http://www.thezimbabwean.co.uk/
Wednesday, 09 July 2008
13:16
Toyako, Japan
1.We expressed our grave concern
about the situation in Zimbabwe. We
deplore the fact that the Zimbabwean
authorities pressed ahead with the
presidential election despite the absence
of appropriate conditions for free
and fair voting as a result of their
systematic violence, obstruction and
intimidation.
2. We do not
accept the legitimacy of any government that does not
reflect the will of
the Zimbabwean people.
3. We strongly urge the Zimbabwean
authorities to work with the
opposition to achieve a prompt, peaceful
resolution of the crisis. It is
important that any mediation process
respect the results of the March 29
2008 election.
4.We support
the Africa Union (AU) as it expresses deep concern with
the negative reports
from the Southern African Development Community (SADC),
the AU and the
Pan-African Parliament observers on the elections and the
loss of life that
has occurred in Zimbabwe. We also support the AU's call
to encourage
Zimbabwean leaders to initiate dialogue with a view to
promoting peace and
stability. We encourage regional bodies, including SADC
and the AU, to
provide strong leadership towards a quick and democratic
resolution of this
crisis, including by further strengthening the regional
mediation
process.
5.We are deeply concerned by the humanitarian dimension of
the
situation in Zimbabwe. The Zimbabwean authorities must allow the
immediate
resumption of humanitarian operations and full and
non-discriminatory access
to humanitarian assistance to prevent the
suffering of the most vulnerable
people in Zimbabwe.
6. We will
continue to monitor the situation and work together with
SADC, the AU, the
UN and other relevant organisations for a prompt
resolution of the crisis.
We recommend the appointment of a Special Envoy
of the UN Secretary-General
to report on the political, humanitarian, human
rights and security
situation and to support regional efforts to take
forward mediation between
political parties. We will take further steps,
inter alia introducing
financial and other measures against those
individuals responsible for
violence
xinhua
www.chinaview.cn
2008-07-10 01:07:44
UNITED NATIONS, July 9 (Xinhua) -- A
U.S.-sponsored draft
resolution proposing Security Council sanctions on
Zimbabwe has been "put in
blue," a UN parlance meaning readied for a vote,
U.S. Ambassador Zalmay
Khalilzad said Wednesday.
"The
resolution went blue last night, so a vote can take place on
the resolution
at any time now," Khalilzad told reporters after a council
meeting.
But he refrained from disclosing the exact time
for the council's
vote, saying that "we are still talking to colleagues in
the council."
Khalilzad reiterated what he had said that the
time for the
resolution to be voted on is this week.
"So we
are still on track, but it could happen any time," he
added.
The United States circulated the draft resolution
last week,
urging the 15-member body to impose an arms embargo on Zimbabwe
and freeze
the asset of Mugabe and 11 other senior officials and restrict
them from
traveling abroad.
Khalilzad said Tuesday that
enough votes have been garnered for
the draft to be
adopted.
Russia, a veto-wielding council member, has questioned
the
legitimacy of such a move to be taken by the Security
Council.
The UN Charter "does not empower the Security Council
to interfere
into the internal affairs of a state unless the situation there
poses a
threat to international peace and security," Russian Ambassador
Vitaly
Churkin told reporters Tuesday.
"There are serious
questions in our mind if the situation in
Zimbabwe can be characterized as a
threat to international peace and
security," Churkin said.
Daily Express, UK
Wednesday July 9,2008
Britain has warned
Russia not to try to block new international sanctions
against Robert
Mugabe's regime in Zimbabwe.
Britain's ambassador to the United Nations
Sir John Sawers said it would be
"unwise" for Moscow to use its veto in the
Security Council to prevent the
adoption of a fresh package of measures
against Harare.
However Russia's UN ambassador Vitaly Churkin described
elements of the
draft resolution drawn up by the United States and Britain
as "quite
excessive" and warned that they would require careful
scrutiny.
Earlier, Gordon Brown, attending the final statement of the G8
summit in
Japan, said that he believed there was now sufficient
international support
in the Security Council to pass a new
resolution.
"We don't expect to get every country to support us on this
but we believe
that we can gain sufficient support for this important
resolution to be
passed in the next few days," he said.
On Tuesday
night, the G8 leaders, including Russian President Dmitry
Medvedev, signed a
statement backing further steps, including financial
measures, against
individuals responsible for the violence in Zimbabwe.
Britain and the US
are calling for targeted travel bans and the freezing of
assets of 14 named
individuals, including Mr Mugabe, as well as the
imposition of a UN arms
embargo.
However, Mr Churkin told the BBC that the proposals went too
far.
"I personally believe that some elements of the draft are quite
excessive,
in fact incongruous, and clearly in conflict with the notion of
sovereignty
of a state member of the United Nations so some of these things
have to be
looked at very carefully," he said.
Sir John cautioned
Moscow not to backtrack on assurances given in Japan.
Monsters and Critics
Jul 9, 2008, 9:18 GMT
Toyako, Japan - British Prime
Minister Gordon Brown said Wednesday that a UN
Security Council resolution
proposed by Britain and the United States
against Zimbabwe will name 14 top
members of Robert Mugabe's regime.
The 14 would face a world-wide travel
ban and asset freeze, Brown said. It
was as yet unclear whether the list
also included Mugabe himself.
Speaking at the end of a Group of Eight
(G8) summit in Toyako, Japan, Brown
said that despite resistance from some
quarters, he was confident that there
would be enough UN support for the
resolution, which also calls for an arms
embargo on the
country.
There will be 'no safe haven and no hiding' for those
responsible for the
violence in Zimbabwe, Brown said.
'We know who
these people are and we are naming them today,' he added.
Brown, who is
said to have shown his G8 colleagues shocking photos of the
violence in
Zimbabwe in order to win them over, said all G8 leaders had
backed his calls
for sanctions.
'The mood, not just of the G8, is of outrage against what
is happening in
Zimbabwe and of disgust at Mugabe's regime,' he
said.
On Tuesday, the G8 leaders issued a statement saying they did not
accept
'the legitimacy of any government that does not reflect the will of
the
Zimbabwean people.
'We will take further steps, inter alia
introducing financial and other
measures against those individuals
responsible for the violence,' the
statement added.
Italy had
initially opposed sanctions. And Russia, which holds veto powers
within the
security council, sent mixed messages about its position while in
Japan.
Japanese Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda said that sanctions were
a matter for
the UN.
The resolution was due to be discussed by the UN
in New York later on
Wednesday, Brown said.
International Herald Tribune
The Associated
PressPublished: July 9, 2008
RUSUTSU, Japan: Russian
President Dmitry Medvedev says a strong G-8
statement on Zimbabwe will not
necessarily lead to sanctions against Robert
Mugabe's
government.
Medvedev is stressing that there are "no concrete decisions"
about how the
United Nations should respond and whether further action will
be taken.
Medvedev spoke Wednesday after a Group of Eight nations summit
in Japan. The
G-8 agreed to a statement promising further steps against
those responsible
for violence in last month's election in Zimbabwe. Russia
is a veto-wielding
permanent member of the U.N. Security Council, where the
U.S. is promoting a
draft resolution on sanctions against Mugabe's
government.
Patrick Wintour in
Hokkaido
guardian.co.uk,
Wednesday July 9, 2008
Gordon Brown
speaking at the G8 summit 2008 in Japan. Photograph: Junko
Kimura/Getty
An arms embargo will be part of new sanctions the UN
will seek to impose on
Zimbabwe this week to increase pressure on the Mugabe
regime, Gordon Brown
said today.
The measure, which would go beyond
the previously known plans for financial
sanctions aimed at the regime's
leaders, would hit both Russian and Chinese
arms exporters, as well as some
private European dealers.
British officials acknowledge that it may take
as long as a week to get
agreement on the resolution, with doubt remaining
over whether either Russia
or China will use their veto at the UN security
council resolution to block
the move.
However, the prime minister
said the resolution would gain considerable, if
not unanimous, support at
the UN. Speaking at the end of the G8 summit in
Japan, he said the ban would
cover the direct supply of arms such as
weapons, military vehicles and
equipment.
The prime minister praised his G8 colleagues for backing
measures to isolate
what he described as the criminal cabal running
Zimbabwe.
