VOA
By Peta Thornycroft
06 December
2007
Zimbabwe's President Robert Mugabe flew to Portugal,
breaking a travel ban
the European Union imposed in 2002 on the country's
top government and
ruling party officials. For VOA, Peta Thornycroft has
this report.
President Mugabe's aircraft, an Air Zimbabwe Boeing 767,
took off from
Harare airport mid-day Thursday on an unscheduled flight to
Lisbon ahead of
the long-delayed summit between the African Union and the
European Union.
African states said they will not go to the summit if Mugabe
was not
invited.
Portugal, the host, says it wants the first
European-African summit in seven
years to strike a new strategic partnership
that will focus on issues such
as counterterrorism, illegal immigration,
trade, debt relief, climate change
and international
peacekeeping.
Africa's leaders say they are determined not to let Europe
set the agenda
and are demanding to be treated as equals. But that could be
threatened with
Mugabe's presence at the summit
Some analysts say the
summit's agenda could turn into a debate over
corruption, human rights,
torture and Africa's post-colonial failures.
So far, British Prime
Minister Gordon Brown has said he will boycott the
summit, citing Mr.
Mugabe's record for repression and economic
mismanagement.
Leaders in
the Czech Republic and Spain also suggested that Mr. Mugabe might
want to
stay away. Even Portugal's foreign minister, who officially invited
Zimbabwe
and issued Mr. Mugabe's visa, says it would be "preferable" if he
didn't
attend.
In 2002, the EU imposed a travel ban on 130 of Zimbabwe's top
government and
ruling party officials, including Mugabe, after violent
presidential
elections which the EU was banned from
observing.
Several analysts say the British prime minister's boycott
has played into
Mugabe's hands and ensured that the political crisis in
Zimbabwe remains
where the Zimbabwean leader wants it, as a bilateral
issue.
Zimbabwe's economy has collapsed, and the country now boasts the
world's
highest inflation rate, well over 7,000 percent a year. More than 80
percent
of Zimbabweans are unemployed and after eight years of economic
decline
there are estimates that a quarter of them have fled to neighboring
countries.
New Zimbabwe
By Business
Reporter
Last updated: 12/07/2007 11:11:01
ZIMBABWEAN President Robert
Mugabe commandeered a London-bound Air Zimbabwe
plane to Lisbon, Portugal,
on Thursday evening.
Hundreds of passengers due to fly out of London for
Harare on the return
flight were left stranded for more than six
hours.
Mugabe, who is in Portugal for the EU-Africa summit which opens
Friday, had
the Boeing 767 flight UM720 reroute to Portugal, only arriving
in London at
12AM on Friday. The flight only left for Harare just after
1.30AM.
When on schedule, the Harare-bound flight should depart London’s
Gatwick
airport at 8.15PM.
Frustrated passengers were given £7 each
for refreshments during the delay.
Passengers who spoke to New Zimbabwe.com
by telephone from Gatwick Airport
said they had only been told of the delay
when they got to the airport.
One passenger said: “On a week that the Air
Zimbabwe chief executive said
the airline was meeting most of its flight
schedules, today’s service is a
mockery even if the flight was free. Imagine
passengers from Harare are
still in Lisbon now, and this is supposed to be a
trouble-free direct
flight? Just to be convenient to someone going to some
summit to throw
tantrums?”
Another passenger said he was “bored
stiff”. “It’s like we have no consumer
rights,” he
complained.
Ezekiel Mungoni, Air Zimbabwe’s station manager in London,
confirmed the
flight delay. He said they could not change the check-in times
in response
to the flight diversion.
Mungoni said: “Passengers are
supposed to check in at normal scheduled times
because thereafter, the
check-in counters will be used by some other
airlines. At the same time, our
handling agents will be committed to other
airlines. Airlines have to
restrict themselves to allocated times of
check-in unless if the delay is
more than 12 hours, which is not the case
here.
“We really sympathise
with our passengers, it’s not something we encourage
(delays).”
Air
Zimbabwe’s chief executive officer Peter Chikumba – appointed in
April --
told of his frustration last week at flight diversions, usually
forced by
President Mugabe’s travels, and the general unreliability of the
airline.
Chikumba’s hands are tied as the Zimbabwe government is the
sole shareholder
at the airline. He said it would take at least 24 months to
“change the
culture” at the airline.
Chikumba said: “Our first
primary focus is getting more flights on time,
giving more service,
listening to the market and hearing what people would
like to see the
service like.”
Independent, UK
7 December 2007 15:13
By Ian Evans in Harare
Published:
07 December 2007
The road out of Zimbabwe's capital, Harare, is a survey
of disrepair. Broken
traffic lights, rusting lampposts, rubbish-strewn scrub
planted with maize
by hungry people, broken down vehicles, hawkers with
pitiful offerings, the
choking fumes of cheap fuel.
The road itself
leads to the poorer townships, the heartland of the
opposition, and some
possible answers to questions surrounding Zimbabwe:
what has happened to
this once-thriving country? And why have its people not
risen up against its
leaders?
Power cuts here are as mundane as rain showers. Sitting and
drinking a beer
waiting for a guide, the lights go out along a whole street
without anyone
raising an eyebrow, let alone a voice. My companions cover
their ears,
there's a rumble and the generators kick back in.
My
township guide duly arrives and we hitchhike through the rain to
Hatcliffe.
The good news is the electricity is on. The bad news is that
there are no
street lights.
Two years ago Hatcliffe was targeted in Robert Mugabe's
Operation
Murambatsvina – Shona for "drive out the rubbish" – when thugs and
police
demolished shacks and stalls leaving tens of thousands of people
without
homes or work. He claimed it was tidying up the neighbourhood but
human
rights workers said that it was collective punishment of opposition
supporters.
Within 10 minutes the lights are off again.
The
man I have come to speak to is a civil servant but it is his daughter
who is
more vocal and passionate. A student in her early twenties, she sums
up the
mood of a desperate nation.
"Ten to 15 years ago we had a good life,
things were stable here. Now it is
going down and down. It will need a
strong political person in [the ruling
party] Zanu-PF to change things
because we do not think Mugabe will step
down. Inflation has ruined
everything. You cannot plan or budget and nothing
is available. It is OK if
you are in Zanu-PF and know people because you can
get what you want. But
for normal people like us, it is very hard."
There is little optimism
here that the talks between the ruling party and
the opposition Movement for
Democratic Change, brokered by neighbouring
South Africa, will deliver fair
elections next year.
The student is not confident about next year's vote
and warns me of
potential trouble. "African elections are very different to
Western
elections. You know there will only be one winner here. People know
he will
win. He will never give up power," she says.
Afterwards we
walk back to my guide's house along the potholed road. I'd got
used to no
electricity, but no water is difficult. Limited supply from
bottles obtained
from a school are not enough to flush a now-full lavatory
or have a
wash.
The morning frees us from the vagaries of power cuts and brings an
encounter
with a man typical of both of the bravery and frustration of those
who will
not be cowed into silence by the police state. Harrison Mudzuri,
36, is a
teacher and a father of three and he is happy to be quoted and
photographed.
