· Mugabe could hold power pending
second round
· Intimidation campaign against voters continues
Chris
McGreal Africa correspondent
The Guardian,
Monday May 5
2008
Zimbabwe's ruling party has said that a second round of presidential
elections could be delayed by up to a year in a move that would extend
Robert Mugabe's rule even though he admits to having lost the first round of
voting five weeks ago.
The election commission is expected to meet
soon to set a date for the
run-off vote between Mugabe and the opposition
candidate, Morgan Tsvangirai.
The law required it to have been held within
three weeks of the original
election, but the commission has the power to
extend the period between the
votes.
The deputy information minister,
Bright Matonga, said at the weekend that
the run-off might take place in
three weeks, but could take up to a year,
suggesting that Zanu-PF remains
concerned at Mugabe's ability to win,
despite a state-sponsored campaign of
violence and intimidation against the
opposition.
Mugabe won only
four out of 10 votes in the first round, according to the
election
commission, leaving him with a considerable task to win the
run-off. The
election commission gave him 43.2% of the vote to 47.9% for
Tsvangirai of
the Movement for Democratic Change.
While it is not clear whether Matonga
was speaking with Mugabe's authority
in suggesting a long delay, political
analysts in Zimbabwe say Zanu-PF is
not in any hurry for another
election.
The opposition also fears that spreading political violence
will provide a
pretext for Zanu-PF to drag out the election further on the
grounds that
there is too much instability to hold another vote, even though
the ruling
party is principally responsible for creating the
upheaval.
Thousands of people have been beaten, thousands more driven
from their homes
and about 20 murdered, according to the opposition, in an
army-led campaign
of violence focused on rural areas where the opposition
performed well.
Yesterday, Zimbabwe's teachers union threatened a
national strike unless the
government stops attacks on teachers who acted as
election officials. The
union said 1,700 teachers had fled their homes and
hundreds more had been
arrested to deter them from overseeing the next
election because they were
neutral.
Meanwhile, the MDC is wavering
over its previous refusal to take part in a
second round after calling the
results "scandalous daylight robbery". It
said Tsvangirai won the
presidential election outright with 50.3%, based on
returns from each
polling station. It accused the government of altering the
results by 87,000
votes in favour of Mugabe to force Tsvangirai below the
50% mark to avoid a
run-off.
However Tsvangirai risks looking as if he is unwilling to
compete if he
shies away from a run-off, and could hand victory to his rival
by default.
The US and other western governments have warned that
state-sponsored
violence against activists and voters since the first round
of elections has
made a democratic run-off impossible. They have been joined
by groups such
as Human Rights Watch, whose Africa director, Georgette
Gagnon said: "The
ruling party's bloody crackdown makes a free run-off vote
a tragic joke."
The Roman Catholic church in Zimbabwe yesterday called on
the UN and African
Union to supervise the next ballot. In a statement read
to Sunday services,
it said the state election commission could not be
trusted to be neutral,
because it took five weeks to release the results of
the first round.
With the economy in tatters, there is also the question
of cost. The former
finance minister, Simba Makoni, who ran a poor third in
the presidential
race, said Zimbabwe could not afford another election and a
power-sharing
deal had to be negotiated.
By Our Correspondent
HARARE, May
5, 2008 (thezimbabwetimes.com) - The Movement for Democratic
Change (MDC)
party has written to Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC)
chairman George
Chiweshe to demand an explanation over discrepancies in
presidential
election figures as well as the by-passing of the verification
process by
the commission last week.
In a letter responding to Chiweshe’s remarks
dismissing the MDC's
allegations of electoral theft during the March 29
poll, the party's
secretary general Tendai Biti, demanded a credible
explanation from the ZEC
chairman.
“There must be some explanation as
to how this happened and we request you
in all seriousness to explain why
and how your Commission went on national
television to announce the totals
of votes cast as tabulated in the
attachment of the letter we sent to
you.
“We do not believe a national institution such as yours can get away
from
this problem by just ignoring it. We insist that you explain why and
how
your commission announced to the nation certain totals as being the
total
votes cast in each constituency,” said Biti.
The ZEC chief
elections officer last Thursday announced presidential
election results
stating Morgan Tsvangirai had garnered 1 195 562 ballots,
or 47.9 percent of
the vote while Robert Mugabe won1 079 730 votes or 43.2
percent. Independent
candidate Simba Makoni was said to have secured 207 470
(8.3 percent), with
Langton Towungana winning14 503 or 0.6 percent.
ZEC also declared that
since no candidate had secured a majority of the
total votes cast, there
would be a run-off election on a date still to be
announced. The two
candidates eligible for the run-off election are
Tsvangirai and
Mugabe.
But Biti said there were huge discrepancies between the earlier
totals of
votes extrapolated from V11 forms posted outside polling stations
after the
initial count and the final results, provoking suspicions of
massive rigging
in favour of Mugabe.
The MDC has since rejected the
results as a “huge fraud”.
Chiweshe was at pains to explain the
discrepancies Friday saying the earlier
figures should be ignored as they
were "merely incomplete updates".
But yesterday, the MDC which says it
has unearthed discrepancies totaling
80,000 votes – a crucial 3.4 percent
that would have put Tsvangirai over the
50 percent threshold - accused
Chiweshe of taking the MDC as "morons".
Said Biti: “We would also like to
advise you that you should not take us as
morons. In the circumstances, we
request and demand that you answer our
letter on its merit and give us an
explanation as to how and why the
disparities referred to
arose.
“What we require from yourself is an explanation as to where you
got the
figures you announced on national television. Put differently, what
was the
source of those figures and why are they so different from the
official
ones? We await a substantive answer to our original request no
later than
the end of Monday, May 5, 2007.”
Under Zimbabwe’s
electoral laws, the opposition has up to next Friday to
appeal to the
Electoral Court which deals with electoral disputes.
But chances of the
court overturning the election result are slim after
Mugabe purged
independent judges and packed the bench with his own
appointees. In fact,
court challenges arising from the 2002 presidential
election, which Mugabe
allegedly also stole, are still pending.
The Telegraph
By
Sebastien Berger in Johannesburg
Last Updated: 2:25AM BST
05/05/2008
Morgan Tsvangirai, Zimbabwe's opposition leader, came under
growing pressure
yesterday to take part in a second round of the country's
presidential
election.
His party, the Movement for Democratic Change,
insists that Mr Tsvangirai
won the vote in March outright and that no
run-off is necessary. It is
threatening to boycott the second round called
by the Zimbabwe Election
Commission, which claims that Mr Tsvangirai beat
Robert Mugabe but fell
short of an absolute majority.
A boycott would
automatically hand victory, and a sixth term in office, to
Mr Mugabe,
84.
David Coltart, a senior MDC figure and a newly-elected senator for
Bulawayo,
said: "I have spoken to individual leaders and supporters and some
are
adamant that they should not participate.
"I think we all have no
choice but to participate although the brutality is
just shocking."
Armed
gangs of Mr Mugabe's supporters have been attacking opposition
activists for
several weeks in a campaign of intimidation designed to boost
the
president's chances of re-election. The two factions of the MDC have
agreed
to campaign in the second round for Mr Tsvangirai, who has stayed
outside
Zimbabwe in the weeks following the poll.
John Mattison, a political
commentator, said: "He's got to participate
because otherwise Mugabe just
becomes president. Having come this far, I
don't see that he has any other
choice.
"It's a terrible double bind. You know people are going to die.
You know
there's going to be corruption and rigging and he's at risk from
that."
As leaders of the MDC met to decide on their next move, an insider
said it
was considering what conditions to demand for its
participation.
"International supervision should be mandatory – the whole
African Union
should be allowed in," he said. "Over and above that there has
to be an end
to politically motivated violence."
Mr Mugabe's Zanu-PF
party may not agree to, or abide by, such terms without
substantial pressure
from Zimbabwe's neighbours.
Some observers believe the threats of a
boycott are a negotiating ploy by Mr
Tsvangirai, who has visited several
regional African leaders in recent
weeks.
News24
05/05/2008 00:09 -
(SA)
Magdel Fourie and Sapa-AP, Die Burger
Johannesburg. - Snipers
in Zimbabwe are ready to shoot and kill MDC party
leaders.
These were
the words of MDC spokesperson and former MP Roy Bennett on Sunday
after the
party was told by informants in the military of a plot to murder
those high
up in the MDC.
Another MDC spokesperson said on Friday that 20 MDC
members had already been
murdered for political reasons since the March 29
elections.