The resolution will also call for a worldwide freezing of the
assets of 14
leaders of the Zimbabwe regime, including Robert Mugabe, as
well as a
worldwide travel ban on the same named individuals.
Brown
said: "With this resolution, there should be no safe haven and no
hiding
place for the criminal cabal that now make up the Mugabe regime."
British
intelligence believes members of the Mugabe regime have transferred
assets
to Switzerland, which is currently outside the EU sanctions regime.
Brown
said: "This is an illegitimate regime with blood on its hands. We do
not
consider the election as either free or fair. The benefit of this
resolution
is, the whole of the international community will be freezing
their assets,
wherever they are held, and will prohibit the 14 named leaders
from
travelling anywhere in the world."
Russian diplomats in New York have
been reported as saying the sanctions
regime proposed in the resolution is
excessive and infringes national
sovereignty.
But Brown is pointing
to the decision of the Russian president, Dmitry
Medvedev, at the G8 to
agree a statement backing financial measures against
named individuals in
Zimbabwe. (The G8 statement made no mention of an arms
embargo.)
He
also defended the idea of a UN-appointed envoy to act as a mediator
alongside South Africa, another proposal in the resolution.
Brown
said: "We have to make it clear that the international community must
know
from someone representing the international community on the ground
about
the beatings, the deaths, the intimidation, the violence, the
suppression of
dissent, the arrest of political prisoners - all that has got
be known to
the world. "
Mail and Guardian
JOHANNESBURG, SOUTH AFRICA Jul 09 2008
15:13
A call by eight of the world's most powerful
leaders to send a United
Nations envoy to Zimbabwe and to press for new
sanctions against Robert
Mugabe's regime is a stinging humiliation for
long-time mediator Thabo Mbeki
and his policy of quiet diplomacy, analysts
said on Wednesday.
The South African president, who was at the Group of
Eight (G8) summit in
Japan, has long argued he is best placed to broker a
settlement between
Zimbabwe's governing party and opposition and that
sanctions would only
worsen the situation.
But while world leaders
have previously been willing to leave the hot potato
of Zimbabwe in his lap,
observers said Tuesday's statement by the G8 shows
they have run of patience
with the South African leader's softly-softly
approach.
"It is
extremely humiliating," said Hussein Solomon, director of the
Pretoria-based
Centre for International Policy studies.
Solomon said that Mbeki's
refusal to criticise Mugabe had not only been
discredited in the eyes of the
West but was regarded with increasing
scepticism closer to
home.
"Various African countries, Kenya, Botswana, Zambia, have all been
critical
of Mr Mugabe, and for some reason Mr Mbeki refuses to budge. This
is partly
his personality -- he would have to accept his
failure."
Mbeki has been involved in mediating the crisis in neighbouring
Zimbabwe
since counterpart Mugabe allegedly rigged his 2002
re-election.
He was again appointed as mediator by the Southern African
Development
Community (SADC) in March last year after a crackdown by
Zimbabwe's security
services left opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai in
hospital with head
injuries.
The South African leader, now into his
last year as president, has always
been the go-to man for the international
community who have relied on him to
carve the African solution they backed
as being the answer to the crisis.
Tony Blair, speaking in
South Africa during a farewell visit as British
prime minister last year,
gave his backing to Mbeki's efforts and stressed
that there had to be "an
African solution for Zimbabwe".
United States President George Bush also
originally lobbied African leaders
to use their influence on Mugabe but he
has also visibly lost patience with
their relatively timid
approach.
As the African Union called last week for the establishment of
a national
unity government in Zimbabwe following Mugabe's re-election in a
one-man
poll, the European Union announced it would only deal with an
administration
led by Tsvangirai, who boycotted the run-off ballot after
attacks on his
supporters.
"What they [G8] have done is accept the
position of Mr Tsvangirai," said
Solomon.
The Star newspaper's
foreign editor, Peter Fabricius, wrote on Wednesday
that the G8 calls for
sanctions and a special UN envoy amounted to a "slap
in the face" for Mbeki
and "an implicit vote of no confidence" in his
mediation efforts.
His
view was echoed by Karin Alexander of the Institute for Democracy in
Southern Africa, who said the G8 call indicated a "falling level of
confidence in Mbeki's mediation".
While Alexander said the move
should not be interpreted as an outright snub
to Mbeki, it was a sign he
needed to be more open about how negotiations
were proceeding.
"A UN
envoy is a way to get a clearer picture on the ground," she
said.
Tsvangirai's relations with Mbeki are notoriously bad, with the
Movement for
Democratic Change leader -- who pushed Mugabe into second place
in the first
round of voting in March -- regarding the South African as
blatantly biased.
Mbeki's claims to neutrality were hardly helped on
Wednesday by Mugabe's
Information Minister Sikhanyiso Ndlovu, who said that
he had "proved his
mettle as an African statesman par excellence" during his
negotiations. --
AFP
International Herald Tribune
The Associated PressPublished: July 9,
2008
JOHANNESBURG, South Africa: A lawyer for Zimbabwe's
opposition told a court
on Wednesday that talks between the group and
Zimbabwean President Robert
Mugabe's party are to begin this week.
An
opposition spokesman denied that, but the comment by lawyer Lewis Uriri
during a court hearing in Zimbabwe was the first by an opposition official
to confirm what Mugabe's party has been suggesting for several
days.
Lawyer Lewis Uriri appeared at a bail hearing in Harare on
Wednesday, asking
a judge to return the passport of Tendai Biti, the
opposition's No. 2 party
official in Zimbabwe, saying Biti needed it to
travel to neighboring South
Africa.
The reason he gave was that
opposition talks with Mugabe's party are to
begin this week.
The
judge ordered the return of the passport, which Biti had been forced to
surrender when he was arrested during Zimbabwe's recent election campaign
and charged with treason.
Zimbabwe's long-running political crisis
has worsened since Mugabe went
ahead with - and declared himself winner of -
the widely condemned June 27
presidential runoff election. He was the only
candidate because opposition
leader Morgan Tsvangirai had quit as a
candidate because of attacks on his
supporters.
Since then, talks about a
U.S.-drafted U.N. Security Council resolution to
impose sanctions on Mugabe
and some of his top political and security
officials appear to have been
spurring developments in Zimbabwe.
The proposed sanctions are aimed at
pushing Mugabe to negotiate and
punishing him for allegedly rigging the
presidential runoff, killing
political dissenters and bringing Zimbabweans,
who once grew food for the
region, to the point of struggling to feed
themselves.
But on Wednesday, it remained unclear whether the opposition
was prepared to
drop its objections to unconditional talks with
Mugabe.
"There are no talks, I assure you," George Sibotshiwe, a
spokesman for
Tsvangirai, told The Associated Press. "When there are talks,
we will let
you know."
Attempts to reach government spokesmen were
not immediately successful.
A spokesman for South African President Thabo
Mbeki, who has been mediating
on-again, off-again talks between the two
sides, also was not immediately
available.
Tsvangirai's opposition
Movement for Democratic Change has said talks cannot
begin until violence
blamed on Mugabe supporters ends and a mediator is
named in addition to
Mbeki, accused by Tsvangirai of being biased in
Mugabe's
favor.
Mugabe's ZANU-PF, meanwhile, has called for talks on forming a
unity
government with Mugabe at the head, something the opposition and
Mugabe's
critics in the West have rejected.
Late Wednesday morning,
the opposition issued a statement saying "there are
currently no
negotiations between itself and ZANU PF," and Biti has told The
Associated
Press that talks about talks weren't even under way.
But state media in
Zimbabwe reported earlier in the week that talks were
imminent, and
government spokesman Bright Matonga told the AP on Wednesday
that "things
are moving at a faster pace than you think."
Zimbabwe's Foreign Minister
Simbarashe Mumbengegwi met Tuesday in
Ouagadougou, the capital of Burkina
Faso, with the West African nation's
President Blaise Compaore. Burkina Faso
is currently a member of the U.N.
Security Council.
A vote on the
U.S. draft Security Council resolution is expected later this
week.
Monsters and Critics
Jul 9, 2008, 13:43 GMT
Harare - Zimbabwe's
opposition party on Wednesday denied it was engaged in
talks with President
Robert Mugabe's Zanu-PF on sharing power as Mugabe's
goverment accused the
G8 group of wealthy nations of 'racism.'