"I am not scared. I am motivated because this is a minority
party ruling the
majority," he says. "If we are afraid we are not going to
gain anything. I
am prepared to keep up the struggle and am ready to meet
death. If we do not
keep up the struggle it could mean death anyway – it is
a no-win situation."
He has been a teacher for 15 years but has never
known conditions to be so
bad. His class is supposed to number 30 but he has
48 on the register. But
not all turn up each day. "They are too hungry, they
have to work or look
after their sick parents. People are very poor and
education is no longer a
priority," says Mr Mudzuri, a member of the
militant Progressive Teachers'
Union of Zimbabwe.
His earnings leave
him below the poverty line which has prompted colleagues
to quit and sent
once high literacy rates crashing. He has been arrested 12
times and been
tortured by secret police.
But not all the people in Zimbabwe are
suffering. We visit Borrowdale Brook,
a wealthy enclave for Mr Mugabe's
ministers, apparatchiks and a world away
from Hatcliffe. Building work,
manicured lawns, full shops, big cars and a
golf club give it the feel of
middle England, except this suburb houses Mr
Mugabe's out-of-town
retreat.
We drive past his high-fenced mansion guarded by troops armed
with
Kalashnikovs, bayonets drawn.
At the local supermarket, co-owned
by the government minister Ray Kaukonde,
we find fully stocked shelves, an
abundance of fruit and vegetables and wine
and spirits with price tags
running into several hundred million dollars.
This wealth is beyond the
imagining of the 40-year-old woman who runs a
nearby orphanage for 60
children with HIV/Aids and who also has the illness
for which she struggles
to get antiretroviral drugs every month. Her soldier
husband died from the
ailment as did her two children aged six and two.
Asked why she runs the
orphanage, she says: "They are all my children. I
just want one of them to
call me mummy so I can feel like a mother again."
The Times
December 7, 2007
The EU should challenge, not
pander to Robert Mugabe
African leaders, preparing for a summit in Lisbon
with the European Union
this weekend, have criticised Gordon Brown's
decision to boycott the meeting
because Robert Mugabe is attending.
Zimbabwe, they said, was not the main
issue, and Britain should have joined
its EU partners in planning a new
“partnership” with Africa. Even the
Portuguese hosts grumbled that the focus
should be on trade, migration,
energy and good governance rather than on
President Mugabe.
Their
protests are absurd. The presence at the summit of a dictator who has
reduced a once wealthy country to penury, hunger and humiliation makes a
mockery of all talk about a “fresh start” in relations. What Mr Mugabe has
done to his country has blighted Africa's development and fuelled widespread
cynicism over its will or ability to combat endemic corruption, cronyism,
economic incompetence and political malice. What is so deeply depressing is
that not only African leaders are defending the man whose policies have
driven millions of his people into exile and turned a former breadbasket
into a basket case; even some European leaders appear to think the Prime
Minister's refusal to sit down together with Mr Mugabe is nothing more than
a petty spat between a former colonial ruler and an African leader angered
by the slow pace of land reform.
Africa does indeed need to work out
a comprehensive new framework of
relations with Europe: one in which its
failings are frankly acknowledged
and commitments are given to the minimum
degree of democracy, security and
governance that would allow the EU to
boost trade and raise infrastructure
aid from £1.85 billion over the past
five years to £2.77 billion over the
next five. How can the necessary frank
discussion be held with the 48
African leaders present when none is ready to
speak out against the kind of
cruel and blinkered policies in Zimbabwe that
are the cause of the country's
suffering? As long as they prefer to salute
Mr Mugabe as a veteran
“anti-imperialist” rather than tell him to his face
that he is an
embarrassment, their demands for better trade and aid deals
with Europe
carry little weight. South Africa, the powerhouse of the
continent, carries
a particular responsibility. Not only was it the main
proponent of the
vaunted — and failed — New Economic Partnership for Africa
(Nepad); but it
has, by its refusal to condemn Mr Mugabe or put pressure on
its neighbour,
allowed him to indulge his megalomania. Whoever succeeds
President Mbeki
must rethink the short-sighted indulgence that has neither
halted the ruin
of Zimbabwe or the outflow of refugees nor prompted regime
change that a
cut-off in energy supplies would surely hasten.
Mr
Mugabe will be delighted by Mr Brown's absence. He can crow to fellow
Africans that it is Britain's obstinacy that has caused Zimbabwe's problems
and make much of his resistance to the “forces of colonialism”. Too many may
still fall for such arrant nonsense. And those who see through the charade
may find it politic to keep silent about failings all too familiar in their
own entourage. The EU has no excuse. Having disgracefully allowed Mr Mugabe
to attend, it must use this weekend to point out his cruelty and crimes, in
public, to others. Only then can it start seriously discussing a new
relationship with Africa.
The Times
December 7, 2007
Bronwen Maddox, Chief Foreign Commentator
It goes against
principles of diplomacy to say it, but Gordon Brown is right
in his
much-criticised boycott of this weekend's summit of European and
African
leaders simply because of the presence of Robert Mugabe.
Every normal
calculation would conclude that he should show up. The Prime
Minister says
that he cares enormously about Africa; then surely he should
be present at
the most important European Union-Africa summit for years. In
staying away,
but failing to persuade anyone but the Czech Prime Minister to
follow suit,
he risks looking impotent and isolated himself rather than
isolating the
Zimbabwean President.
He has allowed Mugabe to gain the upper hand, to
demonstrate the tacit
support of his continent, and to give him all the
advantages of being there.
Nor, coming from Brown, after his petulant
response to a month of crises at
home, does the gesture carry the weight
that it would from Tony Blair. Brown
is thought by his EU counterparts to
recoil from European gatherings in any
case; given that perception, his
response to this weekend's meeting risks
seeming like a bad-tempered impulse
rather than considered principle.
Despite all those good reasons for
going, there are times when pure
revulsion is enough justification. That
reflex, in the presence of Mugabe,
is the right one.
My colleague
Martin Fletcher, in a series of long pieces from Zimbabwe, has
caught in his
reporting the reasons why no other attitude towards Mugabe
should be
possible. Development experts tend to talk of the country hurtling
back down
the chart of development, years of progress wiped out with each
passing
year. But that does not capture the stories of families of children
orphaned
by Aids, the untreated ordinary illnesses in hospitals without any
medicines
or anaesthetics whatsover, the annihilation of daily life as fuel
and now
food disappear altogether.
In 1980, when Zimbabwe became independent from
Britain, life expectancy was
58; now it is the lowest in the world, 34 for
women and 37 for men. It has
the world's highest inflation rate � something
like 15,000 per cent a year �
another measure of the impossibility of normal
life.
Brown was not entirely unsupported. Spain suggested that Mugabe may
want to
reconsider attending. Portugal, which issued the invitation, as
holder of
the EU presidency, ventured that it would be “preferable” if he
didn't come.
But that is the limpest possible way of expressing an
objection and,
unsurprisingly, Mugabe dismissed it as provocation without
weight. Other
European leaders were even more worldly; Angela Merkel, the
German
Chancellor, while promising that Zimbabwe would not be “swept under
the
carpet”, argued that “this is such an important meeting that we should
not
let the presence of one country keep us from paying our respects to the
rest
of the continent”.
