Having watched the Prime Minister being heckled and jeered by exiles in the United Kingdom I realised that the problem was not his message but failure to read the signs of the times by both Tsvangirai and his audience. One appreciates that as the Prime Minister Tsvangirai has to ask professionals to come home to help in re-building the economy and the country. There is no argument among all right thinking Zimbabweans that for the country to move forward we need teachers, doctors, nurses, bankers, etc to go back to Zimbabwe. Tsvangirai rightly argues that change is a process not an event hence for people to sit here and wait for things to improve is to miss the crunch of the matter. Who will change things if those with both the financial resources and professional qualifications are only willing to sit and wait for others to drive the process?
However, Tsvangirai failed to realise that the majority of people in his audience were people who are either waiting for the finalisation of the asylum claims or are failed asylum seekers whose cases are still to be decided in the UK High Court. If Tsvangirai had factored this into his speech he may, perhaps, have chosen different words to use in urging Zimbabweans to come home. I am certain that those who were loudest in shouting down Tsvangirai were people who are afraid that when he starts talking about coming home it might give wrong ideas to the British government. Those who have been refused asylum felt that Tsvangirai’s call may allow the UK government to start deporting Zimbabweans. Faced with the prospect of being deported or being refused asylum, because the situation in Zimbabwe had improved, self interest kicked in. They decided that Tsvangirai was betraying them by calling on them to come home. Suddenly Tsvangirai became the people’s enemy. To be fair to Tsvangirai he was never given a chance to explain himself as a group of rowdy people in the crowd took it upon themselves to stop him speaking. What is disappointing is that the audience never got to hear Tsvangirai’s message because some people wanted to defend their personal interests. I would have wanted to hear his full remarks and then to judge him on the basis of what he actually said rather than what the audience thought he meant. It is worth noting that a question and answer session had been scheduled to allow those who had questions and comments to grill the Prime Minister. For people who claim to be activists fighting for democracy it was disappointing to see the audience not living up to the democratic principles of allowing people to have their say. The scenes were reminiscent of the scenes at the Zanu PF Primary elections.
I know that most people in the audience would have wanted Tsvangirai to address issues of investment opportunities and dual citizenship as part of the overall call to return home. It is unfortunate that many people in the audience were refused a chance to voice their concerns to the Prime Minister and to engage in a civilised debate with him by those who feel that if they disagree with someone then they should not listen to the person. Those who did not want the meeting to be only about the call to come home will feel cheated of an opportunity to explore the ‘nervous condition’ in Zimbabwe and to influence policy through giving their views to the Prime Minister and his delegation.
However, there is a lesson for the Prime Minister in all this. He should choose his words carefully. I am aware he is navigating a tight rope in that if he says there is virtually no progress then he might as well go home because nobody is going to listen to his pleas for help. However, he cannot say that change is complete and indeed he has not said this in all the interviews he has given during this trip. I have argued before that people in Zimbabwe do not want humanitarian assistance to be the be all and end all of the International community involvement in their country (See http://gabrielatlarge.blogspot.com/2009/05/international-community-is-failing.html ). All in Zimbabwe agree that it is time for targeted support that will allow industries, farms and commercial organisations to start working again. For the sake of those who have remained in Zimbabwe who have been at the frontline of Mugabe’s brutality time has come for the International community to engage Zimbabwe. While the interest of those in the audience in London seems to have been only to ensure that they are allowed to stay in the UK it is important that as a responsible leader of his people Tsvangirai should ask people to come home and help in re-building the country. What Tsvangirai did not see is that some in his London audience were people who thought it was an MDC rally. The tenor and tone of his remarks did not acknowledge this hence the anger in the audience. The audience had misread the signs of the times.
