The ZIMBABWE Situation Our thoughts and prayers are with Zimbabwe
- may peace, truth and justice prevail.

Back to Index

Back to the Top
Back to Index

Daily Mirror, Zimbabwe

MDC MP arrested

The Daily Mirror Reporter
issue date :2005-Jun-20

MDC legislator for Mabvuku-Tafara, Timothy Mubhawu, was arrested last Friday
on allegations of violating provisions of the Public Order and Security Act
(Posa) after he reportedly threatened a Zanu PF supporter with unspecified
action for hoisting the ruling party's flag in his constituency.
Mubhawu, the opposition party's Manicaland chairperson, is said to have also
threatened the complainant, identified only as Muchena, with the same action
for wearing the ruling party's regalia, again in his constituency.
The MDC lawmaker further reportedly queried why Muchena's tuckshop was
spared during Operation Murambatsvina/Restore Order.
The incident allegedly took place at Muchena' house in Old Mabvuku, where
Mubhawu had gone to attend a funeral.
Yesterday, Mubhawu confirmed he was arrested but referred this newspaper to
his lawyer Alec Muchadehama of Mbizo, Muchadehama and Makoni legal
practitioners, for more details.
Muchadehama said Mubhawu was arrested some hours after he had paid
condolences to Muchena, whose child had died. "He was picked up by Mabvuku
police on Friday around 9 pm and ordered to report at Harare Central Police
Station the following day. He was charged with contravening Section 22 (A
and B) of the Public Order and Security Act (Posa). Under the section, it is
an offence for anyone to force someone to do what he or she is not legally
supposed to do," said Muchadehama.
 "Muchena alleges that Mubhawu warned her against wearing Zanu PF regalia
and also quizzed her why she was hoisting a Zanu PF flag at her house.
Mubhawu is further alleged to have asked Muchena why operation Murambatsvina
had spared her tuckshop while others in the area were demolished," explained
Muchena, added Muchadehama, alleged that she felt threatened by Mubhawu's
statements and reported the matter to Mabvuku police, who referred the case
to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) Law and Order Department.
"A warned and cautioned statement was made and Mubhawu is denying the
charges," Muchadehama said, adding the police were still carrying out
investigations. Muchadehama said his client was released on Saturday.
Yesterday, police spokesperson Assistant Commissioner Wayne Bvudzijena could
neither deny nor confirm Mubhawu's arrest, saying he needed to verify the
Mubhawu became the Member of Parliament for Mabvuku-Tafara taking over from
Justin Mutendadzamera, after defeating Pamela Tungamirai of the ruling party
in last March's elections.
He becomes the second MDC MP to be arrested this month following the arrest
of St Mary's legislator Job Sikhala, a fortnight ago.
He is alleged to have  incitied people in his constituency to support a
two-day stayaway organised by the Broad Alliance, a loose coalition of civic
bodies against the government.
A number of opposition legislators have been arrested this year on different
On April 7, MDC national youth chairman Nelson Chamisa was arrested after
violent demonstrations by opposition youths in the Central Business District
against the results of the March 31 parliamentary election won by Zanu PF.
Makokoba MP Thokozani Khupe and Goodwill Chimbaira, now Zengeza legislator,
were arrested before the elections on allegations of addressing an illegal
gathering and violence, respectively.
Back to the Top
Back to Index

Daily Mirror, Zimbabwe

State should come up with viable public transport policy

The Daily Mirror Reporter
issue date :2005-Jun-20

THE critical shortage of public transport that has haunted the country,
particularly after the majority of private transport operators had their
fleets impounded by the police as part of the joint police and city council's
operations Murambatsvina and Restore Order, has brought to the fore the need
for a watertight policy to ensure a reliable and efficient transport system.
Although the government - through the Zimbabwe United Passenger Company
(Zupco) - has embarked on a programme to provide public transport through
purchasing buses from China, the programme is largely inadequate to cover
the gap left by commuter omnibuses impounded by the police.
Thousands of commuters have been stranded with some having to walk several
kilometres to and from work. Private vehicle owners - who occasionally eased
the situation by ferrying some people - could no longer offer the services
for fear of arrest, as they had no permits to provide transport services to
the public.
Some city residents  are getting up  as early as four o'clock in the morning
and still get to their workplaces well after nine o'clock. Drivers of the
few commuter omnibuses still on the roads are spending long hours queuing
for scarce fuel instead of ferrying passengers.
In a desperate bid to address the transport problems, Local Government
Minister Ignatius Chombo said that extra 'Freedom Trains' would be
introduced on three city routes.
"We will review the situation with time. We want to ensure that all
commuters are carried to work in time and are home in time," Chombo was
quoted saying.
Commuter omnibus operators, whose fleets are often impounded by the police
as unroadworthy, have been accused of "blowing up" their profits while
failing to service their vehicles so that they can provide better service to
their customers.
One such operator, Joseph Magunda, said  operators tended to neglect their
fleet, but was also quick to say the police were often too harsh on them
even if their vehicles had minor defects..
"Of course it is regrettable that some operators do not service their fleets
and that, in the long run, would have a serious impact on commuters who
often find themselves stranded when such buses are impounded by the police,"
he said.
He said there was need for public transport associations to come up with a
programme that would compel all their members to ensure that  they routinely
took their vehicles for servicing.
Some commuters interviewed said since the Zupco buses plying the roads were
not enough given the demand for public transport, government should consider
other private players in the sector and come up with a law that would compel
them to service their vehicles on a routine basis.
The commuter omnibuses were introduced in the early 1990s, with proponents
of private sector ownership and free competition arguing that such
conditions would generate an efficient and effective public transport
The deregulation process - introducing competition into a previously
protected sector of the economy so as to reduce constraints for potential
entrants - was meant to  'reinvigorate the Industry' and, owing to the
direct competition between rival operators, they would be an efficient and
reliable service.
Back to the Top
Back to Index

Daily Mirror, Zimbabwe

Drugs expire awaiting distribution

The Daily Mirror Reporter
issue date :2005-Jun-20

DRUGS worth over $1 billion intended for clinics in Chirumanzi expired while
in storage at Mvuma District Hospital due to lack of transport to distribute
In addition, another set of drugs worth millions of dollars were recently
stolen in the district, amid reports that most clinics in the area were
reeling from an acute shortage of medication.
These developments have irked the Deputy Minister of Health and Child
Welfare, Edwin Muguti who lashed at both authorities and the community for
what he termed negligence and laxity.
Muguti said: "I am not happy with the reason given as to why the drugs
expired. People should use bicycles rather than to leave drugs to expire. As
a ministry we cannot allow such things to happen."
He said what was baffling was that the hospital had an ambulance, which it
must have used to distribute the drugs.
Muguti, the legislator for Chirumanzi, added that besides the ambulance, the
hospital authorities should have looked for alternative means of transport,
such as bicycles.
On the stolen drugs from Hama and Chengwena clinics, Muguti blamed the
laxity of security and community alertness for the theft.
"It is more worrying that both authorities and the community allow such
things to happen when some clinics in rural areas were complaining that they
had no drugs. Authorities should take measures to ensure that drugs are
safe," he said.
Back to the Top
Back to Index

Daily Mirror, Zimbabwe

Clean-up to continue: Makwavarara

The Daily Mirror Reporter
issue date :2005-Jun-20

THE chairperson of the commission running the affairs of the city of Harare,
Sekesai Makwavarara at the weekend said operation Murambatsvina/Restore
Order would continue until the capital retained its sunshine city status.
Makwavarara said this at a wedding ceremony where she was given $10 million
to donate to charity by Deliah Mahachi, the managing director of Deliah
Images and Corporate Services.
"Operation Murambatsvina is still going on and will not stop until Harare
retains its sunshine city status. We are committed to ensuring that
cleanliness prevails and that all other illegal activities are contained,"
she said.
"People who come to Zimbabwe should see the beauty of the country through
Harare and I hope all the visitors from abroad will report positively on
what they have seen. Harare has a lot of nice places and we should maintain
The clean-up operation launched close to a month ago has resulted in the
demolition of a number of illegal settlements and informal trade markets in
the capital and other parts of the country.
Government has said it will provide at least 20 000 stands to displaced
people in Harare while informal traders have already started registering
under new regulations.
During the clean-up exercise, police discovered several tonnes of basic
foodstuffs and other commodities that are in short supply. These would be
handed over to Harare Children's Home and Young Women Christians Association
"I am humbled to receive this donation on a wedding day. It is unusual to
get a donation on a wedding when we are supposed to be giving gifts. This
explains why she (Mahachi) was voted the 2004 young entrepreneur of the
year. We hope other young people emulate her hard work," Makwavarara said.
Back to the Top
Back to Index

Daily Mirror, Zimbabwe

USaid donates trucks

The Daily Mirror Reporter
issue date :2005-Jun-20

THE United States Agency for International Development (USaid) recently
donated five new seven-tonne delivery trucks valued US$350 000 (over Z$2,1
billion) to the Zimbabwe National Family Planning Council (ZNFPC) to ensure
nationwide availability of condoms for HIV and Aids prevention and family
According to the US Public Affairs Section, the trucks are being used in the
ZFPC "Delivery Team Topping UP (DTTU)" distribution system of condoms and
The delivery vehicles feature insulated van boxes to protect the condoms and
contraceptives while in transit.
"The DDTU system delivers condoms and contraceptives to 1 600 hospitals,
health centres and community based distributors nationwide every four
months," the section said in a
"This innovative and effective system has reduced stock outs of products in
health facilities from as high as 40 percent in some provinces for some
products, to less than two percent for all the products."
It added the delivery trucks and DTTU monitoring vehicles are also equipped
with high frequency radios that connect to a base station at ZNFPC
headquarters, resulting in more efficient deliveries and faster assistance
in the event of breakdown.
"The radio system is provided with United Kingdom Department for
International Development (DFID) funds through its project with John Snow
International, Europe," the section explained.
USaid and DFID, through their contractors, jointly fund and manage the DTTU
system with ZNFPC, among other programmes and activities helping to mitigate
and manage the HIV and Aids epidemic in Zimbabwe.
Back to the Top
Back to Index

The United Africa Organization  -  UAO
Leading the match to African Unification and Democracy

June 2005

                 The Crisis in Zimbabwe
                 The solution is ..The United Africa

                                        By Papa Yalae

1982 in Africa, another Traditional African State confronted another Modern
African State and demanded genuine autonomy. An African Ethnic
Group challenged the omnipotent political power of a government of an
African State and demanded "true" political justice. The Ndebele
Ethnic Group of Matabeleland, a Traditional African State, demanded power-
sharing with the Modern African State of Zimbabwe in order to
protect their ethnic identity and share in the economic wealth of the State
of Zimbabwe. Since then, the Modern African State of Zimbabwe has
been thrown into serious political crises, a political situation quite
characteristic of the Modern States of Africa. These crises emanate from
genuine post-independent political disagreements between Traditional Africa
and Modern Africa but reflect the historical political rivalry
between dominant Ethnic Groups in the Modern African State. In Zimbabwe, the
dominant Ethnic Groups are the Ndebeles and the Shonas.
The Ndebeles, the Ethnic Group of Matabeleland in the Modern African State
of Zimbabwe, questions the legitimacy of the political authority of
the government of Zimbabwe, a government they believed is wholly controlled
by the Shona Ethnic Group. In effect, the people of
Matabeleland, since independence in 1980, have been demanding real autonomy
and common control of the resources of their traditional
lands. Like in many African States such legitimate political demands almost
always result in political crises and military confrontations.
According to reports from the Catholic Commission for Justice and Peace in
Zimbabwe and the Legal Resources Foundation of Zimbabwe, it
can be surmised that the political demands of the Ndebele People unleashed a
ferocious Shona-led military assault on the people of
Matabeleland between 1982 and 1987 and as a result created an almost
irreconcilable political disagreements between the Shonas and the
Ndebeles of Zimbabwe. The rapidly deteriorating political situation of
Zimbabwe is indicative of political impasse. The current political
situation in Zimbabwe is so tense that one can only conclude that another
military confrontation is imminent.

The question that always arises from such military confrontations in Africa
is this: why is it that post-colonial political crisis is still a frequent
occurrence on the Land of Africa. A careful analysis of the frequent crisis
in Africa that at times leads to ethnic annihilation of an African
Ethnic Group by an African Ethnic Group reveals that the seeds of political
instability and ethnic destruction were sown into the African body
politics in the colonial period, specifically by the inglorious partition of
Africa. A careful analysis also reveals that the solution to such crisis
in Africa is..The United Africa. The proposed United Africa nation is the
one continental African nation that will certainly garner the
capability and the willingness to end these crises permanently. Political
crisis has become a sad feature of the African political landscape
because post-colonial Africa has not established appropriate political
structure, appropriate political system and an appropriate political
ideology to neutralize the debilitating effects of the balkanization of
Africa through the partition of Africa. To understand the true nature of the
political crisis in Zimbabwe and its similarity to other African political
crisis and to diagnose an appropriate remedy to eradicate this
debilitating political disease afflicting Zimbabwe and Africa, one must take
a critical look at history. Let us look at the history of Zimbabwe.

History of Zimbabwe

Ancient Zimbabwe
History tells us that the earliest settlers of the Modern African State of
Zimbabwe are the Khoisans, which dates back to 200 BC. But, it is also
believed that the original inhabitants of Zimbabwe were the San Bushmen who
were displaced by the Bantu Migration about 1500 years ago.
During the great Bantu migration of Africa, the Shona Ethnic Group finally
settled in the eastern part of the Modern African State of Zimbabwe.
The Shona were established as a social and political group for centuries in
the present-day Zimbabwe when the Ndebeles arrived.  In 1837,
the Bantu Matabele People settled in southwestern part of Zimbabwe after a
long migration from the south. Evidently then, the two major
Ethnic Groups of Zimbabwe, who are fighting each other for political
supremacy of the Modern African State of Zimbabwe, are indigenous
Africans, the children of the Land of Africa, who migrated on their vast
god-given land and finally settled on the African geopolitical territory
now known as Zimbabwe. This is not unique to Zimbabwe. It is a common
African historical event.

Pre-Colonial States of Zimbabwe
Before the arrival of the Ndebele Ethnic Group, the Shona Ethnic Group
dominated the territory and controlled the coastal trade routes. The
Shona People established strong identity and a system of government. Even
though the Shona lived in dispersed settlements they created
well organized political states as source of centralized power. Each Shona
State was headed by a paramount chief who have a court that
advised him about most important decisions. The head chief often received
substantial payment in the form of tributes from his territory.
Various Shona Empire arose and fell to other Shona States that became
powerful during that period. But, the Shona Empire, which arose in
the 17th and 18th century fell in the 19th century to the Ndebele Ethnic
Group from the south.

By the mid-19th century the Ndebele Ethnic Group that migrated to this
territory established a powerful kingdom and maintained control over
the geopolitical vicinity until the European occupation in 1890. The Ndebele
People, like the Shona People, maintained a highly political and
effectively organized society.  The Ndebele Kingdom had a hierarchical
political relationship between the people and the kingdom and that
gave the Ndebeles a strong sense of belonging to a socio-political group -
The Ndebele Ethnic Group. This sense of belonging was greatly
expressed through military prowess and it enabled the Ndebeles to conquer
other groups who they integrated into Ndebele society and given
a new identity. The strong sense of belonging indicates that the Ndebeles,
like many other African Ethnic Groups, believe strongly that it is the
socio-political group that will always protect them socially and
politically. The African, including the Shona and the Ndebele, have a
passionate feeling of belonging to the "Natural Group", the social group
that provides care and sharing and protection.

