AT the end of the liberation war in 1979, freedom fighters walked into a country ravaged by war they had waged against the enemy, driven by the determination to transform Zimbabwe into a modern country and society.
They could not have imagined how successful they would be in achieving that goal or at worst, how long that transformation would take, but still they made it.
And there was never anything to worry about until they moved to another set of the liberation struggle objectives — taking the land back.
After all, the Zimbabwe they wanted, and had suffered for, was slowly taking shape, emerging as an economic giant that would one day be integrated into the global political economic affairs as key player in development.
Far detached from their minds was that two decades into uhuru, they would be waging another struggle over the land they had paid for with their sweat and blood.
Morgan Tsvangirai, his MDC-T and the coterie of organisations supporting the anti-Zimbabwe campaign represent that war that Harare is fighting and has paid a huge price for.
There is a lingering thought that provokes deep-seated emotions when it comes to what Tsvangirai and his acolytes have done to this country.
Tsvangirai wants a Zimbabwe he does not know what to do with?
His political strategy, if it can be called that, revolves around removing ZANU PF from power with the question, ‘what’s next?’, largely ignored.
That is the tragedy of opposition politics in this country, especially those driven by external forces.
The Zimbabwe we want is the one in which the majority are the owners of the means of production.
We want a Zimbabwe in which the majority own land.
We want a Zimbabwe where the economy is in the hands of the majority.
And it begins with unity.
Peace then anchors the processes necessary for the country to develop.
What has been happening in the country in the past few months is alien to the Zimbabwe we want and the Nation we are trying to build.
On July 6, there was what some called a ‘shutdown’ by some unknown entity trying to carve a niche in Zimbabwe’s political folklore.
What the shutdown was intended to achieve was to grind the country to a halt.
It almost achieved its objectives, but albeit with accidental support from the civil servants’ strike that was gripping the country then.
Several other attempts to achieve that have since failed.
Last Wednesday’s monumental failure of yet another shutdown was a reminder that Zimbabweans are not about to be coalesced into destroying their country.
The idea of shutting down the country is to trap it into unpopular conflict and grind the military strength to an endless struggle with the populace.
In the eyes of the organisers of the shutdown, Zimbabwe must be confronted by a new enemy whose identity is indigenous in outlook, but masking the funders of the programme.
The streets of Harare must be the new battleground from which the fight for so-called democracy must take place.
Building a Nation requires a collective ideology and identity which congregates people to unity of purpose.
Without this, no nation can enjoy peace and tranquillity.
According to a presentation in 2012 by Francis Fukuyama, the Nomellini Senior Fellow at the Stanford University’s Spogli Insititute for International Studies, nation building involves a shared sense of national identity.
“But nation-building goes further and involves a shared sense of national identity, built on elements that tie people together – such as shared culture, language and history – that cannot be imposed from without,” reads the paper in part.
“With resulting dysfunction and inter-group violence, while the US is an example of a diverse nation where people feel a sense of national identity not because of shared ethnicity or longstanding cultural history, but because of a shared set of ideals (sic).
“Independent cultures across Indonesia’s 11 000 islands and Tanzania’s many tribal groups were assimilated into a national identity forged by authoritarian governments. A common language was required to be taught in all schools, a key factor in building a national identity.”
The question therefore is: Are we in the right direction as a country?
The answer is, as long as those who believe in the destruction of this country are still in our midst, then we are yet to get there.
A nation, as Fukuyama says, becomes what the people want if it also has a shared history.
Sadly, there are some who never believed in the ideas and ideals of the liberation struggle, which is the most important aspect of our history that cannot be wished away by mere talk or social media activities.
This again is an indictment on our curriculum, which for strange reasons, has decided to turn a blind eye on this integral part of this country’s wellbeing.
The liberation struggle is a definition of our history.
It is the foundation upon which the Zimbabwe we want is built.
As such, it can never be erased from our collective memories.
As the country moves forward in peace, it is one’s hope that the Zimbabwe that the people want will be engraved in their minds until eternity.
Let those with ears listen.