Introduction
Despite continuing tensions, Zimbabwe’s fragile inclusive government has resulted in significant economic and political changes since its formation in February 2009. Considerable as these changes are, a lot remains to be done to restore Zimbabwe to its former state of relative prosperity and stability. As Jacob Zuma increases regional momentum through SADC for the full implementation of the Global Political Agreement (GPA), ordinary Zimbabweans are speaking out for more improvements to their economic situation. 2010 promises to be a decisive year for political transformation and economic recovery.  Despite grand posturing and public perceptions of undiminished power, the reality is that President Mugabe surrendered significant power to the long time opposition Movement for Democratic Change which now controls parliament and key ministries such as Finance, Education, Industry and Commerce, National Healing and Constitutional Affairs and has been able to affect the course of events in the country. Thus, dynamic power sharing has replaced unilateralism as the new political reality in Zimbabwe as evidenced by compromises the political players have had to make in both parliament and cabinet.

In 2010, constitutional reform and national healing will be tremendously important processes for Zimbabwe. Both of these processes are crucial pre-requisites to free and fair elections that can restore political legitimacy and resolve Zimbabwe’s governance crisis.  Alongside these and very important as well is going to be the capacity of the inclusive government to implement further political reforms as outlined in the Global Political Agreement and continue to improve the standard of living for ordinary Zimbabweans.  The capacity of the delicate transitional government to deliver on these aspiration will depend as much on partners to the inclusive government as it does on international support.

Constitutional Reform
Bogged down by continual lack of funding and incessant wrangling, constitutional reform is now seriously behind the GPA outlined schedule and the Zimbabwean authorities must be pressured to speed up this crucial process. On the positive side, UNDP is playing a key role coordinating a pool of funds from international donors and there is now general agreement by the key stakeholders on how to proceed. Zimbabwe’s inclusive government must play its part by prioritizing this process in its own resource allocations. Bowing to public resistance, the Constitutional Parliamentary Committee (Copac) abandoned the use of the contentious Kariba Draft constitution and resorted to questionnaires as a starting point in gathering people’s views. This is a big victory for Zimbabwe’s civil society actors who resolutely opposed the use of the undemocratic Kariba Draft campaigned for by President Mugabe and ZANU PF. The fact that ZANU PF made this concession after President Mugabe had publicly declared that they will not is evidence of the shifting power balance in Zimbabwe.  

While controversy remains over the democratic nature of the process with some in civil society opposing a parliament led process, the majority of Zimbabwe’s civil society and political parties are participating in the reform efforts. The Zimbabwean authorities must be held to an open and democratic process that allows full civil society participation. Copac has outlined a 5 stages process: The preparatory stage ( first stakeholders’ conference), The public consultation stage (visiting and talking to people across the country; The constitution drafting stage (experts translate people’s views into a draft); The final review and adoption stage (second all stakeholders’ conference); and finally a Referendum (people vote on the draft). 

The second stage of nationwide consultation is expected to start before the end of January and run until April. The outreach teams will be composed of 30% members of parliament and 70% civil society representatives, with a 50% gender balance requirement, according to Copac. The nationwide consultation covers 17 thematic areas ranging from founding principles, separation of powers, systems of government, citizenship and bill of rights, labor, women and gender to religion.

Zimbabwean authorities must guarantee the public security and unhindered participation and people’s views must be captured accurately. There must be a policy of zero tolerance to violence and intimidation. The media must play the very important role of making the debates and discussions widely accessible to the general public. The challenge that Zimbabwe faces is more than just drafting new democratic rules—it is also equally important, a matter of imagining and creating the robust democratic institutions to safeguard democracy. For that, Zimbabwe is going to need to draw a lot from other international experiences.

National Healing
Given the acute polarization and political violence that drove Zimbabwe to the brink of all out conflict in 2008, Zimbabwe seriously needs a comprehensive national healing process. Unresolved trauma and violence in Zimbabwe goes all the way back to the pre-independence era and a historical perspective is required to solve it. If the culture of violence and impunity is not dealt with now, it will likely raise its ugly head again as the vicious cycle of yesterday’s victims becoming today’s perpetrators continues unabated. 

The most difficult question that Zimbabwe is confronted with on the matter of national healing is how to handle perpetrators in a way that deters future acts of violence without plunging the country into chaos while at the same time satisfying the survivors’ quest for justice. With most of the perpetrators being part of the entrenched security forces and or associated with ZANU PF—any attempts at punitive justice at this point will likely result in serious instability and derail the transition—thus creating a big challenge for those seeking justice.  

The Global Political Agreement that founded the inclusive government made provisions for an organ on National Healing, Reconciliation and Integration to “ give due consideration to the setting up of a mechanism to properly advise on what measures might be necessary and practicable to achieve National Healing, Cohesion and Unity in respect of victims of pre and post—independence conflict.”  This, organ led by three elderly Ministers, one each from ZANU PF, and the two MDC formations in the inclusive government is promoting a model of national healing based on forgiveness and a new commitment to non violence.  Some in civil society are opposed to this approach arguing that it will not serve the interest of justice.

Presently, the organ has deferred the question of what to do with perpetrators preferring to focus for the time being on: identifying sources of conflict and its impact;  examining the constitutional and legal framework;  information, advocacy, and publicity strategies; gender, youth, and general psycho-social concerns;  reaching out to the Diaspora;  restoring ‘ubuntu’ or African values of community, peace and forgiveness; and economic empowerment initiatives to anchor peace. 

