The African Union (AU) has once again shown that it is a club of leaders who are largely out of touch with the aspirations of the African people. In an effort to protect its major benefactor, the Union is now proposing a Kenyan/Zimbabwean-style government of national unity for Lybia. The colonel himself sensing an opportunity has quickly dispatched his spokesperson to tell the world that Gaddafi is ready to negotiate with the rebels. What Gaddafi knows is that if a Kenyan/Zimbabwean-style transitional authority is constituted then he will remain in power. His powers will remain largely unchanged. Where was Gaddafi in the last six months? Why didn’t he offer to negotiate before he was on the run?
The African Union has protected and consolidated the power of those who lost elections in Kenya and Zimbabwe. The transitional authorities in both Kenya and Zimbabwe were about Kibaki and Mugabe rather than the people of Kenya and Zimbabwe. It will be a farce for Gaddafi to emerge from whatever ‘hole’ he is hiding in to lead Lybia again. I agree with many other commentators who say that the AU is on the wrong side of history. We have seen how the ‘national unity’ government in Zimbabwe has not been able to achieve its intended aims because of Robert Mugabe and his Zanu PF. Once he had been saved by his friends in SADC and AU it was business as usual for Robert Mugabe. The GNU gave Mugabe legitimacy and gave him a strong negotiating position which hitherto he did not have.
Lybians should resist this blatant attempt by the AU to give a lifeline to Gaddafi. Only a few days ago Gaddafi was calling the freedom fighters rats and calling for their deaths. Now that he is cornered he is now trying to pretend that he is prepared to negotiate. It is common knowledge that once his attempt to make Lybia an Arab nation had failed Gaddafi embraced the AU and invested huge sums of money in the organisation. The AU budget has relied on the benevolence of the Lybian strong man for many years now. It is, therefore, impossible for the AU to be impartial in this conflict. The AU is not interested in the aspirations of the Lybian people. The organisation owes its very existence to Gaddafi and his vision for a United States of Africa so it will do everything possible to keep him in power.
It is farcical for the AU to suggest that Lybians do not know what is good for their country. Thousands left their homes, jobs, universities and families to join the ‘rebel’ army. Some left the comfort of life in Europe and America to join the freedom fighters because they believed that Gaddafi should be removed from power. They did not join the war in order to allow Gaddafi to return as head of a government of national unity. Mooting a transitional authority for Lybia that includes Muammar Gaddafi is like kicking the people of Lybia in the teeth. Gaddafi has made his own bed and he should be allowed to lie in it. The AU should stay out of Lybia.
Sunday, 28 August 2011
Friday, 15 April 2011
Time to reflect on the meaning of Independence
In a few days we will be celebrating 31 years of ‘freedom’ from colonial rule. The word freedom implies that people are free; free to do as they please within the law. Free to participate in the political discourse of their country without the fear of being brutalised. I am not sure that as Zimbabweans we can claim to be free in this sense.
31 years ago Zimbabwe became a state ‘…which governs itself independently of any foreign power’ (Bouvier’s Law Dictionary). This gave us the power ‘…to make laws, to execute and to apply them: to impose and collect taxes, and, levy, contributions; to make war or peace; to form treaties of alliance or of commerce with foreign nations….’ A new state with a majority government was born. We set out on a journey to the future.
I vividly remember the euphoria that engulfed the nation when ZANU PF came to power in 1980. Everyone was flapping their arms like a cockerel to show their joy that Jongwe had won. For the first time the majority black Zimbabweans had a say in how they were governed. As a grade 1 pupil I didn’t understand what this meant but I clearly understood that the people were happy. My teacher then, Miss Muganhu (later Mrs Kadhani) walked into class that day flapping her arm and with a huge smile. As I grew up I was to always associate that smile with the joy that people felt at gaining independence.
