MDC legislator for Mabvuku-Tafara,
Timothy Mubhawu, was arrested last Friday on allegations of violating
provisions of the Public Order and Security Act (Posa) after he reportedly
threatened a Zanu PF supporter with unspecified action for hoisting the
ruling party's flag in his constituency. Mubhawu, the opposition party's
Manicaland chairperson, is said to have also threatened the complainant,
identified only as Muchena, with the same action for wearing the ruling
party's regalia, again in his constituency. The MDC lawmaker further
reportedly queried why Muchena's tuckshop was spared during Operation
Murambatsvina/Restore Order. The incident allegedly took place at Muchena'
house in Old Mabvuku, where Mubhawu had gone to attend a
funeral. Yesterday, Mubhawu confirmed he was arrested but referred this
newspaper to his lawyer Alec Muchadehama of Mbizo, Muchadehama and Makoni
legal practitioners, for more details. Muchadehama said Mubhawu was
arrested some hours after he had paid condolences to Muchena, whose child
had died. "He was picked up by Mabvuku police on Friday around 9 pm and
ordered to report at Harare Central Police Station the following day. He was
charged with contravening Section 22 (A and B) of the Public Order and
Security Act (Posa). Under the section, it is an offence for anyone to force
someone to do what he or she is not legally supposed to do," said
Muchadehama. "Muchena alleges that Mubhawu warned her against wearing Zanu
PF regalia and also quizzed her why she was hoisting a Zanu PF flag at her
house. Mubhawu is further alleged to have asked Muchena why operation
Murambatsvina had spared her tuckshop while others in the area were
demolished," explained Muchadehama. Muchena, added Muchadehama, alleged
that she felt threatened by Mubhawu's statements and reported the matter to
Mabvuku police, who referred the case to the Criminal Investigation
Department (CID) Law and Order Department. "A warned and cautioned statement
was made and Mubhawu is denying the charges," Muchadehama said, adding the
police were still carrying out investigations. Muchadehama said his client
was released on Saturday. Yesterday, police spokesperson Assistant
Commissioner Wayne Bvudzijena could neither deny nor confirm Mubhawu's
arrest, saying he needed to verify the facts. Mubhawu became the Member
of Parliament for Mabvuku-Tafara taking over from Justin Mutendadzamera,
after defeating Pamela Tungamirai of the ruling party in last March's
elections. He becomes the second MDC MP to be arrested this month following
the arrest of St Mary's legislator Job Sikhala, a fortnight ago. He is
alleged to have incitied people in his constituency to support a two-day
stayaway organised by the Broad Alliance, a loose coalition of civic bodies
against the government. A number of opposition legislators have been arrested
this year on different charges. On April 7, MDC national youth chairman
Nelson Chamisa was arrested after violent demonstrations by opposition
youths in the Central Business District against the results of the March 31
parliamentary election won by Zanu PF. Makokoba MP Thokozani Khupe and
Goodwill Chimbaira, now Zengeza legislator, were arrested before the
elections on allegations of addressing an illegal gathering and violence,
respectively.
State should come up with viable public transport
policy
The Daily Mirror Reporter issue date :2005-Jun-20
THE
critical shortage of public transport that has haunted the country,
particularly after the majority of private transport operators had their
fleets impounded by the police as part of the joint police and city
council's operations Murambatsvina and Restore Order, has brought to the
fore the need for a watertight policy to ensure a reliable and efficient
transport system. Although the government - through the Zimbabwe United
Passenger Company (Zupco) - has embarked on a programme to provide public
transport through purchasing buses from China, the programme is largely
inadequate to cover the gap left by commuter omnibuses impounded by the
police. Thousands of commuters have been stranded with some having to walk
several kilometres to and from work. Private vehicle owners - who
occasionally eased the situation by ferrying some people - could no longer
offer the services for fear of arrest, as they had no permits to provide
transport services to the public. Some city residents are getting up as
early as four o'clock in the morning and still get to their workplaces well
after nine o'clock. Drivers of the few commuter omnibuses still on the roads
are spending long hours queuing for scarce fuel instead of ferrying
passengers. In a desperate bid to address the transport problems, Local
Government Minister Ignatius Chombo said that extra 'Freedom Trains' would
be introduced on three city routes. "We will review the situation with
time. We want to ensure that all commuters are carried to work in time and
are home in time," Chombo was quoted saying. Commuter omnibus operators,
whose fleets are often impounded by the police as unroadworthy, have been
accused of "blowing up" their profits while failing to service their
vehicles so that they can provide better service to their customers. One
such operator, Joseph Magunda, said operators tended to neglect their
fleet, but was also quick to say the police were often too harsh on them
even if their vehicles had minor defects.. "Of course it is regrettable
that some operators do not service their fleets and that, in the long run,
would have a serious impact on commuters who often find themselves stranded
when such buses are impounded by the police," he said. He said there was
need for public transport associations to come up with a programme that
would compel all their members to ensure that they routinely took their
vehicles for servicing. Some commuters interviewed said since the Zupco buses
plying the roads were not enough given the demand for public transport,
government should consider other private players in the sector and come up
with a law that would compel them to service their vehicles on a routine
basis. The commuter omnibuses were introduced in the early 1990s, with
proponents of private sector ownership and free competition arguing that
such conditions would generate an efficient and effective public transport
service The deregulation process - introducing competition into a
previously protected sector of the economy so as to reduce constraints for
potential entrants - was meant to 'reinvigorate the Industry' and, owing to
the direct competition between rival operators, they would be an efficient
and reliable service.
DRUGS worth over $1
billion intended for clinics in Chirumanzi expired while in storage at Mvuma
District Hospital due to lack of transport to distribute them. In
addition, another set of drugs worth millions of dollars were recently
stolen in the district, amid reports that most clinics in the area were
reeling from an acute shortage of medication. These developments have
irked the Deputy Minister of Health and Child Welfare, Edwin Muguti who
lashed at both authorities and the community for what he termed negligence
and laxity. Muguti said: "I am not happy with the reason given as to why the
drugs expired. People should use bicycles rather than to leave drugs to
expire. As a ministry we cannot allow such things to happen." He said
what was baffling was that the hospital had an ambulance, which it must have
used to distribute the drugs. Muguti, the legislator for Chirumanzi, added
that besides the ambulance, the hospital authorities should have looked for
alternative means of transport, such as bicycles. On the stolen drugs
from Hama and Chengwena clinics, Muguti blamed the laxity of security and
community alertness for the theft. "It is more worrying that both authorities
and the community allow such things to happen when some clinics in rural
areas were complaining that they had no drugs. Authorities should take
measures to ensure that drugs are safe," he said.
THE chairperson of the
commission running the affairs of the city of Harare, Sekesai Makwavarara at
the weekend said operation Murambatsvina/Restore Order would continue until
the capital retained its sunshine city status. Makwavarara said this at a
wedding ceremony where she was given $10 million to donate to charity by
Deliah Mahachi, the managing director of Deliah Images and Corporate
Services. "Operation Murambatsvina is still going on and will not stop until
Harare retains its sunshine city status. We are committed to ensuring that
cleanliness prevails and that all other illegal activities are contained,"
she said. "People who come to Zimbabwe should see the beauty of the
country through Harare and I hope all the visitors from abroad will report
positively on what they have seen. Harare has a lot of nice places and we
should maintain that." The clean-up operation launched close to a month
ago has resulted in the demolition of a number of illegal settlements and
informal trade markets in the capital and other parts of the
country. Government has said it will provide at least 20 000 stands to
displaced people in Harare while informal traders have already started
registering under new regulations. During the clean-up exercise, police
discovered several tonnes of basic foodstuffs and other commodities that are
in short supply. These would be handed over to Harare Children's Home and
Young Women Christians Association (YWCA). "I am humbled to receive this
donation on a wedding day. It is unusual to get a donation on a wedding when
we are supposed to be giving gifts. This explains why she (Mahachi) was
voted the 2004 young entrepreneur of the year. We hope other young people
emulate her hard work," Makwavarara said.
THE United States Agency for
International Development (USaid) recently donated five new seven-tonne
delivery trucks valued US$350 000 (over Z$2,1 billion) to the Zimbabwe
National Family Planning Council (ZNFPC) to ensure nationwide availability
of condoms for HIV and Aids prevention and family planning. According to
the US Public Affairs Section, the trucks are being used in the ZFPC
"Delivery Team Topping UP (DTTU)" distribution system of condoms and
contraceptives. The delivery vehicles feature insulated van boxes to
protect the condoms and contraceptives while in transit. "The DDTU system
delivers condoms and contraceptives to 1 600 hospitals, health centres and
community based distributors nationwide every four months," the section said
in a statement. "This innovative and effective system has reduced stock
outs of products in health facilities from as high as 40 percent in some
provinces for some products, to less than two percent for all the
products." It added the delivery trucks and DTTU monitoring vehicles are also
equipped with high frequency radios that connect to a base station at ZNFPC
headquarters, resulting in more efficient deliveries and faster assistance
in the event of breakdown. "The radio system is provided with United
Kingdom Department for International Development (DFID) funds through its
project with John Snow International, Europe," the section
explained. USaid and DFID, through their contractors, jointly fund and manage
the DTTU system with ZNFPC, among other programmes and activities helping to
mitigate and manage the HIV and Aids epidemic in Zimbabwe.
The
United Africa Organization - UAO Leading the match to African Unification
and Democracy
June 2005
The Crisis in
Zimbabwe The solution is ..The United
Africa
By Papa
Yalae
1982 in Africa, another Traditional African State confronted
another Modern African State and demanded genuine autonomy. An African
Ethnic Group challenged the omnipotent political power of a government of an
African State and demanded "true" political justice. The Ndebele Ethnic
Group of Matabeleland, a Traditional African State, demanded power- sharing
with the Modern African State of Zimbabwe in order to protect their ethnic
identity and share in the economic wealth of the State of Zimbabwe. Since
then, the Modern African State of Zimbabwe has been thrown into serious
political crises, a political situation quite characteristic of the Modern
States of Africa. These crises emanate from genuine post-independent
political disagreements between Traditional Africa and Modern Africa but
reflect the historical political rivalry between dominant Ethnic Groups in
the Modern African State. In Zimbabwe, the dominant Ethnic Groups are the
Ndebeles and the Shonas. The Ndebeles, the Ethnic Group of Matabeleland in
the Modern African State of Zimbabwe, questions the legitimacy of the
political authority of the government of Zimbabwe, a government they believed
is wholly controlled by the Shona Ethnic Group. In effect, the people
of Matabeleland, since independence in 1980, have been demanding real
autonomy and common control of the resources of their traditional lands.
Like in many African States such legitimate political demands almost always
result in political crises and military confrontations. According to reports
from the Catholic Commission for Justice and Peace in Zimbabwe and the Legal
Resources Foundation of Zimbabwe, it can be surmised that the political
demands of the Ndebele People unleashed a ferocious Shona-led military
assault on the people of Matabeleland between 1982 and 1987 and as a result
created an almost irreconcilable political disagreements between the Shonas
and the Ndebeles of Zimbabwe. The rapidly deteriorating political situation
of Zimbabwe is indicative of political impasse. The current
political situation in Zimbabwe is so tense that one can only conclude that
another military confrontation is imminent.
The question that always
arises from such military confrontations in Africa is this: why is it that
post-colonial political crisis is still a frequent occurrence on the Land of
Africa. A careful analysis of the frequent crisis in Africa that at times
leads to ethnic annihilation of an African Ethnic Group by an African Ethnic
Group reveals that the seeds of political instability and ethnic destruction
were sown into the African body politics in the colonial period, specifically
by the inglorious partition of Africa. A careful analysis also reveals that
the solution to such crisis in Africa is..The United Africa. The proposed
United Africa nation is the one continental African nation that will
certainly garner the capability and the willingness to end these crises
permanently. Political crisis has become a sad feature of the African
political landscape because post-colonial Africa has not established
appropriate political structure, appropriate political system and an
appropriate political ideology to neutralize the debilitating effects of the
balkanization of Africa through the partition of Africa. To understand the
true nature of the political crisis in Zimbabwe and its similarity to other
African political crisis and to diagnose an appropriate remedy to eradicate
this debilitating political disease afflicting Zimbabwe and Africa, one must
take a critical look at history. Let us look at the history of
Zimbabwe.
Political History of Zimbabwe
Ancient Zimbabwe History tells us
that the earliest settlers of the Modern African State of Zimbabwe are the
Khoisans, which dates back to 200 BC. But, it is also believed that the
original inhabitants of Zimbabwe were the San Bushmen who were displaced by
the Bantu Migration about 1500 years ago. During the great Bantu migration of
Africa, the Shona Ethnic Group finally settled in the eastern part of the
Modern African State of Zimbabwe. The Shona were established as a social and
political group for centuries in the present-day Zimbabwe when the Ndebeles
arrived. In 1837, the Bantu Matabele People settled in southwestern part of
Zimbabwe after a long migration from the south. Evidently then, the two
major Ethnic Groups of Zimbabwe, who are fighting each other for political
supremacy of the Modern African State of Zimbabwe, are
indigenous Africans, the children of the Land of Africa, who migrated on
their vast god-given land and finally settled on the African geopolitical
territory now known as Zimbabwe. This is not unique to Zimbabwe. It is a
common African historical event.
Pre-Colonial States of
Zimbabwe Before the arrival of the Ndebele Ethnic Group, the Shona Ethnic
Group dominated the territory and controlled the coastal trade routes.
The Shona People established strong identity and a system of government. Even
though the Shona lived in dispersed settlements they created well
organized political states as source of centralized power. Each Shona State
was headed by a paramount chief who have a court that advised him about most
important decisions. The head chief often received substantial payment in
the form of tributes from his territory. Various Shona Empire arose and fell
to other Shona States that became powerful during that period. But, the
Shona Empire, which arose in the 17th and 18th century fell in the 19th
century to the Ndebele Ethnic Group from the south.
By the mid-19th
century the Ndebele Ethnic Group that migrated to this territory established
a powerful kingdom and maintained control over the geopolitical vicinity
until the European occupation in 1890. The Ndebele People, like the Shona
People, maintained a highly political and effectively organized society. The
Ndebele Kingdom had a hierarchical political relationship between the people
and the kingdom and that gave the Ndebeles a strong sense of belonging to a
socio-political group - The Ndebele Ethnic Group. This sense of belonging
was greatly expressed through military prowess and it enabled the Ndebeles to
conquer other groups who they integrated into Ndebele society and given a
new identity. The strong sense of belonging indicates that the Ndebeles,
like many other African Ethnic Groups, believe strongly that it is
the socio-political group that will always protect them socially and
politically. The African, including the Shona and the Ndebele, have
a passionate feeling of belonging to the "Natural Group", the social group
that provides care and sharing and protection.
As can be seen, both
the Shona Ethnic Group and the Ndebele Ethnic Group have their own strong
social identities and effective systems of governance thus creating a
political situation that requires the creation of appropriate political
structure and appropriate political system to prevent political clashes.
