The ZIMBABWE Situation | Our
thoughts and prayers are with Zimbabwe - may peace, truth and justice prevail. |
Copyright © 2003, Dow
Jones Newswires
(From THE WALL STREET JOURNAL EUROPE) Get-togethers of
Commonwealth heads
of government were, frankly, becoming a bit of a bore
until Robert Mugabe
livened things up by resigning. Why anyone was surprised
at Zimbabwe's
withdrawal is a mystery. But that it was so controversial
speaks to the
bigger problems facing this old-world club of Britain and many
(though not
all) of its former colonies.
After years of
dithering over how to deal with Mr. Mugabe's land
confiscations and violent
rule, the 54-nation Commonwealth finally decided
to suspend Zimbabwe's
membership in 2002. The issue has divided the
organization ever since, with
South African President Thabo Mbeki pushing to
end Zimbabwe's suspension and
winning support from some other (though by no
means all) African
leaders.
It was left to Australian Prime Minister John Howard,
British Prime
Minister Tony Blair and Commonwealth Secretary General Don
McKinnon (a
former New Zealand foreign minister) to insist the suspension be
upheld. The
Commonwealth tried one last time to appease Mr. Mugabe,
nominating Nigeria's
President Olusegun Obasanjo to take over the role of
chief negotiator from
Mr. McKinnon, who is hated in Harare. But the
Zimbabwean leader wasn't
mollified by that gesture. "This is it. Zimbabwe
quits and quits it will
be," he reportedly said.
Had the ouster
happened earlier -- or been initiated by the
Commonwealth itself -- it might
have left time during this meeting for
discussion of important trade matters
or human rights issues and salvaged
some dignity for an organization that
seems to have lost sight of its raison
d'etre. Instead, the meeting was
dominated by hand-wringing over Zimbabwe
and in the end, it was Mr. Mugabe
who pulled the plug.
At least this move destroyed the fiction,
assiduously preserved by Mr.
Mbeki, that nogotiations with Mr. Mugabe could
somehow lead anywhere. Why
would a dictator who has no compunction about
brutalizing his own people,
ruining his economy and inviting starvation be
swayed by the entreaties of
an organization keen for his company and which
threatens nothing more than
finger-wagging and a torn-up membership
card?
Promoting the common good of the members of this organization
is its
ostensible reason for being and in places such as Nigeria, the
Commonwealth,
with the Queen at the symbolic center, is still regarded as
carrying weight.
But the way to help Zimbabweans and others suffering from
dictatorships is
never appeasement. Unless it can show more backbone against
the kinds of
abuses Robert Mugabe has made a career out of, the Commonwealth
will have
little clout, and offer little hope, to those who look to it most
for
support.
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
December 09,
2003 00:30 ET (05:30 GMT)
SABC
Mbeki to release statement on Zimbabwe
December 09, 2003, 07:16
AM
President Thabo Mbeki says he will release a statement clarifying his
views
on the Zimbabwean situation soon. Mbeki has come under fire from
opposition
parties after fighting a losing battle at the Commonwealth summit
in Nigeria
to re-admit Zimbabwe to the organisation following the extension
of its
suspension imposed after a widely-criticised election last
year.
Commenting for the first time on the issue since Zimbabwe quit
the
organisation on Sunday night, Mbeki said members of the Southern
African
Development Community met last night at the request of Joachim
Chissano, the
Mozambican President, to discuss the issue.
Meanwhile,
Stan Mudenge, Zimbabwe's External Minister, said the withdrawal
from the
Commonwealth was like 'escape from hell', as Britain and its 'white
allies'
had turned the organisation into a 'Zimbabwe lynching club'.
IOL
'Mugabe has defecated on this nation'
December 09 2003
at 02:22AM
By Basildon Peta
Zimbabweans fear
President Robert Mugabe's decision to pull out of the
Commonwealth will
worsen their plight and pave the way for more
repressive
measures.
"The decision means there is no end in sight for
our suffering - it means
more sanctions and suffering," said Charity
Charidza, who has been laid off
from her clerical job at a commercial
bank.
"I think Zimbabwe has everything to lose from getting out of
the
Commonwealth, while the Commonwealth has nothing to lose."
Mugabe
announced late on Sunday that he was pulling Zimbabwe out of
the
Commonwealth. This followed Commonwealth leaders' decision to
extend
Zimbabwe's suspension, imposed for electoral irregularities and human
rights
abuses.
The suspension decision was opposed by some African
leaders, including
President Thabo Mbeki.
Tafadzwa Muchagonei, a
Harare city council employee, said he feared there
would be more repression
as Mugabe would lash out at his opponents in
revenge for his humiliation at
the Commonwealth summit in Nigeria.
"We heard the Commonwealth was trying
to put in place some mechanism to help
us out of our problems," said
Muchagonei. "The decision to pull out means
everything falls apart and we
will be the biggest losers in the end."
Many Zimbabweans believe Mugabe
is playing to the African gallery, at cost
to his nation.
"(Mugabe) is
playing games at our expense," said Muchagonei. "He wants to
showcase himself
as a great African who can fight white people whom he
blames for his troubles
in the Commonwealth. But how is that going to help
us?"
Peter Mundoza,
a mechanic, said he was too angry to comment on
Mugabe's
decision.
"(Mugabe) has defecated on this nation for a long
time. It is high time he
was stopped... He has put us in this position where
we can't think of
anything except how to survive from day to day... How can I
be worried about
commenting on his move?"
Peter Chitsva, a former
teacher who has moved here from Zimbabwe and is
making a living by making and
selling crafts and stone sculptures, believes
Mugabe's decision is a "huge
non-event".
He had become used to Mugabe's taking bizarre decisions that
destroyed his
country, he said. Withdrawing from the Commonwealth would not
put food on
his table.
"All I know is that the suffering will continue
as long as Mugabe remains
with us," Chitsva said.
"The only statement
to do with Mugabe that I shall pay attention to is one
announcing his
departure from power... That day will be my Christmas."
Joshua Rusere, a
Zimbabwean political exile here, was angry that Mugabe had
chosen to pull out
of the Commonwealth, denying the organisation the
opportunity to expel him
for his dismal human rights record.
"It would have sent a strong signal
to Mugabe if he had been expelled by the
Commonwealth. It's unfortunate that
Commonwealth leaders are pleading with
him to stay in the club instead of
saying good riddance."
Other Zimbabweans said it was likely more
repression would follow Mugabe's
decision to pull out.
Mugabe would
have nothing to lose as he would no longer have to implement
democratic
reforms to satisfy Commonwealth members and gain readmission,
they
said.
Unconfirmed information on Monday was that Mugabe intended to
target the
remaining whites in Zimbabwe as part of his revenge
tactics.
A farmer, who declined to be named, said he had received
information that
the remaining white farmers would be driven off their
land.
Of about 4 500 white farmers before the controversial land seizures
began,
only about 400 remain.
Mugabe had been confident he would be
able to attend the Commonwealth heads
of government meeting and was upset
when Nigeria's President Olusegun
Obasanjo decided not to invite
him.
Many Zimbabweans think it was this humiliation that prompted him to
pull
out, although he claimed his decision was based on principle.
The
opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) said that the decision
to
withdraw was unconstitutional.
The MDC's secretary-general, Welshman
Ncube, said Mugabe had not consulted
his cabinet and this was in violation of
Zimbabwe's constitution.
Mugabe's supporters have hailed the
decision.
"We should pull out from all bodies dominated by white
countries and focus
on encouraging the development of black institutions like
the African
Union," a so-called war veteran, Alwed Matanda, said. "We could
even
encourage the formation of the equivalent of a United Nations for
black
countries."
British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said Mugabe's
decision was "entirely in
character, sadly".
"I think it's a decision
he and the Zimbabwean people will come to
regret." - Foreign
Service
.. This article was originally published on page 5 of
The Cape Times on
December 09, 2003
BBC
Mugabe to discuss cyber society
Zimbabwe's
President Robert Mugabe has travelled to the Swiss city of
Geneva to attend a
United Nations meeting on the information society.
The summit will
discuss how developments such as the internet have
affected the
world.
His trip comes two just days after he withdrew from the
Commonwealth.
The BBC's Alan Little in Geneva says that it is not
known whether he
will address the meeting but his presence is a calculated
act of defiance.
He is under sanctions from the European Union and
the United States
but is free to travel to Switzerland.
Information age
In Zimbabwe, 14 people were recently charged after
sending e-mails
calling for mass protests against Mr Mugabe's
government.
Zimbabwe's secret services have been trying for several
years to
acquire high-technology equipment to monitor online
communications.
A senior official from a Zimbabwean internet
service provider (ISP)
told BBC News Online that he did not believe the
authorities had yet
obtained this equipment.
The government
controls all local radio and television stations and
recently closed down the
only privately-owned daily newspaper.
Correspondents say this
leaves the internet as one of the only ways
for the opposition to spread its
message, although only a small number of
people have access to
computers.
BBC
African body slams Commonwealth
Southern African
countries have condemned Zimbabwe's continued
suspension from the
Commonwealth.
The Southern African Development Community said the
situation in
Zimbabwe called for engagement by the Commonwealth and not
isolation.
Zimbabwe's President Robert Mugabe pulled out of the
Commonwealth on
Sunday, following its decision to continue sanctions against
Zimbabwe.
Twelve members of the 14-nation SADC are also members of
the
Commonwealth.
They include Mozambique, South Africa and
Namibia, which all opposed
Zimbabwe's suspension.
Decision not
helpful
In a statement, SADC blamed the decision to prolong
Zimbabwe's
suspension on the "dismissive, intolerant and rigid attitude" of
some
Commonwealth members during discussions.
It said the
decision would not help alleviate Zimbabwe's difficulties,
but has instead
caused the withdrawal of Zimbabwe.
