Source: No, President Mnangagwa Was Not ‘Elected’ To Chair COMESA – Zealous Thierry
There is a special art to sounding grand when saying something quite ordinary. It’s an art Zimbabwean state media has perfected. The latest performance arrived neatly packaged in a ZBC headline declaring that President Emmerson Mnangagwa “has been elected” the incoming Chairperson of the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA).
The sentence feels triumphant. “Elected.” It rolls off the tongue like a diplomatic victory, the kind that happens after intense lobbying, whispering in hotel corridors, and strategic handshakes at summits. The only problem is that it didn’t happen. There was no election. There was a handover. It’s a routine, a rotational one in fact, as predictable as the next day’s sunrise.
COMESA does not hold elections for chairpersonship. The organization, founded in 1994 to deepen regional trade integration among 21 member states, is run on consensus and rotation. Every few years, one country hosts the summit and takes the chair. The next time around, it’s another’s turn. There are no ballots, no campaigns, no last-minute surprises. The chairmanship is a ceremonial duty, guiding discussions, hosting the next summit, and symbolically embodying regional unity.
But that kind of quiet diplomacy doesn’t make for great television. So ZBC did what ZBC does best: it added glitter where procedure sufficed.
The irony here is that the President himself did nothing wrong. He attended the COMESA summit in Nairobi, contributed to discussions on regional integration, and accepted the chairmanship as any other Head of State would have when it’s their country’s turn. The embarrassment belongs squarely to the newsroom that could not resist the temptation of grandeur.
One can almost imagine the editorial meeting. A reporter brings in the press release from COMESA, clearly stating that Zimbabwe assumes the chairmanship following Kenya’s term. Someone reads “assumes” and replaces it with “elected.” It sounds more powerful, more victorious, more newsworthy. A “major diplomatic milestone,” they add, because what’s a story without a sprinkle of patriotic seasoning?
And so the story aired, announcing to the nation that the President had been “elected”, as though 21 heads of state had just cast their ballots, eyes fixed on Zimbabwe, united in admiration for Harare’s trade policy prowess.
It is not the first time ZBC has done this. Every time, when Zimbabwe assumes a rotating role (whether in SADC, the African Union, or COMESA), the headlines light up with a familiar choreography of exaggeration. “Zimbabwe elected SADC Chair.” “President Mnangagwa elected to lead regional bloc.” You’d think we were collecting victories like trophies. Yet in reality, it’s simply our turn in a pre-agreed order that all member states follow.
When Zimbabwe assumed the SADC chairmanship in 2024, the narrative was identical. Crowds were told this was evidence of “growing influence.” The headlines were filled with talk of “recognition” and “trust.” No one mentioned the small procedural detail that the position rotated alphabetically, and that Zimbabwe’s turn had been scheduled years before.
The same template has now been applied to COMESA. And, again, the same result: the President gets praised for an achievement that was inevitable.
Let’s pause and remember what COMESA actually is. The Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa is a 21-member regional bloc that replaced the Preferential Trade Area (PTA) in 1994. It was designed to boost intra-African trade, lower tariffs, and coordinate economic policies. Its secretariat is based in Lusaka, Zambia. It’s one of Africa’s most significant economic communities, linking markets from Libya to Eswatini.
The chairmanship is symbolic. The real work lies with the COMESA Secretariat and Council of Ministers. The chairperson does not dictate trade policy or command regional budgets. Their role is closer to that of a convener, ensuring continuity and cooperation among peers.
So when Zimbabwe assumes that role, it means we host the next summit, chair a few meetings, and represent the bloc in ceremonial engagements. It’s an honor, yes. But it is not a contest won through merit or persuasion.
Which is why calling it an “election” is misleading. It distorts the very nature of how regional organizations function. In diplomacy, language matters. Words like “election,” “appointment,” and “assumption” have distinct meanings. Using them carelessly just confuses the public in as much as it cheapens the legitimacy of our institutions.
If one wanted to be generous, perhaps ZBC used “elected” loosely, as a synonym for “chosen.” But COMESA didn’t choose Zimbabwe. It followed rotation. If it had been Malawi’s turn, Malawi would be chair. There was no voting, no rivals, no tallying. Calling that an election is like saying you were “elected” to brush your teeth because the clock struck eight.
The deeper issue is not the mistake itself, but the culture it represents, a tendency to overstate routine diplomatic developments as if they were groundbreaking victories. It’s a reflex inherited from decades of propaganda-style reporting, where symbolism matters more than substance. If the President attends a summit, it’s “a major diplomatic breakthrough.” If he shakes a fellow leader’s hand, it’s “proof of Zimbabwe’s growing influence.” If Zimbabwe hosts a meeting, it’s “evidence of re-engagement.”
This inflation of language serves no one, least of all the President. Because when the state broadcaster dresses up every procedural event as a personal triumph, it risks turning genuine achievements into background noise. When everything is historic, nothing is.
The President deserves accurate representation, not flattery disguised as journalism. In fact, good reporting would make his diplomacy look better, not worse. It would show that Zimbabwe’s foreign policy operates within respected multilateral frameworks, that the country fulfills its responsibilities, and that regional peers trust it enough to uphold rotation schedules smoothly. There’s pride in that, quiet, steady pride. But unfortunately in ZBC’s case quiet pride doesn’t sell. Drama does.
It’s curious how this cycle repeats itself. The same media outlets that should clarify these distinctions are the ones that blur them. The average citizen, reading ZBC’s headline, now believes the President won an election against 20 other heads of state. They may picture campaign posters in Lusaka or late-night strategy meetings at the Rainbow Towers. In reality, the President attended a summit, gave a speech, and accepted a ceremonial gavel.
