𝟮𝟬𝟯𝟬 𝗥𝗘𝗦𝗨𝗥𝗥𝗘𝗖𝗧𝗦 𝗢𝗣𝗣𝗢𝗦𝗜𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡 & 𝗔𝗧𝗧𝗥𝗔𝗖𝗧𝗦 𝗪𝗘𝗦𝗧𝗘𝗥𝗡 𝗦𝗖𝗥𝗨𝗧𝗜𝗡𝗬.

Biti, Job Sikhala, Jacob Ngarivume and opposition members at SAPES offices.

The opposition in Zimbabwe died a natural death after losing the 2023 elections, and after the South African government refused to recognize them upon discovering that they had called for the sanctions in Zimbabwe that were displacing refugees into that country. The impact of this was evident when the opposition tried to contest the election results to push for a GNU government — the South Africans refused to support the agenda. This led to internal opposition infighting and ultimately Chamisa quitting. Without a figurehead, the West stopped funding the opposition, and it fell apart.

During this period, Zimbabwe began to mend its image on the international stage. News from the country turned from negative to positive. Travel warnings from the West shifted into positive travel promotions, and now Forbes Magazine has voted Zimbabwe the best destination in the world for 2025. The IMF has projected Zimbabwe as the fastest-growing economy in SADC, and the economic outlook for 2026 looks very positive, with Zimbabwe potentially becoming the second-fastest-growing economy after South Sudan.

Despite this promising trajectory, somehow we got a fly in the ointment of economic recovery through the debate around extending the current President’s tenure to 2030. Overnight, this has polarized the nation, resurrecting a dead opposition that is now arguing that the country is in a constitutional crisis.

Yesterday, we woke up to allegations of a bombing at SAPES civil society’s offices in Harare. With the way the government has incompetently handled this crisis, whispers of the Zimbabwean government being responsible have begun to rear their ugly heads, without a counter.

We now hear that even foreign ambassadors who had taken a more friendly posture toward Zimbabwe, have begun making statements reminiscent of the times when the country was isolated under sanctions.

In the aftermath, the opposition has been energized, as the incident galvanized them into unity and a choreographed publicity campaign that appears premeditated, but remains unexamined. This was met by a clumsy and disorganized government response. Neither the fire marshal nor the police chief took control by making a statement to reassure the public that government was taking this potential terror attack seriously — feeding into the perception that the government might be responsible for the attack.

It’s difficult to know whether these poor optics by law enforcement are due to internal ZANU PF sabotage, especially considering the power outage that occurred after, while the President was addressing Parliament. Either way, all these developments are a bad omen for 2030.

We had enjoyed a period of peace, harmony, and even the semblance of unity — with figures like Tendai Biti taking a sabbatical from politics. Albeit, the talk of 2030 has given rise to internal ZANU PF divisions, which saw the emergence of Geza and whispers of leadership wrangles within the party. Fortunately, Geza’s campaign fizzled out. However, his defeat — coupled with ZANU PF’s more aggressive push to amend the constitution — has put the West on alert, with a U.S. Congressman, Gregory Meeks, warning Zimbabwe against changing the constitution to extend President Mnangagwa’s tenure.

Ominously, the warning was followed by what many believe to be a false flag — the bombing of the SAPES offices — which once again casts Zimbabwe in a bad political light. With the government’s lackadaisical response, any negative perceptions emanating are likely to stick.

It’s clear that 2030 is going to open divisions and deepen polarization, both in and outside ZANU PF, derailing the trajectory the country has been on. It also risks attracting Trump’s gaze, which had shifted elsewhere, and if we are not careful, we could see more Zimbabweans placed under Magnitsky sanctions — all because of the quest for 2030.