The euphoria translated into delivery as in the first decade of independence Robert Mugabe led a government that declared a policy of reconciliation, built more schools, funded universal primary education, and implemented many other policies that changed people’s lives. There was hope. I am a product of the heavy investment in education. Those of us who went to school and university after 1980 suddenly found ourselves with opportunities that had been closed to non-whites during the colonial period. The work of ZIPRA and ZANLA in the liberation struggle was paying off. Zimbabwe was prospering.
So 31 years on what is there for those who took advantage of the opportunities presented to them by independence? What is there for our children? ZANU PF gave us an education; they made us aware of the power of one man one vote. ZAPU and ZANU introduced us to democracy through the 1980 elections. It is ironic therefore, that both ZAPU and ZANU have collaborated to take away the power of our vote. In the post 1987 era ZANU and ZAPU became ZANU PF and they have systematically taken back the powers that we wildly celebrated in 1980. Now the country that started with great promise is a shadow of its former self. Many of those who went round flapping their ‘wings’ in 1980 are in their fifties and sixties. They should be looking forward to peaceful retirement but instead they are being kept awake by two things; the prospect of extreme poverty in retirement and the fear of being branded a member of the opposition. Those of us who are younger are kept awake by the fact that while those able to vote in 1980 got a chance to change the way they were governed and who governed them we cannot do that now because a cabal of ZANU and ZAPU leaders have conspired to take away this right from us. They gave us an education but their policies have taken away the jobs. They introduced democracy to our parents who in turn inculcated it in us but now they are taking away our votes.
It is this light that we have to reflect on the 31 years of independence. The joy we felt in 1980 has dissipated. We feel cheated. We are effectively under a new colonialism authored and finished in 1987 by ZAPU and ZANU. Those who freed us from the chains of colonialism have now chained us to a rogue nationalist agenda that forces us to support ZANU PF or die. The power of our vote has been removed as those tasked with adjudicating the electoral contests are not impartial. Your vote has full value or double value if you vote for ZANU PF but it has half or no value if you vote for the opposition. 31 years on millions of the born free generation are living in foreign lands running away from the economic and political meltdown presided over by the liberation parties. 31 years on the born free generation watches in horror as those who promised a land of milk and honey are enriching themselves while the masses are languishing in poverty. This is the legacy that ZANU PF has bequeathed us. 31 years of ‘liberation’ have no meaning for most young people. While much was achieved in the early years of independence the last ten years have been largely forgettable.
31 years ago Zimbabwe became a state ‘…which governs itself independently of any foreign power’ (Bouvier’s Law Dictionary). This gave us the power ‘…to make laws, to execute and to apply them: to impose and collect taxes, and, levy, contributions; to make war or peace; to form treaties of alliance or of commerce with foreign nations….’ A new state with a majority government was born. We set out on a journey to the future.
I vividly remember the euphoria that engulfed the nation when ZANU PF came to power in 1980. Everyone was flapping their arms like a cockerel to show their joy that Jongwe had won. For the first time the majority black Zimbabweans had a say in how they were governed. As a grade 1 pupil I didn’t understand what this meant but I clearly understood that the people were happy. My teacher then, Miss Muganhu (later Mrs Kadhani) walked into class that day flapping her arm and with a huge smile. As I grew up I was to always associate that smile with the joy that people felt at gaining independence.
The euphoria translated into delivery as in the first decade of independence Robert Mugabe led a government that declared a policy of reconciliation, built more schools, funded universal primary education, and implemented many other policies that changed people’s lives. There was hope. I am a product of the heavy investment in education. Those of us who went to school and university after 1980 suddenly found ourselves with opportunities that had been closed to non-whites during the colonial period. The work of ZIPRA and ZANLA in the liberation struggle was paying off. Zimbabwe was prospering.
