Sometime in 1978 Chamisa was born. That time his date of birth was not significant and nobody ever thought that there will be a minute put aside to coin discussions bordering on his age or indeed the dates he was born. Recently the war veterans ignited a huge wild fire when they made proposals that the Constitution of Zimbabwe be amended to move the age limit of the president to be 52 and over. With very little considerations the Woman’s league started running with the motion an during the conference the motion was tabled seconded and passed at party level. 
The irony is that once its carried at the conference it becomes easy to be passed in parliament as the new model is that the party leads the government 

Fears were raised whether the age limit is raised just to put Chamisa out of the way. Would it be possible that the whole party was shaken to the bowels by Chamisa. Would the constitution be amended just to side play the youthful but clueless Chamisa. 

ZANU PF has never been shaken by anyone in the Political landscape in the whole continent. So Chamisa was never the target neither will ever be one. While it is true that his waffling gave the Warvets an idea of being serious. Age in choosing the president   Suggested some seriousness and maturity. Zimbabweans are so vulnerable they listen to anything and follow almost anything from Magaya to Chamisa via Makandiwa and another Lunatic who gets acres of air time on national TV claiming that he fought God in a wrestling match. With such kind of followers the Warvets raised the to safeguard the interests of the people. So the age limit came up for the best interest of the nation. 

The nation has been reading and following opinions of Zimbabweans through the various media channels about the proposed constitutional amendment that seeks to amend in particular Article. 
Many of the actors or commentators are busy discussing this very crucial topic with a lot of emotions and biasness. It is easy for those who feel affected to believe that it is a plan to silence Chamisa. we can logically debate this subject without emotions. ZANU PF has so much experience of winning that they do not need to find ways of silencing Chamisa. 

The pressure for change always emanates from external and internal contexts and are usually dynamic and volatile with political, economic and social characteristics. It should be noted that change is always an inevitable thing and it will always be natural. One thing which is certain is change. 

When we changed our political system and adopted a multi-party system, issues of political offices are no longer a matter of an individual but for an organisation. It is extremely wrong for a constitutional amendment to focus on an individual as opposed to a system or process. So the age limit is not an individual agenda and Chamisa should take comfort in the fact that ZANU PF plays fair game and he has nothing to worry about. 
However some lawyers have argued that the very elementary reasoning of equal rights and opportunities for all would make us know that it was in the first place wrong for the Constitution to put limitations based on age for one to access an office and yet not for voting. It is only logical that since we were opening up the presidential term limits in the Constitution we should have well amended it to allow political parties the free choice to select and present their candidates for Elections as long as they attain the majority age. The timing of amendment upwards is suspect. 

The right to fail or win as a political party should be left to the parties. If by sponsoring a young or old person to contest makes a party lose its seat in office, such a decision should be left to a political party to make. In short, organisations should be left to make choices of failing or winning. That is what democracy would demand.The amendment of the law in that aspect steps right on the head of democracy. 
The warvets cannot claim to be  wanting to protect the people from themselves. What interest does a hyena have in nursing an injured calf. 

Change may take many of the following combinations; impose, adaptation, growth and creativity changes. These are crucial and more so for the future stability of a nation state. When we anticipate political change, we ought to be mindful that there are things which must be managed by all actors of change. These include, but not limited to; peace and security, economy, expectations, impatience, arrogances and intolerance.

The reason why the Nation,organisations and the many Zimbabweans still need Mnangagwa as a president is because of the maturity he has exhibited with state affairs over the years. The uncontrolled “rush” “push” by mainly the dismal voices of decent from the opposition out of uncontrolled emotions can only see Zimbabwe regress. Statehood need not require emotions but ability to neutralise potential risk of anarchy. Chamisa let down the youth. He showed that his age was ripe for SRC president at a college. For the nation he successfully showed the system a middle finger.  

The geo-political situation of the Zimbabwe requires a deeper and sober head of state. 
All a leader requires is to tag the young educated and energetic population to these opportunities. Power needs the weight of age so to stabilise it there has to be an age limit. 

Zimbabwe  has become a home to African refugees and this is because of what these brothers and sisters see happen in Zimbabwe. Our history had divided us internally while externally we were looked at as a country full of petty lines of division (religion, tribes). But at the moment, Zimbabwe is the magnet to the unity of Africa.if age is not clipped all this will be lost in one second. During his campaign Chamisa touched a huge storm by threatening to deport all foreigners and demand payment from China. If he ha won Zimbabwe would be a leading nation in Xenophobic attacks. Without caution youthful age can be a disaster so raising the age to 50 stabilises and gives weight the office of the President 

Today, Zimbabwe has embraced and accommodated many from the region and they have brought a lot of opportunities to our citizens. This level of stewardship by ED need to be harnessed and jealously protected. A change from ED to an alternative should be a change that will not rock the foundation achievements we have scored. 

I believe and know that for every move to change, there are underlying resistances which are only natural and can be expressed differently through covert or overt means. However, leaders at the lower levels should guard against the recklessness that would only make us slide into anarchy.
Mankind will always have challenges and issues. All governments have issues and very serious ones, therefore, it is not correct to imagine or assume that it is only Zimbabwe where things seem to be wrong.

Key to all these is the ability of a leader to manage all the challenges while maintaining a balance which is credible and accommodative. Old age comes with a lot of wisdom experience and skills to manage divergent society issues. 
The idea that formulate the content of any change entails managing its context and process.

Correct policies for change are not sufficient, organisation capacity for change is necessary both at the conceptual and operational levels.

Change involves the continuous interplay between the content for change, the process of change and the context of change together with the skills to regulate the relations between the dynamics that comes with change process.
The change of presidential age must not only cover the starting age. It must also limit the age at cut off stage. 
We must not be confused by the fact that other countries have five year olds babies running the country. Zimbabwe is not photocopier. It is a sovereign state. 
The proposal was put and we   Anxiously wait for the motion to be put to parliament for voting. With over two thirds majority the motion might leave till tomorrow. 

Vazet2000@yahoo.co.uk