Zimbabwe has a new leader. Robert Mugabe is out. His former ally turned rival, Emmerson Mnangagwa, is in. What now?

After ecstatic celebrations to mark Mugabe&rsquo;s resignation thoughts have begun to turn to what comes next. Mugabe may have exited the political scene, but it remains dominated by the same political party &ndash; Zanu-PF &ndash; that sustained his rule.

Moreover, the country&rsquo;s president-elect, Emmerson Mnangagwa, is hardly a breath of fresh air. Having held a series of cabinet positions under Mugabe, and served as First Vice President between December 2014 and his sacking in November 2017, he looks more like a force for continuity than change.

As a result, talk in Harare quickly turned to what kind of leader Mnangagwa will be, and the system of government that would best serve ordinary Zimbabweans.

The fork in the road

My conversations with people on the streets of the capital, Harare, about the political system the country needs suggests that two distinct camps are emerging: Those who want elections to be held as soon as possible, and those who say the polls should be postponed and a transitional government established.

Both of these options have genuine &ldquo;pros&rdquo; but also strong &ldquo;cons&rdquo;. As is so often the case, there is no perfect answer that solves all problems.

It is understandable that many Zimbabweans want a period of calm and orderly government after the twists and turns of recent weeks, and believe that it would be better to form an inclusive government that would feature representatives of all of the main political parties &ndash; a kind of power sharing in all but name.

Even though I have consistently argued in favour of the value of democracy and elections in Africa, I have to admit that the &ldquo;transitioners&rdquo; have some viable arguments.

The most obvious is that a period of stability and the more consensual government might facilitate much-needed reform of the economy and also the wider political and legal system. After all, rival parties are unlikely to come to an agreement on these issues if they are immediately thrust into an election campaign.

The &ldquo;transitioners&rdquo; also have a point when it comes to democracy. Few people in Zimbabwe believe that it&rsquo;s possible for elections to be free and fair if they are held between July and August next year, as currently scheduled. Given this, and the current divisions within the opposition, a rush to elections is likely to result in a convincing victory for Zanu-PF under problematic circumstances.

A transitional arrangement would allow for much needed electoral reforms to be put in place, creating the potential for a better quality process and a more consensual outcome later on.

Testing the Crocodile

But there is also another camp that wants to see Mnangagwa, popularly known as The Crocodile, to face an election as soon as possible.

Just like their counterparts in the &ldquo;transitioner&rdquo; camp, &ldquo;electioneers&rdquo;, have some strong arguments. Whatever one wants to call Mnangagwa&rsquo;s rise to power &ndash; from a coup to an internal party squabble &ndash; it is clear that it has not been a high-quality democratic transition. And while it is clear that the overthrow of Mugabe was hugely popular, we don&rsquo;t know if the same applies to a Mnangagwa presidency. An election would settle that question.

It would also give the new government a popular mandate to undertake economic reforms, whoever wins power. This could be important to the success of the reform project, because things are likely to get worse before they get better, and the country&rsquo;s economic medicine may prove to be a bitter pill to swallow.

Holding elections would also do one thing that postponing them will not; it will test the commitment of the new government to democratic norms and values from the get-go. One of the main reasons that Zimbabwean elections have been poor quality is that Zanu-PF and the military have intervened to make sure this was the case. As another friend put it, &ldquo;If they are really committed to doing the right thing, they can do it right away and the elections will not be too bad&rdquo;.

Learning from the past

&ldquo;Electioneers&rdquo; are also motivated by scepticism that an inclusive transitional government would get much done. Both Zimbabwe and Kenya have had power-sharing governments in the recent past, and while they both introduced new constitutions they also saw high levels of corruption and limited security sector reform. They also both led to elections that were denounced by opposition parties as being unfree and unfair.

It&rsquo;s fair to ask: why would it be different this time?

The question is particularly pertinent given the current composition of parliament. Because Morgan Tsvangirai&rsquo;s Movement for Democratic Change boycotted a series of by-elections on the basis that they would not be free and fair, it has lost many of the seats it won in 2013. As a result, any transitional arrangement that deferred elections and &ldquo;froze&rdquo; the current parliament for the next three years would have a big legislative advantage to Zanu-PF.

It is also important to keep in mind that economics cannot be divorced from politics: Zimbabwe&rsquo;s current economic difficulties stem precisely from an unaccountable political framework that ignored the interests of the people. Given that recent events have emboldened the military and given them an even stronger voice within government, this is a pressing concern.

