Ephraim Masawi of ZANU PF has recently been quoted saying because the targeted sanctions still remain so the MDCs have not kept their Global Political Agreement (GPA) commitments. It would appear that ZANU PF is trying to shift blame before the arrival of Zuma in Harare. This clearly shows that there is trepidation in the corridors of ZANU PF power as they are not sure of what Zuma stands for. This has left ZANU PF clutching at straws as they try to show that the other parties have also not kept their commitments.
There is no dispute amongst all commentators that ZANU PF has stalled the progress of the GNU by refusing to fully consummate the GPA. The examples of ZPF intransigence come thick and fast. Mugabe’s unilateral re-appointment of the RBZ governor and the Attorney General, The unilateral appointment of Permanent Secretaries (although later ratified by Tsvangirai and Mutambara), the refusal to install Roy Bennett, Failure to appoint the new Provincial Governors as agreed in the GPA, the list goes on. Faced with these real issues that show commitment or lack of on their part, ZANU PF has come up with its own list of complaint(s) made up of one issue – the targeted sanctions. They now claim that because the sanctions have not been removed therefore the MDCs have failed the GPA. It is instructive to note that most western governments have said that until there is concrete and irreversible change they will not be lifting these sanctions. The thinking in most western capitals is you can only reward people for success. No one calls the GNU a success yet, not even ZANU PF.
Tsvangirai and Mutambara have called for the sanctions to be removed risking the backlash from their own supporters who feel that they are selling out. There is nothing more that they can do but to wait for the various governments to make their own minds up. However, there is a lot ZANU PF can do to ensure that the sanctions go away. Mugabe and his party can ensure that all outstanding issues are resolved amicably. It is within their power to bring an end to the sanctions. ZANU PF should not continue to treat the MDCs as junior partners in the GNU. It should show that there is genuine power sharing. Mugabe’s henchmen should stop acting with impunity. The Attorney General and the police should start pursuing all those who were involved in violence regardless of political affiliation. We want to see Chinotimba and the senior army officers who terrorised people and burned homes around the country being tried for these crimes. We want to see ZANU PF accept that people can and should choose what party they belong to. A more recent example of ZANU PF shooting itself in the foot is the attempt by Chinamasa and Mangwana to derail the appointment of the new media commission because Mahoso and Mutsvangwa failed to make the final list. For the first time we have a parliament led process and ZANU PF are crying foul. If statements by George Charamba are anything to go by then Mugabe is likely to reverse the whole process in order to appoint his surrogates. Why then should the West remove the targeted sanctions?
In my last blog I urged President Zuma to bring an open mind and to look at the terms of the GPA and to make his judgments based only on the evidence before him. I still hope he will do if he does not allow Mugabe’s hospitality to cloud his judgment. I am still concerned that Zuma has chosen to leave the matter until he comes to Harare as a guest of the Zimbabwe government. His independence may be curtailed by his desire to show courtesy to his host. Zuma should tell Mugabe that the world is willing to move only if he moves. The evidence on the ground does not seem to suggest that ZANU PF has adjusted their approach to governing to take into account the new political dispensation. Zuma should not allow ZANU PF to shift the focus from the ‘weighty issues’ by talking about sanctions. Most donor nations have pledged to help Zimbabwe once signs of real change are there for all to see. Mugabe and his cronies do not need to travel to the West for aid and monetary support to come they just need to take the GNU seriously. Zimbabweans are pinning their hopes on Zuma ‘forcing’ the principals to deal with all outstanding issues. Sanctions will die a natural death once the GPA is fully consummated.
Monday, 17 August 2009
Tuesday, 4 August 2009
Zuma’s chance to break with the past
Having met with Prime Minister Tsvangirai to discuss the state of the Global Political Agreement (GPA) President Zuma has now been presented with a chance to break with the past. It is encouraging that he acknowledged that there are weighty issues holding back the full consummation of the GPA.
Under the presidency of Thabo Mbeki the South African government had adopted a ‘hear no evil; see no evil’ approach to Mugabe’s transgressions. Mbeki was always willing to openly criticise the MDC and its leadership while maintaining a policy of ‘quiet diplomacy’ for Zanu PF and Robert Mugabe. This approach allowed Mugabe to act with impunity and, among other things, allowed Zanu PF thugs to continue maiming and killing innocent people for daring to oppose their leader. Most Zimbabweans felt betrayed by Mbeki both as South African president and as the SADC mediator. It is for this reason that many will not be excited by the pronouncements of President Zuma that he will intervene to ensure the GPA is fully implemented. No one can blame us for being sceptical because for years we have been disappointed by those who wielded the power to change our desperate political situation.
