### Mozambique: towards a historical dialogue or a temporary facade?
On March 23, 2024, Maputo experienced a key moment in his recent political history: the first meeting between President Daniel Chapo and the opponent Venancio Mondlane, six months after disputed elections. This meeting, held at the International Center for Conference Joaquim Chissano, aroused considerable interest, not only because of the urgency of the security situation in the country, but also because of the challenges of legitimacy that weigh on the new president.
#### A tense electoral context
On October 9, 2023, the presidential elections were marked by an intense controversy. According to reports from several civil society organizations, widespread violence broke out, leading to the death of more than 300 people. Mondlane, who declared himself a winner of the elections, was the main defender of the rights of the victims of this repression. The question that arises is therefore the following: does this dialogue mark the beginning of an authentic political solidarity to relaunch the nation, or is it only a strategic maneuver to appease tensions while maintaining the status quo?
The Chapo-Mondlane meeting seems, at first glance, a promising gesture. The priority displayed by Chapo and his team to restore confidence in the country’s institutions could point out a more receptive approach to the voice of the opposition. However, it is essential to consider what historically, political dialogue has meant in Mozambique.
#### Dialogue stories: let’s go from the past
The Mozambique, which suffered from a 16 -year -old civil war until 1992, has experienced similar dialogue efforts in the past. Since the end of this conflict, attempts have been made to establish bridges between the Renamo government and that of Frelimo. However, these initiatives have often resulted in mixed results, alternating between relative peace and periods of increased tensions. This story brings us to question: what lessons can we learn for the current situation?
Past experience shows that dialogue, if not accompanied by real security reforms and guarantees for all stakeholders, can quickly turn into a facade. Previous peace agreements have often been frustrated by political maneuvers and the repression of dissent. In order for this meeting to be really productive, it is imperative that changes are visible in the management of post-electoral violence and that concrete measures be taken to protect freedom of expression.
### Security as a priority
During the interview, Mondlane highlighted the extreme insecurity faced by Mozambique, a reality that affects not only political circles, but also the civilian populations on a daily basis. The attack on armed groups, especially in the northern provinces like Cabo Delgado, extends instability in a country already in crisis. Statistics reveal that it has caused more than a million people.
In this context, time is running out for Mozambican leaders. A process of transparent and productive dialogue can only be established if political actors agree to treat the roots of conflicts, including the management of natural resources and the equitable sharing of the wealth of the country. These issues are modern and complex, and their resolution will require a long -term vision.
#### An uncertain future
The question today is whether the two men will manage to overcome their disputes for the good of the country, or whether they will give in to the internal and external pressures which rather encourage them to lock themselves in antagonistic positions.
In conclusion, the dialogue between Chapo and Mondlane represents a potential turning point for Mozambique, but it must be treated with caution. The population expects concrete actions beyond symbolic gestures. For Mozambique to advance towards a lasting peace, a sincere will to reform and unite must emerge, both within the government and in the opposition. The time is no longer for political maneuvers, but for the construction of a future that respects the voice of each Mozambican. Transparency and real commitment to a common future may well be the keys to prevent this dialogue from being transformed into a simple discourse on the need for peace, without real actions to support it.