|
Broadcast: November, 27 2009
GONDA: My guest on the Hot Seat
programme today is Professor Welshman Ncube, the Minister of Industry and
Commerce and one of the negotiators from the MDC-M. Welcome on the programme
Professor Ncube.
NCUBE: Thank you.
GONDA: Now let me start with the latest
developments; you are back discussing issues that you had negotiated on before,
why is this happening again?
NCUBE: Well it's self-evident, we're
back to negotiations because there is a fair amount of unhappiness about either
the implementation of the original Agreement itself or the implementation of the
decision of the SADC Summit of 26th to 27th January this year which directly
gave birth to the inclusive government or because certain maybe unforeseen
circumstances have arisen which have affected the capacity of the parties to
continue to work together and lastly maybe, just because political parties and
their nature - they never stop grandstanding and trying to make political
capital out of every situation.
GONDA: So can you tell us what has been
agreed on so far?
NCUBE: Well regrettably I can't tell
you that because there is agreement that we should not begin to negotiate in the
broader media and one of the resolutions that have been taken by the negotiators
is to simply indicate that we are talking, the talks are continuing, we have an
agreed agenda which we need to go through without talking to each other or doing
reinterpretations which might lead to further complications through the
media.
GONDA: But can you tell us which issues
the parties are still divided on?
NCUBE: Well I wouldn't say the issues
where parties are still divided on because we are going through the agenda. What
I can tell you is that the same issues that everyone knows have been raised by
the parties are the issues which remain on the agenda, issues as I have said
which arise from the SADC Communiqué of 26th to 27th of January this year. And
those issues, you'll recall that communiqué asked the parties, or directed the
parties to go and agree on a formula for the appointment of provincial
governors. Those governors remain unappointed and therefore they're
self-evidently an issue. Then again that communiqué requested or directed the
inclusive government to deal with the dispute around the appointment of the
Reserve Bank governor and the Attorney General. That issue regrettably over the
last nine months has either not been dealt with or no agreement on how to deal
with it has been arrived at. The communiqué also directed that the inclusive
government must be constituted by the swearing in of the Prime Minister and
Deputy Prime Minister and the swearing in of all the Ministers and Deputy
Ministers by the 13th of February. We all know that one of the Deputy Ministers
nominated by MDC-T has not been sworn in and therefore, even though that SADC
Summit resolution has been substantially complied with, it has not been
completely and fully complied with because one Deputy Minister remains un-sworn
in, clearly therefore that is an issue arising out of that
communiqué.
And since the formation of the
inclusive government different parties are happy, are unhappy about different
aspects of implementation of the GPA. And there's unhappiness about
implementation around the provisions that we agreed on sanctions, there's
unhappiness about the agreement relating to the media in what you might call a
two-fold manner - there is the question of the external radio stations such as
yours where the provisions relating to encouraging and ensuring that these radio
stations should be encouraged to come and broadcast from home rather than
externally where it is believed they are influenced by, funded by and also
pursuing the agenda of foreign interests.
Then there is the issue of the
continued polarisation in the media, in particular that whereas the parties and
Zimbabweans have tried to move out of their pre-inclusive government trenches,
the media has remained firmly, firmly entrenched in those trenches and sniping
away at the political party or parties that are perceived to be the enemies of
that section of the media. So all around there's unhappiness about the media,
some are unhappy about the public media, the way it has continued to report,
some are unhappy about the private media which equally has taken sides and
promote as much hate speech regrettably as is promoted by the public media, so
that issue has also to be dealt with.
Then there are issues relating to
alleged operations of parallel government, indeed by both sides, there are
accusations and counter accusations, as you know that this side or that side
operate a parallel government not accountable to and not controlled by the
inclusive government.
Then you have the issues about
continued failure to adhere to the rule of law, selective prosecutions of people
on the basis of their political opinions or their belonging to particular
political parties. So these are some of the issues which we all know have been
in the public arena or public domain for quite some time and in respect of which
this or that party is unhappy about and we have therefore to review these issues
and find a formula to solve them.