Human Rights Watch (HRW) said last Wednesday in Johannesburg
that they had
proof that the military was handing out weapons to youth
militia members and
"war veterans" in a terror campaign against the
MDC.
HRW also said that MDC members were being kept in torture camps,
assaulted
and forced to declare their allegiance to the Zanu-PF.
"The
MDC were informed that these snipers would also eliminate any
opposition
leader if given the opportunity," Bennett said.
In an attempt to escape
night-time attacks, the leaders did not sleep in the
same place for more
than two nights in a row.
Shortly after they left the place where they
had slept, it was destroyed so
as not to be used again.
"The party
leaders' family members are also tortured in their own homes so
that they
will provide information over where the leaders are to be found.
And if
the don't co-operate, their homes are burnt down."
In the current climate
of violence prevalent in especially the rural areas
of Zimbabwe, there were
600 MDC members who were seriously injured, besides
the 20 deaths.
IOL
Hans
Pienaar
May 05 2008 at 07:24AM
Reports continue to
come in of a violent crackdown against opponents
of Zimbabwe President
Robert Mugabe, as the new majority party mulls about
whether to fight a
second presidential election against him.
Harare newspapers
reported at the weekend on reprisals against
supporters of the Movement for
Democratic Change, and in Johannesburg the
MDC claimed an apartheid dirty
tricks style death squad was being assembled
to assassinate its
officials.
Roy Bennett, an MDC spokesperson in Johannesburg and
former MP, said
the MDC's information had come from "the highest echelon of
the intelligence
services". It had been corroborated by sources in the
police.
"There is very little support left for Zanu-PF. All of them
are
talking to us," said Bennett.
In a statement released
earlier, the MDC said a group of 18 "snipers"
had set up base in Chikurubi,
Harare. The MDC gave the registration numbers
of 10 Hilux twin-cab bakkies
supplied to the team.
"Their main targets are MDC officials
including members of parliament
and key members of the MDC secretariat based
at Harvest House in central
Harare," said the MDC. "They have been briefed
to kill or maim those
officials who are involved in the day-to-day
operations of the party."
Observers, governments and diplomats were
warning that a run-off
election can no longer be free and fair. Apart from
various electoral laws
designed to ensure this having been broken with the
delay in the
announcement of results, the violence could intimidate rural
voters into
voting for Mugabe.
The Standard, normally a
state-supporting newspaper, sent a team into
the rural areas to probe the
crackdown. The team reported extensively on
bodies of MDC supporters lying
unclaimed in mortuaries, huts having been
burned down, and small commercial
farmers driven from their land.
The Standard reported that its team
was sent to Guruve hospital in
Mashonaland Central to inquire about the body
of an MDC activist Crispen
Chiutsi, but found three others in the same
mortuary.
"We still have Chiutsi's body here," said one hospital
official. "You
want to go and bury it? It might be dangerous for you guys
since you said
you are coming from Harare. There are three other bodies of
people killed in
Dande but the relatives cannot bury them."
Gordon Moyo, director of Bulawayo Agenda, a coalition of civil-society
groups in Zimbabwe's second largest city, said the opposition should be very
careful about entering a run-off election. Moyo said the MDC should insist
that it would take part in elections only if Zimbabwe's neighbours - under
the umbrella organisation SADC - observed and insisted that Mugabe stop
using militias to intimidate voters.
"They must demand the
disbanding of the war veterans' militia and the
withdrawal of the army from
communities. They can renew their call for the
SADC to mediate, and prepare
the conditions where a runoff can take place."
The MDC said on
Friday that at least 20 of its activists had been
killed, but privately its
officials put the deaths at more than 30.
This article was
originally published on page 1 of The Mercury on May
05, 2008
The Zimbabwe Times
By Rose
Maindiseka
Monday, May 5, 2008
ZIMBABWE ’S vanquished head of state,
Robert Mugabe, has taken the Nazi
tactic of attributing to others the
retributive post-election atrocities he
is perpetrating against the populace
to new levels of perversity in his bid
to deflect criticism and capitalize
on the anguish of the victims for
political gain.
During the era of
Nazism in Germany, it was common for Adolf Hitler’s regime
to attribute to
others what it was doing as a way to distract attention from
its brutal
misdeeds and abuses. Aping this tactic after his unleashing of
violence in
the countryside as punishment against rural voters who rejected
him the
March 29 elections which has been roundly condemned by all
reasonable people
throughout the world, Mugabe has now deployed his wife,
Grace, to the
affected areas to pose as an angel of mercy bringing relief
and comfort to
the victims of her husband’s brutality.
The state-controlled Herald issue
of May 2 carried a report detailing Grace
Mugabe’s foray into the besieged
Manicaland province to donate funds to
enable those whose homesteads have
been burnt down to rebuild. The state
daily reported that Mugabe, who was
accompanied by her sister, donated $10
billion to each of the 10 families
that were targeted by state agents and
militias in the Mayo resettlement
area of Manicaland. She wife was reported
to have also donated blankets,
clothes, shoes, sugar, mealie meal and other
foodstuffs to the
victims.
Mugabe’s feigned attempts to pose as a paragon of tolerance and
compassion
were however exposed the moment she opened her mouth and added
insult to
injury by trying to deceive the people about the hand behind the
atrocities.
She cold-heartedly tried to peddle the illogical and tired
mantra that the
Movement for Democratic Change had reacted to its victory on
March 29 by
embarking on a campaign of violence against those who voted
overwhelmingly
for it.
This claim does not make sense generally but
particularly in Manicaland
where the MDC recorded some of the most stunning
upsets against Zanu-PF.
Voters in Manicaland booted out the highest number
of ministers and voted
for MDC candidates. What earthly reason would there
be for the winning party
to descend on a province that supported it
overwhelmingly to punish voters?
Said the outgoing First Lady to her
grim-faced audience; “Through violence
and destruction, no one can become a
president. Violence is foreign to
Zimbabwe and Africa, but a propaganda of
the West” (sic). In an apparent
reference to Zambian president Levy
Mwanawasa and the president of the
ruling ANC in South Africa, Jacob Zuma,
who have condemned post election
violence and the withholding of
presidential poll results, Mugabe blasted
regional leaders she accused of
betraying the goals of liberation
movements.
Although Manicaland
provincial governor, Tinaye Chigudu urged the people to
be grateful to “Amai
Mugabe’s gesture of love that did not take into account
political
differences” it is clear she is a wolf in sheep’s clothing,
capitalizing on
the suffering of the people to campaign for her detested
husband ahead of
the presidential election run-off. Having become addicted
to the trappings
of power and the resultant limitless opportunities to
plunder, she obviously
cannot imagine someone else’s husband becoming
president and ending her
opulent lifestyle as First Lady.
Someone in the position of First Lady
genuinely moved only by compassion and
empathy would have visited any area
hit by state violence as unobtrusively
as possible and would have been
careful not to offend the still raw
sensibilities of the embattled people.
But for Grace Mugabe to prance before
people traumatized by the brutal
violence unleashed by her husband
resplendent in Zanu-PF regalia bearing the
menacing portrait of Robert
Mugabe and claiming to be there out of the
goodness of her heart is to
underscore the moral bankruptcy and inhumanity
of the greedy clique
holding Zimbabweans to ramsom.
No one would
have believed Mugabe’s wife even if she had not resorted to
reciting her
husband’s tired lines against the West. It was preposterous for
her to tell
victims of atrocities perpetrated at the behest of a man
incapable of
accepting defeat that Zimbabweans were playing into the hands
of the West by
resorting to violence when she knew fully well that the brute
force being
used against innocent people was the handiwork of her husband.
This was
not the first time Mugabe and Zanu-PF have tried to put the people
of
Zimbabwe off the scent after committing unspeakable atrocities. The
incident
that stands out most prominently in the memories of most
Zimbabweans is the
murder of Cain Nkala in 2002 after which a badly
stage-managed attempt was
made to attribute the callous act to the
opposition. In a disgusting attempt
to mask their culpability the Mugabe
regime and Zanu-PF spun out elaborate
tales replete with false allegations
against innocent people. Nkala was even
declared a national hero and buried
amid feigned expressions of grief at the
national shrine in Harare.
Since then many more people have died
mysteriously when their loyalty to the
party was under suspicion and been
accorded “hero” status. Grace Mugabe has
been unpopular in Zimbabwe until
now for her involvement in scandals such as
the looting of the VIP housing
scheme under which she built a mansion dubbed
“Gracelands”. She is also
notorious for her extravagant shopping sprees.