And in Zimbabwe, President
Mugabe has been urged to take further steps
against Britain and Australia,
which led the pro-sanctions group against
Zimbabwe.
Zimbabwe's
state-controlled Herald newspaper blamed the British Prime
Minister Tony
Blair for the country's deepening economic and political
crisis.
It said: "Kicking Britain out of Zimbabwe and withdrawing from London
will
have its repercussions, but it will be a worthwhile price to pay and a
true
test of sovereignty."
How it all started
Zimbabwe was
intially suspended from the Commonwealth in March 2002
following allegations
that Mr Mugabe had won by vote-rigging and
intimidating the
opposition.
At the annual summit in Nigeria which ended on Monday,
the
Commonwealth decided to extend the sanctions. Many African members
had
wanted Zimbabwe reinstated.
The SADC statement said the
Commonwealth had been prejudiced about
Zimbabwe before the
meeting.
"We are concerned that the matter of Zimbabwe's
participation seems to
have been pre-judged, considering the pronouncements
made by some members
prior to the finalisation of this matter," the statement
said.
The statement said there had been a lack of consensus
among
Commonwealth members, which it said would not augur well for the
body.
"We fear that this attitude is destined to undermine the
spirit that
makes the Commonwealth a unique family of nations."
In addition to Mozambique, Namibia and South Africa, the SADC
Commonwealth
members are: Botswana, Lesotho, Malawi, Mauritius, Seychelles,
Swaziland,
Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe.
From The Times (UK), 9 December
Commonwealth struggles to show united front as summit ends
From Michael Dynes in Abuja
The
Commonwealth struggled yesterday to maintain its unity in the face of
the
whirlwind unleashed by Zimbabwe’s unilateral withdrawal from the
54-member
body of former British colonies. As the heads of government summit
in Nigeria
ended, southern African leaders said that the decision to extend
Zimbabwe’s
suspension indefinitely had been demanded by Western members who
had little
understanding of Africa. "We are unhappy because we cannot accept
these
undemocratic procedures," President Chissano of Mozambique, who is
head of
the African Union, said. "We are going to express this as a group."
He
rebuked Britain, Australia and New Zealand for adopting "pressure
and
punishment" tactics against President Mugabe, while southern
African
countries had been striving to coax Zimbabwe back into the democratic
fold.
President Mwanawasa of Zambia said: "The Western countries bulldozed
the
suspension of Zimbabwe partly because of their economic muscle. I am
very
disappointed. We leave Abuja more divided than when we arrived." Jack
Straw,
the Foreign Secretary, said that Mr Mugabe would regret his decision
to
leave the Commonwealth, but added: "President Mugabe will not be there
for
ever and other countries have been out of the Commonwealth -
including
Nigeria for a period - and come back. I look forward to the time
when
Zimbabwe has a democratic government and is back in the
Commonwealth."
Mr Mugabe declared his intention to withdraw after
being formally told by
President Obasanjo of Nigeria that Zimbabwe’s 20-month
suspension had been
extended without limit because of its persistent record
of human rights
abuses. The announcement came as little surprise to the
summit. Mr Obasanjo
had been in constant touch with Mr Mugabe throughout the
four-day gathering
and had told him in advance that an extension of the
suspension was the most
likely outcome. Mr Mugabe had told Mr Obasanjo that
if that was the case, he
would have no choice but to withdraw. Mr Chissano
said that Britain,
Australia and Don McKinnon, the Commonwealth
Secretary-General, had shown
little understanding of the struggle by African
countries to build democracy
after having emerged only recently from the rule
of "abject racialist
states".
But Mr Chissano was himself the
target of a veiled reprimand from Mr
Obasanjo, who rejected the criticism
that the Commonwealth’s decision had
been "undemocratic". The six-member
committee set up to deal with Zimbabwe
had arrived at its decision by
consensus. "In a situation like this,
consensus means you may not always get
your own way," Mr Obasanjo said. He
said that he had pleaded with Mr Mugabe
to stay in the Commonwealth. "But Mr
Mugabe, rightly or wrongly, felt that
there were no grounds for extending
its suspension," Mr Obasanjo said.
"That’s how he felt. I tried to let him
know that whatever he feels, which I
understand, he should try to let the
Commonwealth assist him." The Zimbabwean
opposition Movement for Democratic
Change said that Mr Mugabe’s response was
to be expected. "We all knew that
he would react in a kneejerk manner," Paul
Themba Nyathi, its spokesman,
said. "After all, this is a man who specialises
in the destruction of his
own country."
From The Economist (UK), 8 December
What’s the Commonwealth for?
Robert Mugabe has angrily withdrawn Zimbabwe from the
Commonwealth. If the
club of mostly former British colonies cannot encourage
or enforce democracy
in its own members, then what is it for?
In a
new twist on Groucho Marx’s adage - that he would not like to be a
member of
a club that would have him as a member - Robert Mugabe has angrily
withdrawn
Zimbabwe’s membership of the Commonwealth. The move came in
response to
developments at the weekend, when the club of mainly former
British colonies
decided at its summit in the Nigerian capital, Abuja, to
continue the
southern African country’s suspension indefinitely. Zimbabwe
had been
suspended last year following a presidential election marred by
violence and
vote-rigging. Despite all the evidence that things have got
worse, not
better, Zimbabwe’s Commonwealth neighbours in southern Africa had
lobbied for
its reinstatement at the summit. But they failed in this, and in
a linked
attempt to unseat Don McKinnon, the Commonwealth’s
secretary-general and a
New Zealander, whom they see as a representative of
what they call the
"white" Commonwealth. But if the Commonwealth cannot even
agree on the
suspension of a country that has so egregiously departed from
the club’s
avowed aims of democracy and human rights, then what purpose does
it
serve?
The Commonwealth is indeed an odd creature. It is largely,
though not
purely, the remnants of Britain’s empire, which once covered a
quarter of
the world’s land surface. Zimbabwe’s withdrawal leaves the club
with 53
members - including Australia, Canada, India, Nigeria and South
Africa as
well as Britain - bound together in a voluntary association. When
the term
"commonwealth" was first used, in the 1920s, it was a means of
preserving
ties without the unpleasant colonial overtones that the word
"empire"
contained. The second world war, and in particular the fall of
Singapore in
1942, made it clear that Britain could no longer defend the
empire, and
removed much of the mystique of Britain’s power. During the 1950s
and 1960s,
the Commonwealth was one of the vehicles through which Britain
could manage
the decolonisation of countries it could no longer afford to
govern or
defend (most of which also happened to be hungering after
independence). For
the former colonies, there were tangible benefits. Britain
had special trade
arrangements that favoured, for example, the bananas from
its former
Caribbean dominions over those from Central America. Commonwealth
nationals
had the right to migrate to Britain - and many did. Commonwealth
citizens
who come to live in Britain still enjoy certain voting privileges
over other
foreigners, even over citizens of other European Union (EU)
countries.
However, many of these benefits have diminished in the 30
years since
Britain joined the predecessor to the EU. One of the EU’s main
purposes is
to be a regional free-trade zone, and Britain is now prohibited
from
granting its former colonies special privileges. Britain’s immigration
rules
have tightened up too, and most Commonwealth citizens now have
special
rights only if they already have relatives in Britain. The
Commonwealth
Business Council, a body funded by the club, insists that there
are still
significant trade and investment benefits. A spokesman asserts that
a shared
language (English is the first or second language throughout
the
Commonwealth), common-law tradition and accounting conventions deliver
a
"10-15% increase in efficiency in dealing with [other]
Commonwealth
[members]". This effect might not be as nebulous as it sounds.
Some
economists point to a difference between common-law and civil-law
economies.
Above all, the Commonwealth defines its purpose largely in
civil-society
terms: the promotion of democracy, human rights and sustainable
economic and
social development. In Britain, it seems to have a different
significance
for different people. Traditionalists like the link with the
lost empire.
Others think that the Commonwealth is a modern interpretation of
Rudyard
Kipling’s view that the colonies were the "white man’s burden" - that
the
West, in short, has a responsibility to civilise the developing world.
Some
on the left see the club as an unwanted relic, while others argue that
it is
a way for Britain to atone for its colonial sins and to offer practical
help
in the fraught process of democratisation.
Supporters of the
Commonwealth also point out that there are some beneficial
cultural links for
the former colonies. Britain’s universities retain strong
links with
Commonwealth countries, and the Foreign and Commonwealth Office,
Britain’s
foreign ministry, runs internship programmes, such as the
Chevening
Scholarship for Indian journalists, that are biased towards
Commonwealth
nationals. Moreover, though some criticise the Commonwealth for
being little
more than a talking shop, it is a talking shop that poor
countries (Zimbabwe
apart) seem to like. For former colonies, it is the most
important global
organisation that the United States does not dominate. And
though Britain’s
Queen Elizabeth is the head of the Commonwealth, Britain
has no special
status. Indeed, Tony Blair, Britain’s prime minister, who had
been disgusted
at the idea that Zimbabwe’s suspension might be lifted,
expressed his
frustration that all votes at the Commonwealth have to be
unanimous - Britain
and its anti-Mugabe allies could not pull rank. It is
one of the few
international bodies in which a tiny country like St Lucia
has the same
standing as G7 members like Britain and Canada. Individuals
join clubs
because of the people they will rub shoulders with. Why should
heads of
government, and the countries they represent, be any different
VOA
South African Communist Delegation Travels to Zimbabwe
Peta
Thornycroft
Harare
09 Dec 2003, 16:32 UTC
South Africa's small
but influential Communist Party has sent a delegation
to Zimbabwe to meet
political, social and economic leaders. The South
African Communist Party has
been a vocal critic of human rights abuses in
Zimbabwe, particularly those
against labor leaders.