'The party wishes to reiterate
that there are currently no negotiations
between itself and Zanu-PF,' Morgan
Tsvangirai's Movement for Democratic
Change said in a statement.
'A
catalogue of acts of bad faith by Zanu-PF continue to poison the
environment
for negotiations,' the MDC said in response to a report in a
South African
newspaper that the two parties were due to hold talks
Wednesday on the
country's months-long political impasse.
The African Union has called on
the two parties to form a unity government,
but the MDC has so far shied
away from talks with Mugabe, citing an unfair
playing field.
Ongoing
attacks against MDC leaders, supporters and pro-democracy activists,
the
withholding of passports from party leader Morgan Tsvangirai and
second-in-command Tendai Biti, and divisive statements in state media were
among the impediments to talks, the MDC said.
Business Day newspaper
had quoted South Africa's ruling African National
Congress leader Jacob Zuma
as saying he been informed of planned talks.
Meanwhile, Mugabe's
government labelled calls by G8 leaders at a summit in
Japan Tuesday to
further isolate and put pressure on his regime as 'racism.'
The G8, after
lengthy deliberations, said they refused to recognise Mugabe's
government,
given the violence that characterized the June 27 presidential
run-off
election he alone contested, and that it would take 'further steps,'
including 'financial and other measures against individuals responsible for
the violence.'
Information minister Sikhanyiso Ndlovu dismissed the
resolution as
'ultimately of no consequence.'
'Nowhere in
international law is there provision for a group of countries to
sit down as
a private club and decide the legitimacy of governments. This is
international racism,' he told the state Herald newspaper.
For them
to discredit Mugabe's victory in the election that Tsvangirai
boycotted 'is
an attempt to impose a government on the people of Zimbabwe
against their
will. The people went out and voted, including for Tsvangirai,
and President
Mugabe has won and has been sworn in as head of state,' he
said.
Tsvangirai withdrew from the election a week ahead of voting in
protest over
state-backed militia attacks on his supporters that have killed
around 110
people since the first round of voting for president in March. He
won that
round.
Three African election observer teams found the vote,
which handed Mugabe a
sixth term in office, was undemocratic, while Western
leaders termed it a
'sham.'
Ndlovu also rejected the G8's endorsement
of the MDC's demand for expanding
mediation attempts, currently solely in
the hands of South African President
Thabo Mbeki.
The MDC has called
for up to three AU envoys to oversee talks with Mbeki,
whom the party
accuses of pro-Mugabe bias. The AU has so far refused to
accede the MDC's
request.
'What do they want to impose another mediator for? President
Mbeki has
proved his mettle as an African statesman par excellence, and so
we will
follow the AU and the SADC position on this,' said Ndlovu. dpa
http://www.thezimbabwean.co.uk/
Wednesday, 09 July 2008 13:56
11:00 am
Wednesday 9
July 2008
MDC Press Statement
Further to the statement released by the MDC
yesterday, the party
wishes to reiterate that there are currently no
negotiations between itself
and ZANU PF.
The MDC views this
lack of dialogue as a tragedy given the continued
deterioration of the
security, social and economic conditions prevailing in
the
country.
While the MDC remains committed to a peaceful, negotiated
solution to
the Zimbabwean crisis, a catalogue of acts of bad faith by ZANU
PF continue
to poison the environment for negotiations.
These
include:
The continued murders, beating and displacement of MDC
leaders and
supporters.
The continued persecution of MDC
Members of Parliament
The continued disappearance of MDC
activists.
The continued persecution of all pro-democratic
forces.
The continued denial of passports to both MDC President,
Morgan
Tsvangirai, and Secretary General, Tendai Biti.The continued
publishing in
the State media of false and divisive statements designed to
fan the flames
of political violence.
In light of these
conditions, the MDC remains convinced that there
cannot be serious and
genuine negotiations while the above conditions
prevail.
The MDC and the people of Zimbabwe are encouraged by the
ever-increasing
number of countries and international organizations that are
speaking out
against the brutality in Zimbabwe and the illegitimacy of the
27 June
elections. This continued pressure will help to hasten a peaceful
resolution
to the crisis through reducing the regime's ability to continue
to wage war
on the people of Zimbabwe.
http://www.thezimbabwean.co.uk/
Wednesday, 09 July 2008
14:40
BULAWAYO - This report from Matabeleland North is of great
concern. It
is clear that Pearson Mabaleka is under serious threat against
his life. By
my count we now have one MP in hospital - may die after a
beating at the MT
Star Rally on the 25th June, two in jail, one missing -
abducted. at least 7
in South Africa and an unknown number in hiding inside
the country.
We need to bring this to the attention of the world as
these are all
Members of Parliament - duly elected and not yet sworn in
after 4 months and
it looks as if we will be lucky if a majority can even
attend the swearing
in at this rate. The threat to kill MP's is real and is
a crude attempt to
force down the MDC majority in the House of
Assembly.
Eddie Cross
8th July 2008
United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs -
Integrated Regional Information Networks (IRIN)
Date: 09 Jul
2008
HARARE, 9 July 2008 (IRIN) - The already high levels of
politically
motivated violence in Zimbabwe's rural areas are escalating, the
opposition
Movement for Democratic Change told IRIN.
Violence surged
in the aftermath of the 29 March elections, in which ZANU-PF
lost it
majority in parliament for the first time since independence from
Britain in
1980, and its leader, Robert Mugabe, come off second best to MDC
leader
Morgan Tsvangirai in the presidential ballot. It continued in the
lead-up to
the second round of presidential voting on 27 June.
The presidential
run-off ballot was deemed necessary after neither
presidential candidate
managed to achieve the 50 percent plus one vote
required for an outright
win.
However, according to How to Lose an Election and Stay in Power, a
report by
the Institute for Democracy in South Africa (IDASA), a South
African
think-tank promoting good governance, Zimbabwe's Electoral Act has
two
contradictory clauses determining the outcome of a president's
election.
Schedule one of Section 110 of the Electoral Act states: "Where
two or more
candidates for President are nominated, and ... no candidate
receives a
majority of the total number of valid votes cast, a second
election shall be
held within twenty-one days after the previous
election."
The Second Schedule of Section 110 states: "the Chief
Elections Officer
shall forthwith declare the candidate who has received-
(a) where there are
two candidates, the greater number of votes; (b) where
there are more than
two candidates, the greatest number of votes; to be duly
elected as
President of the Republic of Zimbabwe."
Former finance
minister Simba Makoni was the third candidate in the first
round of the
presidential election, along with Mugabe and Tsvangirai.
The report
surmises that "it is questionable whether the run-off would in
fact have
taken place if Mugabe had gained more votes than Tsvangirai in the
first
poll, though less than 50 percent plus one. The actual results
precluded
that option."
In the interregnum between the 29 March and 27 June polls,
there were
reports of widespread violence, torture and internal
displacement, which,
according to the MDC, resulted in the deaths of more
than 80 of their
supporters and led to Tsvangirai's decision to withdraw his
candidacy.
Mugabe, who has ruled for 28 years, claimed a landslide
victory in the
second round.
Rape as a weapon
Pishai
Muchauraya, the MDC spokesperson for the country's eastern province
of
Manicaland and newly elected parliamentarian for Makoni South, told IRIN
the
violence intensified after Mugabe was sworn in as president two days
after
the vote, on the eve of the African Union summit in Egypt.
"The torture
camps are still in place, and since the beginning of July three
supporters
of the MDC have been murdered by ZANU-PF militia and war veterans
at the
torture camps. Several women, including a 70-year-old grandmother and
a
15-year-old girl, have been gang-raped, while beatings and displacements
continue. People are being forced to donate goats, cattle and women to the
bases to avoid being victims."
Rape was being used as a "deplorable"
weapon against those perceived as not
supporting ZANU-PF, and "In many
instances, the victims cannot remember the
number of people who raped them
but it is usually more than 20, and that
increases the chances of infecting
the victims with HIV/AIDS," Muchauraya
said.
"The perpetrators ...
also expose themselves to infection, which could have
a significant impact
on reversing the impact of the HIV/AIDS pandemic."