So 31 years on what is there for those who took advantage of the opportunities presented to them by independence? What is there for our children? ZANU PF gave us an education; they made us aware of the power of one man one vote. ZAPU and ZANU introduced us to democracy through the 1980 elections. It is ironic therefore, that both ZAPU and ZANU have collaborated to take away the power of our vote. In the post 1987 era ZANU and ZAPU became ZANU PF and they have systematically taken back the powers that we wildly celebrated in 1980. Now the country that started with great promise is a shadow of its former self. Many of those who went round flapping their ‘wings’ in 1980 are in their fifties and sixties. They should be looking forward to peaceful retirement but instead they are being kept awake by two things; the prospect of extreme poverty in retirement and the fear of being branded a member of the opposition. Those of us who are younger are kept awake by the fact that while those able to vote in 1980 got a chance to change the way they were governed and who governed them we cannot do that now because a cabal of ZANU and ZAPU leaders have conspired to take away this right from us. They gave us an education but their policies have taken away the jobs. They introduced democracy to our parents who in turn inculcated it in us but now they are taking away our votes.
It is this light that we have to reflect on the 31 years of independence. The joy we felt in 1980 has dissipated. We feel cheated. We are effectively under a new colonialism authored and finished in 1987 by ZAPU and ZANU. Those who freed us from the chains of colonialism have now chained us to a rogue nationalist agenda that forces us to support ZANU PF or die. The power of our vote has been removed as those tasked with adjudicating the electoral contests are not impartial. Your vote has full value or double value if you vote for ZANU PF but it has half or no value if you vote for the opposition. 31 years on millions of the born free generation are living in foreign lands running away from the economic and political meltdown presided over by the liberation parties. 31 years on the born free generation watches in horror as those who promised a land of milk and honey are enriching themselves while the masses are languishing in poverty. This is the legacy that ZANU PF has bequeathed us. 31 years of ‘liberation’ have no meaning for most young people. While much was achieved in the early years of independence the last ten years have been largely forgettable.
Saturday, 19 February 2011
An Empty Birthday
Today (21st February 2011) marks Robert Mugabe’s 87th birthday. He has lived long and many have remarked on how healthy and spritely he is. One hopes that as he looks back on nearly 9 decades of health and life he will take time to reflect on what he has done to Zimbabwe.
Life expectancy in Zimbabwe has been reduced to thirty seven for most Zimbabweans mainly due to Zanu PF policies. Most government hospitals, clinics and health centres have been reduced to ghosts of their former selves. Thousands of nurses and doctors have been forced into economic exile because Mugabe’s government chose to pay his Green Bomber militias better than teachers and nurses. Some had to run away from their rural health centres because Zanu PF ‘youths’ wanted to kill them. This left Zimbabwe with an understaffed and underfunded health care system.
While Robert Mugabe has had a fruitful and ‘successful’ 87years on earth, hundreds of thousands of children have died in the decade between 1999 and 2009 because they could not access health care. Thousands of mothers died in childbirth because they could not afford to go to hospital. While his health is properly looked after by doctors and nurses in Malaysia and Singapore thousands of Zimbabweans are dying because they cannot access or afford proper health care. Many young people in Zimbabwe will not live to the ripe old age of 87 because of a variety of factors; chief among them the Zanu PF government policies of the last decade. This is the legacy that Mugabe has bequeathed to the children of Zimbabwe.
In his 87years on earth Robert Mugabe has achieved a lot in terms of education. We are constantly reminded of his many university degrees. Those of us who graduated from state universities in Zimbabwe will know that his degrees (earned and honorary) covered half the front of the graduation booklet. I have nothing against his achievements except that he took away from Zimbabwe’s children a chance to achieve the same. Robert Mugabe prides himself as the boy from Kutama (the village) whose mother worked hard to help him get a good education. It is, therefore, ironic that through his scorched earth policies many teachers ran away from village schools because Zanu PF ‘youths’ threatened to kill them for choosing to support the MDC. In some cases teachers were beaten to pulp just for being suspected MDC supporters. Now Zimbabwe’s children can no longer write a Robert Mugabe rags to riches type story for themselves because there are not many qualified teachers in rural schools. Some talented teachers are working in bars and restaurants, construction, warehouses while some are caring for the elderly in foreign lands because they were driven away by politics and poor pay. Thanks to Robert Mugabe. The quality of teachers has been drastically reduced ever since colleges started recruiting teacher trainees based on their political affiliation rather than academic qualification.