True, much of the continent is achieving
astonishing change. But her
“respects” should take account of the shameful
solidarity of African leaders
behind Mugabe. They prefer to characterise
Western pressure as a neocolonial
impulse, and defy it, than acknowledge
that he has ruined Zimbabweans' lives
� and ended many of them. He could
attend the summit only because the 14
member states of the Southern Africa
Development Community threatened to
boycott it if he was not
invited.
The EU, Africa's largest trading partner, is acutely conscious
that its
leverage on issues of governance and human rights is dwindling
because of
China's eagerness to invest, without such strings. But there is a
point when
such calculations should be set aside on principle. This is
one.
The Telegraph
Sir - It is more honourable to
be denounced by Robert Mugabe than praised by
him (report, December 5). The
Prime Minister should be congratulated for
refusing to go to the EU-Africa
summit in Lisbon if it would mean sitting
down with Mugabe; he is making a
principled stand against tyranny.
When Zimbabwe rises from the ruins left
by Mugabe's destructive and
vindictive regime, future generations will
honour those who showed
solidarity with the people of Zimbabwe in their time
of need.
In their scramble to accommodate Mugabe, the EU and African
Union elites
betray not only the people of Africa, but also the founding
principles set
out in the AU Constitutive Act: "Respect for democratic
principles, human
rights, the rule of law and good governance; promotion of
social justice to
ensure balanced economic development; respect for the
sanctity of human
life, condemnation and rejection of impunity and political
assassination,
acts of terrorism and subversive activities."
The
campaign by Thabo Mbeki and other African leaders to shield the
Zimbabwean
dictator from criticism and insist on his attendance at Lisbon is
possibly a
propaganda coup for Mugabe: it is a PR disaster for Africa.
Kate Hoey MP
(Lab), Chairman, All-Party Parliamentary Group on Zimbabwe,
London SW1
Ian
Traynor
Friday December 7, 2007
The Guardian
Pariah in the
west, hero in large parts of Africa, Robert Mugabe embodies
the truculence
and the tensions on display in Lisbon. He is certain to try
to exploit
Europe's guilt complex. Exempted from an EU travel ban in order
to prevent
an African boycott of the summit, the 83-year-old Zimbabwean
leader will
scoff at Gordon Brown's decision to stay away in protest, and
celebrate his
arrival in Europe as vindication.
While the Portuguese organisers are
labouring to try to prevent Mugabe
hijacking the summit, there are plenty of
government officials in Europe who
think it is Brown, not Mugabe, who is
grandstanding by sending only a junior
colleague, Baroness Amos.
"There
is not one single reason for postponing or not having this summit,"
said
Louis Michel, the EU's development commissioner and the man in charge
of the
world's biggest aid budget. "The time is now."
Yesterday European
commission president José Manuel Barroso said statesmen
should be more
pragmatic in choosing who to meet.
"If international leaders decided not
to go to those conferences involving
countries which do not have reasonable
human rights records, I'm afraid we
would not be attending many conferences
at all," he said. He added that he
had told Brown: "If you are an
international leader then you are going to
have to be prepared to meet some
people your mother would not like you to
meet. That is what we have to do
from time to time."
Brussels is seeking to avoid any embarrassment about
Mugabe by arguing that
his presence will provide the chance to talk bluntly
about human rights
abuses in Zimbabwe. But a 13-page document from EU and
African officials
preparing the summit at the end of October failed to
mention Zimbabwe.
As western sanctions on Zimbabwe bite, Mugabe says he
is looking to the east
for help. He means China, which has supplied the
gleaming blue roof tiles
and other materials for Mugabe's Harare
mansion.
saukvalley.com
Thursday, December 06, 2007
Leaders refuse to denounce use of rape by rebels and
governments
By Nat Hentoff
Newspaper Enterprise
Association
The American draft of the resolution before the U.N.
General Assembly could
not have been any clearer or more vital, especially
since an increasing
number of governments and their murderous militias are
using rape as a
political weapon. As reported in The New York Times (Nov.
17), America
intended to condemn "rape used by governments and armed groups
to achieve
political and military ends."
But, as often happens at the
spineless, rampantly disingenuous United
Nations, the final resolution -
after itself being savaged by many
self-protecting revisions - stated that,
in general, rape is not acceptable,
but stripped out rape as an "instrument
to achieve political objectives."
There was no mention left of government
"soldiers and militia members."
Instead, the United Nations weakly says
that rape should not be used "in
conflict and related
situations."
Who crippled the original American draft language? Not
surprisingly, it was
the 43-nation African Group Coalition. Said South
African ambassador
Dumisnai Kumalo, America had created two categories of
rape and the African
delegates wanted "to balance the text by making certain
that there was no
politicization of rape."
Huh?
By leaving out
rape sponsored by an individual state and its armed militia,
the sovereign
criminal nation of Sudan was thereby not embarrassed, let
alone the Belgian
Congo. At first, there was a U.S. objection from the
secretary general to
report on situations in which rape is 'calculated to
humiliate, instill fear
in, disperse and/or forcibly relocate' members of
opposition
groups.
To which nations might he be referring?
Does Sudan simply
"calculate" rape as a primary weapon in its genocide of
black Muslims in
Darfur? And is the world to take heart that U.N.
Secretary-General Ban
Ki-moon - who has become the Alberto Gonzales of that
organization - is the
authority to whom these reports are to be made?
There are certainly
committed and brave human-rights activists in Africa,
but the continent's
leaders steadily fail to excoriate the monstrous Robert
Mugabe, the
terrorizer and starver of his people in Zimbabwe. (And why has
the revered
Nelson Mandela continued to be so silent about Mugabe? There are
many
victims of that brutalizer who would welcome words of encouragement
from the
extraordinary leader who liberated South Africa.)
At the next summit
meeting of African leaders, I do not expect a resolution
on the agenda to
ask for accountability for heads of states or their armed
opponents who have
committed systematic crimes against the humanity of the
people on that
continent. For one example, on Nov. 1, Amnesty International
reported: "Six
years after the end of war in Sierra Leone, tens of thousands
of women and
girls who survived mass rapes, sexual slavery, forced pregnancy
and other
crimes of sexual violence continue to suffer as so-called 'rebel
wives,'
targeted for discrimination and denied access to health care, jobs
and
schools. ... The government has an obligation under international law to
bring to justice those responsible for mass and gang rapes, sexual slavery
and sexual violence, which are considered war crimes."
There is no
mention of Sierra Leone in the new U.N. resolution on rape.
But Africa,
of course, is not unique in the world as a haven for rape as a
political
weapon. On Dec. 8, 2004, in a report including rape as weapon of
war, "Lives
Blown Apart," Amnesty International revealed "a systematic
pattern of abuse
(of women) repeating itself in conflicts all over the world
from Colombia,
Iraq, Sudan, Chechnya, Nepal to Afghanistan and in 30 other
ongoing
conflicts. Despite promises, treaties and legal mechanisms,
governments have
failed to protect women and girls from violence."
