MNANGAGWA’S GRIP ON ZIMBABWE: HOW POWER MOVES SHAPE THE ECONOMY
President Emmerson Mnangagwa has been making big changes in Zimbabwe’s financial sector. By putting people close to him in key positions, he has taken control of important parts of the country’s economy. One of his close business allies, John Muyashavanhu, has been appointed as the governor of the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe (RBZ). Mnangagwa has also placed George Guvamatanga, the Finance permanent secretary, and his son, David Kudakwashe, as the deputy Finance minister. This shows that Mnangagwa is carefully placing trusted people in important roles within Zimbabwe’s financial system.
But Mnangagwa’s influence does not stop at these appointments. He is also making bigger moves by taking control of state enterprises and public assets through the Mutapa Investment Fund (MIF). The way he has done this, without following all the usual constitutional and legal steps, has raised concerns. This action has made people question how much control Mnangagwa has over public resources and whether he is managing them in the right way.
Mnangagwa’s control also extends into the banking sector. One of the biggest banks in Zimbabwe, CBZ Holdings, is part of his plan to merge with other financial companies like ZB Financial Holdings and First Mutual Holdings Limited. This merger is aimed at creating a powerful financial group that could have a big impact, not just in Zimbabwe but in the region as well. The person leading this move is Marc Holtzman, an American banker who used to be the chairperson of CBZ. While this could change Zimbabwe’s financial sector in a good way, it also shows how Mnangagwa is shaping the economy to fit his plans.
However, not everyone is happy with these developments. Some critics argue that these appointments and mergers are not based on who is best for the job, but on loyalty to Mnangagwa. They say that this kind of favoritism is similar to how former president Robert Mugabe used to run the country, by giving important roles to people who supported him. This approach, critics argue, can lead to the same problems of clan-based politics and ethnic divisions that have troubled Zimbabwe for years. It also raises concerns about whether people from all backgrounds are being given a fair chance to take part in the running of the country.
Mnangagwa’s recent choices for the cabinet and civil service are also seen as part of this pattern. Many people in key government roles come from the same ethnic and regional background as Mnangagwa. This has led to talk about the “villagisation” of government, where the leadership of the country is becoming more focused on a small group from a particular region. While this might strengthen Mnangagwa’s control, it could also make the government less diverse and less representative of the whole country. Zimbabwe is made up of many different ethnic groups, and if one group dominates, it could cause problems for national unity.
To sum up, President Mnangagwa’s recent moves in Zimbabwe’s financial and government sectors show that he is working hard to strengthen his control over the country’s economy and political system. His appointment of close allies to key roles in the Treasury, his control over public assets through the Mutapa Investment Fund, and the planned merger of CBZ with other financial institutions all point to a carefully planned effort to consolidate power. While these moves might make financial services more efficient and give Zimbabwe a stronger presence in the region, they also raise important questions. Critics are worried about issues like favoritism, governance, and the lack of ethnic diversity in key government roles. The long-term effects of Mnangagwa’s strategies are still unclear, but they are likely to have a lasting impact on both Zimbabwe’s economy and its political landscape.