As we look back on the 87 years of Robert Mugabe’s life on earth we can’t help but reflect on his thirty years in power. How the hope and euphoria of the 1980s gave way to the anger and disappointment of the 1990s and beyond. While he has lived for nearly 9 decades, thousands of young and middle aged men and women perished in Matabeleland and the Midlands. Their only crime was being different from Mugabe. While he enjoys today with his wife and children, thousands of Zimbabwean families are without a father as a direct result of Mugabe’s policies – Patrick Nabanyama, , Trymore Midzi, Talent Mabika, Tichaona Chiminya, Milton Chambati, Titus Nleya and many others who have remained faceless and nameless. Political violence has robbed children of the chance to see their fathers live to a ripe old age. Mugabe’s merchants of death have torched homes, murdered opponents as well as destroyed families.
I hope when Mugabe sits down to eat cake with his family, friends, cronies and supporters he will realise what an empty 87th birthday it is. Empty because the people are not celebrating with him; they are not praying for many more. It is an empty birthday because Zimbabweans can never aspire to a life half as long as his. A sad birthday to you Mr President!
Life expectancy in Zimbabwe has been reduced to thirty seven for most Zimbabweans mainly due to Zanu PF policies. Most government hospitals, clinics and health centres have been reduced to ghosts of their former selves. Thousands of nurses and doctors have been forced into economic exile because Mugabe’s government chose to pay his Green Bomber militias better than teachers and nurses. Some had to run away from their rural health centres because Zanu PF ‘youths’ wanted to kill them. This left Zimbabwe with an understaffed and underfunded health care system.
While Robert Mugabe has had a fruitful and ‘successful’ 87years on earth, hundreds of thousands of children have died in the decade between 1999 and 2009 because they could not access health care. Thousands of mothers died in childbirth because they could not afford to go to hospital. While his health is properly looked after by doctors and nurses in Malaysia and Singapore thousands of Zimbabweans are dying because they cannot access or afford proper health care. Many young people in Zimbabwe will not live to the ripe old age of 87 because of a variety of factors; chief among them the Zanu PF government policies of the last decade. This is the legacy that Mugabe has bequeathed to the children of Zimbabwe.
In his 87years on earth Robert Mugabe has achieved a lot in terms of education. We are constantly reminded of his many university degrees. Those of us who graduated from state universities in Zimbabwe will know that his degrees (earned and honorary) covered half the front of the graduation booklet. I have nothing against his achievements except that he took away from Zimbabwe’s children a chance to achieve the same. Robert Mugabe prides himself as the boy from Kutama (the village) whose mother worked hard to help him get a good education. It is, therefore, ironic that through his scorched earth policies many teachers ran away from village schools because Zanu PF ‘youths’ threatened to kill them for choosing to support the MDC. In some cases teachers were beaten to pulp just for being suspected MDC supporters. Now Zimbabwe’s children can no longer write a Robert Mugabe rags to riches type story for themselves because there are not many qualified teachers in rural schools. Some talented teachers are working in bars and restaurants, construction, warehouses while some are caring for the elderly in foreign lands because they were driven away by politics and poor pay. Thanks to Robert Mugabe. The quality of teachers has been drastically reduced ever since colleges started recruiting teacher trainees based on their political affiliation rather than academic qualification.
As we look back on the 87 years of Robert Mugabe’s life on earth we can’t help but reflect on his thirty years in power. How the hope and euphoria of the 1980s gave way to the anger and disappointment of the 1990s and beyond. While he has lived for nearly 9 decades, thousands of young and middle aged men and women perished in Matabeleland and the Midlands. Their only crime was being different from Mugabe. While he enjoys today with his wife and children, thousands of Zimbabwean families are without a father as a direct result of Mugabe’s policies – Patrick Nabanyama, , Trymore Midzi, Talent Mabika, Tichaona Chiminya, Milton Chambati, Titus Nleya and many others who have remained faceless and nameless. Political violence has robbed children of the chance to see their fathers live to a ripe old age. Mugabe’s merchants of death have torched homes, murdered opponents as well as destroyed families.