Appropriate political arrangements are essential to preventing extremist
ethnocentric politicians from creating ethnic hegemony in the geopolitical
area. Because of the current political structure and system, ethnocentric
tendencies towards ethnic hegemony are prevalent in Zimbabwe and are
fomenting ethnic hatred which then leads to ethnic clashes. Clearly, the
pursuit of political supremacy in Zimbabwe that began before colonialism is
creating the fear of ethnic hegemony among the people of the two major
Ethnic Groups who live in close proximity. Clearly, the Shona and the
Ndebeles are seeking to control the geo-political vicinity and since
pre- colonial days, the two Ethnic Groups have been very much distrustful of
each other because of the fear of domination. Though ethnic desire
to grab political hegemony has been problematic in Africa even before
colonialism, colonialism actually aggravated these knotty
political situations by transforming ethnic mistrust into ethnic
animosity.
Colonial Zimbabwe Africa's resources attracted colonialism
and Zimbabwe was not spared from European encroachment. In the 19th century
British and Boer traders, hunters, and missionaries started encroaching in
the area now know as Zimbabwe. In the late 19th century the first
European settlers arrived and in 1888 the King of Ndebele signed a concession
giving mineral rights to the British South Africa Company, which
named the territory Rhodesia in 1894. In 1889, the British South Africa
Company gained a British mandate to colonize what became
Southern Rhodesia and promoted the colonization of the region in order to
control the land, labor, and precious metal and mineral resources.
The Ndebele Ethnic Group, the indigenous African political power then,
opposed the Europeans colonialism and rebelled but were defeated by
the European settlers, who established European political supremacy over the
Ndebele and the Shona Ethnic Groups. Both the Ndebele Ethnic Group and
the Shona Ethnic Groups see colonialism as repulsive and being abhorrent to
political domination and distrustful of the Europeans, both Ethnic Groups
staged unsuccessful revolts against colonialist encroachment on their native
lands between 1896 and 1897.
The British South African Company ran
Southern Rhodesia until it became self-governing (under European settlers)
in 1923, and became part of the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland from
1953-63. In 1953, Britain created the Central African Federation, made up of
Southern Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe), Northern Rhodesia (Zambia) and Nyasaland
(Malawi). But the Federation broke up in 1963 when Zambia and Malawi
gained independence. The demise of the federation meant that the Ndebeles,
the Shonas and the European settlers have been incorporated into one
geopolitical entity then called Southern Rhodesia, the government of which
was controlled by the European minority.
So, Zimbabwe (formerly Southern
Rhodesia) is composed of three major groups of people - the Ndebeles, the
Shonas and the Europeans. The Ndebeles and the Shonas are the indigenous
Africans and form the overwhelming majority of the people in the then
Southern Rhodesia. The Europeans, which constituted the minority group,
grabbed power and imposed minority rule and adopted the colonial tactics of
playing one African Ethnic Group against other in order to disrupt the
balance of power and to divide the Africans. Such tactics aggravated the
fear of ethnic domination and resulted in great mistrust and even hatred
among the Africans. In the then Southern Rhodesia, the Shona and
the Ndebele Ethnic Groups were divided until the imperative need for an
Africa unity front to overturn minority rule compelled political
leaders from Shona and Ndebele Ethnic Groups to form one political group.
Without a doubt, colonialism aggravated ethnic mistrust and
provoked ethnic animosity but compelled "marriage of necessity" but not
"marriage of sweethearts". Colonialism, through its machinations, tactic
and despotism did not create a "nation of goodwill" based on mutual trust
among the Africans. On the contrary, colonialism and its successor global
subjugating systems, seek to prevent African unity front in order to achieve
the exploitative and dominating goals against least resistance.
By
incorporating various Traditional African States and changing the balance of
power and employing "divide and conquer" tactics, colonialism cultivated
virulent ethnic animosity in Africa. Colonial tactics were attempts to
prevent African unity front against European settlers. Colonial machinations
were political ploys to eliminate any effective challenge to the colonialist
objective of maintaining a permanent control of the resources of Africa.
Undoubtedly, such political ploy, which has persisted to this day, has
created ethnic enmity all across Africa even in many geopolitical areas where
there were strong inter-ethnic affinities. Colonialism destroyed the African
Affinity and replaced it with the African Enmity. Ethnic enmity has endured
up to this day in all Africa and if these colonial structures are not
dismantled ethnic animosity will endure forever much to the detriment of
Africa.
Pre-Independent Zimbabwe The "marriage of necessity" compelled
by minority rule created one multi-ethnic liberation movement. But, the
loose political marriage between the Ndebeles and the Shonas, two rival
Ethnic Groups of Africa, could not survive under the political reality of
pre-independent Zimbabwe as it became too apparent before independence that
the colonial political structure of Southern Rhodesia will not change and
that the Ethnic Group that wins the first elections has the greatest chance
of establishing ethnic supremacy.
Until 1963, there was one main
liberation movement, known as ZAPU - Zimbabwe African Peoples Union. In
1961, after two multi-ethnic political groups have been banned by the
European controlled minority government of Southern Rhodesia, ZAPU was
formed by politicians from both Shona and Ndebele Ethnic Groups. At this
time, all Ethnic Groups in the former Southern Rhodesia supported ZAPU. But
in 1963 the "marriage" crumbled. ZAPU split along ethnic lines, a year after
its formation. A splinter group, the Zimbabwean African National Union
(ZANU) was formed by politicians from the Shona Ethnic Group, thus setting
the stage for a fight for post-independent political supremacy
between rival African Ethnic Groups, a rivalry pre-dating European
colonialism.
At first, the two political parties were not ethnocentric as
both parties had membership from all Ethnic Groups. However, over
time, differences began to emerge. ZAPU recruited mainly from the
Ndebele-speaking western region of Zimbabwe, and ZANU mainly from
the Shona-speaking eastern regions. ZAPU created a military wing ZIPRA and
trained them in Russia. ZANU created ZANLA, a military wing, and trained
them in China. Like the political wing and the Ethnic Groups that control
them, the two armies, ZIPRA and ZANLA, came to see each other as rivals.
There were many battles between them when they met, both inside and outside
Zimbabwe. In addition, ZIPRA and ZANLA competed with each other for territory
and support and frequently fought and killed each other. Before
Zimbabwean independence there was a clear indication of deep-seated mistrust
and animosity between Shona and Ndebele.
Aside from ethnocentric
ideologies, there were no major ideological differences that divide
Shona-controlled ZANU and Ndebele-controlled ZAPU. ZANU was not formed
because of policy or ideological differences with the ZAPU leadership. ZANU
was formed purely on ethnic grounds. The Shona People could not accept an
Ndebele led party and feared that Ndebele leadership of a dominant political
party will lead to Ndebele political supremacy after independence is
achieved. As a result of the political split, the fight against colonial
domination took an ethnic turn with the Ndebele firmly in support of ZAPU and
the Shona in support of ZANU. The formation of ZANU marked the first time in
the history of the former Rhodesia, in which a political party was formed
purely on ethnic grounds. The rivalry and the mistrust between ZAPU and
ZANU were so deep that at independence, their two armies, ZIPRA and ZANLA
could not be incorporated as one Zimbabwean army. Although, the campaign for
independence gathered strength under these two political parties, the Shonas
rallied around ZANU and the Ndebeles rallied round ZAPU in much the same way
the Ndebeles had rallied around their traditional monarchical system. There
were serious political rift between the Ndebeles and the Shonas but the
political pressures by their respective political parties, ZAPU and ZANU and
the military pressures by their respective military wings, ZAPRA and ZANLA,
resulted in the dissolution of the Central African Federation in
1963.
In 1964 the Rhodesian Front, the European minority controlled
political party, tried to persuade Britain to grant independence and when
Britain refused, the party unilaterally declared independence in 1965 thus
continuing with minority rule. This sparked international outrage
and economic sanctions. The United Kingdom called the declaration an act of
rebellion but did not reestablish control by force. The
unilateral declaration intensified the guerrilla war against the minority
rule, with rival ZANU and ZAPU operating out of Zambia and
Mozambique respectively. In 1965 the European minority government, banned all
African Political Groups, imprisoning the leaders from both Ndebele
and Shona Ethnic Groups. When they were released, the leaders of the two
ethnocentric political groups in the then Rhodesia formed the Zimbabwe
Patriotic Front. They denounced any government that seek to perpetuate
European domination and continued to lead the military wing of the party, the
Zimbabwe African National Liberation Army, from bases in Mozambique. In
1974, the major African nationalists groups-- the Zimbabwe African Peoples
Union (ZAPU) and the Zimbabwe African National Union (ZANU), which split
away from ZAPU in 1963--were united again into the "Patriotic Front" and
combined their military forces, at least nominally. Like events in other
African States, colonialism created a temporary unity (" a marriage of
necessity") between rival African Ethnic Groups in the geopolitical
area.
The political and military pressure of the Zimbabwe Patriotic Front
and the international economic sanctions weakened the European
minority government. In 1978, the European minority government yielded to
the military and political pressures and opted for negotiated
settlement. Elections for transitional legislature were boycotted by ZANU and
ZAPU. The new government, Zimbabwe Rhodesia, failed to gain international
recognition and the civil war intensified. In 1979 Britain decided to broker
a peace agreement between all political factions in Southern Rhodesia. At a
conference in London held by the British government an agreement was reached
between the British government and all Rhodesia's political organizations.
The Lancaster House Agreement led to a peace agreement and a new
constitution, which guaranteed minority rights. The agreement ended
hostilities and sanctions and set the stage for pre-independence
elections.
Elections were conducted in 1980 but like in other African
States, the political group controlled by the majority Ethnic Group, in this
case the Shona Ethnic Group, won convincingly and formed the next government.
Despite the elections, Zimbabwe was a seriously divided African State at
independence in 1980 because the importation of foreign majoritarian
democracy granted the majority Ethnic Group, the Shona, inordinate political
power much to the chagrin of the minority, the Ndebele. The unsuitability of
foreign systems to the socio-geopolitical diversity of Africa became greatly
manifested in Zimbabwe, just like in other African States, when soon after
independence the new government began to have serious problems with the
demands for power-sharing from the Ndebele of
Matabeleland.
Independent Zimbabwe - The Period of Fear: Entumbane and
Gukurahundi - 1980 to 1987 African History indicates that the fear of the
African by the African was greatly manifested in post independent Zimbabwe.
The fear of indefinite domination by the rival Ethnic Group, the Shona, led
to political disturbances in the provinces of Matabeleland, the traditional
territory of the Ndebele Ethnic Group. This fear was not eliminated after
independence when a few cabinet positions were allocated to Ndebele
politicians thus attesting to the fact that post-independent distribution of
a few cabinet posts to the political leaders of disenchanted Ethnic Groups
is not an acceptable power-sharing political mechanism that can sustain peace
in Africa. Just like other African Ethnic Group (The Ijaw of
Nigeria), the Ndebele People did not accept a few cabinet positions as enough
power-sharing with the Shona People because it did not assure
them protection of ethnic identity and sharing in the political power and the
economic wealth of Zimbabwe. Distribution of cabinet post did not
even mitigate distrust and animosity between Ndebele and
Shona.
Distrust and ethnic animosity began to spread soon as after
independence and made it very difficult to integrate the two liberation
armies into the Zimbabwean army. Distrust and animosity did not dissipate
after independence because the people of Matabeleland and the people
of Shonaland have always existed in an uneasy political relationship before
European encroachment. The uneasiness is due to the fear of ethnic
domination which compelled each Ethnic Group to raise ethnocentric armies.
From the first days of the war of independence, there were two separate
guerrilla armies, one for each Ethnic Group. In 1980 when Shona-led ZANU
assumed power in an independent Zimbabwe, many Ndebele were dissatisfied by
their lack of political influence, and a number began to agitate for
secession. As a result of the agitations borne out of fear, it was impossible
to integrate the two liberation armies - ZIPRA and ZANLA. By the end of
1980, only a few ex-military cadres had been integrated in the Zimbabwean
army. The remaining ex-combatants who could not be integrated were settled
in the cities. Many ex ZIPRA cadres were settled in Entumbane in Bulawayo,
where they lived close to civilian suburbs. Their dissatisfaction became
infectious and spread within the civilian and the ex military population in
Matabaleland. Even cursory look at the post-independent
Zimbabwean political situation indicates that the widespread dissatisfaction
was due primarily to post-independent imposition of foreign political
systems which are essentially a "winner-takes-all" political system. Ndebele
dissatisfaction of the political system led to two periods of
military confrontations between the Shona-contolled Zimbabwe government and
the Ndebele People of the provinces of Matabeleland. The two periods are
Entumbane and "Gukurahundi".
Entumbane The first military
confrontation took place in Entumbane in November 1980 started by an
uprising by ZIPRA, the ex -military wing of ZAPU, the party controlled by the
Ndebele Ethnic Group, who resides predominantly in the Matabeleland
provinces of Zimbabwe. The new Zimbabwean government controlled by the Shona
Ethnic Group responded by instructing ZANLA, the military wing of ZANU, the
political party also controlled by the Shona Ethnic Group, to destroy ZIPRA
at Entumbane, Bulawayo, the traditional capital of the Ndebeles of
Matabeleland. ZIPRA and ZANLA fought pitched battles. Even though two
political parties fought militarily, in actuality, the fight was between two
African Ethnic Groups - The Shonas and the Ndebeles. Again in 1981 there was
another military confrontation in Entumbane which also in actuality was
an ethnic fight to gain political supremacy for the Shonas but for the
Ndeneles of Matabeleland it was an ethnic fight to gain maximum political
protection from ethnic domination. Around the same time open skirmishes
between ZANLA and ZIPRA also broke out in various integration camps
throughout the country. An estimated 300 people were killed. Cessation to
the hostilities was brought about when the leadership of both parties
intervened. By the end of the military confrontation, a heightened fear of
ethnic annihilation began to grip Matabeleland.
The military
confrontation at Entumbane was the first indication of the new
post-independent political reality of Zimbabwe. The reality is that the
Shonas are effectively in control of the geopolitical area of the Land of
Africa and it brought home to the people of Matabeleland that the Ndebele
Ethnic Group, by losing the pre-independence elections, has totally lost the
race to the political supremacy of the geopolitical area. Entumbane was a
vivid indication that the power of a major Ethnic Group that used to be the
controlling power in a geopolitical area, has been lost through the
imposition of a foreign political system unsuitable to the political reality
of Africa. The Ndebele Ethnic Group, being the dominating African political
power of the geopolitical area before the advent of the Europeans, wanted to
share power after independence, a political strategy that may have been
dictated by population size. Contrary, the Shona Ethnic Group being the
majority Ethnic Group of the geopolitical area wanted to either reverse the
pre-colonial political power balance against the Shona by grabbing power
with their majority population through elections. The Shona won the election
and the Ndebele, being the minority African Ethnic Group in the area lost
the pre- independence election because of population size. With the loss of
this election, the Ndebeles have always felt a great threat to their
ethnic identity and to their quest for maximum political protection from
political domination. The Shonas, on the other hand, seem empowered
and feel justified to monopolize and control all political jurisdictions, all
political institutions and all political apparatus in Zimbabwe. Although
the Ndebeles, like the Shonas, have contributed immensely to gaining
independence for Zimbabwe they feel permanently powerless as a result
of a loss of an election - the pre-independence election. The Ndebeles, like
many African Ethnic Groups in similar situations all across Africa, feel
politically decapitated by the loss of pre-independent elections. The loss
of political power, the potential loss of ethnic identity and the fear of
ethnic demolition has gripped Matabeleland since the military confrontation
at Entumbane. The fear of the African by the African, which
is epitomized by the fear of Ndebele or Shona by Ndebele or Shona in
Zimbabwe, have unleashed a venomous political vendetta amongst Zimbabwe's
Ethnic Groups thus providing fertile grounds for frequent eruption of
political instability in Zimbabwe. The eruption of "Gukurahundi" was
therefore not surprising.
