Zimbabwe: Beware of the Google types

Now, we have this Charles Ray busy cultivating a false consciousness within our youth, a consciousness that repudiates preceding generations in the name of a better-to-build-young-people false credo. A false consciousness that attaches heroism to a foreigner who has killed kindred spirits, who seems white and American in spite of himself, a privileged exception to an oppressed clan, to an oppressed colour, an exception to an oppressed and repudiated history, a black man conscripted to fight abroad America’s wars of aggression against Third World peoples.
Our youth call that type a hero? Our youth are instigated to repudiate their forebears by such?

The Herald

By Nathaniel Manheru

Picture this: Charles Ray Honoured by Zimbabwe Organisation for Youth in Politics (ZOYP), a “human rights” organisation working with youth at the grassroots. The award, 2011 Diplomatic Human Rights Defender, was given to the American ambassador for, in the words of ZOYP’s national coordinator, one Nkosilathi Moyo, “critical helping hand that Ambassador Ray gave” ZOYP, for which ZOYP notes “with bounteous gratitude”.


What that help was, we are not told. And Moyo goes further, rather rhapsodically: “Here is a man (Ambassador Ray) who on countless occasions removed his ambassadorial resplendence to the level of the ordinary man in the streets all in the name of meeting the Zimbabwean youths at their point of need.”
Not to be outdone, a ZOYP board member, one Patson Dzamara intoned: “It is better to build young people than to repair old men.” By the way, the youthful duo went to the US Embassy to present this mighty award to the Ambassador. They came all the way from KweKwe.

Bawling heroism
Of course the good Ambassador requited the felicitations: “Receiving an award is always a special occasion, but this is made even more special by the true admiration and respect I have for this particular group, ZOYP”. And in a dash of mock-modesty: “The award carries the word “hero”.
But, I am not a hero. The heroes in a struggle for democracy, human rights, equity, or any attempt to remind government of who it serves, are the people and organisations on the ground. The real heroes today are the leaders at ZOYP and other organisations in Zimbabwe and throughout the world, those who work tirelessly to create a space for young voices. The work you are doing is truly heroic and I am pleased to stand with you today.

Stay put, dear youth!
Ambassador Ray urged the youth to press on in their cause: “As leaders, you know the importance of getting involved. Yet, even more important than this, is staying involved. The causes you have taken up will not be accomplished easily or overnight. This is not a sprint, but a marathon, and victory goes to those who continue to run no matter the obstacles or challenges.
My encouragement to you now is this: be ready to hold fast and stay involved. Obstacles will come, challenges are a guarantee. But if you, as young people, persist in making yourselves heard in a voice that is strong and united, if you remain firm in your commitment to living lives of excellence and value, you will persevere.”

From the heart of the land
For the benefit of those who might not have some background on ZOYP, this is a Kwekwe-based youth organisation created by the American Embassy here through MDC-T structures. It is funded by the American Embassy, and has been used by the American Ambassador to test out the responsiveness of Zimbabwean youth to IT-based tools of mobilisation for social action, akin to what happened in North Africa.
This operation began in May and has been on and off, its most dramatic failure being in Kwekwe where the American Ambassador sought to use this group to try out this same experiment outside of Harare. The intended town hall meeting collapsed after Zanu-PF youths who saw through this mobilisation ruse, disrupted it. Nkosilathi Moyo hit the press headlines, rueful, mournfully.

British Ambassador, Father Nigel and licences
I am sure a picture is beginning to emerge. A little more detail. Western commissioned studies have noted that demographically, the youth are the epicentre of the vote for 2012. Apart from tipping provinces which are already earmarked, the other plank is an all-out drive to get the youth registered, indeed to mobilise them initially to vote for MDC-T and, where this fails to secure victory for the MDC, to mobilise them for action.
The American Ambassador, alongside other western ambassadors, are behind this project which is beginning to be paralysed both by a combination of youth indifference and by more aggressive mobilisation of the youth by Zanu- PF. The going has been quite tough, which is why the American Ambassador is urging perseverance.
The whole project badly needs mutual encouragement, which is why this award is important. What is worse, it is beginning to levy huge outlays on the West’s broken economies. But the stakes are high. That is not my story.
I am sure those responsible for handling such foreign-inspired mischief are hard at work, including checkmating Britain’s “excellent” lady here who has been working through Father Nigel Johnson to rig the next round of radio licences. She promises all applicants full financial cover, including start-up capital for such stations. We shall see.


Sex smitten candidate is all we got
My real objective is to reveal the absurd side of American structures here, and how desperate they become once wrong-footed, and thrust into overdrive prematurely. Obviously the Americans are not too sure when elections are coming.
They are working in remarkable panic, more so when they see their protege here fumbling, dramatically tripping on inane, amorous matters in the season of critical choices. Far from seeing a presidential candidate, they find forlorn character, sex-battered.

Theatre of the absurd
Does it not get a bit absurd when a whole American ambassador asks for an award from an organisation which he himself set up, which his own Government funds to achieve the very same objectives for which he was deployed, namely to cause regime change here?
And to have all that gigantic diplomatic award exertion covered by a paper which his Government again set up, which his mission funds to carry his messages, including this speech?
And Ray and his politically henpecked youth parley for heroic greatness, each calling the other “the real hero”? It gets a bit incestuous, does it not?