Jeremy Cronin, secretary general of the South African
Communist Party leads
the party's first official visit to Zimbabwe. He has
met with members of the
ruling Zanu PF party, the opposition Movement for
Democratic Change, trade
unions and other civic organizations.
The
membership of Zimbabwe's trade unions has been decimated in recent years
as
hundreds of thousands of workers, particularly farm workers, have lost
their
jobs in the country's ongoing economic crisis.
South Africa's communist
party, which is part of the country's ruling
alliance, has been a consistent
critic of human rights abuses by Zimbabwe's
President Robert
Mugabe.
Over the past four years, the South African communists have often
displeased
South Africa's ruling African National Congress in its criticism
of Mr.
Mugabe in neighboring Zimbabwe.
The ANC government's policy on
Zimbabwe has been what it describes as quiet
diplomacy, opposing overt
criticism of Mr. Mugabe and his policies and
standing behind him
diplomatically in international forums, such as the
Commonwealth, a grouping
of mostly British former colonies.
While criticizing Mr. Mugabe for human
rights abuses, the South African
communist party is also critical of
Zimbabwe's opposition party, the MDC,
for failing to offer a coherent
political program.
The MDC itself says it has spent the last six months
consulting with its
followers and writing policy documents. The package of
MDC program is to be
presented to the members at the end of this month.
epolitix
Tony Blair: Commonwealth summit statement in
full
The full text of the prime minister's statement on
the
Commonwealth heads of government meeting in Nigeria.
"With permission, Mr Speaker, I should like to make a statement
on the
Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting, which took place in Abuja,
Nigeria,
from December 5 to 8. Copies of the Communiqué and Declaration have
been
placed in the Library of the House.
Her Majesty The Queen
attended the meeting in her role as Head
of the Commonwealth and also paid a
State Visit to Nigeria. She was warmly
welcomed by the Nigerian people. The
outgoing Commonwealth Chairman in
Office, Prime Minister John Howard of
Australia, paid tribute on behalf of
all Commonwealth members to The Queen's
dedication and commitment to the
Commonwealth. I know the whole House will
wish to join me in echoing that
tribute.
Nigeria itself only returned to the Commonwealth in 1999, after
a turbulent
period of military rule. The Queen's visit, and the holding of
the
Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting there, underlines the progress
made
since then in rebuilding a democratic and prosperous Nigeria. Britain
is
committed to supporting the reform programme led by President Obasanjo,
for
whose chairmanship of the Summit I gave sincere congratulations. In
a
difficult situation he managed matters with great skill.
Commonwealth Heads of Government last met in Coolum, Australia,
in March
2002. At Abuja, we reviewed developments since then. We agreed on
the urgent
need to relaunch the world trade talks which stalled at Cancun in
September,
and underlined our collective commitment to a successful Doha
Development
Round.
That commitment is significant. The Commonwealth
represents
one-third of the world's population; developing and developed
countries;
large and small states; and agricultural, service and
manufacturing-based ec
onomies. All have different perspectives and
interests.
The fact that all of us agreed on the need to
relaunch the Doha
Development Round, and on the need for all parties to show
flexibility in
the search for agreement, shows that a global deal is
possible. Everyone
will gain if the talks succeed, but the biggest winners
will be the world's
poor. And if the talks fail, they will be the biggest
losers too.
We discussed other development issues. Heads of
Government
agreed on the need to accelerate progress to meet the Millennium
Development
Goals, which aim to halve the proportion of people living in
poverty by
2015. I reaffirmed the UK's own strong commitment to that
goal.
Heads of Government also underlined their concern at
the spread
of HIV/AIDS. It now threatens not only Africa, but increasingly
Asia and
other parts of the world. Three million people will die of the virus
this
year alone. Two in three people infected live in Commonwealth countries.
It
poses one of the gravest threats to sustainable
development.
We agreed on the need to redouble our efforts to
fight this
threat. Britain is playing its full part, including through our
own Call For
Action on World Aids Day, and we are now the second-largest
bilateral donor
in the world on HIV/AIDS, after the USA. Our bilateral aid
amounted to more
than £270 million in 2002/03 alone, a real demonstration of
commitment on
behalf of the people and Government of
Britain.
The last Commonwealth Summit was postponed following
the
terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001. Since then the terrorists
have
continued their indiscriminate campaign. We agreed in Abuja that
terrorism
threatens everyone, regardless of nationality or faith; and that
all
Commonwealth members would stand together to meet and defeat this
challenge.
The meeting considered the situation in the two
countries that
have been suspended from the Councils of the Commonwealth:
Pakistan and
Zimbabwe. On Pakistan, Heads of Government welcomed the progress
made back
towards democratic governance. They expressed the hope that the
Pakistan
Parliament would soon pass the necessary measures to allow the
lifting of
Pakistan's suspension.
Where Pakistan has moved
forward since Commonwealth leaders last
met, Zimbabwe has gone backwards. The
country was suspended from the
Commonwealth in March 2002, shortly after
elections, which the
Commonwealth's own observers concluded were neither free
nor fair.
Since then there has been more violence and
intimidation against
the opposition MDC; against lawyers and human rights
activists; indeed
against anyone speaking up against President Mugabe's
oppressive policies.
Zimbabwe's only independent daily newspaper, The Daily
News, has been closed
down, despite court orders in its
favour.
Meanwhile, ZANU-PF's ruinous economic policies
are driving the
country further and further into chaos. Inflation is over
500%. Zimbabwe's
GDP has halved in five years. The IMF decided last week to
begin procedures
to expel Zimbabwe, due to its appalling economic policies.
Half of the
population now needs food aid. Britain remains the leading cash
donor for
the UN's humanitarian programmes in Zimbabwe. In the last two
years, we have
given $100 million in food aid.
In these
circumstances I and others argued that it was
inconceivable that Zimbabwe
should be readmitted to the Councils of the
Commonwealth; and that on the
contrary it should remain suspended until we
saw concrete evidence of a
return to democracy, respect for human rights and
the rule of law - the very
principles on which the Commonwealth is founded.
I am glad to
say that this approach was agreed. It was decided
that Zimbabwe should indeed
remain suspended from the Councils of the
Commonwealth; that President
Obasanjo as Chairman in Office together with
the Commonwealth Secretary
General will seek to facilitate progress inside
Zimbabwe; and that if
sufficient progress is made on the issues of concern
he will report, via a
representative group of six Commonwealth members, to
Heads of Government.
Heads will revisit the issue in the light of that
report, and take any
decision on the lifting of the suspension by consensus.
This
is the outcome we wanted. It is also the outcome President
Mugabe worked
assiduously to avoid. It gives the lie to one of his most
outrageous claims -
that the Commonwealth's approach to Zimbabwe is a white
conspiracy led by the
UK against black Africans. The fact is that every
single Commonwealth member
signed up to the Abuja Statement on Zimbabwe -
including the other 19 African
members of the Commonwealth, despite the
strongly held doubts of some of
those countries.
Nor did any African member of the
Commonwealth take up Mr
Mugabe's invitation to boycott the Summit meeting.
The outcome in Abuja was
hard fought, but in the end a victory for
Commonwealth values.
Mr Mugabe's reaction - to withdraw
Zimbabwe from the
Commonwealth - shows clearly that he does not accept
Commonwealth
principles. It was a decision taken without regard for the
wishes or
wellbeing of the Zimbabwean people. ZANU(PF)'s isolation will be
increased.
But the strong bonds that exist between the Zimbabwean people and
the rest
of the Commonwealth remain. There will always be a place for a
democratic
Zimbabwe in the Commonwealth.
The Summit also
re-elected the present Commonwealth
Secretary-General, Don McKinnon, for a
second and final four-year term. We
welcome that outcome. The Secretary
General has done an excellent job in his
first term. He will continue to have
our full support in his second.
Finally, I participated at
the Commonwealth sports breakfast. We
looked back to Manchester's successful
hosting of the last Commonwealth
Games in 2002, and forward to the next in
Melbourne in 2006. I highlighted
the UK's future sporting
priorities.
At this Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting
a group of more
than fifty countries came together to discuss the issues that
matter most to
their peoples - prosperity, security, sustainable development,
the fight
against terror - and agreed a common approach on all, in the
interests of
all.
They discussed more controversial issues
like Zimbabwe, where it
is no secret that there were and remain a range of
differing views among
member states. But here too, through serious discussion
and debate, the
Commonwealth was able to reach a consensus on the way
forward. I commend the
outcome to the House."
Daily News
Mugabe has no intention of negotiating a democratic
solution to
present crisis
Date:9-Dec, 2003
OPINION PIECE: SOUTH African President Thabo Mbeki in a recent State
visit to
Canada assured Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien that talks
were taking
place in Zimbabwe between the Mugabe regime and the opposition
MDC and that a
settlement was likely soon.
These comments follow similar confident
assurances given by President
Mbeki to President George Bush when he visited
South Africa in July.
These assertions are not new. President Mbeki
first commenced his
policy of “quiet diplomacy” in April 2000 following the
first brutal murders
committed earlier that same month by the Mugabe regime
against the
opposition in the run up to the 2000 Parliamentary
elections.
Since then he has repeatedly stated that this policy was
the best way
of resolving the crisis in Zimbabwe.
The MDC has
stated repeatedly since July that whilst there have in the
past been a few
informal discussions with elements of the Mugabe regime no
agreement has been
reached.
In fact since President Bush’s visit no discussions or
talks of any
description have taken place. The Mugabe regime itself has
issued similar
denials about the so-called progress of the talks about
talks.
The only person who persistently insists that talks are
taking place,
that agreement has almost been reached and that a settlement is
imminent, is
President Mbeki.
Whilst one doesn’t wish to
question President Mbeki’s good faith one
wonders what sort of intelligence
he is receiving. What does he know that we
don’t know?