"Gukuruhundi," The sense of fear of fellow
Africans that gripped Zimbabwe after Entumbane did not mitigate political
tensions but rather accentuated the historical ethnic mistrust and animosity
between Ndebele and Shona and it led to the violent eruption of another
political upheaval - "Gukurahundi"- meaning strong wind. In 1982, government
security officials discovered large caches of arms and ammunition on
properties owned by ZAPU and when the Ndebele cabinet members were dismissed,
accused of trying to overthrow the constitution, political unrest broke
loose in Matabeleland. The ouster of Ndebele cabinet members sparked
fighting between ZAPU supporters in the southern Ndebele- speaking region
of the country and the Shona ruling ZANU. As a result of what they perceived
as persecution of leaders and of their party, ZAPU supporters, some of them
deserters from the army, began a loosely organized and ill-defined campaign
of dissidence against the government. The campaign centered primarily in
Matabeleland, home of the Ndebeles who consitutes ZAPU's main supporters.
The dissidence continued through 1987 and involved attacks on government
personnel and installations, armed banditry aimed at disrupting security
and economic life in the rural areas, and harassment of ZANU-PF members.
Occasionally, the dissidents demanded reinstatement of the cabinet positions
of expelled Ndebeles. More frequently, however, they called for the return
of farms and other properties seized from ZAPU.
By early 1982 there
were groups of armed dissidents in Matabeleland killing, robbing, and
damaging property. The government responded by declaring a curfew in areas of
Matabeleland and sending in the army in an attempt to suppress dissidents.
The North Korean-trained Fifth Brigade - the "Gukurahundi", the strong wind,
was deployed by the Shona-controlled government to blow the dissidents away
into oblivion. The best trained army of Zimbabwe was call upon by the
government of Zimbabwe to crush the rebellion by ex-guerrillas of ZAPU in
the Midlands and Matabeleland provinces. The army attacked the dissidents as
well as ZAPU and its unarmed civilian supporters, mainly in rural areas
and at times in the cities. The "Fifth Brigade", like a ferocious hurricane
wind from the ocean, swept furiously through Matabeleland, arresting and
interrogating anyone perceived to be pro-secessionist. The government felt
that support for ZAPU meant support for dissidents. ZAPU denied it was
supporting dissidents. Because the hurricane wind, the Fifth Bridge did not
discriminate between a ZAPU supporter and a dissident a great many Ndebeles
were killed during the period of "Disturbances." Reports surfaced of
widespread violence and disregard for human rights as the ferocious wind
swept through Matabeleland. As a result of the activities of the security
forces during these operations, the level of political tension rose in the
country. According to a 2001 investigative report of the Catholic Commission
for Justice and Peace in Zimbabwe and the Legal Resources Foundation of
Zimbabwe, between 1982 and 1983, the North Korean - trained Fifth Brigade -
the "Gukurahundi", composed of ethnic Shonas, killed between 2000 and 8000
Ndebele in Matabeleland. The violence of "Gukurahundi period was ended by
the signing of the Unity Accord on 22nd December 1987. The intensity of the
ferocious assault against Matabeleland reached a dangerous point and that
compelled Ndebele leading politicians to seek peace. Ultimately, Ndebele
leaders had no choice but to sign a peace accord in 1987, resulting in ZAPU's
merger in 1988 into the ZANU Patriotic Front - ZANU-PF. The peace accord
merged the two parties to create ZANU-PF, leaving Zimbabwe effectively a
one-party state. ZAPU was forced into a compulsory marriage with ZANU in
1987 to end a bitter anti-insurgency operation by the North Korean-trained
Fifth Brigade, an operation aptly described as "Gukurahundi", a ferocious
strong wind that indiscriminately killed many innocent civilians in
Matabeleland.
There are various explanations of why dissidence was
widespread in the early 1980s in Matabeleland. The main reason for the
spread of dissidence in Matabeleland was the historical deep-seated mistrust
between the Ndebeles and the Shonas. The antagonistic
ethnocentric emotions in Zimbabwe were unleashed by the Entumbane military
confrontation. As a result of the great Shona-Nedebele mistrust,
the government, controlled by the Shonas believed that the dissidents were
active supporters of ZAPU, the party controlled by the Ndebeles.
The government believed that ZAPU's objective of supporting dissidence was to
overthrow the government. Ndebele-ZAPU, on the other hand, was so
distrustful of the Shona-controlled government that they believed the
government was using the "dissident problem" as a ploy to crush ZAPU
completely and create a one-party state. The Ndebeles believed the
dissidence to be a genuine expression of dissatisfaction by the Ndebele
populace and the empathy with the legitimacy of their cause fuelled
resentment against the government that spread through Matabeleland. In the
early 1980, ethnic mistrust and animosity were increasing so much that the
fear of ethnic annihilation by the Ethnic Group that is in control of the
political power of Zimbabwe gripped the people of the nation Ndebele and
Shona alike. The Ndebele People believe up to this day that the military
assault by para-military forces chosen exclusively from the ethnic group in
power, and not bound by any military rules of conduct was indicative of
ethnic nationalism and rampant fundamentalism to conquer and dominate the
whole country, by eliminating genuine concerns of minority ethnic groups by
any means even if it means committing genocide and ethnic cleansing. Their
belief was learnt credence when the entire Shona national executive members
of ZAPU, the political party dominated by the Ndebeles did not win even a
single seat in the Shona provinces of Mashonaland and Manicaland in the 1985
elections. Shona-Ndebele Mistrust deepened and fear gripped all Zimbabwe.
Fear of ethnic annihilation or domination was on the increase and it
compelled the people of Zimbabwe to seek protection from within their Ethnic
Group thus attesting to an African political fact that the African Ethnic
Group believe sincerely that ultimately the security of the Ethnic Group rest
solely on the unity of the Ethnic Group not on the magnanimity or the
humanity of the government of the Modern African State. The ethno-military
confrontations during the period of "Gukurahundi" have left a huge, raw,
unhealed wound among the people of the Matabeleland since they are unwilling
to forget. They believe it was a massacre of innocent Ndebeles. It is
a sad outcome from the "Gukurahund' violence that the people of Matabeleland
have come to believe that they are the target of a war not against
dissidents, but against the Ndebele and their political party, ZAPU.
In
the 1985 elections, during the "Gukurahundi" - the period of fear, the
majority Ethnic Group, the Shona gave ZANU-PF increased majority in the
elections, gaining 67 of the 100 seats thus signifying to the Ndebeles that
the Shonas either condone or are apathetic to the militaristic policy of the
government against the Ndebeles. The Ndebeles on the other hand
overwhelmingly elected ZAPU in Matabeleland in the 1985 elections thus
signifying to the Shonas that the Ndebeles support the terrorizing spree of
the dissidents who have been eliminated by the strong military policy of the
government. Despite the violence against the Ndebeles by the Shona
controlled government, the people of Matabeleland were not kowtowed by the
fear of annihilation to join the ruling political party but were instigated
to vote against it. Fear has compelled all Ethnic Groups to seek protection
from their political party, that is, from their Ethnic Group while at the
same time intensifying resentment between them. Matabeleland's lingering
resentment was more than apparent in the 2000 election when every
single parliamentary seat in the region went decisively to the opposition
party. This result of post-independent elections in Zimbabwe is indicative
of ethnic unity within the African Ethnic Group and it is also indicative of
serious divisions among African Ethnic Groups, creating a
political situation that always result in political impasse leading to
tensions, instability and secessionist demands and in some instances to
ethnic cleansing - the ethnic annihilation of one African Ethnic Group by
another African Ethnic Group, Africans who have lived in close
proximity for ages before the advent of colonialism.
The period of
fear characterized by the military confrontation of Entumbane and
Gukurahundi was a direct result of the inappropriateness of the political
structure and the political system of Africa and African States. The
military confrontations also attest to the ineffectiveness of
the political formulae of allocation of a few cabinet positions to
disenchanted Ethnic Groups in post-independent Africa, a political formulae
often used to cultivate ethnic unity and to eliminate dissension. The
distribution of political post to a few members of rival or disenchanted
Ethnic Groups is politically ineffective as it does not dissuade
disenfranchised and disillusioned Ethnic Groups from agitating for political
and economic equality in the distribution of the national power and wealth.
As the political impasse in Zimbabwe and in many Modern African States
have vividly revealed, the allocation of political post is not a panacea to
the problem of lack of equitable sharing of political power and economic
wealth between Modern Africa (Shona-controlled Zimbabwe) and Traditional
Africa (Ndebele-controlled Matabeleland). Entumbane and Gukurahundi are the
result of the political failures of a political structure, system and
formula embraced by the Modern African State of Zimbabwe. In a nutshell, the
politically dangerous outcome from the military confrontation of Entumbane
and Gukurahundi is due to the great Shona-Ndebele mistrust that has persisted
because of the existence of defective political arrangements bequeathed to
Africa by colonialism. Lack of trust led to Entumbane and to the infectious
increase in the number of dissidents during Gukurahundi. Lack of trust made
the government more ferocious. Lack of inter-African trust led to the killing
of Africans by Africans. Without a doubt, the annihilation of an
African Ethnic Group by an African Ethnic Group and the fear of the African
by the African, a recent African political phenomenon, can permanently
be prevented only by the existence of appropriate political structure and
system in all Africa. Entumbane and Gukurahundi have left a deep scare
on the face of Africa and must not happen anywhere in Africa again. To
ensure that it does not happen anywhere in Africa again, the current
political structure of Africa must be changed to suit the socio-geopolitical
diversity of Africa.
Independent Zimbabwe - The Period of Monopoly
& Consolidation: 1987 to 2000 The contemporary history of Zimbabwe
indicates that after the period of fear that resulted in a coercive and
involuntary unity of ZAPU (Ndebele- controlled) and ZANU (Shona-controlled)
to create ZANU-PF (Shona-controlled), the government of Zimbabwe began to
move quickly to monopolize and consolidate the power of the state in the
hands of a sub group of the Shona Ethnic Group. In 1987, the posts of
president and prime minister were combined into executive president and in
1989, a new constitution allocated the position of Vice-President to
an Ndebele. Although there was a rejection of the proposed one-party state
in a referendum, Zimbabwe, by its political structure and system
of governance became effectively a one-party state as power was inordinately
concentrated on a few people and a few political group within the Shona
Ethnic Group. Like in many one party state the world has produced the party
controlling the government keeps winning elections despite serious
dissatisfaction with the government. ZANU-PF won the parliamentary elections
of Zimbabwe in April 1995 which gave the ruling party a stunning victory with
63 of the 65 contested seats, and in 1996 the party won the presidency again
for another six-year term, thanks to the votes of the majority Ethnic Group
of Zimbabwe, the Shona. Monopolization of state power by the Shonas,
permitted by the political structure and the political system, effectively
marginalized the Ndebeles thereby augmenting the political concerns and
intensifying the fears of the people of Matabeleland.
Emboldened by
the success of the strategy of monopolization of power through military
confrontation, the government of Zimbabwe plunged deeply into the politics of
African conflicts. In 1999 Zimbabwe became militarily involved in the
Democratic Republic of the Congo civil war. The political adventure became
increasingly unpopular and precipitated the formation of a new opposition
political party - Movement for Democratic Change (MDC). The 1998-2002
involvement in the war in the Democratic Republic of the Congo drained the
coffers of Zimbabwe thus increasing the economic sufferings of the Zimbabwean
People. The unpopularity of the military involvement in another African
State and the inability to sustain the astronomical cost of the war doomed
the strategy of extra territorial political expansion by the government
of Zimbabwe. The political adventure in the Congo did not only fail at a
great cost to Zimbabwe but more importantly it confirmed internal
and external fears that the Shona-controlled government of Zimbabwe is not
seeking maximum protection for the Shona Ethnic Group
through monopolization and consolidation of state power but is seeking
expansion of the territorial power of the Shona Ethnic Group. Rightly
or wrongly, the Ndebele Ethnic Group became even more apprehensive of the
political intensions of the Shona Ethnic Group and were more determined
to resist what they believe is new-age colonialism by an African Ethnic
Group. The strategy of Shona geopolitical hegemony devised by
Shona-controlled ZANU-PF to extend Shona power beyond the borders of
Zimbabwe unfortunately exacerbated the fear of perpetual Shona domination
among the Ndebele People of Matabeleland. New-Age Colonialism in Africa,
which is the 21st Century colonization of the African by the African is
increasing the fear of the African by the African in Zimbabwe and in many
part of Africa and is heightening political tensions between the African and
the African - between the Ndebele and the Shona.
Independent Zimbabwe
- The Period of Increasing Political Tensions: 2000 to 2005 Between the
year 2000 and this month June 2005 a series of political and economic events
have occurred that have contributed greatly to the heightened political
tensions in Zimbabwe. Political tension in Zimbabwe is on the crescendo and
that has caused many people within and outside Zimbabwe to surmise that
another military confrontation may be imminent. The Zimbabwe People are
apprehensive of the current political situation in Zimbabwe because of the
politics of land, because of election disputes and because of succession
maneuverings.
The Politics of Land - "Hondo yeminda" The politics of
land is increasing the hardship and aggravating the uncertainties of the
Zimbabwean People. Squatters have seized hundreds of farms owned by European
Africans in an ongoing and violent campaign to repossess the lands they
claim were stolen by settlers. It is a popular consensus in Zimbabwe and
Africa that land reform in Zimbabwe is long overdue in view of the fact that
it is more than 20 years since Zimbabwe gained independence that ended
European minority rule. But, the much awaited land reform has not yet been
carried out. Redistributing land has been on the political agenda since
independence, but more than 20 years has passed after the independence
of Zimbabwe and the end of European minority rule and no effective land
policy has been implemented to address the land problem. The current
economic crisis, the worst ever, has fuelled even more hunger for land. Most
indigenous African farmers are struggling to grow enough to eat on tiny
plots, while the huge commercial farms growing tobacco, Zimbabwe's largest
export, are in the hands of European Zimbabweans. Lack of adequate land for
the indigenous Africans to grow food, the result of the concentration of the
best land in the hands of European Africans, who grow tobacco for export, has
caused great economic hardship to many Zimbabweans and as a result
discontent with the government's rule is greater than ever before. Dire
economic hardship has created great uncertainties in the countryside and is
likely to foment more instability. As a result of the economic adversity
there have been general strikes followed by arrests and beatings of
hundreds of people. The government is ferociously cracking down discontented
citizens. The leader of the Opposition Movement for Democratic
Change (MDC) was arrested twice in June 2003, amid a week of opposition
protests and was charged with treason. In 2001 the Finance
Minister publicly acknowledged economic crisis and stated that Zimbabwe's
foreign reserves have run out and warning that the country faces
serious food shortages. In 2003, inflation hit 300%. The country is faced
with severe food shortages because the farming system has been
destroyed. In 2004, the IMF estimated that the country had grown one-third
poorer in the last five years.