Much worse, these little politically empty vessels had called Charles Ray their “hero”? My goodness? I suppose Ambassador Ray liberated the Vietnamese? Is here to liberate Zimbabweans? And you cannot miss the quality of that liberation by the consciousness coming through these two youths.
One superlatively thanks Ray for “the critical helping hand”. Hand helping the youth in which critical direction? Or has America widened its hand-holding beyond the MDC-T leader, to include MDC-T youths? Cry the beloved generation then! The other sees in Ray a figure who “builds young people” rather than “repair old men”. Goodness me!
What age is Ray? Why is it only in America that old men are young? Only from America that we get old Ambassadors with the gift of building young African people, while dismantling “old men”, presumably African ones? Whose old men are these who should not be repaired?

The lesson we cannot learn
Certainly not America’s white old men. Otherwise why would America bother to reissue Ronald Reagan after a double death: of the brain while still in office; of body well after office? Meanwhile, Jimmy Carter trudges on, undiminished in America’s estimate. Each year, America splashes new glory on him, adorns him with fresh plumes of resplendent glory. It is always like that for America, a country at peace with its history, and the personages who presided over that history.
That even-handed view of history extols even those men of staggering foibles and handicaps, all redeemed by the national role thrust upon them, however undeservedly. And America knows that after their foibles comes a great narrative, free of human errors, human frailties, human warts, for the sake of her undiminished greatness.
In its timeless narrative, America knows no low points in its national life. In its narrative, America knows no scoundrels, only men of high honour and higher calling. It fought no inglorious wars, invaded no country, assassinated no leaders, oppressed no blacks, stole no country, massacred no one, committed no genocides, pillaged no oil, infected no Guatemalans with STDs, created no germs, unleashed no imperialism. It is all glory, glory, glory and higher glory as America panegyrizes itself, its history and its leadership, indeed as America scales to dizzy heights, all against a mesmerised human crowd.

Repudiating ourselves
Now, we have this Charles Ray busy cultivating a false consciousness within our youth, a consciousness that repudiates preceding generations in the name of a better-to-build-young-people false credo. A false consciousness that attaches heroism to a foreigner who has killed kindred spirits, who seems white and American in spite of himself, a privileged exception to an oppressed clan, to an oppressed colour, an exception to an oppressed and repudiated history, a black man conscripted to fight abroad America’s wars of aggression against Third World peoples.
Our youth call that type a hero? Our youth are instigated to repudiate their forebears by such? And now that it happens that those “old men” who should not be repaired belong to the generation that created a free Zimbabwe, what now Sir Ray and your depraved youths?
This is a repudiation of history, of our origins, of one’s very being, all to transfer identity and reverence to America? Aaaah? You see it from that angle and you realise why this false award has such grave implications for all of us.

A heresy that stinks all the way to heaven
This is the kind of a-historicity which America preaches abroad, often using mouths that bear our colour. A repudiation of parentage, an overwriting of your history for an American one, indeed a joyous soiling of the heroes of your people, your struggles, your history, all for another sense of history, one so deeply Americanised.
You are incited against that history, sponsored to fight it, to organise against it, all in the name of democracy, human rights, equity. And all those values which are yours by heroic struggles, by huge sacrifices of your own people, you are made to believe you gratefully owe to America which invented them for lesser mankind, indeed you are made to believe you owe them to Ambassador Ray, even though he only came to this country a few days ago, long after Zimbabwe had become free, freed by black Zimbabweans now fashionably referred to as “old men” in disrepair.
How many died? How man perished before Que Que could become Kwekwe? Do these youths know that? And against whom were they fighting? Against white interests, American interests which saw continued white rule as the only guarantee to continued exploitation of chrome over which America repudiated sanctions against Rhodesia. How does a country with such a shameful history vis-a-vis our struggles here, ever produce a representative we can call a hero? For those filthy trinkets? I am disgusted.

Resplendence and sanctions
Lest I get overworked, I need to make a larger point. While these two youths were busy decorating Ray and his country, America was busy de-listing two strategic Zimbabwean companies from trade by adding them on its sanctions list. Ignorant America would never know Mbada, would never know Marange Resources, small companies located in some little, great country called Zimbabwe.
It is America’s mission here — headed by one Charles Ray — who tells America that there is Mbada, that there is Marange Resources, both trading in KPCS-certified diamonds which belong solely to some small but sovereign African country called Zimbabwe. It is America’s mission here — again headed by one Charles Ray — which tells the spiteful American government that unlike Chrome under white Rhodesia, those diamonds are benefiting an African government for an African people under some man called Robert Mugabe: old, black, African and consummately anti-imperialist.
It is Ray, in other words, who counsels the American Government to include our companies on their sanctions, all to disable Zimbabwe. Then you hear some strange youth, drunk by a dollar or two from the American ambassador, radiantly asserting that the same evil ambassador “removes his ambassadorial resplendence . . . to meet the Zimbabwean youths at their point of need”? My goodness. You reward a man who has robbed your country, you, of a prosperous future?

What even Newsday could not support
Not even Newsday, another American funded project here, could agree. Here is their editorial comment only yesterday: “The recent addition of Mbada Diamonds and Marange Resources to the United States sanctions list is the clearest indication yet that Zimbabwe’s erstwhile enemies in the West will do anything to make sure they suffocate the nation’s attempts to extricate itself from the effects of sanctions.
“The latest development, coming barely two months after the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme (KPCS) approved the sale of the country’s gems, is an indication of the double standards that have become the hallmark of countries of the West.” As if to help it’s cousins (ZOYP) in American sponsorship, Newsday adds: “The government anticipates $600m in additional revenue from diamond sales in 2012, which is earmarked to go towards social services that benefit the masses directly. What will become of these programmes if the funds do not come through? Is this not punishing the ordinary people who have been hopeful that their basic needs will be met and their meager salaries improved?”
The editorial clearly questions US’ fatuous assertion to have “the interests of the ordinary people of Zimbabwe at heart as they claim”. Is it not instructive that even this American sponsored organ found American sanctions just too repugnant?
Indeed, could this be the beginning of an awareness that Zimbabwean citizens, corporate ones included, stand to get better rewards from a thriving and therefore advertising Mbada and economy, than from small rolls of newsprint, spasmodic salaries, little T&S from USAID, apart from the vast thought control from USAID and Charles Ray personally? If that is so, then the days of illegal sanctions are clearly numbered.

