Social media becomes Robert Mugabes nightmare
In a country
that reportedly suppresses the traditional media, Zimbabweans have found another way to communicate their frustrations towards the
government
DOMINIQUE VON ROHR
In a WhatsApp video that went viral recently, a middle-aged Zimbabwean man addresses President Robert Mugabe, telling him that 90 per cent of the people in the country are unemployed and do not contribute to the economy because Mugabe cannot provide jobs.
You are assaulting children for expressing their heartfelt disappointment because of your misrule. We are tired of that, the man continues, speaking about high-level corruption, injustice and police brutality and deteriorating social service delivery.
He asks Mugabe: You wear spectacles, but you cant see. How many spectacles do you need to see that you are destroying the country?
In a country that reportedly suppresses the traditional media, Zimbabweans have found another way to communicate their frustrations towards the government.
Social media platforms, as well as texting services such as WhatsApp, have become steadily more popular as means to criticise, but also address Mugabe, who appears to not be easily accessible to ordinary citizens.
The use of social media has especially increased after evangelical pastor Evan Mawarire posted a video earlier this year in April in which he appeared with the national flag around his neck, criticising the governments economic strategy.
The video led to the larger social media campaign #ThisFlag in which thousands of Zimbabweans participated, bringing the situation of the country into the international spotlight and reaching millions of people on a global level, much to the displeasure of Mugabe.
By using the internet to communicate, Zimbabweans become empowered to speak out relatively safely against the government, and at the same time, state propaganda starts to lose its effectiveness.
The worsening economic situation in Zimbabwe has led to multiple protests against the president and his government. Depending on the source, estimates of Zimbabwes unemployment rate range from 4 per cent to 95 per cent, many of the figures not being backed up by reliable data.
Given the precarious state of the economy, unemployment levels, however, are certainly high.
Economic growth decreased from 3.8 per cent in 2014 to an estimated 1.5 per cent in 2015. Large public expenditures, the underperformance of domestic revenues and low export figures have increased the state department and have had a negative effect on urban development such as housing and transport, as well as social services.
In July, countless Zimbabweans gathered to protest against these issues. Since then, unrest has spread across the whole country.
The Zimbabwean government in return has been accused of blocking social media such as Facebook and WhatsApp to prevent people from gathering to protest. social media activism in Zimbabwe has ignited. WhatsApp, a mobile messaging service that is frequently subscribed to in a prepaid form in Zimbabwe, has been widely used as a tool to mobilise. It accounts for 34 per cent of all mobile data use in Zimbabwe. Facebook reports 260,000 daily users, of 890,000 Zimbabweans online, but this only accounts for 3 per cent of mobile broadband usage in the country. Newsday Zimbabwe, an independent news outlet, increased its Twitter network by 10,000 followers in the past month alone.
The ruling ZANU-PF responded to this upswell by drafting new legislation, the Computer Crime and Cyber Crime Bill, to control online activism. But it might find it difficult to keep track of services such as WhatsApp, which now operate with end-to-end encryption making them very hard to keep track of.
Social protest
Protests coordinated on social media have emerged in recent weeks throughout the country addressing issues from socio-economic governance, to the introduction of bond notes (a cash substitute in the country which no longer has its own currency), corruption and frustration by graduates at a lack of employment opportunities. When groups do mobilise on Zimbabwes streets, protests have increasingly been challenged by riot police using tear gas and water cannons.
These protests are different from previous efforts to challenge the governments record in Zimbabwe. Social media mobilisation is more fluid and dynamic than traditional protests, such as trade union strikes, that tend to require the building of solidarity and a common position among workers in an industry. Previous anti-regime protests, such as those by the Movement for Democratic Change, have a traditional leader and grassroots form. It has been easy for the regime to identify and pick off individual leaders such as the opposition figure Morgan Tsvangirai before the 2008 election, leaving movements temporarily rudderless.
The leaderless, issue-driven format of social media protest is different. It works best when organised and executed quickly and when responding to a crisis. This fluidity makes it difficult for the state to track, but it can also pose difficulties for the social movements, which can quickly lose momentum as activists lose motivation. The strength of new movements can become their downfall if not managed well.
Legal clampdown
Growth of social media has happened in a political environment that has become more and more hostile. On August 5, all mobile phone operators suspended data promotions meaning that internet access became significantly more expensive in Zimbabwe.
Two days later the government announced draft legislation to address so-called cyber-terrorism. The draft law contains provisions that deal with the use of digital platforms to incite violence and to cause civil unrest that could undermine future mobilisation.
Although mobile operators have offered little explanation about why data promotions suddenly stopped, the near-simultaneous introduction of cybercrime legislation smacks of state attempts to curtail freedom of expression.
All this feels familiar. In previous periods of anti-government mobilisation and during elections, ZANU-PF successfully used both state-sponsored violence in combination with legislative tools to quell public protest. In the early 2000s, the government introduced legislation aimed at restricting mobilisation, including the 2003 Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act to control the press and the Public Order and 2002 Security Act to monitor and break up public meetings. These tools routinely undermine human rights including freedom of expression and assembly.
In 2012, the government charged six people with treason for organising and attending a lecture to learn lessons from the Arab Spring. Although the charges were later dropped, it is clear that ZANU-PF is sensitive to the impact that free expression could have on the stability of the regime.
ZANU-PF faces this upsurge of mobilisation in the midst of a party crisis. Mugabe is 92-years-old and his party is beset by factionalism with rivals vying for position as his successor. A diverse political opposition is developing, formally rooted in ZANU-PF itself. The former vice president, Joice Mujuru, recently launched Zimbabwe People First party to challenge ZANU-PF in the upcoming 2018 elections.
In late July, a group of war veterans from Zimbabwes liberation struggle, historically a core support base for ZANU-PF, condemned Mugabes running of the country. ZANU-PFs current structure lacks the organisational stability to effectively manage such dynamic threats to the regime.
The Wire