Deferring electoral reforms in order to focus on economic recovery may, therefore, prove to be a self-defeating strategy.

Next steps

Ultimately, the form of government that evolves in Zimbabwe will not be a product of popular dialogue. One of the distinctive features of this process is that for the most part it has been conducted behind closed doors by a small elite.

Don&rsquo;t be fooled by the pictures of tens of thousands of people marching on Saturday &ndash; all sides have invoked popular support, but none have actually encouraged ordinary people to say what they want, or given them a seat at the table. This is a worrying sign if strengthening democracy is the long-term goal.

Recent public statements by the main parties at the time of going to press suggests that they are not converging on an interim administration, and so the &ldquo;electioneers&rdquo; may get their wish. That could still change because talks are ongoing and both sides would gain something from a delay. But if it doesn&rsquo;t the people will be able to have their say on how they want their country to be run.

Of course, voting will not actually equate to &ldquo;having a say&rdquo; unless the country&rsquo;s new leader follows through on his promise to build a &ldquo;new democracy&rdquo;, and the ruling party can kick the habit of a lifetime. Watch this space.

This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" rel="nofollow" target="blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/will-mnangagwa-usher-in-a-new-democracy-the-view-from-zimbabwe-88023" rel="nofollow" target="blank">original article</a>.

(Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity)

After the fall of autocratic ruler Robert Mugabe, Zimbabwe faces a difficult choice between the stability of a transnational government or a potentially divisive election contest.

Zimbabwe has a new leader. Robert Mugabe is out. His former ally turned rival, Emmerson Mnangagwa, is in. What now? After ecstatic celebrations to mark Mugabe’s resignation thoughts have begun to turn to what comes next. Mugabe may have exited the political scene, but it remains dominated by the same political party – Zanu-PF – that sustained his rule. Moreover, the country’s president-elect, Emmerson Mnangagwa, is hardly a breath of fresh air. Having held a series of cabinet positions under Mugabe, and served as First Vice President between December 2014 and his sacking in November 2017, he looks more like a force for continuity than change. As a result, talk in Harare quickly turned to what kind of leader Mnangagwa will be, and the system of government that would best serve ordinary Zimbabweans. The fork in the road My conversations with people on the streets of the capital, Harare, about the political system the country needs suggests that two distinct camps are emerging: Those who want elections to be held as soon as possible, and those who say the polls should be postponed and a transitional government established. Both of these options have genuine “pros” but also strong “cons”. As is so often the case, there is no perfect answer that solves all problems. It is understandable that many Zimbabweans want a period of calm and orderly government after the twists and turns of recent weeks, and believe that it would be better to form an inclusive government that would feature representatives of all of the main political parties – a kind of power sharing in all but name. Even though I have consistently argued in favour of the value of democracy and elections in Africa, I have to admit that the “transitioners” have some viable arguments. The most obvious is that a period of stability and the more consensual government might facilitate much-needed reform of the economy and also the wider political and legal system. After all, rival parties are unlikely to come to an agreement on these issues if they are immediately thrust into an election campaign. The “transitioners” also have a point when it comes to democracy. Few people in Zimbabwe believe that it’s possible for elections to be free and fair if they are held between July and August next year, as currently scheduled. Given this, and the current divisions within the opposition, a rush to elections is likely to result in a convincing victory for Zanu-PF under problematic circumstances. A transitional arrangement would allow for much needed electoral reforms to be put in place, creating the potential for a better quality process and a more consensual outcome later on. Testing the Crocodile But there is also another camp that wants to see Mnangagwa, popularly known as The Crocodile, to face an election as soon as possible. Just like their counterparts in the “transitioner” camp, “electioneers”, have some strong arguments. Whatever one wants to call Mnangagwa’s rise to power – from a coup to an internal party squabble – it is clear that it has not been a high-quality democratic transition. And while it is clear that the overthrow of Mugabe was hugely popular, we don’t know if the same applies to a Mnangagwa presidency. An election would settle that question. It would also give the new government a popular mandate to undertake economic reforms, whoever wins power. This could be important to the success of the reform project, because things are likely to get worse before they get better, and the country’s economic medicine may prove to be a bitter pill to swallow. Holding elections would also do one thing that postponing them will not; it will test the commitment of the new government to democratic norms and values from the get-go. One of the main reasons that Zimbabwean elections have been poor quality is that Zanu-PF and the military have intervened to make sure this was the case. As another friend put it, “If they are really committed to doing the right thing, they can do it right away and the elections will not be too bad”. Learning from the past “Electioneers” are also motivated by scepticism that an inclusive transitional government would get much done. Both Zimbabwe and Kenya have had power-sharing governments in the recent past, and while they both introduced new constitutions they also saw high levels of corruption and limited security sector reform. They also both led to elections that were denounced by opposition parties as being unfree and unfair. It’s fair to ask: why would it be different this time? The question is particularly pertinent given the current composition of parliament. Because Morgan Tsvangirai’s Movement for Democratic Change boycotted a series of by-elections on the basis that they would not be free and fair, it has lost many of the seats it won in 2013. As a result, any transitional arrangement that deferred elections and “froze” the current parliament for the next three years would have a big legislative advantage to Zanu-PF. It is also important to keep in mind that economics cannot be divorced from politics: Zimbabwe’s current economic difficulties stem precisely from an unaccountable political framework that ignored the interests of the people. Given that recent events have emboldened the military and given them an even stronger voice within government, this is a pressing concern. Deferring electoral reforms in order to focus on economic recovery may, therefore, prove to be a self-defeating strategy. Next steps Ultimately, the form of government that evolves in Zimbabwe will not be a product of popular dialogue. One of the distinctive features of this process is that for the most part it has been conducted behind closed doors by a small elite. Don’t be fooled by the pictures of tens of thousands of people marching on Saturday – all sides have invoked popular support, but none have actually encouraged ordinary people to say what they want, or given them a seat at the table. This is a worrying sign if strengthening democracy is the long-term goal. Recent public statements by the main parties at the time of going to press suggests that they are not converging on an interim administration, and so the “electioneers” may get their wish. That could still change because talks are ongoing and both sides would gain something from a delay. But if it doesn’t the people will be able to have their say on how they want their country to be run. Of course, voting will not actually equate to “having a say” unless the country’s new leader follows through on his promise to build a “new democracy”, and the ruling party can kick the habit of a lifetime. Watch this space. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article. (Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity)