Muchauraya said "the
siege" by government supporters was an attempt to
change the political
culture and thinking in rural areas, and that rather
than being dismantled,
"more torture camps are being established."
During the independence war
against white rule, the rural areas were the
bastion of support for
Zimbabwe's guerrilla armies, and the rural vote
against the ruling ZANU-PF
in the recent elections was seen as an insult by
the country's ruling elite,
according to political analysts.
"The international community has
rejected the 27 June circus, in which
Robert Mugabe contested against
himself and declared himself the winner.
ZANU-PF is subjugating everybody,
so that if another election is called, and
even if it was free and fair,
people would vote for ZANU-PF out of fear,"
Muchauraya said.
Social
welfare minister Nicholas Goche told IRIN the upsurge in violence was
a
consequence of the MDC attacking their own supporters in a bid to create
sympathy among the international community.
"The MDC stage-managed
these developments in order to coincide with the G8
summit [in Japan] so
that Zimbabwe is put on the agenda. The idea is to give
the impression that
there is increasing political violence and that people
are still being
beaten, but all that is false."
In reaction to Goche's comment, MDC
spokesman Nelson Chamisa told IRIN: "As
the MDC, we are deeply concerned by
the upsurge in political violence,
especially in the countryside. We are
overwhelmed by the number of
internally displaced persons who continue to
flock to our offices.
"War veterans and ZANU-PF militia are behind these
attacks. We have
information that the torture chambers have not been
dismantled and that new
ones are being set up," he said.
Apparatus of
violence
A "demobilised" member of ZANU-PF's youth militia, who declined
to be
identified, told IRIN that only the militia bases in urban areas were
being
dismantled.
"Some of my colleagues have relocated to rural
areas to set up new bases or
join existing ones. They have launched
Operation Makazviitirei [Operation
Why Did You Ever Vote for the MDC]," he
said. This operation has been
running since ZANU-PF lost the general
elections on 29 March.
"On the eve of voting [in the presidential runoff
on 27 June] we mobilised
all the people to spend the night at an all-night
vigil, so that they would
go straight from the base to the polling station.
Our base commander, a
serving soldier who is a war veteran, was in charge,
and the same appeared
to be the case with other
bases.
"Unfortunately, the lines of communication are so vague that some
of my
colleagues, who had not been officially told to stop mobilising the
people,
have been severely beaten up by the police and army for political
violence,"
he said.
ZANU-PF has mobilised the three main pillars of
the party: the Youth League,
which also contains the Youth Brigade; the
Women's League; and its Main
Wing, comprised of male ZANU-PF
members.
The Youth Brigade has been wearing uniforms since the 1980s, but
in 2000,
after Mugabe launched the fast-track land reform programme to
redistribute
white commercial farmland to landless blacks, ZANU-PF
established a National
Youth Service. Its graduates - also known as the
Green Bombers because they
dress in green fatigues - combined with the Youth
Brigade and are
collectively called the ZANU-PF youth militia.
These
young people fight against opposition activists and were responsible
for
rounding up and frog-marching people to "re-education and re-orientation
bases", known as torture camps by the MDC, the youth militia member told
IRIN.
He said youth militia were never accepted into the party
hierarchy, as these
positions were the preserve of "old men and
women".
The militia bases were usually established in schools or clinics
and were
under the overall command of veterans of Zimbabwe's liberation war,
or
serving members of the army or security services, he said.
The
youth militia member said all-night vigils were held, during which those
brought to the bases were made to sing liberation songs and chant praises to
Mugabe, and to publicly "confess" to being opposition members and then
denounce the MDC.
[END]
This article does
not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations or
its agencies.
International Herald Tribune
The Associated PressPublished: July
9, 2008
STRASBOURG, France: EU lawmakers criticized President
Robert Mugabe of
Zimbabwe on Wednesday for human rights abuses, ahead of a
vote that was
expected call for tighter sanctions against senior members of
his regime.
"Unchecked state sponsored brutality and violence and
savagery has to stop,"
said British Socialist Glenys Kinnock.
Irish
member Eoin Ryan called Mugabe "a murderous thug."
A draft resolution up
for vote by the European Union assembly Thursday urges
the international
community, including other African nations, to refuse to
recognize Mugabe's
re-election on June 27 in a vote where he stood alone
after opposition
leader Morgan Tsvangirai dropped out following attacks on
his
followers.
The draft calls for the setting up of a transitional
administration with a
mandate to halt violence and prepare the way for fresh
elections. EU
Development Commissioner Louis Michel said Tsvangirai should
lead the
transitional government.
"We shall use any means we have
for exerting pressure to get a government
led by Mr. Tsvangirai," said
Michel, who added that he'd spoken to the
opposition leader shortly before
addressing the parliament.
"Mr. Tsvangirai said he was in favor of a national
union government, but he
should have the last word in saying who should be a
member," Michel said,
adding Tsvangirai also wanted a U.N. and African Union
negotiating team to
prepare for the transitional
government.
Tsvangirai has said he would not participate in talks about
forming a
governing accord with Mugabe's government unless an additional
mediator was
appointed besides South African President Thabo
Mbeki.
Tsvangirai has called on Mbeki to step down from his mediation
role, saying
his refusal to publicly criticize Mugabe amounts to
appeasement.
Michel said the EU would immediately free up an aid package
for Zimbabwe, if
Tsvangirai comes to power.
The EU draft "deeply
regrets" South Africa's refusal to declare the election
illegitimate in the
U.N. Security Council and calls for players other than
Mbeki to be brought
into the mediation process.
Without progress to halt violence, the draft
says the EU should push for UN
sanctions, including an arms embargo and a
freeze of assets of the
government and ruling party leadership.
The
27 EU nations already apply such sanctions, but the parliament draft
says
they should be extended to include business people bankrolling the
regime.
It says EU nations should also stop granting visas allowing Mugabe
to attend
international meetings.
The Zimbabwean
Wednesday, 09 July 2008 07:53
UK Parliament House of Lords- Tuesday 8
July 2008 ,Zimbabwe
Lord Blaker asked Her Majesty's
Government:
What progress they have made at the United Nations on
securing
international action on the situation in Zimbabwe.
The
Minister of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord
Malloch-Brown): My
Lords, the UK strongly supports the draft UN Security
Council resolution
tabled by the United States which introduces targeted
measures against the
Zimbabwean regime. That is currently under discussion
and will be a further
powerful expression of the international community's
concern about the
crisis in Zimbabwe, already expressed in the UN Security
Council
presidential statement of 23 June.
Lord Blaker: My Lords, if South
Africa was to join in support of that
resolution, would that not impose a
travel ban on Robert Mugabe and 11 of
his cronies? What would that mean in
practical terms? Will it bring to an
end the distasteful spectacle of Mugabe
gallivanting around the world
visiting UN conferences?
Lord
Malloch-Brown: My Lords, we will have to wait to see the final
words of the
resolution but our purpose is to make sure that Robert Mugabe
and his
henchmen can no longer leave Zimbabwe. The resolution also intends
to make
sure that their banking assets and properties, wherever they hold
them in
the world, are subject to seizure. The purpose of this resolution is
to
tighten a global noose around an illegitimate regime.
Lord Anderson
of Swansea: My Lords, what has been the response of
African countries to the
clear warning from the G8 issued just recently that
their own interests will
be adversely affected if they do not adopt more
robust opposition to the
Zimbabwean regime?
Lord Malloch-Brown: My Lords, I assure my noble
friend that my own
visit to the AU summit last week convinced me that few
African Governments
do not fully share our view that this regime is not
legitimate and that for
the sake of Africa as well as the people of Zimbabwe
it must be brought to
an end as soon as possible. The disagreement, as
always, is about how to
achieve that, with a certain caution still about
reinforcing diplomacy with
sanctions. We have made it clear both at the G8
meeting today in Japan and
in the Security Council that we have reached the
point where negotiations
must now be backed by the teeth of
sanctions.
Lord Avebury: My Lords, will the noble Lord seek to
ensure that the
final texts of the Security Council resolution and the G8
insist that no
interim Government be formed of which Mugabe is a part?
Secondly, does he
not see some incongruity between the Foreign Secretary
addressing 2,000
victims of Mugabe's terrorism in Johannesburg while at the
same time the
Home Secretary is causing letters to be sent to their
counterparts in the UK
cutting off their benefits and forcing them to return
to Harare?
