By A Correspondent

In Mberengwa district, the ZANU PF regime has intensified its manipulation of traditional leaders to consolidate political power and extend its influence in rural areas.

While publicly pledging to work with chiefs and headmen for socio-economic development, the reality is that traditional leaders are being co-opted into the ruling party’s political machinery, undermining their autonomy and abusing their positions for partisan ends.

The party leadership claims that working with traditional leaders is crucial to achieving the Vision 2030 goal of building an upper-middle-class society. However, this partnership often comes at the expense of local communities. ZANU PF has made strategic promises to traditional leaders, including the distribution of farming inputs and equipment, in exchange for their loyalty and support during elections.

Traditional leaders, in turn, publicly praise the regime for these gestures, portraying them as beneficial for the district’s development. One chief, interviewed by ZBC News, expressed his gratitude, stating, “We are happy that the party is helping us restore our district through these programs.” However, such statements must be viewed in the context of the pressure these leaders face to support the regime, often at the expense of their own people’s needs and rights.

ZANU PF officials, including Honourable Tinashe Shumba, the party’s Central Committee member for Mberengwa Central, continue to emphasize the importance of traditional leaders in shaping the future of rural communities. Shumba pointed out that the party’s longstanding relationship with chiefs dates back to the liberation struggle, suggesting that this historical alliance should be maintained for the benefit of the nation. However, the reality is that traditional leaders are now increasingly used as pawns to ensure that the party retains control in rural constituencies.

In exchange for these “development” handouts, traditional leaders are expected to actively endorse ZANU PF’s policies, mobilize voters, and suppress dissent within their communities. The ruling party’s increasing reliance on traditional leaders for electoral success has led to accusations that chiefs and headmen are being politicized, undermining their traditional role as impartial community leaders. Many chiefs are pressured to align with the party or face the risk of losing support, resources, and even their positions.

While some traditional leaders may genuinely believe that the regime’s development initiatives will benefit their communities, it is clear that ZANU PF’s manipulation of these leaders for political gain raises serious concerns about their independence and the true nature of the party’s so-called development agenda. Instead of empowering rural communities, these tactics often lead to a deepening of political patronage, where the needs of the people are secondary to the party’s desire to maintain power.

In essence, what is being presented as a partnership for development is, in many ways, a calculated strategy to control the rural electorate. Traditional leaders, once seen as neutral custodians of cultural values, are now at risk of being co-opted into the service of a regime that uses them to secure its own political survival.