants, NGOs come in all shapes and sizes; some are home-grown, others are internationally connected. In all three categories we have faith-based or church related organizations as well as others which are purely secular. Many cross over the category boundaries, with objectives in two or even all three broad areas. An environmental NGO may teach water harvesting for rural development but may also be engaged in lobbying for more effective environmental protection legislation. An integrated rural development organization may facilitate leadership training and human rights education while teaching the scientific application of fertilizer and running a school feeding programme.
In spite of the differences, all NGOs share certain common features and face a number of common dilemmas. First, they all originate from a vision, ideological or otherwise, of an improved society, social justice if you will, where individuals can satisfy their basic needs and strive to achieve their human potential. They are based on idealism. Second, virtually all depend on foreign donors. Third, all must negotiate a position within the parameters drawn by government policy. Balancing these three conditions can be tricky.
While NGOs of the first two categories (welfare organizations and development organizations) share the vision of a just society, their methods of achieving it usually do not involve direct action relating to governance. Their role in the present crisis has often been simply to keep people alive and help them to adapt to the new environment as well as they can. It is the civil society organizations to which we turn to find a direct role in impacting on the crisis. Can they assist?
Our response to this question will be influenced by our analysis of what is wrong and how it must be corrected. If it is simply to put a new political party into power, then that is best left to political organisations. But most civil society organizations have recognized that the problem is not just ZANU PF's criminality. The problem lies deep in the society itself which has permitted such an aberration of democratic governance to develop and survive. The solution can not therefore be found simply by replacing the present governing incumbents by others, no matter how genuine or even angelic they may appear. The lessons of Zambia, Malawi and Kenya are not lost on Zimbabweans. And the current rupture in the MDC reinforces them. ZANU-like tendencies toward the corrupt use of power exist everywhere in Zimbabwe. They have almost become part of our culture.
If we identify the problem not just as a need for a new governing party, but as a need to create a whole new democratic culture from the grassroots upwards, then civil society organizations do have a key role to play. In most developed societies, state education institutions teach the fundamentals of democratic practice - through both theoretical and practical lessons. But the ZANU-ised government institutions have forfeited the opportunity to play this role as they have become rather tools of oppression, mistrusted by the people.
What can civil society organizations do? A variety of possibilities exist, depending on the particular focus of each organization. All are essential to the development of a new democratic dispensation. Here are some suggestions:
1. Civic education organizations can promote a cultural revolution towards democracy through work at the grassroots. The aim would be to bring people to an understanding of participatory democracy, to a knowledge of their rights and a willingness to claim them, while respecting the rights of others. One of the reasons that ZCTU was in the forefront of the push for change in the 1990's was that they had already gone a long way with this educational work.
2. Information and legal organizations can expose the failings in the present governance by:
a. Research and publication of information on a wide variety of issues, including abuses of rights, corruption and policy failures
b. helping people to seek justice through the courts where their rights have been abused
3. Membership organizations can provide examples of democratic practice in their own structures, giving people the necessary experience of democratic leadership, democratic decision-making, transparency of financial accounting, respect for rights and tolerance for differing opinions, where the emphasis is on argument and persuasion rather than manipulation, intimidation and violence to promote one's views.
4. Special interest organizations can develop model legislation such as constitutions and policies on issues such as land, foreign trade and production modes, challenging people to imagine a better future and think both creatively and critically towards it. The development of models needs to be accompanied not just by campaigning but also by discussion and production of alternatives, so that people fully understand the range of possible policy choices.
5. Membership organizations and coalitions of civil society organizations can mobilize the people to demonstrate and express their dissatisfaction with the present situation and their determination to resolve it in a democratic direction. This builds people's confidence and ensures their participation in the process of change.
6. They can also inform and lobby foreign governments, NGOs and international organizations, bringing formal complaints to human rights bodies and courts, thus building international pressure on the government for change.
7. Peace-building organizations can work at grassroots to help heal the wounds of hatred and intolerance and encourage people to respect each other's humanity and work together to achieve common goals.
