In-fighting in MDC USA

It appears that there is an escalating struggle for control of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) 's affairs in North America, particularly in the United States. For the avoidance of doubt, this has nothing to do with the historical schism of October 2005 which resulted in the two MDC formations now known as MDC (T) (hereinafter referred to as the MDC) and MDC (M).

It would be accurate to say, at this juncture, that the MDC in the USA is in a state of civil war. On the one hand, there is a group calling themselves MDC-North America province, who claim control of the party's affairs in Canada and the USA; on the other a group calling itself MDC-USA, which is apparently favored by the party authorities in Harare.

Even as we speak, either group is trying to line up as many so-called branches of the party behind it, including (allegedly) one man branches being created all across the US for the sake of inflating political territory. Sources inside the movement suggest that the in-fighting has paralysed the party's operations, leaving no clear channels of communication between the rank and file and the party leadership. Other sources say the struggle is less about the soul of the party and more about the hunger for power by those leading the two factions.

As an independent observer, one may wonder why the party authorities in Harare have essentially chosen to remain uninvolved in this matter. Granted, the fortunes of the party do not depend upon the fate of an external branch, even one based in the world's richest and most powerful country. However, the on-going chaos reinforces the impression that the MDC is a group of rank amateurs motivated solely by the lust for power.

It seems to me that the MDC structures in the West would be well-served by adopting some of the practices of political parties in their respective countries. In the United States, for example, the Democratic and Republican parties are highly de-centralized coalitions of strongly motivated members driven by a commonality of issues - unlikely to result in the personality clashes that seem to dominate the MDC's affairs here.

In the same vein, the party authorities in Harare should be flexible enough to not impose the sort of structural puritanism that may be suitable in Zimbabwe to a more liberal political environment such as exists in the United States.

This may seem like a double standard to some, but the reality is that the party's supporters in the Diaspora have been exposed to issue-based approaches to political organizing and seem to like it that way. By de-emphasizing the authority of some of these national and trans-national super-structures, the movement might be better able to listen to the true voices of its members.

For now, unfortunately, the political greed of a few people seems to hold sway in North America.