Have there been any
substantive changes for better or worse in this global
pattern? The General
Assembly of the United Nations or its Security Council
are no more likely to
seriously address itself to the conduct of those of
its sovereign member
nations committing these atrocities than they are
likely to force Sudan's
leader, Gen. Omar al-Bashir, to disband his
Janjaweed militia, serious
contenders for the world championship of mass
raping.
Says a villager
in Darfur recently on PBS's "Frontline" ("On Our Watch"), "I
was carrying my
little baby on my back, and they shot him dead. After the
child died, they
pulled him away and raped me."
I don't think this kept U.N. member
al-Bashir awake that night.
Zim Online
by Wayne Mafaro Friday 07 December
2007
HARARE – The Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC) on
Thursday said it had
commenced demarcating voting constituencies for next
year’s House of
Assembly election, with Harare, Bulawayo and the two
Matabeleland provinces
that back the opposition set to get 67
constituencies.
ZEC chairman George Chiweshe said the mainly rural
provinces of Manicaland,
Mashonaland Central, Mashonaland East, Mashonaland
West, Masvingo and
Midlands that are largely dominated by President Robert
Mugabe’s ruling ZANU
PF party will be alloted a total 143
constituencies.
The six provinces are the most populated and have
traditionally had the most
number of constituencies. Zimbabwe chooses a new
president, House of
Assembly and Senate in elections penciled in for next
March.
Zimbabwe has expanded its Lower Chamber to 210 seats from the
previous 150
seats.
Chiweshe said 5 612 464 people had registered to
vote next year and his
commission had used this figure to cut up the country
into constituencies
for the House of Assembly election. Demarcation of
constituencies for the
senatorial poll will be done at a later stage,
according to Chiweshe.
Briefing journalists in Harare on Thursday,
Chiweshe rejected charges by the
main opposition Movement for Democratic
Change (MDC) party that his
commission was biased and that it was
gerrymandering constituencies to
ensure victory for President Robert Mugabe
and his ZANU PF party.
“Some complaints lack merit. They are just
complaints for the sake of
complaining but we have not received any
complaints which warrant a halt in
the delimitation exercise,” said
Chiweshe, a former soldier and High Court
judge.
The main wing of the
MDC led by Morgan Tsvangirai had called for ZEC to
shelve the demarcation of
constituencies until conclusion of talks between
the opposition and ZANU
PF.
The two factions of the MDC and ZANU PF are engaged in talks under
South
African mediation that are aimed at resolving Zimbabwe’s political and
economic crisis. A key objective of the talks is to ensure next year’s polls
are free and fair.
Nelson Chamisa, spokesman for the Tsvangirai-led
MDC, repeated claims the
ZEC was biased and charged that the electoral
process did not inspire
confidence that polls will be free and
fair.
“ZEC is a scandal in its present form, pregnant with ZANU PF
functionaries
and biased officers,” said Chamisa. “It must be disbanded,” he
added.
Chiweshe said his commission will allot Harare 29 constituencies,
Bulawayo
12, Matabeleland South 13 and Matabeleland North province will get
13
constituencies.
The four provinces are strongholds of the MDC
party but a split opposition
vote could see ZANU PF snatching some seats
especially in the rural
Matabeleland provinces.
The MDC, which came
close to defeating ZANU-PF in the 2000 parliamentary
elections, split into
two rival factions in 2005 because of differences
among senior leaders on
tactics to unseat Mugabe.
The opposition factions have failed to agree an
election pact that would
have seen them rallying behind one presidential
candidate and backing a
single candidate in each
constituency.
Analysts say in its fractured state the opposition party
could easily lose
the vote to ZANU PF, especially in constituencies that are
on the margins of
its urban strongholds.
The ZEC will allocate
Manicaland 26 constituencies, Mashonaland Central 18,
Mashonaland East 23,
Mashonaland West 22, Masvingo 26 and 28 for Midlands.
In the event that
ZANU PF wins in all the 143 constituencies available in
the areas it
dominates, these would be three seats more than the 140 seats
or two-thirds
majority required for the party to pass constitutional bills
in the Lower
Chamber.
The opposition party has in past elections been able to gain a
few seats
especially in urban areas in Masvingo, Midlands and Manicaland
provinces but
ZANU PF has always won the most votes overall in the three
provinces, a key
factor in the presidential poll when the entire country is
regarded as one
large constituency.
Zimbabwe is in the grip of a
debilitating economic crisis that is
highlighted by the world’s highest
inflation rate of nearly 8 000 percent, a
rapidly contracting GDP, the
fastest for a country not at war according to
the World Bank and shortages
of foreign currency, food and fuel.
Analysts believe truly democratic
polls next year are a key requirement to
any initiative to pluck Zimbabwe
out of an ever-worsening political and
economic crisis. - ZimOnline
Zim Online
by Lizwe Sebatha Friday 07 December
2007
BULAWAYO – A faction of Zimbabwe’s divided opposition
Movement for
Democratic Change (MDC) party on Thursday said it would retain
20 of its
current Members of Parliament (MPs) as candidates in next year’s
parliamentary polls.
The faction led by one of the country’s
prominent academics, Arthur
Mutambara, said it would finalise the selection
of candidates to fill up the
210 seats that are up for grabs in the polls in
the next fortnight.
“All the sitting 20 MPs have been confirmed by the
district assemblies as
candidates for the elections. We are behind schedule
to finalise the
selection of our candidates. We are using the existing
boundaries to choose
the candidates,” Bhebhe said in an interview
yesterday.
Bhebhe noted that his wing of the MDC would make final
decision on whether
to participate in the polls after conclusion of talks
with President Robert
Mugabe’s ruling ZANU PF party, but said the opposition
party was “optimistic
and hopeful that the talks will yield positive results
to ensure free and
fair elections.”
He said: “We can’t be pessimistic
and say now that we are not going to
participate in the elections if the
outcome of the talks is negative as that
puts a damper on the whole essence
of negotiations.
“As such, the decision on whether to participate or not
in the 2008
elections will be made after the conclusion of the talks and
that decision
will come from Zimbabweans after a consultative
exercise.”
The MDC faction led Morgan Tsvangirai has expressed doubts on
the South
African-led talks and accused ZANU PF of not being sincere or
committed to
dialogue.
The Tsvangirai-MDC, which insists politically
motivated violence and human
rights abuses are rising despite talks, has
hinted it might pull out of next
year’s elections if it is not convinced the
polls will be free and fair.
The MDC, which has a joint-team in talks
with ZANU PF, split in 2005 because
of differences among senior leaders on
tactics to unseat Mugabe.
Once a formidable party that came close to
ousting Mugabe’s ZANU-PF party in
the 2000 parliamentary elections, the MDC
is now a shadow of itself when it
was formed in 1999, largely due to
internal squabbles and a government
crackdown on its structures.
The
MDC factions have failed to agree an election pact that would have seen
them
rallying behind one presidential candidate and backing a single
candidate in
each constituency. Analysts say in its fractured state the
opposition party
could easily lose the vote to ZANU PF. - ZimOnline
VOA
By Peter Clottey
Washington, D.C.
07 December 2007
Zimbabwe’s
electoral commission says it will go ahead with preparations
towards next
year’s general elections, despite protests by the main
opposition Movement
for Democratic Change (MDC) about the voters register.
