“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!
Wednesday, 22 July 2009
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.
Thursday, 28 May 2009
Let us not forget the victims
There has been a lot said about the failure or success of the Zimbabwean unity government. A lot of it has been based on what concessions Tsvangirai has been able to wring out of Mugabe. There is almost an obsession with who has scored more points than the other that a very important issue has fallen by the wayside. In August 2008 I wrote in The Zimbabwean about the need to help the victims of political violence find closure. While there has been a number of high profile cases highlighted in the media the same cannot be said of the ordinary villagers whose homes and families were destroyed by the actions of political thugs. In my letter I argued that “The victims of the Zanu PF violence risk being forgotten in our desire to get this country working again. Those who lost family members or those whose relatives were maimed and crippled risk just being cannon fodder if we do not put in place a system to keep this in the public domain”.
I believe that while there has been progress in other areas there has not been much in the direction of getting the people responsible for destroying families and homes to account for their actions. Peace without justice rings hollow and I think the people of Zimbabwe will feel hard done by if our political leaders do not pursue this matter with the vigour it requires. Morgan Tsvangirai and Arthur Mutambara owe it to the people to demand justice for the victims of violence. I am not advocating for retribution but it is essential that we investigate and prosecute those who killed and maimed political opponents. I do not believe that the perpetrators should be given amnesty without trial because then they will have received no more than a slap on the wrist. The thugs need to go through the courts and where there is evidence to convict then they should be convicted.
The politicians can then agree that the crimes were done at a time of political madness and grant amnesty but the convictions would be on record. I think we need justice for the men, women, and children who suffered greatly for choosing to oppose Mugabe and Zanu PF. As we seek to open a new chapter in the history of our nation I believe we need to proceed “with malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation's wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan -- to do all which may achieve and cherish a just, and lasting peace, among ourselves, and with all nations” as Abraham Lincoln counselled in his second inaugural address as US President. We owe it to these courageous women, men and children to bring to justice the perpetrators of the violence that ravaged our nation.
While there may be relative peace now there is no guarantee that it will last if we continue to ignore those who suffered at the hands of the political thugs. One day the people will choose to take matters into their hands and we may have to deal with a much messier situation if we do not have the courage to face up to the past now. Let us give these families closure by ensuring that justice is done and is seen to be done. Let us give meaning to the shaky peace that has enveloped our nation by showing that we are willing to forgive and forget but only when justice has been done. Peace will have no meaning for the people because it will only be the absence of physical violence but the psychological wounds will continue to fester. As Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama of Tibet says, “Peace, in the sense of the absence of war, is of little value to someone who is dying of hunger or cold. It will not remove the pain of torture inflicted on a prisoner of conscience. It does not comfort those who have lost their loved ones…. Peace can only last where human rights are respected, where people are fed, and where individuals and nations are free.” I can find no better way of putting across the argument for peace with justice. When I read this quote I was reminded of Albert Nyathi’s questions, “Peace! What peace? Justice! What justice? Whose justice?” Indeed what peace, what justice if we continue to ignore those who were killed and maimed for their belief in democracy. As we seek peace in our nation we must ensure that it has value for all the people otherwise we will have failed those who gave all for freedom. We must not waiver in our commitment to see those who committed crimes against our people brought to justice. Our desire for justice should not be driven by our need for vengeance but the need to close a horrible chapter of our history. In 1987 we agreed to peace without justice and the results are there for all to see. Let those with ears hear.
I believe that while there has been progress in other areas there has not been much in the direction of getting the people responsible for destroying families and homes to account for their actions. Peace without justice rings hollow and I think the people of Zimbabwe will feel hard done by if our political leaders do not pursue this matter with the vigour it requires. Morgan Tsvangirai and Arthur Mutambara owe it to the people to demand justice for the victims of violence. I am not advocating for retribution but it is essential that we investigate and prosecute those who killed and maimed political opponents. I do not believe that the perpetrators should be given amnesty without trial because then they will have received no more than a slap on the wrist. The thugs need to go through the courts and where there is evidence to convict then they should be convicted.
The politicians can then agree that the crimes were done at a time of political madness and grant amnesty but the convictions would be on record. I think we need justice for the men, women, and children who suffered greatly for choosing to oppose Mugabe and Zanu PF. As we seek to open a new chapter in the history of our nation I believe we need to proceed “with malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation's wounds; to care for him who shall have borne the battle, and for his widow, and his orphan -- to do all which may achieve and cherish a just, and lasting peace, among ourselves, and with all nations” as Abraham Lincoln counselled in his second inaugural address as US President. We owe it to these courageous women, men and children to bring to justice the perpetrators of the violence that ravaged our nation.