Lord Malloch-Brown: My Lords, I am glad the noble Lord
raised that
last point. I would see a large incongruity in that situation
and am pleased
to be able to reassure him that nobody is being returned
against their will
to Zimbabwe at this time. The Home Office is looking at
what steps it can
take to help support those who, because of circumstances
in Zimbabwe, are
forced to stay here.
Lord Alton of Liverpool:
My Lords, has the noble Lord seen the reports
in today's newspapers that
rape is being increasingly used, often leading to
HIV infection, as a weapon
of war against supporters of the Movement for
Democratic Change? Does he
recall our recent exchanges about the possibility
of referring these many
crimes against humanity to the International
Criminal Court, overcoming the
technical objections he said might exist in
doing that?
Lord
Malloch-Brown: My Lords, unlike six months ago, there is now no
doubt that
Mr Mugabe and those around him have committed crimes which
deserve referral
to the ICC. In the past, the crimes were of such ancient
origin that they
preceded the establishment of the court and were not
covered by it. Any
referral of a non-signatory such as Zimbabwe would be via
the UN Security
Council. At this stage, the Security Council is seized with
sanctions. If
the object of those sanctions-a change of Government in
Zimbabwe-is not
achieved, I suspect that this is one of several steps we
would want to bring
to the council as a possible next round of pressure.
Lord Howell of
Guildford: My Lords, we are all agreed what should
ideally be part of the
response to this appalling situation in Zimbabwe, as
quiet diplomacy finally
fades and Zimbabwe slides into a gangster state. I
have two practical
questions for the Minister on what we are doing and
perhaps what we should
have been doing long ago. We have been arguing for a
long time that we need
to assemble, or encourage the assembly of, an
international package for the
recovery of Zimbabwe on the other side of
Mugabe. Have we made any progress
with that? It is important that it is put
in place as soon as possible.
Secondly, exactly what advice are we giving to
major companies planning new
investment in Zimbabwe? There appears to be a
bit of ambiguity about that,
and a clear lead is required.
Lord Malloch-Brown: My Lords, I
welcome the opportunity to clarify
both points. On the first, planning has
been led by the World Bank and other
multilateral institutions, and has been
co-ordinated on the bilateral side
by Sweden, to make sure that plans are in
place for the hoped-for period of
recovery of the country. There has been an
estimate that that would cost at
least $1 billion a year for five years. Not
having seen the books of
Zimbabwe, that is still a bit of a rough estimate.
There is no doubt that
any new Government will face an immediate crisis in
trying to establish
their political authority while ending a hyperinflation
running at millions
of per cent. That would make ruling Weimar Germany look
positively easy by
comparison.
Secondly, we are trying to be
very clear with companies, specifically
on new investment. I can give a very
simple answer; we would discourage any
company from undertaking new
investment at this time on political,
commercial and ethical grounds. If
there was more time, I would be happy to
provide the noble Lord with the
arguments that we are making on sanctions,
which, at their simplest, remain
about how we can target the companies and
individuals around Mr Mugabe,
while protecting the people at large. Not all
the activities of every
British company fall into the second category. Some
preserve jobs and
well-being for Zimbabweans without directly supporting the
regime.
http://www.libdems.org.uk/
9 July 2008
Following reports
of a British-US draft UN Security Council resolution on
Zimbabwe, Liberal
Democrat Leader Nick Clegg has called on the Government to
toughen the
proposal and include the threat of International Criminal Court
action
against Robert Mugabe and his ZANU-PF inner circle, unless they leave
office
within six months.
Currently, Zimbabwe is not a party to the Statute of
the International
Criminal Court (ICC), putting Mugabe and his henchmen
outside the reach of
international prosecutors.
However, the United
Nations Security Council can, by a resolution, bring any
situation within
the locus of the ICC, as it did in 2005 for Darfur. The
Court's Prosecutor
could then investigate allegations of torture and other
international crimes
in Zimbabwe.
Commenting, Nick Clegg said:
"The draft proposals are
welcome, but targeted sanctions have been tried
before and found wanting.
The UN must go further if real pressure is to be
applied to Mugabe and his
henchmen.
"If they knew that they would be arrested and face prosecution
until their
dying day, merely by stepping out of Zimbabwe, it would
certainly focus
ZANU-PF minds.
"Britain should now work with African
states to mount a diplomatic offensive
at the UN to win support for this
powerful legal threat. What we are talking
about is the ultimate eviction
notice.
"The Security Council resolution should focus on individual
responsibility
for the crimes that have taken place in
Zimbabwe.
"Mugabe has used brutal force to cheat his way out of
democratic judgement.
If he refuses to go, or if his henchmen refuse to push
him, then we must
make sure he can't escape legal judgement.
"While
we must also push for tougher sanctions, it is time to use the law."
The Telegraph
By Sebastien Berger in Johannesburg
Last Updated: 6:10PM BST
09/07/2008
South Africa needs to "step up to the plate" over Zimbabwe if the
country
wants to earn a seat at the world's "top table", a government
minister has
said.
In the strongest official criticism yet of Thabo
Mbeki's policy of "quiet
diplomacy", Lord Digby Jones, the trade minister,
who is on a mission to
South Africa, departed from the government's official
script of merely
calling for an African Union envoy to supplement the South
African
president's mediation.
"I'm a fellow of Unicef, I'm a member
of the human race who is seeing the
tragedy of Zimbabwe and the one nation
that can do something about it is
failing in the way it's applying its
policy," he said.
"People are dying, violence is endemic. It's perfectly
clear that attempts
at dialogue are failing because the person you are
trying to have dialogue
with will talk day in, day out for the rest of time
without doing anything.
"South Africa must step up to the plate and bring
about a solution to the
Zimbabwe issue. It's clear that the leadership in
South Africa's policy of
what they have called quiet diplomacy has not
worked. The people of Zimbabwe
have spoken and their wishes have been
ignored."
South Africa is among the nations who are seeking a permanent seat
on the UN
Security Council if and when it its numbers are increased, and
would be a
candidate to join an expanded G8, he pointed out.
"South
Africa has every chance in the world of having permanence at that top
table
that would be so important for the people of the African continent.
When you
get to the top table of anything in life it brings
responsibilities."
Lord Jones, a former director-general of the CBI,
who went on anti-apartheid
demonstrations in London in his youth, said it
was not for him to prescribe
what measures South Africa should take, but its
policy had to change.
"Zimbabwe has to have an African solution, not just
for the historical
reasons and the so-called colonial resons, also because
if a strong
confident African is going to mean anything in the 21st century
she has to
sort out her own problems.
"It's South Africa's moment,
she has the chance to shine on the world stage
and show that Africa can
solve its own problems.
"The current leadership in South Africa doesn't
seem to show that it
understands that the world is watching and the world
has lost patience with
the current policy.
"The international
temperature needs to be raised because history proves
that bullies crumble
quickly."
Zimbabwe Today
Why China may finally agree to
action against Mugabe
Leaders of the G8, the group of industrialised
nations currently meeting in
Japan, are calling for additional sanctions and
United Nations action
against the Mugabe regime in Zimbabwe - and this time
even China may join
in.
The G8, in a strongly worded statement, has
demanded that new sanctions
target individual Zimbabwean leaders, and for a
special UN Security Council
envoy to be sent to Zimbabwe to report on the
situation.
In the past China could be expected to veto any such Security
Council
action. But observers now believe that it would not wish to appear
so
isolated on the world stage in the year that it is hosting the Olympic
Games.
The G8 statement was remarkably plain and unequivocal. In part
it read: "We
do not accept the legitimacy of any government that does not
reflect the
will of the Zimbabwean people."
Russia's signature to the
statement also marks a decided shift in that
country's position. Previously
it has refused to support sanctions against
Zimbabwe.
The call for a
UN mediator reflects a general opinion amongst the G8 nations
that the
efforts of South African president Thabo Mbeki, much derided within
Zimbabwe, have been inadequate.
The G8 statement calls for specific
sanctions against 12 individuals it
believes are responsible for the
violence that has characterised Mugabe's
regime. The sanctions would include
a block on all international travel,
plus action to track down and freeze
any assets they hold outside Zimbabwe.
