In the waning months of 2025, Zimbabwe’s political landscape remains a contested arena, with no undisputed heir apparent to President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s throne.
Yet whispers in Harare’s power corridors and the inner sanctums of the ruling ZANU PF party swirl around a handful of high-profile names, each vying for the mantle in this opaque succession drama.
That said, as the debate over Mnangagwa’s successor bubbles beneath the surface – quietly intensifying without quite boiling over – Vice President Constantino Chiwenga stands out as the presumptive frontrunner.
Figures like tycoon Kudakwashe Tagwirei and retired army general Philip Valerio Sibanda are gaining traction in elite chatter, but they lack Chiwenga’s potent mix of entrenched state authority, war-of-liberation bona fides, and lingering military clout.
His vice-presidential perch, pivotal part in the 2017 coup that ousted Robert Mugabe, and sustained – if somewhat diminished – sway over the security apparatus keep him a step ahead in this high-stakes game.
It’s precisely this viability, not mere conjecture or partisan daydream, that demands a clear-eyed examination of what a Chiwenga presidency would entail.
Zimbabweans deserve more than rhetoric or tribal loyalties; we must dissect its potential ramifications across institutions, politics, and the economy with unflinching realism.
A Constantino Chiwenga presidency would fundamentally reorganise Zimbabwe’s political landscape. It would not simply be a change of personalities at the top. It would be a reconfiguration of the state’s operating system.
Chiwenga’s worldview is shaped by decades in uniform, an upbringing in liberation war discipline, and a sense of historical duty that places order above consensus. He is not a populist, nor a deal-maker, nor a natural politician. He is a commander.
And a presidency governed by the instincts of a commander would generate ripple effects across ZANU PF, the security state, the economy, and Zimbabwe’s fragile democratic space.
To understand the scenario, one must first understand the man. Since 2017, Chiwenga has been the pivotal figure in the military-political complex that elevated Mnangagwa and removed Robert Mugabe.
His political education has come late, in a sense, and his leadership culture remains fundamentally that of a general staff. He has a deep distrust for chaos, informality and political improvisation.
Where Mnangagwa tolerates factional balances, Chiwenga strives for a single chain of command. This distinction is essential in forecasting how the country would be governed.
The first and most visible feature of a Chiwenga presidency would be the formalisation of militarisation. The 2017 coup produced what scholars termed a securocratic state.
Under Mnangagwa, however, that structure softened into a hybrid system blending political patronage, business networks and military influence. Under Chiwenga, the security sector would again rise to the centre of gravity.
Key ministries, from Home Affairs to Defence to Foreign Affairs, would likely be entrusted to trusted former officers. The bureaucratic culture would become more rigid, with a strong focus on discipline, hierarchy and compliance.
This would not necessarily mean a return to overt military rule, but rather a deepening of military logic within civilian institutions.
ZANU PF itself would undergo a profound internal reconfiguration. Chiwenga has a tense, transactional alliance with Mnangagwa, and his ascendancy would require the removal or sidelining of Mnangagwa’s political and business loyalists.
One should expect a purge reminiscent of the post-Mugabe clear-outs, only executed with greater efficiency. Provincial structures would be brought into line, and the party would revert to a liberation-war-inspired ethos that privileges loyalty over entrepreneurial politics.
The factional “coexistence” that marks Mnangagwa’s tenure would end. In its place would emerge a more unified, but more authoritarian, ruling elite.-nehandaradio