No-one in Zimbabwe is arguing about
the need for land reform, since overwhelming number of Zimbabweans support
land redistribution. Unfortunately, the government of Zimbabwe has decided to
use the popular support for land reforms to reverse the dwindling political
support for the government. The government of Zimbabwe is losing its grip on
power due to intense political discontents and severe economic hardships
and needs a popular political issue to reverse it political fortunes hence
the use of the land reform as a political instrument to maintain power.
Cognizant of the popularity of land redistribution, the government of
Zimbabwe decided to forcibly evict European-Africans farmers from their land.
The implementation of the land policy with force has indicated to the
Ndebele People that the Shona-controlled government is unwilling to use
negotiations to settle political and economic disputes but is quick to use
force because of the overwhelming power bestowed to the Shona-controlled
government by the political structure and the system of governance. The
Ndebeles believe that the government is using another internal confrontation
to boost the popularity of the ruling political party hence the resort to
buy the confidence of the rural electorate through belligerent racial
policies. Not only has the government land policy antagonized the European
Community and the United States of America, two groups of foreign powers who
are capable and may be willing to help Zimbabwe out of the economic
doldrums, but more importantly has increased the wariness of the Nedebele
People of the government's propensity to use force to achieve
political goals. Resorting to sheer political bravado against internal and
external critics to sail through economic crisis is indicative of the
existence of bad political arrangement that grants inordinate power and as a
result inadvertently encourages irrational implementation of a
good economic policy. The Ndebele People distrust the government intensions
in the land policy. The Ndebeles believe that the Zimbabwean government
of ZANU-PF hopes to gain political capitol by generating tensions between
European Africans (particularly farmers) and impoverished rural Africans, by
blaming their hardships on the Europeans.
It seems to the Ndebeles that
because of the inappropriate political arrangement of Zimbabwe the
Shona-controlled government is always empowered to use force. Even though the
Ndebele support the land policy since it is an African empowerment program,
many Zimbabweans are complaining that a well-intentioned plan to promote
African economic empowerment has become a ZANU-PF vehicle for the enrichment
of party supporters and officials. It is claimed that senior government,
police and army officials have unashamedly helped themselves to the best
farms, evicting ordinary people already settled on these properties.
Undeniably, there is an urgent need for land re-distribution in Zimbabwe.
Undeniably, the politicization of the process by ZANU-PF has condemned
millions of citizens to starvation and death. Zimbabwe is in throes of pain
because of bad implementation of a good policy. The economic empowerment of
rural Africans is a good policy but it must not be implemented to the
detriment of the people it is suppose to help - the citizens of Zimbabwe
many of whom are starving to death. Many Ndebeles believe that as a result of
bad implementation of a good policy the Shona Ethnic Group will
disproportionately benefit since they constitute the ZANU-PF, the political
party grabbing the best land for its members. Disproportionate allocation of
the best lands to ZANU-PF supporters is aggravating the already worse
political mistrust and animosity between the Shonas and the Ndebeles. To the
Ndebeles, too much Shona power has encouraged the use of force as the only
political and economic solution in Zimbabwe, the adverse consequences
of which are overwhelmingly borne by the Ndebele People of Matabeleland. The
land policy has added to the dismal plight of the Ndebele People of
Matabeleland, who have been neglected for years by the government in the
hope that residents of the region would realize their mistakes of
supporting opposition to the ZANU-PF cherished dream of one-party-state.
Undoubtedly, the land policy is worsening the plight of the Ndebeles and
aggravating the already worse political situation in Zimbabwe.
Because of
the implementation of the land policy, the good policy of empowerment of
rural Africa may fail. Thus, "Hondo yeminda", which refers to the land policy
may suffered similar fate of Entumbane and Gukurahundi which like "Hondo
yeminda", were ill-fated political instruments of creating political crisis
to consolidate power in the hand of the Shona-controlled government and to
coerce opponents into submission. A dangerous political situation has been
generated by the bad implementation of the land policy, a situation that has
been exacerbated by the current severe economic hardship. Ironically, the
economic hardship is strengthening the government because it is weakening
the opposition, not the government, since the backbone of opposition
support, young, educated, urban Zimbabweans are leaving the State. As a
result of the economic situation the government and the opposition MDC are
now pitted against each other in a low-intensity political fight. More than
20 years of monopolization of power by ZANU-PF has resulted in economic
chaos, street protests and deep social divisions. These problems facing
Zimbabwe may be indicating that ZANU-PF firm grip on power may be starting
to slip and it may also be indicative of impending military confrontation as
the people of Matabeleland are greatly disenchanted by the political and
economic situation of Zimbabwe. Political crisis seems to loom dangerously on
the political horizon of Zimbabwe. Political crisis resulting in economic
hardship in Zimbabwe continues unabated and it continues to cause a great
concern for the future political stability of Zimbabwe. Unquestionably
the frequent crisis in Zimbabwe is the result of political monopolization of
state power by a group of people within the Shona-ZANU PF, people who are
unwilling to share power with any group in the geopolitical vicinity.
Monopolization of political power has been permitted by the existence of
inappropriate political arrangements and that is fomenting political crisis
and creating economic hardship in Zimbabwe.
Election Disputes Another
series of events that are causing great concern and have a great potential
to ignite another violent military confrontation are the frequencies of
election disputes. With all the economic hardship and general strikes, the
ruling party is still winning overwhelmingly in parliamentary and
presidential elections. When the ruling ZANU-PF won two-thirds of the votes
in parliamentary polls the main opposition party - Movement for Democratic
Change (MDC) claims the election was rigged in favor of ZANU-PF. The
opposition believes the election was rigged because of the magnitude of
discontent that has arisen out of the severe economic hardship.
Notwithstanding the economic hardship and uncertainty of Zimbabwe's political
future, the ZANU-PF still dominates what is virtually a one party state
occupying 147 out of the country's 150 parliamentary seats. In March 2002,
ZANU-PF won the presidency for another six years term but the opposition
claims that was also a blatantly rigged election whose results were coerced
by the ZANU-PF militia. It is obvious that if these elections were free and
fair then it was decidedly determined on purely ethnic grounds by the
majority Shona Ethnic Group under the "winner-takes-all" political
system.
Shona votes to keep the government in power but Ndebele votes to
express discontent with the government. Due to government neglect of the
provinces of Matabeleland, the Ndebeles of Matabeleland are always in
opposition to the government of Zimbabwe and always vote against ZANU-PF,
the political party controlled by the Shonas. Voting against ZANU-PF has
resulted in government neglect of Matabeleland and as a result districts in
Matabeleland, such as the rural trading station in Lupane, have become
degenerated and desolated and have been in economic stagnation for years. To
win Matabeleland in the next election, the government of Zimbabwe began a
belated infrastructure development of Matabeleland after the 2002 elections.
In spite of the government efforts to win Matabelaland in the next elections
through provision of development projects such as the reactivation of the
Zambesi Water Project and construction of a multi-million dollar
university, the electorate of Matabeleland, again, overwhelmingly spurned
ZANU-PF political party in the March 2005 parliamentary election although
the ZANU-PF won overwhelming seats, thanks to the majority Shona Ethnic
Group. The continuous rejection of the Shona-controlled government of
Zimbabwe by the Ndebeles through elections attest to an African political
fact that the political formula of granting development projects
to disenchanted Ethnic Groups in a geopolitical area to display a sense of
government concern each time an election is imminent do not
gain political acceptance nor promote peace and unity. What the African
Ethnic Group want, Ndebele and Shona included, is not
pre-election political largess but durable maximum political and social
protections and genuine sharing of the political power and the economic
wealth of the nation.
Due to ethnic voting pattern in Zimbabwe many
outsiders are convinced that, fraud and intimidation notwithstanding,
ZANU-PF actually won a majority of votes in the recent election because of
the great support from the majority Shona Ethnic Group who are prepared to
keep the government in power no matter what. With large majority in
parliament, Shona-controlled ZANU-PF has passed a law limiting media
freedom to stifle criticism, another indication of the power of the political
party in control of a one party state. As a result of this law, there is
increasing fear of the loss of individual liberty in Zimbabwe and fear
has heightened uncertainties about the future of Zimbabwe. Fear of the loss
of liberty is contributing to the growing popular discontent. The mass
discontent arising from political fears and severe economic
hardships, which indicate that the majority of the people are willing to vote
the government out of power and the ethnocentric voting pattern
which indicates that the majority of the people are willing keep the
government in power at all cost, is causing many election disputes. As a
result of the disputes the political and economic uncertainties in Zimbabwe
is increasing very rapidly. Clearly, political uneasiness has
been mounting since the Zimbabwe parliamentary election. Not even the
declarations of support from other African States in the region and a
seal of approval from the Southern African Development Community is easing
the growing political tensions in Zimbabwe. The Zimbabwe
political situation, undoubtedly, is a clear testimony of an African
political fact which states that the African Ethnic Group, Shona and
Ndebele included, will not stop fighting for political and economic equality
in the Modern African State even if the government of the African State
has unflinching political and economic support from external powers,
international or Africa.
Succession Tension Contemporary African
History tells us that ethnic politics is the norm in Zimbabwe. But recently
sub-ethnic politics is featuring prominently in Zimbabwean politics and it is
contributing to the escalating political tensions. Political tensions are
mounting in Zimbabwe because of succession maneuverings within the Shona
Ethnic Group. Political positioning to grab power subsequently is creating
dissidence within the ruling ZANU-PF. A politician from the Karanga, the
largest Sub-Ethnic Group of the Shona Ethnic Group, broke from the Shona
dominated ruling ZANU-PF late 2004 and was then alleged to be plotting a
palace coup. He had been tipped as a potential presidential successor
and last year made an abortive bid for a vacant vice presidential post. The
vice president post was given to a person from the Zezuru u, a smaller
Sub-Ethnic Group of the Shona Ethnic Group. The President of Zimbabwe is a
Zezuru, the group believed to be in total control of the government of
Zimbabwe as they have accumulated inordinate political power in
Zimbabwe.
The succession maneuverings is increasing the power of Zezuru
at the expense of Karanga. The most senior representative in
the Zimbabwean government of the Karanga Sub-Ethnic Group, the biggest group
among the majority Shona Ethnic Group, and comprising over a third of the
population, was relieved of his post. As a result, the Karangas now have
almost no senior officials in the government while the president's smaller
Zezuru Sub-Ethnic Group, comprising around a quarter of the total
population, has taken the top political and government positions. The
demotion of all the top Karanga leaders in favor of people from the ZeZuru
Group is beginning to cultivate dissidence and stir trouble within the ruling
ZANU-PF. Though the Karanga leader has been offered another position the
offer may be too little. The blatant political move to accumulate more power
in the hands of the Zezuru has cause political chasm within the ruling
ZANU-PF which was manifested by the collapse of the party congress. In the
party congress ZANU-PF representatives from a smaller Ethnic Group - Mayinka
who voted for the Karanga leader were expelled from the party along with five
other non- Zezuru provincial chairmen for backing the Karanga leader.
Such political move has created distrust within the ruling party. Grave
political strains, which are becoming difficult to heal, has been
created between the Karangas and Zezuru within the ruling ZANU-PF. The
political maneuverings are adding to the political tensions that has
gripped Zimbabwe due to the land reform, economic hardship and the state of
belligerence between the Ndebele Ethnic Group and the Shona
Ethnic. Political tensions are rising because the chasm within ZANU-PF may
lead to a spin-off from the party which the ruling party may not be able
to countenance and as a result may employ their strategy of violent
confrontation to destroy the new party thus causing great political
upheaval not only in the territories of the Shona Ethnic Group but also in
the whole of Zimbabwe.
There has been speculation that two dissident
ZANU-PF politicians, one from Karanga and one from Ndebele, who have lost
their powerful positions within the government as a result of the succession
maneuverings, are seeking to form a third political force between the
current opposition - the Movement for Democratic Change and the ruling party
- ZANU-PF . Since Karanga is the largest Sub-Ethnic Group of the Shonas
and is politically valuable to the ruling party, a new political position
has been offered the Karanga leader in an attempt to block the potential
formation of a coalition political party between Karanga and Ndebele, the
arch-rivals of the ZeZuru. Such an ethnic coalition between the Karanga and
the Ndebele will certainly be a formidable political group that can dethrone
the ZeZurus in a free and fair election since the two potential leaders of
the coalition party have wide popularity in their respective ethnic
provinces and in some smaller ethnic province such as the Manyinka province.
A new political alliance may threaten the power of the ruling class. Ndebele
and Kalanga people, together with other smaller ethnic groups seem poised to
form a new political party to challenge ZANU-PF. Today, it seems that both
Ndebele and Kalanga have now developed a joint political community to win
political power. The specter of the loss of power by the ZeZurus has
raised fears of imminent political crisis in Zimbabwe. Uncertainties of
Zimbabwe's political future are mounting every day not because of the
land reforms, not because economic hardship, and not because of election
disputes but primarily because of devious ethnic politics compelled
by the existence of inappropriate political structure and inappropriate
political system, which are foreign concepts of political arrangements
in Zimbabwe.
Crisis
Analysis The
cause is inappropriate Political Structure and Political System
After
an in-depth analysis, the United Africa Organization (UAO) concludes that
the cause of political crisis in Zimbabwe and in Africa is the existence of
an inappropriate political structure and political system. As can be seen
from the history of Zimbabwe, the Traditional African States of Zimbabwe,
represented by the various Ethnic and Sub-Ethnic Groups of Zimbabwe, have
never accepted the political structure and the political system of Zimbabwe
as addressing their legitimate concerns, which are preservation of ethnic
identity and protection against political domination and economic
marginalization. Evidently, the amalgamation of various Traditional African
States living in close proximity to form the Modern African State of Zimbabwe
did not create an appropriate political structure and appropriate political
system to address the legitimate concerns of Zimbabwe's Ethnic Groups. It is
therefore not surprising that periodic eruption of political crisis, such as
Entumbane and "Gukurahundi, has become an endemic feature of contemporary
Zimbabwe history. Undeniably, there is a political dispute between
the Ethnic Groups of Zimbabwe. Admittedly, there is a subterranean,
undercurrent, virulent ethnic war in Zimbabwe. Unambiguously, there is
a dangerous political stalemate in Zimbabwe.
The Zimbabwean Political
Stalemate The political stalemate of Zimbabwe is primarily due to the
reluctance of the Modern African State of Zimbabwe, controlled by the
Shoma Ethnic Group, to share political power and economic wealth of the State
with the Traditional African State of Matabeleland, and the reluctance of
the Ndebele Ethnic Group, the citizens of Matabeleland, to accept the
legitimacy of the government of Zimbabwe. Additionally, the reluctance of
the Ndebeles to extend the traditional African ethnic sentiment of "Natural
Group" to include the State of Zimbabwe has contributed to political tension
in Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe's political situation is quite descriptive of politics
on the Land of Africa. The Reluctance of All Africa - Traditional Africa and
Modern Africa alike is caused by the wholesale acceptance of colonial
political structure and the foreign system of government known as "majority
rule" by the African Leaders of the time. The political structure and the
political system were unacceptable to Traditional African States as they knew
that such political formation will infringe on their identity,
political sovereignty and economic resources. This is the primary reason for
the creation of two liberation movements in Zimbabwe only coming together
as matter of necessity not unity. The reality that colonial borders will be
retained intensified not only nationalist movement in Zimbabwe but also
distrust and animosity between the two groups vying to grab and monopolize
power after independence. Looking at the African political landscape it
became obvious to these groups that the Ethnic Group that wins the position
of the first prime minister in Zimbabwe, either in an election or by force,
will acquire inordinate political power. None want to lose this advantage
hence the intensification of the liberation war and ethnic mistrust and
animosity. The creation of ZANU effectively implied that the future
direction of African politics in the imposed colonial boundaries of former
Rhodesia would decidedly be based on ethnic allegiance. Because colonial
boundaries were retained and majority rule was accepted it became impossible
to create a multi-ethnic society in the Modern African State of Zimbabwe
based on the principles of peaceful co-existence and the rule of
law.