Who are the 12? Moses Moyo has
great pleasure in listing them, coupled with
the warning that for them, the
day of reckoning may finally be at hand:
Robert Mugabe, President.
Constantine Chiwenga, Defence Forces commander.
Emmerson Mnangagwa, rural
housing minister. Gideon Gono, Reserve Bank head.
Augustine Chihuri, police
chief. Patrick Chinamasa, justice minister.
Perence Shiri, Air Force chief.
David Parirenyatwa, health minister. Didymus
Mutasa, security and lands
minister. George Charamba, presidential
spokesman. Paradzi Zimondi, prison
service chief. Happyton Bonyongwe,
Central Intelligence Organisation
head.
Posted on Wednesday, 09 July 2008 at 06:50
The Australian
Michael Kroger |
July 10, 2008
A DECADE or so ago a prominent Australian feature writer
asked me who I
thought would be an interesting international figure to
interview. One that
would "make a splash". "Idi Amin," I
replied.
Some months later, the feature writer telephoned to say that he
gathered
Amin was no longer doing interviews. "Pity," he told me, as he'd
written the
first paragraph of the article in his mind and it had to be
consigned to his
file he called "my best stories never
written".
Pressed to reveal the opening paragraph, he replied: "I met Idi
Amin, his
wife and children in a Jeddah supermarket last Wednesday. It was
good to see
his wife upand well. The only one he hadn't
eaten!"
Amin's downfall followed his unwise decision to invade Tanzania
in 1978. It
was met with superior force and Amin was forced from office by
the invading
Tanzanians in April 1979.
Amin was a butcher of
extraordinary proportions. Tens of thousands of his
countrymen were murdered
by his secret security forces, euphemistically
known as the Public Safety
Unit and the Bureau of State Research. There must
be veterans of the PSU and
BSR still alive today lamenting the good old days
under the rule of Amin.
However, they are surely consoled by the leadership
of Zimbabwean leader
Robert Mugabe, a man in Amin's image.
The world doesn't seem to doubt
that before the recent election in Zimbabwe,
Opposition politicians and
their supporters were variously murdered, beaten,
tortured and raped by the
ruling ZANU-PF and its supporters.
The 30-year friendship between South
African President Thabo Mbeki and
Mugabe is the reason Mbeki was the wrong
person to be appointed to mediate
Zimbabwe's conflict. Mbeki has refused to
criticise Mugabe throughout the
Zimbabwean crisis, nor has South Africa
seriously attempted to put economic
pressure on Zimbabwe despite the obvious
butchery of Mugabe's regime.
Mbeki's policy of "quiet diplomacy" is a
synonym for inaction. Many reasons
are advanced as to why Mbeki and the
South African Government have backed
Mugabe. The likeliest is that, just
like the African National Congress,
Mugabe and ZANU-PF were successful in
their liberation struggles against
white rule.
Nothing came out of
the African Union summit at the Red Sea resort Sharm El
Sheikh and nothing
came of Kenya and Botswana's demands that Zimbabwe be
suspended from the
African Union.
But it is little wonder that Mugabe takes no notice of his
African brothers.
Algeria, Libya, Sudan and Tunisia are often condemned for
human rights
violations, Eritrea is run by dictatorship, vote rigging
plagued recent
elections in Nigeria, and numerous murders disrupted
elections in Kenya and
Ethiopia. No wonder Mugabe said before the African
Union summit: "I'm going
to go to that AU summit. I want to see whose finger
there is clean."
The response by Mugabe to African and international
outrage at his behaviour
is the same self-determination argument used by
many despots through the
years.
"Our people, our people, only our
people will decide and nobody else," he
says.
Before the ballot,
Mugabe said: "Only God, who appointed me, will remove me.
Not the MDC
(Movement for Democratic Change), not the British; only God will
remove
me."
The UN Security Council took only limp-wristed action, issuing a
one-page
statement calling on the government of Zimbabwe to allow rallies
and to free
political prisoners. It said it regretted the campaign of
violence and the
restrictions on the political opposition in Zimbabwe.
Powerful stuff.
Meanwhile, 40,000 turned up in London's Hyde Park to
celebrate Nelson
Mandela's 90th birthday. Amy Winehouse and Annie Lennox
were among those who
sang. Bono recorded a happy birthday tribute. Actor
Will Smith hosted the
event, which came 20 years after a 70th birthday
concert was held at Wembley
stadium to press South Africa's apartheid
government to free Mandela.
With the worldwide publicity given to recent
events in Zimbabwe, one would
have thought that international demonstrations
against Mugabe would abound.
I scoured newspapers of the world for reports
of demonstrations outside the
Zimbabwean embassies and consulates across the
world, or those of the South
African Government. I looked for evidence of
demonstrations outside the UN
headquarters in New York. I searched for
reports of widespread
demonstrations in the streets of London, Paris, Berlin
or Washington against
the brutality of the Mugabe regime. Surely some of
those who opposed white
rule in South Africa and what was then Rhodesia
would be similarly repulsed
by the butchery of Mugabe and his
supporters.
But where are the peaceniks, the greens, the anti-war
demonstrators, the
churches, the democrats, the human rights activists and
others who committed
so much energy to freeing South Africa and Zimbabwe
from oppressive rule a
generation ago? Where are those tens of thousands who
marched against the
war in Iraq? Are they not revolted by the behaviour of
Mugabe and his thugs?
There are no reports of demonstrations, sit-ins,
hunger strikes and peace
marches.
Is silence consent? The streets are
empty, the embassies are left in peace.
No traffic has been stopped, no one
is chained to embassy fences, no flags
of protest are waving. Apparently
Mandela's birthday concert was free of any
mention, let alone condemnation,
of Mugabe.
Could it possibly be that the international Left pays no
attention to
criticising Mugabe because he is seen as anti-Western and
anti-US? Surely
someone on the Left somewhere in the world is outraged at
the Mugabe
Government's behaviour? Surely the Screen Actors Guild in the US
is appalled
by Mugabe. But where are the full-page advertisements signed by
Cate
Blanchett, Susan Sarandon and their ilk? A cynic may be forgiven for
thinking that with no chance to criticise the US, Britain and the West by
opposing Mugabe, opposing him is of no interest to them.
If the UN is
powerless, African nations will do nothing and the West can't
and won't
intervene for a whole host of reasons, could the Tanzanians be
roused for
one last act of international decency on behalf of the rest of
the
world?
Michael Kroger is a former president of the Victorian Liberal
Party and a
Melbourne-based merchant banker.
http://www.mediachannel.org
By Wan Press.
The World Association of
Newspapers and World Editors Forum have called for
the repeal of a punitive
"luxury" tax on newspapers that are imported into
Zimbabwe, which is
preventing independent newspapers from reaching their
audience.
The
tax was imposed in early June in the run-up to the widely condemned
presidential election won by Robert Mugabe after his opponent quit the race
in the face of escalating violence against his supporters. It aims to reduce
the influence of South African-based news sources, which have been extremely
important to Zimbabweans.
"Restricting access to information by
punitive taxation constitutes a clear
breach of the right to freedom of
expression, which is guaranteed by
numerous international conventions,
including the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights," the Paris-based WAN
and WEF, which represent 18,000
newspapers world-wide, said in a letter to
President Mugabe.
The two organisations called on Mugabe to remove the
luxury tax on foreign
publications and to end state intimidation of the
independent media. All
domestic independent newspapers and broadcasters in
Zimbabwe are banned.
The letter to the President said:
"We are
writing on behalf of the World Association of Newspapers and the
World
Editors Forum, which represent 18,000 publications in 102 countries,
to call
on you to immediately lift the punitive "luxury" tax imposed on
imported
newspapers, magazines and periodicals, which is clearly aimed at
preventing
independent newspapers from reaching the people of Zimbabwe.
"On 8 June,
the state-owned Herald newspaper reported that all "foreign
newspapers sold
in Zimbabwe will now have to pay import duty, as the
government moves to
protect Zimbabwean media space". The newspaper went on
to say that this move
is meant to curb the entry into the country of what it
called "hostile
foreign newspapers".
"All foreign publications are now classed as luxury
goods and therefore
attract import duty at 40 percent. The tax appears to be
particularly aimed
at South African-based news sources, which have been
extremely important to
Zimbabweans. All domestic independent newspapers and
broadcasters in
Zimbabwe are banned.