GONDA: I would want to talk a bit more
about the external radio stations but just to go back to some of these
outstanding issues you mentioned, we know where the MDC-T stands on the
outstanding issues, for example they want a review of the appointments of the
Reserve Bank governor Gideon Gono, the Attorney General Johannes Tomana and
governors among other issues and we know that ZANU PF is saying it wants the
sanctions removed and external radio stations shut down but what about the
MDC-M, your party, can you spell out your own view about what you believe are
the outstanding issues?
NCUBE: Well certainly there's no entity
called MDC-M, but having said that . . .
GONDA: What do you mean, there's no
entity called the MDC-M? MDC-Mutambara, is that not your party?
NCUBE: Never. There is no party
registered by that name. There might be persistence in the media and elsewhere
in calling us by that name, but we are not MDC-M.
GONDA: So what is your name?
NCUBE: We are the MDC full stop. We
have never, we contested the elections by that name, we have always used that
name but that's not the core issue. I say it because if I don't then I will be
conceding to being called by a name which we have never fielded.
As
I say, that's not a core issue. Your question is about what are our issues -
first we have always said the issues which SADC require to be resolved must be
resolved and consequently therefore all the issues which arise out of the
communiqué as I have indicated them to you, are issues which we say must be
resolved and have always said must be resolved because we are parties to the
discussions of that communiqué. We are directly affected by those issues, the
appointment of provincial governors is a matter of concern to us which is our
issue too because if you are to have an inclusive government each of the parties
must be represented at all the levels of government and provincial governance is
one of those levels. So that is our issue and we have repeatedly said
so.
We
have equally, equally insisted that the issue of the media as I have summarised
to you is an issue which requires to be addressed. In fact on that issue we have
been most adversely affected. One of the other parties, two parties, complains
about the public media, the other about the private media, we complain about
both and we are the only party which do not control, which do not have any media
under our captivity, the others have this or that media under their captivity
and we clearly therefore do not accept that Zimbabwe deserves a media that is
under captivity in one form or the other.
Clearly therefore too, we have an
interest in the observance of the rule of law, we have an interest in ensuring
that the GPA is implemented as we agreed, that no one party, no one section of
society is subjected to the law and others are not. So those are issues which
are of interest to us. What you might perceive as a difference is that we have
not yet mastered the art of grandstanding and we don't always stand at the
rooftops and shout about these issues.
GONDA: You know in terms of the media
coverage you complain that your party has been adversely affected and that
there's this unfair media coverage but isn't this to some extent because your
party is viewed with suspicion and also because you lost dismally in the last
elections and that out of the four ministers in government, only one was
elected?
NCUBE: Well Violet, that's illogical.
The question of who this party deploys to government is an exclusive prerogative
of this party. It cannot be said because this one was elected, this was
unelected - we have an obligation to deploy this or that person. On the contrary
we have deployed Moses Mzila Ndlovu, David Coltart, and Tapela - all of whom
were elected. We have deployed only so-called unelected people who are the
senior leaders of the party and even that for good cause. You are not going to
go around buying our Members of Parliament who work with you and expect us to
then deploy them into government. And we did that quite deliberately and we were
being asked to deploy people who were already working for another political
party and we are not imbeciles, we will not do that and we'll never do that. We
will deploy people who will stand by, defend the party, die for the party and
will not deploy turncoats who can be bought overnight.
So
it's quite simple as far as we are concerned and the principal issue is you
cannot disagree with Tsvangirai and his party. All of us exist to serve them, if
you don't serve them you will be perceived in a negative way, if you jump at the
top of the highest mountain and say Tsvangirai is God, you will be worshipped by
the media and civil society - that is the bottom line and indeed you should be
worried if you are a true democrat. You shall be worried and indeed not just
worried, you shall be truly afraid because you have a culture, you have a party,
you have a civil society which is a mirror image of ZANU PF in its behaviour, in
its treatment of dissenting voices - because you believe that the positions you
have taken are an eternal truth. Who dares challenge an eternal
truth?
And did ZANU PF not believe that
it's a socialist thing, its nationalist thing, its land thing are eternal
truths? And therefore who dared challenge them? And its exactly the same thing
and this is what is actually frustrating, kuti (that) a people who are supposed
to be champions of democracy because they think they're on the right side of
history and right side of justice and therefore there can no longer be any right
to contest their position and you are constructing ZANU PF.