This comes after the
electoral commission began marking out constituencies
ahead of the upcoming
elections. The MDC petitioned the electoral
commission, complaining that the
voters register is in a mess and needs a
total overhaul to remove people who
had died.
But the electoral commission dismissed the MDC allegation and
challenged the
party to present evidence that proves its case. Sydney
Masamvu is a
Zimbabwean with the International Crisis group in South Africa.
From
Pretoria he tells reporter Peter Clottey the electoral commission is
making
a mistake.
“I think it’s a wrong departure within the spirit
of the dialogue which is
going on, and it is reported to be relying on such
issues that are about to
be concluded. I think the limitation of the
constituencies in Zimbabwe
should have been an exercise carried after the
completion of the
negotiations and within the spirit of the agreement is
agreed by all
negotiating partners. So, to the extent that ZANU-PF is moving
ahead to
finish the limitations of constituencies without having an input
from the
negotiations process, I think this signals a possible deal
breaker,” Masamvu
noted.
He said it was unfortunate the chairman of
the electoral commission is
calling on the opposition party to present
evidence about the voters
register, which Masamvu described as messed
up.
“The voters roll has been messed up for the past 10 years. Actually
what you
need is really to start from scratch. You have an updated voters
roll. There
are lots of ghost voters. There are a lot of people who are
living in the
Diaspora. Our voter’s roll, everything, which is bad with our
voter’s roll,
is bad. So really, for the electoral commission to throw the
challenge to
the MDC when it is not a government, is not a ruling party,
it’s not in
government. It doesn’t have access to all the details, whatever
is really
trying to make things worse in the process,” he
said.
Masamvu said the ruling party’s action has prompted some concerned
citizens
to call for the elections to be postponed.
“No wonder why
these are issues which any right thinking Zimbabwean who is
eager to see the
resolution of this crisis was saying. It calls for the
postponement for the
elections to allow the voters roll to be worked on, and
all the other
accompanying issues,” Masamvu pointed out.
He reiterated his frustration
with the electoral commission taking an action
he described as one-sided
stand.
“As much as the MDC is under pressure to participate, I think this
move by
the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission, is a unilateral move not born out
of a
negotiation process. I see this as a possible deal breaker, an event or
a
process, which has all the ingredients and the capacity to derail the
talks.
And I believe that ahead of the December 15th meeting where the MDC
is
supposed to make a decision on the talks, this development could actually
work to expedite the collapse of the talks if it is not handled within the
spirit which is coming out of the negotiation process,” he
noted.
Zim Online
by Cuthbert Nzou Friday 07 December
2007
HARARE – Zimbabwe’s ruling ZANU PF party has suspended a
top official from
its Masvingo provincial executive for criticising war
veterans’ leader
Jabulani Sibanda, who has led country-wide marches in
support of President
Robert Mugabe.
Party chairman in Masvingo, Alex
Mudavanhu, said provincial spokesman Kudzai
Mbudzi was suspended for
criticizing Sibanda and saying the war veterans
leader and chief storm
trooper for Mugabe was unfit to lead campaign marches
for the 83-year old
President.
“We met as an executive and suspended Mbudzi pending
disciplinary action,”
said Mudavanhu, a former major in the army.
“He
(Mbudzi) was accused of lying to the media that the provincial executive
had
resolved that Sibanda should not have led the ‘Million Man March’
because he
was expelled from the party,” he added.
Mudavanhu said a disciplinary
hearing would be convened soon to decide the
fate of Mbudzi, who however
told ZimOnline he was yet to be informed of his
suspension from the
provincial executive.
Mbudzi two weeks ago told journalists that although
the party executive in
Masvingo supported the “Million Man March” (held last
Friday in Harare in
support of Mugabe), it was against the involvement of
Sibanda because the
war veterans’ leader was expelled from the party in
2004.
Several party leaders including Vice-President Joseph Msika have
questioned
Sibanda’s involvement in the marches because he was expelled from
ZANU PF.
Sibanda has reportedly appealed against the expulsion but he is
yet to be
formally readmitted into the party. The war veterans’ chief says
he is a
member of ZANU PF after Mugabe personally readmitted him into the
party.
Party members who have questioned Sibanda’s activities have been
labelled
dissidents opposed to Mugabe standing for re-election in next
year’s joint
presidential and parliamentary elections.
But Mbudzi is
the first official to be punished for criticising Sibanda in
what appears to
be a signal Mugabe may be moving to crack the whip on
dissenters in the
party.
A ZANU PF congress in Harare next week is set to endorse Mugabe as
party
candidate in the presidential poll that he is expected to win and earn
another five-year term to take his rule to more than three
decades.
Mugabe has ruled Zimbabwe since its independence from Britain in
1980 and
critics say in that period he has ruined the country’s once vibrant
economy
and relied on violence and repressive laws to keep public discontent
in
check in the face of deepening hunger, poverty and unemployment. -
ZimOnline
Zim Online
by Own Correspondent Friday 07 December
2007
JOHANNESBURG – A conference to discuss ways of
harnessing skills of
millions of Zimbabweans who are living outside the
country as well as plan
for a post-(President) Robert Mugabe era begins in
Johannesburg on Friday.
Nora Tapiwa, the acting co-ordinator of the
Zimbabwe Diaspora Forum,
that organised the meeting told ZimOnline last
night that at least 200
delegates were expected at the three-day
conference.
“The conference is about Zimbabweans getting together
to take charge
of their destiny,” said Tapiwa adding that the conference
will seek to
mobilize Zimbabwe’s human resources to make a positive
contribution for the
country.
She said the Forum will also seek
to set up the Zimbabwe Diaspora
Development Chamber, a funding institution
that would help people in the
diaspora who would want to invest in
Zimbabwe.
Professor Ken Mufuka, who is based at Lander University
in the United
States, will deliver the keynote address with the theme,
‘Building a lasting
legacy: The role of the diaspora in the development
future of Zimbabwe,” on
Friday.
Among other key speakers at the
conference are Dr Bhekinkosi Moyo who
will address the conference on matters
of citizenship and identity while
Prof Daniel Makina will speak on issues
relating to migration and the role
of the diaspora.
At least
three million Zimbabweans, a quarter of the country’s 12
million population,
are living outside the country after fleeing economic
hardships and
political repression.
The majority of the exiled Zimbabweans are
said to be in South Africa
with Botswana and the United Kingdom also said to
be hosting a sizable
number of the exiled Zimbabweans. -
ZimOnline
VOA
By Patience Rusere
Washington
06
December 2007
South Africa and Zambia may cut off
electricity supplies to Zimbabwe because
Harare has fallen behind in its
payments, a member of Zimbabwe's
parliamentary committee on energy said on
Thursday, and a news report said
power had already been cut.
News
service ZimOnline reported that the two countries have already cut off
supplies to the Zimbabwe Electricity Supply Authority. The South African
utility Eskom later on Thursday issued a statement saying it had not cut
power to Zimbabwe.
Eskom itself has been straining to meet South
African demand for electricity
as about 24% of its generating capacity was
off line at one point this week
due to maintenance and a temporary shutdown
by a nuclear power plant near
Cape Town.