As can be seen, both the Shona Ethnic Group and the Ndebele Ethnic Group
have their own strong social identities and effective systems of
governance thus creating a political situation that requires the creation of
appropriate political structure and appropriate political system to
prevent political clashes. Appropriate political arrangements are essential
to preventing extremist ethnocentric politicians from creating
ethnic hegemony in the geopolitical area. Because of the current political
structure and system, ethnocentric tendencies towards ethnic
hegemony are prevalent in Zimbabwe and are fomenting ethnic hatred which
then leads to ethnic clashes. Clearly, the pursuit of political
supremacy in Zimbabwe that began before colonialism is creating the fear of
ethnic hegemony among the people of the two major Ethnic
Groups who live in close proximity. Clearly, the Shona and the Ndebeles are
seeking to control the geo-political vicinity and since pre-
colonial days, the two Ethnic Groups have been very much distrustful of each
other because of the fear of domination. Though ethnic desire to
grab political hegemony has been problematic in Africa even before
colonialism, colonialism actually aggravated these knotty political
situations by transforming ethnic mistrust into ethnic animosity.

Colonial Zimbabwe
Africa's resources attracted colonialism and Zimbabwe was not spared from
European encroachment. In the 19th century British and
Boer traders, hunters, and missionaries started encroaching in the area now
know as Zimbabwe. In the late 19th century the first European
settlers arrived and in 1888 the King of Ndebele signed a concession giving
mineral rights to the British South Africa Company, which named
the territory Rhodesia in 1894. In 1889, the British South Africa Company
gained a British mandate to colonize what became Southern
Rhodesia and promoted the colonization of the region in order to control the
land, labor, and precious metal and mineral resources. The
Ndebele Ethnic Group, the indigenous African political power then, opposed
the Europeans colonialism and rebelled but were defeated by the
European settlers, who established European political supremacy over the
Ndebele and the Shona Ethnic Groups. Both the Ndebele Ethnic
Group and the Shona Ethnic Groups see colonialism as repulsive and being
abhorrent to political domination and distrustful of the Europeans,
both Ethnic Groups staged unsuccessful revolts against colonialist
encroachment on their native lands between 1896 and 1897.

The British South African Company ran Southern Rhodesia until it became
self-governing (under European settlers) in 1923, and became part
of the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland from 1953-63. In 1953, Britain
created the Central African Federation, made up of Southern
Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe), Northern Rhodesia (Zambia) and Nyasaland (Malawi).
But the Federation broke up in 1963 when Zambia and
Malawi gained independence. The demise of the federation meant that the
Ndebeles, the Shonas and the European settlers have been
incorporated into one geopolitical entity then called Southern Rhodesia, the
government of which was controlled by the European minority.

So, Zimbabwe (formerly Southern Rhodesia) is composed of three major groups
of people - the Ndebeles, the Shonas and the Europeans. The
Ndebeles and the Shonas are the indigenous Africans and form the
overwhelming majority of the people in the then Southern Rhodesia. The
Europeans, which constituted the minority group, grabbed power and imposed
minority rule and adopted the colonial tactics of playing one
African Ethnic Group against other in order to disrupt the balance of power
and to divide the Africans. Such tactics aggravated the fear of
ethnic domination and resulted in great mistrust and even hatred among the
Africans. In the then Southern Rhodesia, the Shona and the
Ndebele Ethnic Groups were divided until the imperative need for an Africa
unity front to overturn minority rule compelled political leaders
from Shona and Ndebele Ethnic Groups to form one political group. Without a
doubt, colonialism aggravated ethnic mistrust and provoked
ethnic animosity but compelled "marriage of necessity" but not "marriage of
sweethearts". Colonialism, through its machinations, tactic and
despotism did not create a "nation of goodwill" based on mutual trust among
the Africans. On the contrary, colonialism and its successor
global subjugating systems, seek to prevent African unity front in order to
achieve the exploitative and dominating goals against least

By incorporating various Traditional African States and changing the balance
of power and employing "divide and conquer" tactics,
colonialism cultivated virulent ethnic animosity in Africa. Colonial tactics
were attempts to prevent African unity front against European
settlers. Colonial machinations were political ploys to eliminate any
effective challenge to the colonialist objective of maintaining a
permanent control of the resources of Africa. Undoubtedly, such political
ploy, which has persisted to this day, has created ethnic enmity all
across Africa even in many geopolitical areas where there were strong
inter-ethnic affinities. Colonialism destroyed the African Affinity and
replaced it with the African Enmity. Ethnic enmity has endured up to this
day in all Africa and if these colonial structures are not dismantled
ethnic animosity will endure forever much to the detriment of Africa.

Pre-Independent Zimbabwe
The "marriage of necessity" compelled by minority rule created one
multi-ethnic liberation movement. But, the loose political marriage
between the Ndebeles and the Shonas, two rival Ethnic Groups of Africa,
could not survive under the political reality of pre-independent
Zimbabwe as it became too apparent before independence that the colonial
political structure of Southern Rhodesia will not change and that
the Ethnic Group that wins the first elections has the greatest chance of
establishing ethnic supremacy.

Until 1963, there was one main liberation movement, known as ZAPU - Zimbabwe
African Peoples Union. In 1961, after two multi-ethnic
political groups have been banned by the European controlled minority
government of Southern Rhodesia, ZAPU was formed by politicians
from both Shona and Ndebele Ethnic Groups. At this time, all Ethnic Groups
in the former Southern Rhodesia supported ZAPU. But in 1963 the
"marriage" crumbled. ZAPU split along ethnic lines, a year after its
formation. A splinter group, the Zimbabwean African National Union (ZANU)
was formed by politicians from the Shona Ethnic Group, thus setting the
stage for a fight for post-independent political supremacy between
rival African Ethnic Groups, a rivalry pre-dating European colonialism.

At first, the two political parties were not ethnocentric as both parties
had membership from all Ethnic Groups. However, over time,
differences began to emerge. ZAPU recruited mainly from the Ndebele-speaking
western region of Zimbabwe, and ZANU mainly from the
Shona-speaking eastern regions. ZAPU created a military wing ZIPRA and
trained them in Russia. ZANU created ZANLA, a
military wing, and trained them in China. Like the political wing and the
Ethnic Groups that control them, the two armies, ZIPRA and ZANLA,
came to see each other as rivals. There were many battles between them when
they met, both inside and outside Zimbabwe. In addition,
ZIPRA and ZANLA competed with each other for territory and support and
frequently fought and killed each other.  Before Zimbabwean
independence there was a clear indication of deep-seated mistrust and
animosity between Shona and Ndebele.

Aside from ethnocentric ideologies, there were no major ideological
differences that divide Shona-controlled ZANU and Ndebele-controlled
ZAPU.  ZANU was not formed because of policy or ideological differences with
the ZAPU leadership. ZANU was formed purely on ethnic
grounds. The Shona People could not accept an Ndebele led party and feared
that Ndebele leadership of a dominant political party will lead to
Ndebele political supremacy after independence is achieved. As a result of
the political split, the fight against colonial domination took an
ethnic turn with the Ndebele firmly in support of ZAPU and the Shona in
support of ZANU. The formation of ZANU marked the first time in the
history of the former Rhodesia, in which a political party was formed purely
on ethnic grounds. The rivalry and the mistrust between ZAPU
and ZANU were so deep that at independence, their two armies, ZIPRA and
ZANLA could not be incorporated as one Zimbabwean army.
Although, the campaign for independence gathered strength under these two
political parties, the Shonas rallied around ZANU and the
Ndebeles rallied round ZAPU in much the same way the Ndebeles had rallied
around their traditional monarchical system. There were serious
political rift between the Ndebeles and the Shonas but the political
pressures by their respective political parties, ZAPU and ZANU and the
military pressures by their respective military wings, ZAPRA and ZANLA,
resulted in the dissolution of the Central African Federation in 1963.

In 1964 the Rhodesian Front, the European minority controlled political
party, tried to persuade Britain to grant independence and when Britain
refused, the party unilaterally declared independence in 1965 thus
continuing with minority rule. This sparked international outrage and
economic sanctions. The United Kingdom called the declaration an act of
rebellion but did not reestablish control by force. The unilateral
declaration intensified the guerrilla war against the minority rule, with
rival ZANU and ZAPU operating out of Zambia and Mozambique
respectively. In 1965 the European minority government, banned all African
Political Groups, imprisoning the leaders from both Ndebele and
Shona Ethnic Groups. When they were released, the leaders of the two
ethnocentric political groups in the then Rhodesia formed the
Zimbabwe Patriotic Front. They denounced any government that seek to
perpetuate European domination and continued to lead the military
wing of the party, the Zimbabwe African National Liberation Army, from bases
in Mozambique. In 1974, the major African nationalists groups--
the Zimbabwe African Peoples Union (ZAPU) and the Zimbabwe African National
Union (ZANU), which split away from ZAPU in 1963--were
united again into the "Patriotic Front" and combined their military forces,
at least nominally. Like events in other African States, colonialism
created a temporary unity (" a marriage of necessity") between rival African
Ethnic Groups in the geopolitical area.

The political and military pressure of the Zimbabwe Patriotic Front and the
international economic sanctions weakened the European minority
government.  In 1978, the European minority government yielded to the
military and political pressures and opted for negotiated settlement.
Elections for transitional legislature were boycotted by ZANU and ZAPU. The
new government, Zimbabwe Rhodesia, failed to gain
international recognition and the civil war intensified. In 1979 Britain
decided to broker a peace agreement between all political factions in
Southern Rhodesia. At a conference in London held by the British government
an agreement was reached between the British government
and all Rhodesia's political organizations. The Lancaster House Agreement
led to a peace agreement and a new constitution, which
guaranteed minority rights. The agreement ended hostilities and sanctions
and set the stage for pre-independence elections.

Elections were conducted in 1980 but like in other African States, the
political group controlled by the majority Ethnic Group, in this case the
Shona Ethnic Group, won convincingly and formed the next government. Despite
the elections, Zimbabwe was a seriously divided African
State at independence in 1980 because the importation of foreign
majoritarian democracy granted the majority Ethnic Group, the Shona,
inordinate political power much to the chagrin of the minority, the Ndebele.
The unsuitability of foreign systems to the socio-geopolitical
diversity of Africa became greatly manifested in Zimbabwe, just like in
other African States, when soon after independence the new
government began to have serious problems with the demands for power-sharing
from the Ndebele of Matabeleland.

Independent Zimbabwe - The Period of Fear: Entumbane and Gukurahundi - 1980
to 1987
African History indicates that the fear of the African by the African was
greatly manifested in post independent Zimbabwe. The fear of indefinite
domination by the rival Ethnic Group, the Shona, led to political
disturbances in the provinces of Matabeleland, the traditional territory of
Ndebele Ethnic Group. This fear was not eliminated after independence when a
few cabinet positions were allocated to Ndebele politicians
thus attesting to the fact that post-independent distribution of a few
cabinet posts to the political leaders of disenchanted Ethnic Groups is not
an acceptable power-sharing political mechanism that can sustain peace in
Africa. Just like other African Ethnic Group (The Ijaw of Nigeria),
the Ndebele People did not accept a few cabinet positions as enough
power-sharing with the Shona People because it did not assure them
protection of ethnic identity and sharing in the political power and the
economic wealth of Zimbabwe. Distribution of cabinet post did not even
mitigate distrust and animosity between Ndebele and Shona.

Distrust and ethnic animosity began to spread soon as after independence and
made it very difficult to integrate the two liberation armies into
the Zimbabwean army. Distrust and animosity did not dissipate after
independence because the people of Matabeleland and the people of
Shonaland have always existed in an uneasy political relationship before
European encroachment.  The uneasiness is due to the fear of
ethnic domination which compelled each Ethnic Group to raise ethnocentric
armies. From the first days of the war of independence, there
were two separate guerrilla armies, one for each Ethnic Group. In 1980 when
Shona-led ZANU assumed power in an independent Zimbabwe,
many Ndebele were dissatisfied by their lack of political influence, and a
number began to agitate for secession. As a result of the agitations
borne out of fear, it was impossible to integrate the two liberation
armies - ZIPRA and ZANLA. By the end of 1980, only a few ex-military cadres
had been integrated in the Zimbabwean army. The remaining ex-combatants who
could not be integrated were settled in the cities. Many ex
ZIPRA cadres were settled in Entumbane in Bulawayo, where they lived close
to civilian suburbs. Their dissatisfaction became infectious
and spread within the civilian and the ex military population in
Matabaleland.  Even cursory look at the post-independent Zimbabwean
political situation indicates that the widespread dissatisfaction was due
primarily to post-independent imposition of foreign political systems
which are essentially a "winner-takes-all" political system. Ndebele
dissatisfaction of the political system led to two periods of military
confrontations between the Shona-contolled Zimbabwe government and the
Ndebele People of the provinces of Matabeleland. The two
periods are Entumbane and "Gukurahundi".

The first military confrontation took place in Entumbane in November 1980
started by an uprising by ZIPRA, the ex -military wing of ZAPU, the
party controlled by the Ndebele Ethnic Group, who resides predominantly in
the Matabeleland provinces of Zimbabwe. The new Zimbabwean
government controlled by the Shona Ethnic Group responded by instructing
ZANLA, the military wing of ZANU, the political party also
controlled by the Shona Ethnic Group, to destroy ZIPRA at Entumbane,
Bulawayo, the traditional capital of the Ndebeles of Matabeleland.
ZIPRA and ZANLA fought pitched battles. Even though two political parties
fought militarily, in actuality, the fight was between two African
Ethnic Groups - The Shonas and the Ndebeles. Again in 1981 there was another
military confrontation in Entumbane which also in actuality
was an ethnic fight to gain political supremacy for the Shonas but for the
Ndeneles of Matabeleland it was an ethnic fight to gain maximum
political protection from ethnic domination.  Around the same time open
skirmishes between ZANLA and ZIPRA also broke out in various
integration camps throughout the country. An estimated 300 people were
killed. Cessation to the hostilities was brought about when the
leadership of both parties intervened. By the end of the military
confrontation, a heightened fear of ethnic annihilation began to grip

The military confrontation at Entumbane was the first indication of the new
post-independent political reality of Zimbabwe. The reality is that
the Shonas are effectively in control of the geopolitical area of the Land
of Africa and it brought home to the people of Matabeleland that the
Ndebele Ethnic Group, by losing the pre-independence elections, has totally
lost the race to the political supremacy of the geopolitical area.
Entumbane was a vivid indication that the power of a major Ethnic Group that
used to be the controlling power in a geopolitical area, has
been lost through the imposition of a foreign political system unsuitable to
the political reality of Africa. The Ndebele Ethnic Group, being the
dominating African political power of the geopolitical area before the
advent of the Europeans, wanted to share power after independence, a
political strategy that may have been dictated by population size. Contrary,
the Shona Ethnic Group being the majority Ethnic Group of the
geopolitical area wanted to either reverse the pre-colonial political power
balance against the Shona by grabbing power with their majority
population through elections. The Shona won the election and the Ndebele,
being the minority African Ethnic Group in the area lost the pre-
independence election because of population size.  With the loss of this
election, the Ndebeles have always felt a great threat to their ethnic
identity and to their quest for maximum political protection from political
domination. The Shonas, on the other hand, seem empowered and
feel justified to monopolize and control all political jurisdictions, all
political institutions and all political apparatus in Zimbabwe. Although the
Ndebeles, like the Shonas, have contributed immensely to gaining
independence for Zimbabwe they feel permanently powerless as a result of
a loss of an election - the pre-independence election. The Ndebeles, like
many African Ethnic Groups in similar situations all across Africa,
feel politically decapitated by the loss of pre-independent elections. The
loss of political power, the potential loss of ethnic identity and the fear
of ethnic demolition has gripped Matabeleland since the military
confrontation at Entumbane. The fear  of the African by the African, which
epitomized by the fear of Ndebele or Shona by Ndebele or Shona in Zimbabwe,
have unleashed a venomous political vendetta amongst
Zimbabwe's Ethnic Groups thus providing fertile grounds for frequent
eruption of political instability in Zimbabwe. The eruption of
"Gukurahundi" was therefore not surprising.