GONDA: What about the issue of Gono and
Tomana? Where does your party stand on that?
NCUBE: Look, those are communiqué
issues. The communiqué of SADC said the inclusive government must resolve them
and therefore as I have said all communiqué issues are our issues too. We don't
stand with MDC-T; we don't stand with ZANU PF. Our position is clear, we have
nothing personally against Gono, we have nothing personally against Tomana and
we are not obsessed about the matter but we believe in principle that once you
had a GPA signed on the 15th of September, any senior appointments that had to
be made should have been made consistently with the provisions of the GPA, which
required the parties to agree and clearly therefore those appointments were made
after agreement. We believe that they should be made within the letter of the
GPA and should be made within the spirit of the GPA but we have nothing personal
against any of those individuals. Ours is a matter of principle, a matter of
procedure that an appointment that is required to be made in a particular way
was not made in a particular way.
GONDA: So obviously this is a point of
departure between you and the other MDC?
NCUBE: I've no idea; I don't speak for
them so I don't know what their position is.
GONDA: Let me go back to the issue of
the media. What really is the issue at hand here when it comes to the radio
stations is it because we are broadcasting externally into Zimbabwe or that we
do not come under the influence of the State machinery?
NCUBE: My understanding is that in the
GPA there is an agreement that those who broadcast into Zimbabwe and are
supposedly Zimbabwean media should therefore broadcast from Zimbabwe as a matter
of principle. That's what was agreed so that the primary radio stations in
Zimbabwe are not an extension of foreign governments or foreign interests, which
appears to be in the case in the state of some of the external radio
stations.
GONDA: Appears in whose eyes? Appears in
whose eyes that they are an extension of foreign interests?
NCUBE: Well if you have a radio station
which is an arm of a particular foreign government as is the case of at least
one of the foreign radio stations which is in fact funded by a foreign
government as part of its own national radio station but dedicated to
broadcasting into Zimbabwe. Surely you would agree, surely you must agree that
everything else being equal, that is undesirable? That is not to suggest that
there were no justifications or circumstances which justified getting to the
position where you had foreign governments providing a framework or a support to
the establishment of radio stations to broadcast into Zimbabwe because you had a
closed media environment but . . .
GONDA: But surely . . .
NCUBE: . . . if I may finish . . . you
would agree that if you were to correct the internal problems in Zimbabwe, just
like any other country it will be desirable to have what is called Zimbabwe
media to have stations dedicated to broadcasting about Zimbabwe, broadcasting
from Zimbabwe. There's a difference between a station in any other part of the
world reporting on Zimbabwe from time to time but from whether a situation where
you have a radio station dedicated at, dedicated into broadcasting about and
exclusively, almost exclusively on Zimbabwe and everybody's agreed, indeed in
the GPA this is not a matter for debate. The parties agreed that this is
undesirable and that as a general principle we ought to have Zimbabwean media
broadcast from Zimbabwe and we acknowledge in the GPA that there are
circumstances, which gave, rise to this.
GONDA: Can you be more specific about
this? SW Radio Africa is not pursuing the agenda of any foreign government and
is not an extension of foreign interest. And also how can you make the shutting
down of external radio stations a priority when you are failing to open up the
media environment in Zimbabwe?
NCUBE: Firstly I have not alleged that
your radio station is an arm of any foreign government. At the worst it is a
radio station, which operates externally to Zimbabwe or from Zimbabwe. It is a
radio station which will be funded by, I believe, the money which is external to
Zimbabwe and I have not suggested and I would think that everyone would
acknowledge that your radio station is not a radio station which is an arm of a
foreign government.
Then secondly, I have not
insisted, as far as I understand myself that anyone should be shut down. I have
said in the Global Political Agreement there is an agreement that we will
liberalise the media so that those who are operating from outside Zimbabwe will
be free to come into Zimbabwe and broadcast without let or hindrance from
Zimbabwe. Indeed the relevant clause says - in anticipation of a free media
environment the parties thereby agree that the external radio stations should be
encouraged to return to Zimbabwe and to broadcast from Zimbabwe . .
.
GONDA: So why are the . . .