While there may be relative peace now there is no guarantee that it will last if we continue to ignore those who suffered at the hands of the political thugs. One day the people will choose to take matters into their hands and we may have to deal with a much messier situation if we do not have the courage to face up to the past now. Let us give these families closure by ensuring that justice is done and is seen to be done. Let us give meaning to the shaky peace that has enveloped our nation by showing that we are willing to forgive and forget but only when justice has been done. Peace will have no meaning for the people because it will only be the absence of physical violence but the psychological wounds will continue to fester. As Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama of Tibet says, “Peace, in the sense of the absence of war, is of little value to someone who is dying of hunger or cold. It will not remove the pain of torture inflicted on a prisoner of conscience. It does not comfort those who have lost their loved ones…. Peace can only last where human rights are respected, where people are fed, and where individuals and nations are free.” I can find no better way of putting across the argument for peace with justice. When I read this quote I was reminded of Albert Nyathi’s questions, “Peace! What peace? Justice! What justice? Whose justice?” Indeed what peace, what justice if we continue to ignore those who were killed and maimed for their belief in democracy. As we seek peace in our nation we must ensure that it has value for all the people otherwise we will have failed those who gave all for freedom. We must not waiver in our commitment to see those who committed crimes against our people brought to justice. Our desire for justice should not be driven by our need for vengeance but the need to close a horrible chapter of our history. In 1987 we agreed to peace without justice and the results are there for all to see. Let those with ears hear.
Saturday, 23 May 2009
THIS IS NOT A TIME TO SCORE CHEAP POINTS
I find the current media exchanges between Gideon Gono and Tendai Biti unfortunate. At a time when we are trying to build investor confidence we seem to be going about it in the wrong way. The recent leaking of Gono’s letters to the media before they have been delivered to the intended recipients shows that Gono is playing politics. One can’t help but ask why if there was such compelling evidence against the Minister and his law firm it has taken this long to prosecute them? Why did Gono wait until Biti started questioning his suitability for the post of Central bank governor before coming out with this case? If the case has been there since 2004 or thereabouts why has it never come to court?
I am not in a position to say whether Biti is corrupt or not because that can only be proven by Biti himself but I believe I am in a position to critically analyse Gono’s actions. For a man who claims to do things openly I believe it is incumbent upon Gono to let the law take its course without trying and convicting Biti in the media. There is no doubt in my mind that Gono or those close to him deliberately leaked the letters to the media in an effort to humiliate or even smear Biti. Gono has been known to use smear tactics to silence his critics and to intimidate those who threaten his unfettered control of Zimbabwe’s fiscal and monetary policy. David Butau, former Guruve North MP, gave an insight into the workings of Gono and his cronies at the central bank. Although not entirely innocent Butau showed how Gono reacts to investigations into his conduct of central bank and government business since arriving at the RBZ. Everyone who has questioned him has had a case of forex externalisation pulled from somewhere and splashed in the media. For Butau’s full statement go to http://www.talkzimbabwe.com/news/117/ARTICLE/1354/2008-01-17.html . Here you will be able to read Butau’s side of the story. I cannot confirm the veracity of the allegations but these allegations are significant in that they are made by someone from inside Zanu PF with some knowledge of how the system works. Faced with indefinite remand prison the young MP ‘legged’ it to the UK. His innocence or otherwise is still a matter for debate.
Looking at this case between Gono and Biti one cannot help but see similarities between it and many others used by Zanu PF and the central bank to silence critics. Remember Chris Kuruneri, James Makamba, Mutumwa Mawere, etc? However, since there is a chance that Biti and his firm may have broken the ‘law’ it is important that they are brought to court to answer the charges that Gono makes in the media. It is also important that more than just deny the allegations Tendai Biti demands his day in court. The only way to restore his standing is to demand that the central bank take him and his firm to court where he will have a chance to prove his innocence or otherwise. Those of us in the court of public opinion await the outcome of this case with baited breath.
On a different level I believe that Gono should acknowledge that his actions led the country up the garden path into an uncertain and perilous future. Reading his letters one does not seem to see any acknowledgement that his actions accelerated the process of economic decline as more and more people took their forex out of the local banking system fearing that Gono would raid it to fund Zanu PF’s agenda. While he is quick to credit himself for the successes recorded by the new Unity Government and to accuse Biti of plagiarising STERP from him Gono makes no effort to highlight his failures. Reading his letters one would think that Zimbabwe is a successful economy. One, therefore, wonders why with all these successes the economy is in doldrums. It is also difficult to see the difference between Gono’s role as outlined in his letter and the duties of the Finance Minister. It is this quasi-fiscal role of the central governor in the last few years that, in my opinion, accelerated the pace of economic decline. Because Gono no longer had to answer to any politician he became a law unto to himself. This is what makes his position untenable because he is unlikely to remember that his remit is to run the country’s monetary policy not the fiscal policy. He has wielded too much power to an extent that he no longer understands his role as central bank governor. Given this the only solution that will allow this new government to move forward with its new agenda is for him to step aside. This is nothing personal but it is rooted in the idea that new thinking needs to permeate the central bank’s policies. Unfortunately Gono does not represent new thinking neither is he willing to adopt a new approach. Gono believes that he is the best thing ever to have happened to Zimbabwe’s central bank and the arrogance is very evident in his letters. In most democracies a new government appoints a new governor of the central bank and a new attorney general not because the incumbents are incompetent but because for change to happen there is need for new blood. In Zimbabwe’s case I think the tag of incompetence can also be attached to the current incumbent of the Central Bank governor’s post.