I hope when Mugabe sits down to eat cake with his family, friends, cronies and supporters he will realise what an empty 87th birthday it is. Empty because the people are not celebrating with him; they are not praying for many more. It is an empty birthday because Zimbabweans can never aspire to a life half as long as his. A sad birthday to you Mr President!
Saturday, 8 January 2011
THE CAT IS OUT OF THE BAG...
For years now, Zanu PF (ZPF) has claimed that the MDC is seeking to reverse the ‘gains’ of the land reform programme. They have used it to scare rural communities into voting for them. Now ZPF has finally acknowledged that the land reform is not working and that they are no ‘gains’ from the land reform.
This past week Dr Herbert Murerwa for the first time let the cat out of the bag by confirming that the government has taken land from ‘new farmers’ and given it back to the former white owner. The reason for doing this was that the black beneficiary of the land reform programme was not using the land. One hopes this will be the norm rather than the exception. There are many farms where there is hardly any production going on so the government should give the land to people who have the capacity to farm. This should not be about black or white farmers but rather the ability to invest in the farm and to make effective use of the land. The ZPF approach was about taking land from white farmers and giving it to black ‘farmers’. The only criteria for taking away land from you was because you were white and the only criteria for giving land to you was because you were black. This is wrong.
I do not think that we should return to the pre-2000 status quo but I think that those farmers who only had one farm especially those who were given a certificate of no contest when they bought their farms after independence should return to their land. The reason why I opposed the pre-2000 land ownership was because it left almost all of the arable land in the hands of the white farmers. It cannot be justified that 1% of the population controlled 90% of the arable land. There was, therefore, need for reform. It would be naive for people to say there was nothing wrong with the land ownership in our country before 2000. I also think that the current situation with regard to land in Zimbabwe is unsustainable. There are reports of senior political and military figures having multiple farms. If the intention of the land reform was to empower the majority of Zimbabweans then it has failed miserably. The President and his wife each own farms while there are millions who do not have land. I do not subscribe to the notion that we should have more farmers. I subscribe to the thinking that instead of dividing up the farms into smaller holdings we should have a farming community that reflects the makeup of the population i.e. the majority of ownership of the estimated 4000 to 5000 farms should come from the majority in the population. I also subscribe to the idea that we should have a one (wo)man one farm policy and that there must be a maximum farm size. The maximum farm size should be determined by those who are qualified to do so. It should not be a political decision.
There is also something wrong with the approach ZPF is taking now. If we are to believe this is the beginning of a new chapter in the ZPF land reform then they are again seeking a quick fix solution. It is almost like Murerwa wants to sort out the mess by bringing back the white farmers. What this ignores is the fact these farms have been vandalised and cannibalised. The infrastructure has been damaged such that those returning to their farms will need help. I am going to state the obvious here. The reason why white farmers have done well over the years is the investment into farming infrastructure and mechanisation by the white minority governments; a system of financial support that helped the settlers to improve their farms. Before the land reform when you bought a farm it was a going concern. Now most of the farms are no longer working. Replacing one owner with another will work where the farm is still intact but where the farm is derelict then government should develop a soft loans system to help the farmers bring the farms back to life. ZPF should not think there is a quick fix to the mess they created in farming.
Anyone who cares to read the MDC policy on land since 1999 will discover that the party has consistently said that the pre-2000 land tenure was unsustainable and needed reform. The MDC were the first to clearly outline their policy on land even before the 2000 Constitutional Referendum. The policy also included plans to support the new farmers until they became established. Their argument with ZPF has always been the manner in which the ‘reform’ was done. ZPF had no plans so the reform was done in a haphazard way.