The sense of fear of fellow Africans that gripped Zimbabwe after Entumbane
did not mitigate political tensions but rather accentuated the
historical ethnic mistrust and animosity between Ndebele and Shona and it
led to the violent eruption of another political upheaval -
"Gukurahundi"- meaning strong wind. In 1982, government security officials
discovered large caches of arms and ammunition on properties
owned by ZAPU and when the Ndebele cabinet members were dismissed, accused
of trying to overthrow the constitution, political unrest
broke loose in Matabeleland. The ouster of Ndebele cabinet members sparked
fighting between ZAPU supporters in the southern Ndebele-
speaking region of the country and the Shona ruling ZANU. As a result of
what they perceived as persecution of leaders and of their party,
ZAPU supporters, some of them deserters from the army, began a loosely
organized and ill-defined campaign of dissidence against the
government. The campaign centered primarily in Matabeleland, home of the
Ndebeles who consitutes ZAPU's main supporters. The
dissidence continued through 1987 and involved attacks on government
personnel and installations, armed banditry aimed at disrupting
security and economic life in the rural areas, and harassment of ZANU-PF
members. Occasionally, the dissidents demanded reinstatement of
the cabinet positions of expelled Ndebeles. More frequently, however, they
called for the return of farms and other properties seized from

By early 1982 there were groups of armed dissidents in Matabeleland killing,
robbing, and damaging property. The government responded by
declaring a curfew in areas of Matabeleland and sending in the army in an
attempt to suppress dissidents. The North Korean-trained Fifth
Brigade - the "Gukurahundi", the strong wind, was deployed by the
Shona-controlled government to blow the dissidents away into oblivion.
The best trained army of Zimbabwe was call upon by the government of
Zimbabwe to crush the rebellion by ex-guerrillas of ZAPU in the
Midlands and Matabeleland provinces. The army attacked the dissidents as
well as ZAPU and its unarmed civilian supporters, mainly in rural
areas and at times in the cities. The "Fifth Brigade", like a ferocious
hurricane wind from the ocean, swept furiously through Matabeleland,
arresting and interrogating anyone perceived to be pro-secessionist. The
government felt that support for ZAPU meant support for dissidents.
ZAPU denied it was supporting dissidents. Because the hurricane wind, the
Fifth Bridge did not discriminate between a ZAPU supporter and a
dissident a great many Ndebeles were killed during the period of
"Disturbances."  Reports surfaced of widespread violence and disregard for
human rights as the ferocious wind swept through Matabeleland. As a result
of the activities of the security forces during these operations,
the level of political tension rose in the country. According to a 2001
investigative report of the Catholic Commission for Justice and Peace in
Zimbabwe and the Legal Resources Foundation of Zimbabwe, between 1982 and
1983, the North Korean - trained Fifth Brigade - the
"Gukurahundi", composed of ethnic Shonas, killed between 2000 and 8000
Ndebele in Matabeleland. The violence of "Gukurahundi period
was ended by the signing of the Unity Accord on 22nd December 1987. The
intensity of the ferocious assault against Matabeleland reached a
dangerous point and that compelled Ndebele leading politicians to seek
peace. Ultimately, Ndebele leaders had no choice but to sign a peace
accord in 1987, resulting in ZAPU's merger in 1988 into the ZANU Patriotic
Front - ZANU-PF. The peace accord merged the two parties to
create ZANU-PF, leaving Zimbabwe effectively a one-party state. ZAPU was
forced into a compulsory marriage with ZANU in 1987 to end a
bitter anti-insurgency operation by the North Korean-trained Fifth Brigade,
an operation aptly described as "Gukurahundi", a ferocious strong
wind that indiscriminately killed many innocent civilians in Matabeleland.

There are various explanations of why dissidence was widespread in the early
1980s in Matabeleland. The main reason for the spread of
dissidence in Matabeleland was the historical deep-seated mistrust between
the Ndebeles and the Shonas. The antagonistic ethnocentric
emotions in Zimbabwe were unleashed by the Entumbane military confrontation.
As a result of the great Shona-Nedebele mistrust, the
government, controlled by the Shonas believed that the dissidents were
active supporters of ZAPU, the party controlled by the Ndebeles. The
government believed that ZAPU's objective of supporting dissidence was to
overthrow the government. Ndebele-ZAPU, on the other hand,
was so distrustful of the Shona-controlled government that they believed the
government was using the "dissident problem" as a ploy to
crush ZAPU completely and create a one-party state. The Ndebeles believed
the dissidence to be a genuine expression of dissatisfaction by
the Ndebele populace and the empathy with the legitimacy of their cause
fuelled resentment against the government that spread through
Matabeleland.  In the early 1980, ethnic mistrust and animosity were
increasing so much that the fear of ethnic annihilation by the Ethnic
Group that is in control of the political power of Zimbabwe gripped the
people of the nation Ndebele and Shona alike. The Ndebele People
believe up to this day that the military assault by para-military forces
chosen exclusively from the ethnic group in power, and not bound by any
military rules of conduct was indicative of ethnic nationalism and rampant
fundamentalism to conquer and dominate the whole country, by
eliminating genuine concerns of minority ethnic groups by any means even if
it means committing genocide and ethnic cleansing. Their belief
was learnt credence when the entire Shona national executive members of
ZAPU, the political party dominated by the Ndebeles did not win
even a single seat in the Shona provinces of Mashonaland and Manicaland in
the 1985 elections. Shona-Ndebele Mistrust deepened and fear
gripped all Zimbabwe. Fear of ethnic annihilation or domination was on the
increase and it compelled the people of Zimbabwe to seek
protection from within their Ethnic Group thus attesting to an African
political fact that the African Ethnic Group believe sincerely that
ultimately the security of the Ethnic Group rest solely on the unity of the
Ethnic Group not on the magnanimity or the humanity of the
government of the Modern African State. The ethno-military confrontations
during the period of "Gukurahundi" have left a huge, raw, unhealed
wound among the people of the Matabeleland since they are unwilling to
forget.  They believe it was a massacre of innocent Ndebeles. It is a
sad outcome from the "Gukurahund' violence that the people of Matabeleland
have come to believe that they are the target of a war not
against dissidents, but against the Ndebele and their political party, ZAPU.

In the 1985 elections, during the "Gukurahundi" - the period of fear, the
majority Ethnic Group, the Shona gave ZANU-PF increased majority in
the elections, gaining 67 of the 100 seats thus signifying to the Ndebeles
that the Shonas either condone or are apathetic to the militaristic
policy of the government against the Ndebeles. The Ndebeles on the other
hand overwhelmingly elected ZAPU in Matabeleland in the 1985
elections thus signifying to the Shonas that the Ndebeles support the
terrorizing spree of the dissidents who have been eliminated by the
strong military policy of the government. Despite the violence against the
Ndebeles by the Shona controlled government, the people of
Matabeleland were not kowtowed by the fear of annihilation to join the
ruling political party but were instigated to vote against it. Fear has
compelled all Ethnic Groups to seek protection from their political party,
that is, from their Ethnic Group while at the same time intensifying
resentment between them. Matabeleland's lingering resentment was more than
apparent in the 2000 election when every single
parliamentary seat in the region went decisively to the opposition party.
This result of post-independent elections in Zimbabwe is indicative of
ethnic unity within the African Ethnic Group and it is also indicative of
serious divisions among African Ethnic Groups, creating a political
situation that always result in political impasse leading to tensions,
instability and secessionist demands and in some instances to ethnic
cleansing - the ethnic annihilation of one African Ethnic Group by another
African Ethnic Group, Africans who have lived in close proximity
for ages before the advent of colonialism.

The period of fear characterized by the military confrontation of Entumbane
and Gukurahundi was a direct result of the inappropriateness of
the political structure and the political system of Africa and African
States. The military confrontations also attest to the ineffectiveness of
political formulae of allocation of a few cabinet positions to disenchanted
Ethnic Groups  in post-independent Africa, a political formulae often
used to cultivate ethnic unity and to eliminate dissension. The distribution
of political post to a few members of rival or disenchanted Ethnic
Groups is politically ineffective as it does not dissuade disenfranchised
and disillusioned Ethnic Groups from agitating for political and
economic equality in the distribution of the national power and wealth. As
the political impasse in  Zimbabwe and in many Modern African
States have vividly revealed, the allocation of political post is not a
panacea to the problem of lack of equitable sharing of political power and
economic wealth between Modern Africa (Shona-controlled Zimbabwe) and
Traditional Africa (Ndebele-controlled Matabeleland). Entumbane
and Gukurahundi are the result of the political failures of a political
structure, system and formula embraced by the Modern African State of
Zimbabwe. In a nutshell, the politically dangerous outcome from the military
confrontation of Entumbane and Gukurahundi is due to the great
Shona-Ndebele mistrust that has persisted because of the existence of
defective political arrangements bequeathed to Africa by colonialism.
Lack of trust led to Entumbane and to the infectious increase in the number
of dissidents during Gukurahundi. Lack of trust made the
government more ferocious. Lack of inter-African trust led to the killing of
Africans by Africans. Without a doubt, the annihilation of an African
Ethnic Group by an African Ethnic Group and the fear of the African by the
African, a recent African political phenomenon, can permanently be
prevented only by the existence of appropriate political structure and
system in all Africa.  Entumbane and Gukurahundi have left a deep
scare on the face of Africa and must not happen anywhere in Africa again. To
ensure that it does not happen anywhere in Africa again, the
current political structure of Africa must be changed to suit the
socio-geopolitical diversity of Africa.

Independent Zimbabwe - The Period of Monopoly & Consolidation: 1987 to 2000
The contemporary history of Zimbabwe indicates that after the period of fear
that resulted in a coercive and involuntary unity of ZAPU (Ndebele-
controlled) and ZANU (Shona-controlled) to create ZANU-PF
(Shona-controlled), the government of Zimbabwe began to move quickly to
monopolize and consolidate the power of the state in the hands of a sub
group of the Shona Ethnic Group. In 1987, the posts of president and
prime minister were combined into executive president and in 1989, a new
constitution allocated the position of Vice-President to an
Ndebele.  Although there was a rejection of the proposed one-party state in
a referendum, Zimbabwe, by its political structure and system of
governance became effectively a one-party state as power was inordinately
concentrated on a few people and a few political group within the
Shona Ethnic Group. Like in many one party state the world has produced the
party controlling the government keeps winning elections
despite serious dissatisfaction with the government. ZANU-PF won the
parliamentary elections of Zimbabwe in April 1995 which gave the
ruling party a stunning victory with 63 of the 65 contested seats, and in
1996 the party won the presidency again for another six-year term,
thanks to the votes of the majority Ethnic Group of Zimbabwe, the Shona.
Monopolization of state power by the Shonas, permitted by the
political structure and the political system, effectively marginalized the
Ndebeles thereby augmenting the political concerns and intensifying
the fears of the people of Matabeleland.

Emboldened by the success of the strategy of monopolization of power through
military confrontation, the government of Zimbabwe plunged
deeply into the politics of African conflicts. In 1999 Zimbabwe became
militarily involved in the Democratic Republic of the Congo civil war.
The political adventure became increasingly unpopular and precipitated the
formation of a new opposition political party - Movement for
Democratic Change (MDC). The 1998-2002 involvement in the war in the
Democratic Republic of the Congo drained the coffers of Zimbabwe
thus increasing the economic sufferings of the Zimbabwean People. The
unpopularity of the military involvement in another African State and
the inability to sustain the astronomical cost of the war  doomed the
strategy of extra territorial political expansion by the government of
Zimbabwe. The political adventure in the Congo did not only  fail at a great
cost to Zimbabwe but more importantly it confirmed internal and
external fears that the Shona-controlled government of Zimbabwe is not
seeking maximum protection for the Shona Ethnic Group through
monopolization and consolidation of state power but is seeking expansion of
the territorial power of the Shona Ethnic Group.  Rightly or
wrongly, the Ndebele Ethnic Group became even more apprehensive of the
political intensions of the Shona Ethnic Group and were more
determined to resist what they believe is new-age colonialism by an African
Ethnic Group. The strategy of Shona geopolitical hegemony
devised by Shona-controlled ZANU-PF to extend Shona power beyond the borders
of Zimbabwe unfortunately exacerbated the fear of
perpetual Shona domination among the Ndebele People of Matabeleland. New-Age
Colonialism in Africa, which is the 21st Century
colonization of the African by the African is increasing the fear of the
African by the African in Zimbabwe and in many part of Africa and is
heightening political tensions between the African and the African - between
the Ndebele and the Shona.

Independent Zimbabwe - The Period of Increasing Political Tensions: 2000 to
Between the year 2000 and this month June 2005 a series of political and
economic events have occurred that have contributed greatly to the
heightened political tensions in Zimbabwe. Political tension in Zimbabwe is
on the crescendo and that has caused many people within and
outside Zimbabwe to surmise that another military confrontation may be
imminent. The Zimbabwe People are apprehensive of the current
political situation in Zimbabwe because of the politics of land, because of
election disputes and because of succession maneuverings.

The Politics of Land - "Hondo yeminda"
The politics of land is increasing the hardship and aggravating the
uncertainties of the Zimbabwean People. Squatters have seized hundreds
of farms owned by European Africans in an ongoing and violent campaign to
repossess the lands they claim were stolen by settlers.  It is a
popular consensus in Zimbabwe and Africa that land reform in Zimbabwe is
long overdue in view of the fact that it is more than 20 years
since Zimbabwe gained independence that ended European minority rule. But,
the much awaited land reform has not yet been carried out.
Redistributing land has been on the political agenda since independence, but
more than 20 years has passed after the independence of
Zimbabwe and the end of European minority rule and no effective land policy
has been implemented to address the land problem.
The current economic crisis, the worst ever, has fuelled even more hunger
for land. Most indigenous African farmers are struggling to grow
enough to eat on tiny plots, while the huge commercial farms growing
tobacco, Zimbabwe's largest export, are in the hands of European
Zimbabweans. Lack of adequate land for the indigenous Africans to grow food,
the result of the concentration of the best land in the hands of
European Africans, who grow tobacco for export, has caused great economic
hardship to many Zimbabweans and as a result discontent with
the government's rule is greater than ever before. Dire economic hardship
has created great uncertainties in the countryside and is likely to
foment more instability. As a result of the economic adversity there have
been general strikes followed by arrests and beatings of hundreds
of people. The government is ferociously cracking down discontented
citizens. The leader of the Opposition Movement for Democratic Change
(MDC) was arrested twice in June 2003, amid a week of opposition protests
and was charged with treason.  In 2001 the Finance Minister
publicly acknowledged economic crisis and stated that Zimbabwe's foreign
reserves have run out and warning that the country faces serious
food shortages. In 2003, inflation hit 300%. The country is faced with
severe food shortages because the farming system has been destroyed.
In 2004, the IMF estimated that the country had grown one-third poorer in
the last five years.

