• Political violence escalates
• Stop Zimbabwe’s bully
• POLITICAL VIOLENCE REPORT NOVEMBER 2001
• US warns Mugabe of election fraud
• Mugabe must go
• Christmas Message from Lucia Matibenga, chairperson, MDC Womens Assembly
• Government Denies Accusations of Violence
• Zimbabwe reports jumbo inflation
• Harare Denied HIPC Status
• Southern African Ministers Hold Talks on Zimbabwe Crisis
• Zimbabwe dam campaign aims to boost food security
• CFU tells Sadc ministers of worsening crisis
• Local Insight—The violence of Gokwe
• Mkushi board defies Jonathan Moyo

From ZWNEWS, 17 December

Political violence escalates

As the presidential election in March draws closer, the use of violence by the government for political ends is escalating. The Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum last week released its monthly report on political violence for November. The statistics, and the evidence from witness statements, are simply horrifying. The report records six political murders or executions during November alone, bringing the total of those known to have been killed since January this year to 41. Eight kidnappings last month bring the year's running total to 307. Over 2100 cases of torture, and nearly 1000 incidences of unlawful detention, have been reported, and the human rights organisations who compiled the report have documented that 70 000 farmworkers are now refugees in their own country, having been forced off commercial farms by the "fast-track" land seizures. The witness statements included in the November report are nothing less than chilling. Again and again, victims - from all areas of the country - state that the police have refused to come to their aid, or actively assaulted them. Severe torture has been inflicted on the mere suspicion that someone may be less than wholeheartedly supportive of Zanu PF. Those beaten have, more often than not, been refused medical treatment.

Comment from The Globe & Mail (Canada), 12 December

Stop Zimbabwe’s bully

Robert Mugabe and his state-backed thugs are tearing a nation apart. Why are we turning a blind eye? asks former diplomat Art Wright

Zimbabwe's tragedy is that its President, Robert Mugabe, confidently believing that the rest of the world will not respond, is consciously promoting state-sponsored terrorism. After Zimbabwe's independence in 1980, Canada and other Western nations rightly praised Mr. Mugabe for expanding health and education facilities. But we stayed silent in the mid-1980s during the brutal repression of the Ndebele people; this caused 20,000 civilian deaths, and was designed to replace political opposition with a de facto one-party state. Maintaining the threat of physical force while limiting its use, Mr. Mugabe gained successive majorities in carefully managed periodic elections. However, increasing corruption and bad management sharply eroded his political support in the 1990s. He and the ruling Zanu PF began to be increasingly challenged by concerned, informed and articulate Zimbabweans, both black and white. Their determination to protect and promote democratic rights and practices has been met by violent government retaliation - perpetrated by the Central Intelligence Organization, a state security body that acts as an agency of Zanu PF. Newspapers have seen their presses smashed and licences for the import of newsprint and ink denied. Media have been repeatedly harassed and arrested, as have political opponents.

In early 2000, despite government attempts to rig the results, voters rejected a referendum that would have virtually guaranteed Mr. Mugabe the presidency for life. The gloves came off. In the parliamentary election later that year, many opposition candidates were prevented from campaigning by beatings and threats against themselves and their families. Despite such terror tactics, Zanu PF secured only a slim majority of elected seats; many of the results were appealed to the courts. The government then forced the resignation of a number of senior judges, including the Chief Justice, and replaced them with more compliant judges. Despite all this, the organized opposition - based among black and white trade union members, large and small-scale commercial farmers, professionals, academics and businessmen - has continued to grow. Mr. Mugabe has sought to destroy the credibility of the opposition by portraying its members as tools of Zimbabwean whites (now barely 0.5 per cent of the population) and outsiders. Using the legitimate need for redistribution of land (acknowledged by virtually all Zimbabweans), the government has armed and encouraged so-called "liberation war veterans" to occupy large-scale commercial farms, 80 per cent owned by white Zimbabweans (who employed thousands of labourers, and provided primary schooling and health care). The police decline to intervene, saying their hands are tied because the issues are political. Not only have owners been driven from their farms, tens of thousands of farm workers have been displaced. Officially, 21 black and 9 white Zimbabweans have been killed but human rights groups cite much higher numbers. Many previously successful farms are now lying fallow; few of those who occupied them are engaged even in subsistence agriculture.

