Chamisa’s Calculated Silence Sparks New Wave of Party Tensions

A dangerous stage is about to begin for the Citizens Coalition for Change (CCC) as Nelson Chamisa deliberately pulls away from people he perceives as possible rivals.

With a track record of internal strife, Chamisa’s most recent action attempts to eliminate alleged dissension within the party ranks by going after former Binga North legislator Prince Dubeko Sibanda. But his strategy calls into question the opposition group’s long-term viability.

Sources close to Chamisa claim that a culture of mistrust has evolved among his inner group, which is why Sibanda has been quietly sidelined. The soft-spoken but powerful Matabeleland politician is currently an exile without a formal expulsion, existing on the periphery of party operations.

This kind of strategic move, meant to prevent any kind of public spectacle, demonstrates Chamisa’s careful balancing act in preserving support in the region while addressinginternal conflicts.

It is possible to interpret Chamisa’s purported plan of progressively evicting Sibanda without going to war as an attempt to maintain the party’s precarious unity, particularly in Matabeleland, where Sibanda has considerable influence.

In this high-stakes chess match, Chamisa aims to erode opposition without severing vital support networks. The CCC has made the Matabeleland region its stronghold, and Chamisa’s political future depends on keeping that position.

Sibanda, on the other side, is increasingly agitated by his absence, with reports stating that he blames former Pelandaba-Tshabalala lawmaker, Gift Ostalos Siziba, for engineering his downfall.

Claims abound that Siziba is removing roadblocks in the way of his personal goals as Chamisa prepares a new political organization. This internal conflict highlights the larger difficulties the CCC has in juggling individual goals with the unity required to take on ZANU PF.

Political science specialist Dr. Donald Mashonganyika of the University of Zimbabwe remarks that Chamisa’s actions are consistent with a well-established trend. “Chamisa has ejected close associates before. This is not the first time. He has made it a habit to keep his distance from anyone he considers to be a liability. Individuals such as Job Sikhala provide as excellent illustrations of this recurrent dynamic,” he clarified.

Chamisa’s mistrust is not wholly unwarranted, considering the past betrayals he has experienced in opposition politics. But such recurrent purges might point to a more serious problem with his style of leadership. The CCC’s efficacy as a political force has frequently been questioned, and its inability to pose a genuine challenge to ZANU PF’s supremacy is further complicated by internal instability.

This disagreement comes at the worst possible time, as Chamisa is allegedly preparing to launch a new political movement. The CCC, which split out from the previous Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), is currently experiencing more division. This demonstrates the delicate nature of opposition politics in Zimbabwe, where the struggle against well established power structures is frequently weakened by internal splits.

Although Chamisa’s lack of comment on the issue may be calculated, it runs the danger of offending Sibanda as well as the larger Matabeleland constituency, which is crucial to the CCC’s success. His choice to evaluate risks by using his intelligence network would indicate that he is becoming more and more alone in his own party and is unsure of whom to believe. Although these strategies work well in the short run, political observers warn that they could weaken the unity and trust needed for long-term success.

Furthermore, it is impossible to overlook how these internal dynamics have larger ramifications. Chamisa’s distancing from influential people allows other factions to bolster their positions of influence. It begs the issue of how solid Chamisa’s grasp on the opposition is if leaders such as Siziba are in fact scheming to get forward in the new political environment.

How Chamisa handles these will determine both the opposition’s course and his own political future. He might come out on top if he can contain the opposing groups while retaining local and grassroots support. But more internal strife and the marginalization of powerful people like Sibanda might be disastrous for the opposition movement.

In the end, Chamisa’s choice to break ties with Sibanda represents a new development in Zimbabwe’s ongoing history of opposition politics. It remains to be seen if this technique would succeed or cause more internal fractures. But one thing is for sure: the opposition faces difficulties that are not just related to outside threats but also have their roots in the internal dynamics of the party.

These internal conflicts need to be settled if Chamisa is to move forward with creating a new political party; otherwise, they run the potential of becoming the opposition party’s weak point in Zimbabwe. It remains to be seen if Chamisa’s strategic quiet would protect his political career or if it will widen the rift inside the CCC. The opposition leader is still entangled in a complicated web of political survival, treachery, and trust for the time being.

With the CCC’s power dynamics changing, all eyes are on Chamisa to steer clear of these dangerous seas. There is a lot on the line, and how things turn out will definitely influence opposition politics in Zimbabwe going forward.

The Zim Bulletin