The day the Pharaohs rebelled
Whichever way, I take great heart from Egypt, the land of the African pyramids. Two days ago, the Supreme Council of the Military, Egypt’s usually pro-American ruling military junta, decided it has had enough of gross American interference, all done in the name of promoting human rights, democracy and all. One morning, the army was mobilized to freeze operations of 17 NGOs, principally National Democratic Institute (NDI), International Republican Institute (IRI) and Freedom House from America. The rest were little Egyptian pretexts Americans had created, pretexts like ZOYP, created and locally staffed and American funded to create an illusion of a national civic society movement through which to influence national politics towards the preservation of America's global interests. All those 17 NGOs were severely quartered, to great American diplomatic howl. But the stubborn generals are unmoved. However wrong they may be politically, on this one matter the generals are correct, and have opened a new chapter in Africa-US relations on the continent. When America's pernicious instruments of intrusion and influence get rejected even in her client states, what more elsewhere? An all those institutes of deadly intrusion have been at work here, playing cat and mouse with the authorities in Zimbabwe.

Buffeting Africa
What is the grand plan? Well, simply to fashion the world after American and western values. To make it quiescent to western interests and whims. To make the world safe for western and American interests and dominance. It is not any human right, any democracy, any equity which America seeks to give us willy nilly, through organizations like ZOYP. Rather, it is America's democracy. Human rights and equity the American way. And today Africa is a battle ground for competing models. America has her own definition, her own models. Europe has hers. Africa has to content with both, willy nilly.


Enter the Google generation
Here is Tony Blair only a few days back, reflecting on the fate of the lesser peoples from the lesser world. Remonstrating with the West for showing reticence in supporting what he termed "liberal and democratic elements" in the Middle East and North Africa, Blair depicted the lesser world as split between two contending forces: "One is what I would call liberal democratic elements, what I would call the sort of Google types who were initially out in Tahrir Square, the up and coming, aspiring kind of middle class people who want the same type of things we want, the freedoms we want. Then you have got this Islamist movement, in the Muslim Brotherhood, which is very well organized, and where frankly, it is not clear that they want the same things as us and it is not clear that the type of democracy they would create would be genuine democracy." And for him, the tragedy was that "the more religious and extreme elements are very well organized and the liberal and democratic types basically aren't". He then called on the West to support the liberal type, the Google type. Like ZOYP? Clearly the democratic touchstone is "the same type of things we [the West] want", the "freedoms we want". Needless to say it cannot be that type of freedom or democracy which allows Robert Mugabe, Tony Blair and George Bush to coexist as equal Presidents of their respective different but equally sovereign nations. This is what the West and rest of us means, the kind of values which Ray is here to promote, here to inculcate in our youth. And he is right: this cannot be a sprint, but a marathon requiring lots of perseverance.

Exit the Google type, enter new history
Yet all is not lost, as Blair' s lamentation clear show. The native is about to return, smashing the Google type. After all the West, having long lost the moral high ground, has since lost its soft power hold over us. And it being an era of resources, a Third World era in other words, these backward Google types shall soon join the terraces as Africa marches forward - unstopped, unstoppable - its old men in tow, well repaired through a new history, through new times. Icho!
nathaniel.manheru@zimpapers.co.zw

US must reconsider sanctions on Zim diamond companies

What makes the development sad is the fact that the two companies had done everything possible to comply as had been asked by the KPCS only for US to shift goalposts because they have been praying for the classification of the gemstones as blood diamonds so they could not be traded on the lucrative international market. 
Newsday
EDITORIAL

The recent addition of Mbada Diamonds and Marange Resources to the United States sanction list is the clearest indication yet that Zimbabwe’s erstwhile enemies in the West will do anything to make sure they suffocate the nation’s attempts to extricate itself from the effects of sanctions.
The latest development, coming barely two months after the Kimberly Process Certification Scheme (KPCS) approved the sale of the country’s gems, is an indication of the double standards that have become the hallmark of countries in the West.

According to the latest US Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control, the two companies have been added onto the “specially designated” updated nationals list.

The list extends to any assumed names the companies might operate under, including Block Wood Mining and Condurango Investments.

What makes the development sad is the fact that the two companies had done everything possible to comply as had been asked by the KPCS only for US to shift goalposts because they have been praying for the classification of the gemstones as blood diamonds so they could not be traded on the lucrative international market.

We are told the approval of the sale of the country’s diamonds was reached after negotiations involving the KP council, Zimbabwe, the European Union, South Africa and the United States. The approval will be effective until a KP meeting next year.

Yes, there could still be issues that have to be addressed, but we do not believe the sanctions route was the way to go.

In fact, the sanctions with which top government officials have been slapped over the past years don’t seem to have shaken them, and this is likely to be the case with the diamond companies.

Considering the immense benefit the diamonds are expected to bring into the country not for certain individuals but for the economy as a whole, these sanctions are unnecessary.

What the US should be advocating for is transparency in the usage of the funds generated from the sale of these gems rather than completely shutting the country out.