President Zuma now has a chance to change our perception of the Presidency in South Africa. We have come to associate the South African Presidency with those who appease Robert Mugabe without the courage to confront him when the need arises. Zuma now has a chance to break with this past. President Zuma has the power to change the situation in Zimbabwe if he chooses to put his foot down. What Zimbabweans are asking of Zuma is not that he just criticises Mugabe without cause but that he attempts to get to the bottom of the problems bedevilling the GPA. If he is to break with the past he must make an honest assessment of the situation in Zimbabwe before deciding who is stalling the progress of the unity government. Zuma must be prepared to criticise both Zanu PF and MDC where there is evidence that they are prolonging the suffering of Zimbabweans by not keeping their commitments under the GPA. The basis of criticism should be the terms of the GPA not personal like or dislike of the signatories to the GPA. In the past Thabo Mbeki allowed his personal dislike of Morgan Tsvangirai to cloud his judgement and he also allowed his elitist mentality to influence his dealings with Tsvangirai and Mugabe. Personal relationships became more important than rescuing Zimbabweans from the political and economic abyss. Zuma is not cut from the same elitist stone that Mbeki and Mugabe are cut from. He has made a big issue of his ‘common’ roots and we hope that this time we have a South African President who is on the side of ordinary people.
As President Zuma goes to speak to Robert Mugabe about the ‘weighty’ issues threatening the GNU in Zimbabwe I hope that he will be objective, fair and firm with all the signatories to the GPA. I hope that he will not allow personalities and relationships to cloud his judgement. He should rely only on the letter and spirit of the GPA to determine who has not kept their side of the deal. This is a chance for Zuma to break with the past or to join Mbeki in defending Mugabe at all costs. We wait with baited breath!
Under the presidency of Thabo Mbeki the South African government had adopted a ‘hear no evil; see no evil’ approach to Mugabe’s transgressions. Mbeki was always willing to openly criticise the MDC and its leadership while maintaining a policy of ‘quiet diplomacy’ for Zanu PF and Robert Mugabe. This approach allowed Mugabe to act with impunity and, among other things, allowed Zanu PF thugs to continue maiming and killing innocent people for daring to oppose their leader. Most Zimbabweans felt betrayed by Mbeki both as South African president and as the SADC mediator. It is for this reason that many will not be excited by the pronouncements of President Zuma that he will intervene to ensure the GPA is fully implemented. No one can blame us for being sceptical because for years we have been disappointed by those who wielded the power to change our desperate political situation.
President Zuma now has a chance to change our perception of the Presidency in South Africa. We have come to associate the South African Presidency with those who appease Robert Mugabe without the courage to confront him when the need arises. Zuma now has a chance to break with this past. President Zuma has the power to change the situation in Zimbabwe if he chooses to put his foot down. What Zimbabweans are asking of Zuma is not that he just criticises Mugabe without cause but that he attempts to get to the bottom of the problems bedevilling the GPA. If he is to break with the past he must make an honest assessment of the situation in Zimbabwe before deciding who is stalling the progress of the unity government. Zuma must be prepared to criticise both Zanu PF and MDC where there is evidence that they are prolonging the suffering of Zimbabweans by not keeping their commitments under the GPA. The basis of criticism should be the terms of the GPA not personal like or dislike of the signatories to the GPA. In the past Thabo Mbeki allowed his personal dislike of Morgan Tsvangirai to cloud his judgement and he also allowed his elitist mentality to influence his dealings with Tsvangirai and Mugabe. Personal relationships became more important than rescuing Zimbabweans from the political and economic abyss. Zuma is not cut from the same elitist stone that Mbeki and Mugabe are cut from. He has made a big issue of his ‘common’ roots and we hope that this time we have a South African President who is on the side of ordinary people.
As President Zuma goes to speak to Robert Mugabe about the ‘weighty’ issues threatening the GNU in Zimbabwe I hope that he will be objective, fair and firm with all the signatories to the GPA. I hope that he will not allow personalities and relationships to cloud his judgement. He should rely only on the letter and spirit of the GPA to determine who has not kept their side of the deal. This is a chance for Zuma to break with the past or to join Mbeki in defending Mugabe at all costs. We wait with baited breath!
Wednesday, 22 July 2009
None but ourselves
“The most potent weapon in the hands of the oppressor is the mind of the oppressed.” Steve Biko
I have recently been thinking a lot about Biko’s statement in relation to Zimbabwe. What has been foremost in my mind is how as Zimbabweans we have allowed Mugabe to control the way we react to our political situation. In most Zimbabweans’ mind Mugabe cannot and will not be removed. A lot of reasons are proffered for this.
Most Zimbabweans you speak to hold Mugabe in awe. Some will say, “Mudhara uya akangwara zvekuti hapana anomugona.” Others will say, “Masoja ese arikusapota Mugabe saka vanaTsvangirai havana yavo.” It would appear that Mugabe’s critics are also his staunchest defenders. Mugabe has created this image of invincibility that Zimbabweans continue to feed to each other. He no longer needs to tell people or even to do anything to create fear and despondency. The fear created by stories of Mugabe’s ruthlessness and shrewdness has created an oppressed population so scared of the oppressor. Mugabe uses this weapon skilfully as it has ensured that people of Zimbabwe do not believe in their ability to change their lot.
