As Zimbabwe enters the closing months of 2025, the question of succession to President Emmerson Mnangagwa remains unresolved, keeping the country’s political establishment in a state of quiet but intense speculation. There is no formally designated successor, yet discussions within Harare’s political corridors and the inner circles of the ruling ZANU PF party point to a narrowing field of contenders.
By Gabriel Manyati
Among the names circulating are businessman Kudakwashe Tagwirei and retired army commander General Phillip Valerio Sibanda. While both feature prominently in elite conversations, analysts note that neither commands the combination of institutional authority, liberation war credentials and residual military influence held by Vice President Constantino Chiwenga.
As internal debate over Mnangagwa’s eventual successor continues largely behind closed doors, Chiwenga increasingly emerges as the presumptive frontrunner. His position as vice president, his central role in the 2017 military intervention that ended Robert Mugabe’s 37-year rule, and his enduring—albeit reduced—connections within the security establishment place him ahead of other potential aspirants.
It is this political viability, rather than speculation or partisan sentiment, that has prompted renewed scrutiny of what a Chiwenga presidency would mean for Zimbabwe. Political observers argue that the issue is not simply who succeeds Mnangagwa, but how the nature of the state itself might change under new leadership.
A Chiwenga presidency would likely mark a significant reordering of Zimbabwe’s political system, rather than a routine change of leadership. Analysts suggest it would amount to a recalibration of how power is exercised, with far-reaching implications for government, the ruling party, the security sector and the economy.
Shaped by decades in the military and the discipline of the liberation struggle, Chiwenga is widely described as a leader who prioritises order and command over negotiation and consensus. Unlike Mnangagwa, who has managed competing factions through political balancing, Chiwenga is seen as favouring a clearer, more centralised chain of authority. This distinction is viewed as critical in assessing how Zimbabwe might be governed under his leadership.
Since 2017, Chiwenga has been a key figure in the military–political alliance that facilitated Mnangagwa’s rise to power. Although he entered frontline politics relatively late, his leadership style has remained rooted in military command structures. He is known to harbour little tolerance for institutional disorder, informal power centres or political improvisation.
One of the most immediate consequences of a Chiwenga presidency, analysts argue, would be the consolidation of the security sector’s influence within the state. The post-2017 period produced what some scholars described as a “securocratic” system, though this later evolved under Mnangagwa into a hybrid arrangement combining political patronage, business interests and military influence. Under Chiwenga, the balance is expected to shift decisively back towards the security establishment.
Key ministries—including Defence, Home Affairs and possibly Foreign Affairs—would likely be overseen by trusted former military officers or individuals closely aligned with the security sector. While this would not necessarily translate into overt military rule, it would deepen the penetration of military logic into civilian governance, emphasising hierarchy, discipline and compliance.
Within ZANU PF, Chiwenga’s rise would almost certainly trigger significant internal restructuring. His alliance with Mnangagwa has long been viewed as pragmatic rather than ideological, and analysts expect that a Chiwenga presidency would involve the marginalisation or removal of Mnangagwa-aligned political and business figures. Party structures at provincial and national levels would be tightened, with loyalty and liberation credentials taking precedence over entrepreneurial or factional politics.
As Zimbabweans quietly assess the post-Mnangagwa era, the prospect of a Chiwenga presidency raises fundamental questions about governance, civil–military relations and democratic space. Whether such a shift would bring stability or further entrench authoritarian tendencies remains a subject of intense debate—one that is likely to shape the country’s political discourse well into the future.
The News Hawk first published this article.