My advice for both Biti and Gono is that this is not a time for scoring cheap political points. Zimbabweans want their lives to get better and not to see people wasting time on non issues. Biti has the mandate to run our fiscal policy as well as to oversee the running of the monetary policy hence he needs to focus on this. Gono must realise that all good things come to an end and that his time has come to an end. All Zimbabweans educated or not, economists and layman are agreed that Gono has failed except of course those who have benefited from his largesse. It is time for the two protagonists to sit down and deal with their issues away from the media spotlight. While they are scoring cheap points in the media Zimbabwe continues to burn. No one man should be bigger than Zimbabwe. I feel that Gono has had his chance so it is now time to pass the baton.
I am not in a position to say whether Biti is corrupt or not because that can only be proven by Biti himself but I believe I am in a position to critically analyse Gono’s actions. For a man who claims to do things openly I believe it is incumbent upon Gono to let the law take its course without trying and convicting Biti in the media. There is no doubt in my mind that Gono or those close to him deliberately leaked the letters to the media in an effort to humiliate or even smear Biti. Gono has been known to use smear tactics to silence his critics and to intimidate those who threaten his unfettered control of Zimbabwe’s fiscal and monetary policy. David Butau, former Guruve North MP, gave an insight into the workings of Gono and his cronies at the central bank. Although not entirely innocent Butau showed how Gono reacts to investigations into his conduct of central bank and government business since arriving at the RBZ. Everyone who has questioned him has had a case of forex externalisation pulled from somewhere and splashed in the media. For Butau’s full statement go to http://www.talkzimbabwe.com/news/117/ARTICLE/1354/2008-01-17.html . Here you will be able to read Butau’s side of the story. I cannot confirm the veracity of the allegations but these allegations are significant in that they are made by someone from inside Zanu PF with some knowledge of how the system works. Faced with indefinite remand prison the young MP ‘legged’ it to the UK. His innocence or otherwise is still a matter for debate.
Looking at this case between Gono and Biti one cannot help but see similarities between it and many others used by Zanu PF and the central bank to silence critics. Remember Chris Kuruneri, James Makamba, Mutumwa Mawere, etc? However, since there is a chance that Biti and his firm may have broken the ‘law’ it is important that they are brought to court to answer the charges that Gono makes in the media. It is also important that more than just deny the allegations Tendai Biti demands his day in court. The only way to restore his standing is to demand that the central bank take him and his firm to court where he will have a chance to prove his innocence or otherwise. Those of us in the court of public opinion await the outcome of this case with baited breath.
On a different level I believe that Gono should acknowledge that his actions led the country up the garden path into an uncertain and perilous future. Reading his letters one does not seem to see any acknowledgement that his actions accelerated the process of economic decline as more and more people took their forex out of the local banking system fearing that Gono would raid it to fund Zanu PF’s agenda. While he is quick to credit himself for the successes recorded by the new Unity Government and to accuse Biti of plagiarising STERP from him Gono makes no effort to highlight his failures. Reading his letters one would think that Zimbabwe is a successful economy. One, therefore, wonders why with all these successes the economy is in doldrums. It is also difficult to see the difference between Gono’s role as outlined in his letter and the duties of the Finance Minister. It is this quasi-fiscal role of the central governor in the last few years that, in my opinion, accelerated the pace of economic decline. Because Gono no longer had to answer to any politician he became a law unto to himself. This is what makes his position untenable because he is unlikely to remember that his remit is to run the country’s monetary policy not the fiscal policy. He has wielded too much power to an extent that he no longer understands his role as central bank governor. Given this the only solution that will allow this new government to move forward with its new agenda is for him to step aside. This is nothing personal but it is rooted in the idea that new thinking needs to permeate the central bank’s policies. Unfortunately Gono does not represent new thinking neither is he willing to adopt a new approach. Gono believes that he is the best thing ever to have happened to Zimbabwe’s central bank and the arrogance is very evident in his letters. In most democracies a new government appoints a new governor of the central bank and a new attorney general not because the incumbents are incompetent but because for change to happen there is need for new blood. In Zimbabwe’s case I think the tag of incompetence can also be attached to the current incumbent of the Central Bank governor’s post.
My advice for both Biti and Gono is that this is not a time for scoring cheap political points. Zimbabweans want their lives to get better and not to see people wasting time on non issues. Biti has the mandate to run our fiscal policy as well as to oversee the running of the monetary policy hence he needs to focus on this. Gono must realise that all good things come to an end and that his time has come to an end. All Zimbabweans educated or not, economists and layman are agreed that Gono has failed except of course those who have benefited from his largesse. It is time for the two protagonists to sit down and deal with their issues away from the media spotlight. While they are scoring cheap points in the media Zimbabwe continues to burn. No one man should be bigger than Zimbabwe. I feel that Gono has had his chance so it is now time to pass the baton.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)