No-one in Zimbabwe is arguing about the need for land reform, since
overwhelming number of Zimbabweans support land redistribution.
Unfortunately, the government of Zimbabwe has decided to use the popular
support for land reforms to reverse the dwindling political support
for the government. The government of Zimbabwe is losing its grip on power
due to intense political discontents and severe economic
hardships and needs a popular political issue to reverse it political
fortunes hence the use of the land reform as a political instrument to
maintain power.  Cognizant of the popularity of land redistribution, the
government of Zimbabwe decided to forcibly evict European-Africans
farmers from their land. The implementation of the land policy with force
has indicated to the Ndebele People that the Shona-controlled
government is unwilling to use negotiations to settle political and economic
disputes but is quick to use force because of the overwhelming
power bestowed to the Shona-controlled government by the political structure
and the system of governance.  The Ndebeles believe that the
government is using another internal confrontation to boost the popularity
of the ruling political party hence the resort to buy the confidence of
the rural electorate through belligerent racial policies. Not only has the
government land policy antagonized the European Community and the
United States of America, two groups of foreign powers who are capable and
may be willing to help Zimbabwe out of the economic doldrums,
but more importantly has increased the wariness of the Nedebele People of
the government's propensity to use force to achieve political
goals. Resorting to sheer political bravado against internal and external
critics to sail through economic crisis is indicative of the existence
of bad political arrangement that grants inordinate power and as a result
inadvertently encourages irrational implementation of a good
economic policy. The Ndebele People distrust the government intensions in
the land policy. The Ndebeles believe that the Zimbabwean
government of ZANU-PF hopes to gain political capitol by generating tensions
between European Africans (particularly farmers) and
impoverished rural Africans, by blaming their hardships on the Europeans.

It seems to the Ndebeles that because of the inappropriate political
arrangement of Zimbabwe the Shona-controlled government is always
empowered to use force. Even though the Ndebele support the land policy
since it is an African empowerment program, many Zimbabweans
are complaining that a well-intentioned plan to promote African economic
empowerment has become a ZANU-PF vehicle for the enrichment of
party supporters and officials. It is claimed that senior government, police
and army officials have unashamedly helped themselves to the
best farms, evicting ordinary people already settled on these properties.
Undeniably, there is an urgent need for land re-distribution in
Zimbabwe. Undeniably, the politicization of the process by ZANU-PF has
condemned millions of citizens to starvation and death. Zimbabwe is
in throes of pain because of bad implementation of a good policy. The
economic empowerment of rural Africans is a good policy but it must
not be implemented to the detriment of the people it is suppose to help -
the citizens of Zimbabwe many of whom are starving to death. Many
Ndebeles believe that as a result of bad implementation of a good policy the
Shona Ethnic Group will disproportionately benefit since they
constitute the ZANU-PF, the political party grabbing the best land for its
members. Disproportionate allocation of the best lands to ZANU-PF
supporters is aggravating the already worse political mistrust and animosity
between the Shonas and the Ndebeles. To the Ndebeles, too
much Shona power has encouraged the use of force as the only political and
economic solution in Zimbabwe, the adverse consequences of
which are overwhelmingly borne by the Ndebele People of Matabeleland. The
land policy has added to the dismal plight of the Ndebele People
of Matabeleland, who have been neglected for years by the government in the
hope that residents of the region would realize their mistakes
of supporting opposition to the ZANU-PF cherished dream of one-party-state.
Undoubtedly, the land policy is worsening the plight of the
Ndebeles and aggravating the already worse political situation in Zimbabwe.

Because of the implementation of the land policy, the good policy of
empowerment of rural Africa may fail. Thus, "Hondo yeminda", which
refers to the land policy may suffered similar fate of Entumbane and
Gukurahundi which like "Hondo yeminda",  were ill-fated political
instruments of creating political crisis to consolidate power in the hand of
the Shona-controlled government and to coerce opponents into
submission. A dangerous political situation has been generated by the bad
implementation of the land policy, a situation that has been
exacerbated by the current severe economic hardship. Ironically, the
economic hardship is strengthening the government because it is
weakening the opposition, not the government, since the backbone of
opposition support, young, educated, urban Zimbabweans are leaving
the State. As a result of the economic situation the government and the
opposition MDC are now pitted against each other in a low-intensity
political fight. More than 20 years of monopolization of power by ZANU-PF
has resulted in economic chaos, street protests and deep social
divisions. These problems facing Zimbabwe may be indicating that ZANU-PF
firm grip on power may be starting to slip and it may also be
indicative of impending military confrontation as the people of Matabeleland
are greatly disenchanted by the political and economic situation
of Zimbabwe. Political crisis seems to loom dangerously on the political
horizon of Zimbabwe. Political crisis resulting in economic hardship
in Zimbabwe continues unabated and it continues to cause a great concern for
the future political stability of Zimbabwe. Unquestionably the
frequent crisis in Zimbabwe is the result of political monopolization of
state power by a group of people within the Shona-ZANU PF, people
who are unwilling to share power with any group in the geopolitical
vicinity. Monopolization of political power has been permitted by the
existence of inappropriate political arrangements and that is fomenting
political crisis and creating economic hardship in Zimbabwe.

Election Disputes
Another series of events that are causing great concern and have a great
potential to ignite another violent military confrontation are the
frequencies of election disputes. With all the economic hardship and general
strikes, the ruling party is still winning overwhelmingly in
parliamentary and presidential elections. When the ruling ZANU-PF won
two-thirds of the votes in parliamentary polls the main opposition
party - Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) claims the election was rigged
in favor of ZANU-PF. The opposition believes the election was
rigged because of the magnitude of discontent that has arisen out of the
severe economic hardship. Notwithstanding the economic hardship
and uncertainty of Zimbabwe's political future, the ZANU-PF still dominates
what is virtually a one party state occupying 147 out of the
country's 150 parliamentary seats. In March 2002, ZANU-PF won the presidency
for another six years term but the opposition claims that was
also a blatantly rigged election whose results were coerced by the ZANU-PF
militia. It is obvious that if these elections were free and fair then
it was decidedly determined on purely ethnic grounds by the majority Shona
Ethnic Group under the "winner-takes-all" political system.

Shona votes to keep the government in power but Ndebele votes to express
discontent with the government. Due to government neglect of
the provinces of Matabeleland, the Ndebeles of Matabeleland are always in
opposition to the government of Zimbabwe and always vote
against ZANU-PF, the political party controlled by the Shonas. Voting
against ZANU-PF has resulted in government neglect of Matabeleland
and as a result districts in Matabeleland, such as the rural trading station
in Lupane, have become degenerated and desolated and have been
in economic stagnation for years. To win Matabeleland in the next election,
the government of Zimbabwe began a belated infrastructure
development of Matabeleland after the 2002 elections. In spite of the
government efforts to win Matabelaland in the next elections through
provision of development projects such as the reactivation of the Zambesi
Water Project and construction of a multi-million dollar university,
the electorate of Matabeleland, again, overwhelmingly spurned ZANU-PF
political party in the March 2005 parliamentary election although the
ZANU-PF won overwhelming seats, thanks to the majority Shona Ethnic Group.
The continuous rejection of the Shona-controlled government
of Zimbabwe by the Ndebeles through elections attest to an African political
fact that the political formula of granting development projects to
disenchanted Ethnic Groups in a geopolitical area to display a sense of
government concern each time an election is imminent do not gain
political acceptance nor promote peace and unity. What the African Ethnic
Group want, Ndebele and Shona included, is not pre-election
political largess but durable maximum political and social protections and
genuine sharing of the political power and the economic wealth of
the nation.

Due to ethnic voting pattern in Zimbabwe many outsiders are convinced that,
fraud and intimidation notwithstanding, ZANU-PF actually won a
majority of votes in the recent election because of the great support from
the majority Shona Ethnic Group who are prepared to keep the
government in power no matter what. With large majority in parliament,
Shona-controlled ZANU-PF has passed a law limiting media freedom
to stifle criticism, another indication of the power of the political party
in control of a one party state. As a result of this law, there is
fear of the loss of individual liberty in Zimbabwe and fear has heightened
uncertainties about the future of Zimbabwe. Fear of the loss of
liberty is contributing to the growing popular discontent. The mass
discontent arising from political fears and severe economic hardships,
which indicate that the majority of the people are willing to vote the
government out of power and the ethnocentric voting pattern which
indicates that the majority of the people are willing keep the government in
power at all cost, is causing many election disputes. As a result
of the disputes the political and economic uncertainties in Zimbabwe is
increasing very rapidly. Clearly, political uneasiness has been
mounting since the Zimbabwe parliamentary election.  Not even the
declarations of support from other African States in the region and a seal
of approval from the Southern African Development Community is easing the
growing political tensions in Zimbabwe. The Zimbabwe political
situation, undoubtedly, is a clear testimony of an African political fact
which states that the African Ethnic Group, Shona and Ndebele
included, will not stop fighting for political and economic equality in the
Modern African State even if the government of the African State has
unflinching political and economic support from external powers,
international or Africa.

Succession Tension
Contemporary African History tells us that ethnic politics is the norm in
Zimbabwe. But recently sub-ethnic politics is featuring prominently in
Zimbabwean politics and it is contributing to the escalating political
tensions. Political tensions are mounting in Zimbabwe because of
succession maneuverings within the Shona Ethnic Group. Political positioning
to grab power subsequently is creating dissidence within the
ruling ZANU-PF. A politician from the Karanga, the largest Sub-Ethnic Group
of the Shona Ethnic Group, broke from the Shona dominated
ruling ZANU-PF late 2004 and was then alleged to be plotting a palace coup.
He had been tipped as a potential presidential successor and
last year made an abortive bid for a vacant vice presidential post. The vice
president post was given to a person from the Zezuru u, a
smaller Sub-Ethnic Group of the Shona Ethnic Group. The President of
Zimbabwe is a Zezuru, the group believed to be in total control of the
government of Zimbabwe as they have accumulated inordinate political power
in Zimbabwe.

The succession maneuverings is increasing the power of Zezuru at the expense
of Karanga. The most senior representative in the
Zimbabwean government of the Karanga Sub-Ethnic Group, the biggest group
among the majority Shona Ethnic Group, and comprising over a
third of the population, was relieved of his post. As a result, the Karangas
now have almost no senior officials in the government while the
president's smaller Zezuru Sub-Ethnic Group, comprising around a quarter of
the total population, has taken the top political and government
positions. The demotion of all the top Karanga leaders in favor of people
from the ZeZuru Group is beginning to cultivate dissidence and stir
trouble within the ruling ZANU-PF. Though the Karanga leader has been
offered another position the offer may be too little. The blatant political
move to accumulate more power in the hands of the Zezuru has cause political
chasm within the ruling ZANU-PF which was manifested by
the collapse of the party congress. In the party congress ZANU-PF
representatives from a smaller Ethnic Group - Mayinka who voted for the
Karanga leader were expelled from the party along with five other non-
Zezuru provincial chairmen for backing the Karanga leader. Such
political move has created distrust within the ruling party. Grave political
strains, which are becoming difficult to heal, has been created
between the Karangas and Zezuru within the ruling ZANU-PF. The political
maneuverings are adding to the political tensions that has gripped
Zimbabwe due to the land reform, economic hardship and the state of
belligerence between the Ndebele Ethnic Group and the Shona Ethnic.
Political tensions are rising because the chasm within ZANU-PF may lead to a
spin-off from the party which the ruling party may not be able to
countenance and as a result may employ their strategy of violent
confrontation to destroy the new party thus causing great political upheaval
not only in the territories of the Shona Ethnic Group but also in the whole
of Zimbabwe.

There has been speculation that two dissident ZANU-PF politicians, one from
Karanga and one from Ndebele, who have lost their powerful
positions within the government as a result of the succession maneuverings,
are seeking to  form a third political force between the current
opposition - the Movement for Democratic Change and the ruling party -
ZANU-PF . Since Karanga is the largest Sub-Ethnic Group of the
Shonas and is politically valuable to the ruling party, a new political
position has been offered the Karanga leader in an attempt to block the
potential formation of a coalition political party between Karanga and
Ndebele, the arch-rivals of the ZeZuru. Such an ethnic coalition between
the Karanga and the Ndebele will certainly be a formidable political group
that can dethrone the ZeZurus in a free and fair election since the
two potential leaders of the coalition party have wide popularity in their
respective ethnic provinces and in some smaller ethnic province
such as the Manyinka province. A new political alliance may threaten the
power of the ruling class. Ndebele and Kalanga people, together
with other smaller ethnic groups seem poised to form a new political party
to challenge ZANU-PF. Today, it seems that both Ndebele and
Kalanga have now developed a joint political community to win political
power. The specter of the loss of power by the ZeZurus has raised
fears of imminent political crisis in Zimbabwe. Uncertainties of Zimbabwe's
political future are mounting every day not because of the land
reforms, not because economic hardship, and not because of election disputes
but primarily because of devious ethnic politics compelled by
the existence of inappropriate political structure and inappropriate
political system, which are foreign concepts of political arrangements in

                     Crisis Analysis
                                                            The cause is
inappropriate Political Structure and Political System

After an in-depth analysis, the United Africa Organization (UAO) concludes
that the cause of political crisis in Zimbabwe and in Africa is the
existence of an inappropriate political structure and political system. As
can be seen from the history of Zimbabwe, the Traditional African
States of Zimbabwe, represented by the various Ethnic and Sub-Ethnic Groups
of Zimbabwe, have never accepted the political structure and
the political system of Zimbabwe as addressing their legitimate concerns,
which are preservation of ethnic identity and protection against
political domination and economic marginalization. Evidently, the
amalgamation of various Traditional African States living in close proximity
to form the Modern African State of Zimbabwe did not create an appropriate
political structure and appropriate political system to address the
legitimate concerns of Zimbabwe's Ethnic Groups. It is therefore not
surprising that periodic eruption of political crisis, such as Entumbane
and "Gukurahundi, has become an endemic feature of contemporary Zimbabwe
history. Undeniably, there is a political dispute between the
Ethnic Groups of Zimbabwe. Admittedly, there is a subterranean,
undercurrent, virulent ethnic war in Zimbabwe. Unambiguously, there is a
dangerous political stalemate in Zimbabwe.