Finally Murerwa’s statement clearly shows that ZPF accepts the land reform in its current form is not working. All the more reason for having a Land audit in order to know who owns what land and what they are doing with it. What, then, is the way forward for Zimbabwe’s farming? The answer lies in all stakeholders accepting that the current land ownership model is not working. Those who have benefited unfairly from the land reform programme should be forced to give up the land. This land should then be given to people with the financial and technical ability to run a farm regardless of their politics, religion or ethnicity. The government should mobilise financial resources to support those who get the land to help them in their farming. There is also need to give title deeds to the new owners to allow them to use the land as collateral. Having title deeds will encourage people to invest in the farms. Here is hoping that the realisation in ZPF that the land and agrarian reforms have not worked will make the party more amenable to the idea of a land audit.
This past week Dr Herbert Murerwa for the first time let the cat out of the bag by confirming that the government has taken land from ‘new farmers’ and given it back to the former white owner. The reason for doing this was that the black beneficiary of the land reform programme was not using the land. One hopes this will be the norm rather than the exception. There are many farms where there is hardly any production going on so the government should give the land to people who have the capacity to farm. This should not be about black or white farmers but rather the ability to invest in the farm and to make effective use of the land. The ZPF approach was about taking land from white farmers and giving it to black ‘farmers’. The only criteria for taking away land from you was because you were white and the only criteria for giving land to you was because you were black. This is wrong.
I do not think that we should return to the pre-2000 status quo but I think that those farmers who only had one farm especially those who were given a certificate of no contest when they bought their farms after independence should return to their land. The reason why I opposed the pre-2000 land ownership was because it left almost all of the arable land in the hands of the white farmers. It cannot be justified that 1% of the population controlled 90% of the arable land. There was, therefore, need for reform. It would be naive for people to say there was nothing wrong with the land ownership in our country before 2000. I also think that the current situation with regard to land in Zimbabwe is unsustainable. There are reports of senior political and military figures having multiple farms. If the intention of the land reform was to empower the majority of Zimbabweans then it has failed miserably. The President and his wife each own farms while there are millions who do not have land. I do not subscribe to the notion that we should have more farmers. I subscribe to the thinking that instead of dividing up the farms into smaller holdings we should have a farming community that reflects the makeup of the population i.e. the majority of ownership of the estimated 4000 to 5000 farms should come from the majority in the population. I also subscribe to the idea that we should have a one (wo)man one farm policy and that there must be a maximum farm size. The maximum farm size should be determined by those who are qualified to do so. It should not be a political decision.
There is also something wrong with the approach ZPF is taking now. If we are to believe this is the beginning of a new chapter in the ZPF land reform then they are again seeking a quick fix solution. It is almost like Murerwa wants to sort out the mess by bringing back the white farmers. What this ignores is the fact these farms have been vandalised and cannibalised. The infrastructure has been damaged such that those returning to their farms will need help. I am going to state the obvious here. The reason why white farmers have done well over the years is the investment into farming infrastructure and mechanisation by the white minority governments; a system of financial support that helped the settlers to improve their farms. Before the land reform when you bought a farm it was a going concern. Now most of the farms are no longer working. Replacing one owner with another will work where the farm is still intact but where the farm is derelict then government should develop a soft loans system to help the farmers bring the farms back to life. ZPF should not think there is a quick fix to the mess they created in farming.
Anyone who cares to read the MDC policy on land since 1999 will discover that the party has consistently said that the pre-2000 land tenure was unsustainable and needed reform. The MDC were the first to clearly outline their policy on land even before the 2000 Constitutional Referendum. The policy also included plans to support the new farmers until they became established. Their argument with ZPF has always been the manner in which the ‘reform’ was done. ZPF had no plans so the reform was done in a haphazard way.