If they really have the interests of the ordinary people of Zimbabwe at heart as they claim, this is what they are supposed to do.

What then is it that we should do as a country before we can enjoy the proceeds from the precious mineral resource?

The government anticipates $600 million in additional revenue from diamond sales in 2012, which is earmarked to go towards social services that benefit the masses directly.

What will become of these programmes if the funds do not come through?

Is this not punishing the ordinary people who have been hopeful that their basic needs will be met and their meagre salaries improved?

In that regard, we urge the US to reconsider its decision.

2011: A year of travails

Revolt is what the West got in North Africa, during the so-called Arab Spring, and profited from it.
(There have been uprisings in Europe and the US itself but they have not been so viral. Could this have anything to do with lack of outside support and interventions?)

Arguably the biggest trophy of the West during the Arab Spring which saw the demise of leaders in Tunisia and Egypt, was the cruel death of Libya's colonel Muammar Gaddafi, who died at the hands of Nato-backed rebels in October.

By Tichaona Zindoga

If there is one word that was this year most used by Zimbabwean politicians and commentators in reference to the inclusive Government, it is "dysfunctional". 

This is read in the context of the "marriage of convenience" that Zanu-PF and the two MDC formations entered in 2009. That the marriage is now "dysfunctional" is the basis for calls, which have become more strident lately, to terminate the life of the inclusive Government.
This is not unjustified. 

Parties in the inclusive Government have bickered on anything from civil servants salaries and financing agriculture to diamond revenues. Perhaps the disagreements have been overplayed to the extent of painting an unduly negative picture of the inclusive Government.
Was it not columnist Nathaniel Manheru who wrote something to the effect that society is wont to hear a couple's disagreements rather than the quieter, productive - and reproductive moments? However, President Mugabe has said that the inclusive Government should no longer subsist. He and his party say elections should be held as a matter of course, that is, in 2012. The party, at its annual conference - dubbed mini congress in Bulawayo earlier this month resolved as much.
The other parties in the inclusive Government are not prepared for elections and they have been seen to hold it out - demanding the "full implementation" of the GPA and the Sadc roadmap on elections.
The long-winded constitution-making process has put a drag on the holding of elections, which were initially hoped to be held this year, if the 18-month timeline to complete the process was adhered to.
The MDCs have been accused of stalling the process with Finance Minister Biti being accused of not funding the process adequately. The year ends with drafters on the table meaning the text of the constitution might be available in the first quarter of 2012.
It also ends in drama, which would make a body weep or laugh or both. Consider Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai's controversial "marriage" to Locardia Karimatsenga Tembo in the "sacred" month of November. The issue was a talking point politically and socially.
It could have a bearing on Mr Tsvangirai's long-held presidential aspirations. In October, Mr Tsvangirai came out in support of "gay rights" during a BBC programme. He was apparently influenced by the British government's policy that it would not give aid to homophobic governments in Africa. The issue landed Mr Tsvangirai in trouble. For a moment it seemed that his "marriage" to Tembo was a way to steer himself from the maelstrom around the gay issue.
However, his marriage lasted only 12 days and he (or was it his staff?) made a statement confirming he had a relationship with Tembo but thought it would not consummate because it had been taken over by the CIO.
The Herald was blamed by Mr Tsvangirai and his minions and supporters of being part to the plot to destroy him. The paper did an excellent job in breaking the news of the marriage right up to the moment where Locardia was playing daughter-in-law at the Tsvangirai's in Buhera.
And what a sight Locardia was when she appeared with a "Zambia" wrapped around her waist, with her manicured hands on the short rustic broom and her head covered with a doek but for a few strands of "weave"!
The Tembo story had the effect of upsetting people within the MDC-T. After the episode lapsed, the MDC-T, sought to claim some victories to gain confidence. The party sought to give itself twin Christmas presents, all brewed in Parliament.
The party moved motions to oust Clerk of Parliament Mr Austin Zvoma and to dissolve the Broadcasting Authority of Zimbabwe which awarded commercial radio licences to Zimpapers Talk Radio and Supa Mandiwanzira's AB Communications.
The party had in tow MPs from the other MDC formation. It remains to be seen whether the MDCs will succeed in both fronts.
However, what is clear is that with a majority in Parliament, the two MDC formations can give Zanu-PF a tough time, which situation the revolutionary party finds itself in. The "kingmaker", the smaller MDC formation is in trouble. After the party's congress in February, Professor Welshman Ncube took the reins at the party only for Professor Arthur Mutambara to dispute the legitimacy of the congress and Ncube's ascent.
A group aligned to Mutambara challenged the legality of the congress in the courts. The case is still pending. As a counter measure, the Ncube faction approached the courts seeking to bar Mutambara from acting as MDC leader, which they won this December.
Their victory came hard on the heels of an announcement of a new executive by the Mutambara faction at which point five MPs and senators from the party aligned themselves to Mutambara.
The state of affairs means that Ncube is virtually without a member in Parliament.
Yet Mutambara seems moribund as a "principal" of the inclusive Government as his status, having been barred by the courts to act as leader, remains doubtful.
Some analysts point out that his stay will be at the mercy of President Mugabe.
The Ncube faction has said it "donated" Mutambara to Zanu-PF. In November, the Mutambara faction suffered another setback when they were chucked out of an anti-violence indaba that parties convened allowing for the interaction of the central committee of Zanu-PF and the national councils of the MDC formations.
The anti-violence indaba was in itself a significant milestone in the country's politics which is characterised sometimes by violent clashes. The parties agreed that violence had to be avoided and President Mugabe emphasised that parties had to approach the electorate on the strength of their programmes.
Zanu-PF banks on its people-oriented programmes such as the indigenisation and economic programme which took shape this year. President Mugabe launched the first community share ownership scheme at Zimplats in Mhondoro in October.
The scheme will help locals in resource rich areas to get 10 percent stake in companies that exploit their resources. The employee share ownership, by which employees get stake in their companies, was also launched at Schweppes and has included companies like Miekles.
The indigenisation train is set to move irrevocably.
MDC-T has said it has its own "Jobs and Investment and Upliftment Plan", to rival the indigenisation programme. Either way, the issues over indigenisation or lack of it might win or lose the next elections to the protagonists.

