From Harare to Pretoria: How ZANU-PF’s Dirty Money Is Influencing African Diplomacy.

 By Youngerson Matete

Introduction.

In the high-stakes realm of international relations, traditional diplomacy that was once anchored in shared values, ideology, and international law has increasingly been augmented, and at times overshadowed, by wallet diplomacy. This emerging paradigm hinges on the use of financial leverage, strategic investments, control over natural resources, and well-funded lobbying to influence the behavior of other states. From direct monetary inducements to campaign financing and opaque infrastructure deals, economic tools are now deployed not only to pursue national interests but to redraw diplomatic allegiances and reorder global influence.

From Israel’s institutionalized lobbying efforts in the West to ZANU-PF’s resource-backed statecraft across Africa, money has become a primary currency in determining who is heard, supported, or sanctioned. Wallet diplomacy shapes UN votes, legitimizes authoritarian regimes, and marginalizes dissenting actors even those with strong democratic credentials. It reveals a troubling paradox. States that champion democracy at home may simultaneously undermine it abroad. For instance, South Africa's continued support for ZANU-PF despite Zimbabwe’s repressive governance, and the West's unwavering alliance with Israel despite mounting allegations of genocide in Palestine, demonstrate the deep contradictions within value-based diplomacy.

ZANU-PF and Resource-Fueled Diplomacy in Africa and Beyond.

In contrast to Israel’s high-tech lobbying ecosystem, Zimbabwe’s ruling party, ZANU-PF, has utilized a different form of wallet diplomacy. The strategic deployment of natural resources especially gold, diamonds, and lithium to curry diplomatic favor and suppress opposition legitimacy.

Following decades of Western sanctions and isolation post-2000 land reform policies, ZANU-PF pivoted towards a “Look East” policy and intensified ties with countries like China, Russia, and the United Arab Emirates. These alliances are often transactional. For instance, Chinese companies enjoy access to mineral concessions in return for infrastructure development and political solidarity at multilateral forums like the UN Human Rights Council.

Domestically, ZANU-PF has also weaponized economic rents to weaken the opposition. Through patronage networks, selective resource allocation, and opaque deals with multinational companies, the regime creates a rentier state where access to wealth and by extension, political influence is tightly controlled.

Regionally, ZANU-PF has used liberation war credentials and resource diplomacy to maintain goodwill within the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and the African Union (AU). Zimbabwe’s liberation struggle mythology continues to resonate among older leaders in Africa. Combined with behind-the-scenes financial inducements such as contracts or favorable trade deals this has often muted regional criticism of political repression and electoral manipulation. We have seen the regime’s proxies such as Wicknell Chivhayo, Ambassador Hubert Angel and many others frequenting African statehouses in the region like Kenya, Namibia and Tanzania. It's not only business that is being conducted but money is being given in form of resources or contracts in exchange for solidarity. 

Notably, recent outreach efforts by President Emmerson Mnangagwa have sought to normalize relations with the UK, EU, and potentially even the US. A 2025 EU-Zimbabwe Business Forum in Harare signaled tentative European re-engagement, driven largely by lithium and rare earth interests. Mnangagwa’s government has increasingly framed itself as a “necessary evil” in a mineral-rich region. A narrative that fits neatly within wallet diplomacy’s logic.

Dirty Money and the Resource Diplomacy Game

At the heart of ZANU-PF’s influence operation is resource diplomacy. The practice of leveraging access to valuable minerals and extractive contracts in exchange for diplomatic loyalty. Since the early 2000s, but with renewed vigor under Mnangagwa, Zimbabwe has signed opaque deals with Chinese, Russian, and Middle Eastern companies. These deals, often involving joint ventures with politically connected Zimbabwean elites, result in billions in lost revenue, much of which bypasses the formal treasury and is diverted into off-budget funds.

This "slush economy," as termed by Global Witness (2020), is then used to fund diplomatic missions, lobby foreign leaders, and sustain foreign-based ZANU-PF affiliates who counter opposition narratives abroad. For example, in 2021 and 2022, Zimbabwe’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs dramatically increased its spending on diaspora engagement and rebranding, focusing on countries like South Africa, Namibia, and Kenya, where AU influence is prominent.

The impact of this strategy is visible in AU reports and resolutions, which remain sterile or neutral in their language on Zimbabwe, avoiding direct condemnation even amid documented political violence, electoral theft, and civil society repression. As one AU insider reportedly stated anonymously to The Continent (2023), “The AU does not want to upset states that finance parts of its programs—directly or indirectly.” Although, the ZANU-PF may not be financing the AU or SADC-they definitely finance its leaders or leaders of the member countries. 

The Opposition’s Diplomatic Decline

In sharp contrast to ZANU-PF’s resource-backed statecraft, Zimbabwe’s opposition has struggled to maintain international and regional support. Once hailed as a democratic alternative during the early 2000s under Morgan Tsvangirai’s MDC, the opposition’s image has suffered from factionalism, strategic incoherence, and a lack of sustained engagement with regional bodies.

After the 2018 and 2023 elections which were both widely criticized for irregularities. The opposition failed to convert regional sympathy into coordinated diplomatic pressure. SADC’s 2023 observer reports raised concerns,and criticized how the election had been conducted but without sustained lobbying or material interests at stake, regional leaders ultimately deferred to Harare’s narrative of sovereignty and anti-imperialism.