The Zimbabwean Political Stalemate
The political stalemate of Zimbabwe is primarily due to the reluctance of
the Modern African State of Zimbabwe, controlled by the Shoma
Ethnic Group, to share political power and economic wealth of the State with
the Traditional African State of Matabeleland, and the reluctance
of the Ndebele Ethnic Group, the citizens of Matabeleland, to accept the
legitimacy of the government of Zimbabwe. Additionally, the
reluctance of the Ndebeles to extend the traditional African ethnic
sentiment of "Natural Group" to include the State of Zimbabwe has
contributed to political tension in Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe's political situation
is quite descriptive of politics on the Land of Africa. The
Reluctance of All Africa - Traditional Africa and Modern Africa alike is
caused by the wholesale acceptance of colonial political structure
and the foreign system of government known as "majority rule" by the African
Leaders of the time. The political structure and the political
system were unacceptable to Traditional African States as they knew that
such political formation will infringe on their identity, political
sovereignty and economic resources. This is the primary reason for the
creation of two liberation movements in Zimbabwe only coming
together as matter of necessity not unity. The reality that colonial borders
will be retained intensified not only nationalist movement in
Zimbabwe but also distrust and animosity between the two groups vying to
grab and monopolize power after independence. Looking at the
African political landscape it became obvious to these groups that the
Ethnic Group that wins the position of the first prime minister in
Zimbabwe, either in an election or by force, will acquire inordinate
political power. None want to lose this advantage hence the intensification
of the liberation war and ethnic mistrust and animosity. The creation of
ZANU effectively implied that the future direction of African politics in
the imposed colonial boundaries of former Rhodesia would decidedly be based
on ethnic allegiance. Because colonial boundaries were
retained and majority rule was accepted it became impossible to create a
multi-ethnic society in the Modern African State of Zimbabwe based
on the principles of peaceful co-existence and the rule of law.

Although ethnic mistrust and animosity was on the crescendo, the two
competing groups were compelled to unite forces against the
colonialist. This unity was in theory. In practice the two groups remained
loyal to their ethnic nations, and hence ZAPU-ZIPRA on one hand and
ZANU-ZANLA on the other. Various attempts at unity were made, especially at
the behest of the OAU. Some of these attempts led to ZIPA, ANC
and Patriotic Front. All these were 'marriages of necessity'.  It was
necessary to unite forces because both Ethnic Groups and the whole of
Africa subscribed to the African Political Mission of the time - The Total
Liberation of the Land Africa from colonialism. But, after independence
some ethnic intellectuals changed the African Political Mission from
Liberation & Unification to ethnic monopolization of power within the
boundaries created by the colonialist. As a result of such devious political
machination of some Ethnic Groups of Africa, a few Ethnic Groups
in the colonial imposed boundaries became the core of the Modern Africa
State while the rest of the constituent Ethnic Groups became
peripheral and marginalized, politically and economically. Indisputably,
Mashonaland today constitute the core of Zimbabwe and Matabeleland
is the periphery. Thus, there is a dangerous political situation in Zimbabwe
and in the whole of Africa because of the decision to keep colonial
borders as is. Colonial borders and majority rule enabled extremist
ethnocentric intellectuals to create New-Age Colonialism in Africa - The
African Colonialism, which is the modern colonization of African Ethnic
Groups by one or a few Ethnic Groups on the Land of Africa. Instead
of African independence ushering in the unification of the new Modern
African State, in this case Zimbabwe, with the component Traditional
African States, in this case Matabeleland, African independence ushered in
the dawn of New-Age Colonialism in Africa thus extending the
liberation struggle for overwhelming majority of Ethnic Groups in Africa.

Indisputably, all the people of Africa and all the Ethnic Groups of Africa
recognize the existence of New-Age Colonialism in Africa. A
visit to ethnic website is quite revealing. The concept of a nation of the
Modern African State such as Zimbabwe or Nigeria is non-existent,
sadly to say. A visit to the discussion forums on Ndebele or Shona websites,
which is reflective of the sentiments of the people of the two
Ethnic Groups, will make it clear how divergent people's views are on a
range of issues, suggesting that Zimbabweans do not share the
concept of united Traditional States of Zimbabwe, which independence from
colonialism was suppose to create but failed to do so because of
ethnocentrism, the ideology that propagate ethnic superiority through
monopolization of state power and enforcement of the ethnic superiority
through the use of state power. Ethnocentrism, the subterranean ideology of
the ruling political party of Zimbabwe, has created a deep
political chasm between the two major Ethnic Groups of Zimbabwe - The
Ndebeles and the Shonas. There is a deep political chasm in
Zimbabwe between the Ndebele People and the Shona People the result of a
sharp difference of opinion in regards to the appropriateness of
the Zimbabwean political structure and system of governance. Political feud
between the two Ethnic Groups continues, reinforced by the
rivalry between the Shona Ethnic Group and the Ndebele Ethnic Group. Because
of colonial political structure and importation of foreign
majority system of governance ethnic rivalry continues abated as fighting
for the re-emergence of the Ndebele Kingdom has been re-ignited.
As a result of forcibly incorporating the indigenous land regions of the
Ndebele People with those of the Shona People into the present unitary
state system, colonialism irreparably destroyed the African Affinity, the
mutual interdependent relations between the African and the African -
between the  Shona and the Ndebele that existed prior to colonialism. Yes,
there was rivalry but there was affinity between Ndebele and
Shona and when affinity was destroyed rivalry reined supreme turning into
virulent hatred.

Colonialism thrived through the divide and rule methodology of authoritarian
power and domination. It was in the interest of the colonialists to
foment ethnic enmity. It was the colonialist interest to fuel ethnic
divisions between the Ndebele and Shona Peoples in order to sustain
European hegemony and superiority in former Rhodesia. Apartheid South Africa
also exploited the situation between ZAPU and ZANU-PF to
make things worse in Zimbabwe. The colonial boundaries resulting from the
partition of Africa enabled colonialists to continue to exploit and
exacerbate ethnic divisions and allegiances for their own economic
advantages but with the unsolicited help of extremist ethnocentric
African politicians who wants to perpetuate a new form of colonization
through grabbing and monopolizing state power. To enable them grab
political power and aware that they cannot win power based on honest
political discourse on issues of common interest to all people
irrespective of ethnic affiliations, the majority Ethnic Groups in the
Modern African State employed the tactic of inflaming ethnic passions to
win the first and only free elections in post-independent African State.
Such tactics has resulted in destroying the sentiment of inter-ethnic
affinity that have existed and created in its stead inter-ethnic animosity.
Fuelling passions as a political tactic of grabbing and monopolizing
state power by extremist ethnocentric politicians is the cause of such
violent political confrontations as Entumbane and Gukuranhundi in
Africa. No wonder that nearly all post colonial states within Africa who had
retained the concept of nation states as formulated by the
colonialists have inflicted genocide, ethnic cleansing, murders, and
disappearances against powerless Ethnic Groups.

Extremist ethnocentric politicians inflame ethnic passions and when
disenchanted and disenfranchised Ethnic Groups agitate the
government they control used political bravado to intimidate dissidents.
They make inflammatory statements that do not intimidate but fuels
passion to the point of military confrontation. Such statements by high
government officials as this, is very destructive: "the Government
could choose to burn down "all the villages infested with dissidents" and
that; "the campaign against dissidents can only succeed if the
infrastructure that nurtures them is destroyed". This is advocating the
destruction of a whole Ethnic Group, an African Ethnic Group, a
beautiful and valuable flower in the Garden of Africa.  Such genocidal
statement does not intimidate an African Ethnic to abandon the pursuit
of their legitimate demands for sharing power and economic wealth of the
State. Such inflammatory statements destroy Africa as they incite
people to mass murder of Africans by Africans.

The Uncertain Future of Zimbabwe
The military confrontations of Entumbane and  Gukurahundi,  the bad
implementation of the land reforms  ("Hondo yeminda), the frequent
election disputes and the succession maneuverings in Zimbabwe are political
crises creating grave uncertainties about the future of
Zimbabwe. These crises are the result of the existence of inappropriate
political structure and inappropriate political system and they have
contributed greatly to the political stalemate that has created a general
sense of political uncertainties in Zimbabwe. Grave political
uncertainties have arisen in Zimbabwe because of the political machinations
of extremist ethnocentric politicians in Zimbabwe who have
exploited the inappropriate political arrangements for their own
ethnocentric agenda. This agenda coupled with the economic hardship have
created uncertainties about the future of Zimbabwe. The political situation
has particularly created a growing sense of alienation in
Matabeleland and especially among young people, city dwellers, and skill
educated Zimbabweans. The uncertainties of the future of
Zimbabwe are borne out of fear, not only because of the total economic
breakdown, but mainly because of the sense of imminent political
instability. The fear of draconian political repression in the name of
safeguarding the gains of African Liberation in Zimbabwe has gripped

The fear of an imminent political instability has gripped Zimbabwe due
primarily to the existence of inappropriate political structure and
political system, political arrangements that has proved beyond any shadow
of doubt of its unsuitability to the socio-geopolitical diversity of
the Land of Africa. It is believed by many Zimbabweans that the current
deteriorating political and economic situation has instigated the
ruling ZANU-PF to re-organize another militias unknown to the international
press.  These militias are reported to be recruited from
unemployed young men from the Shona Ethnic Group, trained and armed by the
ruling party. They are believed to have murdered opposition
political leaders, including candidates for Parliament. They have joined the
"veterans" of the independence struggle (many of whom were not
even born then) to beat and terrorize supporters of the opposition Movement
for Democratic Change, a political party that transcends ethnicity
since its leader is Shona but has its greatest support is in Matabeleland.
Equally ominous, recently, was the movement of a largely Shona
Zimbabwe Army brigade into Matabeleland. Most Zimbabweans believe that what
is happening is not an unfortunate precipitation of chaos but
a carefully orchestrated State organized violence. The violence has little
to do with land, which is a legitimate Zimbabwean issue of interest
to all the people irrespective of ethnic affiliation. The violence that has
engulfed Zimbabwe is a political strategy to destroy the first real threat
to ZANU-PF in 20 years, which is the emergence of a trans-ethnic political
party, the MDC and the potential emergence of another more
powerful trans-ethnic political party.

The movement of a large Shona Zimbabwe Army into Matabeleland has increased
the specter of genocidal massacres, such as was seen in
Rwanda, occurring in Zimbabwe and this has heightened the sense of political
instability in Zimbabwe. A sense of uneasiness has
particularly gripped Matabeleland because the overwhelming victims of
previous military assaults were people with ethnic Ndebele identity.
Many analysts, domestic and regional, foresee a period of instability in a
society now sharply divided between urban and rural communities
and between ethnic groups, with popular legitimacy still evading the
government after elections. It is believed that the leadership of the
Zimbabwean government may be unable to recreate the balance between Ethnic
Groups that held the ruling ZANU-PF party together. The
concern is whether, with the election storm passed, the party will be able
to co-opt again the Karanga leaders ditched some months earlier.

It seems that the Zimbabwean government will be unable or unwilling to
create a political balance between the constituent Ethnic Groups
because of the discredited and destructive ethnic politics. The Shona Ethnic
Group that controls the Zimbabwean government is unwilling to
share power because extremist ethnocentric politicians controlling the
government of Zimbabwe believe that since they won the territory of
Zimbabwe by force, their grip on power can only be kept by force not by some
liberal foreign construct such as a democratic election,
although foreign political concept of democracy aided their ascendancy to
power. Indubitably, the ruling ZANU-PF has become an ethnic party
since the political leaders of the party regularly appeals to race and
ethnicity, and labels opponents as "traitors", "terrorists", and
"dissidents" of Africa. Although, extremist ethnocentric politicians have
subverted and changed the African Political Mission - African
Liberation and Unification to ethnic monopolization and consolidation of
power, they are quick to brand any opponent as an enemy of Africa. It
should be well noted that the African Ethnic Group is Africa and as such the
African Ethnic Group is not an enemy of Africa but the enemy of
colonialism, domestic or foreign, and would not accept any form of
colonialism despite egregious intimidation, persecution, massacre or
ethnic cleansing. The abhorrence of any form of colonialism by Traditional
Africa, including the Ndebele People and the Shona People, cannot
be changed by the political might of the Modern African State. Therefore,
the political might of the Shona controlled government of Zimbabwe
cannot extinguished the passions of the Ndebeles for political and economic
equality in Zimbabwe just as the political might of Arab
controlled government of the Sudan cannot extinguish the passions of people
of Western and Southern Sudan for political and economic
equality. Ethnocentric Ethnic Groups of Africa who control the government of
the Modern Africa States should note very well that the
liberation struggles of Traditional African States would not end until and
unless Modern Africa share power and wealth with Traditional Africa.

Another destructive political action that creates political chasm and
heightens the political uncertainties of the future of Zimbabwe are
political statements by a high Zimbabwean government official such as this:
"We must get in and do away with those who want to sabotage
us." This is an attempt to create a wedge between Ethnic Groups. Extremist
ethnocentric politicians create wedges, just as the European
colonialist did, between Ethnic Groups in order to monopolize power. They
create "us" versus "them" and in so doing destroy any affinity that
existed between African Ethnic Groups. Instead of developing the African
Affinity into African Unity, these politicians seeks to destroy the
African Affinity to enable them perpetuate ethnic monopolization of state
power. UAO appeals to African politicians to cease and desist from
such political statements as it is ultimately very self-destructive.

Another destructive political statement was made during the campaign for the
Lupane by-election. A high government official and an MP for
the neighboring Insiza constituency told to his party candidate pointedly:
"If you lose this election, I am going to remove all the government
equipment working on the Nkayi to Lupane road. That is the ZANU way." This
clearly indicates that only members of the ruling party are
supposed to benefit from government policies. Under such political system,
democracy cannot thrive as in a true democracy government
policies are not formulated and implemented to benefit only party members
but to benefit all the people irrespective of any social, political or
economic affiliations. Again UAO appeals to all African politicians to
embrace true democracy and eschew ethnocracy because peace and
prosperity in Africa and in the African State solely rest on unity, harmony
and cooperation of all Africans irrespective of social, political and
economic affiliations.

The inappropriate political structure and political system of Zimbabwe and
Africa have actually promoted ethnocentric ideology in Africa.
Ideologically, ZANU belongs to the African liberationist tradition of the
1960s - anti-West, suspicious of capitalism and deeply intolerant of
people they perceive as dissidents or opponents to their rule since they
believe, wrongly, that opposition meant pro- European colonialism.
Criticism of the government, to them, is an attempt to reverse the gains of
liberation. The ruling party believes that opposition to government
policies and agitation for political equality is tantamount to treason.
People who oppose their policies are traitors to the cause of Africa which
is liberation from European colonialism. They see the party as protecting
the gains of African Liberation and that anyone in the opposition or a
dissident is a traitor of Africa. Unfortunately, these politicians
especially in Zimbabwe have apartheid South Africa, a belligerent next door
neighbor, to lend credence to their beliefs and actions. South Africa, in
the early 1980s, had a policy of destabilizing independent African
States on its border to make it harder for these States to provide support
to the ANC and other groups aiming to bring about majority rule in
South Africa. The policy was also to justify the preservation of European
rule in South Africa. South Africa tried to infiltrate Zimbabwe politics
to deepen the ethnic enmity between ZAPU and ZANU and conducted military
attacks such as the one that destroyed a major munitions dump
at Inkomo Barracks in August 1981, and another that destroyed the ZANU-PF
headquarters in December 1981, and Thornhill Air Base in Gweru
which destroyed many of Zimbabwe's Air Force aircraft. The behavior of
apartheid South Africa made the Zimbabwean government see itself
as permanently under threat, and this gave the government an excuse to use
force to quash opponents.