Although ethnic mistrust and animosity was on the crescendo, the two
competing groups were compelled to unite forces against the colonialist.
This unity was in theory. In practice the two groups remained loyal to their
ethnic nations, and hence ZAPU-ZIPRA on one hand and ZANU-ZANLA on the other.
Various attempts at unity were made, especially at the behest of the OAU.
Some of these attempts led to ZIPA, ANC and Patriotic Front. All these were
'marriages of necessity'. It was necessary to unite forces because both
Ethnic Groups and the whole of Africa subscribed to the African Political
Mission of the time - The Total Liberation of the Land Africa from
colonialism. But, after independence some ethnic intellectuals changed the
African Political Mission from Liberation & Unification to ethnic
monopolization of power within the boundaries created by the colonialist. As
a result of such devious political machination of some Ethnic Groups of
Africa, a few Ethnic Groups in the colonial imposed boundaries became the
core of the Modern Africa State while the rest of the constituent Ethnic
Groups became peripheral and marginalized, politically and economically.
Indisputably, Mashonaland today constitute the core of Zimbabwe and
Matabeleland is the periphery. Thus, there is a dangerous political situation
in Zimbabwe and in the whole of Africa because of the decision to keep
colonial borders as is. Colonial borders and majority rule enabled extremist
ethnocentric intellectuals to create New-Age Colonialism in Africa -
The African Colonialism, which is the modern colonization of African Ethnic
Groups by one or a few Ethnic Groups on the Land of Africa. Instead of
African independence ushering in the unification of the new Modern African
State, in this case Zimbabwe, with the component Traditional African States,
in this case Matabeleland, African independence ushered in the dawn of
New-Age Colonialism in Africa thus extending the liberation struggle for
overwhelming majority of Ethnic Groups in Africa.
Indisputably, all the
people of Africa and all the Ethnic Groups of Africa recognize the existence
of New-Age Colonialism in Africa. A visit to ethnic website is quite
revealing. The concept of a nation of the Modern African State such as
Zimbabwe or Nigeria is non-existent, sadly to say. A visit to the discussion
forums on Ndebele or Shona websites, which is reflective of the sentiments
of the people of the two Ethnic Groups, will make it clear how divergent
people's views are on a range of issues, suggesting that Zimbabweans do not
share the concept of united Traditional States of Zimbabwe, which
independence from colonialism was suppose to create but failed to do so
because of ethnocentrism, the ideology that propagate ethnic superiority
through monopolization of state power and enforcement of the ethnic
superiority through the use of state power. Ethnocentrism, the subterranean
ideology of the ruling political party of Zimbabwe, has created a
deep political chasm between the two major Ethnic Groups of Zimbabwe - The
Ndebeles and the Shonas. There is a deep political chasm in Zimbabwe
between the Ndebele People and the Shona People the result of a sharp
difference of opinion in regards to the appropriateness of the Zimbabwean
political structure and system of governance. Political feud between the two
Ethnic Groups continues, reinforced by the rivalry between the Shona Ethnic
Group and the Ndebele Ethnic Group. Because of colonial political structure
and importation of foreign majority system of governance ethnic rivalry
continues abated as fighting for the re-emergence of the Ndebele Kingdom has
been re-ignited. As a result of forcibly incorporating the indigenous land
regions of the Ndebele People with those of the Shona People into the
present unitary state system, colonialism irreparably destroyed the African
Affinity, the mutual interdependent relations between the African and the
African - between the Shona and the Ndebele that existed prior to
colonialism. Yes, there was rivalry but there was affinity between Ndebele
and Shona and when affinity was destroyed rivalry reined supreme turning into
virulent hatred.
Colonialism thrived through the divide and rule
methodology of authoritarian power and domination. It was in the interest of
the colonialists to foment ethnic enmity. It was the colonialist interest to
fuel ethnic divisions between the Ndebele and Shona Peoples in order to
sustain European hegemony and superiority in former Rhodesia. Apartheid South
Africa also exploited the situation between ZAPU and ZANU-PF to make
things worse in Zimbabwe. The colonial boundaries resulting from the
partition of Africa enabled colonialists to continue to exploit
and exacerbate ethnic divisions and allegiances for their own economic
advantages but with the unsolicited help of extremist
ethnocentric African politicians who wants to perpetuate a new form of
colonization through grabbing and monopolizing state power. To enable them
grab political power and aware that they cannot win power based on honest
political discourse on issues of common interest to all
people irrespective of ethnic affiliations, the majority Ethnic Groups in the
Modern African State employed the tactic of inflaming ethnic passions
to win the first and only free elections in post-independent African State.
Such tactics has resulted in destroying the sentiment of
inter-ethnic affinity that have existed and created in its stead inter-ethnic
animosity. Fuelling passions as a political tactic of grabbing and
monopolizing state power by extremist ethnocentric politicians is the cause
of such violent political confrontations as Entumbane and Gukuranhundi
in Africa. No wonder that nearly all post colonial states within Africa who
had retained the concept of nation states as formulated by
the colonialists have inflicted genocide, ethnic cleansing, murders, and
disappearances against powerless Ethnic Groups.
Extremist
ethnocentric politicians inflame ethnic passions and when disenchanted and
disenfranchised Ethnic Groups agitate the government they control used
political bravado to intimidate dissidents. They make inflammatory
statements that do not intimidate but fuels passion to the point of military
confrontation. Such statements by high government officials as this, is very
destructive: "the Government could choose to burn down "all the villages
infested with dissidents" and that; "the campaign against dissidents can
only succeed if the infrastructure that nurtures them is destroyed". This is
advocating the destruction of a whole Ethnic Group, an African Ethnic Group,
a beautiful and valuable flower in the Garden of Africa. Such genocidal
statement does not intimidate an African Ethnic to abandon the pursuit of
their legitimate demands for sharing power and economic wealth of the State.
Such inflammatory statements destroy Africa as they incite people to mass
murder of Africans by Africans.
The Uncertain Future of Zimbabwe The
military confrontations of Entumbane and Gukurahundi, the bad
implementation of the land reforms ("Hondo yeminda), the
frequent election disputes and the succession maneuverings in Zimbabwe are
political crises creating grave uncertainties about the future
of Zimbabwe. These crises are the result of the existence of inappropriate
political structure and inappropriate political system and they
have contributed greatly to the political stalemate that has created a
general sense of political uncertainties in Zimbabwe. Grave
political uncertainties have arisen in Zimbabwe because of the political
machinations of extremist ethnocentric politicians in Zimbabwe who
have exploited the inappropriate political arrangements for their own
ethnocentric agenda. This agenda coupled with the economic hardship
have created uncertainties about the future of Zimbabwe. The political
situation has particularly created a growing sense of alienation
in Matabeleland and especially among young people, city dwellers, and skill
educated Zimbabweans. The uncertainties of the future of Zimbabwe are
borne out of fear, not only because of the total economic breakdown, but
mainly because of the sense of imminent political instability. The fear of
draconian political repression in the name of safeguarding the gains of
African Liberation in Zimbabwe has gripped Zimbabwe.
The fear of an
imminent political instability has gripped Zimbabwe due primarily to the
existence of inappropriate political structure and political system,
political arrangements that has proved beyond any shadow of doubt of its
unsuitability to the socio-geopolitical diversity of the Land of Africa. It
is believed by many Zimbabweans that the current deteriorating political and
economic situation has instigated the ruling ZANU-PF to re-organize another
militias unknown to the international press. These militias are reported to
be recruited from unemployed young men from the Shona Ethnic Group, trained
and armed by the ruling party. They are believed to have murdered
opposition political leaders, including candidates for Parliament. They have
joined the "veterans" of the independence struggle (many of whom were
not even born then) to beat and terrorize supporters of the opposition
Movement for Democratic Change, a political party that transcends
ethnicity since its leader is Shona but has its greatest support is in
Matabeleland. Equally ominous, recently, was the movement of a largely
Shona Zimbabwe Army brigade into Matabeleland. Most Zimbabweans believe that
what is happening is not an unfortunate precipitation of chaos but a
carefully orchestrated State organized violence. The violence has little to
do with land, which is a legitimate Zimbabwean issue of interest to all the
people irrespective of ethnic affiliation. The violence that has engulfed
Zimbabwe is a political strategy to destroy the first real threat to ZANU-PF
in 20 years, which is the emergence of a trans-ethnic political party, the
MDC and the potential emergence of another more powerful trans-ethnic
political party.
The movement of a large Shona Zimbabwe Army into
Matabeleland has increased the specter of genocidal massacres, such as was
seen in Rwanda, occurring in Zimbabwe and this has heightened the sense of
political instability in Zimbabwe. A sense of uneasiness has particularly
gripped Matabeleland because the overwhelming victims of previous military
assaults were people with ethnic Ndebele identity. Many analysts, domestic
and regional, foresee a period of instability in a society now sharply
divided between urban and rural communities and between ethnic groups, with
popular legitimacy still evading the government after elections. It is
believed that the leadership of the Zimbabwean government may be unable to
recreate the balance between Ethnic Groups that held the ruling ZANU-PF
party together. The concern is whether, with the election storm passed, the
party will be able to co-opt again the Karanga leaders ditched some months
earlier.
It seems that the Zimbabwean government will be unable or
unwilling to create a political balance between the constituent Ethnic
Groups because of the discredited and destructive ethnic politics. The Shona
Ethnic Group that controls the Zimbabwean government is unwilling
to share power because extremist ethnocentric politicians controlling the
government of Zimbabwe believe that since they won the territory
of Zimbabwe by force, their grip on power can only be kept by force not by
some liberal foreign construct such as a democratic election, although
foreign political concept of democracy aided their ascendancy to power.
Indubitably, the ruling ZANU-PF has become an ethnic party since the
political leaders of the party regularly appeals to race and ethnicity, and
labels opponents as "traitors", "terrorists", and "dissidents" of Africa.
Although, extremist ethnocentric politicians have subverted and changed the
African Political Mission - African Liberation and Unification to ethnic
monopolization and consolidation of power, they are quick to brand any
opponent as an enemy of Africa. It should be well noted that the African
Ethnic Group is Africa and as such the African Ethnic Group is not an enemy
of Africa but the enemy of colonialism, domestic or foreign, and would not
accept any form of colonialism despite egregious intimidation, persecution,
massacre or ethnic cleansing. The abhorrence of any form of colonialism by
Traditional Africa, including the Ndebele People and the Shona People,
cannot be changed by the political might of the Modern African State.
Therefore, the political might of the Shona controlled government of
Zimbabwe cannot extinguished the passions of the Ndebeles for political and
economic equality in Zimbabwe just as the political might of
Arab controlled government of the Sudan cannot extinguish the passions of
people of Western and Southern Sudan for political and economic equality.
Ethnocentric Ethnic Groups of Africa who control the government of the
Modern Africa States should note very well that the liberation struggles of
Traditional African States would not end until and unless Modern Africa
share power and wealth with Traditional Africa.
Another destructive
political action that creates political chasm and heightens the political
uncertainties of the future of Zimbabwe are political statements by a high
Zimbabwean government official such as this: "We must get in and do away
with those who want to sabotage us." This is an attempt to create a wedge
between Ethnic Groups. Extremist ethnocentric politicians create wedges,
just as the European colonialist did, between Ethnic Groups in order to
monopolize power. They create "us" versus "them" and in so doing destroy any
affinity that existed between African Ethnic Groups. Instead of developing
the African Affinity into African Unity, these politicians seeks to destroy
the African Affinity to enable them perpetuate ethnic monopolization of state
power. UAO appeals to African politicians to cease and desist from such
political statements as it is ultimately very self-destructive.
Another
destructive political statement was made during the campaign for the Lupane
by-election. A high government official and an MP for the neighboring Insiza
constituency told to his party candidate pointedly: "If you lose this
election, I am going to remove all the government equipment working on the
Nkayi to Lupane road. That is the ZANU way." This clearly indicates that
only members of the ruling party are supposed to benefit from government
policies. Under such political system, democracy cannot thrive as in a true
democracy government policies are not formulated and implemented to benefit
only party members but to benefit all the people irrespective of any social,
political or economic affiliations. Again UAO appeals to all African
politicians to embrace true democracy and eschew ethnocracy because peace
and prosperity in Africa and in the African State solely rest on unity,
harmony and cooperation of all Africans irrespective of social, political
and economic affiliations.
The inappropriate political structure and
political system of Zimbabwe and Africa have actually promoted ethnocentric
ideology in Africa. Ideologically, ZANU belongs to the African liberationist
tradition of the 1960s - anti-West, suspicious of capitalism and deeply
intolerant of people they perceive as dissidents or opponents to their rule
since they believe, wrongly, that opposition meant pro- European
colonialism. Criticism of the government, to them, is an attempt to reverse
the gains of liberation. The ruling party believes that opposition to
government policies and agitation for political equality is tantamount to
treason. People who oppose their policies are traitors to the cause of
Africa which is liberation from European colonialism. They see the party as
protecting the gains of African Liberation and that anyone in the opposition
or a dissident is a traitor of Africa. Unfortunately, these politicians
especially in Zimbabwe have apartheid South Africa, a belligerent next
door neighbor, to lend credence to their beliefs and actions. South Africa,
in the early 1980s, had a policy of destabilizing independent
African States on its border to make it harder for these States to provide
support to the ANC and other groups aiming to bring about majority rule
in South Africa. The policy was also to justify the preservation of European
rule in South Africa. South Africa tried to infiltrate Zimbabwe
politics to deepen the ethnic enmity between ZAPU and ZANU and conducted
military attacks such as the one that destroyed a major munitions dump at
Inkomo Barracks in August 1981, and another that destroyed the ZANU-PF
headquarters in December 1981, and Thornhill Air Base in Gweru which
destroyed many of Zimbabwe's Air Force aircraft. The behavior of apartheid
South Africa made the Zimbabwean government see itself as permanently under
threat, and this gave the government an excuse to use force to quash
opponents.