 Will sanctions be another election issue?
It could be; and who knows what those behind the National Anti-Sanctions Petition Campaign have up their sleeves? The programme was launched in March by President Mugabe and sources say two million signatures were collected. The next step is likely to be as big as the raucous launch that beautiful day in March.The MDCs snubbed the function. One of the highlights of 2011 was the unfortunate demise of General Solomon Mujuru in August. The national hero was killed in a fire at his house in Beatrice.
Thousands of people from all walks of life converged at the National Heroes Acre to pay their last respects to the late Mujuru. The event was deemed one of the biggest of all time; probably second to the first Independence celebrations in 1980.
The death of Gen Mujuru remains a mystery.
Another talking point will be Zimbabwe's gruelling win at the Kimberly Process. In November the KP allowed Zimbabwe to sell its Marange diamonds unconditionally. The US and other western lobbyists did not block the move. However, the US had other ideas. This month, the country flexed its hideous muscles and slapped sanctions on the companies that are operating in Marange. Effectively, after the US imposed sanctions on Zimbabwe exactly a decade ago, it still is at war with Zimbabwe, strangle the economy of the country so that the people suffer and revolt.
Revolt is what the West got in North Africa, during the so-called Arab Spring, and profited from it.
(There have been uprisings in Europe and the US itself but they have not been so viral. Could this have anything to do with lack of outside support and interventions?)
Arguably the biggest trophy of the West during the Arab Spring which saw the demise of leaders in Tunisia and Egypt, was the cruel death of Libya's colonel Muammar Gaddafi, who died at the hands of Nato-backed rebels in October. After being besieged by Nato since March 19, Gaddafi did not flee his country but remained defiant. He paid for it on October 20. Gaddafi's demise has been viewed partly as a self-created tragedy since he did not allow democratic participation of the citizenry and chose to go to bed with the enemy. Gaddafi did not invest in Africa but in the West where he stashed about US$150 billion.
Zimbabwe only got two camels from the oil-rich country, according to President Mugabe. The West froze his assets and supported rebels and pummelled Libya, destroying the infrastructure and the social services that Gaddafi, for all his warts had built in 42 years.
That three African countries South Africa, Nigeria and Gabon - supported UNSC Resolution 1973 that authorised the occupation of Libya courted much controversy and anger. Closer home, the drama around the suspension of ANC Youth League president Julius Malema made headlines across the world, including here. Malema was in the news for his "Shoot the Boer song", deemed hate speech; and his call for regime change in Botswana where he said President Ian Khama was a Western puppet.
He also embittered the ANC leadership when he criticised President Jacob Zuma. For a time, he looked set to unmake Zuma in the fashion he made him through mobilising youths. But the elephant called ANC crashed him and it remains a conjecture whether he will rise again.

Luke Tamborinyoka's exercise in futility

Except with propagandists, bona fide writers and artists should accept the basic fact that they no longer have control over the message the moment it reaches the other end. Sooner or later, propagandists, too, have to contend with the knowledge that their messages might find no takers entailing them to be more persuasive or subtler.