Of course, there is a subtle psychology behind the misrepresentation. To say the President was “elected” fits neatly into the national narrative of validation, 1that Zimbabwe is being recognized, accepted, even celebrated on the regional stage. It’s a comforting story, one that reassures a weary public that the country is back in good standing. But diplomacy doesn’t work like that. Regional organizations don’t grant legitimacy through chairmanships; they demonstrate equality through rotation.
The COMESA chairmanship rotates to ensure fairness, inclusivity, and shared ownership of the organization. It prevents dominance by any single state. Each member gets a chance to lead. It’s the diplomatic equivalent of taking turns driving on a long road trip, not because one is a better driver, but because everyone must share the wheel.
So when ZBC calls this “a major diplomatic milestone,” it’s overstating the obvious. Zimbabwe’s participation in COMESA has been consistent for decades. We are a founding member. We hosted the summit before. We’ll do so again. The chairmanship is part of that rhythm. It’s a turn, not a trophy.
The tragedy is that this habit of exaggeration diminishes public understanding of real diplomacy. Citizens are left thinking international relations are competitions, where “wins” and “losses” are measured by titles and photos. That mindset reduces regional cooperation (which thrives on patience, negotiation, and consensus) into a scoreboard.
Imagine explaining to an international observer that our state media still treats rotational chairmanships as national victories. It’s like a student bragging about taking attendance as an “academic achievement.” It doesn’t inspire confidence in the maturity of our public communication.
What would real diplomatic reporting look like? It would explain that Zimbabwe, as a long-standing member of COMESA, is assuming the rotating chairmanship following Kenya’s tenure. It would highlight the policy themes discussed at the summit, the push to remove non-tariff barriers, the progress on the Tripartite Free Trade Area, the integration of infrastructure projects. It would link those issues to Zimbabwe’s economic interests: how improved regional logistics might boost exports from Chirundu, how harmonized customs rules could benefit small-scale traders at Beitbridge.
That kind of journalism informs citizens and elevates public debate. It shows leadership through substance, not slogans. But it requires effort, nuance, and, unfortunately, a willingness to sacrifice drama for depth.
The embarrassment, then, is not that ZBC got a word wrong. It’s that the word reveals a pattern, a pattern of institutional laziness dressed as patriotism. The President’s communication team should be worried, not pleased. Because if state media keeps inflating routine events, the international audience will stop taking any of it seriously.
Diplomatic circles notice these things. Officials at the COMESA Secretariat certainly know there was no election. Their press statements use careful wording, “assumed the chairmanship,” “took over the chair,” “handed over the reins.” When they read ZBC’s version, they see a country unable to distinguish between procedure and prestige. That’s not the image Zimbabwe needs.
The tragedy of overstated media is that it traps leadership in a hall of mirrors. Everyone keeps clapping at reflections. Meanwhile, the serious work of economic diplomacy, negotiating trade facilitation, improving logistics, aligning standards, is buried under self-congratulation.
To be clear, Zimbabwe’s assumption of the COMESA chairmanship is not meaningless. It is a chance to steer the conversation on regional integration, to align COMESA’s priorities with the African Continental Free Trade Area, to push for infrastructure investments that link the north-south corridor. These are real opportunities. But they require clear communication and credible leadership, not fanfare.
When a country takes its turn in rotation, the real measure of success is how it uses that term to advance practical cooperation. If, by the end of Zimbabwe’s chairmanship, intra-COMESA trade has improved even marginally, that would be an achievement. If customs procedures at our borders become faster, if regional trucking becomes cheaper, that’s worth celebrating.
But we cannot reach that stage if our media keeps confusing ceremony for substance. ZBC’s job is to inform, not decorate. The public deserves accuracy. The President deserves competent coverage. And the nation deserves journalists who can tell the difference between an election and a rotation.
The diplomatic community operates on precision. A single misplaced word can alter meaning. That’s why communiqués are written in such careful language, every phrase negotiated, every adjective considered. It’s also why trained diplomats raise an eyebrow when they see headlines like “Mnangagwa elected COMESA Chair.” They know what actually happened. They know there was no election. They know the headline was written for domestic consumption, not international credibility.
It’s a small thing, perhaps, but small things accumulate. Over time, careless wording corrodes trust. If a state broadcaster cannot accurately report a regional handover, why should anyone trust it to handle complex economic data or sensitive foreign policy analysis?
In an era when information moves faster than correction, credibility is currency. Once lost, it’s hard to earn back. That’s why nations with mature media ecosystems treat accuracy as an act of patriotism. Truth, not embellishment, strengthens diplomacy.
Zimbabwe is a respected member of COMESA. It has contributed meaningfully to regional trade initiatives and hosted successful summits before. The country doesn’t need inflated headlines to validate its role. What it needs is professional communication that matches the dignity of its diplomacy.
If misleading were a media house, it would look a lot like the one that can’t resist turning a routine chairmanship into an election drama. The irony is painful because it’s unnecessary. The President’s foreign policy team works hard to position Zimbabwe as a credible regional partner. Yet their efforts risk being overshadowed by a newsroom too eager to manufacture applause.
So, no, President Mnangagwa was not “elected” to be the Chairperson of COMESA. Zimbabwe assumed the chairmanship as part of the organization’s rotation system. It’s a procedural event, not a political victory. The honor lies in stewardship, not selection.
In the end, one hopes that state media learns what diplomacy already knows: words carry weight. The difference between “elected” and “assumed” is the difference between truth and theatre. For a nation seeking re-engagement and respect, that difference matters.
Zimbabwe’s diplomacy has matured. Its media should try to keep up.
The post No, President Mnangagwa Was Not ‘Elected’ To Chair COMESA appeared first on Zimbabwe Situation.