Opinion: Will Mnangagwa usher democracy in Zimbabwe?

Grace Ntombizodwa Mugabe&#39;s journey of life appears to be a fantasy or akin to an animated world of Hollywood, where the princess, who lived her life in distress met her prince charming and live happily forever. But &#39;happily ever after&#39; is certainly not the case with Grace Mugabe.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/untitled%20design%20(30)-20171120104326.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
&quot;Gucci Grace&quot; pictured with her husband in Vietnam in 2001. (AFP)
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

From a typist to the most powerful lady in the Zimbabwe, her lifestyle has an iridescent all negative shades. From being unapologetically arrogant to uncomparably ambitious, she was a synonym of nasty.

She was born in Benoni, Johannesburg, in a middle-class family but Grace had certainly bigger dreams for herself. She was married to Stanley Goreraza, an air force pilot from Zimbabwe and has a son.

Soon after that, she started working as a typist in president&#39;s office, where she met Zimbabwean President, Robert Mugabe. In some time, they started having an affair. At that time, Robert was married to his first wife Sally Hayfron but she was terminally ill.&nbsp;

Robert is 40 years older than Grace. Love might have certain boundaries but ambition does not have any. After the death of Sally Hayfron, ambitious Grace got married to Robert Mugabe in a lavish ceremony. She has three children with Robert.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/untitled%20design%20(33)-20171120112628.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
Grace and Robert got married in the year 1996. (Others)
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

As far as her education is concerned, she was given the doctoral degree in sociology in the year 2014 but her dissertation is still not available in the archive of University of Zimbabwe.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/grace%20at%20convocation-20171120111339.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
She was given the doctoral degree in sociology in the year 2014. (AFP)
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

Western media has named her &#39;Gucci Grace&#39; just because of her lavish lifestyle and extravagant spending on luxuries. The European Union even put a travel ban on her. The EU attempts to put an end to her expensive trips in European countries while her citizen suffers. Once she spent USD 120000 on a short shopping spree in Paris, France. After the travel ban, she started visiting China and Malaysia to shop. She also has mansions in China and Malaysia.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/untitled%20design%20(29)-20171120104108.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
Grace Mugabe shows off her pearl jewellery as she arrives for the opening of Parliament in Harare. (Reuters)
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

She launched construction of two palaces in Zimbabwe, one of which was sold to Muammar Gaddafi, another leader of her kind.