Today there is no threat from the new South Africa but
confrontational and violent politics still prevail in Zimbabwe which
indicates that the extremist ethnocentric politicians of Zimbabwe were not
safeguarding the gains of African Liberation but were using colonialism as a
ploy to monopolize power through violent and intimidating politics. As a
result of the government attitude towards dissent and opposition, there is
an uncertainty of the future and this has unleashed a growing fear of anarchy
and uprising engulfing the nation since the government is intolerant to
opposition. The political situation in Zimbabwe today is dicey because while
the government is geared to use force to maintain power in the name of
safeguarding the gains of liberation, the people of Matabeleland are
galvanized to end political domination. A headlong confrontation seems
imminent. This may take the form of an organized civil or military campaign
by the Ndebele Ethnic Group to force an acceptable government in Zimbabwe, or
more likely that, the Ndebeles just like the Ijaws of Nigeria and the Furs
of Western Sudan, may call for independence from Zimbabwe, which like such
conflicts in Africa may lead to genocide, ethnic cleansing, starvation and
mass death in Zimbabwe. Undeniably, political tension in Zimbabwe, which
currently is subterranean but which like a deep seated volcanic matter will
soon burst open onto the surface to destroy anything in its path. As
political tensions heighten, the specter of genocide in Africa not unlike
the Hutu- Tutsi events of Rwanda cannot be ruled out in Zimbabwe. To say it
briefly, the political and economic future of Zimbabwe does not look
good.
The economic future of Zimbabwe does not look good because of the
economic breakdown. The economic deterioration of Zimbabwe has increased
the future uncertainties of Zimbabwe. Properly managed, Zimbabwe's wide
range of resources should enable it to support sustained economic growth. The
country has a great percentage of the world's known reserves of
metallurgical-grade chromites. Other commercial mineral deposits include
coal, platinum, asbestos, copper, nickel, gold, and iron ore. But the
current political stalemate, essentially ethnic impasse between the Ndebeles
and the Shonas, is diverting national resources to monopolizing,
consolidating, intimidating, agitating, demonstrating, litigating, and
fighting all because of "The African Reluctance" foisted on Zimbabwe by the
acceptance of inappropriate political structure and inappropriate political
system. The current challenges facing Zimbabwe include the need to
address the political stalemate, the economic crisis and one of the world's
highest rates of HIV/Aids infection. Indirectly, political
inappropriateness has caused food shortages and untold suffering to the
Zimbabwe People. As a result of political instability and the misuse of
national resources, millions of Zimbabweans are at a risk of starvation
without food relief. The economic breakdown is a result of the
broader Zimbabwean political crisis emanating from preserving the
inappropriate political structure and inappropriate political system of
Zimbabwe. It is reported that about 7 million Zimbabweans are in urgent need
of food aid and 600,000 children are already suffering from a severe
shortage of food. The shortage is particularly acute in Matabeleland, the
homeland of the Ndebeles and the stronghold of the opposition Movement
for Democratic Change, a geopolitical area prone to harvest failures and
drought. The dire economic predicament of Matabeleland is a source
of great concern as it may compel the Ndebeles to take up arms to alleviate
the economic hardship, a political action that may lead to the
total destruction of the fabric of the Ndebele society. The political
structure and the political system of Zimbabwe, just like in any other
Modern African State, are seriously defective as both are foreign designed
and unsuitable to the socio-geopolitical diversity of Africa.
Additionally, this foreign concept of political arrangements does not promote
unity neither do they foster economic growth. Contrary, they
promote ethnocentrism, the political ideology of ethnic monopolization of
state power that fuels irrational and destructive ethnic passions.
The inappropriate political arrangements are the direct cause of the future
uncertainties of Zimbabwe. As a result of the political structure and
the political system of governance in Zimbabwe there is a specter of
imminent political instability, imminent repression of dissidents
and opposition and imminent total economic breakdown that may lead to
imminent disintegration of the State of
Zimbabwe.
Loose Union is not the Solution The future of Zimbabwe is uncertain and
as a result many Zimbabweans are crying for a permanent solution to the
political stalemate that has virtually shut down Zimbabwe. Some Ndebeles have
advocated the creation of a federal state as can be seen by this statement:
"That is why my party advocates for a federal state allowing each region to
use available resources to the best advantage for its own
development." Proponents of federalism fiercely argue that the present
unitary state has failed and it is therefore time for a different system of
government. A spokesman for ZAPU has been quoted in African Times (21/4/03)
as saying "the whole idea is to federate the country into MaShonaland
and Matabeleland. We want to have our own government separate to that of
ZANU-PF. We want to manage our own resources in a way that will boost the
ordinary people of Matabeleland who since independence have suffered ....."
Similar statements can be found on websites - " It is not about changing the
guard and putting in place some checks to prevent dictatorship, but rather,
it is about changing the basic form of government." The word federalism, as
we know it, seems acceptable to many people in discussion forums. The
federalism we know it calls for the two Ethnic Groups, the Ndebele Ethnic
Group and the Shona Ethnic Group to co-exist alongside each other. The
question that must be asked in regards to a federal Zimbabwe is this: will
the Shona Ethnic Group share the power and the wealth of the Zimbabwe with
the Ndebele Ethnic Group and will federalism resuscitate trust? Will the
federal government of Zimbabwe be so neutral as to protect,
politically and economically, all citizens of the State? The answer is
no.
The answer is no because foreign concept of federalism, as we know it
from the contemporary history of Nigeria, Sudan, Congo and many more
federated states in Africa, do not share power and wealth equitably. This is
because the federal government of the Modern African State, which is normally
controlled by an Ethnic Group, is not a neutral government and as such is
unwilling to protect all citizens and distribute power and wealth equitably.
The apathy of such governments to the plight of other Ethnic Groups
cultivates, deepens and perpetuates ill- feelings, mistrust and animosity
just as it is in Zimbabwe today. Therefore, those who call for a federal
system of government in Zimbabwe do so without in-depth analysis of a foreign
political concept that is incapable of solving African political problems.
Would a federal system guarantee an equitable distribution of power and
resources in Zimbabwe? No! Even a casual look at Nigeria, which introduced
a federal system in 1914, will show that the foreign concept of federalism
has failed to guarantee peace and stability. Proponents of federalism
in Zimbabwe would be wise to study the situation in Nigeria if similar
problems are to be avoided in Zimbabwe.
Foreign federalism creates
unequal arrangement and just like a unitary State grant inordinate power to
one or a few Ethnic Groups thus inadvertently perpetuating the subjugation of
African Ethnic Groups by an African Ethnic Group. Such subjugation already
exists in Zimbabwe today and need not be perpetuated through another form of
foreign political concept. It is precisely this kind of subjugation which,
apart from fuelling federalist feelings amongst the Ndebele, also deepens the
mistrust between the Shona and Ndebele Ethnic Groups of Zimbabwe. Because
of the reluctance of Modern Africa, many Ethnic Groups of Africa, including
the Ndebeles, do not trust the government of the Modern African States,
unitary or federal, to either protect them or to share the power and the
wealth of the State. Such reluctance in Zimbabwe has exacerbated historical
ethnic animosities between the Ndebele and Shona, ethnic enmities that
cannot be eradicated by foreign federalism as we know it. Like many other
African Ethnic Groups in similar political situations, the Ndebele Ethnic
Group of Zimbabwe feels totally unprotected not even by the new South Africa
who shares common historical and cultural roots with Matabeleland. The
Ndebele People has more in common with South African Zulus than the Shonas of
Zimbabwe. But, the South African government cannot be seen to
support Matabele nationalism because that might revive Zulu nationalism in
their own backyard. The African Ethnic Group need political and economic
protections but does not trust the Modern African State to provide them. It
is because of such mistrust between the Ndebele and the Shona that a federal
system of government cannot work in Zimbabwe. The Ndebele do not trust the
Shona to ensure the survival and growth of their nation while the Shona
suspect that the Ndebele may use the pretext of federalism to restore their
traditional state. Even if the Shona, as the political majority, sees the
need for a new system of government, such as federalism, the political
crisis of Zimbabwe will not end since the unequal relationship will still
remain and the deep mistrust will not dissipate. Just as the Ijaw People and
the Igbo of Nigeria do not support the Federal State of Nigeria, and just as
the people of Western and Southern Sudan do not support Federal State of
Sudan and are fighting to secede, the people of Matabeleland in Zimbabwe will
not support a Federal State of Zimbabwe when an Ethnic Group, the
Shonas, still controls the political power and the economic resources of the
State. The Ndebele Ethnic Group will not accept any political
arrangement whereby political and economic protections are not absolute from
a super-neutral African political power. The super-neutral power is ..
The United Africa. United Africa will end the political impasse in Zimbabwe
permanently through equitable distribution of power between Traditional
Africa, in this case the Ndebele Ethnic Group, and Modern Africa, in this
case Zimbabwe, which is controlled by the Shona Ethnic Group.
Equal
power sharing between Traditional Africa and Modern Africa through
meaningful political autonomy and meaningful revenue sharing are the
solutions to Africa's political problems, including Zimbabwe political
problems. The political problems of Africa, such as the crisis in Zimbabwe,
are the result of the inappropriate political structures and political
systems bequeathed to Africa by colonialism. Being the result of the
partition of Africa, Africa's political problems cannot be resolved through
military solutions or through loose ethno-regional affiliations, loose
regional groupings or loose unions of African States. Colonialism did not
eliminate the fundamental causes of the centuries-old wariness and divisions
among Ethnic Groups in Africa; likewise post-colonial Africa. Colonialism
imposed inappropriate political structures and system of governance on Africa
that are not conducive to maintaining permanent political stability in
Africa, including Zimbabwe. Durable political stability is elusive in Africa
because the structures and the systems imposed on Africa are unsuitable to
the socio-geopolitical aspirations of Africa's Ethnic Groups and being
unsuitable they fuel ethnocentrism. For this reason, the Modern African
State such as Zimbabwe cannot rely on imported western political concepts to
maintain permanent political stability neither can Zimbabwe or any
other Modern African State rely on loose union of African Heads of States to
prevent political crisis.
Federalism as we know it in Africa is a
loose amalgamation of Traditional African State to form the Modern African
State. Loose groupings of Traditional African States through colonialism to
create Zimbabwe are not the appropriate political structure for Zimbabwe or
Africa neither are the post-colonial loose regional groupings of African
States nor the loose union of African States. Post-colonial regional
groupings and loose union of African States have not developed the
capabilities to prevent or resolve political crisis that have plagued Africa
since after the colonial period. These unions are not the solution to
Africa's problems because they are incapable of resolving the fundamental
political problem confronting Africa and as such they are powerless. The
African Heads of State championing the African Union (AU) or
New Partnership for African Development (NEPAD) are powerless because they
are also confronted with similar political situation simmering beneath
the political landscape of their respective African State. They fear that
the solution they forcefully advocates today to end one crisis may come back
to haunt them when the subterranean volcanic political matter (ethnic
animosities) in their State burst open the deceptively quiet political
landscape and erupts to destroy everything in its path including precious
human life and property. The African Head of State may pontificate of how
Africans are ready to solve African internal strife and police African own
leadership but they do not have the requisite political power to achieve the
goal of crisis-free Africa. It is quiet obvious that neither AU nor NEPAD,
provide maximum capabilities to protect all Ethnic Groups in Africa due to
inherent structural deficiencies of such unions. Additionally, the
multiplicity of regional groupings such as ECOWAS, MAGREB, and SADC within a
loose African Union provides inadequate solutions to problems confronting
Africans. Such organizations do not generate enough strength to meet the
ever-present ethnic wars camouflaging today as liberation wars, wars that
are destroying the African social landscape and endangering the precious
African Cultural Diversity.
Loose unions, such as the federalism
being advocated for Zimbabwe, are powerless and therefore are incapable of
preventing such crisis as the Zimbabwe political crisis or quickly end such
crisis as the crisis in Darfur in the Sudan. Because of the inability of
respective African governments, such as Zimbabwe, and respective loose
African unions and organizations to create effective political structures
and political systems in Africa, endless political crisis is now the face of
Africa, and it is the sort of Africa that we will be living in, 20 or 50
years from now, if the political status quo of Africa, including Zimbabwe, is
not fundamentally changed to neutralize the destructive effects of
the balkanization of Africa by the partition of Africa. The United Africa
Organization - UAO is committed to neutralizing the destructive effect of
the balkanization of Africa since this colonial political mechanism is
primarily the main cause of the cycle of political crisis in Africa.
The President of Nigeria, Olusegun Obasanjo, seems to agree with UAO in his
address at the First Conference of Intellectuals of Africa and
the Diaspora in Dakar, Senegal in October 2004 when he blamed colonialists
for the over 100 years of balkanization of Africa. The balkanization of
Africa through the partition of Africa was a political mechanism employed by
the colonialist to control the resources of the Land of Africa and the
colonial scheme is still working perfectly well for the colonialist today.
As a result of the balkanization, post colonial Africa could not embrace new
Afrocentric ideologies such as Neo-Africanism, the New Ideology for a New
Africa. Neo-Africanism would have restructured Africa to create appropriate
political structures and political systems to facilitate the emergence of
new, challenging, creative, innovative and progressive African ideas built on
the specificities of Africa, ideas that draw on Africa's internal strength,
values, policies, politics and spirituality. To accept the current
inappropriate political structures of Africa is to accept the balkanization
of Africa. To accept the balkanization of African Ethnic Groups within
inappropriate boundaries is to accept living with perennial political
crisis. Undeniably, Zimbabwe like any other African State is a balkanized
State and that is the reason for the frequent political crisis. Therefore,
to accept or ignore the political status quo of Zimbabwe and Africa is to
accept living with the same Africa the world knows - gun violence,
atrocities, ethnic annihilations, refugees, crisis, famine and mass death. To
say it briefly, foreign concept of federalism, loose regional groupings
and loose union of African States do not offer solutions to the political
problems of Zimbabwe and Africa. The solution is..The
United Africa.
The Solution is .. United Africa UAO is advocating an "African solution"
to Zimbabwe's socio-political crisis. The solution lies in implementing the
tenets of African Federalism. African Federalism creates The United Africa.
The solution to the political crisis in Africa and Zimbabwe lies in
accepting the new political concept of African Federalism. The proposed
African Federalism is a system of government which consists of all
Traditional African States and all Modern African States. Each State have
their own governments and are granted constitutional powers to decide their
own affairs and are protected, politically and economically, by a single
super-neutral United Africa national government which is
granted constitutional powers to make decisions only on foreign affairs,
defense and management of a single African Currency.
Inarguably,
Zimbabwe like most Modern African States consists of Traditional African
States, of people of who sees themselves first as citizens of an ethnic
nation before any modern imposed socio-political identity. This traditional
socio-geopolitical identity, history has done well to tell us, cannot be
vanquished by any political concept that does not recognize the legitimacy
and the relevance of such a strong political sentiment of the African.
Without recognizing the legitimacy of Traditional Africa, it is impossible
for any government of Modern Africa to secure political legitimacy, election
or no election, distribution of political post or development projects
notwithstanding. And without political legitimacy, it is impossible to
provide for the material well-being of disenfranchised citizens. Lack of
legitimacy for the ZANU-PF government lies in the breach of the most cardinal
principle of success of any modern state and any modern political leader,
which is meaningful power-sharing, which in Africa, only the proposed African
Federalism can deliver. African Federalism has been proposed to provide
all the States on the Land of Africa, Traditional and Modern, genuine
political legitimacy so as to make all governments acceptable to all the
people of Africa.
African Federalism is based on the distribution of the
political power of Africa between the United Africa, the Modern African
State, the Provinces of Africa where Traditional Africa resides and the
Districts or Localities within the Modern African State. The political
leaders of each political jurisdiction are elected by the people of the
geopolitical area except where the people accept their traditional monarch
or chieftain as the political leader with either or not constitutional
executive powers. Essentially, the people of the geopolitical area of
United Africa choose their own political leaders and have constitutional
power to raise as much money in their jurisdiction as they deem
appropriate without any manner of imposition from any external powers,
foreign or domestic. African Federalism delegates substantial political and
legal power to the semi-autonomous political jurisdictions of United Africa.
