3 June 2008: Last month, in response to a controversial figure receiving an honorary degree at Washington University in St. Louis, the best (backhanded) compliment a local newspaper could give her was that “she’s no Robert Mugabe.” While the recent events surrounding Zimbabwe’s recent election and ensuing violence have thrust the African leader back into the international spotlight, it’s important to remember that Mugabe has been the central figure in Zimbabwean politics for a long time: he was hailed as a hero after leading the Zimbabwe African National Union (ZANU) to victory in the Bush War in the 1960s and has served as either the country’s President or Prime Minister since 1980. His legacy of violence, human rights violations, and economic mismanagement, has become synonymous with the country as a whole. Given how much Mugabe has come to represent the face of Zimbabwe and the length of his time in power, it can seem daunting to imagine a Zimbabwe sans Mugabe.

With the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission having announced that the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) party won the majority of seats in parliament in this past April’s election and a runoff election to decide the next president set for June 27, a non-Mugabe-helmed Zimbabwe is becoming more and more of a possibility. Given this potentiality, it becomes crucial for those members of the international community concerned with this sub-Saharan African nation’s future to become familiar with the individuals and groups that may succeed Mugabe in steering and transforming Zimbabwe in the years to come.

Having already secured the majority of seats in parliament, it is essential to investigate the history and key positions of the MDC party. The original party was formed in 2000 by many different civic groups and individuals, the most prominent of which was the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU), composed of six separate trade unions with a total of 400,000 members. The party came together in February 2000 to vote against a constitutional referendum, which would extend Mugabe’s term as President indefinitely, grant immunity to politicians and military leaders who commit crimes while in office, and allow the government to expropriate farmland from the country’s white minority without compensation. The referendum was overwhelmingly defeated and this provided the MDC with a large amount of credibility and influence.

In the June 2000 parliamentary election, the party won enough votes to deny Mugabe’s Zimbabwe African National Union Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF) party a two-thirds majority of seats for the first time since 1980. The party split in two, however, in late 2005—one faction being led by Morgan Tsvangirai, the current President of the MDC, and the other led by Arthur Mutambara, the current Managing Director and CEO of Africa Technology and Business Institute. The schism occurred over whether the party should participate in any elections in Zimbabwe until they were deemed free and fair. After winning the majority of seats in the Parliament and Senate this past April, however, the two factions have announced that they will be once again reunifying.

While the MDC has clearly set itself up in direct opposition to Mugabe and ZANU-PF, many questions remain. How would the country truly be different under the MDC’s rule? What would stop its leader from slipping into the same autocratic position as Mugabe? To answer these questions, one must look closer at the party’s President and how he embodies the ideals of his organization.

Morgan Richard Tsvangirai has served as the President of the MDC since 2000 and has become an internationally-recognized figure since his run against Robert Mugabe in the April Presidential election and resulting violence and chaos. Tsvangirai has made a career out of political activism—first on behalf of organized labor and then in the areas of constitutional reform and human rights protection. He became a prominent figure in the MDC early on and has survived at least three separate assassination attempts, has been arrested on multiple occasions, and beaten and harassed since gaining prominence. If he gains power in a post-Mugabe Zimbabwe, Tsvangirai will most likely attempt to draft a new constitution for the country—an act which he had been lobbying in support of for years.

Tsvangirai fled to South Africa following the April elections. From outside the country he has urged opposition from the people of Zimbabwe, decried state-sponsored violence, and called Mugabe’s Zimbabwe a "state of despair." He has pledged that if he wins the presidency there will be no amnesty for perpetrators of political violence, that he will take advantage of the country’s great natural resources and attraction to foreign investment, and address past human rights abuses. Generally, the MDC claims that its desire is to transform Zimbabwe into a welcoming and stable community—or, as the party said in a recent press release: “our vision is to build a Zimbabwe that has sufficient space and comfort for all.”

There is also to hope that there will be space in a post-Mugabe Zimbabwe for individuals and groups who were forced to flee the country and wish to return. One such individual is Tapera Kapuya, who served as a Fellow in Residence during the Fall of 2007 for the National Endowment for Democracy in Washington, DC. Kapuya served as the Africa region secretary for the International Union of Students while he was a university student in Zimbabwe and he fled to South Africa when he was banished from his university by the government. He has worked for years outside of the country to organize young people both within Zimbabwe and internationally striving for democratization and educational rights within the country. The hope is that, with an opening of Zimbabwean society, young leaders like Mr. Kapuya may return and continue their work with developing democracy and civil society.

All of this speculation regarding a Mugabe-free Zimbabwe is, of course, very much just that—speculation. If events in Zimbabwe over the last few months have shown the international community anything, it is that Robert Mugabe is unlikely to retire peacefully, even if a free and fair election could be attained. Even after Mugabe is gone, his legacy of human rights violation, violent repression and economic stagnation will leave massive obstacles in the way of true progress. What this conjecture does reveal, however, is that there truly are other alternatives available for Zimbabwe and that there is hope, even if faint, that this country’s path may be taken in a new and better direction in the near future.