She has a habit of being in the news for all the possible wrong reasons. Once she assaulted a model and later a British journalist because of which she surfaced in the media for quite some time. She was an attention seeker. Her lifestyle has earned the name &quot;Dis-Grace&quot; at home.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/untitled%20design%20(32)-20171120112050.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
Grace Mugabe spotted with her husband Robert Mubage in Paris. (AFP)
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

Initially, she stayed out of politics and was better known for her spending habits, such as rare diamond jewellery, and Rolls-Royce limousines for her playboy sons.

But later her political ambition was very much clear by her imprudent actions. When Majuru was expelled from the party, Grace became head of the ZANU-PF Women&rsquo;s League that gave her a seat at the party&rsquo;s top table.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/untitled%20design%20(31)-20171120111538.jpg" />
<div class="media-description">
There are claims that the money funding her lifestyle came from the country&#39;s diamonds. (AP)
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

Emmerson Mnangagwa was president&#39;s ally and also likely to be President&#39;s successor but Grace used her political platform to take on Mnangagwa and his allies, eventually firing him from the party.

She emerged to be the most powerful lady in Zimbabwe, but her inappropriate lifestyle is the reason why many anticipated her downfall, and now its happening. She could have used her power and stature to improve the standard of living of thousands of Zimbabweans. Like her rise, even her downfall is dramatic as a feature film. A film that ends with a question, where did the sorceress go?

(Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity).

From a typist to Zimbabwe's First Lady, Grace Mugabe has been unapologetic, arrogant and ambitious

Grace Ntombizodwa Mugabe's journey of life appears to be a fantasy or akin to an animated world of Hollywood, where the princess, who lived her life in distress met her prince charming and live happily forever. But 'happily ever after' is certainly not the case with Grace Mugabe. "Gucci Grace" pictured with her husband in Vietnam in 2001. (AFP) × From a typist to the most powerful lady in the Zimbabwe, her lifestyle has an iridescent all negative shades. From being unapologetically arrogant to uncomparably ambitious, she was a synonym of nasty. She was born in Benoni, Johannesburg, in a middle-class family but Grace had certainly bigger dreams for herself. She was married to Stanley Goreraza, an air force pilot from Zimbabwe and has a son. Soon after that, she started working as a typist in president's office, where she met Zimbabwean President, Robert Mugabe. In some time, they started having an affair. At that time, Robert was married to his first wife Sally Hayfron but she was terminally ill. Robert is 40 years older than Grace. Love might have certain boundaries but ambition does not have any. After the death of Sally Hayfron, ambitious Grace got married to Robert Mugabe in a lavish ceremony. She has three children with Robert. Grace and Robert got married in the year 1996. (Others) × As far as her education is concerned, she was given the doctoral degree in sociology in the year 2014 but her dissertation is still not available in the archive of University of Zimbabwe. She was given the doctoral degree in sociology in the year 2014. (AFP) × Western media has named her 'Gucci Grace' just because of her lavish lifestyle and extravagant spending on luxuries. The European Union even put a travel ban on her. The EU attempts to put an end to her expensive trips in European countries while her citizen suffers. Once she spent USD 120000 on a short shopping spree in Paris, France. After the travel ban, she started visiting China and Malaysia to shop. She also has mansions in China and Malaysia. Grace Mugabe shows off her pearl jewellery as she arrives for the opening of Parliament in Harare. (Reuters) × She launched construction of two palaces in Zimbabwe, one of which was sold to Muammar Gaddafi, another leader of her kind. She has a habit of being in the news for all the possible wrong reasons. Once she assaulted a model and later a British journalist because of which she surfaced in the media for quite some time. She was an attention seeker. Her lifestyle has earned the name "Dis-Grace" at home. Grace Mugabe spotted with her husband Robert Mubage in Paris. (AFP) × Initially, she stayed out of politics and was better known for her spending habits, such as rare diamond jewellery, and Rolls-Royce limousines for her playboy sons. But later her political ambition was very much clear by her imprudent actions. When Majuru was expelled from the party, Grace became head of the ZANU-PF Women’s League that gave her a seat at the party’s top table. There are claims that the money funding her lifestyle came from the country's diamonds. (AP) × Emmerson Mnangagwa was president's ally and also likely to be President's successor but Grace used her political platform to take on Mnangagwa and his allies, eventually firing him from the party. She emerged to be the most powerful lady in Zimbabwe, but her inappropriate lifestyle is the reason why many anticipated her downfall, and now its happening. She could have used her power and stature to improve the standard of living of thousands of Zimbabweans. Like her rise, even her downfall is dramatic as a feature film. A film that ends with a question, where did the sorceress go? (Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity).