As political scientist Ibbo Mandaza (2023) noted, “The opposition remains trapped in a moral narrative of democracy without the means to back it with strategic alliances or economic leverage.” This lack of resources has translated into diplomatic impotence.

The opposition’s limited access to financial resources also hampers its capacity to engage in the type of sustained lobbying that ZANU-PF executes with relative ease. For instance, while the ruling party can fly regional journalists and officials to Zimbabwe on government-sponsored tours, the opposition lacks even a shadow diplomatic corps capable of mounting consistent outreach to key international actors.

Rebuilding Diplomatic Credibility: A Strategy for the Opposition.

To reclaim its diminishing influence, Zimbabwe’s opposition needs to adopt a more pragmatic and well-resourced diplomatic strategy. This means moving beyond rhetoric and embracing a calculated, long-term approach that is grounded in both realism and financial investment.

Such a strategy should include targeted engagement with regional and international actors, leveraging strategic partnerships, and presenting a clear alternative vision for Zimbabwe’s governance. Building a robust diplomatic network, supported by sustainable funding and expert coordination, is essential to counter ZANU-PF’s entrenched influence and reframe the country’s political narrative on the global stage.

 Build a Pan-African Democratic Network

The opposition must shift from relying solely on Western allies and instead invest in building solidarity with Africa’s emerging democratic movements. Coalitions with progressive voices in Africa could amplify calls for electoral reform and human rights through African platforms, sidestepping accusations of foreign puppeteering.

This strategy would align with scholar Nic Cheeseman’s (2019) argument that democratic consolidation in Africa depends increasingly on regional legitimacy rather than just Western approval. The opposition needs to master the art of building and maintaining relationships. This does not only apply to Zimbabwe, the opposition parties in the region need to build coalitions for solidarity. Opposition in African countries has won elections that if there was sustained relations-the opposition challenges would have an entry point at the regional level. 

Establish a Diaspora-Funded Diplomatic Desk

The opposition should consider establishing a dedicated diaspora diplomacy task force to strategically engage Zimbabweans living in key countries such as South Africa, the United Kingdom, and the United States. This task force could work to build relationships with influential media outlets, academic institutions, and diplomatic missions, amplifying the opposition’s voice on the global stage.

Zimbabwe’s diaspora represents a politically aware and economically powerful constituency whose networks and resources can be harnessed to shape international perceptions and influence foreign policy toward Zimbabwe. By organizing and mobilizing this community, the opposition can strengthen its legitimacy and advocacy efforts beyond the country’s borders.

Policy-Oriented Messaging and Alternative Governance Proposals

Rather than limiting their messaging to ZANU-PF’s failures, the opposition must develop and communicate clear, cost policy alternatives. International diplomats are more inclined to support opposition movements that appear not only credible but also governable.

By offering concrete proposals on land reform, mining policy, and regional trade, the opposition can challenge the narrative that ZANU-PF is the only party with the capacity to maintain order and economic development.

Leverage Strategic Litigation and International Legal Platforms

Wallet diplomacy need not be one-sided. Strategic litigation—such as taking cases to the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights or leveraging universal jurisdiction laws in sympathetic Western countries—can generate international media attention and force governments to take diplomatic positions.

This legal activism must be complemented by media campaigns and lobbying efforts aimed at sustaining pressure, a tactic effectively used by opposition movements in countries like Uganda and Sudan.

Expose the Dirty Money.

Partnering with investigative journalism networks and international watchdog organizations such as The Sentry, Global Witness, and Open Secrets offers a strategic avenue for uncovering illicit financial flows and revealing how natural resource deals are manipulated to entrench authoritarian power and suppress democratic processes. These collaborations bring together expertise in data analysis, forensic investigation, and political risk assessment, making it possible to follow the money and expose the shadowy intersections between political elites and economic exploitation.

In this context, transparency becomes more than just a governance principle—it emerges as a potent form of diplomacy. By shedding light on opaque transactions and holding powerful actors accountable, transparency initiatives can challenge the impunity of corrupt regimes, embolden reformers, and empower civil society. Exposing these financial networks can shift international narratives, disrupt patronage systems, and ultimately contribute to the global defense of democracy.

 In an international order where economic interests often override ideological commitments, wallet diplomacy is not a passing trend—it is the new norm. Israel exemplifies how robust lobbying can secure unwavering support, while Zimbabwe demonstrates how liberation credentials and mineral wealth can suppress regional accountability.

The lesson for opposition movements is clear. Moral standing alone cannot sustain diplomatic relevance. To challenge entrenched autocracies, movements must build their own financial muscle, international networks, and policy credibility. Wallet diplomacy is not inherently corrosive—it can empower democratic actors too. But it requires coordination, funding, and a long-term strategy.

From Harare to Addis Ababa, dirty money now buys more than domestic power—it buys regional silence, diplomatic ambiguity, and institutional paralysis. It is shaping a new political economy of African diplomacy. One that resists accountability and celebrates transactionalism over transparency. If opposition forces fail to adapt, they risk remaining morally righteous, but politically irrelevant.

Youngerson Matete is a multi-award-winning pro-democracy and Human Rights activist, a Mandela Washington Fellowship Alumni, and a student of human rights and Politics. He is the founder of Project Vote 263, African Network For Democracy, National Constitutional Movement, and The School of Governance and Center For Democracy. He writes in his own capacity. His views don't represent any organization.

Cell: +263 773 622 044

Email:youngmatete0@gmail.com/ director@projectvote263.org.zw.