Today there is no threat from the new South Africa but confrontational and
violent politics still prevail in Zimbabwe which indicates that the
extremist ethnocentric politicians of Zimbabwe were not safeguarding the
gains of African Liberation but were using colonialism as a ploy to
monopolize power through violent and intimidating politics. As a result of
the government attitude towards dissent and opposition, there is an
uncertainty of the future and this has unleashed a growing fear of anarchy
and uprising engulfing the nation since the government is intolerant
to opposition. The political situation in Zimbabwe today is dicey because
while the government is geared to use force to maintain power in the
name of safeguarding the gains of liberation, the people of Matabeleland are
galvanized to end political domination. A headlong confrontation
seems imminent. This may take the form of an organized civil or military
campaign by the Ndebele Ethnic Group to force an acceptable
government in Zimbabwe, or more likely that, the Ndebeles just like the
Ijaws of Nigeria and the Furs of Western Sudan, may call for
independence from Zimbabwe, which like such conflicts in Africa may lead to
genocide, ethnic cleansing, starvation and mass death in
Zimbabwe. Undeniably, political tension in Zimbabwe, which currently is
subterranean but which like a deep seated volcanic matter will soon
burst open onto the surface to destroy anything in its path. As political
tensions heighten, the specter of genocide in Africa not unlike the Hutu-
Tutsi events of Rwanda cannot be ruled out in Zimbabwe. To say it briefly,
the political and economic future of Zimbabwe does not look good.

The economic future of Zimbabwe does not look good because of the economic
breakdown. The economic deterioration of Zimbabwe has
increased the future uncertainties of Zimbabwe. Properly managed, Zimbabwe's
wide range of resources should enable it to support
sustained economic growth. The country has a great percentage of the world's
known reserves of metallurgical-grade chromites. Other
commercial mineral deposits include coal, platinum, asbestos, copper,
nickel, gold, and iron ore. But the current political stalemate,
essentially ethnic impasse between the Ndebeles and the Shonas, is diverting
national resources to monopolizing, consolidating,
intimidating, agitating, demonstrating, litigating, and fighting all because
of "The African Reluctance" foisted on Zimbabwe by the acceptance
of inappropriate political structure and inappropriate political system. The
current challenges facing Zimbabwe include the need to address
the political stalemate, the economic crisis and one of the world's highest
rates of HIV/Aids infection. Indirectly, political inappropriateness
has caused food shortages and untold suffering to the Zimbabwe People. As a
result of political instability and the misuse of national
resources, millions of Zimbabweans are at a risk of starvation without food
relief. The economic breakdown is a result of the broader
Zimbabwean political crisis emanating from preserving the inappropriate
political structure and inappropriate political system of Zimbabwe. It
is reported that about 7 million Zimbabweans are in urgent need of food aid
and 600,000 children are already suffering from a severe shortage
of food. The shortage is particularly acute in Matabeleland, the homeland of
the Ndebeles and the stronghold of the opposition Movement for
Democratic Change, a geopolitical area prone to harvest failures and
drought. The dire economic predicament of Matabeleland is a source of
great concern as it may compel the Ndebeles to take up arms to alleviate the
economic hardship, a political action that may lead to the total
destruction of the fabric of the Ndebele society. The political structure
and the political system of Zimbabwe, just like in any other Modern
African State, are seriously defective as both are foreign designed and
unsuitable to the socio-geopolitical diversity of Africa. Additionally,
this foreign concept of political arrangements does not promote unity
neither do they foster economic growth. Contrary, they promote
ethnocentrism, the political ideology of ethnic monopolization of state
power that fuels irrational and destructive ethnic passions. The
inappropriate political arrangements are the direct cause of the future
uncertainties of Zimbabwe. As a result of the political structure and the
political system of governance  in Zimbabwe there is a specter of imminent
political instability, imminent repression of dissidents and
opposition and imminent total economic breakdown that may lead to imminent
disintegration of the State of Zimbabwe.

  Loose Union is not the Solution
The future of Zimbabwe is uncertain and as a result many Zimbabweans are
crying for a permanent solution to the political stalemate that has
virtually shut down Zimbabwe. Some Ndebeles have advocated the creation of a
federal state as can be seen by this statement: "That is why
my party advocates for a federal state allowing each region to use available
resources to the best advantage for its own development."
Proponents of federalism fiercely argue that the present unitary state has
failed and it is therefore time for a different system of government.  A
spokesman for ZAPU has been quoted in African Times (21/4/03) as saying "the
whole idea is to federate the country into MaShonaland and
Matabeleland. We want to have our own government separate to that of
ZANU-PF. We want to manage our own resources in a way that will
boost the ordinary people of Matabeleland who since independence have
suffered ....."  Similar statements can be found on websites - " It
is not about changing the guard and putting in place some checks to prevent
dictatorship, but rather, it is about changing the basic form of
government." The word federalism, as we know it, seems acceptable to many
people in discussion forums. The federalism we know it calls
for the two Ethnic Groups, the Ndebele Ethnic Group and the Shona Ethnic
Group to co-exist alongside each other. The question that must be
asked in regards to a federal Zimbabwe is this: will the Shona Ethnic Group
share the power and the wealth of the Zimbabwe with the
Ndebele Ethnic Group and will federalism resuscitate trust? Will the federal
government of Zimbabwe be so neutral as to protect, politically
and economically, all citizens of the State? The answer is no.

The answer is no because foreign concept of federalism, as we know it from
the contemporary history of Nigeria, Sudan,  Congo and many
more federated states in Africa, do not share power and wealth equitably.
This is because the federal government of the Modern African State,
which is normally controlled by an Ethnic Group, is not a neutral government
and as such is unwilling to protect all citizens and distribute
power and wealth equitably. The apathy of such governments to the plight of
other Ethnic Groups cultivates, deepens and perpetuates ill-
feelings, mistrust and animosity just as it is in Zimbabwe today. Therefore,
those who call for a federal system of government in Zimbabwe do
so without in-depth analysis of a foreign political concept that is
incapable of solving African political problems.  Would a federal system
guarantee an equitable distribution of power and resources in Zimbabwe?  No!
Even a casual look at Nigeria, which introduced a federal
system in 1914, will show that the foreign concept of federalism has failed
to guarantee peace and stability.  Proponents of federalism in
Zimbabwe would be wise to study the situation in Nigeria if similar problems
are to be avoided in Zimbabwe.

Foreign federalism creates unequal arrangement and just like a unitary State
grant inordinate power to one or a few Ethnic Groups thus
inadvertently perpetuating the subjugation of African Ethnic Groups by an
African Ethnic Group. Such subjugation already exists in Zimbabwe
today and need not be perpetuated through another form of foreign political
concept. It is precisely this kind of subjugation which, apart from
fuelling federalist feelings amongst the Ndebele, also deepens the mistrust
between the Shona and Ndebele Ethnic Groups of Zimbabwe.
Because of the reluctance of Modern Africa, many Ethnic Groups of Africa,
including the Ndebeles, do not trust the government of the Modern
African States, unitary or federal, to either protect them or to share the
power and the wealth of the State. Such reluctance in Zimbabwe has
exacerbated historical ethnic animosities between the Ndebele and Shona,
ethnic enmities that cannot be eradicated by foreign federalism as
we know it. Like many other African Ethnic Groups in similar political
situations, the Ndebele Ethnic Group of Zimbabwe feels totally
unprotected not even by the new South Africa who shares common historical
and cultural roots with Matabeleland. The Ndebele People has
more in common with South African Zulus than the Shonas of Zimbabwe.  But,
the South African government cannot be seen to support
Matabele nationalism because that might revive Zulu nationalism in their own
backyard.  The African Ethnic Group need political and
economic protections but does not trust the Modern African State to provide
them. It is because of such mistrust between the Ndebele and the
Shona that a federal system of government cannot work in Zimbabwe. The
Ndebele do not trust the Shona to ensure the survival and growth
of their nation while the Shona suspect that the Ndebele may use the pretext
of federalism to restore their traditional state. Even if the Shona,
as the political majority, sees the need for a new system of government,
such as federalism, the political crisis of Zimbabwe will not end
since the unequal relationship will still remain and the deep mistrust will
not dissipate. Just as the Ijaw People and the Igbo of Nigeria do not
support the Federal State of Nigeria, and just as the people of Western and
Southern Sudan do not support Federal State of Sudan and are
fighting to secede, the people of Matabeleland in Zimbabwe will not support
a Federal State of Zimbabwe when an Ethnic Group, the Shonas,
still controls the political power and the economic resources of the State.
The Ndebele Ethnic Group will not accept any political arrangement
whereby political and economic protections are not absolute from a
super-neutral African political power. The super-neutral power is .. The
United Africa. United Africa will end the political impasse in Zimbabwe
permanently through equitable distribution of power between
Traditional Africa, in this case the Ndebele Ethnic Group, and Modern
Africa, in this case Zimbabwe, which is controlled by the Shona Ethnic

Equal power sharing between Traditional Africa and Modern Africa through
meaningful political autonomy and meaningful revenue sharing
are the solutions to Africa's political problems, including Zimbabwe
political problems. The political problems of Africa, such as the crisis in
Zimbabwe, are the result of the inappropriate political structures and
political systems bequeathed to Africa by colonialism. Being the result of
the partition of Africa, Africa's political problems cannot be resolved
through military solutions or through loose ethno-regional affiliations,
loose regional groupings or loose unions of African States. Colonialism did
not eliminate the fundamental causes of the centuries-old
wariness and divisions among Ethnic Groups in Africa; likewise post-colonial
Africa. Colonialism imposed inappropriate political structures
and system of governance on Africa that are not conducive to maintaining
permanent political stability in Africa, including Zimbabwe. Durable
political stability is elusive in Africa because the structures and the
systems imposed on Africa are unsuitable to the socio-geopolitical
aspirations of Africa's Ethnic Groups and being unsuitable they fuel
ethnocentrism.  For this reason, the Modern African State such as
Zimbabwe cannot rely on imported western political concepts to maintain
permanent political stability neither can Zimbabwe or any other
Modern African State rely on loose union of African Heads of States to
prevent political crisis.

Federalism as we know it in Africa is a loose amalgamation of Traditional
African State to form the Modern African State. Loose groupings of
Traditional African States through colonialism to create Zimbabwe are not
the appropriate political structure for Zimbabwe or Africa neither
are the post-colonial loose regional groupings of African States nor the
loose union of African States. Post-colonial regional groupings and
loose union of African States have not developed the capabilities to prevent
or resolve political crisis that have plagued Africa since after
the colonial period. These unions are not the solution to Africa's problems
because they are incapable of resolving the fundamental political
problem confronting Africa and as such they are powerless. The African Heads
of State championing the African Union (AU) or New
Partnership for African Development (NEPAD) are powerless because they are
also confronted with similar political situation simmering
beneath the political landscape of their respective African State. They fear
that the solution they forcefully advocates today to end one crisis
may come back to haunt them when the subterranean volcanic political matter
(ethnic animosities) in their State burst open the deceptively
quiet political landscape and erupts to destroy everything in its path
including precious human life and property. The African Head of State
may pontificate of how Africans are ready to solve African internal strife
and police African own leadership but they do not have the requisite
political power to achieve the goal of crisis-free Africa. It is quiet
obvious that neither AU nor NEPAD, provide maximum capabilities to
protect all Ethnic Groups in Africa due to inherent structural deficiencies
of such unions. Additionally, the multiplicity of regional groupings
such as ECOWAS, MAGREB, and SADC within a loose African Union provides
inadequate solutions to problems confronting Africans. Such
organizations do not generate enough strength to meet the ever-present
ethnic wars camouflaging today as liberation wars, wars that are
destroying the African social landscape and endangering the precious African
Cultural Diversity.

Loose unions, such as the federalism being advocated for Zimbabwe, are
powerless and therefore are incapable of preventing such crisis as
the Zimbabwe political crisis or quickly end such crisis as the crisis in
Darfur in the Sudan. Because of the inability of respective African
governments, such as  Zimbabwe, and respective loose African unions and
organizations to create effective political structures and political
systems in Africa, endless political crisis is now the face of Africa, and
it is the sort of Africa that we will be living in, 20 or 50 years from
now, if the political status quo of Africa, including Zimbabwe, is not
fundamentally changed to neutralize the destructive effects of the
balkanization of Africa by the partition of Africa.  The United Africa
Organization - UAO is committed to neutralizing the destructive effect of
balkanization of Africa since this colonial political mechanism is primarily
the main cause of the cycle of political crisis in Africa. The
President of Nigeria, Olusegun Obasanjo, seems to agree with UAO in his
address at the First Conference of Intellectuals of Africa and the
Diaspora in Dakar, Senegal in October 2004  when he blamed colonialists for
the over 100 years of balkanization of Africa. The balkanization
of Africa through the partition of Africa was a political mechanism employed
by the colonialist to control the resources of the Land of Africa
and the colonial scheme is still working perfectly well for the colonialist
today.  As a result of the balkanization, post colonial Africa could not
embrace new Afrocentric ideologies such as Neo-Africanism, the New Ideology
for a New Africa. Neo-Africanism would have restructured
Africa to create appropriate political structures and political systems to
facilitate the emergence of new, challenging, creative, innovative and
progressive African ideas built on the specificities of Africa, ideas that
draw on Africa's internal strength, values, policies, politics and
spirituality. To accept the current inappropriate political structures of
Africa is to accept the balkanization of Africa. To accept the
balkanization of African Ethnic Groups within inappropriate boundaries is to
accept living with perennial political crisis. Undeniably,
Zimbabwe like any other African State is a balkanized State and that is the
reason for the frequent political crisis. Therefore, to accept or
ignore the political status quo of Zimbabwe and Africa is to accept living
with the same Africa the world knows - gun violence, atrocities,
ethnic annihilations, refugees, crisis, famine and mass death. To say it
briefly, foreign concept of federalism, loose regional groupings and
loose union of African States do not offer solutions to the political
problems of Zimbabwe and Africa. The solution is..The United

The Solution is .. United Africa
UAO is advocating an "African solution" to Zimbabwe's socio-political
crisis. The solution lies in implementing the tenets of African
Federalism. African Federalism creates The United Africa. The solution to
the political crisis in Africa and Zimbabwe lies in accepting the new
political concept of African Federalism. The proposed African Federalism is
a system of government which consists of all Traditional African
States and all Modern African States. Each State have their own governments
and are granted constitutional powers to decide their own
affairs and are protected, politically and economically, by a single
super-neutral United Africa national government which is granted
constitutional powers to make decisions only on foreign affairs, defense and
management of a single African Currency.

Inarguably, Zimbabwe like most Modern African States consists of Traditional
African States, of people of who sees themselves first as
citizens of an ethnic nation before any modern imposed socio-political
identity.  This traditional socio-geopolitical identity, history has done
well to tell us, cannot be vanquished by any political concept that does not
recognize the legitimacy and the relevance of such a strong
political sentiment of the African. Without recognizing the legitimacy of
Traditional Africa, it is impossible for any government of Modern Africa
to secure political legitimacy, election or no election, distribution of
political post or development projects notwithstanding. And without
political legitimacy, it is impossible to provide for the material
well-being of disenfranchised citizens.  Lack of legitimacy for the ZANU-PF
government lies in the breach of the most cardinal principle of success of
any modern state and any modern political leader, which is
meaningful power-sharing, which in Africa, only the proposed African
Federalism can deliver. African Federalism has been proposed to
provide all the States on the Land of Africa, Traditional and Modern,
genuine political legitimacy so as to make all governments acceptable to
all the people of Africa.