Until we liberate our minds from the control of the tyrant we can never achieve the liberation that we yearn for. Zimbabweans hold the keys to their own liberation. We need to start believing in our ability to change our destiny if we are to confront Mugabe. The first step is for us to take away the ‘potent weapon’ from the hands of the oppressor by fighting the fear and despondency that our nervous condition has created in us as Zimbabweans. I believe that Zimbabweans suffer from mental slavery where we have come to believe that Mugabe is destined to rule ‘kusvika madhongi amera nyanga’. As Bob Marley counsels we need to emancipate ourselves from our mental slavery for none but ourselves can free our minds.
It is not going to be easy to deal with the myths and legends about Mugabe that are out there. The man is made up of stuff of urban legends but what shows me that he is human is the fact that, against his will, we have managed to corner him into accepting to share power. There may still be a remnant that believes he holds all the power but most of us have seen that Mugabe is just an owl. “Manhenga chete zizi harina nyanga” It is not impossible to continue to force Mugabe to accept people power. We need to take the initiative away from him and his friends.
Last week we witnessed Mugabe and his party try to turn back the hands of time by disrupting the Constitutional Convention. We need to stand firm and tell the rogue ‘war veterans’ that Zimbabwe belongs to all of us. As a way of taking away the weapon from the oppressor we need to participate fully in the process of crafting and revamping the Lancaster House constitution. Change in Zimbabwe can only be concretised by a new constitution. A new constitution on its own can never be the panacea to our political problems but it allows us to begin the process of cleaning up our politics. We need to make a strong statement to Mugabe that the time of impunity is gone and that we will demand accountability and participation in our governance. This requires that we believe in what numbers can do. Numbers gave the opposition a majority in parliament. Numbers forced Mugabe to a run off. Numbers will liberate us. We just need to believe in ourselves rather than Mugabe’s invincibility. None but ourselves can do this!
I have recently been thinking a lot about Biko’s statement in relation to Zimbabwe. What has been foremost in my mind is how as Zimbabweans we have allowed Mugabe to control the way we react to our political situation. In most Zimbabweans’ mind Mugabe cannot and will not be removed. A lot of reasons are proffered for this.
Most Zimbabweans you speak to hold Mugabe in awe. Some will say, “Mudhara uya akangwara zvekuti hapana anomugona.” Others will say, “Masoja ese arikusapota Mugabe saka vanaTsvangirai havana yavo.” It would appear that Mugabe’s critics are also his staunchest defenders. Mugabe has created this image of invincibility that Zimbabweans continue to feed to each other. He no longer needs to tell people or even to do anything to create fear and despondency. The fear created by stories of Mugabe’s ruthlessness and shrewdness has created an oppressed population so scared of the oppressor. Mugabe uses this weapon skilfully as it has ensured that people of Zimbabwe do not believe in their ability to change their lot.
Until we liberate our minds from the control of the tyrant we can never achieve the liberation that we yearn for. Zimbabweans hold the keys to their own liberation. We need to start believing in our ability to change our destiny if we are to confront Mugabe. The first step is for us to take away the ‘potent weapon’ from the hands of the oppressor by fighting the fear and despondency that our nervous condition has created in us as Zimbabweans. I believe that Zimbabweans suffer from mental slavery where we have come to believe that Mugabe is destined to rule ‘kusvika madhongi amera nyanga’. As Bob Marley counsels we need to emancipate ourselves from our mental slavery for none but ourselves can free our minds.
It is not going to be easy to deal with the myths and legends about Mugabe that are out there. The man is made up of stuff of urban legends but what shows me that he is human is the fact that, against his will, we have managed to corner him into accepting to share power. There may still be a remnant that believes he holds all the power but most of us have seen that Mugabe is just an owl. “Manhenga chete zizi harina nyanga” It is not impossible to continue to force Mugabe to accept people power. We need to take the initiative away from him and his friends.
Last week we witnessed Mugabe and his party try to turn back the hands of time by disrupting the Constitutional Convention. We need to stand firm and tell the rogue ‘war veterans’ that Zimbabwe belongs to all of us. As a way of taking away the weapon from the oppressor we need to participate fully in the process of crafting and revamping the Lancaster House constitution. Change in Zimbabwe can only be concretised by a new constitution. A new constitution on its own can never be the panacea to our political problems but it allows us to begin the process of cleaning up our politics. We need to make a strong statement to Mugabe that the time of impunity is gone and that we will demand accountability and participation in our governance. This requires that we believe in what numbers can do. Numbers gave the opposition a majority in parliament. Numbers forced Mugabe to a run off. Numbers will liberate us. We just need to believe in ourselves rather than Mugabe’s invincibility. None but ourselves can do this!
Sunday, 21 June 2009
Signs of the times misread
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!
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!
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)