Her latest fraudulent
antics however show that she has become her husband’s
active accomplice in
the brutalizing and subjugation of the people of
Zimbabwe. She has taken to
behaving like Elena the wife of former Romanian
despot, Nicolae Ceausescu
who actively supported her husband’s tyrannical
rule. She paid the ultimate
price for her collusion when they were both
summarily executed after being
found guilty of genocide, crimes against the
state, undermining the national
economy and illegal accumulation of wealth.
Grace Mugabe does not seem to
realise that the people of Zimbabwe are not
fools and they can see through
her deceptive antics. She does not seem to
have considered that a time of
reckoning could come when she will have to
answer questions about the source
of the billions she is flaunting in a bid
to pull the wool over the eyes of
Zimbabweans regarding her husband’s brutal
campaign of retribution against
the electorate that rejected him on March
29.
The Zimbabwe Times
Ulysse Gosset of France 24 interviews Morgan
Tsvangirai
Ulysse Gosset: Welcome to France 24 for this new edition of
The Talk de
Paris. Today, we will be looking at Zimbabwe and at the complete
deadlock
there. The Presidential Election took place a month ago but nobody
can tell
who will be running that country.
The ruthless dictator –
and the world’s oldest Head of State (84) – Robert
Mugabe is
clinging to
power. Our guest today is his main opponent and the leader of
the
opposition, Morgan Tsvangirai – who claims he has won the election.
He
has taken refuge in South Africa, and the images of this former miner and
trade unionist being pounded have been around the world and made Morgan
Tsvangirai a symbol of repression. The leader of the Movement for Democratic
Change and official opposition candidate has had to flee to South Africa. He
is with us on a live line-up with Johannesburg.
Good day, Mr
Tsvangirai.
Morgan Tsvangirai: Good morning.
Ulysse Gosset: Do
you see yourself as a political exile, or as a refugee?
You left Zimbabwe
three weeks ago. When do you think you’ll be able to
return without putting
your life at risk?
Morgan Tsvangirai: Thank you very much. I do not
consider myself to be in
exile. I simply consider myself to have embarked on
a diplomatic effort to
try to address the political impasse in Zimbabwe.
Therefore, once that has
been accomplished – i.e. once the political impasse
has been unlocked – I
will return home where I have very responsibilities to
discharge.
Ulysse Gosset: How long do you think it will be before you can
return? Mr
Mugabe had you beaten up and we’ve all seen the dreadful images.
Do you
think your life is in danger and that you could be assassinated if
you
returned to Harare?
Morgan Tsvangirai: Well, the risk has always
been there ever since I
challenged Robert Mugabe when we formed the Movement
for Democratic Change
in 2000. The risk has always been there. But that has
never deterred from
challenging Robert Mugabe, as has been witnessed by the
number of elections
that we have conducted. So I will be going back in spite
of that potential
risk.
Ulysse Gosset: More specifically, do you
think Robert Mugabe has made plans
to eliminate you? Are you one of the
targets of the regime? Are you afraid
for your life?
Morgan Tsvangirai:
Well, I know, from reports, from threats (from Mugabe’s
verbal and
psychological threats), that I am the prime target because I
provide the
leadership to challenge [his] dictatorship. So I am the prime
target.
Whether he’s going to discharge that execution or elimination is
another
matter. But I know that Mugabe, the ZANU-PF and other zealots that
do not
want to see democracy achieved in our country [see me] as their
biggest
obstacle to permanent power.
Ulysse Gosset: Do you know, Mr President,
that some people have criticised
you for leaving your country, and that some
are wondering if it might have
been more useful for you to stay on the spot.
Why have you left Zimbabwe and
what do you have to say about those
criticisms?
Morgan Tsvangirai: Well, those criticisms [have] no
justification. A leader
does not just [stand still]. You find alternatives
to try to solve the
problem. I am not the first leader who has left a
country in order to launch
a campaign for freedom. Robert Mugabe himself
[has been] outside the
country. George [inaudible - Nguomo] left the country
into
exile (at one point [indeed] under very suspicious circumstances). So
the
question here is not my presence in the country. The question is what
agenda
we are pursuing. Inside the country to mobilise people and outside
the
country to mobilise international opinion in order to resolve the
crisis.
That is the challenge. My physical presence does not mean
that
my leadership is not there. After all, Morgan Tsvangirai is one of the
leaders of the movement. There are others inside the country who are
discharging their various responsibilities – especially [with regard to] the
humanitarian crisis that we face. But Morgan Tsvangirai remains the symbol
and the leader of the movement whether physically inside the country or
outside it.
Ulysse Gosset: So you think you’re more useful
outside Zimbabwe in the
safety of South Africa…
Morgan Tsvangirai: I
am not in the safety of South Africa. I have been
embarking on a diplomatic
African effort to try to persuade Robert Mugabe to
concede defeat on an
election that he has lost. I am [asking] various
African leaders to help us
and press upon Robert Mugabe that He has lost and
that he should retire. So
that effort (engaging these
African leaders) cannot be discharged by anyone
other than myself.
Ulysse Gosset: If today you were invited to a
direct face-to-face meeting
with President Robert Mugabe, would you agree to
negotiate the future of the
country and end the deadlock?
Morgan
Tsvangirai: Absolutely. That has been my demand. What is needed here
is a
negotiated process that will see Robert Mugabe exit honourably and
provide
security to all those who feel very insecure about the democratic
change
that is taking place in the country. What must be accepted is that
the
people have spoken and that their voice and their will must be
respected.
That’s our fundamental position. So Robert Mugabe and myself must
sit down
and chart a new way forward for the country. We cannot hold the
country to
ransom with his intransigence.
Ulysse Gosset: Some observers have
compared the situation in Zimbabwe to the
Titanic, arguing that it is
sinking. Are you that pessimistic? Everybody
knows you have a staggering
160,000 percent inflation rate. Is Zimbabwe
Africa’s Titanic?
Morgan
Tsvangirai: Well, I’m sure the analogy of the Titanic is very, very
instructive. That you have a country that has been one of the potential
success stories in Africa but that has all of a sudden, due to policies that
Mugabe has pursued, run aground [is undeniable]. So, yes, I think that
analogy [fits quite] perfectly. A country that [had a
thriving economy]
20 or 30 years ago [has] an economy that is almost on its
knees [today]. The
inflation is around 160 000 percent, 3 000 000 to 4 000
000 Zimbabweans have
left their country (not because of their own free will
but because of
economic and political reasons). This is a country in crisis
and therefore
yes, certainly, it is actually a
sinking Titanic.
Ulysse Gosset: How
do you explain that the population that voted for you is
not more mobilised?
Why aren’t there any street demonstrations calling for
the election results
to be acknowledged? Why haven’t the people come down
into the
streets?
Morgan Tsvangirai: Well, I’ve heard that people talk about
“people power”.
But you must understand that, over the last 30 years,
Mugabe’s
State-sponsored violence has suppressed any expression of
discontent. He has
responded to any expression of discontent by violence. He
has been beating
up people. He has been using the army and other
paramilitary units to make
sure that this population is captive and does not
express itself. I suppose,
as far as that is concerned, that he has
succeeded in making the population
captive to his view. But [that] certainly
does not mean that the people of
Zimbabwe support his view. They are just
afraid.
Ulysse Gosset - I think the time has come to review your
political career.
There is a tradition on this programme to produce a
profile. France 24
journalists, K. Chabour and K. Spencer, produced yours.
Let’s watch it.
Profile: This footage of Morgan Tsvangirai with a
fractured skull and
swollen eye was beamed around the world, attesting to
the brutality
unleashed by Robert Mugabe’s regime. Last year, the leader of
Zimbabwe’s
main opposition group, the MDC, was arrested and beaten up by
police
following an anti-government rally. Despite the country’s climate of
fear
and intimidation, Tsvangirai has worked assiduously to build
Up a
credible opposition force in Zimbabwe.
Born in 1952, the eldest son of a
bricklayer, he left school at 16 to become
a textile weaver. He then worked
in a mine and promptly became the leader of
the mining union.
A
charismatic figure and orator, Tsvangirai was a prolific trade-unionist.