In the meantime, Zimbabwean civil society has started many important initiatives to open dialogue on political violence and explore ways to bring about justice, national healing and reconciliation. These initiatives require international support. It seems that what is important at this stage is allowing survivors to openly speak out about their experiences and the documentation of those stories for possible use in future processes. Zimbabwe has no experience with a nationwide healing process as is required now and will need a lot of help from international partners to succeed. Both civil society and government initiatives are going to have to learn a lot and draw experience and expertise from countries that have dealt with political violence, national healing, and transitional justice on a comparable scale. 

While the specific form that national healing takes in Zimbabwe must be informed by the widest possible consultations of what Zimbabweans want, this process can learn a lot from other transitional justice initiatives that have included the following:   Truth commission— Official state commission of enquiry to investigate, report on past abuses and make recommendations to remedy such abuses and prevent recurrence   Criminal prosecutions— Judicial investigations of those most responsible for widespread and systematic abuses   Reparations program— State sponsored initiatives to help repair the material and moral damage of past abuse  Security sector reform— transforming the military, police, secret service and related state institutions from instruments of repression and corruption into instruments of public service and integrity.  Gender justice—challenging impunity for sexual- and gender-based violence and ensure women's equal access to redress of human rights violations.  Memorialisation—Memorials that preserve public memories, raise awareness and discourage recurrence.

Supporting Civil Society
Decimated by years of harsh repression and economic hardships that pushed millions of Zimbabweans into the Diaspora, Zimbabwe’s civil society is in serious need of rebuilding and strengthening. Since the formation of the inclusive government many key civil society leaders have been co-opted into government structures leaving a huge void. The formation of the inclusive government has created a new challenges given the fact that the MDC has traditionally been allied to progressive civil society and many find it difficult to criticize their old allies.  Independent civil society voices are needed now, more than ever, as Zimbabweans are fast realizing that even MDC leaders must be held accountable and subjected to strict checks and balances.  Support in rebuilding organizations and leadership and capacity development is essential at this time for civil society to effectively play a  role in the crucial political processes underway in Zimbabwe.

The ability of civil society to fully and independently engage in the constitutional reform and national healing processes at this critical stage in Zimbabwe’s transition is of tremendous importance to the overall democratic transformation goals. A battered economy makes resources a major challenge especially for grassroots groups and this hampers democratic participation. Zimbabwe’s civil society needs both material and moral support in playing an independent watchdog role and holding accountable government officials across the political divide. 

Given that an estimated 3 million plus Zimbabweans are leaving in the Diaspora, it is very important that this population plays a part in the constitutional reform and national healing processes currently underway. Sadly, currently there are no significant initiatives aimed at reengaging the Zimbabwean Diaspora and facilitation Diaspora involvement in the reconstruction efforts.

Given the centrality of constitutional reform and the national healing processes, specialized training and support in these areas will greatly enhance the quality of civil society participation. 

While every effort must be taken to ensure that the old oppressive apparatus is not allowed to regenerate itself, the U.S must shift from a policy of broad sanctions and isolation to strategic reengagement and targeted support—deploying resources and political leverage to compliment economic/community recovery efforts and political reforms. This urgently requires new legislation that will facilitate an appropriate response given the new political reality in Zimbabwe.

U.S Policy
 The U.S maintains two legal instruments determining policy on Zimbabwe: The Zimbabwe Economic and Democracy Recovery Act of 2001 (ZEDERA) and an Executive Order declared by President Bush in 2003 and extended by President Obama until March 2010. ZEDERA effectively imposed economic sanction on Zimbabwe by

prohibiting all key International Financial Institutions from the “extension …of any loan, credit, or guarantee to the Government of Zimbabwe”, in addition to barring any “cancellation or reduction of indebtedness owed by the Government of Zimbabwe to the United States or any international financial institution.”  The specified international financial institutions are the International Monetary Fund (IMF), International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD), the International Development Association (IDA), the International Finance Corporation (IFC), the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB), the Asian Development Bank (ADB), the Inter-American Investment Corporation (IAIC), the African Development Bank (ADB), the African Development Fund (ADF), the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), and the Multilateral Investment Guaranty Agency (MIGA).

The executive order specifies more than 200 individuals and business entities slapped with a travel ban and whose assets are frozen. U.S citizens are prohibited from doing business with the specified individuals and entities. The list of specified individuals expanded over the years to include spouses and children of ZANU PF officials, civil servants,  journalist, businesspeople, religious figures and academics sympathetic to ZANU PF.

 U.S policy continues to be guided by the position that nothing has changed as long as President Mugabe is part of Zimbabwe’s political landscape. Unfortunately, this attitude is blinding the U.S to the many significant changes underway in Zimbabwe and the opportunity to promote critical reforms. While every effort must be taken to ensure that the old oppressive apparatus is not allowed to regenerate itself, the U.S must shift from a policy of broad sanctions and isolation to targeted support and strategic reengagement—deploying resources and political leverage to compliment economic/community recovery efforts and political reforms. This urgently requires new legislation that will facilitate an appropriate response given the new political reality in Zimbabwe.