Mr Tsvangirai now needs to disabuse members of his own party who think that he was addressing the London meeting as MDC President rather than as Prime Minister of Zimbabwe. It would appear that most in the audience expected to hear Tsvangirai blasting Mugabe and Zanu PF as he has done when addressing party rallies. They failed to realise that he was addressing Zimbabweans from all political persuasions hence their feeling of betrayal. All of us in the MDC need to realise that Tsvangirai now speaks for Zimbabweans when speaking as Prime Minister. We all need to realise that we are at a delicate time in the democratisation of our nation where it may not be possible to satisfy all the interest groups in the democratic movement. Listening to Tsvangirai throughout this tour you can see a man who is trying to manage expectations but at the same time convince the world that there is progress. It is, therefore, disingenuous for people in London to claim that there is no progress in Zimbabwe. Things are not the same as four months ago. We can argue as to whether the progress is enough but we can never say there has been no movement even in the emotive issue of political violence. I am sure even those who jeered at Tsvangirai can acknowledge this.
At this critical time in the history of our country we all need to learn to watch out for the signs of the times!
Sunday 21 June 2009
Saturday 13 June 2009
TSVANGIRAI’S NIECE AND THE LAND REFORM PROGRAMME
The past week the media has been awash with stories about the American medical doctor who has been trying to take over a farm in Zimbabwe. The insinuation is that because Prime Minister Tsvangirai was seen with this woman at President Zuma’s inauguration then he knows about these things. Many people will remember that when the pictures first appeared there was the suggestion that this could be the Prime Minister’s lover and she was referred as the mystery woman. The Prime Minister’s spokesman then cleared the issue by telling the press that she is the Prime Minister’s niece and that apparently Mr Tsvangirai had no prior knowledge of her presence until they met at the ceremony. You can verify this on http://www.newzimbabwe.com/pages/primeminister42.19787.html .
However, the media has continued to insinuate that she is not related to Tsvangirai suggesting that the Prime Minister may actually have lied to the people of Zimbabwe. There is a concerted effort to cast shadows on the person of the Prime Minister because of these stories. The media stories are all based on an unnamed MDC source – Zimpapers style. Those who understand the way Zimbabwe’s extended family system works will know that there are no distant relatives because there is no distance in our family relations. The use of the English language to try and explain Zimbabwean relationships is fraught with difficulties. I am not interested in exploring whether Chihombori is related to Mr Tsvangirai or not because this misses the real point in this issue.
There are two outrageous things happening here. The first is that a business person who is living a comfortable and pampered life in America wants to benefit from freebies and to take away land that should, in all fairness, be given to people in Zimbabwe. The second is how a person who has lived outside Zimbabwe for thirty years can be allocated a farm when there are thousands of landless peasants waiting for land. What criteria did Zanu PF use in allocating land to someone who in all but name is essentially a foreigner? Who does this Chihombori know in the top echelons of Zanu PF? Although she may still be Zimbabwean on paper I believe that there are more deserving Zimbabweans than this ‘fat cat’ from USA. One would not be surprised if it emerges that Chihombori secretly holds dual citizenship which is against Zimbabwean law. I urge those in the media to investigate this. No one doubts that there has been need to redistribute land in Zimbabwe since independence. What has been in dispute has been the manner in which Zanu PF went about this. The Chihombori case is yet another example of how those who are well connected or those who can pay those who are well connected have benefited from Zanu PF’s land reform at the expense of those who genuinely needed land. Can Joseph Made and Didymus Mutasa explain how a woman who has not lived in Zimbabwe for thirty years was allocated land? Where is the Pan Africanist Robert Mugabe in all this? This exposes the lie that Zanu PF’s land reform benefited or was meant to benefit ordinary Zimbabweans.
There is a moral question in this whole saga. It is not whether Tsvangirai and Chihombori are related. It is not even whether Tsvangirai knew about the case. The question should be whether it is right that Chihombori was offered a farm in Zimbabwe. This case highlights the need for a Land Commission to look into the way the disastrous land reform was carried out. It is an outrage that those with money could buy their way into owning free land in Zimbabwe when those whose very survival depends on being able to work the land are still stuck in the old ‘Tribal Trust Lands’ of Chihota, Seke, Buhera, etc. Looking at the business portfolio of Dr Chihombori one cannot understand why she needs free land. She can afford to buy and run a farm but may be she shouldn’t. Her love for free things does not bode well for those who will be employed to work on the farm. I personally think that Chihombori is driven by pure greed more than the need to see the historical imbalance in land ownership being corrected. She is making all the right noises about the unfairness of the pre-2000 land ownership but only to disguise the unfairness of her owning land in Zimbabwe ahead of people like my parents or your parents. I sincerely hope that the offer letter to Dr Chihombori will be withdrawn and the land given to ‘real’ Zimbabweans.