Has he
been advised of something that even the head of our dialogue
team, Hon
Professor Welshman Ncube doesn’t know? The South Africans counter
these
denials from both parties as coyness on their part – in other words
part of
their negotiating strategy and, accordingly, untrue.
So what in
fact is happening?
In answering this question it is instructive to
draw a comparison
between what is taking place in Zimbabwe today and what
happened in South
Africa after the release of Nelson Mandela and the
commencement of the
Codesa talks which led to the end of apartheid and the
first democratic
elections in 1994.
Whilst there were major
setbacks and a continuation of violent
actions, including those perpetrated
by a third force, President FW De Klerk
did ensure that an environment was
created to facilitate discussions.
Codesa itself was conducted in a
relatively transparent fashion and
the general public was at least aware of
its existence and what progress was
being made.
In other words
aside from the inevitable doublespeak and setbacks,
that are part and parcel
of any settlement talks, the world was able to
judge from an objective
reality that talks were taking place, that all the
parties to them were
engaged in the process and that they were bearing
fruit.
The
situation prevailing in Zimbabwe today is a far cry from what
happened in
South Africa in the early 1990s.
Whereas in South Africa attempts
were made by the apartheid regime to
create a more conducive environment for
talks the converse applies in
Zimbabwe today and the lie regarding the
success of the talks and “quiet
diplomacy” is given in the harsh objective
reality of the political crack
down that has been experienced in Zimbabwe,
ironically since Thabo Mbeki
became George Bush’s “point man” in July. This
harsh objective reality is
given in five indicators which show what the
Mugabe regime’s true intentions
are.
1. The August supplementary
budget
In August the Zimbabwean Parliament debated a supplementary
budget for
the 2003 financial year. Most budgets are a clear guide as to the
policies
which any government is about to implement and this budget is no
exception.
The budget for the CIO (Zimbabwe’s equivalent of the
Stazi) doubled to
a total of Z$10 billion. The salary budget for the parent
Ministry of the
notorious Youth Brigade (the so called “Green Bombers”,
Mugabe’s version of
the Hitler Youth) went up from Z$1,2 billion to Z$3,4
billion.
To put these increases in context the total budget for
drugs and
medical expenses for all of Zimbabwe’s prisoners (conservatively
estimated
to number 22 000) went up from the original figure of Z$400 million
by
paltry Z$100 million to Z$5 billion.
Put another way the
regime is happy to spend billions on institutions
that are designed to
instill fear in the public but is only prepared to
spend approximately Z$
23000, or US$ 4, per prisoner in a prison system
ravaged by Aids and
overcrowding.
2. The new food distribution policy
Largely as a result of the chaotic land and economic policies over
half the
Zimbabwean population faces starvation. The Mugabe regime has
turned this
situation to its own benefit as it has used food as a
political
weapon.
The World Food Programme has attempted to
negate this policy by
insisting that NGOs distribute food donated by foreign
governments and
institutions.
In August the regime issued a new
food distribution directive that WFP
sourced food must be distributed by
government agents.
Whilst this caused a flutter in the donor
community and a Memorandum
of Understanding (that the preexisting system of
food distribution by NGOs
would continue) being agreed to between the donor
community and the regime,
the fact remains that the original directive has
not been withdrawn.
Whether the Memorandum of Agreement or the
directive holds sway is not
the point. There was never any need for the new
directive and its issuance
is a clear demonstration of what the regime’s
intentions are – it would
still like to use food as a weapon.
3.
Harassment of the MDC and civil society
Immediately after the
Bush/Mbeki meeting in early July the MDC made
several conciliatory gestures
to facilitate negotiations. Its MPs and Morgan
Tsvangirai attended the
opening of Parliament by Mugabe (having previously
boycotted any functions
attended by him); it postponed further mass action
(having organised two
extremely successful nationwide strikes in March and
June) and advised that
it was prepared to suspend the court challenge to
Mugabe’s March 2002
election.
Those actions have not been reciprocated by anything
other than
ongoing harassment of the MDC by the regime. The August Urban
Council
elections were marred by violence, intimidation, fraud and abuse of
the
electoral process by the regime.
Despite this the MDC still
managed to win control of 11 of the 12
municipal councils and controls the
five largest cities in the country.
Spurious prosecutions against
MDC leaders have continued and new
prosecutions commenced.
A few
weeks ago 3 MDC employees were shot in the MDC headquarters by a
ZANU (PF)
supporter; as is customary the wounded employees were arrested and
the ZANU
(PF) culprit has not been prosecuted.
On the 18th November the
entire MDC campaign team for the Kadoma
Constituency by-election was arrested
and the same team denied access to the
voters’ roll for the
constituency.
These are but a sample of the types of harassment the
MDC continues to
endure. Pro-democracy efforts by civil society are not
exempt as
demonstrated by the violent suppression of the Zimbabwe Congress of
Trade
Union’s peaceful protests by the police on the 18th
November.
Even the ANC’s tripartite alliance partner, COSATU,
recognised the
extent of the suppression and threatened to shut down
Zimbabwe’s borders
with South Africa.
The point is that far from
liberalising the political environment the
regime has done the very opposite
since July.
4. The banning of the Daily News
Presidents Mbeki and Obasanjo have in the past year expressed
disquiet
regarding legislation designed to silence the press such as the so
called
“Access to Information” Act (AIPPA) and announced that they had
received
assurances from the regime that the draconian aspects of the Act
would be
repealed.
Whilst the Act has been amended, the
draconian measures are still
firmly in place and in September were utilised
effectively to ban the only
independent daily newspaper, with the highest
circulation of all newspapers,
The Daily News. This is the only independent
paper the average Zimbabwean
can afford. Excessive force has been employed by
the police to ensure that
the Daily News remains closed - computers have been
confiscated and senior
editorial staff, journalists and directors of the
company have been
arrested. The regime shows no sign of allowing the Daily
News to open again,
indeed government controlled newspapers have celebrated
the “demise” of the
Daily News in their columns. Threats have been issued by
the regime’s
Minister of Information, Jonathan Moyo, against the only two
remaining
independent weekly newspapers. When the regime’s Minister of
Justice was
asked in Parliament recently by me whether Moyo’s comments
reflected the
regime’s policy, the retort was that the “law” would have to
take its course
against these other newspapers, another clear threat and an
indication that
the regime has no intention of creating an environment
conducive to
negotiations. Threats have even now been directed against the
Administrative
Court Judge, Michael Majuru, who ruled recently that the Daily
News was
lawfully entitled to operate. All of these measures are designed to
ensure
that a free press is not allowed to operate in Zimbabwe. 5.
The
militarisation of institutions and society Whilst in Canada President
Mbeki
indicated that there was a prospect of a coalition government emerging
in
Zimbabwe soon. This sentiment is not matched by facts on the ground. On
the
same day President Mbeki spoke in Canada General Zvinavashe, the
Commander
of the Armed Forces, announced his intention to retire and to go
into some
form of “national” position. Speculation is rife that Mugabe’s
intention is
to appoint Zvinavashe as Vice President to replace the late
Simon Muzenda.
This would be consistent with Mugabe’s policy of the past few
years to
appoint military men to head the Prison service, the Grain Marketing
Board,
the Electoral Supervisory Commission, secret police and even Provinces
- the
latter demonstrated by Mugabe’s appointment two weeks ago as Governor
of
Manicaland Province of the officer in charge of the regime’s
military
operations in the Congo. The appointment of this army officer has
resulted
in hostilities being directed against MDC leaders in Manicaland in
the past
few days. All in all there is nothing to indicate that the Mugabe
regime has
any intention of negotiating a peaceful and democratic solution to
Zimbabwe’
s crisis. On the contrary there is every indication that the regime
is
digging in. What many throughout the world do not seem to grasp is
that
Mugabe is a tyrant and tyrants do not negotiate their way out of power.
What
also is not appreciated is that Mugabe has very compelling reasons why
he
fears losing power. Only two groups of people fully know what happened
when
Mugabe deployed his North Korean trained Fifth Brigade in Matabeleland
in
January 1983 – the surviving victims and the perpetrators responsible
for
the massacres of over 20000 people and the torture of tens of thousands
of
others. Mugabe himself is in the unique position of knowing both
what
happened (having engineered and directed it in the first place) and
of
knowing the depth of anger still felt by the victims (routinely reported
to
him by his intelligence services). Just recently the Supreme
Court,
increasingly a willing arm of the regime, ruled to suppress the
publication
of government reports prepared in the early 1980s which detail
what happened
during this period. Furthermore few appreciate the extent to
which the
Mugabe regime has looted the resources of Zimbabwe in the last few
years.
The leaders of the regime know they simply cannot relinquish power if
they
are to continue to hide and retain their ill-gotten gains. It does
not
matter what amnesty guarantees the MDC gives Mugabe and those around him
who
are guilty of crimes against humanity and corruption. They know that
there
is nothing anyone can do to protect themselves from the wrath of
the
Zimbabwean public and international law once they lose the safe haven
of
political power. Because of this all consuming fear Mugabe himself will
not
consider resigning unless three conditions are met. Firstly, a
broad
consensus will have to emerge within the ZANU PF leadership regarding
a
successor to take over from Mugabe as leader of the party. The party
is
seriously divided on this issue at present and Mugabe knows that if he
goes
prematurely it could lead to serious internecine strife. Secondly,
Mugabe
would have to be satisfied that that proposed successor would not sell
him
down the river ala President Mwanawasa’s treatment of former
President
Chiluba in neighbouring Zambia this year. One of Mugabe’s
greatest
nightmares is the prospect of him being offered up as a sacrificial
lamb to
appease the international community after losing power. Thirdly,
Mugabe
would have to be satisfied that this chosen successor is able to win
a
national Presidential election, in other words that this person would
be
able to command support nationwide from, at the very least, rank and
file
ZANU PF members. Mugabe’s dilemma is that there is no suitable candidate
who
meets all three of the criteria. There certainly is no consensus within
the
ZANU PF leadership regarding a successor. Unless ZANU PF has played
its
cards close to its chest well there does not appear to be any resolution
to
this problem in sight unless General Zvinavashe is viewed as a
compromise
candidate between the Mnangagwa and Mujuru factions. Zvinavashe
and
Mnangagwa would be the only candidates that Mugabe would trust not to
betray
him but both do not command national support. A further complication
is that
both are also on the UN sanctions list as a result of their
nefarious
activities in the Congo and as a result would not be able to
secure
international support and recognition easily, which is vital if the
economy
is to be turned around. Former Finance Minister Makoni is probably
the only
leader who would get national and international support but Mugabe
would
never trust Makoni to keep him out of jail. Until a leader does emerge
who
satisfies these criteria, Mugabe will not budge. The facts are obvious.
