Skip Navigation

African Affairs 2005 104(414):1-34; doi:10.1093/afraf/adi016
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (5)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kriger, N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© Royal African Society 2005, all rights reserved

Article

ZANU(PF) strategies in general elections, 1980–2000: Discourse and coercion

Norma Kriger

Norma Kriger is an independent scholar

Abstract

For many analysts, the general election campaign in 2000 showed a new face of the ruling party, ZANU(PF). Against the new opposition party, the Movement for Democratic Change, ZANU(PF) engaged in violence and intimidation, often relying on youth and war veterans, even as it accused its opponents of subversive violence. Moreover, ZANU(PF) appealed to its liberation war credentials, while dismissing its chief opponents as puppets of British imperialism and reactionary white settlers. After the election, President Mugabe appealed for reconciliation between winners and losers, only to permit violence against those who had voted against the ruling party. For ruling party perpetrators of violence, there was impunity and later a presidential pardon. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate how the ruling party used remarkably similar strategies in every general election since 1980, notwithstanding striking differences in the contexts, issues, and nature of the chief opposition party. Given this well established pattern of ruling party violence and intimidation and characterization of opposition parties as illegitimate, the article seeks to understand why analysts repeatedly saw in the regular multiparty elections either a democratic system or one that was amenable to democratization.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Asian and African StudiesHome page
L. Zeilig
Student Politics and Activism in Zimbabwe: The Frustrated Transition
Journal of Asian and African Studies, April 1, 2008; 43(2): 215 - 237.
[Abstract] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.