How have Robert Mugabe and his ruling party, the Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF), managed to remain in power for so long? Since the beginning of Zimbabwe’s dismal descent in early 2000, a veritable cottage industry of personalized accounts of the crisis and authoritarian endurance has dominated discussion to the exclusion of deeper analysis of the country’s politics. Finally, and refreshingly, in this magnificent account, Michael Bratton contends that the answer to Zimbabwe’s condition, including Mugabe and ZANU-PF’s victory in the 2013 elections, lies not in the common “big man” account but in the regime that developed in the country beginning as far back as the colonial period. For Bratton, the root cause of the country’s condition is not a single individual, though that individual is a key actor, but the institutional configuration of power politics.

The elements and features of power politics that Bratton highlights are familiar. Critically, in this form of politics, “might makes right” (p. 7). In this framework, therefore, there is no room for persuasion and ethical considerations, nor are incumbents constrained by law in what they do in pursuit and defense of power. Typically associated with the realist school of international relations, Bratton brings this framework to domestic politics, arguing that it captures, more concretely, the interests and behavior of incumbents in authoritarian contexts like Zimbabwe. Alongside and working in concert with power politics is a patchwork of political settlements, understood as elite bargains that define the balance of power and, in so doing, frame the rules of the game.

By analyzing Zimbabwean politics through the lenses of power politics and political settlements, Bratton is able to show how group interest and an identity forged during the anticolonial movement explain the resilience of authoritarianism in the country. In the somewhat path-dependent story that he tells, the country’s colonial experience under a brutal settler-colonial system and the version of anticolonial struggle that was eventually successful—a liberation war prosecuted by two divided nationalist parties—left an indelible mark on the political elite. According to Bratton, because Zimbabwe’s postcolonial leaders, Robert Mugabe and ZANU-PF, were socialized by racial discrimination, arbitrary political detention, and the liberation war, what they learned was that “political power is rooted in military might” (p. 51). As a consequence of this experience and the lessons that it offered, the victors at independence created a militarized electoral authoritarian system, as this is how they understood political power.

This aspect of Bratton’s analysis explains why in the postindependence period incumbents have repeatedly resorted to intimidation, coercion, and violence to retain power and secure the privileges it affords. We also see clearly in the analysis that authoritarianism and power politics in Zimbabwe did not begin with Mugabe and ZANU-PF. Power politics has been a feature of the country’s politics for much longer, and therefore will likely remain even after Mugabe is gone.

In addition to using political settlements to identify existing elite bargains and analyze crises in the country’s history (i.e., critical junctures) that portended a break from existing rules of the game, Bratton shows that new rules of the game have not been forthcoming. Instead, once established, the power politics equilibrium reproduced itself at all critical junctures—moment of conquest and creation of colonial government, period of settler rebellion, early independence, and after the 2008 crisis—as those in power relied on exclusive political settlements to defend their position.

One consequence of the absence of a usable history of inclusive elite settlements in Zimbabwe is that it undermined the power-sharing model as a viable path to political reform in the country. Bratton examines the 2008 power-sharing deal to illustrate this point. Negotiated in bad faith by Mugabe and ZANU-PF, the agreement allowed a discredited ruler “who had lost an election to stay in power” (p. 234). Worse still, according to Bratton, the power-sharing deal gave Mugabe and hardliners in the party the time to regroup and tighten their control, leading into the manipulated 2013 elections. As the author notes, during the government of national unity period, the civilian—military coalition was more skillful at playing the power politics game than the opposition. For its part, the opposition commendably opted not to pursue a militarized opposition to Mugabe, but regrettably failed to gain control of the institutions of coercion in the power-sharing government and then naively hoped that international pressure and constitutional reform would create an equal playing field. Since ZANU’s control of coercive institutions remained, while international pressure waned and constitutional reform sputtered, it is no wonder that Mugabe and ZANU-PF won the 2013 elections, extending authoritarian rule.

Despite Bratton’s important corrections to the way that authoritarian resilience in Zimbabwe has been explained to date, the book is less satisfying on some themes. First, while power politics has been introduced as the organizing framework of politics in the country, why power politics stuck and survived in Zimbabwe and not in other similar countries is not entirely clear. Second, Bratton’s account leaves somewhat undertheorized and unresolved the central question of the relationship between power politics and legitimacy. Yes, he is right that a continuum of political legitimacy fundamentally runs from coercion to persuasion. But once history, conditions, and elite interests conspire to create a world of coercion (power politics), what becomes of persuasion (legitimacy)? Is power politics alone enough to gain power and secure incumbency?

Bratton’s theoretical framework seems to suggest yes or, more generously, is silent on these questions. However, his nuanced discussion of Zimbabwe’s political history seems to imply that mastering coercion alone is not enough to secure incumbency. How else are we to interpret his contention that the settler colonial system “never gained full political legitimacy; ultimately, race-based minority rule proved unsustainable” (p. 34). Or, for that matter, how are we to understand why in the early postindependence period we see incumbents investing “in improving access to agriculture and social services for the bulk of the population, most of whom were small-scale ‘communal area’ farmers” (p. 57). Legitimacy is present in the narrative account of Zimbabwe’s political history but absent in the theoretical exposition of the power politics framework to the obfuscation of its limitations.

These limitations are also apparent in the decision of Mugabe and ZANU-PF to enter into a political settlement with Morgan Tsvangirai and the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), having used intimidation, coercion, and violence in the 2008 elections. To explain this turn of events, I think we need to go beyond power politics and recognize that in domestic politics, even authoritarian rulers need a modicum of legitimacy. As Rousseau put it in The Social Contract (1994), “the stronger party is never strong enough to remain the master forever, unless he transforms his strength into right, and obedience into duty” (p. 48). So, while political power in 2008 was retained through violence, it was then immediately followed by a power-sharing agreement that, while negotiated in bad faith by Mugabe and ZANU-PF, nevertheless offered a path to legitimizing ill-begotten power.

These quarrels aside, Power Politics in Zimbabwe offers a refreshing and institutionally grounded account of authoritarian resilience. It is compelling, thoroughly researched, and immensely informative. The book will no doubt appeal to readers who found personalized accounts unsatisfying. As Bratton clearly shows in this book, Zimbabwe’s predicament cannot be attributed to the actions of a single individual, no matter how apparent that seems. Power Politics will also generate a great deal of discussion among Zimbabwe specialists as they confront the lessons and implications of Bratton’s provocative analysis.