He
orchestrated a series of strikes against President Mugabe and his ruling
Zanu-PF party, and slowly grew into an opposition politician. His support
growing, in 1999 he helped set up the Movement for Democratic Change as an
alternative to ZANU-PF. Four years later, accused of plotting a coup against
Mugabe, he was arrested and faced the death penalty – but was ultimately
acquitted. In 2005, he overcame a split within the MDC and had to fight to
restore his reputation as a leader.
If he manages to dethrone Mugabe
and become Zimbabwe’s next president, his
main challenge will be to turn
around the country’s economic crisis.
Ulysse Gosset: Another question
about your situation today: do you think you
will be able to return to
Zimbabwe before Robert Mugabe leaves power? And
when do you think you will
be able to do so?
Morgan Tsvangirai: Well, I think that, at the moment,
what you must
understand is that there is a process that is taking place.
The Zimbabwe
Electoral Commission has convened a verification exercise in
which all the
parties that contested the presidential election will be
represented. It
would appear that there are various figures that
have
been thrown around. The MDC has got its own figures; Zanu-PF has got its
own
figures, the other opposition [parties] have got their own
figures.
But, because these figures were displayed at various polling
stations, I am
sure that the verification exercise will not be difficult.
Because we will
all have to compare the notes and compare the figures, and
then ultimately
come up with an outcome that everyone can agree to. Once
that is done, then
we [will know] who has won the election. And then I will
take the necessary
steps to go back.
Ulysse Gosset: So you think you
will return after Electoral Commission
announces the official
results…
Morgan Tsvangirai: Well, I am saying that that will probably be
the most
ideal time to reflect and say, “The results are now out, we are
faced with
various challenges, and perhaps it is time to consider to see
whether I can
go back or not (depending on the situation on the
ground).”
Ulysse Gosset: Let’s talk about the leaks regarding the
results. People say
that, today, according to the Electoral Commission,
these are unconfirmed
results. The opposition has won the presidential
election with 47 percent of
the vote but you don’t have an absolute
majority. What is your response? Do
you question those figures or do you
think
they are right?
Morgan Tsvangirai: Those are merely speculative
numbers thrown around by
Zanu-PF in order to justify their position that
there is going to be a
runoff. Our own figures demonstrate quite clearly
that the MDC, including
myself as the presidential candidate, won that
election decisively. So there
is no need for a runoff. Those figures have
no
basis. They are intended to create an impression that nobody [won]
outright.
But, besides, if I may make an argument, if you add my numbers
(even at 47
percent) together with my colleagues’ [figures, you get to]
(over 57
percent). That’s more votes for the opposition than [for] Mugabe
himself. It
would have made more sense for the opposition, if it [had got]
43 percent to
demand a runoff rather than the incumbent demanding a runoff
when he has
lost [by] such [a long stretch].
Ulysse Gosset: Is
the 35 percent figure for Mr Mugabe credible or did he get
fewer votes than
that, in your view?
Morgan Tsvangirai: Well, I don’t know. I don’t know
whether that 43 percent
or whatever percent [is accurate]. All I know is
that, as far as we are
concerned, we have won over 51 percent and Mugabe has
around 43 percent.
This gives us an almost nine percent points’ lead over
his [result].
Ulysse Gosset: So a runoff is out of the question even
if, officially, the
commission decides you haven’t got an absolute
majority?
Morgan Tsvangirai: A runoff is [out of the] question for [three
reasons].
Firstly, the MDC has won the election. For [a whole] month,
they have not
been revealing those results, which means that they have
either been
tampering with those results, they have been manipulating those
results, or
massaging those results. So the ZEC itself has totally been
discredited by
this delay.
Secondly, from our own results, which we
collected from polling stations,
the ZEC has already published those results
by posting them at various
polling stations. What that means is that the MDC
collected all those
results and has come out with a result that we feel is
credible. And that
result gives us a decisive victory. So there is no need
for a
Run-off.
Thirdly, how can you have a runoff when Mugabe, over
the last month, has
been unleashing State-sponsored violence against our
structures and
decimating our electoral structures on the ground? Burning
the houses of our
people, […] refugees in our country, beating up people and
hitting people?
How do you run an election under those
circumstances?
Some people today think that a solution has to be found.
If there isn’t a
runoff, is it possible to set up a future government of
national union? Are
you prepared to negotiate a government of national
union?
Let me just make it clear. An election has been conducted. There
is an
obvious winner. In normal circumstances, that winner must be
inaugurated.
That is [what would happen] in a normal democracy. Democracy at
the moment
is on trial when the people suggest that the obvious loser now
wants to
negotiate the transfer of power. I think it’s ridiculous to make
that
suggestion. However, we believe as MCD that, being the winner, we must
be
allowed to how magnanimity towards the other parties and create a
government
of national union. We do recognise that there is a need to manage
that
transition and to create security for everyone. But, certainly, we have
a
situation where the loser [wants] to negotiate on his own term [and] I
think
it’s ridiculous and undemocratic.
Ulysse Gosset: Today, in
your mind, are you already the future president of
Zimbabwe? Do you feel
that you are the new president of Zimbabwe?
Morgan Tsvangirai:
Absolutely. I have no doubt in my mind that I have won
this election. I have
no doubt in my mind that the people of Zimbabwe have
shown their confidence
in my leadership. I have no doubt in my mind that we
have the responsibility
of addressing the people’s needs with a specific
programme (which we issued
during the campaign and [which] the people
support.
Ulysse Gosset: Mr
President, let’s listen to a question we have received
over the Internet. It
is a question about the future of Zimbabwe from Elodie
Bouchot, a student in
Paris.
Elodie Bouchot: The violent crackdown on dissidents against Mugabe
clearly
shows his refusal to release the reigns of power. My question is
what the
opposition’s attitude will be if Mugabe, in spite of a second
defeat, still
refuses to step down
What would be your reaction if Mr
Mugabe refuses to leave power? Have you
got a strategy should this
occur?
Morgan Tsvangirai: Well, our strategy is very, very simple. Mr
Mugabe will
be staying in power by default. And therefore is illegitimate.
And therefore
the crisis continues. It is inevitable that Robert Mugabe has
no solution to
the people’s plight, has no solution to the crisis the
country is facing.
Just to retain power for power’s sake is not a solution.
And therefore the
problem of Zimbabwe becomes a regional problem. And that’s
why we are
mobilising regional leaders [so that they] realise that they have
to impress
upon Mugabe [the need] to accept defeat and go into retirement,
and allow
the country to move forward. We do have a clear strategy how
Robert Mugabe
can not force his will on the people.
Ulysse
Gosset: Mr President, are you afraid of a confrontation, blood bath
of coup
d’état?
Morgan Tsvangirai: Look, we don’t subscribe to the values of
violence or
unorthodox means of obtaining power. That’s why, for the last
ten years, we
have been at the receiving end of Mugabe’s violence. We have
had to fight a
dictatorship using democratic means. And there is no way we
can review our
position and say “Let there be a military coup, let there be
violence, let
us resort to military action in order to remove the dictator.”
It’s not
necessary. The people of Zimbabwe have suffered enough. What they
want is
peaceful reconstruction of their country.
Ulysse Gosset: Have
you got any information regarding the army? What’s the
position of the
military? Are they prepared for democratic transition or
could they hang on
to power with Mr Mugabe?
Morgan Tsvangirai: Well, we do understand that
there are a few individuals
who are taking that hard-line position [and] do
not want to relinquish
power. But they don’t have a solution once the people
have voted. Either
they have to declare themselves that they are ruling by
decree (in other
words that they have subverted the will of the people)
and
see how they can sustain that position. But they also know that the
international community and African leaders are against any attempt at a
military takeover or any attempt at military rule.
Ulysse Gosset:
What role are South Africa and its president playing? We have
a question
from our correspondents there, Caroline Dumay Alex Duval Smith.
Caroline
Dumay: Mr Tsvangirai, I have a question about South Africa and
South
Africa’s role. You’ve rejected President Thabo Mbeki as continued SADC
mediator. Now I wonder if that’s because you consider his mediation to be
too narrow and would actually rather have a mediator with a higher profile
who could broaden the mediation effort. Can South Africa put direct
pressure on Mugabe?
Morgan Tsvangirai: Well, let me say that South
Africa [could] play a very
critical role in the resolution of the Zimbabwean
crisis. If it wished to
take a strong position, the Zimbabwean crisis would
be resolved overnight.
Why do I say that? Because the Zimbabwean crisis is
no longer just a foreign
policy crisis for South Africa. It is a domestic
crisis for South Africa.