Inarguably, foreign concept of federalism has failed in Africa because
of the reluctance of Modern Africa to share power and economic resources with
Traditional Africa. African Federalism, on other hand, permits the growth
of indigenous institutions that can best benefit the provinces and the
districts of Africa without much federal and state interference. Such
distribution of power will make provincial and district administrations
effective in providing for the needs of the African People.
The
political structure and the system of governance in Africa must be changed
to assure all Ethnic Groups of Africa, the Shona and the Ndebele included, of
maximum political and economic protection by a super-neutral African
political power. The super-neutral power capable and willing to protect all
Africans irrespective of ethnicity is.. The United Africa. The United
Africa is built on African Federalism. It is only African Federalism that can
neutralize the adverse effect of partition of Africa so as to eradicate
destructive ethnic rivalries permanently or at least reduce them to a mere
nuisance - infrequent, few and far between. African Federalism as the
political structure of United Africa is essential to sustaining stability,
peace and prosperity in all Africa as it will stop the camouflaged new-age
colonialism of Traditional Africa by Modern Africa. Indubitably, the
Federation of Traditional Africa and Modern Africa to form United Africa
will end permanently the perennial political instability resulting from
holding onto colonial boundaries that permit subjugation of one Ethnic Group
by another Ethnic Group.
Obviously, there are two Traditional States in
the Modern African State of Zimbabwe that were forcibly brought together by
the partition of Africa and perpetuated by post-colonial leaders. Both have a
right to self-determination. Under African Federalism, the territory
occupied by the state of Zimbabwe will remain intact; however, the power
relations within that territorial will be changed by the tenets of
African Federalism, the new African political structure and the African
Democracy, the new system of governance. African Federalism is the
most appropriate way of rearranging the socio-political relations within the
Modern African State to accommodate the Traditional States within
one territorial entity. African Federalism is the political structure that
will be acceptable to the Shonas and Ndebels of Zimbabwe.
It is clear
from African history that Traditional Africa will continue to fight hegemony
or subjugation, whether foreign or domestic. This is because many Ethnic
Groups of Modern African States are so aggrieved, so victimized, so
ethnically cleansed and facing extinction for no other reason than their
being, their humanity and their identity, that they are prepared to rise
against any form of ethnic colonialism, fascism and hegemony. Traditional
Africa has demonstrated that they are prepared to fight to ensure their
basic survival, their lives and their way of life which are threatened by
ethnocentric groups controlling the central government whom they believed,
rightly or wrongly, are determined to annihilate them or at least subjugate
them. Many Ethnic Groups in Africa have now reached a stage where they can
no longer remain silent and incapable of defending themselves in the face of
grave injustice. African Federalism has been proposed not only eliminate
these tensions, not only to appease Traditional Africa but also to avoid
violent disintegration of the Modern African States as a result of pent-up
ill feelings boiling dangerously beneath the surface of the African political
landscape.
UAO have concluded from in-depth political analysis of
Africa that until and unless there is equal power sharing in Zimbabwe,
political crisis will continue to erupt now and then in Zimbabwe and in many
parts of Africa. Post independent African governments, including
Zimbabwe, are unable to prevent political crisis because the Modern African
State is essentially the amalgamation of loose Traditional African
States with unequal political powers. For example, Zimbabwe was constituted
by a loose affiliation of two distinct regional groups subdivided
into MaShonaland and Matabeleland. British colonialism created Zimbabwe,
joining two diverse peoples and regions in an involuntary
political entity. It was, therefore, not unusual that the nationalism that
became a political factor in pre-independent Zimbabwe arose essentially from
a common sentiment against colonialism rather than from any sense of a common
Zimbabwe nationality. Despite the brief periods of "marriages of
necessity" early nationalists in Zimbabwe tended to ignore Zimbabwe as the
focus of patriotism; rather, the common denominator was based on a newly
assertive ethnic consciousness that fuel adherence to the ideology of
ethnocentrism, the ideology that have prevented equal sharing of political
power among the Ethnic Groups of the Modern African State including
Zimbabwe. Since the 1960s, the ideology of ethnocentrism fueled ethnic
animosities in Zimbabwe and created ethnic organizations instead of national
organizations. Zimbabwean regionalism, fueled by ethnocentrism, created
semi-autonomous entities that have little in common politically or socially.
The UAO have determined that until and unless ethnocentrism is neutralized
and until and unless colonial political arrangements are discarded,
equal sharing of political power among the Ethnic Groups of Zimbabwe will not
materialize and as a result political crisis will continue to be a
prevalent feature of Zimbabwe and Africa.
The United Africa, as proposed
by the United African Organization, is a restructured Africa that
distributes political power equally between Traditional Africa and Modern
Africa. Because no effective political structure and political system were
created after independence to cement the loose affiliations of Traditional
African States into a solid united modern political entity, the United
Africa Organization (UAO) is advocating the restructure of the Land of Africa
and its component traditional and modern states to create a trusting and
meaningful federalism - The African Federalism. The proposed new federalism
for Africa enables equal sharing of political power between Traditional
Africa and Modern Africa. The people of Matabeleland, as clearly asserted in
their pronouncements, will accept a true federalism, the African
Federalism, because United Africa will guarantee the Ndebeles and all Ethnic
Groups of Africa maximum social, political and economic protections
from domestic or international exploitation, subjugation and marginalization.
Similarly, the people of MaShonaland will accept Africa
Federalism because the Shona Ethnic Group will never be in danger of being
subjugated or marginalized by any Ethnic Group in the world. Therefore,
the United Africa will permanently solve the political crisis in Zimbabwe.
UAO is saying that permanent solution to the political crisis in
Africa, including Zimbabwe, is all Africans accepting the proposed African
Federalism that creates United Africa. UAO believes that the
political restructure of Africa in accordance with the concept of African
Federalism is the effective political mechanism to permanently end the
cycle of political crisis in Zimbabwe and in all Africa. The proposed African
Federalism creates...... The United Africa. The United Africa is
the solution to Africa's cycle of political crisis that have destabilize many
parts of Africa for so long.
UAO believes strongly that the sudden
eruption of political crisis in the Modern African State is not due to
inherent animosity among the African Ethnic Groups that constitute the Modern
African State. The political instability of the Modern African State is
directly the result of defective political structure bequeathed to Africa by
the partition of Africa. As a result of this inappropriate political
structure there are crises in Sierra Leone, Liberia, Ivory Coast, the
Sudan, the Congo, Uganda and Angola and Zimbabwe. Clearly, the current
political crisis in Zimbabwe is not unlike the political crisis in other
African States. The demand of the people of Matabeleland in Zimbabwe for
autonomy is no different than the demands of other African Ethnic Groups
fighting in these political hotspots of Africa. These frequent
confrontations between the Modern African State and the Traditional African
State is decimating the population of Africa and destroying the economy of
Africa. The defective political structure of the Modern African State is
seriously destroying the political and economic stability of the African
State and Africa. According to reports from the Catholic Commission for
Justice and Peace in Zimbabwe and the Legal Resources Foundation
of Zimbabwe about 2,000 people, since independence, have been killed in
fighting in Matabeleland where the Ndebele People live in poverty despite
the existence of natural resources under their territory. Abject poverty of
certain Ethnic Groups in the Modern Africa State is a direct result of
inappropriate political structures and systems that marginalize these Ethnic
Groups, politically and economically, and enables other Ethnic Groups of the
Modern African State to control the rich endowment of resources on the
traditional lands of marginalized Ethnic Groups. Political crisis are
inevitable in such a political arrangement that creates poverty in rich
areas of the Modern African State. Unquestionably, abject poverty of certain
Ethnic Groups of Africa caused by unequal political power is a direct cause
of crisis in Africa, including Zimbabwe. The United Africa will end these
crises in Africa by ensuring equitable power sharing in Africa. The solution
to these crises is ..The United Africa.
Unbiased analysis of the
African political situation indicates that the cause of the crisis in Africa
and in Zimbabwe is not the distinctiveness of African Ethnic Groups but the
prevalence of inappropriate political structures and that the permanent
solution to African crisis is the creation of an appropriate African
political structure, which is....The United Africa. The United Africa
enables the dissemination of an appropriate ideology, which is Neo-Africanism
instead of ethnocentrism. The inappropriate political structures in Africa
have compelled many an African Ethnic Group to reluctantly embrace
ethnocentrism, the ideology that encourages ethno-imperialism, the
unintentional new-age African imperialism. Africa's Ethnic Groups have
adhered to ethnocentrism in post-colonial Africa mainly in the belief that
it is the only means to acquire maximum social, political and economic
protections for the Ethnic Group given the political structures they have
been forced to live with. Today's ethnocentrism arises out of the belief that
the Ethnic Group will be in danger of political subjugation, social
domination and economic marginalization by another Ethnic Group in the Modern
African State, if the Ethnic Group does not control the powers of the
State. Under such prevailing beliefs, crisis are inevitable since trust and
the social affinity of Africa's Ethnic Groups are destroyed, the result
of which is unbridled Ethnic Group competition for state power. Contemporary
African history clearly tells us that an African Ethnic Group
cannot maintain endurable political stability through monopoly of political
power and adherence to such divisive ideology as ethnocentrism because of
the unrelenting fierce socio-political competition from other Ethnic Groups.
Zimbabwe and Nigeria epitomize such fierce competition in Africa.
The
relentless crisis in Africa is due mainly to the incompatibility of
political realities and ethnic interest. Today's African political realities
are the existence of inappropriate political structures and it is
incompatible with the ancient, resolute, ethnic interest of Africa's Ethnic
Groups. It is the unsuitability of the current African political structures
to the socio-political condition of Africa that is causing the never-ending
crisis in Zimbabwe and in other parts of Africa not the fundamental
social temperament of the African Ethnic Group. So, the pursuit of
ethnocentric ideology in Zimbabwe is not due to the social temperament of
Zimbabwe Ethnic Groups but by an underpinning ideology that compels
the pursuit of maximum monopoly of state power to attain maximum protection
given the nonexistence of appropriate African political structure. The
existence of inappropriate political structures in Zimbabwe has perpetuated
divisive ideologies as the only means to attain maximum social protections
for MaShonaland and Matabeleland. Thus, the causes of the crisis in Zimbabwe
and in many parts of Africa are not the distinctiveness of Africa's Ethnic
Groups because various Social Groups in Africa have lived and can live
harmoniously and cooperatively on the same land forever. Some of the
historical examples of harmonious and cooperative living of Africa's Social
Groups are the syncretic living of Muslim and Non-Muslim People in Mali and
by the various Social Groups of the Niger Delta in the pre-colonial era. The
crisis in Zimbabwe and in Africa is the result of today's political
structures that are incompatible with the distinctiveness of
socio-geopolitical groupings of Africa. Therefore, to end the frequent crisis
in Zimbabwe and in other parts of Africa, Modern Africa must be
politically restructured to enable a proper African ideology, Neo-Africanism,
to germinate and disseminate. Neo-Africanism is an Afrocentric
ideology, not an ethnocentric ideology, and it is the ideology that emanates
from the creation of the United Africa, the proposed one continental
African nation properly structured to create a new Modern Africa.
UAO
is proposing to All Africa to embrace Neo-Africanism in order to eradicate
ethnocentrism in Africa and replaced it with Africanism, a new ideology to
resuscitate the original African Political Mission defined by Dr. Kwame
Nkrumah, which were African Liberation and African Unification. While
eliminating ethnocentric agendas in Africa, Neo-Africanism directs Africa to
the next phase of the African Political Mission, which is African
Unification & African Democracy in order to protect the gains of African
Liberation. It is imperative for All Africa to embrace Neo-Africanism because
it is imperative to permanently safeguard the gains of Africa Liberation and
to establish a political environment conducive to sustaining peace and
prosperity on the Land of Africa. The New African Ideology - Neo-Africanism,
which is the underpinning ideology of United Africa, neutralizes
ethnocentrism to enable the creation of a new and appropriate political
structure and political system to replace the current destructive political
arrangements bequeathed by colonialism.
UAO is proposing United
Africa, one African continental nation built on African Federalism, governed
by African Democracy, and guided by Neo-Africanism because the inappropriate
political arrangements that have encouraged ethnocentrism in Africa have
unleashed a tidal wave of fear and mistrust among Africa's Ethnic Groups and
as a result have made it almost impossible for consensus and cooperation to
seep into the political fabric of the African State. Instead, the current
political structures, unsuitable to the unique socio-geopolitical condition
of Africa, have foisted conflict and confrontation as a political norm.
As a result of the inappropriate political structures bequeathed to Africa
by colonialism, political structures embraced by post-colonial African
leaders, it is very difficult almost impossible to maintain harmony
and cooperation necessary to achieve permanent political stability because of
inordinate political pressures from competing Ethnic Groups who have been
vying for perpetual supremacy of the Modern African State since the advent
of colonialism. It is therefore not surprising to see frequent crisis in
Africa. United Africa, by its structure, governance and ideology, is capable
of ending theses crises in Africa permanently.
The inappropriate
political structures that are causing great mistrust and causing the
frequent crisis engulfing many African States, including Zimbabwe, indicate
that neither the African Head of State nor the Modern African State nor the
Traditional African State can achieve any measure of success and history has
proved that to true, albeit sadly. This historical evidence means that an
African Head of State cannot achieve success, that is, cannot create and
maintain durable peace and stability through unity and democracy unless the
Head of State joins an appropriately restructured African political entity,
which is... The United Africa. The African Head of State cannot govern
successfully without encountering inordinate socio-political pressures of
competing Ethnic Groups and without threats of coup d'etat unless the Head
of State joins... The United Africa. Also, the inappropriate political
structures of Africa, with its attendant deep mistrust and crisis
prone political environment, have demonstrated abundantly clear that an
African State cannot sustain peace and harmony and attain
maximum political protection against internal and external aggression unless
the African State joins... The United Africa. Similarly, the crisis
caused by the inappropriate political structures have indicated without a
shadow of doubt that an African Ethnic Group cannot protect its identity
and secure maximum social, political and economic protections unless the
African Ethnic Group joins... The United Africa, a restructured
new continental one African nation. The proposed United Africa nation is
created according to African Federalism and African Democracy and as such
it has political structures, political systems and political ideology
suitable to the socio-geopolitical situation in Africa. In essence,
the solution to Africa's myriad problems is... The United
Africa.
Undoubtedly, Africa is afflicted by the cancer of political
debility caused by the serious defective political structures imposed on
Africa by colonialism and perpetuated by post-colonial African leaders.
Evidently, the inappropriate political structures of Africa have denied
Africa the political tools that prevent such crisis from occurring, which are
unity and democracy. It has also prevented Africans, including African
Head of States, from accepting a common African ideology, which is
Neo-Africanism, the ideology capable of preventing such crisis in Africa.
The current African political structure has incapacitated the African
Head of State, the African State and the African Ethnic Group and as a
result Africa is suffering. The United Africa Organization - UAO believes
fervently that the solution to the current African political crises is..