Opinion: 50 shades of Grace Mugabe

Soon after Zimbabwe&rsquo;s army confined President Robert Mugabe to his palatial Harare home this week &ndash; allegedly for his safety &ndash; it was announced in Luanda that Angola&rsquo;s new President, Jo&atilde;o Louren&ccedil;o, had relieved Isabel dos Santos of her position as head of the state-run oil company Sonangol.

While there may not be any direct connection between these two events, they suggest some intriguing comparisons. In both countries, ruling families seem to have failed to secure themselves in power.

When Mugabe, as leader of the Zimbabwean African National Union-Patriotic Front (Zanu-PF), became ruler of Zimbabwe at independence in April 1980, Jos&eacute; Eduardo dos Santos was already President of Angola. He had succeeded to that position after the death of Agostinho Neto in September 1979.

Dos Santos had to deal with external intervention and over two decades of civil war, during which he ruled dictatorially. Mugabe, despite a facade of constitutionalism and regular elections, also became increasingly dictatorial. He abandoned adherence to the rule of law and his country&rsquo;s economy collapsed. Angola became notorious for the scale of the corruption linked especially to its oil riches. Zimbabwe went from bread-basket to basket-case. With the great majority of the people of both countries living in dire poverty, Dos Santos flew to Europe when he needed medical attention, while Mugabe went to Singapore.

Though Dos Santos was probably as reluctant as Mugabe to give up power, he decided to quit as president of the country and try to retain influence through the ruling party and members of his family. Mugabe tried to impose his wife on his party as his chosen successor and then to cling on to his positions even when the army took effective control of his country.

Given recent developments in Luanda and Harare, it would seem that neither of these two old men have succeeded in securing their family dynasties.

Dos Santos&rsquo;s succession plan

By 2016, suffering health problems that took him to Spain for treatment, Dos Santos announced that he would step down as president of Angola and he approved his Minister of Defence, Jo&atilde;o Manuel Gon&ccedil;alves Louren&ccedil;o as his successor.

Following the victory of the ruling Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA) in the general election held in August this year, Louren&ccedil;o took over as president in September. But Dos Santos remained president of the MPLA, and clearly expected Louren&ccedil;o to look after his interests and that of his family, who had become enormously wealthy.

From the action Louren&ccedil;o has now taken against Dos Santos&rsquo; billionaire daughter Isabel, it would seem that he&rsquo;s becoming his own man. It appears he wishes to distance himself from the Dos Santos family, which for many Angolans is associated with corruption on a vast scale.

The London-educated Isabel has proved herself to be a very capable businesswoman, and though the Angolan economy has been suffering because of low oil prices, on top of massive corruption, it&rsquo;s unlikely she was sacked to bring in a better chief executive to run the country&rsquo;s most important state-owned company. There is talk in Luanda that Isabel&rsquo;s brother, Jos&eacute; Filomeno dos Santos, will be relieved of his position as head of the country&rsquo;s large Sovereign Wealth Fund and that his father, the former president of the country, will be replaced as president of the ruling party, though that may have to wait until a party congress is held.

Mugabe&rsquo;s succession plan

In Zimbabwe Mugabe has sought to arrange that his wife will succeed him. But Gucci Grace and Robert made the mistake of trying to ensure this by firing Vice-President Emmerson Mnangagwa.

Though at the time of writing, the 93-year-old Mugabe remains president both of the country and of the ruling Zanu-PF party, it&rsquo;s widely expected that he will soon be relieved of both positions, probably by Mnangagwa, with the assistance of the army.

Changes for the better?

New leadership in Angola and Zimbabwe will have an impact on the region as a whole.

Given Mnangagwa&rsquo;s record as a long-serving member of the government in Zimbabwe and his involvement in the mass killing of Ndebele in the early 1980s, it is hardly likely that he will emerge as a champion of democracy.

In Angola, Louren&ccedil;o is still finding his feet as head of government.

It is therefore unrealistic to hope that either country will soon move from decades of repressive rule and lack of transparency to greater constitutionalism and closer adherence to the rule of law.

But if we are witnessing the end of an era in which dictators stayed in power for decades and tried to secure their continuing influence through their families, and if we are seeing the diminishing importance of liberation movements turned political party, this must be good not only for Angola and Zimbabwe but for the southern African region as a whole.

It should also hold lessons for those who rule in neighbouring countries.

This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com" rel="nofollow" target="blank">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/mugabe-and-dos-santos-africas-old-men-seem-finally-to-be-fading-away-87689" rel="nofollow" target="blank">original article</a>.