Cremmer (the current farm owner) must also realise that he may need to give up part of his farm because Zimbabwe cannot afford to return to the status quo of the pre-2000 years. If it is true that he used words like ‘kaffir’ then he is on the wrong side of history. This sort of Rhodesian mentality does nothing to help the cause of the white farmers. It just gives Zanu PF ammunition to use against them. All Zimbabweans, black and white, deserve to a share of the land but land must not be given to opportunists like Dr Chihombori.
However, the media has continued to insinuate that she is not related to Tsvangirai suggesting that the Prime Minister may actually have lied to the people of Zimbabwe. There is a concerted effort to cast shadows on the person of the Prime Minister because of these stories. The media stories are all based on an unnamed MDC source – Zimpapers style. Those who understand the way Zimbabwe’s extended family system works will know that there are no distant relatives because there is no distance in our family relations. The use of the English language to try and explain Zimbabwean relationships is fraught with difficulties. I am not interested in exploring whether Chihombori is related to Mr Tsvangirai or not because this misses the real point in this issue.
There are two outrageous things happening here. The first is that a business person who is living a comfortable and pampered life in America wants to benefit from freebies and to take away land that should, in all fairness, be given to people in Zimbabwe. The second is how a person who has lived outside Zimbabwe for thirty years can be allocated a farm when there are thousands of landless peasants waiting for land. What criteria did Zanu PF use in allocating land to someone who in all but name is essentially a foreigner? Who does this Chihombori know in the top echelons of Zanu PF? Although she may still be Zimbabwean on paper I believe that there are more deserving Zimbabweans than this ‘fat cat’ from USA. One would not be surprised if it emerges that Chihombori secretly holds dual citizenship which is against Zimbabwean law. I urge those in the media to investigate this. No one doubts that there has been need to redistribute land in Zimbabwe since independence. What has been in dispute has been the manner in which Zanu PF went about this. The Chihombori case is yet another example of how those who are well connected or those who can pay those who are well connected have benefited from Zanu PF’s land reform at the expense of those who genuinely needed land. Can Joseph Made and Didymus Mutasa explain how a woman who has not lived in Zimbabwe for thirty years was allocated land? Where is the Pan Africanist Robert Mugabe in all this? This exposes the lie that Zanu PF’s land reform benefited or was meant to benefit ordinary Zimbabweans.
There is a moral question in this whole saga. It is not whether Tsvangirai and Chihombori are related. It is not even whether Tsvangirai knew about the case. The question should be whether it is right that Chihombori was offered a farm in Zimbabwe. This case highlights the need for a Land Commission to look into the way the disastrous land reform was carried out. It is an outrage that those with money could buy their way into owning free land in Zimbabwe when those whose very survival depends on being able to work the land are still stuck in the old ‘Tribal Trust Lands’ of Chihota, Seke, Buhera, etc. Looking at the business portfolio of Dr Chihombori one cannot understand why she needs free land. She can afford to buy and run a farm but may be she shouldn’t. Her love for free things does not bode well for those who will be employed to work on the farm. I personally think that Chihombori is driven by pure greed more than the need to see the historical imbalance in land ownership being corrected. She is making all the right noises about the unfairness of the pre-2000 land ownership but only to disguise the unfairness of her owning land in Zimbabwe ahead of people like my parents or your parents. I sincerely hope that the offer letter to Dr Chihombori will be withdrawn and the land given to ‘real’ Zimbabweans.
Cremmer (the current farm owner) must also realise that he may need to give up part of his farm because Zimbabwe cannot afford to return to the status quo of the pre-2000 years. If it is true that he used words like ‘kaffir’ then he is on the wrong side of history. This sort of Rhodesian mentality does nothing to help the cause of the white farmers. It just gives Zanu PF ammunition to use against them. All Zimbabweans, black and white, deserve to a share of the land but land must not be given to opportunists like Dr Chihombori.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)