HARARE – Zimbabwe’s ruling party, ZANU PF, is once again caught in the crosshairs of internal power struggles — this time, with implications that cut to the very heart of national security.
Recent remarks by outspoken politician Temba Mliswa have ignited widespread speculation that the country’s military and intelligence institutions are now divided along political lines, echoing the factional tensions that defined the 2017 coup which ushered President Emmerson Mnangagwa into power.
Mliswa’s claims, made during a live broadcast from outside the country, have thrown the political establishment into turmoil. In his assertions, he alleged that Zimbabwe’s national security structures — particularly the army and intelligence services — are split between two camps: one loyal to President Mnangagwa and another aligned with his deputy, Vice President Constantino Chiwenga.
According to Mliswa, business tycoon Kuda Tagwirei, often perceived as a powerful financier within the ruling elite, is part of the Mnangagwa camp’s inner circle, allegedly wielding influence over the Presidential Guard (PG) — an elite unit distinguished by its yellow berets and tasked with protecting the Head of State. Notably, Sean Mnangagwa, the President’s son, reportedly serves as a senior officer within the same unit, reinforcing the perception of a militarised family nexus around the Presidency.
In contrast, the rest of the military establishment is said to lean toward the Chiwenga camp, through the Vice President’s wife, Colonel Minoyothabo Baloyi Chiwenga, a serving officer whose influence within the ranks is believed to remain strong. The alleged divide, if accurate, exposes a dangerous undercurrent of mistrust within Zimbabwe’s power architecture — one that analysts warn could have severe implications for both political stability and national security.
A Treacherous Line Between Politics and Security
For decades, ZANU PF has prided itself on its fusion of party and state, where the security apparatus is expected to uphold the ruling party’s dominance. But the latest claims — implying that factions within the armed forces are taking political sides — challenge that delicate balance.
“Any suggestion that the army is divided or politicised at factional level constitutes a grave national security matter,” said a retired intelligence officer speaking on condition of anonymity. “Such public statements are considered subversive because they erode confidence in the command chain and threaten the cohesion of the state.”
Indeed, under Zimbabwean law, it is a serious offence to publish or utter statements that cause “disaffection” among members of the defence forces or intelligence services. For this reason, many were stunned that Mliswa made such bold allegations — not from within Zimbabwe, but from abroad, where he appeared unrestrained by the consequences such speech would likely invite at home.
Tagwirei’s Shadow Over the State
At the centre of this storm stands Kuda Tagwirei, a figure often portrayed as both indispensable and controversial. His extensive business empire, built around energy, mining, and logistics, has made him one of Zimbabwe’s most influential men — and a frequent target of international sanctions and domestic scrutiny.
Mliswa’s remarks have now drawn Tagwirei deeper into the web of political intrigue. Allegations that he is financing narratives designed to advance particular factions within ZANU PF have alarmed the country’s military and intelligence command, who view such civilian involvement in state security matters as reckless and dangerous.
Analysts say Tagwirei’s habit of appearing in photographs with uniformed officers and political elites is seen within military circles as a provocative display of influence. “It’s a mistake that many power brokers before him have made — conflating business clout with state authority,” noted a Harare-based political analyst. “Those who once projected invincibility through proximity to power often discover how quickly the state reclaims its autonomy.”
The Mnangagwa–Chiwenga Rift Resurfaces
To many observers, this controversy merely revives a long-simmering rift between Mnangagwa and Chiwenga — two men whose alliance in 2017 was forged in shared ambition but strained by competing visions for succession.
Chiwenga, a former commander of the Zimbabwe Defence Forces (ZDF), was instrumental in the military intervention that toppled Robert Mugabe. Yet since then, his influence has reportedly waned as Mnangagwa consolidated his control over state institutions and party structures, sidelining or reassigning figures once loyal to the former general.
“The struggle is not new; it’s simply resurfacing in more dangerous form,” remarked one senior ZANU PF insider. “Both men understand that whoever controls the security apparatus controls the future of the party and the state.”
The emergence of Sean Mnangagwa within the military hierarchy adds another layer of complexity. While his service in the Presidential Guard has been officially framed as patriotic duty, it now risks being interpreted through the lens of dynasty and factional entrenchment. Critics argue that his visible involvement blurs the line between family loyalty and professional service, undermining the army’s supposed impartiality.
Lessons From the Past
Zimbabwe’s political history is littered with cautionary tales of figures who mistook political protection for permanence. Mliswa himself drew comparisons to a past power broker, Gninimbi, whose life ended violently after a fall from grace — a reminder of how swiftly political fortunes can reverse in Harare’s corridors of power.
As tensions rise, what is unfolding within ZANU PF appears to be more than mere rumour. It represents the early tremors of a deeper struggle for control of the post-Mnangagwa era — a contest that may determine not only the ruling party’s future, but the trajectory of Zimbabwe’s fragile state institutions.
For now, the silence from the government and military leadership is telling. But within the barracks and boardrooms of power, the whispers are growing louder — and the question lingers: who truly commands the loyalty of Zimbabwe’s men in uniform?