The
Mugabe regime has paid lip service to negotiations and has no real
intention
of seeing them through to their logical conclusion. All the regime
has done
in the last few months is buy time whilst simultaneously tightening
its grip
on power. In this context it is appalling that some in the
international
community are seeking to relieve, rather than increase,
pressure against the
regime. International pressure against the regime should
be increased in the
following ways: 1. Existing targeted sanctions against
those leaders of the
regime responsible for gross human rights abuses and
corruption should be
maintained, strengthened and broadened. It should be
stressed that the MDC
is not calling for the imposition of general economic
sanctions, and has
never done so. It is only the regime’s propaganda machine
that has put out
the lie that the MDC has called for economic sanctions. 2.
Those States
still giving moral support to the regime should be engaged on a
bilateral
basis and encouraged to speak out against the human rights abuses
taking
place in Zimbabwe. In particular world leaders should no longer accept
the
glib assurances that all is well (which fly in the face of the harsh
factual
reality of Zimbabwe) made by those who have undertaken to resolve the
crisis
on behalf of the international community. 3. The Mugabe regime
has
effectively stemmed the flow of information out of the country by
banning
foreign journalists and independent local newspapers such as the
Daily News.
President Obasanjo said on the 17th November that one of the
purposes of his
visit to Zimbabwe was to find out for himself what was
happening in the
country. Whilst his efforts are greatly appreciated there is
no way he could
accurately assess what is going on in the country in a
whistle stop visit to
Harare lasting only a few hours. What is needed is for
an eminent persons
group to come to Zimbabwe for at least a week. That group
will need to
travel the country and must have an opportunity to speak to rank
and file
Zimbabweans, the opposition and civil society groups. 4. The
international
community should take every opportunity to invite opposition
politicians,
civic leaders and human rights activists to international fora
and other
meetings to give them an opportunity to explain to the world just
what is
happening in Zimbabwe. Once the full enormity of what is going on
in
Zimbabwe is appreciated internationally more will be motivated to
do
something constructive to resolve the crisis. 5. Greater attention should
be
paid to those who being subjected to massive human rights abuses
in
Zimbabwe. In particular greater international attention should be paid
to
the plight of people like Morgan Tsvangirai and many other lesser known
MDC
and civil society activists facing spurious, trumped up charges some
of
which potentially carry the death penalty. 6. Efforts must be made to
raise
the Zimbabwean crisis in the United Nations General Assembly. In
particular
consideration should be given to the application of the Report of
the
International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty given
the
Mugabe regime’s abuse of WFP food aid and the use of food as a
political
weapon against the Zimbabwean populace. The situation in Zimbabwe
cries out
for a visit by Secretary General Kofi Annan. 7. International
resources
should be secured to support civil society groups and human rights
NGOs that
have been assisting victims of the Mugabe regime and are engaged in
non
violent democratic opposition to the regime. Likewise resources should
be
obtained to ensure that a free and fair electoral environment is
obtained,
for it is only through free and fair elections that legitimacy and
stability
can be restored to Zimbabwe. When Presidents Mbeki and Bush held a
joint
press conference in Pretoria in July they both acknowledged that
the
Zimbabwean crisis demanded urgent attention. Tragically another four
months
have been allowed to slip by and if anything the crisis has grown.
Zimbabwe
has the fastest declining economy in the world. It is
experiencing
hyper-inflation with rates well over 500 percent and sharply
rising. Three
million Zimbabweans have sought refuge in neighbouring States
and elsewhere
in the last few years. The numbers of refugees pouring out of
the country
grow daily and are now impacting fledgling, fragile democracies
in the
region. Aids infection rates are amongst the highest in the world with
over
one in four people infected. The health system is collapsing as are
other
social services. Over five million Zimbabweans face starvation in the
coming
months and there is no short term relief in sight because of the
regime’s
chaotic land and economic policies which will ensure that even if
there are
good rains this coming rainy season insufficient food will be
grown. Life
has, in short, become intolerable for the vast majority of
Zimbabweans. The
pro-democracy opposition has been accused by some of not
being ready to
govern. It has been accused of lacking unity and vision. It
has been accused
of not having a concrete “way forward” out of this crisis
once new elections
are finally held. It is also accused by its detractors of
being a stooge of
the West and whites. This criticism and propaganda ignores
the factual
reality. The MDC, despite operating in one of the most draconian
political
environments in the world, has almost half the elected seats in
Parliament
and this year commenced governing 11 of 12 local governments in
the country’
s largest cities. Despite the arrest, torture and detention of
virtually
every single member of its National Executive and Parliamentary
caucus the
unity and determination to govern of the MDC has never been
stronger. The
MDC has spent the whole of 2003 re-crafting its policies to
cater for the
rapidly changing economic environment caused by the Mugabe
regime’s
disastrous policies and these will be presented to the MDC’s
membership at a
convention in December for ratification. The draft policy
document approved
at a recent National Executive meeting is impressive. The
opposition has
fought a principled non-violent campaign to gain power
peacefully and
constitutionally but its options have been systematically
terminated by the
regime. These actions of this tyrannical regime will only
strengthen the
hand of hawks and reduce the chances of a peaceful resolution
to the crisis.
If Zimbabwe implodes there will be devastating consequences
for the region
as a whole and much of the fine work done by African democrats
such as
President Mbeki will be undone. As difficult as it is for President
Mbeki
and other influential democratic leaders to deal with a tyrant in
their
midst, the time is now for them to vocalise the principled
African
Renaissance leadership that all in SADC expect of them. Time is
rapidly
running out for Zimbabwe and the international community must act
urgently
and decisively to avoid a major humanitarian
catastrophe.
By David Coltart MP
David Coltart has
been a human rights lawyer in Bulawayo for the last
20 years. In 2000 he was
elected to Parliament in the Bulawayo South
Constituency. He stood against a
former ZANU (PF) cabinet minister and won
with an 84 percent majority. He is
presently the MDC Shadow Minister of
Justice and Constitutional
Affairs.
NAIROBI (AFX) - Kenyan foreign minister Kalonzo Musyoka has asked Zimbabwe
to
reconsider pulling out of the Commonwealth, saying membership of the
grouping
of mainly former British colonies is vital for the democratization
process in
Africa.
"My advice is that Zimbabwe should not pull out of the
Commonwealth,"
Musyoka told a news conference in Nairobi.
"As a
continent, the Commonwealth is a very important vehicle for
transmitting a
message of democracy," he added.
Zimbabwe pulled out of the Commonwealth
on Sunday, a day after delegates at
a summit in Abuja prolonged a 20-month
suspension imposed after President
Robert Mugabe was reelected in March 2002,
in a vote allegedly marred by
irregularities and violence.
Kenya is a
member of the Commonwealth.
newsdesk@afxnews.com
Mail and Guardian
Mugabe's mouthpiece: Kick Britain out of
Zimbabwe
Harare
09 December 2003
13:13
Zimbabwe's state press called on President Robert Mugabe on
Tuesday to sever
diplomatic ties with Britain and Australia, blaming British
Prime Minister
Tony Blair's government for all the southern African country's
economic and
political crises.
"The time has now come for Zimbabwe to
fully engage Britain head-on by
cutting all diplomatic ties with the former
colonial master and its
sidekick, Australia," the government-controlled daily
Herald said in a
front-page editorial. Mugabe announcement on Sunday night
that he was
withdrawing Zimbabwe from the Commonwealth after it decided to
continue
Zimbabwe's suspension from the 54-member association
indefinitely.
The Herald is controlled directly from Mugabe's office.
Blair and Australian
Prime Minister John Howard were seen as the leading
protagonists for
Zimbabwe's extended suspension. Zimbabwe was first suspended
in April last
year after the Commonwealth found that Mugabe had rigged his
victory in
presidential elections a month before.
The Herald said that
Mugabe's decision to pull out of the Commonwealth "only
deals with the
symptoms and not the cause of the disease."
"The issue is not the
Commonwealth or any other third parties but Britain
and its Prime Minister,
Tony Blair."
It said Britain had brought about "sanctions," imposed by
the European
Union, the United States, Australia and New Zealand, which had
"savaged"
Zimbabwe's economy.
The Herald went on: "The country's
political landscape has been put into
disarray following the creation of the
British-sponsored (opposition)
Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) and a
host of non-governmental
organisations that have sought to cause mayhem and
instability in the
country by staging foolish demonstrations and media
campaigns designed to
precipitate instability and undermine the Zimbabwean
government."
It said that international concern about human rights,
democracy, press
freedom and the independence of the judiciary were "a
smokescreen to
maintain the colonial grip on Zimbabwe".
"Kicking
Britain out of Zimbabwe and withdrawing from London will have
its
repercussions, but it will be a worthwhile price to pay and a true test
of
sovereignty," The Herald said.