Thembinkosi Sibindi,
legislator for Hwange East for the opposition formation
of Arthur Mutambara,
said ZESA in late October told his committee that South
Africa and Zambia
had threatened to cut off the flow of power over arrears.
ZESA executives
told the committee that the troubled utility had asked the
government for an
allocation of foreign exchange, but to no avail.
Sibindi told reporter
Patience Rusere of VOA's Studio 7 for Zimbabwe that
power cuts are possible
as the 2008 budget makes no provision for the
electric power authority to
settle its hard-currency debts.
SW Radio
Africa (London)
6 December 2007
Posted to the web 6 December
2007
Tichaona Sibanda
The MDC led by Morgan Tsvangirai on
Thursday said that it will only sign a
resolution with Zanu-PF if the regime
implements measures agreed to so far
during the talks.
The ruling
Zanu-PF party has between now and the 15th December to give an
undertaking
that it would introduce a new constitution before the next
elections, agree
to work on a new voter's role and, most importantly, stop
all acts of
hostility and violence.
Professor Elphas Mukonoweshuro, the MDC
secretary for International Affairs,
spoke to Newsreel from Lisbon, Portugal
on the eve of the EU-Africa summit.
'We are taking this opportunity here in
Lisbon to spread the word that as a
political party, despite all the
sincerity that we have demonstrated,
Zanu-PF has not reciprocated in any
manner. Violence continues and the
freedom of assembly continues to be
non-existent,' Mukonoweshuro said.
Mukonoweshuro is leading a two-man
delegation that includes Nqobizitha
Mlilo, who is the party's regional
officer based in Johannesburg.
Dialogue between the two parties is
expected to be concluded on 15th
December. It is believed each party to the
crisis talks will be handed a
copy of the resolution, to be studied by their
respective decision making
bodies, before each will sign the
resolution.
The MDC believes there is still time for the regime to
reform, if they show
commitment given that it has taken all parties six
agonising months to come
close to a resolution, three months longer than the
Lancaster House talks
that led to an agreement that brought the country's
Independence in 1980.
The deadline for the talks has been missed on several
occasions starting as
early as October. The MDC has blamed Zanu-PF for its
delaying tactics,
accusing the regime of not taking the negotiations
seriously.
Urging SADC and the AU to closely monitor the concluding
period of the
talks, Mukonoweshuro said his party would like to see a
situation in which
the implementation of the agreed measures was no longer
an option for
Zanu-PF, but an imperative.
The Nation (Nairobi)
OPINION
7 December
2007
Posted to the web 6 December 2007
Matirasa
Muronda
Nairobi
With both the ruling Zanu-PF and the opposition
Movement for Democratic
Change adamant about issues they are willing, or not
willing, to discuss
during the negotiations mediated by South African
President Thabo Mbeki, the
talks are doomed to fail.
South African
President Thabo Mbeki has a difficult task as mediator in the
talks between
Zimbabwe's ruling party Zanu-PF and the opposition Movement
for Democratic
Change (MDC), which are unlikely to get the country out of
its current
economic problems.
Last week, Senegalese President Abdoulaye Wade was
in Zimbabwe to help
broker the talks with Mbeki and other African
leaders.
However, some people think that Wade's visit might be an
indication that
Africa has realised the enormity of the mediatory task in
the complex
political situation in the country.
With the "one million
men and women march" in Harare last week, many people
feel there is little
Zanu-PF party can offer for it and MDC to arrive at a
win-win
situation.
Some officials with close links to the two parties say they
feel the
Mbeki-mediated talks collapsed after only a few weeks because they
were not
borne out of a genuine commitment by the parties
involved.
The crisis in Zimbabwe runs deep, with inflation above 15,000
per cent - the
highest in the world - and a record-breaking national budget
running into
quadrillions of dollars, which is soon expected to hit the
quintillion (18
zeroes) mark.
President Mbeki was mandated by the
Southern Africa Development Community
(SADC) to mediate between President
Robert Mugabe's Zanu-PF and Morgan
Tsvangirayi's MDC in an attempt to
restore normalcy in Zimbabwe.
Although already showing signs of strain,
the negotiations are expected to
straighten a number of issues, including
ensuring a new democratic
constitution, humane media laws, electoral laws
that ensure elections are
not rigged and an amendment to security
legislation.
But it is clear from the slow progress that neither party
expects the talks
to achieve much, and that they might, in fact, be taking
President Mbeki for
a ride.
With the presidential, parliamentary and
council elections due next year,
Zanu-PF and the MDC were expected to take
the talks that began in May
seriously. But it is embarrassing that they
missed the September deadline
for submitting various critical reports. The
deadline was extended to
October, then November, but they still failed to
meet it.
Each party has two representatives at the talks. Zanu-PF is
represented by
Patrick Chinamasa, the Legal Affairs Minister, and Nicholas
Goche, the
Social Welfare and Public Service Minister while the MDC is
represented by
Welshman Ncube and Tendai Biti.
Mbeki's last visit to
Zimbabwe on his way to the Commonwealth Summit in
Uganda last month was
meant to follow up on the progress the two parties had
made regarding the
issues they had promised to tackle by the end of
November. However, they
were not ready.
Mbeki gave them up to the end of the first week of
December before they
could meet again for him to be able to make his
presentation to the SADC
troika on politics, defence and security chairman,
President Eduardo Dos
Santos of Angola.
The MDC called a press
conference to announce that it needed more time to
work on its report on its
position on sanctions and land.
Meanwhile, Zanu-PF has been reluctant to
make any electoral amendments,
largely because it views this as the wrong
time to be make such drastic
changes, given that the country's elections are
just a few months away.
However, it is apparent from what has been coming
out of the ruling party's
meetings in the past few weeks that it is going to
be difficult to reach a
compromise with regard to the requests being made by
the MDC, which sees
electoral amendments as critical if it is to beat
Zanu-PF in next year's
elections.
The MDC claims that with the
current electoral laws, it is possible to
manipulate the elections. In
addition, it says, the country's security laws
and militarisation of public
institutions does not ensure a level playing
field or protection for its
supporters.
During Mbeki's last visit, the MDC leader, Tsvangirayi,
presented a report
chronicling violence that has been perpetrated against
his supporters, with
allegations that several people were killed during the
political clashes
that hit some parts of the country in recent
weeks.
But President Mugabe dismissed the allegations, saying it was not
the first
time the MDC was desperately trying blame its own failures on
Zanu-PF.
Political analysts say those who understand the complexity of
Zimbabwe's
politics will understand if President Mbeki's efforts fail to
achieve
anything significant. They add that there is no way the opposition
party,
whose infiltration by ruling party agents has seen it divided into
two,
would agree on a common position to take on all critical areas, which
might
lead to direct sharing of power.
The Tsvangirayi-led faction is
believed to be the genuine party while the
faction led by Professor Arthur
Mutambara is viewed as weak and a branch of
the ruling
Zanu-PF.
"Mbeki is burdened. Nothing really significant will emerge from
those talks
because the ruling party will obviously want to take more and
give less. The
MDC backed Zanu-PF's constitutional amendment, which Mugabe
said would open
doors for reciprocal negotiations, but Mugabe has so far not
fulfilled his
promise," a political analyst said.