The reign of terror, the declining production of cash crops, the collapse of tourism and disinvestments in mineral production, combined with the cost of keeping 11,000 Zimbabwean troops in the Congo, has bankrupted Zimbabwe. It cannot pay for fuel and electricity imports. Massive food imports are needed in a normally food-exporting country. Current financial support from Libya cannot compensate for Zimbabwe's lost earnings. Mr. Mugabe's actions have isolated him from Southern African Development Community (SADC) partners. Though he told a visiting SADC team this week that presidential elections would be held in March, they remain (diplomatically) critical of Zimbabwe's mismanagement and concerned about the destabilizing effects on their own countries. As presidential elections approach, Mr. Mugabe, 77, is determined to hold on to power against a much younger challenger, Morgan Tsvangirai, leader of the broadly based Movement for Democratic Change (MDC). He knows that in a free election, this will not be possible. In defiance of recent agreements to reinstate democratic practices, he has escalated his rhetoric, demonizing the opposition and media as "agents of terrorism supported by outsiders." Articles in the government press now publicly attack prominent opposition figures; MDC offices in Bulawayo, Zimbabwe's second-largest city have been torched. Urban workers who have lost jobs in the declining economy, largely MDC supporters, are being returned to rural areas in an attempt to reduce the number of urban voters.

Canada and others countries have failed to respond adequately to the warning signals emanating from Zimbabwe. Suspension of aid reflects disengagement, rather than commitment to find solutions. Quiet diplomacy, through neighbouring countries and the Commonwealth, has failed to bring back the rule of law. But if international terrorism - or domestic terrorism in the former Yugoslavia – is unacceptable to us, why do we tolerate it in Zimbabwe? We must implement measures that would have a direct impact on Mr. Mugabe and his government; we should employ targeted sanctions - such as travel restrictions and the freezing of personal foreign accounts - against Zimbabwe's leaders. The European Union is currently considering such measures. The U.S. Congress has approved a similar bill. Zimbabwe has long ceased to respect the rule of law or the rights of its citizens to basic security. It should not escape international censure for its reign of terror against its own people. Africans and Europeans are finally speaking out. If we remain silent in the face of overwhelming evidence of the misuse of power, then we are complicit in its continued abuse. We reduce our own credibility as proponents of basic human rights and democratic freedoms. The Commonwealth Ministers meeting on Zimbabwe, to be held in London next week, provides us with an opportunity to join African and European countries, and the United States in condemning such abuses. We must reduce the ability of Mr. Mugabe and his ministers to oppress the Zimbabwean people.

Art Wright, a consultant and lecturer on sustainable development issues, was Canada's high commissioner to Zimbabwe from 1993 to 1996

Monday, 17 December, 2001, 16:03 GMT

Zimbabwe reports jumbo inflation

Price controls on food have failed to halt inflation

Zimbabwe's inflation rose to a record 103.8% in the year to November, due largely to increases in the cost of food despite price controls introduced earlier this year.

The price of beverages, bread and cereals, household operations, rent and vehicle running costs all contributed to driving inflation up from 97.9% in October, figures from the Central Statistical Office (CSO) showed.

Retailers have been pricing foods at the parallel currency rates, which given the official exchange rate of Z$55 to the US dollar and the black market rate of Z$300, has pushed the figure up

Razia Khan Standard Chartered

"Of the 103.8% year on year rate of inflation ... increases in food prices accounted for 33.1 percentage points while non-food items ... accounted for 70.7 percentage points," CSO said.

The figures were in line with analysts expectations and they expect inflation to fall again next year.

"Price controls haven't crept into this index and moderated inflation and we should have lower levels next year after the high base of this year," said Razia Khan of Standard Chartered.

"Retailers have been pricing foods at the parallel currency rates, which given the official exchange rate of Z$55 to the US dollar and the black market rate of Z$300, has pushed the figure up," she said.

Troubled economy

Zimbabwe's economic outlook is bleak with government forecasts predicting a second year of depression.

The economy is expected to contract by 7.3% in 2001 and a further 5.3% in 2002 and unemployment is expected to stay well over 60%.

President Robert Mugabe's controversial land reforms, in which white-owned farms have been seized for redistribution, have been geared up along with the downturn.

Foreign investment has dried up, exports have fallen and most international lenders, including the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, have cut off Zimbabwe.

Reuters

17 Dec 2001 Zimbabwe dam campaign aims to boost food security

The Makhosi Irrigation schemes in Matabeleland South province, one of the region's success stories. Photo by BUSANI BAFANA

Zimbabwe's Give a Dam (GAD) campaign has become a model long-term solution to drought-related poverty in the country's arid regions such as Matabeleland South province. GAD's coordinator, Philani Mpofu, explained the ideas behind the programme, now in its sixth year, to AlertNet correspondent Busani Bafana.

AN: How did GAD come about?

PM: The idea for the Give a Dam Campaign arose out of the experience of agencies working in the drought-stricken province of Matabeleland South -- mainly national and international NGOs, government departments, communities of Matabeleland South represented by six rural district councils coordinated through the Provincial Administrator and the U.N. Development Programme.