"The Zimbabwean, a twice-weekly
newspaper printed in South Africa for
distribution in Zimbabwe, has been
forced to pay almost USD20,000 per week
and is reducing its circulation from
200,000 copies to 60,000 as a result.
"The Zimbabwe Revenue Authority
refused to release a consignment of 60,000
copies of the 19 June issue of
The Zimbabwean. This followed the burning of
60 000 copies of The Zimbabwean
on Sunday on 25 May.
"We respectfully remind you that restricting access
to information by
punitive taxation constitutes a clear breach of the right
to freedom of
expression, which is guaranteed by numerous international
conventions,
including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Article 19
of the
Declaration states: 'Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and
expression; this right includes the freedom to hold opinions without
interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through
any media, regardless of frontiers.'
"We respectfully call on you to
remove the luxury tax on foreign
publications and to end state intimidation
of the independent media. We urge
you to take all necessary steps to ensure
that in future your country fully
respects international standards of
freedom of information."
WAN, the global organisation for the newspaper
industry, defends and
promotes press freedom and the professional and
business interests of
newspapers world-wide. Representing 18,000 newspapers,
its membership
includes 77 national newspaper associations, newspaper
companies and
individual newspaper executives in 102 countries, 12 news
agencies and 11
regional and world-wide press groups.
Further restrictions could backfire
and reunite African leaders behind
Mugabe in the face of an interfering
west
Blessing-Miles Tendi
guardian.co.uk,
Wednesday July 9,
2008
After the EU imposed targeted sanctions against Robert Mugabe's
administration in 2002, Tanzania issued the following statement:
As
you have heard about Zimbabwe and the EU's decision to impose
sanctions, it
seems they want to divide Africa at Brussels in 2002 just as
they did in
Berlin in 1884. Africa must be prepared to say no! I want to
tell the
Zimbabweans that we are supporting them on this matter.
South Africa did
not welcome the EU sanctions either. A political adviser to
the former
Nigerian leader, Olusegun Obasanjo, remarked: "They seem to want
Mugabe's
head delivered on a platter of gold."
An Africa-Europe summit for leaders
of both continents, scheduled for April
2003 in Lisbon, was deferred
repeatedly because an EU travel ban on Mugabe
meant he could not attend.
African leaders refused to countenance Mugabe's
exclusion. For four years,
in spite of EU overtures, African leaders were
unyielding in their stance
that they would not attend the Lisbon summit if
Mugabe was barred. It
finally took place in December 2007, with Mugabe as an
invited head of state
amid British-led disquiet over Mugabe's attendance.
That is the history
of Africa's response to western targeted sanctions
against the Mugabe
government, and one would have thought that the G8 would
be informed by this
history going into the summit. However, they chose to
disregard it. The
leaders gave attending African leaders a dressing down for
failing to "deal"
with Mugabe, and chose to press ahead with targeted
sanctions via the UN
security council - despite the fact that all the
African countries invited
to the G8 summit were opposed to sanctions. This
division risks playing into
what Mugabe has been preaching about all along:
that he is in a fight
against an imperialist west.
Mugabe's spin doctors in Harare will make
the most of events at the G8
summit, and the possibility of more sanctions
may have the effect of
producing more resolve and hostility on Mugabe's
part. Indeed, there already
exists a hardened nationalist faction of the
Zanu-PF ruling elites and
members of the Joint Operations Command aligned
with Mugabe who understand
western interference as being aimed at "regime
change". Moreover, the
existing sanctions have given Mugabe a false pretext
for explaining
Zimbabwe's economic decline. Increasing them will provide him
with a
convenient scapegoat for the current acceleration in the country's
economic
decline.
The G8's condemnation and targeted sanctions would
command more authority if
the same human rights standards were applied
everywhere evenly, which is not
the case. And the moral authority of G8
members such as Britain and America,
who have been most vocal about Mugabe's
undemocratic re-election, is at its
lowest ebb since September 11, largely
because of the illegitimate 2003
invasion of Iraq. Few, if any, countries
still look up to these two states
as champions of human rights and
democracy.
The G8 is enthusiastic about imposing sanctions against an
undemocratic
African government, but is less enthusiastic about meeting its
aid
commitments to Africa, as emerged from this year's summit. These
inconsistencies further undermine its human rights and democracy promotion
agenda in Africa.
Should the G8's sanctions bid succeed, it may
reunite African leaders behind
Mugabe, even as many of them recognise his
illegitimacy.
---
Comments
a.. waazpi
Jul 09 08,
07:26pm (43 minutes ago)
There was a good article by a New York Times
columnist about two weeks ago
titled:
If Only Mugabe Were
White
In that article he gave two options to get Mugabe out of
power.
The first option is to bribe him to leave office while allowing
him to
save face by claiming he's doing it for medical reasons. He suggests
letting
him retire in South Africa with a bank account worth about five
million
dollars.
The second option, suggested by Robert Mugabe
himself in the 1970s during
his attempt to get rid of Ian Smith, is to make
the sanctions worse. This
can be done by getting Mozambique, South Africa
and the Congo to cut off all
electricity supplies to Zimbabwe. Kristof also
suggests getting African
leaders to back an indictment of him and his aides
in the International
Criminal Court.
Either of those options may
work but perhaps paying him to leave and
allowing him to save face would be
the quickest option.
b..
a.. Recommend? (1)
b.. Report
abuse
c.. Clip |
d.. Link
a.. Brazilian
Jul 09 08,
07:45pm (25 minutes ago)
Well, Mr Tendi, you seem to want African
leaders to be treated like
children. Come on! You know that I know that you
know that the G8 has no
imperialistic agenda whatsoever. I can't believe you
don't see the irony in
using the expression 'regime change' in connection
with Robert Mugabe on
July the 9th 2008. What do you mean by regime change?
From tyranny to
democracy? Why should anybody be sorry about such a
wonderful regime change?
And, Mr Tendi, why is it that Morgan Tsvangirai is
not entitled to the same
respect bestowed upon Robert Mugabe by the big
abstract word Africa? Because
the West likes him? Or is it because
Zimbabweans like him? Do you like him,
Mr Tendi? Do you think he is African
enough? What about Nelson Mandela? The
West loves Nelson Mandela. Why can't
the black folks in Zimbabwe be free as
well? Is it because they are black?
Is it because they are not black enough?
Is it because Mugabe isn't white
even though he drinks tea at five and wears
European clothes and sports a
preposterous Hitler moustache?
http://www.zimbabwejournalists.com
9th
Jul 2008 13:45 GMT
By a
Correspondent
PLUMTREE - Police here have dropped the case against
Kholwani Nyathi a
Bulawayo-based correspondent with The Standard privately
owned weekly who
they wanted to question over an unpublished story he had
investigated
following a visit to the south-western border
town.
Nyathi was ordered to present himself at the police station by
Plumtree
officer- in- charge law and order section Assistant Inspector
Sifelani and
duly did so in the company of his lawyer, Munyaradzi
Nzarayapenga, on 7 July
2008.
Davison Maruziva, the editor of The
Standard, told MISA-Zimbabwe that the
police had recorded his accreditation
details and said the case was over.
According to Maruziva, the police
wanted to question the reporter on what
became of the story he had been
investigating following his visit to the
area before the presidential
election runoff elections held on 27 June 2008.
Maruziva said he had been
told by Sergeant Mudenda of the police law and
order section in Plumtree
that the people who had been interviewed by Nyathi
were wondering as to what
had happened because the story had not been
published.
The editor
said he subsequently provided the police with details of Nyathi's
accreditation including the Harare telephone numbers of the MIC for further
verification of the information supplied.
The police still insisted
that Nyathi should present himself at Plumtree
police station. Maruziva
described the police actions as downright
harassment and intimidation of
journalists going about their lawful duties.
http://nationalvision.wordpress.com
What is going on in Zimbabwe right now is a
serious indictment on the more
than twelve million citizens of Zimbabwe for
failing to stand up for the
mutual defense of their rights and freedoms
which have been trampled upon by
the Mugabe regime. We watched as the regime
entrenched itself year after
year since 1980 until it blossomed into
becoming this monster that we see
today. We let them create fiefdoms that
have come to haunt us. There is no
doubt that this current phase of
deceptive politics smacking of
Machiavellianism, is coming to an abrupt end
even though its architects are
still deluded into thinking that they will
forever rule Zimbabwe. Remember
the late (let us emphasize ‘late’)
Vice-President Muzenda used to boast that
the regime will rule ‘kusvika
madhongi amera nyanga’ (literally translating
to ‘until donkeys grow horns’)
oblivious of the fact that nothing lasts
forever and that Zanu PF’s defeat
was imminent irrespective of how many
elections they were bent on
stealing.
