The Zimbabwe Situation

In South Africa, where independence was gained from the murderous white
apartheid regime, independence is still celebrated, and the leaders of that
liberation-the late Walter Sisulu and Nelson Mandela, the first president of
a democratic South Africa-are still honored in their own land, and among
democratic forces in Africa.

As Lynne Duke noted in her tribute to Walter Sisulu at his death at 90 (The
Washington Post, May 7), when he and Nelson Mandela led the militant Youth
League of the African National Congress, "they staged marches, boycotts and
work stay-aways to battle the laws that progressively stripped nonwhites of
their human rights."

But now, as the black citizens of Zimbabwe are battling the savage laws and
brutality of Robert Mugabe's government, South Africa's president, Thabo
Mbeki, is hesitantly and ineffectively involved in what The Economist calls
" 'quiet diplomacy,' a euphemism for inaction."

This abandonment of the brutalized people of Zimbabwe is joined by the
rulers of Nigeria and Malawi. On May 5, Mbeki, along with presidents
Olusegun Obasanjo (Nigeria) and Bakili Muluzi (Malawi), came very briefly to
Harare to speak with Mugabe. As the headline in the May 6 New York Times
noted: "Negotiations in Zimbabwe Fail to Break Political Crisis."

At a news conference, Mugabe crowed: "I am the president of this country and
I have legitimacy."

In a May 8 editorial, the Times had a quick explanation for this forsaking
of the freedom fighters in Zimbabwe: "We understand why African leaders are
reluctant to lean on Mr. Mugabe. Mr. Mbeki shares Mr. Mugabe's roots in a
liberation movement, and the instability of many African regimes makes their
leaders loath to promote regime change anywhere."

But why is the universally respected-and indeed, venerated-Nelson Mandela
silent? After all, in May, Mandela, together with South African deputy
president Jacob Zuma, was involved in arranging an agreement between Hutu
and Tutsi antagonists in Burundi. But Mandela was not in Harare.

However, another hero of the South African liberation movement, Desmond
Tutu, archbishop emeritus, Capetown, has vigorously denounced the Mugabe
dictatorship: "The hard facts on the ground in Zimbabwe . . . suggest an
alarming array of policies and practices that may be leading the country to
a catastrophic future. . . . The ongoing political violence . . . must be
brought to an end. The threatening famine, caused in part by government land
policies, will make things even worse."

But only Nelson Mandela has the resounding stature to compel
attention-including among the largely silent black civil rights leaders in
the United States-to the horrific measures Mugabe inflicts on his people to
stay in power.

I asked Adotei Akwei, Africa advocacy director of Amnesty International USA,
about the silence of Mandela. "If Mandela would speak out," Akwei said,
"that would be a big breakthrough. But in addition to his disinclination to
attack Mugabe, the 'liberator' of Zimbabwe, in the past, Mandela is a very
loyal person, and he has known Mugabe a long time. Why did Bishop Tutu speak
out? He is a man of principle."

Furthermore, while Nelson Mandela is respected worldwide for the price he
paid for his principled fight for the liberation of South Africa-imprisoned
in the former leper colony Robben Island for 26 years-there has been no
pressure on Mandela from his international admirers to bring hope and
encouragement to the Zimbabweans.

"Very disappointing," said Akwei, "is that there has been such little
visible public concern anywhere for the suffering of the black people of
Zimbabwe. And that includes black leaders in the United States. Even some of
those who eventually became involved in protesting the slavery and genocide
in Sudan have not been heard from about Zimbabwe."

But there has been no pressure on American black leaders to come forward.
American black church groups were an important force in getting more black
political leadership to focus on Sudan. And in time, some of the white
American media woke up, to some extent, to the savagery of the National
Islamic Front government's jihad against the black Sudanese in the south.

Although The New York Times has provided some useful spot-news and editorial
coverage to the liberation struggle in Zimbabwe, most of the media have been
indifferent. I have seen nothing on Ted Koppel's Nightline or on the
valuable Frontline documentary projects of the Public Broadcasting System.
As for Kofi Annan and the United Nations, keep in mind Rwanda, and all the
UN's failures to save millions of people around the world from their
oppressors.

Meanwhile, Cathy Buckle, in a March 29 online weekly letter from Zimbabwe,
tells of Patricia, in Harare, attacked in her home at 1 a.m. by men in army
uniforms accusing her of supporting the opposition to Mugabe. They "put a
condom on the end of a rifle barrel and forced it inside her. Afterward they
beat her and forced her to drink her child's urine. 'They have already
killed me,' she said, 'but I have to carry on.' " Patricia, like a huge
number of Mugabe's victims, is black.

Here at the Voice, I received a press release from the African Liberation
Day Coalition 2003. The headline: "Blacks Assert Hands Off Zimbabwe,"
addressed to the "U.S. and British governments," accused by this coalition
of recolonizing Africa. The demand: "money for reparations and not
occupations."

Will they demand that Mugabe pay reparations to all the black Zimbabweans he
has so ruthlessly misruled?

Among the signers of the "Hands Off Zimbabwe" message are: Africans Helping
Africans, International Action Center, National Conference of Black Lawyers,
Harlem Tenants Council, and New York A.N.S.W.E.R. The latter is noted for
its skill at organizing anti-war demonstrations, along with the
International Action Center.

Will A.N.S.W.E.R. invite Robert Mugabe to address its next demonstration for
"Peace and Justice"? Meanwhile, incredibly, the African Liberation Day
Coalition scheduled a rally for last weekend advocating "support of
President Mugabe for standing up for his country." Ask the black Zimbabweans
about that.

      This is evidenced by the discourse in the media and everywhere else.
However, most Zimbabweans know that similar talks between the two parties
collapsed mid last year after ZANU PF put a pre-condition that the MDC must
withdraw its court case challenging the validity of the presidential
election, thereby recognising the legality and legitimacy of the
establishment, before the talks could proceed.

      In as much as most Zimbabweans can't wait to have a negotiated
settlement to the current political impasse, the prospects for such a
solution are bleak, at least at the present moment.

      I am not trying to sound pessimistic but the objective situation and
the prevailing discourse show that there is still some work be done. The
pre-conditions attendant upon the dialogue are naturally a blockade to the
birth of a process of principled dialogue and negotiation.