NCUBE: So clearly therefore we have not
yet got to a state where you can say the legislative framework has allowed that
to happen and clearly therefore it is a matter therefore which needs to be
addressed.
GONDA: So you see, this is perhaps where
the confusion is, why are you then as the negotiators and even as the political
parties even talking about the external radio stations right now when there is
no free media environment, when the airwaves have not been opened up? Surely,
shouldn't that come first? Opening up the airwaves, setting up the media
commission and then the journalists or the radio stations that are operating
from abroad can then decide whether they want to go back into the
country?
NCUBE: SADC resolved in Maputo, that the
grievances of each and of all the parties must be addressed and resolved
concurrently and not sequentially and hence if a party has therefore said we are
unhappy with the continued operations of the external radio stations, well none
of the parties have the power to veto it because SADC said if you do not put on
the table the grievances of all the parties then you would not make progress.
Clearly therefore we have to put that issue of external radio stations on the
agenda because one of the parties flagged it at SADC as an issue over which it
is unhappy. And so consequently it is an issue, which we have to address and
find a formula in respect of which everyone will be happy about it. It is not
for us to prejudge the issue by saying your issue is invalid and we should not
put it on the table because the other party will also say - fine we will say
your issues are equally invalid and we'll veto their putting them on the table
and we will not get anywhere if that is the attitude.
If
you ask me personally and you ask me as the representative of the MDC, I will
tell you that there are certain things which would make it easier for us to deal
with this issue if they were to happen internally to Zimbabwe but I will not go
so far as to say these must therefore be preconditions. If you do then you will
have in fact validated ZANU PF's contention that the issues which were put by
them on the agenda originally are all often being said - ah they are issues for
implementation last, you must implement all the other issues that we - as the
MDC collectively this time - were concerned about: Have a full restoration of
the rule of law, have a full media freedom, have full this or that and all those
were issues which were placed by us on the agenda and ZANU PF complains that you
want a full realisation and full benefit of your "issues" in quotation marks
while you are saying - oh our issues depend on the implementation of your issues
so therefore we will get a situation where all your issues are implemented and
ours remain unimplemented and there is this or that excuse for their lack of
implementation. That is the challenge and that is what they have flagged over
the last couple of months and it behoves us to find a formula to ensure that
they are satisfied that if the other issues are implemented we will not simply
walk away and say - we have got what we want in respect of issues, it's your
problem that you haven't got what you wanted.
GONDA: But don't you realise that you
can or you may discuss the issue of the external radio stations until you are
blue in the face but nothing is going to happen because the creation of some of
these radio stations such as ours had nothing to do with politicians and you
have no authority to ask for the radio stations to close down. And secondly we
all know that this is a ZANU PF pre-condition - the closing down of these
external radio stations - you can't close down things you don't like - isn't
that what it all means, isn't this what democracy is about?
NCUBE: We all recognise that we have no
power to legislate for something which is happening from London or from America
and we all realise that we cannot therefore compel anybody to shut down a radio
station one way or the other which is why in the GPA we talk of encouraging. We
could not and we did not say they must shut down or must be shut down by anyone
because we clearly have no such physical or legal power to do it, it's
self-evident and in this interview I have repeatedly used the word
encourage.
GONDA: Yes but ZANU PF doesn't use that
word. Robert Mugabe has on many times been on record as saying that the radio
stations should be shut down, he does not say encourage.
NCUBE: Violet, I don't care what people
in their parties say, I care about what we agreed and what we agreed is in the
GPA and I'm just giving it to you. I'm no spokesperson for ZANU PF or any other
party for that matter therefore I have no mandate nor the will nor the desire to
explain what they say.
GONDA: You know it's been suggested that
your team from the MDC is sympathetic towards ZANU PF and is doing the bidding
for ZANU PF and that you are viewed as a spoiler. How do you react to
that?
NCUBE: I'm tempted not to dignify that
rubbish with an answer. You have just been saying right now - passionately
defending your right of your freedom of expression, freedom of the media to
exist and to hold views and to allow people to propagate their views through
their media as freely as they want to and you were very passionate just a few
minutes ago - and surely you must be equally passionate about our right as a
party to hold views which are different from MDC-T and which are different from
yours and which are different from civil society and which are different from
those of ZANU PF, and therefore we don't exist for the purpose of agreeing with
this or that particular party.