And therefore it is in the best interest
of
South Africa to ensure that the Zimbabwean crisis is resolved
peacefully.
At the moment, we are talking about 2 000 000 to 3 000 000
Zimbabweans
crossing the [border] and causing a totally unnecessary social
and economic
burden on South Africa. So, yes, South Africa has the
responsibility for
taking the leadership but it can not afford to [be a
mediator and take sides
at the same time]. And I think that’s where their
problem
arises.
Ulysse Gosset: Is Mbeki a good mediator or are you
expecting somebody else
to play that role?
Morgan Tsvangirai: Well,
what we have said is that this crisis in Zimbabwe
has been with us for
almost nine years. In March last year, President Thabo
Mbeki was appointed
mediator in order to prepare for elections. He has
played his part. It was
because of lack of effort. But Mugabe proceeded to
[set] an election date
unilaterally. But I think there
were positive outcomes [from] that mediation.
We are allowed, now, to
display for the first time the results of the
election in polling stations.
[The election was relatively peaceful]. And I
think the objective of the
dialogue literally came to an end at the time we
went to the election. After
that, there is no [place] for mediation because
the results are known.
Therefore, we do not foresee a situation where
President Mbeki will have a
role. However, we believe that SADC, which
initiated the dialogue on the
crisis, have a responsibility [for] launching
another initiative which
[should be] broad based [and focus] on the transfer
of power and not at the
elections or election disputes.
Ulysse
Gosset: Are you thinking of a solution on the lines of what happened
in
Kenya, where there was an international mediator, former UN Secretary
General Kofi Annan. Would you like the UN to get involved? Do you think what
happened in Kenya could be applied to Zimbabwe?
Morgan Tsvangirai:
There are differences with the Kenyan example. The
difference is that, in
Kenya, the results were not known. In Zimbabwe, the
results were published
at various polling stations. So, as far as we are
concerned, the mediation
in Kenya was about sharing power. In Zimbabwe, it
is about transferring
power from a regime which has lost the election to a
regime which has been
given a new mandate. So, whilst there are
similarities, I think that what is
important is [that] people recognise that
difference and appreciate that
what we are dealing with is the intransigence
of a man who has lost the
election openly, and is refusing to transfer
power. So, yes, perhaps there
needs to be
regional…
Ulysse Gosset: Who is the man who could
organise this transfer of power? Are
you thinking of Kofi Annan and the
United Nations? Who could help you to end
the deadlock?
Morgan
Tsvangirai: I think that any mediator or group of mediators would be
helpful. I don’t have anyone in particular in mind. But I suppose that
somebody who enjoys the confidence of all the parties in the region will be
useful in unlocking that [situation].
Ulysse Gosset: France will
become President of the European Union in July
this year. What would you
expect from Europe and what do you expect from
Nicolas Sarkozy if the crisis
were not resolved when he becomes leader of
the European Union for six
months?
Morgan Tsvangirai: I am sure that, when Mr Sarkozy takes over
leadership of
the European Union, there will be no significant [change in]
the European
Union’s position on Zimbabwe unless there is a significant
[display] of
reform [from] the Zimbabwean government. So, as far as I’m
concerned, the
European Union’s policy will remain consistent within the
parameters set out
by other countries.
Ulysse Gosset: Do you want
Europe to get more involved? The UN Security
Council has agreed there is a
problem. What do you expect of Europe? Or is
the solution with the
UN?
Morgan Tsvangirai: I know that current UN discussions are informal so
the UN
will not come out with a resolution. But I also know that the
Secretary
General has been given the responsibility of appointing an
investigator to
come and investigate the current violence in Zimbabwe. And I
hope that the
UN Secretary General, together with the support of
the
Europeans and everyone, will come to investigate the current violence and
undertake that mission in order to stem the violence and solve the
crisis.
Ulysse Gosset: Some people are thinking about power sharing in
the absence
of an agreement between President Mugabe and you. Could a third
man emerge?
One of Mr Mugabe’s former Finance Ministers, Mr Makoni also ran.
Could you
form an alliance with him?
Morgan Tsvangirai: We do have an
alliance with all the opposition forces. As
far as I am concerned, there is
no [third man] because the results are very,
very clear. The winner, with an
absolute majority, is the MDC. Zanu-PF is in
the opposition. Mr Makoni has
no Member of Parliament to talk about. But he
has a significant following
and therefore cannot be excluded when a
government of national healing is
[formed]. But
one has to understand the matrix [underlying] the political
results of this
election.
Ulysse Gosset: You were talking about
the risks of the conflict in Zimbabwe
spilling over its borders. We all
remember the Chinese ship that was turned
back (with weapons, apparently).
What do you say to China and what do you
say to those who would be tempted
to support the current regime?
Morgan Tsvangirai: The MDC has no hostile
intentions against China. But I
think that for the Chinese government to
support arms shipments to Zimbabwe
to suppress the people of Zimbabwe and
oppress the people of Zimbabwe is
unacceptable. So that policy difference
has nothing to do with
Chinese-Zimbabwean relations. It has everything to do
with the Chinese
government [providing] partisan supporting to Robert
Mugabe
And Zanu-PF, [in whom] the people of Zimbabwe have no confidence.
That’s
where we have a big, big, big problem.
Ulysse Gosset:
Regarding international relations, do you think the
Europeans, for example,
should be talking to Mr Mugabe? Should he be invited
to a summit between
Europe and Africa? Should he remain an interlocutor or
should he be
sidelined?
Morgan Tsvangirai: For a very long time, the European Union
has pursued a
policy of isolation [regarding] this regime. I think it is a
worthwhile
policy to isolate this regime. But also for a very long time the
European
Union has used incentives for good behaviour. And those incentives
have
included that, if there is significant reform on the part of
Robert
Mugabe, [inaudible]. He has not dared to do that. And therefore I
think that
the European Union is justified in continuing to ostracise this
regime. I
think that, at some stage, if Robert Mugabe is prepared to stop
the
violence, observe democratic rules and standards, observe the will of
the
people, I think he should be talked to. But only
subject to his acceptance of
a normal democratic leader in the family of
nations.
Ulysse Gosset:
We are reaching the end of the programme. I would like to
quote Mr Mugabe.
He was asked how long he would stay in power, and replied,
“Until the age of
100.” When you hear him say things like that, what do you
feel like saying
back?
Morgan Tsvangirai: The message he is putting across is that he
wants to die
in office. Now we can not have a man die in office just for his
own ego and
his own selfish aims. The people of Zimbabwe have realised that
Mugabe’s
[regime] has reached its sunset, that he should go into retirement,
and that
we should move on as a country. He can not hold the country to
ransom just
because he wants to stay in power. And I think that is the
message he is
putting across.
Ulysse Gosset: Thank you, Morgan
Tsvangirai, for being our guest here at
France 24. That’s the end of this
Talk of Paris. Thank you to Caroline
Dumay, Alex Duval-Smith, our
correspondents in South Africa, who helped us
to prepare for this programme,
and to the rest of the France 24 team. See
you soon.
Mercury, SA
May 05, 2008 Edition
1
HARARE: Teachers had become targets in Zimbabwe's post-election
violence, a
teachers union said yesterday, threatening a nationwide strike
unless the
government stopped the attacks.
The Roman Catholic Justice
and Peace Commission also protested against
political violence and called on
the United Nations and the African Union to
supervise a planned presidential
run-off.
In a statement to coincide with Sunday services, the Catholic
human rights
body said the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission could no longer be
relied on as
a "neutral and nonpartisan electoral umpire" after its
five-week delay in
announcing final results of the March 29 national
election amid witness
reports of politically motivated murder, abduction and
torture.
"All fair-minded Zimbabweans have lost faith and confidence in
the ZEC which
can no longer be trusted to superintend a run-off," the
commission said.
Zimbabwe's opposition and international and local human
rights groups have
accused the ruling party, its militant allies and the
army of waging a
campaign of terror since President Robert Mugabe came in
second in the March
29 vote. Electoral officials have said a second round of
voting is necessary
because neither Mugabe nor his rival, Morgan Tsvangirai,
won a simple
majority and there are fears of increased violence in the
lead-up to the
run-off.
Teachers have traditionally assisted in
running elections. The Progressive
Teachers' Union said yesterday that the
violent campaign against them was
meant to instil fear and prevent them from
participating as polling officers
in the run-off.
"Whoever is calling
himself the government should act to stop violence in
schools or we will be
forced to act," the union said, adding that it was
considering calling a
nationwide strike.
The union said more than 1 700 teachers had fled
violence, 133 had been
assaulted in the past week and 496 had been
"interrogated over election
matters". Human Rights Watch said it had
received reports that more than 100
polling station officers - most of them
teachers and low-ranking civil
servants - had been detained in an eastern
province.
Mugabe's officials have denied fomenting political violence. -
Sapa-AP
The Age, Australia
May 5, 2008
- 1:19PM
Australia is willing to send or assist electoral observers
at a presidential
run-off vote in Zimbabwe, Foreign Minister Stephen Smith
says.
Zimbabwe's electoral commission said it would soon fix a date for
the
presidential election second round, as the opposition continued to
consider
under what conditions, if any, it would take part.
The
opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) has insisted its leader
Morgan Tsvangirai won the March 29 election outright.
However,
official figures, while putting Tsvangirai in the lead, did not
give him an
outright win.
But while Tsvangirai has said previously there was "no need
for a run-off",
he has indicated he could take part in a second round if
international
observers are present.
Mr Smith said Australia would
help in electoral observance if asked.
"The only way that a second round
run-off that will in anyway reflect, or
respect the will and the wishes of
the Zimbabwean people, is if it is full,
free and fair, and if there is
participation without intimidation by the
Zimbabwe people and is subject to
extensive international supervision and
scrutiny," he said.
zimbabwejournalists.com
5th May 2008 00:10 GMT
By Chenjerai Chitsaru
LAST week, when they saw Grace
Mugabe belting out a political tirade with
the gusto of a veteran, many
people in the opposition sector thought they
had good reason to be very
afraid. Zanu PF, preparing for the run-off
election on a date yet to be
announced, was ready to throw, not only the
kitchen sink into the fray, but
the First Lady as well.
Grace Mugabe, until then famous (or notorious?)
for her seemingly insatiable
penchant for shopping, put passion into her
political delivery, almost
equaling the customary stridency of her
husband.
In the last days of the campaign for the 29 March election,
President Robert
Mugabe sounded as if he had punctured a number of vocal
chords in his voice
box, as he seemed to challenge his audience to give him
one valid reason why
they would not vote for him against Morgan
Tsvangirai.
Grace, probably unaware that to many people her impromptu
political posture
lacked grace totally, referred to her husband’s voice
going hoarse as
evidence of how dedicated he was to the cause of the
people.
Grace Mugabe has usually kept a very low political profile,
realizing that
she would be lost in that maze of doublespeak and
gerrymandering.
That she has somehow convinced herself that a good woman
must stand by her
man in his time of greatest need – as Mugabe definitely is
– speaks volumes
of Mugabe’s and Zanu PF’s desperation.
Another
indication of this nervousness can be gleaned from the state media
preoccupation with the “glorious past”. Yesterday, Sunday, ZTV re-ran
footage of Mama Mafuyana, Joshua Nkomo’s late wife, recalling her husband’s
role in the struggle.
Mugabe may not have bargained for being treated
to volumes of praise for two
people he is not known to have treated with
much high regard – James
Chikerema and George Nyandoro.
The two were
Nkomo’s indefatigable lieutenants: Nyandoro was buried at
Heroes Acre, as
was Nkomo himself, but not Chikerema, Mugabe’s relative, who
was buried in
their home area of Zvimba, Mashonaland West.
Grace Mugabe must know that
if she is going to play an active role in the
run-off campaign, then she
must be prepared to perform more distinctly
unFirst Lady-like functions. The
rough-and-tumble of Zimbabwean political
campaigning is no place for a lady
– first, second or third.
This one promises to be pretty brutal, as Zanu
PF and Mugabe must realize
that their opponents now have the bit between
their teeth: they won the
first round and are not going to lie down to be
spanked by the Mugabe
behemoth, assuming it can still rise from the
dead.
The MDC has officially signaled it has no time for the run-off. Its
own
figures indicate its leader, Tsvangirai won hands down. It has publicly
rebuked the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission for refusing to carry the
verification exercise to its logical conclusion.
If it is confirmed
that the ZEC’s rejoinder was an obviously curt “go to
court if you dare”
then the Sadc organ to which they intend to appeal can
only listen to their
complaint with sympathy.
It will be interesting to see how Zanu PF will
react to that response,
assuming Sadc has decided, finally, that Zimbabwe is
in a crisis, contrary
to Thabo Mbeki’s weird prognosis. Two Sadc leaders,
whose countries have as
different political histories as night is from day
are Zambia and Botswana,
they could play a decisive role in the regional
organization’s resolution of
the Zimbabwe imbroglio.
Seretse Ian
Khama took over only recently from Festus Mogae. That country
achieved
independence in 1966, also from the British, like Zambia, Zimbabwe
and
Malawi. But Botswana has been ruled by the same party since
independence,
although there is an active opposition party which has its own
Members in
Parliament.
A time may come when the opposition may outstrip Khama’s
party in
popularity, but for the moment, the chances of that happening look
distinctly bleak. Zambia ’s founding president, Kenneth Kaunda, a
contemporary of Sir Seretse Khama – the present president’s father – lost
power in an election.
His United National Independence Party (UNIP)
is now in opposition, probably
permanently, outflanked by Levy Mwanawasa’s
Movement for Multiparty
Democracy (MMD) since 1991. Malawi ’s independence
was achieved by the
Malawi Congress Party, then led by the acerbic,
bowler-hated,
flywhisk-wielding Kamuzu Banda who, like Kaunda, was thrown
out of power in
an election by a new party, led by a protégé of his, Bakhili
Muluzi of the
UDF.
Zambia, Malawi and Zimbabwe constituted the
ill-fated federation of Rhodesia
and Nyasaland. If the domino theory is to
be believed Mugabe must be the
next one of the leaders of the three states
from the dead federation to bite
the dust in an election.
In fact, it
would be absolutely amazing if he survived to complete another
term as
president. The ill-fated federation itself must have brought its own
curse
on the leaders of the three former members. Of course, when you look
at the
political fortunes of the leaders in the region you begin to grasp a
certain
pattern.
Kenya and Uganda, led by strong-willed, rather despotic men at
independence,
have changed leaders in an atmosphere of the loudest political
reverberations. Uganda had the most radical transformation, featuring Milton
Obote, Idi Amin and – after enduring a few other lackluster leaders -
ending up with what some people call an Amin-like ruler, Yoweri Museveni,
who may or may not have mellowed.
Emmerson Mnangagwa, in charge of
the elections for Zanu PF, must know of
Kaunda’s plunge to the status of a
former president. He was once a member of
UNIP, before joining the
liberation struggle in Zimbabwe. Although UNIP was
not ideologically
socialist and did not receive, as Zanu and Zapu did,
spiritual or material
aid from the Soviet Union or China, it was obsessed
with the one-party
system of government.
Similarly, Kamuzu was contemptuous of socialism and
was openly capitalist in
ideological outlook. But he too was obsessed with
the one-party system,
using brutal force to suppress the opposition, using
his notorious Young
Pioneers as Mugabe used the Green Bombers to instill
fear in the hearts of
the opposition.
If Mugabe is handed another
term – under any circumstances whatsoever – this
will be a disaster for
Zimbabwe, politically and economically. For a start,
the man will want to
show everybody who thought he was politically dead and
buried that he is
still alive and kicking and he will kick them in the
teeth.
We can
also be sure that there will be no halt in the economic descent to
the
poorhouse. The present crisis, which looks as if it will end with
Zimbabwe
being one of the few countries with a billion dollar bank note, has
not been
supervised by the RBZ governor Gideon Gono alone. He has been
actively aided
and abetted by Mugabe himself, who has a Master’s in
Economics but cut his
economic teeth running a liberation movement in the
jungles of Mozambique,
hardly familiar to people who have read Adam Smith.
A scenario that may
be too ghastly for most Zimbabweans to contemplate is
the complete failure
of Sadc to appreciate what a potentially explosive
situation is developing
in Zimbabwe. Since 2000, when Zimbabweans realized
they had the political
clout to remove Zanu PF from power – as the people of
Malawi and Zambia
removed the founding parties in their countries – they
have somehow believed
in the power of the ballot to achieve their objective.
If Sadc
effectively pronounces that they have all along been wrong to
believe this,
then it must be prepared to reap the whirlwind of its
adulation of
Mugabe.
Dispatch, SA
2008/05/05
SOUTH
Africa will send a team to Zimbabwe to investigate
claims of violence,
African religious leaders were told by President Thabo
Mbeki on
Friday.
“He assured us that he would do
everything to ensure that
the runoff election happens in an atmosphere of
peace,” the All Africa
Conference of Churches’ president, the Reverend
Nyansako-ni-Nku, said after
four hours of talks with Mbeki at the
Presidential Guesthouse in Pretoria.
“In order to
achieve that, the president said that right
away they will dispatch a team
to check every allegation of violence,” he
said.
It
was during their talks that the Zimbabwe Electoral
Commission announced that
MDC leader Morgan Tsvangirai had won 47.9% of the
vote – more than President
Robert Mugabe, but not enough to avoid a runoff
election.
The inter-religious group, consisting of
church leaders
from several African countries, said Mbeki was “adamant” that
everything
would be done to ensure a peaceful second round of voting, which
included
the deployment of a South African team to
Zimbabwe.
“A team will leave for Zimbabwe to engage
stakeholders, to
make them realise that the peace and progress of Zimbabwe
are at stake, and
to make sure everything possible is done to make sure the
violence is under
control,” Nyansako-ni-Nku said.
The leaders were confident that Mbeki’s continued
engagement with Zimbabwe
would bear results, he said. “If we do not have
confidence in his leadership
we would not have come here in the first
place,” he added. —
Sapa
Politicsweb, SA
05 May 2008
Do
we really know why our president supports the old tyrant next
door…
Over the past eight years President Thabo Mbeki has endorsed
Zanu-PF's
victories in a string of stolen elections, opposed the imposition
of any
sanctions on the regime in Zimbabwe, acted to shore up Robert
Mugabe's
support within SADC, and successfully diverted international
outrage into
various meandering and ultimately futile diplomatic
initiatives. The only
surprise about his obdurate refusal to do or say
anything constructive about
the latest crisis is - as Tony Leon noted in
Business Day recently - that
"we are at all surprised."
Still, the
extremes to which Mbeki has, apparently, been willing to go in
support of
Mugabe still has a residual capacity to shock. On Friday the Mail
&
Guardian confirmed that Mbeki had both known about and condoned the
transhipment across South African territory of the Chinese weapons, intended
for the Zimbabwean military, aboard the An Yue Jiang. Indeed, the newspaper
reported that according to its sources Mbeki had given a "direct order" to
the ministry of defence and national conventional arms control committee
that the weapons be waved through.
This revelation seems to
contradict Mbeki's statement to journalists in New
York on April 16 that
"those weapons would have had nothing to do with South
Africa. I really
don't know what Zimbabwe imports from China or what China
imports from
Zimbabwe." The fact that cabinet clearly knew about the arms
from early on
also casts doubt on Aziz Pahad's denial of any knowledge of
the shipment.
The deputy minister of foreign affairs told journalists on
April 17 "We are
not able to determine as Foreign Affairs what are the goods
that are going
from one country to another. We are not aware of any nature
of the
consignment because we don't have the capacity to go and check on any
consignments on any ship coming into South Africa."
Over the past
month numerous formerly supportive politicians, commentators,
and diplomats
have pealed away from Mbeki on the Zimbabwe issue. Indeed,
according to the
Mail & Guardian, his insistence on letting the weapons
through has
alienated some of his closest allies in government. "Everyone is
asking what
has happened to him" it quotes one person as saying. "It is very
hard to
explain."
If there is now a consensus that Mbeki supports Mugabe - and
has done since
2000 - there is a lot less certainty about why this is the
case. The
destruction of the Zimbabwean polity and economy was never in
South Africa's
national interest. It has done no good for Mbeki's
international reputation.
And it wasn't obviously in his political
self-interest either - it was one
of the contributing factors to his
downfall at Polokwane. Between 2000 and
2003 Mbeki argued that effecting a
final solution to the "legacy of
colonialism" was the overriding priority in
Zimbabwe. But the great majority
of white farmers were forced off their land
years ago - and so that
consideration can hardly still apply.
Mark
Gevisser, has ascribed Mbeki's approach towards Mugabe to a combination
of
"filial obligation", "diplomatic strategy", stubbornness, and a belief
that
Zanu-PF would never concede power anyway. Professor Stephen Chan makes
similar claims. He has argued there are five reasons for Mbeki's
"extraordinary patience" towards Mugabe: 1.) Mbeki knows that Mugabe is
backed up by "his hardline generals" - people who will not just disappear at
his say so; 2.) He does not see Tsvangirai as a "viable alternative
president". 3.) Mbeki and Mugabe "simply get on intellectually" 4.) Mugabe
holds Mbeki in "thrall" as the "grand old man of liberation"; 5.) Mbeki "has
blind spots" and is stubborn.
When one measures these putative
reasons against the thing they have to
explain these explanations cannot but
come across as faintly inadequate.
Like darts thrown against an elephant
they can't but hit the target - but
they fail to penetrate very deeply. What
man would stand back and allow the
utter immiseration of a country just
because he views its despotic leader as
a kind of dad? Or, because he
regards the head of the main opposition party
as beneath him
intellectually?
A more substantive explanation has recently been provided
by two observers
on opposite sides of the ideological spectrum. In an essay
on the Zimbabwe
crisis in the latest edition of the London Review of Books
R.W. Johnson
argues that "Mbeki's fundamental position was that, as a fellow
national
liberation movement (NLM), Mugabe's ruling Zanu-PF had to be
maintained in
power at all costs." This is a view shared by the SACP's
Jeremy Cronin. In a
speech last week he said he personally believed "that
what informs much of
President Mbeki's Zimbabwean strategy is the belief
that national liberation
movements in our region should close ranks. This is
informed by a conviction
that the crisis in Zimbabwe is being used as an
entry point by imperialist
powers to reassert hegemony over a former colony
and eventually over our
whole region."
Still, one wonders whether
this explanation can bear the entire weight of
that which it seeks to
explain. The bulk of the ANC leadership - including
Jacob Zuma and Kgalema
Motlanthe - once went along with this line of
thinking. But it seems that
they have now realised that at some point it
becomes barbarous to persist
with this course of action.
Once it became clear that the presidential
and parliamentary polls had been
lost to Zanu-PF, Mbeki had a great deal to
gain from ensuring Mugabe's
peaceful exit from power. His decision to back
Mugabe from 2000 onwards had
had disastrous consequences for the region this
provided him with an out.
His spin doctors were already spreading the
message that "quiet diplomacy"
was on the verge of vindication. But he
humiliated them and himself by
standing by Mugabe after the old tyrant
decided to stay on. His stance has
left him isolated both at home and
abroad. The only obvious beneficiary has
been ANC President Jacob Zuma, who
has been made to look positively
statesmanlike by comparison.
There
are other curiousities about Mbeki's relationship with Mugabe. The
cover of
a recent issue of the British magazine Private Eye has a picture of
Robert
Mugabe and Mbeki under the heading "Zimbabwe crisis talks". Mugabe
says to
Mbeki "I'll resign if I can keep my job." To which a smiling Mbeki
replies,
"Anything you say boss." Gevisser observed in his article that on
Mbeki's
recent visit to Harare, "Fondly clasping Mugabe's hand, he averred
that
there was ‘no crisis' in Zimbabwe. The smirk on the father's face left
no
doubt about where the power in this relationship lay." In a column a
couple
of weeks ago Justice Malala derisively described Mbeki as Mugabe's
"foreign
minister." All three comments point at the same thing: despite his
obvious
vulnerability it is Mugabe who holds the whip hand in their
relationship. If
one did not know otherwise one would almost think - as
Malala's ‘foreign
minister' jibe suggests - that it is Mugabe, not the South
African taxpayer,
who pays Mbeki's salary at the end of every month.
So, the honest answer
then to the question of why Mbeki has backed Mugabe is
that I just don't
know. I get the sense that there is something else - some
strange and secret
bond - that binds Mbeki and Mugabe together. I would
almost class this thing
as a "known unknown." It is there and if we only
knew what it was a lot
which currently appears inexplicable would suddenly
make a lot of sense.
VOA
By Peter Clottey
Washington, D.C.
05 May
2008
Zimbabwe’s main opposition Movement For Democratic Change
(MDC) says it is
considering all options before deciding what to do about
the Zimbabwe
Electoral Commission’s (ZEC), announcement that there will be a
presidential
election run-off. The MDC says the announcement is a day light
robbery
calculated to perpetuate the 28-year rule of President Robert
Mugabe. But
partisans of the ruling ZANU-PF party dismissed the opposition
claims that
it won the presidential vote with over 50 percent, saying
ZANU-PF is
preparing to win the run-off election.