During his recent
visit, Mbeki urged Mugabe to return the favour by at least
honouring some of
the requests put forward by the opposition.
"Mugabe is a leader who plays
his cards well and what he wants is for his
party to win the elections next
year. He will not compromise his chances by
giving in to the MDC's demands,
so we expect a lot of delaying tactics by
the ruling party for it to buy
time and frustrate the MDC," the political
analyst added.
The failure
of the talks might complicate the elections even further, and
possibly see
the two MDC factions, or at least the Tsvangirayi faction,
boycotting the
them. It is understood that the Tsvangirayi faction is
willing to make
compromises to bring about changes that might boost its
chances of getting
more votes.
The split of the MDC has also cost the party donor funding,
which had been
pouring in since its formation.
It is important to
note that this is not the first time efforts have been
made to bring the
MDC, which advocated for the imposition of sanctions
against Zimbabwe, and
Zanu-PF to the negotiating table.
Two years ago, Mbeki tried to
facilitate negotiations but failed due to the
adamant stand taken by Zanu-
PF; the ruling party claimed that there was no
need for an outside mediator
since it was already negotiating with MDC
members who sit in
parliament.
Those talks, like the current ones, were shrouded in secrecy,
leaving the
public to speculate on what was going on.
Some political
scientists view this as a strong indication that the talks
will not resolve
the Zimbabwean crisis.
For one, President Mugabe will never forgive
Tsvangirayi for turning against
him, disturbing the peace in the country,
acting in collusion with whites
and successfully calling for sanctions
against the country.
Tsvangirayi was just a "tea boy" before he became a
trade unionist and
managed to influence people to conduct massive
demonstrations against Mugabe
in 1997, before he formed the first ever
opposition party since
independence, which became
popular.
Tsvangirayi contested the 2002 presidential election, which were
widely
believed to have been rigged by Mugabe using his right-hand man,
Registrar
General Tobaiwa Mudede.
It would be surprising, therefore,
if Mugabe were to agree to come face to
face with Tsvangirayi, whom he
blames for the country's current economic
problems.
It is possible
that Mbeki tried to bring the two leaders together before he
realised that
there was more to the crisis than meets the eye.
Mugabe may smile and put
on a show for the media when he meets and shakes
hands with Mbeki, who eats
and dine with the West, but he will never back
down on his stance towards
Tsvangirayi, whom he accuses of wining with the
West and plotting to
recolonise Zimbabwe.
Mugabe, who wore a brave face for the media when
Wade (who is believed not
to be particularly close to him) visited the
country, is suffering the
effects of old age; he will be 84 next
February.
Thus, many say, he has become a rigid, egotistical hardliner
who forgets
that not all African leaders who want to safeguard and promote
investment
and collaboration with the West are fools.
Many Africans
respect other races and strongly believe that the most
important thing is
for all people to co-exist peacefully.
Besides, Africa is blessed with a
variety of resources, which its people
have not used to their advantage,
first, because of colonialsm, and more
recently, due to limited technology
and unfair trade practices, which force
Africans to sell their resources
cheaply to the West.
But while Africa should unite and speak with one
voice against unfair global
trade practices, Africans should understand
that, while they need to control
their resources, they have to bear in mind
that they are trying to develop
at a time when the West and Asian countries
like Japan and China have
already developed and would want to maintain the
status quo because it is
advantageous to them.
And that being the
case, they have to handle these issues tactfully.
Unlike Mugabe, who
personally feels he does not care about the West, the
young generation in
Zimbabwe believes that the West is an important
component of the country's
development, and that it is critical to have a
leader who upholds the ideals
of the country's struggle while at the same
time nurturing a give-and-take
relationship with the West, Asia and the
Middle East.
Many
Zimbabweans are not following the ongoing negotiations because of the
strident calls by Mugabe's supporters demonstrating in the
streets.
Many had expected serious negotiations, which would result in
Tsvangirayi's
being given a senior post in the government, or even in the
presidium.
But the ruling party will never accept such an arrangement.
Worse still, the
army has threatened war should people vote in the
opposition.
This is a clear indication that there will be no serious
negotiations since
the two sides are being pressured to talk.
Genuine
negotiations call for both parties to acknowledge where they have
gone wrong
to allow for correction.
No negotiations will take place when each party
has issues on which it is
not willing to budge.
The negotiations in
Zimbabwe are the result of the SADC's failure to take a
stronger stand
against Mugabe, who is seen as tarnishing the region's image.
Some of the
new leaders in the SADC region who came to power after Mugabe
and
understudied him while at university regard him as a hero and would
never
openly criticize him.
Others, like Mbeki and Hifikepunye Pohamba of
Namibia and Arimando Guebuza
of Mozambique, feel they owe Mugabe a lot for
having supported them in their
hour of need.
Yet other leaders feel
it is important to maintain the peace, stability and
trust within the region
by standing by Mugabe in his last years of
leadership.
If the region
is divided, it would be difficult to reconcile differences in
the long
term.
At the highest political levels, this has been the principle - to
support
"the old man" for the sake of peace and security of the
region.
On the ground, neighbouring countries are showing insreasing
hostility
towards suffering Zimbabweans fleeing their country in search of
better
better jobs or a better life.
The SADC region leaders want to
show the whole world that they are doing
something about Zimbabwe, whose
economic crisis is now in its seventh year.
But whether anything
significant will come out of the halting negotiations,
only time will
tell.
Africa Insight is an initiative of the Nation Media Group's Africa
Media
Network Project.
SW Radio Africa (London)
6 December 2007
Posted
to the web 6 December 2007
Henry Makiwa
A London-based human
rights and pro-democracy organisation on Thursday
demonstrated outside the
Portuguese embassy to protest Robert Mugabe's
attendance at the EU-Africa
summit at the weekend.
Members of Action for Southern Africa (ACTSA)
braved London's wet weather to
register their displeasure at Mugabe's
expected presence at the Lisbon
summit that starts Friday. Placard carrying
activists chanting protest songs
brought business to a standstill at the
Portuguese mission in London,
accusing the European Union of being lenient
on Mugabe.
ACTSA questioned why European leaders had strayed from the
"common position
on Zimbabwe" which restricts Mugabe and members of his
government from
travelling to Europe due to their gross human rights
violations. The
organisation also argues that stiffer measures should in
fact be enforced on
Mugabe's regime, as the situation has not improved but
worsened since the
travel ban was first imposed.
ACTSA's campaigns
officer, Simon Chase, said they had "hammered the point
home" with their
demonstration.
Chase said: "We saw the officers and workers at the
embassy coming out and
looking on as we protested, and we knew the point had
been made. We had a
very loud crowd of about 50 activists here, most of them
of either English
or Zimbabwean origin. Many more are already in
Lisbon.
"We are most concerned with the inconsistency on the part of the
EU. It is
very disappointing that they have allowed Mugabe to attend the
summit. It
will only lend legitimacy to his regime and grant him the
platform for his
destructive propaganda, rather than an opportunity for
engagement of world
leaders," Chase added.
ACTSA says it is planning
more demonstrations in Lisbon, London, Cardiff and
Johannesburg at the
weekend, in protest at Mugabe's attendance at the
EU-Africa summit.