The end of an era in which dictators like Mugabe and Dos Santos stayed in power for decades, is good not only for Angola and Zimbabwe but for southern Africa as a whole

Soon after Zimbabwe’s army confined President Robert Mugabe to his palatial Harare home this week – allegedly for his safety – it was announced in Luanda that Angola’s new President, João Lourenço, had relieved Isabel dos Santos of her position as head of the state-run oil company Sonangol. While there may not be any direct connection between these two events, they suggest some intriguing comparisons. In both countries, ruling families seem to have failed to secure themselves in power. When Mugabe, as leader of the Zimbabwean African National Union-Patriotic Front (Zanu-PF), became ruler of Zimbabwe at independence in April 1980, José Eduardo dos Santos was already President of Angola. He had succeeded to that position after the death of Agostinho Neto in September 1979. Dos Santos had to deal with external intervention and over two decades of civil war, during which he ruled dictatorially. Mugabe, despite a facade of constitutionalism and regular elections, also became increasingly dictatorial. He abandoned adherence to the rule of law and his country’s economy collapsed. Angola became notorious for the scale of the corruption linked especially to its oil riches. Zimbabwe went from bread-basket to basket-case. With the great majority of the people of both countries living in dire poverty, Dos Santos flew to Europe when he needed medical attention, while Mugabe went to Singapore. Though Dos Santos was probably as reluctant as Mugabe to give up power, he decided to quit as president of the country and try to retain influence through the ruling party and members of his family. Mugabe tried to impose his wife on his party as his chosen successor and then to cling on to his positions even when the army took effective control of his country. Given recent developments in Luanda and Harare, it would seem that neither of these two old men have succeeded in securing their family dynasties. Dos Santos’s succession plan By 2016, suffering health problems that took him to Spain for treatment, Dos Santos announced that he would step down as president of Angola and he approved his Minister of Defence, João Manuel Gonçalves Lourenço as his successor. Following the victory of the ruling Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA) in the general election held in August this year, Lourenço took over as president in September. But Dos Santos remained president of the MPLA, and clearly expected Lourenço to look after his interests and that of his family, who had become enormously wealthy. From the action Lourenço has now taken against Dos Santos’ billionaire daughter Isabel, it would seem that he’s becoming his own man. It appears he wishes to distance himself from the Dos Santos family, which for many Angolans is associated with corruption on a vast scale. The London-educated Isabel has proved herself to be a very capable businesswoman, and though the Angolan economy has been suffering because of low oil prices, on top of massive corruption, it’s unlikely she was sacked to bring in a better chief executive to run the country’s most important state-owned company. There is talk in Luanda that Isabel’s brother, José Filomeno dos Santos, will be relieved of his position as head of the country’s large Sovereign Wealth Fund and that his father, the former president of the country, will be replaced as president of the ruling party, though that may have to wait until a party congress is held. Mugabe’s succession plan In Zimbabwe Mugabe has sought to arrange that his wife will succeed him. But Gucci Grace and Robert made the mistake of trying to ensure this by firing Vice-President Emmerson Mnangagwa. Though at the time of writing, the 93-year-old Mugabe remains president both of the country and of the ruling Zanu-PF party, it’s widely expected that he will soon be relieved of both positions, probably by Mnangagwa, with the assistance of the army. Changes for the better? New leadership in Angola and Zimbabwe will have an impact on the region as a whole. Given Mnangagwa’s record as a long-serving member of the government in Zimbabwe and his involvement in the mass killing of Ndebele in the early 1980s, it is hardly likely that he will emerge as a champion of democracy. In Angola, Lourenço is still finding his feet as head of government. It is therefore unrealistic to hope that either country will soon move from decades of repressive rule and lack of transparency to greater constitutionalism and closer adherence to the rule of law. But if we are witnessing the end of an era in which dictators stayed in power for decades and tried to secure their continuing influence through their families, and if we are seeing the diminishing importance of liberation movements turned political party, this must be good not only for Angola and Zimbabwe but for the southern African region as a whole. It should also hold lessons for those who rule in neighbouring countries. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Mugabe and Dos Santos: No place for dictators in Africa

gucci-grace

Gucci Grace, News on Gucci Grace, stories on Gucci Grace, articles on Gucci Grace, Gucci Grace stories at Wion, Gucci Grace news, Gucci Grace latest news

gucci grace

Opinion: Will Mnangagwa usher democracy in Zimbabwe?

Opinion: 50 shades of Grace Mugabe

Mugabe and Dos Santos: No place for dictators in Africa