By Tichaona Zindoga
Many people may have been left fascinated reading the op-ed piece by Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai's spokesperson Luke Tamborinyoka yesterday in which he sought to foist a guided reading of his boss' book.
He was responding to reviews of "At the deep end" by the media and other analysts, including Professor Jonathan Moyo. Predictably, Tamborinyoka reserved a couple of potshots at Prof Moyo, which had nothing to do with the analysis of the book itself. By and large, the article could have been a mistake on Mr Tamborinyoka's part, who wrote on behalf of the master, although he pretended otherwise.
He exposed himself so glaringly, just as PM Tsvangirai ultimately did through his book that he today might be cursing the very idea of having it published in the first place.
First, it is astounding to learn that the premier's spokesperson believes, and actually wishes, people would read and get the message just as the premier wanted. This is fallacious. It is not only impractical and unrealistic but also undesirable in a democratic society.
MDC, the "party of excellence" the premier leads, is a democratic party, by all means! Or so we are told.
All works of art, from sculpture and painting to music and writing are open to various interpretations that are informed by the audience's backgrounds, philosophies, orientations and so forth. Even in media schools,
which Tamborinyoka, a former editor at the Daily News no doubt went through, this basic communication fact is taught.
For Tamborinyoka to therefore teach what constitutes the "juicy" is not only unfortunate but also impractical. It is anathema to democracy that allows for free thought and expression. It is a slightly different case with newspapers where classically it has been taught that news is what the editor says is news. Mr Tamborinyoka's editorial background could have misled him.
Except with propagandists, bona fide writers and artists should accept the basic fact that they no longer have control over the message the moment it reaches the other end. Sooner or later, propagandists, too, have to contend with the knowledge that their messages might find no takers entailing them to be more persuasive or subtler.
In the case of "At the deep end", which was written for PM Tsvangirai by William Bango, his former spokesperson and who interestingly also has a Daily News background, there are things that are less subtle.
They are in black and white, as PM Tsvangirai's ruing that he lacked weapons to fulfil people's wishes after a "stolen" election. This is on page 485 in which PM Tsvangirai states: "I had won two elections in a row
but still failed to execute the people's mandate. For a moment I did not know what to do. I had no arms of war. I lacked the wherewithal to force myself into power to fulfil the people's wish."
This is, it has to be emphasised, in black and white and all those who can lay their hands on the book can see it. It is an uncomfortable and incontrovertible truth. Perhaps it was said without much thought in what is called "kuomoka" or "kuvhumuka" in Shona.
This is where the beauty and the bad of artworks are.
One can betray what is hidden in the dark crevices of conscience. Words spoken in sleep can give away a cheating spouse just as a troubled and sickly soul of a witch can account for the death of the village's children.
A single word can be the tip of an iceberg. Those who have elementary knowledge of psychology will quickly relate to Freud. You cannot wrap that which has horns, counsels traditional wisdom.
In which case, it is only logical, but almost fruitless for Mr Tamborinyoka as the PM's current mouthpiece, to do a bit of fire fighting. He is fighting the fires stoked by his predecessor. In part, he tries to do that by diverting readers and analysts from the uncomfortable zones to the "juicy" ones. It is little doubt whether other readers would share Mr Tamborinyoka's assessment or take of the "juicy".
What if they regard his professed lack of knowledge of electoral laws, which does not bode well for a leader aspiring high office in the land, as juicy? Or if people find out that he profited from tribalism, of which he has shown to be a great practitioner, as juicy?
Or still that he did not go to war against racist Rhodesia because he was self-centred? All this is contained in PM Tsvangirai's book. This means that there cannot be a universal matrix of the "juicy". There is a very compelling dimension to this whole thing. Looking at precedent, it might appear as though Mr Tamborinyoka might be headed for writing another book for his boss.
So he better be more careful with what he writes and says on behalf of the former trade unionist. There won't, and cannot be, a monolithic reading of the words. People are bound to read both the black and white as well as between the lines.
Unfortunately, one won't have control over what people think or say, unless authoritarianism is taken to the Divine stretches. This means that one should not lose sleep over what some people think or read into art.
One can take comfort, as Mr Tamborinyoka tries to do, in the belief that there are other people who think favourably or who find the "juicy" elsewhere where there could be mutual pleasure for the source and his interlocutors.
This is why Mr Tamborinyoka apparently wasted his precious time trying to parcel out blinkers with which to read his boss' book.
It is his democratic right, though.

Tsvangirai: Avoiding the deep end

... if Tsvangirai seeks to portray himself “at deep end” of fighting the national struggles of Zimbabwean people, he fails dismally.

In fact, reading the story of his life, one gets a picture of someone who all but avoids the deep end of Zimbabwe’s national questions.
He shows to be an opportunist who swims with the tide, which trait generally erodes the little credit he otherwise deserves at times.

By Tichaona Zindoga
Many people have been surprised by the publication of Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai’s memoirs at the beginning of this month.

Typically, political memoirs are published at the end of one’s career but Tsvangirai’s autobiography, “Morgan Tsvangirai: At the deep end”, ghost-written for him by journalist and his former spokesman William Bango, is out in the middle of his career.

Tsvangirai says: “So much has been written from other people’s perspective and not from my perspective.

"There has been so much distortion, so much undermining of my character, even misrepresentation of certain events over the last 20 or so years, so I am just putting the record straight.”

Bango chips in saying Tsvangirai has been “swimming against a very harsh tide which was determined to stop any movement towards the democratisation of this country”.

The book traces the MDC leader’s life from Nerutanga village in Buhera where he was born on March 10 1952, his modest education of up to “O” Level, through his first job in Mutare, to Bindura Nickel Mine, the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions, the formation of the MDC in 1999, its split in 2005, up to the present when he is premier in the inclusive Government.

But if Tsvangirai seeks to portray himself “at deep end” of fighting the national struggles of Zimbabwean people, he fails dismally.

In fact, reading the story of his life, one gets a picture of someone who all but avoids the deep end of Zimbabwe’s national questions.

He shows to be an opportunist who swims with the tide, which trait sometimes erodes the little credit he otherwise deserves at times.

Apart from the book being written for him by Bango, formerly at MDC propaganda mouthpiece The Daily News (Tsvangirai admits as much), Tsvangirai’s autobiography draws heavy influences from conservative and neoliberal sources ranging from Ian Smith to western-sponsored anti-Zanu-PF websites.

As such the ordinary “village boy” he tries to portray himself in the first chapter, for example, is stilted and does not come to life when he is made relate history through, and pouts the words of, the likes of Ian Smith, whose book Tsvangirai uses profusely.

Despite claiming that “My life was destined to be closely interwoven with political, economic and social changes in Zimbabwe,” Tsvangirai failed in the first big test of his time.

He did not join the liberation struggle against Rhodesian settler rule.

“Perhaps I would have become a political activist but my parents needed financial help to support the other children through school,” rationalizes Tsvangirai.

He claims that his father, Dzingirai Chibwe, “as always, pressed me to finish my studies and enter working life.” (page 25).

While working in Mutare (then Umtali) in 1972 for a company that made underwear elastic bands and curtain tapes, Tsvangirai says after being questioned by Rhodesian authorities over the use of the name Morgan instead of the Christian Richard, “It was a warning to stay out of politics”.