And therefore when we disagree
with the favourite party of some interest you can label us whatever you wish and
we wouldn't care a hoot. We take our position on the basis of our party policies
and on the basis of our principles and we hold no brief for ZANU PF. We disagree
in a lot of ways, too many ways with ZANU PF to be even considered as a party,
which bids for ZANU PF. Just as much as we disagree in terms in particular of
the practices of the MDC-T, fundamentally disagree with them in many ways and
it's our right to do so. The fact that we do disagree with them does not make us
ZANU PF.
GONDA: Did you deliberately leave the
country to avoid the talks?
NCUBE: First again that is a nonsensical
idiotic allegation. What the heck do I have an interest in avoiding the talks?
What is it that I have to gain by avoiding the talks when in fact, when in fact
we were the party which was saying before these talks were started and were
called that the parties need to sit down and talk? You look at each and every
comment, every statement that we made prior to the SADC Ministerial visit, prior
to the SADC Troika Summit in Maputo, president Mutambara consistently,
consistently called upon MDC-T, called upon ZANU PF to sit down and
talk.
We
are the ones who called upon Morgan Tsvangirai to come back to the country so
that this matter can be resolved by Zimbabweans across the table and if you look
at our oral and written submissions to the SADC Ministerial Troika we
recommended this dialogue and these talks, it is emphatically calling for the
talks. Indeed more than any of the other parties we did that. You will recall
the MDC-T were saying there is no reason for any talks, all you need is to
implement the GPA without any discussion. So even on the basis of the fact it is
nonsensical to say that the party, which called for, which campaigned for, which
argued for the dialogue suddenly wants to avoid the dialogue.
Secondly the meetings, which we
travelled to attend, were meetings, which were predetermined long before, long
before the talks were agreed and before the timeframe was set by SADC. I went to
the ATC Council of Ministers in Brussels which was agreed upon six months ago
that it will take place on those dates which we committed ourselves that we will
attend to ensure that you have appointments of the new secretary general, you
have the budget for next year, you have programmes for next year and that we as
a country have an interest in ensuring that all those things take place and that
is the meeting I went to attend. Mrs Mushonga went to attend the meeting of the
ADB Bank, which we were requested as chair of COMESA to go and attend that
meeting and to make a presentation on behalf of COMESA as the current chairs of
COMESA. So if some imbecile somewhere thinks that attending those meetings is
avoiding the talks it is not my problem.
Thirdly and finally, the 15 days
we are talking about, we as a party were available for the talks. When we
returned from Maputo we said we were available for the talks and others were not
available. I then travelled to Egypt with President Mugabe to the Africa/China
Summit on that weekend immediately, or rather on the Sunday immediately after
the Maputo Summit and we came back on the Monday and we offered ourselves for
the talks, we said we can talk on Tuesday, we can talk on Wednesday, we can talk
on Thursday, we can talk on Friday, we can talk on the Saturday and the Sunday
and there were no takers for our offer, others were busy. On the Monday that's
when we were then away, on the Monday, and the Tuesday and the Wednesday - three
days.
We
returned on Thursday and offered to be at the negotiating table on the Friday,
on the Saturday, on the Sunday, on the Monday and we even offered to say let's
get out of Harare and have a retreat so that we will have uninterrupted
negotiations with a view to concluding them as expeditiously as possible. Again
there were no takers. For instance the Minister of Finance said he was working
on his budget, he could not be out of Harare although he was available during
those days for talks in Harare. The ZANU PF team said they were not available
during that period and therefore only an idiot can suggest that representatives
of a party who were available out of the 15 days that we are talking about, were
available except in respect of four of those days, you can then say they avoided
the talks.
GONDA: So what is going to happen if you
don't meet the SADC mandated deadline? I understand it's the 6th of . . .
(interrupted)
NCUBE: There is no such thing. That is a
creation of those who grandstand and who are masters of deception. There never
was a SADC deadline. Those that want to believe there was, it is their problem,
not mine. SADC provided a framework and said, and this is a decision of SADC and
it has no deadline and I'll summarise it to you.