"Smart" sanctions have been imposed
since 2002, and apply exclusively to
Mugabe and members of his immediate
ruling clique. Diplomats point out they
go no further than banning them from
travel and from holding assets in the
countries imposing the
sanctions.
Britain, the colonial authority until Zimbabwe's independence
in 1980, has
been the government's largest aid donor and currently is the
biggest
contributor to famine relief needed to feed 5,5-million people
facing
starvation, and has given 26-million pounds since September
2001.
Cultural ties run deep between the two countries, and Britain has
become
home to an estimated 100 000 illegal Zimbabwean economic refugees
fleeing
economic chaos at home.
The government routinely blames the
British labour government for its
problems, accusing it of spying, sabotage
and even of hijacking Zimbabwe's
fuel supplies on the high seas.
International and local civil rights groups
have recorded thousands of cases
of murder, torture, assault, illegal
detention and other human rights abuses
by the government and ruling party
militias since 2000 when Mugabe, fearing
imminent defeat in parliamentary
elections launched a campaign of repression
to try and destroy the
pro-democracy MDC.
The Commonwealth secretariat
reported before the weekend's Commonwealth
summit that Mugabe had done
nothing to carry out democratic and electoral
reforms he agreed to since the
suspension was imposed.
Mugabe, who turns 80 in February and is now in
his 24th year of rule, last
week denounced calls for him to retire. He said
he intended to stay in power
at least until 2008. - Sapa
The Australian
Mugabe to attack whites at UN talks
From The
Times
December 10, 2003
A day after confirming Zimbabwe's isolation by
quitting the Commonwealth,
President Robert Mugabe flew to Geneva to attend a
United Nations
conference, where he is expected to denounce the "white plot"
against his
nation.
Denied the chance to address the Commonwealth
summit in Nigeria, which ended
yesterday, Mr Mugabe lost no time in finding a
new platform at the World
Summit on the Information Society, which opens
today.
The Zimbabwean leader is likely to condemn the Commonwealth's
decision to
extend his nation's suspension from the 53-nation
group.
The controversial decision, opposed by most African nations, was
championed
by Australian Prime Minister John Howard.
Mr Mugabe and his
leadership group are barred from travelling to Europe, the
US and some other
countries, but he regularly uses the loophole that allows
him to attend
international conferences and put his case.
He will be accompanied by his
wife, Grace, who is known for extravagant
shopping, and two Zimbabwean
cabinet ministers.
Mr Mugabe was due to seek his cabinet's authority to
confirm Zimbabwe's
withdrawal from the Commonwealth, but that approval is as
good as given.
Party sources said his ruling Zanu-Patriotic Front party
was ordered at its
conference last weekend to propose a resolution urging Mr
Mugabe to quit the
Commonwealth "club", which is expected to receive
enthusiastic approval.
But opposition groups and commentators warned that
Zimbabwe's withdrawal
would encourage greater repression, accelerate economic
collapse and
heighten the chances that any political change in the country
would be
bloody.
Lovemore Madhuku, the chairman of the National
Constitutional Assembly,
which is campaigning for constitutional reform, said
Zimbabwe's membership
of the Commonwealth had restrained Mr Mugabe from more
obvious excesses,
especially in the run-up to the Abuja summit.
"We
should have no illusions. He is going to rule with full brutality now,"
said
Mr Madhuku, who has been arrested 10 times for participating in
illegal
demonstrations.
Despite the danger of violence, the
secretary-general of the opposition
Movement for Democratic Change, Welshman
Ncube, praised the summit for
recognising "dictatorship, genocide, murder and
torture".
"The decision by the Commonwealth confirms Mugabe's
illegitimacy," he said.
Financial Times
Obasanjo in pledge to seek reconciliation with
Harare
By Michael Peel in Abuja
Published: December 9 2003
4:00 | Last Updated: December 9 2003 4:00
Nigeria's President
Olusegun Obasanjo yesterday pledged to do
"everything humanly possible" to
reverse Zimbabwe's withdrawal from the
Commonwealth as the organisation's
summit ended in acrimony over the issue.
Mr Obasanjo, the
summit's host and current Commonwealth chair,
admitted the strategy put in
place last year for dealing with the Zimbabwean
government of President
Robert Mugabe had failed but said the summit had
achieved important
agreements on trade and development.
The Zimbabwe issue dominated
the four-day meeting in Nigeria, and late
on Sunday night Mr Mugabe announced
his country's withdrawal from the
organisation after it it decided to
maintain a suspension imposed last year.
"We are determined to do
everything humanly possible within the values
and the principles that we
cherish in the Commonwealth to assist Zimbabwe
and facilitate [its] return,"
Mr Obasanjo said at the summit's closing press
conference.
Mr
Obasanjo said he would send an envoy to Zimbabwe before Christmas
in an
attempt to encourage Commonwealth reconciliation with the country,
which was
suspended after allegations of fraud and intimidation during
elections last
year.
He insisted the summit agreement to keep Zimbabwe's
suspension under
continuous monitoring was still relevant, although he
described as a
"failure" a three-member Commonwealth group mandated in March
last year to
oversee the Zimbabwe issue. The group consisted of the leaders
of Nigeria,
South Africa and Australia.
Mr Obasanjo criticised
both Australia's hardline approach to the
troika and the strong positions
taken by some countries ahead of the summit,
where Commonwealth officials
said South Africa had led attempts by states
from southern Africa and
elsewhere to readmit Zimbabwe straight away.
Don McKinnon,
Commonwealth secretary-general, admitted the summit had
been "one of the more
difficult" of recent years but said the organisation
had made good progress
in areas other than Zimbabwe.
The Commonwealth is to send envoys to
"key capitals" around the world
to try to help build a consensus on global
trade, following the collapse of
the World Trade Organisation's September
ministerial summit in Cancún,
Mexico. Next Monday the WTO will hold a special
conference in Geneva, in
what is billed as a final effort to resolve
outstanding issues.
A joint statement by Commonwealth leaders
called for the early phasing
out of all forms of export subsidies,
substantial reductions in
"trade-distorting" domestic subsidies, tariff
reform and significant
improvements in countries' access to foreign markets.
"We want to see the
issue of Cancún behind us," Mr McKinnon
said.
A communiqué issued by the leaders said the global "war
against
terrorism" could not be won by military force and said travel
warnings
issued by foreign governments had had a negative impact on the
economies of
a number of member states
New Zimbabwe
Obasanjo blasts Howard
By newzimbabwe.com
staff
09/12/03
JOHN Howard was attacked yesterday for adopting too harsh a
line on Zimbabwe
and frustrating efforts to get the rogue nation back into
the Commonwealth.
At the end of the Commonwealth Heads of Government
Meeting in Abuja,
Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo - who has taken over
as chairman of the
Commonwealth from Howard - condemned the Prime Minister's
approach to
Zimbabwe.
Obasanjo said Howard wanted Zimbabwe's
suspension from the body reviewed six
months after it was imposed when it
really should have been given a full 12
months to comply.
"Instead of
looking at measures we'd taken (Howard) wants more sanctions,"
he said. "Some
of us felt that was not right ... Our mandate is not to
add
sanctions."
Obasanjo described the so-called leadership troika -
led by Howard and
including Obasanjo and South Africa's Thabo Mbeki - as
"trackless and a
failure".
CHOGM resolved to extend Zimbabwe's
suspension, but not without bitter
divisions emerging between African states
and the rest of the Commonwealth.
As a further concession to the largely
African states' backing for the
failed bid to have Zimbabwe's suspension
lifted, Obasanjo will now take the
lead role in negotiating with Zimbabwe
following Robert Mugabe's decision to
pull out of the Commonwealth in
protest.
Howard is part of a six-member panel to whom Obasanjo will
report on
Zimbabwe's progress.
Obasanjo also chastised nations, such
as Australia, Britain, Namibia and
South Africa, that took hardline positions
on the eve of the summit.
"Taking hardline positions before events
doesn't help because then you
either force others to also take a hardline
position or you are forced to
capitulate," he said.
Howard was already
in the air on the way back to Canberra by the time the
attack was launched,
but he earlier denied Australia's stance had been too
tough or that it had
contributed to the issue dominating the summit.
"I don't think for a
moment that I went in too hard," Howard said. "The
reality is that if the
Commonwealth had lifted the suspension at this
meeting, then the values that
it is meant to stand for would have been seen
as quite wasted and
irrelevant."
Zimbabwe was suspended from the Commonwealth in March 2002
after a
presidential election saw the 79-year-old Mugabe voted back into
office amid
widespread vote-rigging, violence and political
repression.
IPS News
President Mugabe On War Path
Chris Anold
Msipa
HARARE, Dec 9 (IPS) - Zimbabwe, already in a dire economic,
political and
social situation, faces another bitter year ahead. The ruling
ZANU-PF has
declared war against the opposition, the West and the
Commonwealth.
ZANU-PF, in power since independence from Britain in 1980,
has threatened
tough action against what it calls agents of Zimbabwe's
opposition and its
western allies. It has also ordered the government to
withdraw its
membership from the Commonwealth.
'The message is clear.
The Commonwealth is not vital for Zimbabwe to exist.
We have decided to leave
it because it is racist and does not respect our
hard-won independence,' said
one ex-combatant of the Zimbabwe?s 1970s war of
liberation.
The
commonwealth is an organisation of about 53 independent states which
were
formerly parts of the British Empire, established to encourage trade
and
friendly relations among its members.
Tapiwa Padera, a war veterans'
leader, said there was no going back on the
road ZANU-PF had taken to redress
the hardships facing the majority of
Zimbabweans.
He was speaking in a
telephone interview with Inter Press Service after this
year's charged annual
conference of the ZANU-PF at the weekend in the
southeastern city of
Masvingo.
President Robert Mugabe, who until the meeting had kept people
guessing on
his exit plans, has praised his party support for him, its
decision to leave
the Commonwealth and its backing of his land reform
programme.