      Both parties appear to be taking a "fixed-pie" approach to the talks
and if they don't see the need for mutual compromise on their part in the
national interest then dialogue, let alone its success will be at best
illusory.

      The unfortunate thing is that the pre-conditions and the acceptance or
otherwise thereof form the core of both parties argumentative framework and
there is less likely to be a quick meaningful compromise.

      The government and ruling ZANU PF insist that Tsvangirai must withdraw
his election petition as a pre-condition for dialogue. The MDC remains
adamant and defiant that the talks must be unconditional and that's a
legitimate argument.

      Infact if Tsvangirai withdraws the petition then he would have sold
out to the millions of people who voted for him and his party.

      Pre-conditions have always been used in political history to increase
the bargaining power of the party which imposes them in the negotiation
process.

      They are part of a broader political posturing process and if the MDC
accepts ZANU PF's precondition they would have compromised on a fundamental
point without ZANU PF itself compromising on anything and by so doing they
enter into the negotiating arena from a defensive perspective, like guests
invited to a members-only club. We must reject the beggar tactics that are
being forced on us by those that seek to appease our cruel masters.

      If we go cap in hand begging for our deliverance, we are only inviting
the contempt of those who have power over us.

      The talks must just be unconditional or if there are to be any
pre-conditions the MDC must also come up with strategic and tactical counter
pre-conditions like withdrawing the treason trial of the three MDC leaders,
the repeal of repressive legislation like POSA and AIPPA, etcetera.

      These counter pre-conditions are not meant to abstract the talks as
such but to increase the bargaining power of the pro-democracy movement and
obviously in such a process some skillful and innovative obstructive tactics
are required.

      In any case, the counter pre-conditions suggested above naturally fall
squarely within the guiding principles of the progressive movement -
transparency and accountability.

      The MDC is a movement for "democratic" change and in a democracy, even
in a representative one like our own, there is a limit to the decision that
leaders can make without consulting directly with their members and
supporters.

      It is my respectable view that these talks and the election petition
therewith have a crucial bearing on the future of Zimbabwe and I hope wise
counsel will continue to prevail in the MDC leadership that they must be
wary of cutting out deals with the establishment on these issues without
consulting their constituency and the broader civil society.

      So, as a tactical move the MDC must demand the repeal of POSA as a
pre-condition so that they are able to hold rallies across the breath of the
country gathering the views of their membership.

      These rallies and consultation meetings must be accompanied by an
effective conscientisation and socio-political mobilisation process which
has the effect of sensitising the masses to the issues at hand.

      The MDC owes this to the nation if they are to prove their
"demoncratic" character and that they are not out to get political power.

      The obvious advantage of such a strategic and diplomatic move is that
even when the talks collapse along the way, supposing they resume, the
people will respond/react appropriately in defence of their interests
because they would have been consulted and so they "own" the negotiation
process by virtue of having made their input into it.

      The MDC must also make strategic and multi-pronged alliances with the
broader civil society.

      It will be naïve for the MDC to think that they will do it alone and
to ignore the potency of other pro-demoncracy forces, especially the
constitutional reform movement where we find the genesis of the party. The
MDC has always been a civil society party and it must remain so.

      I have argued in previous contributions (Financial Gazzette November
7-12; November 14-20) that a presidential poll re-run and a new constitution
are not incompatible, but rather, complementary.

      I restate what I stated in the contributions referred to above that
the talks between ZANU PF and MDC must take place within a constitutional
context and that that is the only way other progressive forces can really
see the dialogue as positive and deserving of their support.

      The MDC must not take President Mugabe's statements that demonise NCA
leader Lovemore Madhuku too far because we all know that it is not true but
an attempt by the regime to further fragment the people's resistance ahead
of the possible resumption of talks between ZANU PF and the MDC.

      We have seen a lot of activism in its various manifestations by the
NCA since the beginning of the year and even beyond.

      Although most of their calls for stay-aways were arguably perceived as
a failure in certain quarters, their undeniable success was in managing to
create and sustain a discourse that constitutional reform is inextricably
tied to any lasting solution to our current crises.

      That is important and due recognition has to be accorded to the
constitutional reform movement for surviving the turbulent political
currents obtaining in this country since the "NO" vote.

      The MDC itself having largely evolved from the NCA and having placed
constitutional review as one of their top priorities in their Presidential
election manifesto, can not convince us that constitutional reform has
suddenly ceased to be important or that it only becomes important when they
take over the reigns!

      Having argued that the talks between ZANU (PF) and the MDC are
ill-fated from birth by virtue of their structure and the pre-conditions
attendant thereon, people must brace up for the "final push". We must
however, not forget that the push may not be final but it's a step ahead all
the same. A negotiated settlement cannot altogether be ruled out but it can
only be possible if progressive forces demand by concrete action, political
concessions from the status quo in a confrontational manner. The concessions
that the powerful give to the powerless at any given time reflect the
balance of political forces at that particular time.

We must learn to accept that no group , however benevolent, can hand
over power to the vanguished on a silver plate. We must accept that the
limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they
oppress. We must realise that the government and the ruling party have no
desire to share power and encourage democratic governance and our situation
is not a mistake on their part but a deliberate act of suppression and
therefore no amount of moral lecturing will persuade the system to come to
terms with the people and correct the situation.

The system concedes nothing without demand for it formulates its very
method of operation on the ironic basics that they are the sole conscience
of the people.

It gears itself to resist demands in whatever way it sees fit and our
preparedness to take upon ourselves the cudgels of the struggle will see us
through. However, the reality of our situation is that fear has become an
important determinant in Zimbabwean politics. We must remove from our
vocabulary completely the concept of fear, for fear breeds misery in the
land. If we acquiesce in the system's strategies and fail to make political
demands and choose to come to a round table to beg for our deliverance, we
are asking for the contempt of the powers that be.

We must completely discard any beggar tactics and confront the system
head on with political demands. Of course this may involve being subjected
to victimisation, police brutality and judicial harassment. It may even mean
death but in a true bid for change we have to take off our coats, be
prepared to lose our comfort and security, our jobs and positions of
prestige, and our families, for just as it is true that "leadership and
security are basically incompatible," a struggle without casualties is no
struggle.