GONDA: Before you summarise it to us,
Morgan Tsvangirai, after the SADC Summit in Mozambique, he came out and told
journalists that Robert Mugabe had been given a 30-day deadline, so are you
saying he lied?
NCUBE: I'm not the spokesperson for
MDC-T or for Morgan Tsvangirai, you are free to go and ask him . . .
GONDA: But you are saying there was no
deadline.
NCUBE: There was no deadline and I don't
know whether he said that or he didn't say that, I'm hearing it from you and as
far as I'm concerned there wasn't. My understanding and my party's understanding
of the SADC resolutions was that the parties must meet immediately and after 15
days, the facilitator will review the progress they have made and render such
assistance as might be necessary to render. And after a further 15 days the
facilitator shall report to the SADC chair on progress or lack of it and then
the SADC might then consider what further assistance or what further action, if
any, is required and in my vocabulary, those are not deadlines, that is a
framework.
GONDA: The MDC-T has issued several
statements and in most of the statements they've talked about a SADC deadline
and I was actually going to ask you who pushed for the 15 to 30 day
timeline?
NCUBE: First as I say I'm not a
spokesperson of anybody except the party that I represent. As I understand it
there was no deadline pushed for or the timeframe, which was pushed for by
anyone. The Ministerial Report, the Foreign Ministerial Troika Report contained
the provision relating to the 30-day period or 30-day framework, that was
already in the Report to say that the parties must talk and SADC must then
review within 30 days the progress thereof. What was then added on the floor of
the Summit was the 15-day period and that 15-day period was proposed by
President Zuma and accepted by everybody else who was present at the
meeting.
GONDA: Right, and so President Zuma has
actually appointed a new team tasked with evaluating the negotiation process, so
in your view how significant is the shift in persons?
NCUBE: Previously the dialogue was
facilitated by the South African President who was at that time President Mbeki
and there's a new President in South Africa and he's facilitating the dialogue.
In fact if there's a team to evaluate, they never was a team before to evaluate.
That's a new development. Previously there was a facilitation team and this was
not an evaluation team. This was a team, which basically chaired the dialogue
among and between the parties. You had Reverend Chikane, you had then Minister
Mufamadi you had Advocate Mojangu - these were the facilitation team, they sat
with the negotiators, chaired the meeting when they were required to be chaired
and then when we requested that we wanted to talk on our own without them being
present we will tell them so. That is what used to happen and they were not an
evaluation team. I have no idea what the terms of reference of the new team
are.
GONDA: Finally Professor Ncube why are
the talks being held in total secrecy because many people are saying obviously
you cannot give all details but surely there has to be some kind of a brief, or
the occasional press conference so that at least Zimbabweans know what is being
discussed about their future?
NCUBE: Well I think Zimbabweans know
what is being discussed. The contentious issues, the unresolved issues and the
outstanding issues are known. What we have said we will not do is give a
briefing of 'we have an agreement on this, we are still negotiating on this'
because first there can be no agreement on one issue without an agreement on the
others because all the parties have said while they may make a concession on
item "A", that concession is valid only on the assumption that they will be able
to get concessions on items "C" or "D". Therefore without going through the
entire agenda there is in fact no agreement on anything. So it is pointless to
say you are announcing that we have an agreement on how to take the issue of
sanctions when you have no agreement on how to take the issue of the rule of law
because whatever concessions people are making on one issue might be conditional
on the other issues being resolved, so it is pointless.
Secondly by its very nature, if
you start to brief the media and to issue statements on the substance there will
always be different points of emphasis which will only create contradictions and
we might then end up negotiating what we have said in the media - is this
correct, is this the best way of saying it - and it doesn't help in our
respectful view.
GONDA: I'm afraid we've run out of time
and we have to end here but thank you very much for talking on the programme Hot
Seat.
That was Professor Welshman Ncube
one of the negotiators from the MDC and the Minister of Industry and Commerce,
thank you very much.
NCUBE: Thank you. -
ZimOnline | 
A Paper Presented at the 27th Annual Meeting of the
Association of Third World Studies, Cape Coast, Ghana, November 21-24,
2009