The former guerrilla leader celebrates his 80th birthday in
two months. But
he has dashed hopes for a new face to replace him, arguing
that he is still
fit, has the mandate of the people and will rule until they
want him out, or
when he feels too tired to go on.
Media commentators
had predicted Mugabe would take advantage of the two-day
conference and allow
the ruling party to decide on his successor. He says
that was never his
idea.
Instead he has chosen war. 'Icho!' Mugabe
shouted.
'Charira!' his followers responded, vehemently.
The
slogan, coined during the liberation struggle of the 1970s, means 'The
War
Has Erupted' and 'direct confrontation'. It was abandoned in 1980
after
Mugabe declared national reconciliation with the white minority
settlers in
Rhodesia (now renamed Zimbabwe), following
independence.
One political commentator says its invocation now smells
bad, especially for
the labour-backed Movement for Democratic Change (MDC).
And President Mugabe
has made it clear the threat is genuine.
'Anyone
who has a thought to destabilise us must take care that we can
unleash
(security) forces on him. I think the MDC have learnt their lesson,'
Mugabe
said.
'If they want to violate our rule, the law of the country' We can
unleash
legal violence, which we are permitted to do to correct violence. If
they
are throwing stones, naturally, some measure of force must be used to
term
them.'
Mugabe said Zimbabwe had taken the stance after London
continued to use the
MDC to remove him from power and stop seizure of farms
owned by about 4,500
whites, who held more than half of the country's prime
land.
He said the opposition, to fulfil the scheme, has since launched
'strikes,
demonstrations and senseless protests'. The white-run industry
joined in,
creating artificial shortages and hiking prices, while interest
rates are
shooting up at commercial banks.
Mugabe said the continued
gold production also fails to reflect in the
national reserves. The amount of
the yellow metal the state handled annually
in the recent past have since
dwindled from between 27 and 29 tonnes to just
10 tonnes.
'But now,
with the measures we took, I understand from the Reserve Bank that
gold has
now started flowing in,' he said, referring to the recent crackdown
on
illegal gold dealings in the country.
Mugabe said 'numerous factories'
have also closed down for political
reasons, to cause anger among the people
and turn them against the
government for the benefit of the Movement for
Democratic Change.
He has announced measures to empower blacks for more
goods production, which
will cause competition and force prices down to
counter the alleged
sabotage. The state will now take full control to acquire
inputs and make
them available to the new producers.
Mugabe has lashed
out hard at some senior members of his party who he says
have become too
greedy for money and adopted double standards, with 'one leg
in the MDC and
another leg in ZANU-PF.'
He accused the members of seizing plots
allocated to ordinary people for
either their own use or for relatives and
friends.
Mugabe said his government had set up a committee to probe such
people, who
face unspecified action if they did not surrender the extra
farms.
His administration, he said, would also deal with white farmers
like the
'Nicole Brothers' in his home area in western Zvimba District, who
are
resisting the agrarian reforms.
Mugabe also said the state would
intervene to ensure interest rates, which
have now reached 400 percent, are
not only harnessed but are also reversed
immediately.
His pullout from
the Commonwealth has been communicated to the group meeting
in Nigeria, which
media reports say received the statement Sunday, hours
after it had further
extended the suspension of the Southern African
country.
President
Olusegun Obasanjo of Nigeria has been given personal charge to
monitor the
political climate in Zimbabwe, with hope to restore its
membership. But the
Southern African nation has already taken a stand.
Obasanjo, as well as
the South African Head of State, Thabo Mbeki, and the
Malawian Leader, Bakili
Muluzi, is mediating between ZANU-PF and the MDC to
bring them into talks to
end their impasse. The three maintain their efforts
are proceeding well and a
solution is possible soon.
However, the MDC dismisses the statements as
misleading. It complains
against continued rights violations, while its
petitions against the
presidential and legislative poll results stand in the
High Court.
The state has also not dropped treason charges against MDC
leader Morgan
Tsvangirai, accused of plotting to kill Mugabe before last
year's
presidential poll. He faces the death penalty if
convicted.
ZANU-PF's conference had raised hopes for an end to
Western-led sanctions
and normalisation of the strained international ties,
to return the economy
back on track. But the party's weekend declaration to
quit the Commonwealth
has shattered those expectations.
The
Commonwealth last year suspended Zimbabwe after accusing the ruling
party of
grabbing white-owned farms, vote rigging and rights violations
against the
opposition. Mugabe, who enjoys support from some developing
countries like
South Africa and Cuba, says the accusations and the sanctions
are racist
plans to derail his land reform programme.
Zimbabwe used to export food
surplus. But the land grab and poor planning,
as well as sanctions, the
Cyclone Eline of 2000 and two successive dry
seasons, have forced the country
to beg for its staple grain, maize. About
six million people, half the
country's population, need food aid now.
(END/2003)
Accept Constructive Criticism
New Vision
(Kampala)
EDITORIAL
December 9, 2003
Posted to the web December 9,
2003
Kampala
ZIMBABWE HAS decided to withdraw from membership of
the Commonwealth
following the Abuja Conference's decision to maintain its
suspension until
it met key democratic benchmarks.
Everyone agrees
that Zimbabwe is in freefall. Inflation is running at close
to a 1000 per
went. An estimated ten per cent of the population has fled to
Botswana and
South Africa. Fuel and foodstuffs are in very short supply.
Once it
was a food exporter but three-quarters of its population now survive
on food
handouts from the WFP.
Internally the country is bitterly divided. The
MDC opposition insists that
the last elections were rigged. The trade unions
have called general
strikes. Church leaders have condemned
government.
Foreign correspondents have been expelled and the private
press virtually
banned
There is no country in Africa, or even in the
world, undergoing such
catastrophic decline.
Why then have the leaders
of southern Africa been so reluctant to condemn
the political leadership of
Zimbabwe?
They fear to appear as imperialist stooges since Mugabe claims
to be a
victim of an international conspiracy for daring to confiscate
white-owned
farms.
Yet the problem was the manner in which farms were
confiscated, not the
action itself. There should have been systematic land
reform rather than
land grabbing by Zanu politicians. And if there is a
conspiracy why are the
whites providing the food aid that keeps Zimbabwe
afloat?
Both Zimbabwe and other African nations should welcome
constructive
criticism.
They should not delude themselves that the
country will recover just because
Mugabe is readmitted to the Commonwealth
and we pretend everything is better
in Zimbabwe.
New Zimbabwe
Vanity reason for Mugabe pull out
By Ewen MacAskil
and Andrew Meldrum
09/12/03
ZIMBABWE has given the cosy club of
Commonwealth countries its most dramatic
jolt since the South African
apartheid furore more than 40 years ago, but
its withdrawal from the
54-nation grouping is likely to have more symbolic
than practical
impact.
While several countries have fallen foul of the body over its
72-year
history, sanctions and suspensions have usually proven only temporary
before
members are invited back into the fold.
And it is an important
fold; though the common connection for almost all
members is an often
inglorious colonial past, the Commonwealth offers a
useful forum for leaders
to meet informally and establish common agendas.
Robert Mugabe will not
mind leaving on economic grounds. His country may be
suffering its worst
economic slump since the guerrilla warfare of the 1970s,
with food and fuel
shortages, a currency crisis and runaway annual inflation
of above 500%, but
the Commonwealth's funds are extremely limited and its
aid packages tend to
be modest.
And on political grounds, though self-exclusion will hurt,
suspension was
even more humiliating. The Commonwealth has few rules apart
from the chief
tenet which Mr Mugabe flouted: respect for
democracy.
The grouping has made it clear that in rigging elections last
year and
violently muzzling his opponents, Mr Mu gabe has lost the right to
sit at
the table.
In Harare, his leading critics said they were not
surprised by his action.
They said he was furious about the continued
suspension and did not want to
submit to any Commonwealth investigation or to
pressure.
"A rogue state like Zimbabwe needs to be isolated," said Iden
Wetherell,
editor of the Zimbabwe Independent. He said that even though Mr
Mugabe had
quit the Commonwealth, there was no doubt that he still wanted to
be in the
club.
Most of Zimbabwe's neighbours are Commonwealth
members, and Mr Mugabe's
decision leaves his country even more isolated
internationally.
"Despite all the rhetoric, few doubt that Mugabe wants
to be readmitted,"
Wetherell said. "He wants to strut upon the world stage.
The suspension has
been a huge humiliation for him.
"The announcement
that he is quitting is just a case of bad sour grapes. The
Commonwealth
continues, by dangling the carrot of good governance before
him, to hold out
a real prospect of securing his readmission, and it should
hold
firm."
A Foreign Office spokesman said last night that Zimbabwe could
only rejoin
"when it returns to the values of demo cracy and tolerance on
which the
Commonwealth was founded".
There have been endless rows
since the organisation was formed in 1931 -
with South Africa and its
apartheid policies being the most divisive. That
country rejected the
criticism of fellow members and withdrew in 1961, only
to return in 1994
after the end of apartheid.
Others too have fallen foul, including the
host of this weekend's summit,
Nigeria. It was suspended in 1995 when its
military government executed the
writer and activist Ken Saro-Wiwa, and was
readmitted four years ago after a
return to civilian rule.
Fiji was
suspended in 1987 and readmitted in 1997, only to be suspended
again in 2000
after a short-lived military takeover. Pakistan too was
suspended from
membership of key Commonwealth committees after its military
coup in
1999.
Some larger nations such as Britain give the impression that
the
Commonwealth is an irrelevance, but others view it more
positively.
Mozambique paid the organisation the ultimate accolade of asking
to join
even though it had been a Portuguese rather than a British
colony.
Members of the Zimbabwean opposition party, the Movement for
Democratic
Change (MDC), welcomed Zimbabwe's continued suspension.