I have often said one major set back in the progressive movement is
lack of a courageous militant and combative leadership. However, its
refreshing to note that the MDC has now ceased to think that economic
hardships will automatically mobilise the people and are taking an active
leadership role. A simple and general definition of leadership includes the
capacity to influence, inspire, rally, direct, encourage, motivate, induce,
move, mobilise and activate others to pursue a common goal or purpose while
maintaining commitment, momentum, confidence and courage.

One major shortcoming in our strategy is being contend with fighting
within a framework set by the system. This is the major danger I see facing
the progressive movement at the present moment - to be so conditioned by the
system as to make even our most well - considered resistance to fit within
the system both in terms of the means and of the goals.

After the wake up call of the "NO" vote ZANU (PF) in danger of
collapse, embarked on a massive macho style process or re-organisation and
they re-defined the boundaries of the political boxing ring. The events that
followed the referendum are well documented and will not be repeated here.
To add a semblance of legitimacy to the new lawless dispensation the "Hondo
yeminda" or "Third Chimurenga" philosophy was developed together with an
ideology that relegate opposition supporters and progressive elements to
sell-outs and puppets of the British. This was used to create a misguided
discourse and to veil governance crisis that is at the core of Zimbabwe's
problems.

      The system has put in place a framework where they are the embodiment
of patriotism, the national interest and the sole conscience of the people
inspite of glaring evidence to the contrary. The system has put in place a
legal framework which bans demonstration, strikes, mass actions and any form
of political activity although it is public knowledge that the law is
applied selectively in this regard.

      The system has virtually closed all democratic avenues of political
expression and there are very few options, if any, left for the
pro-democracy movement.

      The only viable option left, in my view, is to go outside this
framework but remaining within the constitution, defective as it may be.

      This means confrontation with the government but it must not be
fragmented and isolated confrontation. For the final push to be effective we
must broaden our base of operation. A fundamental tenet of the strategy is
totality of involvement.

      No fragmentation or distraction from the mainstream of events should
be allowed.

      As people existing in a continuous struggle for truth and justice, we
have to examine and interrogate old concepts, values and systems. Having
found the right answers we should then work for consciousness among all
people to make it possible for us to proceed towards putting these answers
into effect. In this process, we have to evolve our own schemes, forms and
strategies to suit the need and situation, always keeping in mind our
fundamental values and beliefs.

We must stop dreaming that one day the President will have an on the
road to Damascus experience and embark on a genuine democratisation process.
There must be political pressure upon political pressure and this will
inevitably lead to genuine dialogue, talks, conferences and conventions
until the will of the people triumphs. The will of the people is destined to
triumph anyway because the voice of the people is the voice of God! We must
avoid going to the table before we revive and increase our bargaining power
through mass political activity. The late Kempton Makamure used to tell me
that "you can not win on the conference table what you have lost on the
battlefield of political struggle" and this is the essence of the final push
strategy. I have already mentioned that it may not be the final push and
that more pushes may be needed.

If there are to be any talks or mass political activity, the MDC must
get all progressive forces on board and this also means broadening the
issues to be discussed. One major flaw underlying the management paradigm of
the troika is its over concentration on ZANU (PF) and the MDC whereas our
crisis is complex and multi-faceted. It would be naïve and parochial for the
MDC to ignore sideline and therefore antagonise civil society in any deal
with ZANU (PF) and this is tantamount to sowing seeds of its own
destruction. The political implication is that even if the MDC comes into
power, it will have to face the music of a hostile civil society. The MDC
must not forget that their success in the June 2000 parliamentary elections
has been out of a harmonious working relationship with civil society,
especially the NCA which they now seem to despise.

Minority parties like NAGG, ZAPU, ZANU and others which were
complaining of marginalisation from the talks must be able to forge amongst
themselves an alliance and present their case as a coalition. If they remain
fragmented, divided and uncoordinated, they will only have themselves to
blame. Noticeably most, if not all, of them are members of the NCA and in my
view, the most appropriate thing for them to do is to rally behind the NCA
in demanding that the talks between ZANU (PF) and MDC encompass
constitutional reform. That is the only viable way to ensure that their
interests and those of other minority groups are protected.

      So fellow countrymen, meanwhile lets forget about the talks and brace
up for the final push. Genuine constructive engagement will come later. The
fact that the establishment is still arrogant enough to impose
pre-conditions for dialogue means that it has not yet been hit below the
belt and that we still have some work to do. The MDC and the rest of the
progressive movement must present a common action front to confront the
powers that be. Let us show the will and ability to dialogue amongst
ourselves as the pro-democracy movement and come up with a co-ordinated
action plan supported by a wide mass base. We cannot afford to waste any
more time and to lose any single battle. While it may be relevant now to
talk about the establishment in relation to us, we must not make this our
pre-occupation, for it can be a negative exercise. As we proceed further
towards the achievement of our goals let us talk more about ourselves and
our struggle and less about the establishment.

      Brace up for the final push - the Zion train is coming our way

      ABOUT THE AUTHOR: ISAYA SITHOLE IS A HARARE-BASED LAWYER AND CAN BE
CONTACTED ON HIS MOBILE NO. 091 382 977

      For President Mugabe's spokesman George Charamba to compare Mugabe
with other presidents and former presidents and heads of government like
Hosni Mubarak, Muammar Gaddafi, Bill Clinton and Margaret Thatcher in his
slovenly attempt to justify Mugabe's unbridled extravagance is insulting
Zimbabweans to the marrow.

      To start with, Mugabe is in a class of his own. Close to this class
are other like-minded rulers like Sam Nujoma, Fidel Castro, Olusegun
Obasanjo and Bakili Muluzi, so for Charamba to start seeing any similarities
between Mugabe and the likes of Mubarak, Gaddafi, and Clinton, is the worst
will-o' the-wisp any person could have.

      The leaders in question could afford packing their official cars with
their paraphernalia like socks and the like on their several junkets because
their economies could afford it. The question here is: can Zimbabwe afford
this opulent life Mugabe loves? The answer should be obvious to any
right-thinking Zimbabwe.

      If the facts about the story that Charamba, for once, confirmed that
Mugabe last week took with him his official Benz to South Africa, then CZ
starts wondering whether the rulers of this country really appreciate the
gravity of the economic problems before them.

      People do not care about where Mugabe takes his car with him, but the
inordinate costs attached. If he and his Merc are as inseparable as Siamese
twins, he should stay put at State House because poor Zimbabwe cannot afford
his lifestyle.