African Federalism is based on the distribution of the political power of
Africa between the United Africa, the Modern African State, the
Provinces of Africa where Traditional Africa resides and the Districts or
Localities within the Modern African State. The political leaders of
each political jurisdiction are elected by the people of the geopolitical
area except where the people accept their traditional monarch or
chieftain as the political leader with either or not constitutional
executive powers. Essentially, the people of the geopolitical area of United
Africa choose their own political leaders and have constitutional power to
raise as much money in their jurisdiction as they deem appropriate
without any manner of imposition from any external powers, foreign or
domestic. African Federalism delegates substantial political and legal
power to the semi-autonomous political jurisdictions of United Africa.
Inarguably, foreign concept of federalism has failed in Africa because of
the reluctance of Modern Africa to share power and economic resources with
Traditional Africa. African Federalism, on other hand, permits
the growth of indigenous institutions that can best benefit the provinces
and the districts of Africa without much federal and state
interference. Such distribution of power will make provincial and district
administrations effective in providing for the needs of the African

The political structure and the system of governance in Africa must be
changed to assure all Ethnic Groups of Africa, the Shona and the
Ndebele included, of maximum political and economic protection by a
super-neutral African political power. The super-neutral power capable
and willing to protect all Africans irrespective of ethnicity is.. The
United Africa.  The United Africa is built on African Federalism. It is only
African Federalism that can neutralize the adverse effect of partition of
Africa so as to eradicate destructive ethnic rivalries permanently or at
least reduce them to a mere nuisance - infrequent, few and far between.
African Federalism as the political structure of United Africa is
essential to sustaining stability, peace and prosperity in all Africa as it
will stop the camouflaged new-age colonialism of Traditional Africa by
Modern Africa. Indubitably, the Federation of Traditional Africa and Modern
Africa to form United Africa will end permanently the perennial
political instability resulting from holding onto colonial boundaries that
permit subjugation of one Ethnic Group by another Ethnic Group.

Obviously, there are two Traditional States in the Modern African State of
Zimbabwe that were forcibly brought together by the partition of
Africa and perpetuated by post-colonial leaders. Both have a right to
self-determination. Under African Federalism, the territory occupied by
the state of Zimbabwe will remain intact; however, the power relations
within that territorial will be changed by the tenets of African
Federalism, the new African political structure and the African Democracy,
the new system of governance. African Federalism is the most
appropriate way of rearranging the socio-political relations within the
Modern African State to accommodate the Traditional States within one
territorial entity. African Federalism is the political structure that will
be acceptable to the Shonas and Ndebels of Zimbabwe.

It is clear from African history that Traditional Africa will continue to
fight hegemony or subjugation, whether foreign or domestic. This is
because many Ethnic Groups of Modern African States are so aggrieved, so
victimized, so ethnically cleansed and facing extinction for no
other reason than their being, their humanity and their identity, that they
are prepared to rise against any form of ethnic colonialism, fascism
and hegemony. Traditional Africa has demonstrated that they are prepared to
fight to ensure their basic survival, their lives and their way of
life which are threatened by ethnocentric groups controlling the central
government whom they believed, rightly or wrongly, are determined to
annihilate them or at least subjugate them. Many Ethnic Groups in Africa
have now reached a stage where they can no longer remain silent
and incapable of defending themselves in the face of grave injustice.
African Federalism has been proposed not only eliminate these
tensions, not only to appease Traditional Africa but also to avoid violent
disintegration of the Modern African States as a result of pent-up ill
feelings boiling dangerously beneath the surface of the African political

UAO have concluded from in-depth political analysis of Africa that until and
unless there is equal power sharing in Zimbabwe, political crisis
will continue to erupt now and then in Zimbabwe and in many parts of Africa.
Post independent African governments, including Zimbabwe,
are unable to prevent political crisis because the Modern African State is
essentially the amalgamation of loose Traditional African States
with unequal political powers. For example, Zimbabwe was constituted by a
loose affiliation of two distinct regional groups subdivided into
MaShonaland and Matabeleland. British colonialism created Zimbabwe, joining
two diverse peoples and regions in an involuntary political
entity.  It was, therefore, not unusual that the nationalism that became a
political factor in pre-independent Zimbabwe arose essentially from a
common sentiment against colonialism rather than from any sense of a common
Zimbabwe nationality. Despite the brief periods of "marriages
of necessity" early nationalists in Zimbabwe tended to ignore Zimbabwe as
the focus of patriotism; rather, the common denominator was
based on a newly assertive ethnic consciousness that fuel adherence to the
ideology of ethnocentrism, the ideology that have prevented
equal sharing of political power among the Ethnic Groups of the Modern
African State including Zimbabwe. Since the 1960s, the ideology of
ethnocentrism fueled ethnic animosities in Zimbabwe and created ethnic
organizations instead of national organizations. Zimbabwean
regionalism, fueled by ethnocentrism, created semi-autonomous entities that
have little in common politically or socially. The UAO have
determined that until and unless ethnocentrism is neutralized and until and
unless colonial political arrangements are discarded, equal
sharing of political power among the Ethnic Groups of Zimbabwe will not
materialize and as a result political crisis will continue
to be a prevalent feature of Zimbabwe and Africa.

The United Africa, as proposed by the United African Organization, is a
restructured Africa that distributes political power equally between
Traditional Africa and Modern Africa. Because no effective political
structure and political system were created after independence to cement
the loose affiliations of Traditional African States into a solid united
modern political entity, the United Africa Organization (UAO) is advocating
the restructure of the Land of Africa and its component traditional and
modern states to create a trusting and meaningful federalism - The
African Federalism. The proposed new federalism for Africa enables equal
sharing of political power between Traditional Africa and Modern
Africa. The people of Matabeleland, as clearly asserted in their
pronouncements, will accept a true federalism, the African Federalism,
because United Africa will guarantee the Ndebeles and all Ethnic Groups of
Africa maximum social, political and economic protections from
domestic or international exploitation, subjugation and marginalization.
Similarly, the people of MaShonaland will accept Africa Federalism
because the Shona Ethnic Group will never be in danger of being subjugated
or marginalized by any Ethnic Group in the world. Therefore, the
United Africa will permanently solve the political crisis in Zimbabwe. UAO
is saying that permanent solution to the political crisis in Africa,
including Zimbabwe, is all Africans accepting the proposed African
Federalism that creates United Africa. UAO believes that the political
restructure of Africa in accordance with the concept of African Federalism
is the effective political mechanism to permanently end the cycle
of political crisis in Zimbabwe and in all Africa. The proposed African
Federalism creates...... The United Africa. The United Africa is the
solution to Africa's cycle of political crisis that have destabilize many
parts of Africa for so long.

UAO believes strongly that the sudden eruption of political crisis in the
Modern African State is not due to inherent animosity among the
African Ethnic Groups that constitute the Modern African State. The
political instability of the Modern African State is directly the result of
defective political structure bequeathed to Africa by the partition of
Africa. As a result of this inappropriate political structure there are
in Sierra Leone, Liberia, Ivory Coast, the Sudan, the Congo, Uganda and
Angola and Zimbabwe.  Clearly, the current political crisis in
Zimbabwe is not unlike the political crisis in other African States. The
demand of the people of Matabeleland in Zimbabwe for autonomy is no
different than the demands of other African Ethnic Groups fighting in these
political hotspots of Africa. These frequent confrontations between
the Modern African State and the Traditional African State is decimating the
population of Africa and destroying the economy of Africa. The
defective political structure of the Modern African State is seriously
destroying the political and economic stability of the African State and
Africa. According to reports from the Catholic Commission for Justice and
Peace in Zimbabwe and the Legal Resources Foundation of
Zimbabwe about 2,000 people, since independence, have been killed in
fighting in Matabeleland where the Ndebele People live in poverty
despite the existence of natural resources under their territory. Abject
poverty of certain Ethnic Groups in the Modern Africa State is a direct
result of inappropriate political structures and systems that marginalize
these Ethnic Groups, politically and economically, and enables other
Ethnic Groups of the Modern African State to control the rich endowment of
resources on the traditional lands of marginalized Ethnic Groups.
Political crisis are inevitable in such a political arrangement that creates
poverty in rich areas of the Modern African State. Unquestionably,
abject poverty of certain Ethnic Groups of Africa caused by unequal
political power is a direct cause of crisis in Africa, including Zimbabwe.
The United Africa will end these crises in Africa by ensuring equitable
power sharing in Africa. The solution to these crises is ..The United

Unbiased analysis of the African political situation indicates that the
cause of the crisis in Africa and in Zimbabwe is not the distinctiveness
of African Ethnic Groups but the prevalence of inappropriate political
structures and that the permanent solution to African crisis is the
creation of an appropriate African political structure, which is....The
United Africa. The United Africa enables the dissemination of an
appropriate ideology, which is Neo-Africanism instead of ethnocentrism. The
inappropriate political structures in Africa have compelled many
an African Ethnic Group to reluctantly embrace ethnocentrism, the ideology
that encourages ethno-imperialism, the unintentional new-age
African imperialism. Africa's Ethnic Groups have adhered to ethnocentrism in
post-colonial Africa mainly in the belief that it is the only means
to acquire maximum social, political and economic protections for the Ethnic
Group given the political structures they have been forced to
live with. Today's ethnocentrism arises out of the belief that the Ethnic
Group will be in danger of political subjugation, social domination and
economic marginalization by another Ethnic Group in the Modern African
State, if the Ethnic Group does not control the powers of the State.
Under such prevailing beliefs, crisis are inevitable since trust and the
social affinity of Africa's Ethnic Groups are destroyed, the result of
which is unbridled Ethnic Group competition for state power. Contemporary
African history clearly tells us that an African Ethnic Group cannot
maintain endurable political stability through monopoly of political power
and adherence to such divisive ideology as ethnocentrism because
of the unrelenting fierce socio-political competition from other Ethnic
Groups. Zimbabwe and Nigeria epitomize such fierce competition in

The relentless crisis in Africa is due mainly to the incompatibility of
political realities and ethnic interest. Today's African political realities
the existence of inappropriate political structures and it is incompatible
with the ancient, resolute, ethnic interest of Africa's Ethnic Groups. It
is the unsuitability of the current African political structures to the
socio-political condition of Africa that is causing the never-ending crisis
Zimbabwe and in other parts of Africa not the fundamental social temperament
of the African Ethnic Group. So, the pursuit of ethnocentric
ideology in Zimbabwe is not due to the social temperament of Zimbabwe Ethnic
Groups but by an underpinning ideology that compels the
pursuit of maximum monopoly of state power to attain maximum protection
given the nonexistence of appropriate African political structure.
The existence of inappropriate political structures in Zimbabwe has
perpetuated divisive ideologies as the only means to attain maximum
social protections for MaShonaland and Matabeleland. Thus, the causes of the
crisis in Zimbabwe and in many parts of Africa are not the
distinctiveness of Africa's Ethnic Groups because various Social Groups in
Africa have lived and can live harmoniously and cooperatively
on the same land forever. Some of the historical examples of harmonious and
cooperative living of Africa's Social Groups are the syncretic
living of Muslim and Non-Muslim People in Mali and by the various Social
Groups of the Niger Delta in the pre-colonial era. The crisis in
Zimbabwe and in Africa is the result of today's political structures that
are incompatible with the distinctiveness of socio-geopolitical
groupings of Africa. Therefore, to end the frequent crisis in Zimbabwe and
in other parts of Africa, Modern Africa must be politically
restructured to enable a proper African ideology, Neo-Africanism, to
germinate and disseminate. Neo-Africanism is an Afrocentric ideology,
not an ethnocentric ideology, and it is the ideology that emanates from the
creation of the United Africa, the proposed one continental African
nation properly structured to create a new Modern Africa.

UAO is proposing to All Africa to embrace Neo-Africanism in order to
eradicate ethnocentrism in Africa and replaced it with Africanism, a new
ideology to resuscitate the original African Political Mission defined by
Dr. Kwame Nkrumah, which were African Liberation and African
Unification. While eliminating ethnocentric agendas in Africa,
Neo-Africanism directs Africa to the next phase of the African Political
which is African Unification & African Democracy in order to protect the
gains of African Liberation. It is imperative for All Africa to embrace
Neo-Africanism because it is imperative to permanently safeguard the gains
of Africa Liberation and to establish a political environment
conducive to sustaining peace and prosperity on the Land of Africa. The New
African Ideology - Neo-Africanism, which is the underpinning
ideology of United Africa, neutralizes ethnocentrism to enable the creation
of a new and appropriate political structure and political system to
replace the current destructive political arrangements bequeathed by

UAO is proposing United Africa, one African continental nation built on
African Federalism, governed by African Democracy, and guided by
Neo-Africanism because the inappropriate political arrangements that have
encouraged ethnocentrism in Africa have unleashed a tidal wave
of fear and mistrust among Africa's Ethnic Groups and as a result have made
it almost impossible for consensus and cooperation to seep
into the political fabric of the African State. Instead, the current
political structures, unsuitable to the unique socio-geopolitical condition
Africa, have foisted conflict and confrontation as a political norm.  As a
result of the inappropriate political structures bequeathed to Africa by
colonialism, political structures embraced by post-colonial African leaders,
it is very difficult almost impossible to maintain harmony and
cooperation necessary to achieve permanent political stability because of
inordinate political pressures from competing Ethnic Groups who
have been vying for perpetual supremacy of the Modern African State since
the advent of colonialism. It is therefore not surprising to see
frequent crisis in Africa. United Africa, by its structure, governance and
ideology, is capable of ending theses crises in Africa permanently.

The inappropriate political structures that are causing great mistrust and
causing the frequent crisis engulfing many African States, including
Zimbabwe, indicate that neither the African Head of State nor the Modern
African State nor the Traditional African State can achieve any
measure of success and history has proved that to true, albeit sadly. This
historical evidence means that an African Head of State cannot
achieve success, that is, cannot create and maintain durable peace and
stability through unity and democracy unless the Head of State joins
an appropriately restructured African political entity, which is... The
United Africa. The African Head of State cannot govern successfully
without encountering inordinate socio-political pressures of competing
Ethnic Groups and without threats of coup d'etat unless the Head of
State joins... The United Africa.  Also, the inappropriate political
structures of Africa, with its attendant deep mistrust and crisis prone
political environment, have demonstrated abundantly clear that an African
State cannot sustain peace and harmony and attain maximum
political protection against internal and external aggression unless the
African State joins... The United Africa. Similarly, the crisis caused
by the inappropriate political structures have indicated without a shadow of
doubt that an African Ethnic Group cannot protect its identity and
secure maximum social, political and economic protections unless the African
Ethnic Group joins... The United Africa, a restructured new
continental one African nation. The proposed United Africa nation is created
according to African Federalism and African Democracy and as
such it has political structures, political systems and political ideology
suitable to the socio-geopolitical situation in Africa.  In essence, the
solution to Africa's myriad problems is... The United Africa.

Undoubtedly, Africa is afflicted by the cancer of political debility caused
by the serious defective political structures imposed on Africa by
colonialism and perpetuated by post-colonial African leaders. Evidently, the
inappropriate political structures of Africa have denied Africa the
political tools that prevent such crisis from occurring, which are unity and
democracy. It has also prevented Africans, including African Head
of States, from accepting a common African ideology, which is
Neo-Africanism, the ideology capable of preventing such crisis in Africa.
current African political structure has incapacitated the African Head of
State, the African State and the African Ethnic Group and as a result
Africa is suffering.  The United Africa Organization - UAO believes
fervently that the solution to the current African political crises is.. The
United Africa, a united democratic one continental African nation structured
according to African Federalism, governed according to African
Democracy and guided according to the New African Ideology - Neo-Africanism.