Later, while working in Bindura at a time when the liberation struggle became more intense, Tsvangirai states that he could not join the war because his wife, Susan was pregnant with his son, Edwin.

In fact, he revels in his opportunism as, following the “constant conscription of white managers into the police and army, I soon found myself with additional responsibilities at work which set the stage for professional growth.”

He was to stretch his opportunism at Independence in 1980 when “suddenly” he “felt a surge of renewed interest to participate in politics.”

He thus joined the local branch of Zanu-PF well in the safety of the Independence which he could not sacrifice to bring.


Trade unionism and politics

Trade unionism illustrates the best and worst of Tsvangirai.

He started at Bindura when he joined the Allied Mineworkers Union of which he was later to become second vice president.

He later joined the Zimbabwe Congress of trade Union as vice president and later secretary general.
On one hand, it must be admitted that Tsvangirai did exceptionally well as a worker representative in post-independent Zimbabwe.

He had a bit of luck, too, as Government’s ill-advisedly adopted the International Monetary Funds’ Economic Structural Adjustment Programme in the early 1990’s.

The austerity programme set Government apart from workers who bore the brunt of retrenchments and erosion of social services.

ZCTU’s “Beyond Esap” programmes led to the formation of the Movement for Democratic Change in May 1999, albeit with the manipulation of Tsvangirai who had over the years seen his profile rise and rise and wanted the highest political office.

He admits in the book that he used the resources of the labour body, which was supported by Western and Nordic countries.

Although he says “people said that they regarded the 1990s as a totally wasted decade”, clearly the 1990’s had belonged to the trade unionist Morgan Tsvangirai.

But then if anybody had trusted that Tsvangirai would champion the cause of workers whose background he shared, they were wrong.

No sooner had Tsvangirai formed the MDC did he take up the cause of white commercial farmers.

He fought in the corner of white commercial farmers to block passage of a new constitution that threatened their hold on colonially-gotten land.

A referendum on February 12, 2000 saw MDC and the whites succeed in the “No” vote.

Tsvangirai admits it was a mistake, though, believing he lost an opportunity to oust President Mugabe as the envisaged new constitution provided for his leaving office within the a short time of the operationalization of the new supreme law.

But he had drunk a poisoned chalice, moreso for workers he purported to represent.

Tsvangirai became a hit with western capitals who saw an opportunity to make a go at President Mugabe who had angered Britain and its western allies over the question of land.

As if to sanitise his veering off the course of workers’ struggle at the party they birthed, Tsvangirai claims MDC is “social democracy”, as the guiding ideology of the party.

Perhaps Tsvangirai could also have pointed out that his association with the white interests is what set him apart from the “false starts” of the likes of Edgar Tekere.

When it comes to his alliances, Tsvangirai tries to come clean on his dalliance with the West, which has been an indictment on his type of politics.

Incredibly, Tsvangirai says he has not received any money from Britain except for “£12 000 sterling from the Westminster Foundation for the training of our election agents.”

“Beyond that,” declares Tsvangirai, “we received nothing from London, either in the form of cash or ideas.

“To eliminate all doubt, as president of the MDC, I challenge any person in Harare, London or anywhere else to prove me wrong on this basic historical fact.” (pp 318)

This is despite the fact that the UK government officials have on numerous occasions said they were working with the MDC to effect regime change in Harare.

London has also stated that it consults the MDC on the direction of sanctions.

However, maintaining that he has no links with Britain, Tsvangirai even complains that UK has spoiled his game.

On the other hand, though, Tsvangirai is silent on the role of America and does not stand up and challenge anyone who questions MDC-US links, in the fashion of his challenge on Britain.

The US has taken the forefront in supporting the MDC and its civil society allies financially, diplomatically, materially and morally under the so-called democracy promotion.

Tsvangirai is also silent on a number of awards he has received in western capitals in which he is cited as a democratic player.

Tsvangirai has also been awarded with an honorary degree by a South Korean university.

Hate speech

It is remarkable and disturbing but unsurprising that Tsvangirai who has claimed to be a victim of hate speech, uses his book to propagate hate against President Mugabe.

While being self-indulgent and self-adulatory Tsvangirai is coarse and caustic against President Mugabe.

He makes sure that he does not mention a single achievement by the Zanu-PF leader and tries to portray his rule as unmitigated failure from 1980.

Where he grudgingly accepts achievements of the Zanu-PF government, he makes sure that pins an underside of the achievement.

For example, Tsvangirai seems to blame the country’s education system for producing graduates, whom he says were soon to find no employment.

He is unsparing when he comes to university education, which coincidentally he did not get.

He says: “The narrow technical traits our universities prize as higher learning can easily block our access to wisdom, deform our morals and deplete our intuitive gifts to a point where common sense ceases to be common.” (pp467).

He despises Prof Arthur Mutambara for his learnedness saying it was through him that “I realised that one could easily pass through law school, a university or any structured technical training course and still come out totally unfinished as a human being.”

Interacting with degreed ministers and other officials Tsvangirai says, “I found myself surrounded by lots of well-read and knowledgeable officials but many lacked the requisite wisdom to handle changing circumstances.” (pp 527).

But it is against President Mugabe that he reserves his venom and contempt.

He calls the President a “national disgrace” and “dictator” who had lost his legacy which he could salvage by associating with Tsvangirai.

Discussing the circumstances that led to the GPA and formation of the inclusive Government, Tsvangirai portrays himself as the proverbial knight in shining armour.

In part, he does that by denigrating President Mugabe and seems to have a pathological obsession with his age.

For example, he describes a meeting they had at Rainbow Towers one day.