      Surely to spend 90 litres of scarce fuel on just below 200 km is an
ulcerous waste by a ruler who should be leading this country by example. If
Mugabe's Merc alone needs that much, what about the cavalcade of outriders
that accompany him where ever he feels like going? Some people are really
sitting pretty.

      Which school did ZBC's Regis Mhako attend? His former English language
teachers should surely be cringing in shame every time he files a news story
from his base in Bindura. For the fellow is a walking scandal. His
pronunciations are execrable to say the least. Although ZBC has announced
plans to implement its controversial 100 percent local content, that is no
justification for pronouncing English words the way this bureau chief does.

      If the Queen Mother was a bit finicky about the purity of her
language, this fellow would be hanged for bastardising her language and
whoever did the auditions would be sued to poverty.

      It looks like the auditions were done at the Border Gezi National
Youth Training Centre in Mount Darwin. Drs Mahoso and Chivaura would to do
the nation a great service if they take this fellow aside for a day or two
and give extra lessons.

      In other parts of the world such carelessness would not be tolerated.
In fact one would be fired on the spot. Ask my colleagues in Jalalabad!

Friday May 23, 2003 07:50 - (SA)

Zimbabwe's President Robert Mugabe on Thursday urged his supporters to
debate his succession but expressed dismay that some officials had already
started consulting occult and supernatural specialists over the issue.

"Some people are consulting spirit mediums, diviners. This has nothing to do
with spirit mediums, but it's all about the will of the people. It should be
debated," he told thousands of his loyalists in the region that is his party
stronghold, speaking in the local Shona language.

He said he would draw confidence from knowing he had "strong" people around
him, not puppets.

"But for this country to be taken over by (British Prime Minister) Tony
Blair, no, not over my or our dead bodies. We can never be a colony again,"
he told a rally in this rural Tsakare village, some 160 kilometres (100
miles) northeast of the capital.

Mugabe contended that opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai is a puppet of the
former colonial power Britain.

He also accused gold mining firms, some cabinet ministers and foreign
diplomats of involvement in illegal gold trading deals and externalising
earnings from gold sales.

He said that there was a lot of illegal gold panning across the country and
that the gold was not being sold to the central bank, but being smuggled out
of the country by foreign diplomats and cabinet ministers which he did not
name.

"We are told there are... ministers involved in buying gold from panners.
Even diplomats clandestinely buy gold from them," Mugabe said at a rally
attended by about 7,000 party loyalists.

Mugabe said some transnational firms involved in gold mining were taking the
desperately needed foreign exchange earned from the gold exports out of the
country.

Gold has been the second top earner of foreign exchange after tobacco in
Zimbabwe.

"The monies from the gold that is being exported, is not being remitted
here.... Be truthful, be honest, we don't want crooks," Mugabe said.

Mugabe was addressing the first of a series of rallies lined to assess the
recovery levels from last year's drought that hit the country.

He was also preparing for a national review of the country's controversial
land reform scheme, in which land was taken from whites and given to blacks.

He admitted that some of the land that had been allocated to blacks was now
lying idle, especially under the commercial farming scheme, saying the
uptake rate had been low.

"Those who have been allocated and taken up their land are few, the majority
have not taken up their land, the land is lying idle," he said.

He said that land that has not been put into production would be forfeited
to the state and re-allocated.

Mugabe said the review will also track down officials who awarded themselves
more than one farm or more land than permissible, and take up the excess
land.

AFP

Back to the Top
Back to Index

SABC

Mugabe says land policy will be reviewed
May 23, 2003, 08:15

            Robert Mugabe has warned that black people who have been
allocated land but are not using it productively, will forfeit it to the
state. The Zimbabwean president was speaking during the first of a series of
rallies aimed at addressing the country's drought problem.

            Mugabe said his government would re-allocate un-used land to
people who will use it. He confirmed that there would be a national review
of the country's land reform policy, which has seen many farms taken from
white farmers and given to blacks.

            Mugabe said much of the land had not been taken and was lying
idle. During the rally, Mugabe again hinted that he might retire soon,
urging his supporters to debate a successor.

Back to the Top
Back to Index

The Mercury (SA)

     A new challenge for African politics
      May 23, 2003

      By Chris Landsberg and Shaun Mackay

      The AU has appropriated the power to intervene in the affairs of
member states should they violate human rights or become a source of
instability. The crucial question now, ahead of African Day on Sunday, is
whether - and how - it will exercise this power.

      THE Organisation of African Unity, Africa's premier multilateral
institution from 1963 to 2002, has been superseded by the African Union.

      While the OAU failed in numerous significant respects, one of its
major achievements was to bring the challenge of attaining liberation in
Africa to a close. The challenge to its successor is to introduce norms,
values and mechanisms for democratic governance into African politics and
interstate relations. One of the more radical departures by the AU has been
the introduction of the notion of legitimate intervention in the affairs of
member states.

      While non-interference in domestic affairs was a golden rule of the
OAU, the AU is seeking - rather ambitiously - to defend and protect human
rights even should this require such intervention.

      Thus its Constitutive Act of union gives it "legislative powers to act
against member states acting against the ethos of good governance and the
rule of law'" on the following grounds:

a.. A violation of constitutionalism - ie, the toppling of a
legitimate government by unconstitutional means, such as a coup d'etat;

a.. Genocide;

      a.. Internal "instability" which threatens the stability of a
subregion or the continent.

      Intervening in such circumstances will be regarded as a defence of
peace and democracy. As the keystone of this new emerging structure of
continental governance, the AU is seen by some as being in a unique position
to promote a whole new set of norms and values which emphasise that the
principles of "sovereignty" and "non-interference" are not sacrosanct, and
that the norms of democracy and human rights that were not cornerstones of
the OAU's founding charter are indispensable.

      But many developed countries do not believe that Africans are willing
to police themselves, and the muted response to the crisis in Zimbabwe by
the AU, other multilateral institutions, and leading African countries has
not helped to dispel those fears.

      Indeed, given the OAU's dismal record in this regard, the AU will have
to work hard to prove its efficacy and viability. It will need to garner the
necessary political will to intervene, and the capacity to do so.