Wall Street Journal
By R.W.
JOHNSON
December 7, 2007
CAPE TOWN -- South Africa's President Thabo
Mbeki risks a humiliating defeat
within his own party, the African National
Congress, which may even see him
ejected from office before his term ends in
May 2009. In the run-up to the
national Polokwane conference in a fortnight,
his arch-rival Jacob Zuma has
crushed him in a party-leadership nomination
poll and the media are
preparing the public for a Zuma
presidency.
Mr. Mbeki appears to be an increasingly isolated figure.
He has angrily
shrugged off suggestions that he withdraw his bid to continue
as ANC party
head and seems to be in denial over Mr. Zuma's impending
triumph. He still
has too much power not to be feared but much of the old
public deference is
gone. The word here is that Mr. Mbeki's circle of
advisers has shrunk to one
or two intimates. Newspapers are full of quotes
by anonymous cabinet
ministers, expressing their doubts about the man they
once followed blindly.
What worries people is that his judgment and
behavior have become
increasingly erratic. Recently he startled a public
gathering by asking what
"tik" was. Tik is a heroin derivative widely used
in the Cape. There has
been massive press coverage about the hideous damage
the drug has done to
many young people, frequently causing violent and
criminal behavior. It was
as if the President lived in another country, was
only visiting here and
asking the sort of innocent questions that tourists
may ask.
Similarly, when at the last ANC policy conference the rank and
file made it
brutally clear that they did not want him to soldier on, that
they wanted to
avoid having two centers of power (i.e., Mr. Mbeki as state
president and
Mr. Zuma as party president), Mr. Mbeki's response was, let's
say, bizarre.
He immediately rushed to a TV camera to express his
willingness to continue
if the people twisted his arm to do so.
"It's
as if he's Joan of Arc, listening to strange voices. He's certainly
not
listening to ours," said one bewildered cadre and former admirer.
For
years now Mr. Mbeki's political style could only be described as
paranoid.
He's always casting himself as a victim, accusing others of
"hidden
agendas," suggesting that his rivals within the ANC are plotting a
coup
against him. Any sign of opposition could only be explained as the
machinations of Western imperialists and their local reactionary clients.
Recently he warned his parliamentary caucus of "mercenaries and
counterrevolutionaries," leaving them wondering who exactly he
meant.
Then there are his statements on AIDS -- such as that HIV has
nothing to do
with the illness because "a virus cannot cause a syndrome" --
and his belief
in a plot by big pharmaceutical companies to assassinate him.
One missive he
sent to then President Bill Clinton and Prime Minister Tony
Blair on the
subject of AIDS was so wacky that Mr. Clinton thought it must
be a fake.
Similarly, his siding with Zimbabwe's President Robert Mugabe
is also based
on a conspiracy theory: that Western imperialists are trying
to overthrow
radical regimes in the region and that if Zimbabwe "fell,"
South Africa
would be next. While Mr. Mbeki himself has been careful enough
not to say
this in public, his spokesmen have repeatedly made that point for
him.
This paranoid trait is accentuated by a streak of narcissism. Mr.
Mbeki sees
himself as a major intellectual figure, towering above the rest
of his
party -- and there was never a shortage of sycophants to confirm this
view.
He spends hours surfing the Internet, where he gleans odds and ends of
(half-) knowledge which he uses to second-guess AIDS scientists,
unemployment statisticians, actuarial analysts and so on. He peppers his
speeches with quotations suggesting a vast knowledge of literature, and his
weekly online letter includes earnest essays on anticolonial history from
Haiti to Sudan. Typically relying on single or dubious sources, these would
be full of historical howlers. (For instance, in one such tractate, he wrote
of British Governor Charles Gordon coming to conquer Sudan when actually he
came to effect a withdrawal.) Mr. Mbeki's aides told me that Fidel Castro
was once amazed to find their boss creeping off to write these weekly
lectures, protesting, reasonably enough, that he could get other people to
perform such work.
Mr. Zuma's dogged and gradually successful
campaign appears to have
exacerbated Mr. Mbeki's paranoia. His online
letters are now full of
tirades, not simply against critics or opponents but
"enemies." The press is
allegedly engaged in a systematic campaign of
denigration aimed at his
overthrow.
Equally eccentric has been Mr.
Mbeki's patronage of Ronald Suresh Roberts.
The author and lawyer once
famously lost a libel suit against the
Johannesburg Sunday Times, the
country's biggest newspaper, for an
unflattering portrait of him. The court
found Mr. Roberts to be "vindictive
and venomous." And yet, Mr. Mbeki chose
this man, who was censured by the
Law Society for his improper behavior, to
write his official biography --
titled, without a hint of irony, "Fit to
Govern: The Native Intelligence of
Thabo Mbeki." The book is a hagiography
of schoolboy standard, purporting to
show that Mr. Mbeki never was an AIDS
denier, and that he always was a
multiparty democrat. In fact, Mr. Mbeki, a
graduate of Moscow's Marx-Lenin
Institute, once wrote articles in praise of
the Algerian one-party state.
According to this rewrite of history, Mr.
Mbeki never supported Mr. Mugabe
and actually criticized him.
It was
child's play for critics to punch holes in this oeuvre -- and in any
case,
even after the book's launch Mr. Mbeki was ringing up another
biographer,
Mark Gevisser, to volunteer an AIDS-denying document he had
penned himself,
in which AIDS scientists are compared to Nazi concentration
camp doctors and
black people who accepted their medicines as displaying a
slave
mentality.
More recently, Mr. Mbeki staggered critics by sacking his
deputy health
minister because she had spoken out against the high infant
mortality rate
in an Eastern Cape hospital, saying that the situation there
was part of a
national health emergency. Mr. Mbeki, who is fiercely
protective of his
health minister (who supports his AIDS denial) not only
insisted that 200
dead black babies a year in that hospital was perfectly
normal but inserted
into his argument a long and prurient analogy about
1960s miniskirts and
what they revealed and suggested, claiming that media
coverage of the event
was concealing and suggesting but not exposing the
truth. This juxtaposition
of miniskirts and dead babies shook many who had
hitherto overlooked the
president's eccentricities. When he later sacked the
public prosecutor and
threatened to arrest the editor of the Sunday Times
for publishing that the
health minister was a drunk and had a conviction for
stealing from comatose
patients, it only further damaged public
confidence.
His opponents, particularly the backers of ANC Deputy
President Jacob Zuma,
are by now so bitterly alienated from him that if Mr.
Mbeki fails to be
re-elected as ANC president next month, they could well
try to remove him
also as president of the country. For this is the terrible
irony of Mr.
Mbeki's life. His paranoia has led him to offend so many of his
former
supporters that he has conjured up the true paranoid nightmare: For
it
really is true now that his opponents are conspiring against him, that he
is
cornered and that his enemies may triumph. Naturally this winds up Mr.
Mbeki
even more. The next month or two are going to be a difficult time in
South
Africa.
Mr. Johnson is southern Africa correspondent for the
Sunday Times, and
author of "South Africa: The First Man, The Last Nation"
(Phoenix, 2004).