At a meeting with donors to discuss the 1994 drought, the parties decided to have field assessments of the situation in Gwanda Province. During the encounter with the communities, a villager brought to the donors' attention that their relief handouts only consisted of maize without relish. The people then suggested that rather than give them full rations, the donors should give them enough to sustain themselves and help them with seed money to build dams. People wanted water for livestock and irrigation. When donors, NGOs and government representatives eventually bought the idea, it was easy to pick a name for the new collaborative effort. During the meetings, people were clamouring for dams, hence the name Give a Dam campaign. People realised that drought in the region was recurring almost every year. What was essential, therefore, was to come up with long-term mitigation measures to empower the affected communities through food security.

The rallying points for the formation of the Give a Dam Campaign were that drought relief food handouts were not sustainable. The mobilisation of resources, dam construction and the provision of irrigation infrastructure would be more effective under the GAD umbrella. This would provide a common forum for all stakeholders to address the question of equity in the distribution of water and resources to achieve food security.

BB: Who is behind GAD and how many communities are involved?

PM: GAD is a consortium of national and international NGOs, the communities of Matabeleland South, represented by their rural district councils, and the government of Zimbabwe. The participating NGOs bring in their expertise, equipment and funds through the various Give a Dam committees. The participating NGOs are the Organisation of Rural Associations for Progress (ORAP), Dabane Trust, Netherlands Development Organisation (SNV), German Development Service, World Vision, Oxfam Canada, Oxfam USA, Lutheran Development Service, CADEC, Africare, Africa 2000 Network, Christian Care and government agencies which provide personnel, transport and technical support.

BB: What would you say has been GAD's contribution to food security?

PM: GAD has completed 39 small- to-medium-sized dams, which are used for livestock watering and irrigation schemes. These dams ensure a constant supply of water all year round. Eight irrigation schemes are currently operational, and these have improved the household income of their beneficiaries and also provided food on their table.

AN: Your organisation has helped to source funding towards dam building. How many dams have you built and at what cost?

PM. Thirty-nine dams have been built at a cost of approximately Z$120million (U.S.$2.17 million). The 39 dams are part of the original 47 dams to be completed within a period of five years. Furthermore, we have managed to develop eight out of 31 (16 others are at an advanced stage of development) originally planned irrigation schemes, with a total hectarage of 50. Several spin off projects like fish farming, cattle fattening, beekeeping, poultry, and eco-tourism ventures have also been developed.

AN: What tangible benefits have been realised by participants in the GAD campaign?

PM: In the past six years, dam site locations have been rationalised through the forum. It has reduced duplication and saved time in community mobilisation, as the different partners have managed to address communities under one roof. In any event, the involvement of rural district councils has taken partners to communities that would invariably be mobilised already. While creating a partnership among implementing agencies, rural district councils and government agencies that has reduced monitoring and approval delays, GAD has also generally improved the project planning and the implementing process by providing a pool of expertise from different agencies and a platform for experience sharing. The programme has opened windows for co-funding which has facilitated the achievement of the prime objective of water and food security, as partners who would not otherwise been able to be players now can be.

AN: Community mobilisation and teamwork are challenges in dealing with projects such as those undertaken by GAD. What problems have you experienced and how have you overcome them?

PM: Several community dynamics, especially those arising from coerced community participation, have either retarded the speed of project implementation or got into the way of the sustainability of the projects. We have realised that, to ensure sustainability of interventions in the water sector, there is need for active community participation and democratic leadership. Problems in coordinating the work of various development agencies in the water sector in Matabeleland South have led to duplication and fragmentation of activities by these agencies. Added to that, agencies' resources were not used in an optimal manner. Catchment conservation and general environmental concerns have not been sufficiently integrated into the programme. There was a strong urge to see dams and irrigation schemes developed. This has had a negative impact on many dams, as a lot of silt is going into the dams threatening their design life span, and thus their sustainability. On this score the programme intends to conduct baseline surveys on all its projects and start planning on how catchment conservation issues can be incorporated.

AN: What are the prospects for the future and where is GAD going?

PM: From June 2002, the programme is going to transform its self into a GAD Trust, which will be charged with the responsibilities of hosting and governing the proposed Matabeleland South Integrated Water Programme (MSIWP). The decision to establish the MSIWP is a response to the initial success of the GAD Campaign and its growing need for coordination of efforts, avoiding wasteful competition by development agents and institutions and the quest for accountability, transparency and sustainability of development interventions and initiatives in the water development sector in Matabeleland South. The establishment of the GAD Trust is seen as the necessary move to institutionalise the envisaged coordinating role of the MSIWP. The Trust will be an independent organisation with clear mandates enshrined in the constitution. The goal of MSIWP is to enable women and men in the marginal areas of Matabeleland South to equally engage in and benefit from water harvesting undertaken in an integrated, interdisciplinary and environmentally sound manner, in order to improve local food production and generate cash income.