      This may be easier said than done. It will require not just the
commitment of the AU secretariat but also that of key powers on the
continent, such as Nigeria, Egypt, Libya, South Africa and others.

      This is not only because they will need to provide the necessary
resources, but also because, without their political support, the doctrine
will be dead in the water. Of course, the recent debacle in the UN
surrounding intervention in Iraq brings into sharp focus the potential for
states, especially stronger states, to disregard multilateral forums in
pursuing agendas that may affect an entire region.

      One positive development to emerge from the debacle over Iraq is that,
despite the fact that the UN was unable to persuade the US to abide by a UN
decision on that country, it did not allow itself to be used to rubber-stamp
US actions.

      This must have sent a clear message that the UN would not allow itself
to be used as a legitimising instrument for the objectives of any one state,
even if that state was the most powerful in the world. At some stage, the AU
may find itself in a similar situation. Will the African states which have
supported the ideal of multilateralism as expressed via the UN accept this
when their own interests are at stake?

      Beyond this, a major task for the AU will be to convince member states
of the need to pool some of their sovereignty to it and its organs,
including the proposed African parliament. President Thabo Mbeki recently
underscored this point in an address to a conference of representatives of
churches in 23 African countries when he said that "the idea of sovereignty
is a matter we need to look at. We must be able to act more forcefully
together as Africans to take forward the whole idea of African unity."

      He added that the AU's Constitutive Act had "extra-territorial
provisions", enabling it to intervene in countries where it was convinced
that genocide or other crimes against humanity were being committed.

      AU members have signed numerous protocols binding them to democratic
governance, but few have observed them in practice.

      No doubt, some will enter the AU in the belief that it too will become
a "toothless tiger". It is up to the AU, its secretariat and instruments
such as the organ on peace and security to set in motion the conventions and
practices that will signify the body is serious.

      The AU has an opportunity to distinguish itself from its predecessor
in the way in which it chooses to handle the issues that bedevil the
continent. One of its most distinguishing features, at least on paper, is
its commitment to intervention. The major task for the AU in this regard
will be to garner both the necessary political will to make such
interventions where circumstances require, and to build its capacity to
enforce them.

a.. Chris Landsberg is the director of the Centre for Policy Studies
at Wits University and Shaun Mackay its manager.

Back to the Top
Back to Index

A sad day at Lord's

Yesterday saw the start of England's controversial Test match against
Zimbabwe. We sent two journalists: Andrew Meldrum, the Guardian's man in
Harare until last weekend when he was dramatically kicked out; and Mduduzi
Mathuthu, who suffered under Mugabe and now lives in exile in this country

Friday May 23, 2003
The Guardian

The verdant green manicured pitch. The clipped, chipper accents and the
cheering schoolchildren. The crack of leather on willow. It all combined at
the opening of the England versus Zimbabwe test match at Lord's yesterday to
convey the atmosphere of fair play and civilised normality that cricket
embodies.
But that is the problem. There is nothing civilised or fair about what is
going on in Zimbabwe. The thought that the Zimbabwe team's tour of England
is being used by Robert Mugabe to project an image that things are normal
and acceptable in Zimbabwe rankled so much that I could not enjoy the match
at Lord's.

When the schoolchildren booed the anti-Mugabe protesters who ran onto the
pitch, I found myself wanting to go over to them to explain that Zimbabweans
are being beaten and tortured by Mugabe's police. I wanted to engage in
heated exchanges about the morality of handing Mugabe positive publicity on
a platter, especially with MCC members who sauntered around wearing their
striped ties.

Certainly the performance of the Zimbabwe side left a lot to be desired. The
team did their best and were energetic and spirited. But their inexperience
was glaringly obvious. This was not the best team that Zimbabwe could have
fielded. Rather, it was the team that the Mugabe regime found acceptable as
its ambassadors. It is a very young team, with an average age of 23, and
inexperienced. Not only inexperienced in sport, they are inexperienced in
life and they will follow the instructions of the Zimbabwe Cricket Union to
avoid saying anything about the political or economic situation in the
country.

The team playing at Lord's is a team that has been purged of any element
that is critical of the Mugabe order. The ZCU encouraged several senior
cricket players to retire, or just sacked them. Former captains Andy Flower,
and Alistair Campbell, Guy Whittall and Craig Wishart, who all performed
well in the recent World Cup cricket tournament, have left the team.

Worst of all, Henry Olonga, who at 26 was just reaching his peak in cricket,
is no longer on the team. In fact, he cannot even go back to Zimbabwe.
Instead of playing for Zimbabwe, he spent yesterday up in the incongruous
fish-eye on stilts that is Lord's media centre working as a commentator for
cricket. I am sure that Henry did a great job of explaining the actions on
the field. But his rightful position is playing for Zimbabwe, and as the
stirring role model that he has been for so many aspiring young Zimbabweans.

Henry showed great courage and moral leadership when he and Andy Flower wore
black armbands at Zimbabwe's first World Cup match to mourn the death of
democracy in Zimbabwe. He has gone through a torrid time of threats and
harassment. No matter what Mugabe's lackies on the ZCU do to erase his
image, Henry Olonga will remain a hero to the ordinary Zimbabwean.

The most infuriating part of the match was when I picked up my programme and
saw a lengthy interview with English Cricket Board chief executive Tim Lamb.
He, of course, said sport and politics should remain separate. I agree.
That's why I do not think that Mugabe should be the patron of the ZCU or
that the board should be packed with his fervent supporters and sycophants.
Lamb says Zimbabwe's cricketers should not be treated any differently than
tennis players, golfers or other sportsmen from Zimbabwe. I say that those
other athletes do not curry favour with the Mugabe regime in the way that
the cricket administration does.

Most maddening is Lamb's assertion: "Why should cricket be treated
differently from other sports or, indeed, in relation to the 300-plus
companies that are continuing to trade with Zimbabwe with nobody batting an
eyelid." My riposte to that is that virtually every single one of those
companies has stood up in opposition to Mugabe. The companies and, most
importantly, their thousands of employees have participated in the
anti-government national strikes that have closed the country down twice in
the past two months. Those British-based companies have encouraged good,
accountable business practices and values in a way that the ZCU and the ECB
have not. I agree with critics that the ECB has made a "grubby deal" with
the ZCU.

