I just came from a very interesting discussion on "Constitutionalism and the Military in Zimbabwe, which was hosted by @SAPESTrust10. During that discussion @Wamagaisa and @ProfJNMoyo made important observations regarding the army's relationship with

ZANU-PF and how that has affected the political landscape in Zimbabwe. Both of them also made compelling arguments for why the army should be confined to the barracks, away from the streets where it has been implicated in several cases of human rights abuse.

I totally understand the important arguments they made about the constitutional complications that arise from the entanglement of the army into ZANU-PF and government. The question I had, which I posted via the zoom chat, but could not picked relates to

the role that external forces have played in entrenching the military's involvement in politics on ZANU-PF's side. I agree with both gentlemen's observation that the relationship between the military and the civilian leadership of ZANU-PF has been like that

since the Mgagao Declaration, which removed Ndabaningi Sithole from the leadership of ZANU and replaced him with RGM. However, I also think that it is important to scrutinize the role that external powers have played (and are still playing) in all this.

Here is 1 eg. When the US imposed sanctions on Zim, it identified the ZDF and some of its companies and leaders as specifically targeted by those sanctions. In the same sanctions document, the US made a commitment to support the civil society org's,

private companies, media org's and other non-state institutions. Fast forward to a few weeks ago when a senior leader in the US gov publicly stated that Zimbabwe was a "foreign adversary" of America. Given this context, is it not possible that the army

sees itself and the entire country as being under attack by a foreign country and therefore justifies its actions accordingly? If it is possible that the army sees things that way, what then needs to be done? @ibbosnr