8. At a transitional stage, all forms of civil society organizations can participate in interim measures and negotiations to prepare the way for a constitutional conference and internationally supervised elections.
The road we have to travel to establish genuine democracy in Zimbabwe is a long and winding one. Civil society organizations can help through all these activities and many others to take us along that road towards a shared vision of social justice.
But there are problems and dangers along the road which must be overcome. Just as these organizations may share a common idealism so they face many common problems which work to undermine their contribution.
1. Donor dependence. Virtually all civil society organizations are donor funded. Donors have their own goals and expectations and give funds because they want them to be put to a specific use. The process of designing project proposals, budgeting, persuading donors, and then reporting in detail is an important and useful discipline. However, the dependence leads to a deep insecurity and can also distort programmes as organizations tailor their proposals to known donor interests.
2. Bureaucracy/loss of idealism. Many Zimbabwean organizations have been well supported by foreign donors, who have provided funds for comfortable offices, smart vehicles, hi-tech equipment, training courses and even regional and international travel. Through the past inflationary years it is the NGOs with foreign funds which have been best able to raise salaries, while government and even the private sector have lagged behind. Gradually NGOs have become the preferred place of employment for all types of trained personnel. Comfortable employees find difficulty in risking their good fortune by implementing policies which could put them in government's spotlight and might threaten the very existence of the organizations they serve. Hence even civil society organizations become conservative in their outlook, keeping to safe programmes which will not jeopardize their infrastructure and jobs. Some lose the will to spearhead change altogether.
3. Egotism/power complex. All human beings have weaknesses, whether they work for government or for NGOs. There is always a temptation for capable individuals who find prominence within the NGO world to become distracted by their own sense of self-importance. This leads them to ignore democratic interactions in their organizations and in their relations with the people on the ground. Instead of working with the people they begin to use them as a force to push their own agendas, without allowing the people to develop the necessary skills to enable democracy to grow.
4. Infiltration. The strongest civil society organizations are those with membership throughout the country, but they are also perceived as the most threatening by government. These are organizations such as ZCTU, Zimbabwe Human Rights Association (Zimrights), the National Constitutional Assembly (NCA), Women of Zimbabwe Arise (WOZA) and the Zimbabwe National Students Union (ZINASU). Membership organizations can easily fall victim to the individual who simply wants a position in order to establish a power base for his or her own aggrandizement, or even to access funds which can be appropriated. But more dangerous is the government agent who is planted within the organization for the purpose of causing havoc and rendering it incapable of carrying forward its programmes. By their very openness membership organizations are vulnerable, but even non-membership organizations can be debilitated by infiltration.
5. Government restrictions. It has long been the practice for welfare organizations to register with the Department of Social Welfare to establish their legitimacy in the eyes of government. But this has never been a legal requirement and many civil society organizations have simply registered trust deeds with the High Court under a common law procedure. As the ZANU PF government has become increasingly totalitarian, it has sought to exert control over all NGOs by requiring registration. It could then refuse to register any "undesirable" organization, rendering its operations illegal. The notorious NGO Bill specifically targets civil society NGOs which are concerned with "issues of governance". These would be excluded from receiving any foreign funding. Even before the law is passed, we can observe some organizations adjusting their programmes in the hope of not being refused registration. Should the current draft become law, civil society organizations will have to decide individually whether to cease operations or devise other ways of continuing their work. Few, considering the elements of donor dependence and bureaucratization, would have the will or the means to continue, and many would simply close down.
The challenge to civil society organizations, their boards and their staff as well as their donors, is a tough one. While they cannot directly bring the much needed political change they do have a vital role to play in guiding Zimbabweans through the maze towards the establishment of a genuinely democratic society. Only in such a context can we enjoy economic development which leads to prosperity for all. However, the way will be long and perhaps dangerous, and those who believe there are any quick fixes are bound to be disappointed. Positive achievements will not be made unless the organizations and individuals within them rise above their own personal needs and ambitions and are prepared to work, and even sacrifice, for the common good. Let us hope they will have the skill, commitment, moral courage and endurance to navigate through the rocks and survive, in order to fulfill their important mission.