Lamb went even further, hotly defending the ZCU and saying that Mugabe was
just a figurehead patron and that Andy Flower was encouraged to extend his
contract. Surely Lamb knows that Flower had voiced his unhappiness with the
situation in Zimbabwe and also at the highly political machinations behind
the scenes in the ZCU. It is most unseemly of Lamb to sully the image of
cricket by justifying the unjustifiable.

I snapped shut my programme in disgust and looked around for a cricket
official to argue with.

The most enlivening and fun part of my day at Lord's was outside at the
determined but festive demonstration by hundreds of Zimbabwean exiles
committed to exposing the Mugabe government. I saw old friends and made new
ones. I laughed at the poster that read, "Tim Lamb is Mugabe's Lord Haw
Haw". The protesters decided not to spend the money to go into the stands,
but instead to use that money to help feed hungry Zimbabweans.

I was happiest with those people, who I believe are showing a true
commitment to values of good sportsmanship and fair play. I agreed with some
of them to go out and streak at the Lord's pitch, wearing nothing but a
black armband or two. That is the only way I could have fun at the Zimbabwe
test. AM

'The killing is a little local difficulty to these cricketers'

The only Zimbabwean flag flying at Lords cricket ground was the official
flag. It was posted high on the grandstand and a few steps below sat Heath
Streak, the Zimbabwe cricket captain, who constantly opened his mouth wide
like an overfed hippopotamus. From where I was seated, I thought he was
laughing. It was just another day and another cricket match for this
extraordinary man whose very presence at this event was, put simply,
numbing.

My fascination with the career of the 29-year-old fast bowler dates back to
2001, when his father Denis's farm, in the Turk Mine area of Matabeleland,
was designated by the government for resettlement, so he and his family
would have to leave. A few days after the property was listed, Streak
resigned as cricket captain. I was working at the Bulawayo bureau of the
country's leading daily independent, the Daily News, and I latched on to the
story, drawing attention to what he later called a "coincidence". As the
Daily News hit the streets the next morning, with a story headed Farm
Designation Bowls Streak, he rang the office and arranged to meet me. He
assured me that his resignation was not linked to their farm's seizure by
Mugabe's government. He revealed during the same discussion that he feared
the story would cause the confrontation between the farmers and the
government to escalate.

But it wasn't too long before another extra-ordinary coincidence took place
in the life of Heath Streak that would forever change my opinion of him. In
lightning time, the farm was de-listed, and - you guessed it - Streak
reclaimed the captain's armband. Watching him open Zimbabwe's bowling
yesterday was like a date with Mugabe's ambassador.

Outside the ground were scores of Zimbabweans driven into exile by the
regime. There's no doubt that Streak and his delegation could hear the
whistling, or that they saw the protesters who ran on to the field. The
chilly weather would not dampen their determination to send a message to the
suited hypocrites who sign grubby deals for their entertainment while
Mugabe's shock troops are battering people into submission in Zimbabwe.
Having been arrested on six occasions and spent several nights in Mugabe's
jails myself, I knew just how they felt.

But the hypocrisy of playing in such an event was lost on these cricketers
whose only concern is money and the lush green pitches. Nothing will make
them boycott a match, except maybe a bad pitch. The mere sight of them
smiling provoked a swirl of rage in me.

For here I was, looking at missionaries for a murderous and isolated regime
whose survival is guaranteed by such commonsense-defying actions. The
killing of political opponents and the starvation of millions in Zimbabwe
are but little local difficulties for these cricketers who remain fiercely
loyal to Mugabe, their patron.

By exporting entertainment to a place where thousands of Zimbabweans have
fled for their safety and behaving as if everything is normal, the
Zimbabwean delegation and the blundering England and Wales Cricket Board
officials have launched a propaganda salvo for Mugabe. He will dutifully
repay them with more blood.

Attempts to justify the Zimbabweans' presence here have been shockingly
lacking in reason. Sport can never be divorced from politics, particularly
when the patron of said sport has ordered the unprovoked killing of 20,000
native Ndebeles and is responsible for a famine that could kill millions.

If the dead could talk, a message would today be reaching Heath Streak at
Lords from Tichaona Chiminya, the opposition leader's driver, who was doused
in paraffin and set alight by Mugabe's supporters in 2001. And Gloria Olds,
a 78-year-old farmer from Nyamandlovu, and her son, Martin, killed one after
the other in 2000 and 2001, would almost certainly have something to say
about Streak and his team embedding with the regime that cut their lives
short. MM

Back to the Top
Back to Index

Business Report

How many toilet rolls will Z$100 get you?

Some creative marketers pulled a stunt at our office last week. They sent
two packages - one to me and one to our production manager, Jeremy Miles.

Mine contained only Z$100; his just had a roll of toilet paper. Very strange
gifts to receive.

We haven't heard from the marketing firm to explain what its aim was, but
I'd bet those Zimbabwe dollars are worth less than the roll of toilet paper.

What do you think? One hundred Zimbabwe dollars versus a roll of one ply?
Place your bets.

I went down to my local supermarket to check the price of toilet paper. For
500 sheets of one-ply house-branded paper, (probably as cheap as it gets in
South Africa) you'll pay R2.29. Still think the Z$100 is worth more? Let's
see.

According to the currency cross tables, one Zimbabwe dollar is worth just
R0.009. As hard as it is to believe, that Z$100 note is worth just 90c, less
than half the price of a roll of the cheapest toilet paper in South Africa!

Zimbabwe remains our major trading partner in the region, but the damage
done to that country is unbelievable, as is the negative perception it has
created for southern Africa as a whole.

Rhodesia was once described as the jewel in Africa's crown by Cecil John
Rhodes. I think if Rhodes saw the simple equation above, he would turn in
his grave. In fact, the thought that this is what the resource-rich country
has turned into would probably sicken him to his stomach.

It is unfortunate that globally we have been tarnished with the same brush
as Zimbabwe for no apparent reason other than sentiment and
short-sightedness
.

But President Thabo Mbeki's breakthrough talks, together with Malawi's
Bakili Muluzi and Nigeria's Olusegun Obasanjo, could slowly start rectifying
the ludicrous link between us and this recalcitrant distant cousin on our
border.

South Africa's recent global bond take-up, upgrades by rating agencies and
the strengthening rand are already reflecting this new thread of actionabili
ty in African politics.