The United Africa, a united democratic one continental African nation
structured according to African Federalism, governed according to
African Democracy and guided according to the New African Ideology -
Neo-Africanism.
Undoubtedly, the crisis in Zimbabwe and in many parts of
Africa does not require military solution or genocidal solution since such
so-called solutions do not end crisis but aggravate political disputes that
are reconcilable. Military solutions expand scope of conflict thus leading
to dangerous apocalyptic wars in Africa. The crisis in Africa today requires
a political solution and the most effective political solution is
...The United Africa. Undeniably, the solution to the crisis in Zimbabwe is
United Africa - one African nation created by all Africans and for
all Africans, a nation all Africans can trust to protect them from all manner
of persecutions - social, political and economic. The United Africa
as proposed by the United Africa Organization corrects the wrongs of African
history, especially the destructive effects of the partition of
Africa imposed on Africa by colonialism. Colonialism, out of self interest,
did not recognize the socio-political interest of African Ethnic
Groups during the partition of Africa when distinct African Social Groups
were forced into colonial boundaries. Unquestionably, Zimbabwe, as it
is politically constituted, is an inappropriate political entity as it
enables the Ethnic Group with the most population to monopolize political
power and as it denies minority Ethnic Groups equal share of political power
thus cultivating ethnic animosities which eventually deteriorates
into political crisis. To enable an Ethnic Group to win national power by
campaigning on local issues and inflaming ethnic passion is to ignore
the issues of other Ethnic Groups, the consequence of which is apocalyptic
political crisis.
Autonomy of the Ndebele Ethnic Group within a
Zimbabwe federal system is appropriate but the system of majoritarian rule
based on population size must be abandon in favor of African Democracy.
However, to make the Zimbabwe federalism a solid indivisible unity of
the Shona Ethnic Group and the Ndebele Ethnic Group, Zimbabwe must be part of
a wider stronger unity of African States and African Ethnic Groups, which
is... The United Africa, one continental African nation with the capability
to protect the African State, such as Zimbabwe and protect the African
Ethnic Group, such as the Ndebele People, against internal and external
aggression. Therefore, the unity of Modern African States and Traditional
African States, built on African Federalism and African Democracy is the
permanent solution to the crisis in Zimbabwe and in other parts of Africa.
The proposed new democracy - The African Democracy does not grant any Ethnic
Group, regardless of population size, unequal amount of political power. This
new type of African Unity and African Democracy will become a permanent
African political reality only through the creation of ... The United
Africa.
To say it simply, the solution to the crisis in Zimbabwe is
.. The United Africa.
SOME retail supermarkets in
Harare are beating the controlled price cap of standard bread by
manufacturing special bread such as whole wheat and milk bread before
selling it at more than double the gazetted price of $4 500. Last month, the
government increased the price of bread, a controlled commodity, from $3 500
to $4 500 a loaf in response to the cries of manufacturers suffering high
production costs. But most supermarkets that bake bread have been evading the
new price cap of standard bread by manufacturing special types of bread such
as milk bread at more than $8 000 a loaf. The practice is not only on the
increase in reputable supermarket chains in the Harare City centre but also
rampant in bakeries in several high-density supermarkets. In Warren Park
D, one supermarket was selling a sesame-coated loaf of bread at $7 500 while
standard bread was not in supply. "We have to buy the type of bread that is
available at the high price because we have no choice," a resident
said. Due to the controlled price of bread, manufactures argue that it does
not adequately cover costs. Other major bread manufacturers such as
Lobels have been delivering dry and poor quality bread that weighs much less
than the stipulated 770 grams to several shops and the few remaining
tuck-shops in the high-density areas.
Businessman takes council to court over
demolition
The Daily Mirror Reporter issue date :2005-Jun-20
A
BUSINESSMAN has accused the Municipality of Harare of acting in bad faith in
a High Court case in which, he is opposing the council's intention to
destroy his two-storey complex in the Graniteside industrial area. In the
High Court case (number (HC2602/05), Redline Security Service Private
Limited represented by its managing director, Alex Mashamhanda is the sole
applicant while, Municipality of Harare and the commissioner of police,
Augustine Chihuri are the first and second respondents respectively. In
his answering affidavit filed on Thursday, Mashamhanda said he acquired
stand 18226 Salisbury Township, where the complex in question was built
legally and with the approval of the council. "On the 27th January 2004
the 1st respondent's town clerk wrote to the applicant advising that he was
prepared to recommend to the 1st respondent that stand 18226 Salisbury
Township lands be sold to applicant for the sum of $180 million. Applicant
was requested to confirm its acceptance of the offer to facilitate for the
sale," Mashamhanda said. He went on to produce a letter from the town clerk,
Nomutsa Chideya in which he said he was prepared to recommend to council
that the stand be sold to his company. The letter reads in part:
"Reference is made to the above issue (sale of stand 18226 Salisbury
Township to Redline Security Private Limited) and I wish to advise you that,
I am prepared to recommend to council that the above property be sold to
Redline Security Services Private Limited for the sum of $180 million,
subject to the purchaser meeting all costs pertaining to survey and transfer
of the subject property." On January 30, 2004, Mashamhanda then responded to
the town clerk's correspondence indicating that his company was willing to
buy the stand. "I acknowledge receipt of your letter dated 27th January, 2004
advising that you are prepared to recommend to council that the above
property be sold to us for the sum of $180 million subject to us meeting all
costs pertaining to survey and transfer of the property. I confirm our
acceptance of the proposal," he said. Mashamhanda also argued that the
city's finance committee also recommended that the stand be sold to him for
$180 million on April 6, 2004. Part of the committee's recommendations reads:
"That subject to adoption of recommendation (1) and (2) above and subject to
the provisions of the Section 152 of the Urban Council's Act (Chapter 29:15)
stand 18226 Harare Township be sold to Mr A E Mashamhanda of Redline
Security Services Private Limited for $I80 million." According to
correspondence between the town clerk and the chamber secretary that was
cited by Mashamhanda as proof that council had regularised the construction
of the structure, the town clerk said: "As provide for in the Agreement of
sale, the company sought and was to be paid against the transfer of the
stand. Despite the stand being surveyed for Title purposes at the company's
cost, the stand could not be transferred as there was outstanding road
closure formalities which had to be attended to." The town clerk added that
the developer sought and was granted permission to develop the stand for
commercial purposes and upon approval a three-storey building, shops and a
leisure park. The town clerk went on to recommend to the chamber secretary
that the stand be sold to Mashamhanda for $180 million.
Govt should heed Zimbabwean plea to cancel
tour Monday, 20 June 2005, 9:05 am Press Release: Green
Party
Govt should heed Zimbabwean plea to cancel Black Caps
tour
Prime Minister Helen Clark should heed calls from the Zimbabwean
pro-democracy movement to take firm action to stop the Black Caps tour of
Zimbabwe, Green Co-Leader Rod Donald says.
Welshman Ncube, the
general secretary of Zimbabwe's Movement for Democratic Change, said
yesterday that the Black Caps' tour should be called off.
"The
Zimbabwean Opposition is well placed to comment on whether a New Zealand
cricket tour would help or hinder the odious Robert Mugabe," Green Co-Leader
Rod Donald said. "Helen Clark should be taking Mr Ncube's comments very
seriously and formally advise NZ Cricket not to tour Zimbabwe."
The
'force majeure' clause in NZ Cricket's future tours agreement with other
national cricket boards allows for a tour to be called off without financial
penalty if the cancellation is the result of a Government
directive.
"In the same way that New Zealand responded positively to
calls from pro-democracy voices in South Africa to suspend all international
sporting ties until the apartheid regime was brought to an end, the
Government should be acting on this request from Zimbabwe's pro-democracy
movement."
Mr Donald said that Robert Mugabe's recent bulldozing of
the homes of 250,000 poor Zimbabweans made the need for firm action even
more urgent.
"After watching the heart-wrenching images of ordinary
Zimbabweans' fragile homes being crushed like matchsticks, the whole of New
Zealand would be behind the Government telling the Black Caps to pull out of
the tour so as not to give Mugabe any legitimacy.
"In 1994, Helen
Clark said, 'The collapse of apartheid did not occur in the 1990s without
significant international pressure ... the systematic violation of human
rights in South Africa was eventually taken very seriously by the
international community, but it took many years, through a combination of
economic and other sanctions, and diplomatic pressure, to bear fruit'. It's
time for the Prime Minister to lead an international sporting boycott of
Zimbabwe."
By Staff
Reporter Last updated: 06/20/2005 11:10:51 PRESIDENT Robert Mugabe's wife,
Grace, has dropped out of a univeristy in London where she was studying for
a Bachelor of Arts (English) degree after dismally failing most of her
examinations.
Reports at the weekend said the First Lady, whose personal
tutor was President Mugabe, had passed only two subjects since she enrolled
at the University of London eight years ago, the Zimdaily.com website
reported.
She was studying through correspondence.
Her lack of
progress prompted the university officials to deregister her from the
programme, the report said.
"According to officials at the university Mrs
Mugabe could go down in the university's history as the worst student ever
to enrol there," the website added.
The First Lady was reportedly
registered with the University of London since 1996, and eight years down
the line, she had passed only two subjects. She had until December 2004 to
complete the degree programme or face being deregistered.
So dismal
was the first lady's performance that she obtained marks as low as 7% in one
of the subjects, Approaches to Text.
"In 1998, Grace failed all three
subjects she was tested for. She flunked Explorations in Literature (I) for
which she achieved 9%, Explorations in Literature (II)-18% and Renaissance
Comedy: Shakespeare and Jonson-17%. The following year the first lady
repeated the three subjects but again failed Explorations in Literature
(I)-31%, Renaissance Comedy: Shakespeare and Jonson-29%," the report
said.
"She, however, salvaged a pass in Explorations in Literature (II)
with a 42% mark. In the same year, she attempted an additional subject,
Approaches to Text, but failed with a lowly 7% mark."
Mugabe's wife
was born in South Africa in 1965 and came to Zimbabwe in 1970 where she
attended a primary school in her hometown, Chivhu. She then went to Christe
Mambo, just outside Rusape, for her secondary education.
She later
enrolled for a secretarial course with the Christian College of Southern
Africa before joining the President's Office as a secretary. She completed
Advanced Level studies through distant education while working in the
President's Office.
She wedded President Mugabe in 1996, long after their
extramarital affair had yielded two children while the president was still
married to his first wife, Sally, who died in January 1992.
Life inside: The asylum detainee By Dominic
Casciani BBC News website community affairs
reporter
A report by Amnesty International has criticised the
government for locking up thousands of asylum seekers, some of whom turn out
to be genuine refugees. Forard (not his real name), a detainee at Colnbrook
Removal Centre in Berkshire, describes what life is like inside one of these
centres. Forard, speaking by phone from a landing at Colnbrook, says he
fled Zimbabwe after he was singled out for attacks by members of the youth
wing of President Robert Mugabe's ruling ZanuPF party.
He has
been refused asylum but has not yet been removed.
He claims he
carries the evidence of torture on his body, although he wanted to remain
anonymous out of fear of damaging his case.
Colnbrook is the newest
centre and is close to Heathrow to make removals easier. But Forard says he
has been there for most of this year after initially being held in Dungavel
in Lanarkshire.
"I came here in February and have been here ever
since," he said amid the din of a noisy corridor where other people were
waiting for phone calls.
"The structure of this building is just
like a jail. [Inside the rooms] there are toilets with no doors. The ceiling
is dark blue, close to black and they lock us up at 10pm and they open in
the morning at 7.30, sometimes 7.45.
"There is no way you can
get out of the room. It feels that there is no air coming in, there is
artificial ventilation but it feels like it is blocked most of the
time.
"It gets very hot sometimes and I have to fan myself with a
newspaper at night and there is no way you can open windows."
Forard described the view from his room as one of razor wire and solid
fences. He said there was "nothing much to see, you look from the room to
the fence - the way I had seen the inside of a jail on television, this is
what I see here".
"In Dungavel it's more like a house, but that
doesn't mean it is any better there.
"In Dungavel the toilets
are outside the rooms and you can get out of the room and go to television
rooms and you come out and you can play games.
"Your rooms are not
locked at night. Here, when they lock, you are locked in there and there is
nothing else you can do."
'Hangings'
Asked what he
would say to those who support the detention policy, Forard said it was not
as good as people thought.
He said: "People in here are cutting
their wrists and they are burning themselves with boiling water. There are
people in [detention centres] who are hanging themselves but nothing is said
about this on the outside.
"I have seen these things several times.
There are people here who are mad, they were normal people when they came in
but now it's like their brains have been disturbed.
"They walk
in circles all day, there is this other guy who is like a zombie who doesn't
talk and walks like a tree, with little movement.
"I have seen this
guy for three months in here and a few minutes ago he upset another man and
wanted to hit him and one day he will get himself killed."
Scream
Forard's words were cut short by a loud scream which sounded
like it had come from down the hallway. It was one of the men Forard said
was now mentally unstable. A few minutes later, as he resumed his story, the
same man began loudly banging the door to a room.
"This is the
frustration that I have been talking about. Sometimes [the man] talks,
sometimes he will go and just scream like this, sometimes he will go and
slash his hands - he has scars all over his hands."
Forard said he
sought asylum with no intention of staying in the UK - he simply followed
the same path as other family members who had spent a lot of money
organising a secretive and hopefully temporary escape from
Zimbabwe.
He says he has every intention of going home once
President Mugabe is gone - but until then he does not feel
safe.
"I don't think this is an easy country. The process of coming
here is not easy at all, raising money to take flights from Africa, false
passports and so on.
"I was warned before by other people that
the asylum system in Britain is very difficult. My other choice was a
country which I didn't have a clue about. But my cousin had made it here and
said they would wait for me at the airport; you have to understand that was
the reason why."
"The other people who told me about Britain told
me the weather is very unfriendly and you should not expect people to have
any time for each other, not like in Africa when people greet each other as
they pass."
Forard is still fighting his case and says ultimately
he would rather stay in Colnbrook than go home because whatever his
conditions in the UK, having no liberty is better than no life at
all.
"I will try to resist [removal]. There is no safety in
Zimbabwe for me."
Mon, 20 Jun
2005 Members of Zimbabwe's opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC)
were turning Johannesburg into a bloody battle-field as they jostled for
positions in the party's structures, City Press newspaper reported on
Sunday.
This had prompted the MDC to send a "high-powered" delegation
to South Africa to try and defuse the situation, the newspaper
said.
The MDC has been accused of, among others, killing a man known only
as Lungile, who was a member of the rival Zimbabwean Action Support Group
(ZASG).
Jealousy behind friction - ZASG
Jealousy was behind
the friction between the two groups, said ZASG chairman, Remember
Moyo.
"It seems MDC members are jealous of our popularity and following
and think we are after the positions they hold," said Moyo.
"We are
not a political party. We support any political party that strives to bring
about change in Zimbabwe. We are not interested in positions."
City Press
said Moyo believed the same MDC youths responsible for Lungile's death were
behind the kidnapping of two other ZASG youths, Musa Mhlanga and Liberty
Mcube.
He said two went missing in Joubert Park last week and had not
been seen since.
Asked when exactly the MDC delegation was expected
to arrive, Moyo said "not anytime soon".
"The problem is that right
now, tempers are flying," he said.