Undoubtedly, the crisis in Zimbabwe and in many parts of Africa does not
require military solution or genocidal solution since such so-called
solutions do not end crisis but aggravate political disputes that are
reconcilable. Military solutions expand scope of conflict thus leading to
dangerous apocalyptic wars in Africa. The crisis in Africa today requires a
political solution and the most effective political solution is ...The
United Africa. Undeniably, the solution to the crisis in Zimbabwe is United
Africa - one African nation created by all Africans and for all
Africans, a nation all Africans can trust to protect them from all manner of
persecutions - social, political and economic. The United Africa as
proposed by the United Africa Organization corrects the wrongs of African
history, especially the destructive effects of the partition of Africa
imposed on Africa by colonialism. Colonialism, out of self interest, did not
recognize the socio-political interest of African Ethnic Groups
during the partition of Africa when distinct African Social Groups were
forced into colonial boundaries. Unquestionably, Zimbabwe, as it is
politically constituted, is an inappropriate political entity as it enables
the Ethnic Group with the most population to monopolize political power
and as it denies minority Ethnic Groups equal share of political power thus
cultivating ethnic animosities which eventually deteriorates into
political crisis. To enable an Ethnic Group to win national power by
campaigning on local issues and inflaming ethnic passion is to ignore the
issues of other Ethnic Groups, the consequence of which is apocalyptic
political crisis.

Autonomy of the Ndebele Ethnic Group within a Zimbabwe federal system is
appropriate but the system of majoritarian rule based on
population size must be abandon in favor of African Democracy. However, to
make the Zimbabwe federalism a solid indivisible unity of the
Shona Ethnic Group and the Ndebele Ethnic Group, Zimbabwe must be part of a
wider stronger unity of African States and African Ethnic
Groups, which is... The United Africa, one continental African nation with
the capability to protect the African State, such as Zimbabwe and
protect the African Ethnic  Group, such as the Ndebele People, against
internal and external aggression. Therefore, the unity of Modern
African States and Traditional African States, built on African Federalism
and African Democracy is the permanent solution to the crisis in
Zimbabwe and in other parts of Africa. The proposed new democracy - The
African Democracy does not grant any Ethnic Group, regardless of
population size, unequal amount of political power. This new type of African
Unity and African Democracy will become a permanent African
political reality only through the creation of ... The United Africa.

To say it simply, the solution to the crisis in Zimbabwe  is .. The United Africa.
Back to the Top
Back to Index

Daily Mirror, Zimbabwe

Retailers evading price controls

The Daily Mirror Reporter
issue date :2005-Jun-20

SOME retail supermarkets in Harare are beating the controlled price cap of
standard bread by manufacturing special bread such as whole wheat and milk
bread before selling it at more than double the gazetted price of $4 500.
Last month, the government increased the price of bread, a controlled
commodity, from $3 500 to $4 500 a loaf in response to the cries of
manufacturers suffering high production costs.
But most supermarkets that bake bread have been evading the new price cap of
standard bread by manufacturing special types of bread such as milk bread at
more than $8 000 a loaf.
The practice is not only on the increase in reputable supermarket chains in
the Harare City centre but also rampant in bakeries in several high-density
In Warren Park D, one supermarket was selling a sesame-coated loaf of bread
at $7 500 while standard bread was not in supply.
"We have to buy the type of bread that is available at the high price
because we have no choice," a resident said.
Due to the controlled price of bread, manufactures argue that it does not
adequately cover costs.
Other major bread manufacturers such as Lobels have been delivering dry and
poor quality bread that weighs much less than the stipulated 770 grams to
several shops
and the few remaining tuck-shops in the high-density
Back to the Top
Back to Index

Daily Mirror, Zimbabwe

Businessman takes council to court over demolition

The Daily Mirror Reporter
issue date :2005-Jun-20

A BUSINESSMAN has accused the Municipality of Harare of acting in bad faith
in a High Court case in which, he is opposing the council's intention to
destroy his two-storey complex in the Graniteside industrial area.
In the High Court case (number (HC2602/05), Redline Security Service Private
Limited represented by its managing director, Alex Mashamhanda is the sole
applicant while, Municipality of Harare and the commissioner of police,
Augustine Chihuri are the first and second respondents respectively.
In his answering affidavit filed on Thursday, Mashamhanda said he acquired
stand 18226 Salisbury Township, where the complex in question was built
legally and with the approval of the council.
"On the 27th January 2004 the 1st respondent's town clerk  wrote to the
applicant advising that he was prepared to recommend to the 1st respondent
that stand 18226 Salisbury Township lands be sold to applicant for the sum
of $180 million. Applicant was requested to confirm its acceptance of the
offer to facilitate for the sale," Mashamhanda said.
He went on to produce a letter from the town clerk, Nomutsa Chideya in which
he said he was prepared to recommend to council that the stand be sold to
his company.
The letter reads in part: "Reference is made to the above issue (sale of
stand 18226 Salisbury Township to Redline Security Private Limited) and I
wish to advise you that, I am prepared to recommend to council that the
above property be sold to Redline Security Services Private Limited for the
sum of $180 million, subject to the purchaser meeting all costs pertaining
to survey and transfer of the subject property."
On January 30, 2004, Mashamhanda then responded to the town clerk's
correspondence indicating that his company was willing to buy the stand.
"I acknowledge receipt of your letter dated 27th January, 2004 advising that
you are prepared to recommend to council that the above property be sold to
us for the sum of $180 million subject to us meeting all costs pertaining to
survey and transfer of the property. I confirm our acceptance of the
proposal," he said.
Mashamhanda also argued that the city's finance committee also recommended
that the stand be sold to him for $180 million on April 6, 2004.
Part of the committee's recommendations reads: "That subject to adoption of
recommendation (1) and (2) above and subject to the provisions of the
Section 152 of the Urban Council's Act (Chapter 29:15) stand 18226 Harare
Township be sold to Mr A E Mashamhanda of Redline Security Services Private
Limited for $I80 million."
According to correspondence between the town clerk and the chamber secretary
that was cited by Mashamhanda as proof that council had regularised the
construction of the structure, the town clerk said: "As provide for in the
Agreement of sale, the company sought and was to be paid against the
transfer of the stand. Despite the stand being surveyed for Title purposes
at the company's cost, the stand could not be transferred as there was
outstanding road closure formalities which had to be attended to."
The town clerk added that the developer sought and was granted permission to
develop the stand for commercial purposes and upon approval a three-storey
building, shops and a leisure park.
 The town clerk went on to recommend to the chamber secretary that the stand
be sold to Mashamhanda for $180 million.
Back to the Top
Back to Index

      Govt should heed Zimbabwean plea to cancel tour
      Monday, 20 June 2005, 9:05 am
      Press Release: Green Party

Govt should heed Zimbabwean plea to cancel Black Caps tour

Prime Minister Helen Clark should heed calls from the Zimbabwean
pro-democracy movement to take firm action to stop the Black Caps tour of
Zimbabwe, Green Co-Leader Rod Donald says.

Welshman Ncube, the general secretary of Zimbabwe's Movement for Democratic
Change, said yesterday that the Black Caps' tour should be called off.

"The Zimbabwean Opposition is well placed to comment on whether a New
Zealand cricket tour would help or hinder the odious Robert Mugabe," Green
Co-Leader Rod Donald said. "Helen Clark should be taking Mr Ncube's comments
very seriously and formally advise NZ Cricket not to tour Zimbabwe."

The 'force majeure' clause in NZ Cricket's future tours agreement with other
national cricket boards allows for a tour to be called off without financial
penalty if the cancellation is the result of a Government directive.

"In the same way that New Zealand responded positively to calls from
pro-democracy voices in South Africa to suspend all international sporting
ties until the apartheid regime was brought to an end, the Government should
be acting on this request from Zimbabwe's pro-democracy movement."

Mr Donald said that Robert Mugabe's recent bulldozing of the homes of
250,000 poor Zimbabweans made the need for firm action even more urgent.

"After watching the heart-wrenching images of ordinary Zimbabweans' fragile
homes being crushed like matchsticks, the whole of New Zealand would be
behind the Government telling the Black Caps to pull out of the tour so as
not to give Mugabe any legitimacy.

"In 1994, Helen Clark said, 'The collapse of apartheid did not occur in the
1990s without significant international pressure ... the systematic
violation of human rights in South Africa was eventually taken very
seriously by the international community, but it took many years, through a
combination of economic and other sanctions, and diplomatic pressure, to
bear fruit'. It's time for the Prime Minister to lead an international
sporting boycott of Zimbabwe."

Back to the Top
Back to Index

New Zimbabwe

Mugabe's wife flunks degree course

By Staff Reporter
Last updated: 06/20/2005 11:10:51
PRESIDENT Robert Mugabe's wife, Grace, has dropped out of a univeristy in
London where she was studying for a Bachelor of Arts (English) degree after
dismally failing most of her examinations.

Reports at the weekend said the First Lady, whose personal tutor was
President Mugabe, had passed only two subjects since she enrolled at the
University of London eight years ago, the website reported.

She was studying through correspondence.

Her lack of progress prompted the university officials to deregister her
from the programme, the report said.

"According to officials at the university Mrs Mugabe could go down in the
university's history as the worst student ever to enrol there," the website

The First Lady was reportedly registered with the University of London since
1996, and eight years down the line, she had passed only two subjects. She
had until December 2004 to complete the degree programme or face being

So dismal was the first lady's performance that she obtained marks as low as
7% in one of the subjects, Approaches to Text.

"In 1998, Grace failed all three subjects she was tested for. She flunked
Explorations in Literature (I) for which she achieved 9%, Explorations in
Literature (II)-18% and Renaissance Comedy: Shakespeare and Jonson-17%. The
following year the first lady repeated the three subjects but again failed
Explorations in Literature (I)-31%, Renaissance Comedy: Shakespeare and
Jonson-29%," the report said.

"She, however, salvaged a pass in Explorations in Literature (II) with a 42%
mark. In the same year, she attempted an additional subject, Approaches to
Text, but failed with a lowly 7% mark."

Mugabe's wife was born in South Africa in 1965 and came to Zimbabwe in 1970
where she attended a primary school in her hometown, Chivhu. She then went
to Christe Mambo, just outside Rusape, for her secondary education.

She later enrolled for a secretarial course with the Christian College of
Southern Africa before joining the President's Office as a secretary. She
completed Advanced Level studies through distant education while working in
the President's Office.

She wedded President Mugabe in 1996, long after their extramarital affair
had yielded two children while the president was still married to his first
wife, Sally, who died in January 1992.

Back to the Top
Back to Index


      Life inside: The asylum detainee
            By Dominic Casciani
            BBC News website community affairs reporter

      A report by Amnesty International has criticised the government for
locking up thousands of asylum seekers, some of whom turn out to be genuine
refugees. Forard (not his real name), a detainee at Colnbrook Removal Centre
in Berkshire, describes what life is like inside one of these centres.
      Forard, speaking by phone from a landing at Colnbrook, says he fled
Zimbabwe after he was singled out for attacks by members of the youth wing
of President Robert Mugabe's ruling ZanuPF party.

      He has been refused asylum but has not yet been removed.

      He claims he carries the evidence of torture on his body, although he
wanted to remain anonymous out of fear of damaging his case.

      Colnbrook is the newest centre and is close to Heathrow to make
removals easier. But Forard says he has been there for most of this year
after initially being held in Dungavel in Lanarkshire.

      "I came here in February and have been here ever since," he said amid
the din of a noisy corridor where other people were waiting for phone calls.

      "The structure of this building is just like a jail. [Inside the
rooms] there are toilets with no doors. The ceiling is dark blue, close to
black and they lock us up at 10pm and they open in the morning at 7.30,
sometimes 7.45.

      "There is no way you can get out of the room. It feels that there is
no air coming in, there is artificial ventilation but it feels like it is
blocked most of the time.

      "It gets very hot sometimes and I have to fan myself with a newspaper
at night and there is no way you can open windows."

      Forard described the view from his room as one of razor wire and solid
fences. He said there was "nothing much to see, you look from the room to
the fence - the way I had seen the inside of a jail on television, this is
what I see here".

      "In Dungavel it's more like a house, but that doesn't mean it is any
better there.

      "In Dungavel the toilets are outside the rooms and you can get out of
the room and go to television rooms and you come out and you can play games.

      "Your rooms are not locked at night. Here, when they lock, you are
locked in there and there is nothing else you can do."


      Asked what he would say to those who support the detention policy,
Forard said it was not as good as people thought.

      He said: "People in here are cutting their wrists and they are burning
themselves with boiling water. There are people in [detention centres] who
are hanging themselves but nothing is said about this on the outside.

      "I have seen these things several times. There are people here who are
mad, they were normal people when they came in but now it's like their
brains have been disturbed.

      "They walk in circles all day, there is this other guy who is like a
zombie who doesn't talk and walks like a tree, with little movement.

      "I have seen this guy for three months in here and a few minutes ago
he upset another man and wanted to hit him and one day he will get himself


      Forard's words were cut short by a loud scream which sounded like it
had come from down the hallway. It was one of the men Forard said was now
mentally unstable. A few minutes later, as he resumed his story, the same
man began loudly banging the door to a room.

      "This is the frustration that I have been talking about. Sometimes
[the man] talks, sometimes he will go and just scream like this, sometimes
he will go and slash his hands - he has scars all over his hands."

      Forard said he sought asylum with no intention of staying in the UK -
he simply followed the same path as other family members who had spent a lot
of money organising a secretive and hopefully temporary escape from

      He says he has every intention of going home once President Mugabe is
gone - but until then he does not feel safe.

      "I don't think this is an easy country. The process of coming here is
not easy at all, raising money to take flights from Africa, false passports
and so on.

      "I was warned before by other people that the asylum system in Britain
is very difficult. My other choice was a country which I didn't have a clue
about. But my cousin had made it here and said they would wait for me at the
airport; you have to understand that was the reason why."

      "The other people who told me about Britain told me the weather is
very unfriendly and you should not expect people to have any time for each
other, not like in Africa when people greet each other as they pass."

      Forard is still fighting his case and says ultimately he would rather
stay in Colnbrook than go home because whatever his conditions in the UK,
having no liberty is better than no life at all.

      "I will try to resist [removal]. There is no safety in Zimbabwe for

Back to the Top
Back to Index

MDC conflicts hit Joburg - report

Mon, 20 Jun 2005
Members of Zimbabwe's opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) were
turning Johannesburg into a bloody battle-field as they jostled for
positions in the party's structures, City Press newspaper reported on

This had prompted the MDC to send a "high-powered" delegation to South
Africa to try and defuse the situation, the newspaper said.

The MDC has been accused of, among others, killing a man known only as
Lungile, who was a member of the rival Zimbabwean Action Support Group

Jealousy behind friction - ZASG

Jealousy was behind the friction between the two groups, said ZASG chairman,
Remember Moyo.

"It seems MDC members are jealous of our popularity and following and think
we are after the positions they hold," said Moyo.

"We are not a political party. We support any political party that strives
to bring about change in Zimbabwe. We are not interested in positions."

City Press said Moyo believed the same MDC youths responsible for Lungile's
death were behind the kidnapping of two other ZASG youths, Musa Mhlanga and
Liberty Mcube.

He said two went missing in Joubert Park last week and had not been seen

Asked when exactly the MDC delegation was expected to arrive, Moyo said "not
anytime soon".

"The problem is that right now, tempers are flying," he said.


Back to the Top
Back to Index