Finally Murerwa’s statement clearly shows that ZPF accepts the land reform in its current form is not working. All the more reason for having a Land audit in order to know who owns what land and what they are doing with it. What, then, is the way forward for Zimbabwe’s farming? The answer lies in all stakeholders accepting that the current land ownership model is not working. Those who have benefited unfairly from the land reform programme should be forced to give up the land. This land should then be given to people with the financial and technical ability to run a farm regardless of their politics, religion or ethnicity. The government should mobilise financial resources to support those who get the land to help them in their farming. There is also need to give title deeds to the new owners to allow them to use the land as collateral. Having title deeds will encourage people to invest in the farms. Here is hoping that the realisation in ZPF that the land and agrarian reforms have not worked will make the party more amenable to the idea of a land audit.
Saturday, 18 December 2010
Of Robert Mugabe’s threats and the impact on the economy
Zimbabwe is an exciting place. You can’t beat the way we shoot ourselves in the foot. There has been a lot of debate surrounding the merits and demerits of the targeted sanctions. The sanctions have been blamed for all our economic ills and the absence of foreign direct investment (FDI). Then in one swoop Robert Mugabe removed whatever little chance we had of FDI by threatening to take over companies in revenge for the targeted sanctions.
Any foreign investor watching Robert Mugabe’s speech in Mutare will have deduced that if you invest in Zimbabwe your investment is only safe if your government is in good books with Zimbabwe. This failure to distinguish between individuals and their governments or countries of origin has been our biggest problem. Using business people as a pawn in our fight with western governments is wrong. What the Chinese, Indians and other potential investors will ask themselves is: What will happen when Mugabe is annoyed with their governments? The answer is manifestly clear in Mugabe’s statement to the Zanu PF (ZPF) conference. If we don’t like your government we will take away your business. With hundreds of countries around the world falling over each other to create investor friendly policies one cannot see any serious investors coming to Zimbabwe.
We have been here before. The land reform was another example of a badly thought out policy that was premised on revenge. ZPF and Mugabe had a quarrel with the then British government and they took their ire on all the white farmers. Every white farmer became a pawn in the power game between Zimbabwe and Britain. I leave it to others to judge whether the land reform policy has been a success in achieving its aims. However, the lesson that we should have learnt from our land reform programme is that we should not have policies driven by anger or any other emotion. Policies should be thought through and carefully planned. This has not been ZPF’s strength over the years – war vet payments, farm invasions, murambatsvina, and now this...
Once again ZPF is looking for a populist policy to shore up their falling popularity. Faced with certain defeat in 2000 they came up with the violent land reform programme. This gave them a reason to visit violence on all people on the farms. While the media focussed on the farmers who were killed or savagely attacked, the narrative ignored the suffering of the farm workers. It largely ignored the violence that was visited on them for daring to oppose ZPF in the constitutional referendum. The real beneficiaries of the land reform have been senior ZPF and security people who now have several farms. Now ZPF has come up with another populist policy designed to hoodwink voters into thinking that they care about Zimbabweans. This new policy as written by Mugabe at the ZPF conference will once again benefit the ZPF big fish. They will throw lots and divide the spoils among themselves while ordinary Zimbabweans live in the clutches of poverty. It will be another reason to visit violence on the people of Zimbabwe.
Someone in ZPF should tell Mugabe that he is putting the final nail on Zimbabwe’s coffin. We have had a decade of destroying the economy. The GPA had allowed us to arrest the decline but now that Mugabe believes that power, by any means, is better than protecting our future the little gains are about to disappear. I know some people will accuse me of saying that native Zimbabweans have no capacity to run these companies. I am not suggesting this at all but I am stating that whatever we do, we need FDI if our economy is to grow. The (un)intended consequences of Mugabe’s rant at his party’s conference will be to scare away investors. If the intention is to punish the Americans and the British then inadvertently this policy will scare away foreign investors.
If Mugabe was one who listens to advice then I would have offered my advice but he is stubborn and allergic to advice so I will not waste my advice on him. However, there are those in his party to whom he might listen. These women and men should tell him he is making a mistake. Those in ZPF who love Zimbabwe must act against Mugabe. I wish.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)