The
MDC spokesman Paul Themba Nyathi, in Abuja on the sidelines of the
summit,
said that Mr Mugabe's abrupt withdrawal should not change the
Commonwealth's
decision.
Daily News
Government compromising public education
Date:9-Dec, 2003
AFRICAN academics have never had a rosy life,
and while there could be
exceptions, the history of the continent does not
have many good stories to
tell about how governments dealt with
them.
Since independence, African governments have waged
ideological and
economic wars with academics as African intellectuals
demanded good
governance and good remuneration.
But many a time
these demands have been met with both incarceration
and death of those men
and women who, through the tomes they devoured in
their pursuit for knowledge
and therefore a better understanding of the
world around them, became a
threat to the political lives of many African
despots.
Zimbabwe
has not been an exception to that tradition. However, 2003
has provided the
worst documentation for posterity in terms of the treatment
university
lecturers have been receiving from the government here since the
attainment
of independence.
This year has given a new twist to projections
about the country’s
future within the realm of both education in general and
the economic decay
in particular.
The very fact that state
universities here are operating under
capacity to the extent that some degree
programmes did not for this academic
year enrol any aspiring graduands raises
questions about the country’s
future within the provision of a better
education for all.
And this when in the past it was agreed that
each country especially
in Africa needed to train its populations in every
field as an investment
into the country’s human resources pool.
Skilled personnel were obviously needed after the coming of
independence to
replace manpower which largely represented the colour of the
colonial
governments.
That is precisely why in the 1980s, and even early
1990s, men and
women who went to further their studies abroad still returned
home to work
for both their country and families.
This is what
this regime should recall as it dithers about giving
lecturers competitive
remuneration and issues threats on academics. That is
how the ruling party
deals with problems anyway: issue threats – problem
solved.
The
government should ask itself: why did academics a few years
ago –and still
under the same ruling party- readily come back home from
First World
universities where they could have lived better lives?
We could
understand why they returned after a sojourn in Eastern
Europe what with its
poverty and congenital dictatorships.
It was perhaps because of two
principal issues, and one of them
unfortunately carries an odious ruling
party aura today: “patriotism” as
they wanted to work for the country’s
development; and perhaps most
importantly, to be with their
families.
But for this country, the brain drain, much like
everything else,
inevitably has a domino effect. Amid the reluctance to give
university
teachers reasonable rates, does that then mean there will never in
the
foreseeable future be any intakes for those programmes that have
been
affected by the mass exodus of lecturers?
What does it mean
for the students who were enrolled this year? Are
there are any guarantees
that they will finish their programmes within the
stipulated
schedules?
A few years ago, it was something to be envied by the
whole
neighbourhood that one’s son or daughter was at university, but amid
the
circumstances here, the government has eroded all that.
A
good number of people have become cynical about the whole idea of
knowing
that someone has enrolled at a Zimbabwean university.
And this
because, first; there are no longer any guarantees for
landing that dream
job; and second with the perennial strikes by lecturers,
what it means is
that there are no guarantees that a four-year undergraduate
degree programme
for example is finished within those four years.
It can stretch up
to six with the kind of attitude this government has
adopted.
There are many pointers that this regime has stopped giving a hoot
about the
people it claims voted it into power.
But because the ruling party
has made sure it suppresses all forms of
legitimate protests against its many
flaws, student activism which today
should be at its loudest considering the
government’s failures be it in
university administration or anywhere else,
this has, not surprisingly, not
happened.
It is a huge farce
then that despite the government denying these
young people an education,
which in the past would assure parents of early
retirement, there still are
no street protests by both the lecturers and
their charges, the
students.
It would therefore appear all is well. But we all know
all is not
well, the ruling party can always unleash its super cops on
unarmed
protestors and suppress student militancy. That is how the regime
chooses to
address legitimate complaints.
What is happening in
Zimbabwe as it loses its “brain trust” in the
form of intellectual flight as
lecturers go to where they will get the
treatment they deserve, points to a
country that will in the long term have
no one to teach at these centres of
higher learning.
The skeletal staff who remain at the different
faculties and
departments are not there because they love their country: they
are there
because their many applications to universities abroad and other
local NGOs
have not been replied – yet.
If then the future is
that ominous, it brings us back to where all
this is coming from. A
government whose brief has long ceased to be
addressing the concerns of its
citizens surely has lost all reason why it
should be occupying that
space.
But not big surprises here, the regime still firmly believes
the
people’s complaints are inspired by British and American
malcontents.
Education remains one the greatest ideals that form a
permanent part
of all democratic societies, and that in itself is a
truism.
But when that is seemingly jettisoned for whatever pursuit,
questions
have to be asked about where the people’s collective march to a
better world
is heading.
It is also curious that for a
government with so many individuals with
PhDs in its cabinet, the men in
power who themselves could easily be on some
university teaching post
somewhere still think those academics who chose a
life as university teachers
did so against their better judgment.
By Marko Phiri
Reuters
09 Dec 2003 13:16:48 GMT
ANALYSIS-Commonwealth
pullout seen slowing Zimbabwe
reforms
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
By
Cris Chinaka
HARARE, Dec 9 (Reuters) - Zimbabwe's withdrawal from the
Commonwealth has
robbed the world of a critical forum in which to engage
President Robert
Mugabe and may reduce the pressure he feels to carry out
democratic reforms,
analysts said on Tuesday.
A furious Mugabe said on
Sunday that Zimbabwe was quitting the 54-member
group after it extended its
suspension of the southern African country,
imposed in 2002 on the grounds
that Mugabe had rigged his re-election and
persecuted his opponents.
Political analysts said that as well as further
isolating him
internationally, Mugabe's angry decision would hurt national
confidence as
Zimbabwe struggles with a deepening economic and
political
crisis.
"The decision demonstrates that Mugabe's government
is prepared to fight,"
said Lovemore Madhuku, chairman of a political
pressure group, the National
Constitutional Assembly (NCA).
"If he
continues to feel threatened, the democratic reforms that we require
to get
the country back to normality are going to become even more difficult
to
win," Madhuku told Reuters.
In a defiant move hours after the
Commonwealth extended Zimbabwe's
suspension at its summit in Nigeria, Mugabe
left Harare for a U.N.
information technology conference in
Switzerland.
Diplomats said Mugabe was clearly reminding his critics that
he could still
find a place on the world stage despite his country's growing
isolation and
travel sanctions imposed by the European Union last
year.
Mugabe was able to attend the meeting because it is under the
auspices of
the United Nations, which has imposed no sanctions on Zimbabwe,
and is
taking place in a non-EU country.
BAD FOR ECONOMY
A
senior Western diplomat said Mugabe's decision to leave the
Commonwealth
could also have a long-term impact on Zimbabwe's economy.
Unemployment is an
alarming 70 percent, inflation is running at well over 500
percent and food
and fuel are in short supply.
"Mugabe might impress
some people in Zimbabwe and in Africa with his
rhetoric, but his hardline
posturing does not feed a nation and an isolated
government will find it very
difficult to get economic aid," the diplomat,
who asked not to be named, told
Reuters.
"I think Mugabe's decision will also have a pyschological effect
and affect
national confidence. People will realise this (political and
economic
crisis) is going to run for a while, and it will demoralise them,"
he added.
Mugabe's embattled government has defended its decision to quit
the
Commonwealth as an "escape from hell," saying Britain had turned the
group
into a "lynching club."
His officials say Zimbabwe had been
pushed into a no-win situation because
"racist leaders" in Britain and
Australia seeking Mugabe's downfall had
taken over the
organisation.
Membership of the Commonwealth gives poor nations political
prestige on an
international stage and some modest trade and aid benefits,
and exclusion
from the "gentlemen's club" carries the stigma of pariah
status.
Last week the International Monetary Fund also began procedures
that could
lead to Zimbabwe's expulsion, adding to its isolation. The IMF
said Mugabe's
government had "not actively cooperated" with it to help revive
the economy
and Zimbabwe had been in arrears on repayments since February
2001.
Mugabe, in power since independence in 1980, says the economy is a
victim of
sabotage by Western and domestic opponents trying to topple him in
revenge
for his government's seizure of white-owned farms for black
resettlement.
News24
MDC 'will bring Zimbabwe back'
09/12/2003 13:15 -
(SA)
Cape Town - The Zimbabwean official opposition, the Movement for
Democratic
Change (MDC), says that when it comes to power it will restore the
country's
membership of the Commonwealth.
Responding to President
Robert Mugabe's withdrawal of his country from the
union of former British
colonies, MDC secretary general Welshman Ncube said:
"The MDC government,
which will come into power as soon as free and fair
elections are conducted
in Zimbabwe, will restore the country's membership
to the
Commonwealth."
"In this respect we welcome the setting up a committee of
seven countries
aimed at assisting Zimbabweans find a solution to the crisis.
We hope that
they will succeed in bringing the two main political parties and
other
stakeholders to the negotiating table."
Ncube said Mugabe's
decision to pull Zimbabwe out of the Commonwealth was
"clearly not in the
interest of Zimbabwe and its people but is an attempt to
avoid returning the
country to democratic principles".
The opposition secretary general said
the constitution of Zimbabwe clearly
provided that decisions such as that of
pulling out of the Commonwealth
"must be made on the authority of a cabinet
resolution and therefore Mugabe
alone cannot lawfully do the withdrawal of
Zimbabwe from the Commonwealth".
The decision was therefore unlawful,
Ncube argued.
"We congratulate the Commonwealth for standing firmly on
the side of the
people of Zimbabwe and strongly urge the rest of the
international community
not to be bullied into turning a blind eye to
dictatorship, genocide, murder
and torture under the guise of sovereignty.
The decision by the Commonwealth
(to suspend Zimbabwe's membership) confirms
Mugabe's illegitimacy."