The soldiers take an oath or make an affirmation to protect, defend and uphold the constitution of the Republic Of Zimbabwe If there is an illegal rebellion or insurrection with the intention of bringing down the government. For instance through unconstitutional means, then the military will oppose such a rebellion or insurrection. Zimbabwe’s constitution does not allow the removal of a constitutionally elected government by force or coercion. So all the demonstrations and Mugabe must fall calls are unconstitutional and must be dealt with democratically. When they become violent surely the army cannot stand by. If the majority is not happy with the current government they can wait for the next elections. On the other hand, if the government becomes a tyrant and issues orders to the military contrary to the constitution, then the military would not (or should not) obey such orders.
If there is an illegal rebellion or insurrection with the intention of bringing down the government, i.e. undoing the constitution, then the military will oppose such a rebellion or insurrection. It is true that the Zimbabwean citizens have rights which the government does not acknowledge. With all due respect to Zimbabweans the National Army are citizens too, and they will not just recklessly kill their fellow citizens. If citizens become rebels they become rebels not citizens.
When Chihuri ordered the police to attack the war vets they were citizens who attacked Veterans and their families.
It’s happened before, it can happen again.
Quite simply, the vast majority of the members of the active army would support the government – not to mention veterans who would do everything within their capabilities to bring down the rebellion. This is called the call of duty.
If the hypothetical rebellion were to occur, if nothing else, would you go undercover within the rebellion and supply information of their criminal plans to the government forces?
The military of the Zimbabwe is made up of citizens. The idea of insurrection is almost ubsurd without massive support from the people and also the military in general. The army is well enough equipped to put down any camp that is causing trouble.
We haven’t seen a military response in any real sense
We just don’t see it happening Zimbabwe
In a protest no, unless it was a huge deadly war-zone type deal, the police should be able to handle it without the call on military coming in and shooting everything up. Protests by definition are peaceful so We assume soldiers mean riots, a couple of ZRP members have put down most of the bad riots Zimbabwe has ever faced. So the threat of the army coming in does not give Zimbabwe a good name. We do not need the army to handle a few riots or peaceful demonstrations.
In the case of mass civil disobedience, that is mainly a peaceful type of uprising so that does not really make it something the military would be involved in. We really cannot think of a situation where they would be disobeying a law in mass that would make them into the type of problem only the army can fix.
The really interesting question is what would happen during a rebellion. We are going to assume that by rebellion you mean A Revolution or Hunger Games style where all the patriots rise up and are fighting some terribly corrupt government that does not represent them anymore. In that case things are very complicated because it becomes an information war between the elites and the people.
Army would probably be the most loyal to whatever regime is in power and the military will initially fall in line with them thinking it is some anti-Zimbabwean uprising until they get on the ground and see what the people are fighting for.
Lets face it our military is comprised of patriotic red-blooded, freedom loving, beer drinking, meat eating Zimbabweans. Do you honestly believe that even 10% of the boots on the ground would be OK with the idea of fighting against an army of their own countrymen. Its obviously a no, as long as the soldiers know that the people they are being told to fight are not rebels or some bull like that they most definitely have more in common with the rebellion and join them instead.
The CIO would quickly become irrelevant as the internet becomes weaker and less accessible, the CIO would probably be heavily divided, the top officials would be most definitely be part of the totalitarian regime but the lowly field agents and analysts would probably turn in favor of the uprising and put the intelligence community into turmoil.
The black boots would probably be the least relevant part of the war along with the police They would join whatever faction they like.
It truly depends on what the military is being asked to do whether or not they will fight the people or join them against the government.
The reason is that state feels that such action is necessary to protect its stakeholders regionally or even its very existence.
Violence and threats being used to intimidate and coerce the Public for Political purposes.
The use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes is used more often in Zimbabwe.
The government has also been using violence and threats to intimidate and coerce the public for political purposes.
For example, the government is doing the following things to terrorize the public into docility and compliance:
Labeling peaceful protest as regime change agenda.
Using security laws to crush dissent.
Spying on all Zimbabweans.
Threatening to indefinitely detain citizens without cause and without any due process.
Even threatening to kill any citizen on a whim.
Constitutional law has taught for hundreds of years that chilling the exercise of our liberties is as dangerous to freedom than directly suppressing them.
The CIO would quickly become irrelevant as the internet becomes weaker and less accessible, the CIO would probably be heavily divided, the top officials would be most definitely be part of the totalitarian regime but the lowly field agents and analysts would probably turn in favor of the uprising and put the intelligence community into turmoil.
You can rock the boat, but you can never say that the entire ocean is in trouble …. You cannot say: By the way, there’s something wrong with our …. system.
Mainstream-media political journalism is in danger of becoming increasingly irrelevant, but not because of the Internet, or even Comedy Central. The threat comes from inside. It comes from journalists being afraid to do what journalists were put on this earth to do.
Peaceful protesters should not be treated as potential terrorists nor spied upon by government agents. Not only is this a misuse of public funds that could be used to find real terrorists, it chills free speech activities and inhibits the public debate on important issues.
The threat of being labeled a terrorist or a traitor certainly dissuades and chills our willingness to exercise our rights.
Especially when power has become so concentrated that the same agency which spies on all Zimbabweans also decides who should be arrested.
Postscript: fear of terror makes people docile and stupid … and the government has also intentionally whipped up an exaggerated hysteria of terror by “others” in order to scare the people. This is another form of terrorism.