Official results of
the March 29 presidential vote showed main opposition
leader Morgan
Tsvangirai won with over 47.9 percent, beating incumbent
President Mugabe to
second position with 43.2 percent. Simba Makoni who was
the only independent
presidential candidate trails the two with 8.9 percent.
Nelson Chamisa is
the spokesman for Zimbabwe’s main opposition MDC. From the
capital, Harare
he tells reporter Peter Clottey that the opposition is
considering its next
line of action.
“The MDC is a people-based party and is a mass-based
organization. And it is
exactly consistent and in line with that tradition
that we had a meeting
this weekend at the party’s headquarters in Harare and
deliberated on a
number of issues. Among them was the issue of the election
results, which we
in our view consider to be waylaying of the people’s will
by the Zimbabwe
Electoral Commission because they arrogantly and
unilaterally proceeded to
announce the outcome without verification, which
is a cooked and a concocted
result, and we rejected that result,” Chamisa
noted.
He described as bogus and unfortunate the presidential election
results
released by the electoral commission.
“Apart from rejecting
the results, we are calling for the verification of
the actual results so
that we will come up with the proper results. Before
we talk about a
run-off, we need to exhaust all the other build up processes
verification
also consistent with the SADC (Southern African Development
Community)
resolutions that had a summit in Mulungushi with Article Number
14, which
said all parties should be able to verify the results,” he said.
Chamisa
said the MDC will register its protest about the election results
with some
regional leaders and organizations.
“In fact we have always emphasized
that going to court is as good as going
to Mugabe’s bedroom and expect to
get justice. That will not happen. We are
simply going to raise this matter
with SADC region because they are the
ones, who made the resolution, and
they are the ones who are the guarantors
and our insurance in terms of
whatever misdemeanor or misdeeds that might be
done by any other party,
ZANU-PF included, Zimbabwe Electoral Commission
included. So, that is our
appeal, but that does not mean that we are also
going to just wait there. We
want to be convinced by ZEC that indeed there
is a run-off and the run-off
is necessary. Once we are convinced, we are
ready anytime, any minute to
defeat Mugabe once more,” Chamisa pointed out.
He described as
preposterous accusation by the ruling ZANU-PF party that
some officials of
the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission rigged the vote for the
opposition.
“They (ZANU-PF) would want to justify why they lost so
much. This election
was a ZANU-PF government-run election, not an MDC
government-run election.
And it is for that reason that we see no reason why
they should be crying
about the election. In fact this is the first time
where we having a
government or a regime accusing itself of rigging, and
this is totally
unacceptable,” he said.
Independent, UK
Leading article:
Monday, 5 May 2008
The declaration of the presidential
election result in Zimbabwe, when it
finally came last Friday, was rather
eclipsed by the cascade of Labour local
election defeats here in Britain.
And the opposition Movement for Democratic
Change is quite right to ask how
far the belated result corresponds to the
actual vote. Party officials were
convinced at the end of voting, more than
five weeks ago, that their leader,
Morgan Tsvangirai, had won the more than
50 per cent required to avoid a
run-off. The declared result, following
resort to the courts, international
pressure and a recount, is that he won
just short of 48 per cent, against
Robert Mugabe's 43 per cent.
But these figures present the MDC with a
conundrum. If they reject them out
of hand as a travesty – as they must be
inclined to do – and decide to
boycott a run-off, they leave the field clear
for Mr Mugabe to cruise into a
new term as president. If, as has been
mooted, they field a lesser
candidate, the result will be the same. The
party will betray all the hopes
of those who had the courage to vote for Mr
Tsvangirai on 29 March.
Yet if the MDC swallows its pride and agrees to
contest the run-off, it will
lend legitimacy to a process that is, at very
least, deeply compromised. Not
only this, but it risks consenting to an
election which it cannot win. The
beatings of opposition activists and the
vandalism against MDC offices that
have been reported since the election
show that Mr Mugabe and his Zanu-PF
party will stop at nothing to ensure
their victory.
The MDC met yesterday, but failed to reach any decision
about contesting a
run-off. The party's procrastination is understandable:
it is damned if it
refuses to take part, and damned – in a different way –
if it does. That Mr
Tsvangirai is no longer persisting in his blanket
rejection of a run-off,
however, may be a sign that he is coming around to
the idea of
participating.
This is the outcome we would favour. The
court-ordered recounts were not the
whitewash for Mr Mugabe that they might
have been. If, as it appears, the
presidency will now be decided by a second
round, Mr Tsvangirai should take
the risk, but not without a guarantee that
there will be international
supervision. The MDC should insist that all
those with an interest in
Zimbabwe's future – which includes its neighbours,
the African Union and the
Commonwealth – should join forces to ensure that
the run-off is as free and
fair as possible. An election worth the name has
to be an election where the
Opposition has a chance.
Politicsweb, SA
Sandra
Botha MP
05 May 2008
Statement issued by the Democratic Alliance
May 4 2008.
South African government's inaction over Zimbabwe crisis
- DA calls for
parliamentary debate
When Parliament re-convenes on
Tuesday 6th May 2008, I intend to move a
motion calling for a debate on the
post-election crisis in Zimbabwe, and
more specifically, probing President
Mbeki and the South African
government's distinct lack of action on the
matter.
On the 25th April 2008, during a deputation to the Ministry of
Foreign
Affairs in Pretoria, I presented a representative of Minister
Nkosazana
Dlamini-Zuma with a letter detailing a series of Democratic
Alliance (DA)
proposals to help bring about an end the post-election
violence and
political stalemate in Zimbabwe.
In the document, we
proposed that the South African government give
Zimbabwe's ZANU-PF
government a fixed period to comply with the following
demands:
•1.) That the presidential election results be
immediately released;
•2.) That state-sponsored or -supported
political violence come to an
immediate end;
•3.) That the
government accept the deployment of a joint AU-UN mission
to monitor the
situation in Zimbabwe, and prevent the recurrence of violence
there;
•4.) That, if all parties accept the released results, and
the
opposition MDC candidate is declared the victor in the presidential
election, this result be fully accepted and complied with.
•5.)
That, if it became necessary to contest a run-off election, and
this were
accepted by all parties, such a run-off proceed without further
unnecessary
delay;
•6.) That a run-off election be monitored by officials and
observers
from SADC, the African Union, and the United
Nations;
•7.) And lastly, that local, regional, and international
media be
allowed to operate in Zimbabwe throughout this period, free from
any form of
harassment or intimidation.
If the Zimbabwean government
failed to meet these demands, we proposed that
South Africa pursue more
stringent measures - such as imposing targeted
travel and financial
sanctions on ZANU-PF's ruling elite, calling for an
international arms
embago on the country, and condemning publicly both
President Mugabe and his
government for their refusal to adhere to the
mandate of the Zimbabwean
people.
Yet despite having received these proposals, and regardless of
the
overwhelming number of continued calls from regional and international
bodies and political leaders for South Africa to take a principled and
decisive stance on this urgent matter, our government - following the
example of President Mbeki's unrelenting denialism - has yet to respond to
the crisis in any significant way.
To add insult to injury, we now
know from reports in the media that
President Mbeki not only endorsed the
effort by Robert Mugabe's ZANU-PF to
procure a massive cache of arms and
ammunition from China, but that Mbeki
instructed the Ministry of Defence and
the National Conventional Arms
Control Committee (NCACC) to allow the arms
transfer to continue unhindered
if the Chinese ship containing these weapons
were to dock at Durban Harbour.
This move - a morally bankrupt one, which
would have further contributed to
the violent suppression of the Zimbabwean
people by the military and the
police there - is further evidence that
President Mbeki can no longer be
considered a credible mediator in the
Zimbabwe crisis. The President's
actions also highlight the need for the
executive to be brought to account
for its actions in Parliament.
The
South African president's mooted move, therefore, to send a team of
observers to Zimbabwe to verify MDC claims that Robert Mugabe's ZANU-PF is
waging a violent campaign against opposition supporters, could not possibly
be considered a credible or reliable one. Rather - as the DA has proposed in
its recommendations to the Foreign Affairs Minister - a team of observers
under the auspices of the African Union, the United Nations, or both, should
be deployed to Zimbabwe immediately to monitor the situation
there.
Statement issued by Sandra Botha MP, DA parliamentary leader, May
4 2008