Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
17 April 2018 Photo Valentino Ndaba
Researcher probes into military presence in politics - Dr Hlengiwe Dlamini
Dr Hlengiwe Dlamini, a postdoctoral Fellow at the International Studies Group at UFS questions the nature of Zimbabwe’s leadership change in her research.

Was Zimbabwe’s leadership transition in 2017 a classical coup d’état, an unconstitutional change of government or a legal political process? Dr Hlengiwe Portia Dlamini, a postdoctoral Fellow at the University of the Free State’s International Studies Group (ISG), employed this contentious question as the backdrop to her paper titled: “The Paradoxes of Accepting/Rejecting and Constitutionalising/unconstitutionalising the 2017 Zimbabwe coup d’état through the Prism of the Organisation of African Unity and African Union Framework.” She presented her findings at the Stanley Trapido seminar held on 9 April 2018 at the Bloemfontein Campus.

Zimbabwe’s military facilitated the removal of former President Robert Mugabe from power after a 37-year rule. Dr Dlamini’s stance is that the events of 14 November 2017 were a trailblazer for a new form in coup across the globe. In veering from conventional coup elements and adapting alternative terminology in reference to overthrowing Mugabe, Zimbabwe’s military has set the pace for the rest of the world as far as the intertwining of military and politics is concerned.

Remembering 14 November

On the evening of 14 November 2017 the Zimbabwe defence force gathered around the country’s capital, Harare, and seized control of the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation and other key areas of the city. A day later the situation escalated when military spokesman Major General Sibusiso Moyo addressed the citizens via television assuring them there was no military takeover of the government. 

Mugabe’s resignation was announced on 24 November 2017 following a motion of impeachment and a vote of no confidence reinforced by a joint session of parliament and the senate as well as the ruling Zanu–PF party. 

Military and politics intersections
According to Dr Dlamini, Zimbabwe High Court Judge, retired Brigadier General George Chiweshe, justified the military intervention in November 2017 as legal, thereby setting a dangerous precedent for political change in Africa.  

Prompted by the premise that the military overthrow of governments is no longer treated as a domestic issue in the post-cold war era, Dr Dlamini argues that it has become the business of the African Union and donor organisations to intervene and stop coups when they threaten. This explains why, according to Dr Dlamini, the Zimbabwe military establishment struggled to conceal the removal of Robert Mugabe from power as a coup for fear of attracting the wrath of the African Union and other organisations. 

Whether Zimbabwe’s crisis was merely a military response to a popular call by disgruntled citizens or a coup is left to contextual interpretation. 

News Archive

Visiting Professor, Piet Bracke, Speaks on Public Mental Health
2015-02-20

Piet Bracke

Professor in the Department of Sociology at the Ghent University in Belgium, Piet Bracke, recently visited the UFS to speak about his research on the Public mental health and comparative health research: between social theory and psychiatric epidemiology.

At the public lecture on Monday 16 February, Bracke stated that part of the sociological attention to mental health and well-being was rooted in the 19th century's romanticists' discontent with self and society. The classical and contemporary social theorists' views on the disconnection between culture and the ‘real’ self resembles the more recent evolutionary psychological assumptions about the maladaptation of  psychobiological mechanisms to contemporary societal arrangements.

In contrast to these perspectives, contemporary psychiatric epidemiological research has a strongly underdeveloped conception about the nexus between society and population mental health. Both perspectives, the social-theory-and-societal-discontent approach and the biomedical psychiatric epidemiological approach, have drawbacks. Starting from the pitfalls of the aforementioned perspectives, they have been exploring the challenges posed by the development of a macro-sociology of population mental health.

Recently, this research domain has received renewed attention of scholars inside as well as outside sociology. The rise of multi-country, multilevel datasets containing health-related information, as well as the growing attention on the fundamental social causes of health and illness, and the focus on population as opposed to individual health, has contributed to the revival of comparative public mental health research. Based on findings from their recent research, they have illustrated how taking the context into account is vital when exploring the social roots of mental health and illness. In addition, they have demonstrated how they can liberate a few so-called ‘control variables’ in risk factor epidemiology – e.g. gender, education, and age – from their suppressed status by linking them to core concepts of sociology. With their research, they hope to further the development of a macro-sociology of public mental health.

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept