zimfinalpush
Zimfinalpush">@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Custom Search
 | |||
|
Snap Shots
Powered byIP2Location.com
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
3rd FACE OF "ZIMFINALPUSH" 30th May, 2007
THE REAL FIGHTER DEAD OR ALIVE WAS USED AND BETRAYED!
THE ONLY WAY FORWARD IS A "TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION!"
MBEKI'S PRESIDENCY BAFFLES THE WORLD!
"is there any-one who understands the man?'
THE MDC PRESIDENT WITH THE LATE NATIONAL CHAIRMAN MATONGO!
"Heroes lie in our hearts! Musacheme vaTsvangirai! Mwari akunyaradzei!"
"HEROES DON'T NECESSARILY LIE AT HEROES' ACRE........
..........THEY LIE IN OUR HEARTS! HAMBA KHAHLE CDE MATONGO!"
THE LATE MATONGO AND V P THOKOZANI KHUPE!
The New Zimbabwe has lost a dedicated cadre!
"THE REV NDABANINGI SITHOLE: THE UNSUNG HERO!"
For Serialization of book refer: www.finalpushzim.blogspot.com
Yahoo! Answers - Got a question? Someone out there knows the answer. Try it now.
"THE ZIMBABWE I DON'T WANT!" DANIEL MOLOKELA!
The Zimbabwe
By Daniel Fortune Molokele
Last updated: 05/29/2007 12:50:09
I HAD an unplanned visit to Zimmbabwe recently.
I was forced by circumstances to go to Harare and sort out some problematic issues pertaining to my legal status in South Africa
In the end, I had to apply for a new visitors' visa altogether, and the rather lengthy process ended up lasting up to fifteen days.
The circumstances in which I had to leaveZimbabwe
The circumstances in which I had to leave
Ever since I left Zimbabwe for South Africa
It was the first time that I had an opportunity to really return to Zimbabwe and have a better feel of what it is now like not to be part of the ever growing Diaspora community. But after having spent fourteen consecutive nights inHarare
It was the first time that I had an opportunity to really return to Zimbabwe and have a better feel of what it is now like not to be part of the ever growing Diaspora community. But after having spent fourteen consecutive nights in
What I saw is definitely not the Zimbabwe Zimbabwe
To say that the country has gone to the dogs is most certainly a huge understatement. Someone actually suggested to me the other day that it is actually more appropriate to say that the country has now gone to the zhing-zhongs, reference to the growing Chinese community seelling cheap wares all aroundHarare
Zimbabwe
This is a country that shuns excellence, and embraces any form of underachievement. This is one country where mediocrity is celebrated day in and day out.
To say that the country has gone to the dogs is most certainly a huge understatement. Someone actually suggested to me the other day that it is actually more appropriate to say that the country has now gone to the zhing-zhongs, reference to the growing Chinese community seelling cheap wares all around
This is a country that shuns excellence, and embraces any form of underachievement. This is one country where mediocrity is celebrated day in and day out.
I was so disgusted to see ZTV, the only national television channel in the entire country, give at least five minutes of prime time television news to one Joseph Chinotimba. The man was supposedly speaking on behalf of all the Zimbabwean workers in his capacity as the Vice President of the so-called Zimbabwe Federation of Trade Unions. Yet it is common cause that the legitimate representative body for all the remaining few workers in the country is the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions.
It was so sad to note that while the news bulletin afforded Chinoz, as he is called here, ample time to waffle about Workers' Day celebrations, the ZCTU was not given even a second to air their own planned programme for the same day. Under normal circumstances, Chinoz should not be even allowed near the television cameras at all. He is a glorified former municipal security officer whose only claim to fame is that he led some of those violent farm invasions a few years ago, the same farm invasions that have brought untold hunger and food shortages to many workers and their families inZimbabwe
I also had an opportunity to spend an afternoon at theUniversity of Zimbabwe
In particular, the once proud and revolutionary students' union building is now no more. Not to mention the symbolic October 4 bar! The students' union no longer has an administrative building it can call its own any more. The truth is that without a strong culture of student activism, the UZ is now just a glorified high school. They might just as well introduce a prefectorial system to officially represent the broader students' body interest. How have the mighty fallen!
Yet the saddest thing about it all is that no-one in the high offices seems to take care of the rapid decline of standards in most of the country's public systems. The national leadership seems to be so engrossed in the desperate struggle for political survival; so much that they are now more than prepared to sacrifice the greater national interest on the alter of political self-aggrandizement. In the meantime, the nation continues to suffer rapid degradation and stagnation.
I also had an opportunity to visit the Westgate Shopping Mall on a Saturday. What I saw there really broke my heart. The place that used to be a thriving social hive now lies forlorn and deserted. The shops are still there but the customers are no more. Many have left the country. While those who remain simply cannot afford to pay for most of the things that are on offer.
It was so sad to note that while the news bulletin afforded Chinoz, as he is called here, ample time to waffle about Workers' Day celebrations, the ZCTU was not given even a second to air their own planned programme for the same day. Under normal circumstances, Chinoz should not be even allowed near the television cameras at all. He is a glorified former municipal security officer whose only claim to fame is that he led some of those violent farm invasions a few years ago, the same farm invasions that have brought untold hunger and food shortages to many workers and their families in
I also had an opportunity to spend an afternoon at the
In particular, the once proud and revolutionary students' union building is now no more. Not to mention the symbolic October 4 bar! The students' union no longer has an administrative building it can call its own any more. The truth is that without a strong culture of student activism, the UZ is now just a glorified high school. They might just as well introduce a prefectorial system to officially represent the broader students' body interest. How have the mighty fallen!
Yet the saddest thing about it all is that no-one in the high offices seems to take care of the rapid decline of standards in most of the country's public systems. The national leadership seems to be so engrossed in the desperate struggle for political survival; so much that they are now more than prepared to sacrifice the greater national interest on the alter of political self-aggrandizement. In the meantime, the nation continues to suffer rapid degradation and stagnation.
I also had an opportunity to visit the Westgate Shopping Mall on a Saturday. What I saw there really broke my heart. The place that used to be a thriving social hive now lies forlorn and deserted. The shops are still there but the customers are no more. Many have left the country. While those who remain simply cannot afford to pay for most of the things that are on offer.
Most restaurants were empty; the movie houses were also virtually empty. In fact the busiest shop was TM supermarket. Otherwise the rest of the mall was deserted. I really felt sad! This is so especially if I compare with what I always witness when I visit any mall here in South Africa
As for the topical issues in the political discourse of the country, things have become even more depressing. One cannot help develop the feeling that there is a now lot of political sterility and stagnation in the country. The politics of personalities and survival has become the order of the day. It is so hard to be both a visionary and a politician inZimbabwe
As for the topical issues in the political discourse of the country, things have become even more depressing. One cannot help develop the feeling that there is a now lot of political sterility and stagnation in the country. The politics of personalities and survival has become the order of the day. It is so hard to be both a visionary and a politician in
It was so nauseating to see him continue to convince himself that he is still a relevant asset to our country. I still don't understand why he cannot see that he has long gone past by his sell-by date. What is even more depressing is that while Tony Blair and George Bush are preparing to leave public office, the man is preparing to launch another presidential election campaign!
Admittedly, there are still some genuine leaders from various facets of the pro-democracy movement that is still burning the flames of the struggle at home.
Admittedly, there are still some genuine leaders from various facets of the pro-democracy movement that is still burning the flames of the struggle at home.
There are a lot of brave men and women that are still facing the brunt of the dictatorship at the political battlefront. Some have been brutalised, detained or even murdered in the name of the struggle for a new Zimbabwe
But one thing I felt as I walked on the UZ campus grounds and also the other day when I was outside the national Parliament building, is that somehow, Zimbabweans now living in the Diaspora have a greater responsibility to the country than ever before. The truth is that the country now needs you, more than ever before.
Wherever you are, please do not give up on the dream for a better and newZimbabwe Zimbabwe
Do not keep quiet anymore. Let your silence come to an end now. Join the growing movement fighting in various ways to keepZimbabwe Zimbabwe under Mugabe is definitely not the Zimbabwe Zimbabwe
But one thing I felt as I walked on the UZ campus grounds and also the other day when I was outside the national Parliament building, is that somehow, Zimbabweans now living in the Diaspora have a greater responsibility to the country than ever before. The truth is that the country now needs you, more than ever before.
Wherever you are, please do not give up on the dream for a better and new
Do not keep quiet anymore. Let your silence come to an end now. Join the growing movement fighting in various ways to keep
Daniel Molokele is a Zimbabwean Human Rights Lawyer who is based in Johannesburg
JOIN THE DEBATE ON THIS ARTICLE ON THE NEWZIMBABWE.COM FORUMS
JOIN THE DEBATE ON THIS ARTICLE ON THE NEWZIMBABWE.COM FORUMS
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
"TO QUIT OR NOT TO QUIT??????" BY MUTUMWA MAWERE!
LINK!
IF THE Labour Party was an African party and Tony Blair was its leader, would the party's interests, and indeed, national interest have overridden the leader's personal interest to remain in power?
The succession debate is not unique to Africa but what makes Africa unique is that personal interests of incumbents appear to be more important that even national interests. This is not restricted to the Heads of States but even to functionaries like Reserve Bank Governor Gideon Gono in the case of Zimbabwe.
Last Thursday, it was reported in that Gono was under pressure to quit against a background of an acknowledgement that Project Sunrise has left most of Zimbabwe in darkness and condemned the country to unprecedented inflation.
Notwithstanding the fact that the wheels are off in Zimbabwe, Gono hit is reported to have hit out at his critics in parliament and the ruling Zanu PF party.
At the centre of the apparent dispute between Gono and the Portfolio Committee on Budget and Finance chaired by Guruve North MP, David Butau, appears to be the management of the national foreign currency resources by one man and the opaque quasi-fiscal activities of the RBZ. This is not the first time Gono has been criticised for monopolising the management of the national loot.
Zanu PF at its national conference held in December 2006 passed a similar resolution to no effect.
It is now clear that President Mugabe will not exit as anticipated by his critics. The position taken by President Mugabe is not unusual and, in fact, he has many friends including the outgoing President of the World Bank, Paul Wolfowitz, whose initial reaction to the scandal that has rocked the World Bank was to say that he will not quit only to then succumb to sustained pressure from within and outside the institution.
Even when there is overwhelming evidence that the continued stay in office of a leader is not in the best interests of the institution they serve there appears to be a universal attitude of leaders to continue to cling to power at all costs.
To the extent that the behaviour is not unique to Africa, it is important that we interrogate the issue of leadership response to internal and external shocks and crises so that citizens can find better ways of convincing stubborn leaders to vacate office to allow the mission of their institutions or nations to be advanced.
Any observer who watched how the Labour Party and presumably Gordon Brown outmanoeuvred Tony Blair would agree that there are important lessons to be learnt on how an institution can democratically remove obsolete and irrelevant leaders.
Even in the Wolfowitz case it was clear from the beginning that his days were numbered but what was instructive is how the Staff Association of the World Bank and other external stakeholders as well as the media worked constructively to remove him. At the end, he conceded on Thursday last week the same day that Gono vowed that he will not quit by saying that he was resigning in the "best interests" of the bank, thus ending a protracted controversy over a generous pay and promotions package for his girlfriend, Shaha Riza.
My focus is not to dwell on the Wolfowitz case but to demonstrate how it is possible to make the necessary leadership changes in the face of recalcitrant leaders who become married for life to the offices they hold. Mr. Wolfowitz said something profound in his resignation statement. It read as follows: "I have concluded that it is in the best interests of those whom this institution serves for that mission to be carried forward under new leadership."
Why is it not conceivable that persons like President Mugabe and Gono will not see it in themselves to allow the destiny of Zimbabwe to continue to be written by other leaders when there is evidence that the patient i.e. Zimbabwe remains brain dead in the intensive care unit? Some may argue rightly or wrongly that it would not be in the national interest for a President to throw the towel in the face of problems instead of solving the problems in as much as President Wolfowitz, Blair and even the late Nyerere could have advanced the same self serving argument.
Some have said that "attitude determines altitude" and Zimbabwe's possibilities can be as elastic as Zimbabweans are realistic enough to appreciate what works and what does not work. In the case of the RBZ, it does not take any genius to understand that any economy that is as micro-managed by a single unaccountable individual is doomed to fail. What is scarier are the justifications advanced to rationalise the destructive policies and actions. Having read what Gono had said to Zimbabwe's elected representatives; I thought it was important to revisit Gono's statements to highlight the dangers inherent in the continuation of the current economic strategy if it exists at all.
This is what Gono is reported to have said: "They say the governor is big-headed, he has got ambition. Some hide behind the camouflage of the legislature and bring out their spears so that the governor can be moved. Not before my term is finished!"
"We offer no apologies for interfering in all spheres of the economy. We offer no apology for doing the unorthodox. Those who wrote economic textbooks never experienced Zimbabwe's land reform."
"I hardly have a good sleep at night. I sleep facing the stars…why should we be importing food when the RBZ has printed trillions and trillions? We are being told that we cannot produce because we are susceptible to drought.
"It is therefore, illogical and misguided for some sections of society to recommend to government the formation of foreign exchange allocation committees thinking that this would in itself solve the prevailing foreign currency shortages."
If it is common cause that the Gono medicine is not helping the patient, why would he want to remain in office giving the same dosage to a dying patient? If the Parliament of Zimbabwe is an address through which citizens express their views about the state of the nation, why would Gono adopt the attitude that the Parliament of Zimbabwe does not have a right to know about the allocation of the resources of the nation? Who should have oversight on the operations of the government? Is the budget still the vehicle for allocating resources in Zimbabwe?
Why would Gono have the courage of not offering an explanation for doing what he terms as the unorthodox?
Is it Gono's position that because of the land reform program, democracy should be suspended?
Gono's argument seems to suggest that institutions that should ordinarily inform any democratic society should be suspended in Zimbabwe. If this is accepted, then does a Zimbabwe that is implementing land reform really need a transparent and honest government?
The RBZ is an organ of the state of Zimbabwe and, therefore, it is unprecedented for a Governor to publicly ridicule the Parliament when he is not the Head of State. Even the Head of State would not dare make such statements to a Parliament if the doctrine of the separation of powers is applicable and operational.
Any reasonable Governor should ordinarily have no problems with the recommendation of the portfolio committee for the government to put in place institutional arrangements that would allow a multi-stakeholder framework to be responsible for allocating national resources. Why would Gono be afraid of a foreign exchange allocation committee? Does he have anything to hide? Could it be that one of the unorthodox measures being implemented by the RBZ is corruption?
The probability exists that in an environment where there is no transparency; corruption becomes the order of the day and the perpetrators benefit by pointing the fingers to other people like NMB officials when in truth and fact the worst transgressions may be the order of the day at the RBZ. Is it not possible that the citadel of corruption may now be the RBZ?
We have seen the drama associated with the so-called NMB's second forex scandal. Could it be the case that the NMB officials were fully aware of the modus operandi in Zimbabwe i.e. the unorthodox where anything goes and with this in mind they proceeded to construct their own external bridge by remitting funds in the same manner that officials of the RBZ may be doing for personal gain?
It is evident that the attitude of President Mugabe to textbook economics is no different from Gono or the other way round. If theoretical economics is no longer relevant in Zimbabwe, then surely trained economists have reason to worry. If the attitude is as expressed by Gono then surely the 2008 elections would be nothing but a sham.
Why would President Mugabe bother to get the mandate of the people when his Governor has the courage to tell the representatives of the same people to take a walk? This begs the question of whether a Zimbabwe that is implementing land reform and is under sanctions still needs a democratic dispensation.
It is clear from Gono that if he were the President of Zimbabwe, it would be in the national interest to suspend democracy.
Mutumwa Mawere's weekly column appears on New Zimbabwe.com every Monday. You can contact him at: mmawere@ahccouncil.com
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
UPDATE ONE:WE HAVE A SERIOUS PROBLEM BEFORE US!
(PHOTO: THE SENIOR PRESIDENTIAL ADVISOR, The REV M S HOVE (HOLDING SAUCER) WITH THE C.E.O. OF THE S.A.B.C., CDE DALI MPOFU!)
Ladies and Gentlemen, Comrade and Friends we have a serious problem before us!
We are expecting hundreds of thousands, if not millions of refugees from our Northern neighbour, Zimbabwe.
The problems there are of our own making because we misled the world that their Elections from the year 2000 to date are free and fair, when we knew very, very well that they are not.
We further misled the world that that was some dialogue going on between and among the various Political Players in that troubled country when in reality there was none at all!
Now we have publicly announced to our own peoples (the South Africans), to "brace themselves" for "an influx" of refugees from there but we have not made any arrangements for them.
THAT IS WHERE WE NEED SERIOUS ATTENTION!
We need to set up shelters whether they be tents or whatever may shelter them from this freezing weather. May Churches and other Groups and Organizations eg The Red Cross please get into a Mode of Operation to assist.
We will need to get some form of Employment for the majority of these brothers and sisters of ours!
We, obviouly need doctors, teachers, nurses, accountants, etc. These we have been "absorbing" for the past seven or more years.
Our concern is about those that do not have specific qualifications.
If we do not attend to these, we will run into serious problems!
We do not need to remind ourselves about crime, prostitution and other related vices!
We therefore call upon all patriots to liaise with The Reverend Mufaro Stig Hove to attend to this urgent, grave crisis of refugees from Zimbabwe!
May we also take this opportunity to inform you all THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING GOING ON ABOUT ANY DIALOGUE!
WHOEVER SAID THERE WAS ANY PROGRESS WAS MISLEADING YOU ALL!
THE ZIMBABWEAN PEOPLE MUST JUST WAKE UP AND DEVISE WAYS AND MEANS OF LIBERATING THEMSELVES!
################################################################
FROM: The Rev Mufaro Stig Hove (SENIOR ADVISOR TO THE STATE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA!)
mufarostig@yahoo.co.uk Cell: 0791463039 RSA.
Monday, May 21, 2007
MBEKI AND THE "THIRD TERM" ISSUE!
Thabo Mbeki and the 'third term' issue
Sharing power without giving up control?
James Myburgh
21 May 2007
After the first rumours began circulating in mid-2003 that a constitutional amendment might be on the cards to allow Thabo Mbeki to serve a third term as South African president, Nelson Mandela made very clear that he would be completely opposed to such a move. Subsequently Mbeki has, on at least four occasions, said that he would indeed step down as South African president in 2009. However, it is generally assumed, both by his allies and his enemies, that he will stand again for a third term as ANC president in December this year.
Were it not for the Zuma rebellion, and the slipping of Mbeki's grip over the organisation, the succession would probably have been managed in the following way: Mbeki would have been re-elected ANC president at the movement's national conference in December this year by acclamation. The conference would also have elected the other five senior officials and the sixty ordinary members of the national executive committee (NEC).
The NEC, guided by the top party leadership, would then have chosen the ANC's presidential candidate for the 2009 national elections. It would have had two options here. The one would be to choose someone to succeed Mbeki. The other would have been to have the South African constitution changed to give Mbeki a third term in office. The latter would not be much more difficult to push through than the former, procedurally if not politically speaking. In terms of the ANC constitution the party's parliamentary caucus, which has well over two-thirds of the seats in the national assembly, has no choice but to implement the instructions of the NEC. In an article in January 2006 the UCT academic Anthony Butler observed, in a general context:
The most notable feature of campaigns to change the constitution to permit a third term is that the president himself invariably insists that an additional term in office is the last thing on his mind. Usually the case for a third term is said to hinge on a number of 'special' factors, which allegedly oblige party grandees to force a tired and reluctant leader of the nation to defer his long-anticipated retirement and - for the sake of his people - take up the weary burden of office once again.
Formidable pressures build on a president to submit to such demands. Firstly, once out of power he has to fear the enduring enmity of those he, or his creatures, have treated roughly in the past. Secondly, most presidents "have been forced by the demands of their office to act in some ways illegally, and fear persecution or prosecution by their successors." Thirdly, "Hangers-on, loyalists, and recipients of presidential largesse fear for their future and will do anything to keep 'their man' in office."
This latter consideration is a particularly pressing one for the beneficiaries of Mbeki's patronage, many of whom owe their high positions to their weakness rather than their strength. Robert Schrire noted in 1998 that "political loyalty" was the most "important factor in determining recruitment to the Mbeki team" - something which required "personalities and intellects who constitute no threat to the leader personally."
In such circumstances Mbeki's previous assurances not to allow a constitutional amendment to give him a further term in office may have counted for very little. Yet there were other reasons why many have distrusted Mbeki's motives on this matter.
One of these was that Mbeki's actions seemed to speak louder than his words. Unlike Mandela, who went to great lengths to ensure a smooth transition to a capable successor, Mbeki has done nothing of the sort. (And he has already been in power, if not in office, for over ten years.) As Butler noted concern about his intentions began, ironically enough, with his "endorsement of the rise of Jacob Zuma. So inconceivable was a Zuma presidency in 1999 that his elevation to deputy president engendered speculation that Mbeki was contemplating a third term."
Another was that individuals close to the presidency have at various times floated trial balloons on the matter, and begun to rehearse arguments about why a third term would be no bad thing. With Mbeki's various rivals having been cut off at the knees, the suggestion was made that there was no one of sufficient stature in the ANC left to succeed him.
Yet such has been the opposition to Mbeki within the ANC, over the past two years, that it looks as if even his closest allies have given up (for now) on the idea of pushing for a constitutional amendment. The current Mbeki-ite strategy seems to be to, firstly, secure the party presidency for Mbeki and the position of secretary-general for Frank Chikane, currently director-general of the presidency.
Yahoo! Mail is the world's favourite email. Don't settle for less, sign up for your free account today.
Friday, May 18, 2007
UNIFICATION OF THE MDC "AN UPHILL" TASK!
Zimbabwe: One candidate for MDC is an uphill task. Who will take it?
LINK!
BY TRUST MATSILELE!
But a divided movement in which freedom fighters fight amongst themselves cannot win over any substantial section of the population. Only a united movement can successfully undertake the task of uniting the country, this is an extract from the former South African president Nelson Mandela's Reflections in Prison page 15.
WHEN I read this I said for sure this is the kind of struggle which Zimbabweans should engage in, a struggle were all progressive forces set aside their selfish agenda and put a cause for a liberated Zimbabwe ahead as a way of ensuring that the present repressive and illegitimate government leave office as of yesterday. This is a principle the Nelson Mandela’s generation incorporated and eventually made the apartheid regime history by fighting arms akimbo with the association of Indian Communities.
In September 2005, a squabble within the vibrant opposition MDC left a loophole and a huge opportunity for ruling ZANU PF to maximise its rigging and divide and rule tactics. Tensions became rampant within opposition supporters as they were left in a dilemma of choosing which faction to stand with and in the process the ZANU PF has managed to rig the senates elections and all by-elections held under such suspicions.
A lot of stories have been circulated to the cause of the split though not the focus in this presentation. The MDC Mutambara’s Mkwananzi in less than a month addressing Zimbabweans in South Africa said MDC leader Morgan Tsvangirai asked the MDC leadership to go for an in-house elections to determine whether to go for senates elections or not and the vote would decide the course of action. When Tsvangirai who was vying for a protest of the elections lost, took his jacket and left the Harvest House (MDC offices in Harare).
On the other side the Secretary General of the MDC Mutambara Welshman Ncube is alleged to have been the man fighting against going for elections and on the last minute Ncube said the party would go for elections, then divisions emerged with others saying Ncube was bribed by the ZANU PF to go for elections whilst some saying Tsvangirai’s dictatorship had caused
these divisions.
Now Zimbabweans are faced with another election in less than 11 months. ZANU PF has already chose its candidate or imposed a candidate upon in the name of Robert Mugabe now (83) who has ruled and ruined the country in the past 27 years with many even wishing that things would have been better if Ian Douglas Smith had continued as president as problems persist. Reports of rigging are reported to have already started, Zimonline published an article saying teachers were sent forms to fill their political affiliation and to me it is a way of preparing for another massive rig were all teachers who will fill ZANU PF as their party which highly likely to happen as teachers in the past been attacked by National Youth Militia and ZANU PF for allegedly supporting MDC
As I write this article the government has withheld releasing of inflation figures, pegged at 2200% by April 2007.Unemployment is above 80% and if one loses the job chances of getting another job in Zimbabwe are zero. This has made the public even more dependent on its repressive government which made the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Union planned strike a huge flop.
The MDC as agreed in the Save Zimbabwe campaign banner are to chose a candidate in less than few months to fight it with Mugabe. The veteran leader defeated Tsvangirai in the 2002’s most disputed elections, though the candidate has not been named it is alleged the MDC Tsvangirai has already cleared the air by saying Morgan will be the candidate. The MDC Mutambara wants conditions set which a candidate who will only meet conditions fill the post.
This is an election were the two MDC factions should unite. By the end of this week I will be receiving feedback from the MDC Mutambara’s faction from its South African branch as to who they propose should be the candidate. Nqabitho Dube the information officer has confirmed this development.
Tribalism is one of those key issues which is rocking the MDC supporters since the split some have been made to hate Morgan more than the way they hate Mugabe. The same applies to Ncube. The most surprising thing is that Welshman Ncube’s name has been spoken of a lot more than the way Tsvangirai’s name has been spoken about. This is one of the challenges facing such a candidate in waiting to unite the party and defeat Mugabe next year who has been
defeated before but won through his arch rigging expert Tobaiwa Mudede, the Registrar General.
The two MDC factions have agreed that they will not go for elections next year until a new democratic constitution is in place to ensure a level ground. Two days ago one of the online news organisation quoted Emmerson Mnangagwa as saying the MDC had been given three conditions to adhere to as preconditions for talks by the South African president Thabo Mbeki who is mediating the talks under SADC’s commands during his temporary chairmanship of the house of Assembly. The conditions are:
1) MDC should acknowledge that Mugabe is the legitimate president of Zimbabwe
2) MDC should acknowledge that Mugabe won the 2002 elections
3) MDC should denounce violence
And Mugabe's condition is to bring sanity back in Zimbabwe in both economy and politics. Efforts to get confirmation from Mbeki’s office were unfruitful.
If the conditions are to be taken as serious, not as a mere ZANU PF propaganda message of pre-empting dialogue impending, Mbeki’s efforts are almost futile as the MDC can never deceive its constituency which elected it in power by saying Mugabe won the 2002 elections were hundreds were abducted and some killed. Some of the cases are still pending to date in the High Court hence accepting those conditions will mean the appeals will be withdrawn and sanctions given to Mugabe for cheating in elections will be null hence declaring Mugabe persona no grata.
This is another litmus test for the MDC strength and survival in Zimbabwean politics; challenges are in choosing one candidate, uniting the votes, protesting elections if a new constitution is not in place and last resisting Mugabe’s bribery tactics-meaning eliminating all opportunists who would want to sacrifice the cause of the struggle for their individual constituencies.
Above all Mandela’s message remains that a divided movement in which freedom fighters fight amongst themselves cannot win over any substantial section of the population. Only a united movement can successfully undertake the task of uniting the country.
Thursday, May 17, 2007
MBEKI'S BROTHER INTERVIEWED ON SWRADIOAFRICA!
Broadcast on 15 May 2007
Violet Gonda: We welcome on the programme Hot Seat Moeletsi Mbeki a political analysts and brother to South African President Thabo Mbeki and Zimbabwe human rights lawyer and commentator Brian Kagoro. Welcome on the programme Hot Seat.
Moeletsi Mbeki: Thank you
Brian Kagoro: Thank you Violet.
Violet Gonda: Now I am going to start with Moeletsi Mbeki. Many believe that Africa is failing to do more about the crisis in Zimbabwe and Zimbabwe was t his week elected to Chair the UN Commission on Sustainable Development. But there has been an outcry by many who feel that Zimbabwe is completely unfit for this position and that it was the African bloc that pushed this recommendation. Now why is Africa not responding to the situation in your view?
Moeletsi Mbeki: Well I think the main reason; the main problem with Zimbabwe; why Africa is not responding; is actually Southern Africa. It’s not Africa in general. I know for a fact that many other parts of Africa especially West Africa disapprove very strongly of what the ZANU PF regime is doing in Zimbabwe. I have talked to several Presidents in West Africa and they don’t support what’s happening. The problem is that Southern African governments; who are themselves behind Robert Mugabe; one can say, behind ZANU PF, are the ones who are insisting that Zimbabwe must be put forward. If you recall; when there was an Organization of African Unity meeting; these issues were put to the background by the Southern Africa countries because if you remember there was a human rights report, which disapproved strongly of Zimbabwe. So it’s the Southern African countries rather than Africa as a whole.
Violet: Now Brian Kagoro do you agree with this? The Zimbabwean Government is responsible for major human rights abuses in the country, now why are the Southern African countries not criticizing the Mugabe regime?
Brian Kagoro: I think there are several factors. The first one is that Zimbabwe is, for most of them, not a foreign relations issue. It’s a domestic relations issue. If South Africa were to admit that Zimbabwe is guilty of the violations that we have all recounted time and time again, South Africa would have to change its policy on how it treats Zimbabwean immigrants. Especially the so-called illegal immigrants and asylum seekers in the country. It will have to stop detaining them like criminals as it does in several detention centers and deporting them, sending them back home. It would have to adopt a position consistent with an acknowledgment that there is political persecution of a certain group of citizens in Zimbabwe. So that domestic consideration affects, that’s one of them. There are economic and other factors that are linked to accepting that Zimbabwe is behaving like a rogue state. It would mean that domestically it would have to change how it structures its economic interactions in Harare; the sort of loans, soft loans, small loans, some medium size loans that are given to the Harare regime. So in a sense I think there is a huge domestic consideration because South Africa’s foreign policy indicates that it has to be motivated by considerations of human rights, consistent with the ANC Charter and its history of supporting democratic struggle and development.
And for Botswana a similar problem has arisen, one similar to Zimbabwe, in the sense that if Botswana were to condemn, it has in the past raised concerns about the influx of Zimbabwean immigrants. But, if it were to out rightly condemn the Harare regime of course this would not only harm the relationship between the two countries, but would also mean that there has to be a change internally. But, there are some sentimental issues that are not necessarily economic which are related to history. And the sentimental issues take several strands. The one is the suspicion that to condemn Mugabe would be to affirm Tsvangirai as the legitimate successor to the Zimbabwean President. And there are some in SADC; of course; whose views are that the MDC lacks depth to take over the country. That if it did so there would not be stability and that it will comprise the stability of the region. These are speculative reasonings that are not proven. But, amongst the security agencies of course the sort of spectre that is often dangled is that we saw Chiluba and the disastrous consequences for Zambia. And, that to have another Chiluba in Zimbabwe would be undesirable and of course the encouragement to labour-based opposition in South would be great as it would in other countries.
And, for Angola it is a totally different consideration. I am not sure that Angola would pride itself as being any different to Zimbabwe in terms of how it reacts and responds to way it treats the opposition. It’s not as blatant as Harare but certainly not one of the. And in other countries of course the Presidents are fairly new. Our colleagues in the Democratic Republic of Congo benefited largely from the largess and patronage of the Zimbabwean state.
Violet : Let me just go back to the issue of domestic consideration that Brian talked about. We know that there is a huge influx of Zimbabwean refugees fleeing to South Africa – about 40 000 a month and many of them are getting sent back, back to Zimbabwe. Now the South African government continues to ignore what’s happening next door. But an opposition official Roy Bennett was recently granted asylum in South Africa And, I understand he is the first senior opposition official to be given refugee status in South Africa. Moeletsi, does this mean South Africa is now acknowledging that there is political persecution in Zimbabwe?
Moeletsi Mbeki: Well the question of refugee status is a question that isgoverned in Africa by the OAU – now AU Refugee Convention. So there are a whole lot of conventions – the United Nations Convention, but above all the African Union and formerly the OAU’s own refugee convention. So there are agreements that you can recognize people as refugees and give them political asylum. So I think it’s under that context that Roy Bennett was given political asylum. But I just want to add to a point that Brian I think is overlooking. The reality is that the opposition in Zimbabwe is a very sophisticated opposition. Really the notion that it’s made up of unsophisticated people is not true. You have a huge number of NGOs supporting it, a number of academics, former ZANU PF supporters themselves, senior ZANU PF leaders, trade union leaders. So it’s a fallacy to say that MDC can’t run the country. MDC can run Zimbabwe better than ZANU PF, which has run the country to the ground.
I think several of the Southern African countries have opposition from the trade unions and from civil society in their own countries. Namibia for example has had opposition from its trade unions. Ben Mulenga the former President of the Namibia Mine Workers Union was one of the leaders of the opposition to SWAPO. So the question of Zimbabwe, of the MDC, is a real question its not speculation. The governments in region don’t want to encourage a new type of party that has the support of the large majority of the people whose primary programme is the welfare of the people rather than of a few nationalists leaders.
Violet: You know an ANC member was recently a guest on this programme and he said that the view in Africa is that the opposition is sponsored by the West and that they are puppets of the West. What are your thoughts on this?
Moeletsi Mbeki: Ah, this is a complete fallacy. The MDC is not a puppet of the West, was not set up by the West anymore than the ANC was set up by the West. The ANC got a lot of Western support. It got sanctions, it asked for sanctions from Western countries, from the United States Congress. And it got sanctions from Western countries that didn’t constitute the ANC being a puppet of the West, so that it is a fallacy that is being propagated by ZANU PF and its supporters in the region.
Violet: Now Brian given all these issues and by way of seeking solutions to the Zimbabwean crisis is SADC or the AU likely to be effective brokers of a peace deal?
Brian Kagoro: I think Moeletsi has indicated some of the dilemmas. Firstly their premise and judgment of the Zimbabwean opposition is totally misplaced. Secondly, a significant number of them fear ghosts in their own closets, skeletons in their own closets or fear that developments in Zimbabwe would replicate themselves within their own countries with the emergence of strong opposition and a social base. In my view there is a critical mass of African leaders who are not necessarily anti Mugabe or pro Tsvangirai but who are pro-democracy. Who I’d say are interested in the emergence of a new Africa with a new image and a way of doing things and are growing increasingly frustrated by the sort of reputation or reputational hazards that allowing a Zimbabwean type of reputation to persist would impose on the continent.
So I am not sure that SADC would necessarily be the best abiders for several reasons: That they have been mired in the politics that we both described – that is 1. No. 2 - none of them seems to have sufficient willpower or political clout to push Mugabe beyond the current position that he has adopted. Which is that the feud in Harare or the crisis in Zimbabwe is a bilateral feud between Harare and Whitehall and the British government. Perhaps his position will change now that Blair is gone. Before, SADC’s excuse for not acting was that the Zimbabwean crisis was anchored around the land issue but now that we witness human rights violations that are not related to the rest of the historical question of land in any remote way, I think that SADC no longer has any excuse. If you like ‘the emperor is without his clothes’ so to speak.
But is there political will? Is there political clout? I doubt that SADC – they will in closed-door sessions perhaps express concerns – but I doubt that they do have a strong, if you like, a strong man that will be able to reign in Zimbabwe. Are there interests on the African continent beyond SADC? Yes, I think there are several, there are many that will be interested in seeing a resolution to the Zimbabwean crisis because the crisis is not only political. I mean the political crisis has worsened other crisis like the structural and the economic crisis but the resolution of the political question is central to achieving stability and beginning to session some form of transition and then transformation in Zimbabwe. And I think that there is sufficient African leadership beyond SADC to be able to make it happen.
Within the AU we have seen positive signs from the Commission itself where it expressed concerns. But you know the restrains of diplomacy are such that once SADC has defined this as its turf and determined that it is going to do something, albeit inadequate, they have to await the outcome of that process. And of course if you are Zimbabwe who went through the Troika and another Troika and another Troika and the bilateral negotiations and all these collapsed and yet the crisis has persisted. So there would be frustrations if you are Zimbabwe. Generally I think there is a solution and that solution can be found in African leadership. But, the question is how do you then broker, how do you ensure that there are more genuine interlocutors actually are the ones who come into play as opposed to those who are interested in international public relations for Mr. Mugabe.
Violet: That’s what I actually wanted to find out and back to the issue of SADC and m y next question could be a difficult one for Moeletsi because President Thabo Mbeki is your brother. Now he was chosen by SADC leaders in March as mediator for the crisis in Zimbabwe. Do you think he is the best man for the job?
Moeletsi Mbeki: Well I can’t say whether he is the best man or not. The situation is that South Africa has been involved in the Zimbabwean crisis from the very beginning and to tell you the honest truth the ANC has been saying that Zimbabwe is a democratic country despite the fact that elections have been rigged in Zimbabwe. They have give a clean bill of health to the elections that were rigged in Zimbabwe so my own reading is not so much about this individual or that individual. The point is that Southern African countries don’t really want a replacement of Mugabe, they want a reformed ZANU PF to be put in place but they don’t want a free and fair election, which the MDC can win.
Violet: And you know Thabo Mbeki has received a lot of criticism for the way he is handling the Zimbabwe situation and I think at one point you were quoted saying South Africa's political elite is an obstacle in the quest to save Zimbabwe from collapsing. Now why did you say this?
Moeletsi Mbeki: No, No, No I never said that. It was the newspaper reporter who said that. I said Zimbabwe has become a Bantustan of South Africa and as a Bantustan of South Africa the economy of Zimbabwe is sustained by remittances from Zimbabweans who work in South Africa and which they send to their families and the goods that South African companies chasing after that money sent to Zimbabwe. That was my analysis the other one was by some journalist who wrote his own thing.
Violet: As a political analyst what advice would you give though to your brother in handling the Zimbabwe issue since he is the go-between, the one who is facilitating dialogue?
Moeletsi Mbeki: No, No my brother is President of South Africa. He has his advisers; he has his cabinet he doesn’t depend on family members for his advise. No I don’t give his er…
Violet: So you don’t talk about the Zimbabwe situation?
Moeletsi Mbeki: No the question of him being President of South Africa is not a family matter it’s a matter of democracy in South Africa. We will then emasculate our democracy if the family now becomes the ruler of South Africa. That’s not democracy.
Violet: Now moving on to what Zimbabweans can do about their situation. Brianw hat can people realistically do to deal with their predicament?
Brian Kagoro : I think there are things that can be done internally which are to continue to advocate and fight for their rights. I think that is a duty that every citizen in every country on the continent, particularly Zimbabweans wherever they are. But there are some practical issues. I think that the battle for Zimbabwe won’t be won in only one front. There are some who think that it can be won on the streets by a march to the State House. I am sad to say I don’t share that view. There are others who think it would be simply won at a negotiating table and knowing the history of ZANU, Mugabe – I don’t share that view in response to a constituency that is definable and defined that is powerful, it is assertive. There are others who think that the external interlocutors will actually resolve the internal crisis and as Moeletsi has already said they have their own strategic and other interests that there would be championing in the process. So my suggestions would be, perhaps, we have to think somewhat out of the box.
What are the key points of contention? There is the claim by ZANU of course that there are these sanctions against them and of course the counter by the opposition that these sanctions are necessary because you have behaved like a rogue state. You violate human rights and so in a sense ZANU’s current position is that it will not negotiate until the sanctions are removed. The opposition’s position as I understand it is that there are no sanctions against Zimbabwe. There are travel bans against ZANU PF officials many of whom have declared that they don’t want anything to do with the West anyway.
So here is the small question for me. If the opposition has no real stake in whether or not there are travel bans on ZANU PF, one way of upping the anti will be to suggest that ZANU PF should scrap repressive legislation, commit to the dismantling of the structural violence – the militia and this new type of abduction and murder of people. And, that in turn, those who have the capacity to suspend the travel bans should consider that as a quid pro quo and that if the commitments from either side are not met within a set period then of course you look at other alternatives. I think that the red herrings that have kept this negotiation from going, I don’t think the travel ban are doing any particular amazing work in keeping a democracy in Zimbabwe or restraining ZANU actions and that is the only premise that’s holding them. And of course we know this is just gamesmanship. But call their bluff in a sense. I am not sure that there would be anyone in the opposition who would want to stake their life on whether or not the travel ban stay or are removed. They are not a significant factor. For most people in Zimbabwe it would be not just economic normalization but the creation of a conducive environment, for political dialogue and discourse to happen, for citizens to exercise their rights. And this would mean dealing with the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act, dealing with the Public Order and Security Act - the legislation. But also dealing with the conduct and practice of violations.
So I would propose that for those; both the external actors as well as the internal actors; is that we call Mugabe’s bluff on this matter. Somebody has to demonstrate that they are playing games.
Violet: Do you agree with this Mr. Mbeki? Do you think that the targeted sanctions should be scrapped as a way of getting the Mugabe regime to the negotiating table?
Moeletsi Mbeki: Well it’s not up to us for non-Zimbabweans to specify how Zimbabweans should run their negotiations so…
Violet: At the SADC summit, the SADC leaders, that was one of the recommendations from the African leaders that perhaps the West should consider the issue of targeted sanctions.
Moeletsi Mbeki: Well I don’t know what the SADC states were going to put what pressure. They didn’t put an alternative pressure to the western sanctions. So I don’t see that as being serious proposals. But as I was saying it is up to the Zimbabweans to say what kind of sanctions should be put where, when and so on. We had the same situation in South Africa and we demanded comprehensive sanctions against the apartheid regime but it was us the South Africans who demanded that and we said we would live with the consequences of those sanctions. So it’s not for me or for us who are outsiders who are supporters of democracy in Zimbabwe to specify how the negotiation processes should happen.
Violet : You know it’s been said that only Zimbabweans can resolve their issue. Now I just wanted to get your views on this. What does it mean when people say that Zimbabweans need to do something about their situation. What exactly would they…
Moeletsi Mbeki: …No I disagree with that point of view. In our struggle in South Africa we had support from people from all over the world including Zimbabwe. We had support from the Zimbabweans, from Tanzanians, Zambians, Mozambicans, Americans, British, Swedes, Chinese. So we had support from all over the world. When you are fighting a dictator you need a lot of support. So I don’t accept the position that only Zimbabweans can resolve the issue. And as I pointed out in any case the government in Zimbabwe uses a whole lot of international mechanisms to support itself. So that point I don’t accept I think those of us who want to see peace and democracy in Zimbabwe have to support the peoples of Zimbabwe. The strategy obviously has to be developed by the Zimbabwean not by us. But the support, yes we have to carry on we cannot expect the unarmed innocent people of Zimbabwe to be able to get on top of a tyrant a brutal tyrant like the ZANU PF regime all on their own.
Violet: Ok and finally Brian Kagoro what role should Africa play in negotiating a solution to the Zimbabwean crisis in your view?
Brian Kagoro: I think Moeletsi has captured it well. There needs to be clear pressure and clear deliverables that they are demanding of their colleagues. I think it is insufficient to simply say let the Zimbabweans do something about it, as though to suggest that a regime that responses with violence to peaceful protests or even gatherings will accept the opposition coming to its doors to negotiate just like that. To even suggest, even remotely, that Zimbabweans should consider anything else other than a peaceful process that they have been engaged.
So my view is very simple and a straightforward one. Africa should put clear demands if they are going to make demands of the West around the sanctions they must make clear demands of Harare around creating the necessary conducive political environment. The scrapping of repressive legislation and also dismantling the infrastructure of violence and desisting from perpetrating or encouraging violence and in particular dealing with the political criminals that have been causing this violence. I think nothing has been expected of the Mugabe government and it is unacceptable. So I think there should be clear censure, clear pressure and a clear expression of the fact that people want African leadership and Africans aren’t happy with the descent of Zimbabwe. Not just economic descent but also the political descent that we witness. I think that ZANU caused it to itself. If it is to retain a legacy, a historical legacy, of having liberated the country it owes it to itself to ensure that the citizens have freedom, even freedom from their opponents. Ian Smith believed in democracy only for the white minority and not for the rest of the country and if ZANU is to adopt a similar position it is tragic and it is unfortunate.
Violet Gonda: Thank you very much Moeletsi Mbeki and Brian Kagoro.
Moeletsi Mbeki: Ok thank you
Brian Kagoro: Thanks Violet.
Comments and feedback can be emailed to violet@swradioafrica.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)