Once President Robert Mugabe is out, some real progress will be made. I
don't think he'll go easily, but I believe we are on track to at least edge
him out sideways.

He will be edged out because he does not stand for the policies most of
Africa now stands for and has signed on the dotted line to implement.

He does not stand for the tenets of nationhood espoused by the modern
African leaders, who employ social as well as individual, capitalistic and
democratic ideologies in their political philosophy.

There will be no place for dictators in this climate. They will be sidelined
by a new breed of African government.

I believe the ANC's strategic team are right in their resolve. And it is
great to see it actually happening within just one year.

In an efficient African model, Z$100 would be worth R100.

Imagine how much toilet paper you could buy with that. - Evan Pickworth

Evan Pickworth is the financial editor of Fleet Street Publications in South Africa

Back to the Top
Back to Index

Daily News

War vets vow to crush mass action

5/23/03 12:37:37 AM (GMT +2)

By Farai Mutsaka Chief Reporter

VETERANS of Zimbabwe's war of liberation yesterday warned that they
would use "military force" against anti-government protesters next month, in
what analysts have described as an attempt to cow the populace in the run-up
to mass demonstrations planned by the opposition and civic groups.

      Officials within the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC)
and civic society have indicated that they are planning combined mass
protests that are scheduled for the middle of June.

      Patrick Nyaruwata, the chairman of the Zimbabwe National Liberation
War Veterans' Association (ZNLWVA), told journalists in Harare that his
organisation would use force to stop the street protests.

      "We have stood aside and observed you (the MDC) for too long and this
time we will not. This time, using our own military experience, we will
mobilise against you. I do not mince my words. The consequences for any mass
action will be grave," he said.

      "We will co-ordinate with the state security agents to fight you off.
Remember most top security agents in defence, the police and the CIO
(Central Intelligence Organisation) are war veterans, and we will be
co-ordinating with them," he added.

      State Security Minister Nicholas Goche, under whose control the CIO
falls, declined to comment on the war veterans' leader's threats.

      "Why do you want me to comment on that? I have no comment. I won't
assist you," he said, before switching off his mobile phone.

      Defence Minister Sydney Sekeramayi, under whose ministry the war
veterans fall, also said he could not comment on the matter.

      "I have been out of Harare. I cannot comment on things that I did not
personally hear, I'm sorry," he told The Daily News.

      Home Affairs Minister Kembo Mohadi could not be reached for comment
last night.

      Officials of the ZNLWVA at the Press conference would yesterday not
provide details on what "military force" they planned to use against
Zimbabweans who might participate in the demonstrations next month.

      But ZNLWVA secretary-general Endy Mhlanga told The Daily News that it
was common knowledge that MDC youths would be armed during street protests,
adding that his organisation had a plan to deal with them.

      "Ian Smith (former Rhodesian prime minister) was armed to the teeth,
but we defeated him. We are prepared to fight again using all the experience
we garnered during the war to defend the ordinary people from this unlawful
violence," Mhlanga said.

      He added: "We have a plan in place and we will deal with them in a
very decisive way. Everything has been put in place. We will use the same
tactics we used during the farm invasions and during the war to crush the
demonstrations.

      "We have been mobilising our 55 000 members throughout the country,
starting in Harare, and we have been telling them to be prepared to risk
their lives once again and assist militarily for the final battle to defend
our sovereignty."

      The war veterans played a critical role in the invasion of white-owned
farms, which began in 2000 and caused massive instability in the
agricultural sector, the backbone of Zimbabwe's economy.

      Several white farmers and farm workers were killed during the
invasions that have led to the displacement of thousands of farm workers,
most of who are now destitute.

      Commentators said the war veterans' threats were part of attempts to
discourage public participation in the proposed mass action, which is
expected to include marches on President Robert Mugabe's State House
residence and Munhumutapa offices.

      The public overwhelmingly supported calls for a mass job stayaway
called by the MDC in March and another organised by the Zimbabwe Congress of
Trade Unions last month.

      MDC secretary-general Welshman Ncube yesterday said the war veterans'
threats were an attempt to intimidate the public from responding in a
similar fashion to the proposed mass action, which the opposition party says
is the "final push" to resolve the Zimbabwe crisis.

      He denied that the MDC was arming supporters, saying: "It is patently
false that the MDC is arming anyone. We have no soldiers to arm and we have
not trained anybody in any form of combat.

      "This is clearly calculated to intimidate the people of Zimbabwe from
undertaking peaceful mass action to free themselves from this rogue regime.
We are not afraid and the people should not be afraid. We decline this
invitation to engage in any form of violence. They can shoot us if they
want, but we will be unarmed."

Back to the Top
Back to Index

Daily News

Midlands student leader suspended for distributing MDC mass action
material

5/23/03 12:47:01 AM (GMT +2)

From Zerubabel Mudzingwa in Gweru

ONWELL Marasha, the president of the Students' Representative Council
at the Midlands State University, was suspended yesterday after he was
allegedly caught distributing the opposition Movement for Democratic Change
(MDC)'s mass action pamphlets on campus.

      Professor Ngwabi Bhebe, the university's vice-chancellor, said the
suspension was with immediate effect.

      Marasha was ejected from campus and barred from attending lectures
until he had been cleared by the students' disciplinary committee.

      Part of the suspension letter reads: "On 14 and 15 May 2003, you
breached Section 3.1.4 of the Ordinance in that you engaged in conduct
reasonably likely to be harmful to the interest of the university by
distributing pamphlets and whistles to other students."

      "An investigation into your case will be carried out as a matter of
urgency and you shall be called to a Student Disciplinary Committee set up
in terms of section 27 of the State University in the Midlands Act Chapter
25.21".

      Bhebe alleges that on 14 May, Marasha and a group of other
unidentified students were caught distributing opposition party material and
urging other students to join in the MDC's planned mass action scheduled for
next month.

      Last week, Marasha and three other student leaders were arrested and
fined $3 000 each for contravening a section of Miscellaneous Offences Act.

      But Marasha denied the charge yesterday and alleged that he was just
being victimised for being a student leader.

      "We just paid the fines so that we could secure our release from
police custody. The alleged material was distributed by people from outside
Gweru and there is no evidence linking me to the commission of the crime,"
said Marasha.