It is our blind faith in politicians that has made us despots
across
nations where we are not wanted. We have all seen the humanitarian
crisis
that the Mugabe rule has created. The health delivery system is in
total
collapse, mass-starvation is looming as the nation fails to feed
itself,
political violence has caused hundreds of deaths and severe
injuries, influx
of refugees across the borders and the barbaric xenophobic
killings of
fellow citizens in South Africa bear testimony to a plundered
civilization
and a return to primitivism.
Even though the defenseless
citizens continue to be pounced upon by Mugabe’s
heartless hangmen,
shameless rapists, seasoned torturers and abductors, the
day of reckoning is
coming. We will all have an opportunity to sit back and
listen to the tales
of horror narrated by our present tormentors as they
give an account of all
the atrocities they committed. It is incumbent upon
each citizen now to
gather as much evidence of the abuses as possible so as
to hold the
perpetrators accountable. There is need for a vibrant and
vigilant
citizenry. From human rights lawyers, journalists, private
investigators, to
teachers and preachers, let them quietly pen every abuse
that is being
committed by the regime. There has never been an urgent need
for journalists
(trained and self made alike) like now. With the advent of
the internet
information can be disseminated very rapidly. Right now it is a
fact that
most people in Zimbabwe are kept in the dark because the regime
muzzled
freedom of the press, thanks in part to Jonathan Moyo’s ‘heroic’
efforts to
quash voice of dissent during his five year tenure as the regime’s
information boss. Can you imagine what goes on in those Zanu PF camps manned
by the Green Bombers? If we had at least one hidden camera for each of the
2000 plus camps then the world would be better informed about the evils of
the Mugabe regime. Maybe we need to launch a “Donate a Camera for Zimbabwe’
campaign.
The whole idea of forcibly removing Ian Smith from power was
centered
around the need to create a society that upholds the respect for
human
rights, establishment of democracy, and the realization of peace and
prosperity for all citizens. For over half a century, the citizens have
lived under two dictatorships in a row (Smith and Mugabe combined). Then the
question will arise, which one of the two dictatorships was better? That
will be for academics to answer but citizens will have a not-so-surprising
answer. They might very well say Smith was better compared to Mugabe who has
taken everything away from them (even that which they did not have). There
is no doubt that the crisis will be upon us probably for some time to come.
In the not-so-distant future another revolution will spark to fight for the
very same goals that led to the ouster of Smith. The regime fails to
recognize that the human spirit will not rest until justice is done. Through
the ballot box, people have already said no to this regime. They will say it
again even louder in one form or another!
Never again should we put our
faith in these politicians. Mbeki, or Mugabe
should not determine our
destiny. The power lies in us, the citizens who
should determine who best
serves our interests.. We need to stop them from
lying to us under the guise
of nationalism or some form of misplaced
jingoism that we have been fed
before. They claim to represent us yet we
know that they represent their own
selfish interests. Together as a nation
we have an urgent obligation to
unwaveringly renew our commitment to the
cause of freedom that the very
gallant liberators like Josiah Tongogora
sacrificed their lives for. We
cannot live in the past and continue to
embrace their colonial rhetoric
which is being used to cover up for their
corruption, economic mismanagement
and to justify political suppression. We
have new war frontiers that are
more menacing than the mere possession of
land for subsistence agriculture
which has always been a victim of erratic
rains of Africa. The fight against
poverty and disease should be the number
one priority of the next President
(deservedly, Morgan Tsvangirai).
Political oppression and repression are
natural causes that will be dealt
with head-on. As highlighted in our last
article
http://nationalvision.wordpress.com,
it is the economy stupid that is making
the rebirth of Zimbabwe imminent.
The country is ungovernable and we know
change is knocking!
This is the
time to start new civic groups, political movements and pressure
groups that
serve the purpose of safeguarding our freedoms. Never again
shall we take
our freedoms for granted!
Investors Chronicle
Created:
9 July 2008
Written by:
Martin Li
Recent research by
broker Ambrian argues that as the dust settles in
Zimbabwe, large companies
will be able to operate effectively in the
country - notwithstanding a
likely leadership change and unfavourable mining
bills.
Zimbabwe has
highly attractive geology. It was once Africa's second-largest
gold producer
and is also highly prospective in platinum, nickel and
ferrochrome. But, as
demonstrated by the current state of the industry,
Ambrian analyst Dr Brock
Salier sees no future for mining in Zimbabwe as
long as President Mugabe
remains in power. Dr Salier highlights the
Indigenisation and Empowerment
Bill (51 per cent indigenous ownership) and
the Mines and Minerals Amendment
Bill (25 per cent free-carry to
government - yet to pass into law) as key
threats.
Ambrian believes it likely that there will be new leadership of
Zimbabwe.
With an uncertain long-term tenure for most Zimbabwean
politicians, Dr
Salier expects any new administration to focus on short-term
gain over
long-term economic growth. This should be good news, since mining
has the
capacity to drive the rapid growth the country so badly
needs.
Close political ties to ruling politicians are essential for any
aspiring
miner, which suggests that CAMEC and Anglo American - which have
both made
recent investments - have connections at senior government level
that offer
security of tenure.
Public perception is also critical.
Rio Tinto is very conscious of public
opinion, not least because of its UK
pension fund shareholders, and has
stated it won't invest in Zimbabwe "until
the situation stabilises". Dr
Salier argues that Anglo American, which is
currently "reconsidering" its
investment, has more to lose than to gain, and
will follow Rio Tinto's lead
and halt investment in the country.
Dr
Salier identifies the potential big winners as junior mining companies,
whose long-standing commitment may stand them in good stead over the coming
months. CAMEC has historical ties with Zimbabwe and other hardened African
operators, including Mwana Africa, Central African Gold and Aquarius
Platinum, are also likely to be keen to get involved.
http://www.thezimbabwetimes.com/
July 9, 2008
JOHANNESBURG - Political
turmoil in neighbouring Zimbabwe was adding to a
long list of problems South
Africa faced in its preparation for the 2010
World Cup finals, FIFA general
secretary Jerome Valcke said on Wednesday.
“The situation in Zimbabwe has
to be solved quickly. What is happening there
is definitely terrible,”
Valcke told a media briefing in Johannesburg on
Wednesday.
“It would
have been nice for South Africa with all the other challenges they
are
facing not to have the problem of Zimbabwe on top of it all.”
Valcke said
FIFA backed various international initiatives to resolve the
political
impasse following the contested elections that returned president
Robert
Mugabe to power last month.
“We add our voice to concerns and we fully
support what is being done by all
international organisations.”
But
Valcke said he was unsure what the effect of possible international
sanctions might be on Zimbabwe’s national team, who are involved in 2010
World Cup qualifiers.
“Their national association has done nothing
wrong. This would be something
we would have to discuss with the United
Nations. We do have links with some
international bodies but for the time
being I can tell you we have made no
decision on Zimbabwe.”
Valcke
said the list of organisational challenges in South Africa for the
2010
tournament, which kicks off in 700 days from Thursday, remained long.
On
Tuesday organisers decided to drop Port Elizabeth as one of the venues
for
the Confederations Cup, an eight-team test event to be played next
June.
The city had promised to complete their new Nelson Mandela Bay
stadium by
March but the South Africa 2010 World Cup Organising Committee
said this was
unlikely.
“It is a challenge to deliver a brand new
stadium and if our main goal is to
succeed in 2010 then it was a good idea
to remove it from the 2009
tournament,” Valcke said.
“We would rather
drop them from the list than have to play in an uncompleted
stadium. It is
not the image we want to send out before 2010″.
Valcke said he was
considering increasing the frequency of his trips to the
country from two
monthly to monthly to help ensure South Africa would be
ready.