Back to the Top
Back to Index

Daily News

Mutare journalist removed from remand

5/23/03 12:49:52 AM (GMT +2)

Own Correspondent

STANLEY Karombo, 29, a reporter with SW Radio Africa and a
correspondent with the Voice of America (VOA), facing a charge under the
Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA), was on Tuesday
removed from remand by Mutare magistrate, Milton Serima.

      This was after his lawyer, Peter Makombe, had argued that AIPPA was
being challenged at the Supreme Court, and it was improper for the
journalist to remain on remand.

      SW Radio Africa is an independent Zimbabwean radio station that beams
from the United Kingdom.

      Makombe said: "There is no need for Karombo to remain on remand until
the Supreme Court delivers the judgement on the Act."

      Makombe said Karombo's cellphone and audio recorder that were seized
by the police on 19 March when he was arrested should be returned.

      Karombo was arrested after he allegedly attempted to interview the
police for a story he intended to file to the VOA radio station .

      The police immediately confiscated his audio recorder and cellphone,
which he was using.

      Karombo, who spent five days in police cells, claims that he was
beaten up by the police before they went and searched his house for
"broadcasting equipment".

Back to the Top
Back to Index

Daily News

Shortage of blood

5/23/03 12:51:38 AM (GMT +2)

From Sandra Mujokoro in Bulawayo

SUPPLIES of blood to most hospitals in Bulawayo have been erratic
during the last few weeks because of the critical shortage of fuel.

      Emmanuel Masvikeni, the public relations manager of National Blood
Transfusion Services (NBTS), said the national blood reserves had only 700
units of blood when 3 500 units were needed at any given time.

      He said supplies had been erratic over the last few months due to
various economic problems being experienced in the country. He said the
reasons were beyond the NBTS control.

      "The biggest problem we are experiencing is the non availability of
fuel and as a result, we have had to cancel bleeding sessions," said
Masvikeni.

      The organisation normally use mobile units to move around centres such
as schools and clinics in the country collecting blood from donors.

      He said the NBTS was finding it difficult to get round the fuel
crisis. "Industrial actions in the various sectors of the economy and job
stayaways have also compromised blood collection activities," said
Masvikeni.

      He said despite the just ended school holidays, adults were reluctant
to donate blood because of fear of knowing their HIV status. This, he said,
led to seasonal shortages.

      Operations at Bulawayo's biggest hospitals, Mpilo and the United
Bulawayo Hospital have been seriously affected by the recurrent blood
shortages.

      Doctors at Mpilo, where some patients needing blood have been detained
since the beginning of this month, are prescribing iron sulphate tablets.

      Zulu Mahlangu, the deputy medical superintendent at Mpilo Central
Hospital confirmed that they had a serious shortage of blood at the
hospital. Patients in need of blood transfusions at Mpilo had been waiting
since the beginning of this month.

      George Nkomo of Entumbane, whose wife had been admitted at Mpilo
hospital and was waiting for a blood transfusion since last week, said they
were told to keep checking with the hospital. They were initially told to
buy the blood transfusion kit for $ 2000 as the hospital had run out of the
equipment.

Back to the Top
Back to Index

Daily News

ZESA workers press for Gata's ouster

5/23/03 12:52:13 AM (GMT +2)

Staff Reporter

REPRESENTATIVEs of striking Zimbabwe Electricity Supply Authority
(ZESA) workers yesterday vowed to continue with their action until their
management agreed to their demands of a pay hike and the removal of Sydney
gata as the executive chairman of the power utility.

      In a telephone interview from Kadoma where ZESA management and workers
are negotiating to break the impasse which threatens electricity supplies in
the country, Ian Munjoma, the general secretary of the Zimbabwe Electricity
Energy Workers' Union, said there was little progress on the salary
negotiations.

      "The management is now offering 30 percent but we have expressed our
displeasure with such peanuts," he said.

      "Workers have mandated us to get to the $125 000 minimum wage mark in
tandem with the devaluation of our currency. The cost of living has risen to
unacceptable levels and we can't accept anything less. The $47 696 minimum
wage suggested by the government is also unacceptable."

      Munjoma expressed the hope that an agreement would be reached by today
because they agreed to negotiate for two days.

      ZESA workers downed tools on Monday demanding a salary hike and Gata's
dismissal because of his alleged misuse of ZESA pension funds.

      The strike has spread to other parts of the country as artisans and
other skilled staff in Masvingo have downed tools demanding salary
increments.

      A member of the workers' committee who refused to be named said
skilled workers and general hands in Masvingo had joined the strike
paralysing operations at the country's sole power utility.

      This week national strategic institutions such as the Harare
International Airport and Morton Jaffray Water Works experienced power
interruptions.

      Managers were reported to be at work and were doing all the work
including office cleaning.

      Said a member of the workers committee: "We are not going to go back
to work unless our demands are met." Workers in Mutare, Bulawayo, Hwange and
several other stations have since joined the strike.

      The workers yesterday petitioned Amos Midzi, the Minister of Energy
and Power Development and Emmerson Mnangagwa, the Speaker of Parliament,
demanding Gata's dismissal.

      ZESA has maintained that the strike was premature and against the true
spirit of negotiations and it has declared it illegal.

Back to the Top
Back to Index

Daily News

Made refuses to name top land beneficiaries

5/23/03 12:55:08 AM (GMT +2)

Staff Reporter

DR JOSEPH Made, the Minister of Lands, Agriculture and Rural
Resettlement this week refused to disclose in Parliament the names of
Cabinet ministers and judges who have benefited under the controversial land
reform programme.

      Responding to a question from Tendai Biti, the MP for Harare East
(MDC), on which ministers and judges had acquired farms during the
fast-track programme, Made said: "That would be unprecedented, moreover,
when one applies for land we do not ask his status in society. We just give
land to Zimbabweans."

      But Willas Madzimure, the MP for Kambuzuma said Made was misleading
the House as the application form has a section which asks one's occupation.

      Said Biti: "What Made has said is not convincing. Ministers and judges
hold very important arms in the government."

      Shadreck Chipanga, the Zanu PF MP for Makoni East concurred with Biti
saying: "Apo ndinobvumirana newe. hatidi vanhu vanoita mafarm akawanda. (I
agree with you there. We do not want multiple farm ownership.)

Back to the Top
Back to Index


	An anti-Mugabe protestor invades the pitch

Signed by a concerned farmer