He writes: “As I entered the Rainbow Towers meeting room, I was shocked to see a frail senior citizen huddled on a chair at a corner table.

“I had not seen Mugabe at close range for more than ten years. He certainly looked much older than I expected.

“He stared at me with an ashen face, looking deeply troubled.

“He reminded me of my late father, Dzingirai-Chibwe. In fact, Mugabe was older than my father had been when he died.

“I wondered why Mugabe’s close friends and relatives didn’t insist on his retirement. Surely a person of his age should be allowed to rest?” (pp 500).

During the meeting Tsvangirai patronizingly portrays himself as the more alert, intelligible, and generally the better politician.

It is understandable.

Only Tsvangirai exposes himself to be immature, base and compensatory.

He does not do any good to the identification with the simple “village boy”, the father, or the widower which one could identify with.

This makes his book, which largely is bound to be of little value to any discerning reader, generally ashy-tasting.

Last chimurenga: says who?

There has always been the danger, especially in the last decade or so, that the gains of the liberation struggle are under threat, and could be undone if Zanu-PF, winners of the Second and Third Chimurengas and custodians of all the Chimurengas, are defeated by the MDC
The Herald

Tichaona Zindoga
Zimbabwe's history records with pride the exploits of Murenga, a High Spirit of the Njelele Shrine, referred to as the Mlimo based in Matobo District, Matabeleland South.
It is said that this spirit was more superior than, and gave instructions to, other spirits such as Kaguvi, Nehanda, Mkwati which are well-known today.
In 1896, this heroic spirit led the national uprising against British settlers, who had come to Zimbabwe under the banner of the British South Africa Company.
Although the black people of Zimbabwe fought that losing cause, having been endowed with only the rudimentary munitions of war, their bravery and inspiration was remarkable. As remarkable was the leadership of Murenga that the uprising was quickly identifiable and synonymous with him, hence the name "Chi-Murenga", meaning "Murenga's kind (of war)".
Subsequently, the initial resistance against settler rule was referred to as the First Chimurenga. The nationalist struggle, the liberation war that eventually led to the country's Independence in 1980, is known as the
Second Chimurenga.
The land redistribution exercise that Government embarked on as it reclaimed colonially-stolen land and gave it to the majority has been dubbed the Third Chimurenga. Still, a Fourth Chimurenga - some call it the Last Chimurenga - is underway as Government embarks on the indigenisation and economic empowerment process which seeks to give the majority control of the economy.
A Chimurenga, as has been shown by history, is an instrument of revolution. A common thread runs through these chimurengas. First, these struggles are homegrown. They represent a determination by the black people of Zimbabwe to see off constraining status quos and historical epochs imposed by settlers. There is a price to pay, and a heavy one at that.
The black people of Zimbabwe died in their thousands trying to defeat colonialism. As people asserted themselves, their adversaries could only be more stubborn and brutal. In contemporary times, the West has rallied against Zimbabwe and imposed sanctions on Zimbabwe which are meant to, as they have done, cause untold suffering to the people.
It has thankfully not happened so far, though there can never be a guarantee that it will not.
For example, what guarantee do beneficiaries of the Third Chimurenga have when they largely do not have security of tenure and the 99-year leases have not shown to be such? If successful, will the current indigenisation provide an ambient air of economic ownership among Zimbabweans as much as they now walk freely on First Street, from which they were previously barred?
A good guess is that it might not, what with the avarice of a few fat cats, as many people have feared.
Does history not say something about a revolution sowing seeds of own destruction? This is where the problem with naming the current indigenisation programme the "Last Chimurenga" at least from the perspective of semantics.
If what people fear comes to pass that fat cats will control the means of production, and they revolt against it some years from now, will it not be another Chimurenga? In essence, to call the current Chimurenga "last" is not only an attempt to put a lid on history but also sounds myopic. Zimbabwe's history, as far as its Chimurengas are concerned, has evolved over a more than a century. It cannot be chained in 31 years of Independence.
That attempt to put a lid on history will not only be unsuccessful but will also be drowned in history, too.
Struggles and revolutions and histories are as varied and spontaneous and respond to conditions that characterise them. Struggles and revolutions and histories are as constant as change itself because they change, revolve and evolve.
There has always been the danger, especially in the last decade or so, that the gains of the liberation struggle are under threat, and could be undone if Zanu-PF, winners of the Second and Third Chimurengas and custodians of all the Chimurengas, are defeated by the MDC. The MDC are funded and otherwise supported by those against whom the three Chimurengas up to the land reform programme, and now the fourth, have been directed. Zanu-PF has had a close shave with defeat at the hands of the MDC led by Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai. There is a chance that Zanu-PF, sometimes with a tendency to self-destruct, might someday lose to their Western-sponsored rivals.
If that happens, surely people might have to revolt against the Western puppets the same way North Africans intended to do when they rose up against long-time puppets Hosni Mubarak and Ben Ali?
Granting the western-sponsored MDC will not have pilfered and bastardised the Chimurenga and call the defeat of Zanu-PF a "Fifth Chimurenga" - and possibly name their undoing of the gains of the liberation struggle the Sixth - then there will be another Chimurenga, this time the seventh?
Providing all this does not happen, there simply are many facets of struggle that are still to be undertaken and explored. For example, will there not be a need in future for cultural, information and even religious revolutions? Politics, in its inherent idiosyncrasy to produce contradictions, can be trusted to produce situations previously unimagined.
It will be a big surprise indeed if Zimbabwe's continuum of struggles is to end today with the indigenisation programme, however glorious it sounds.

Can Zim trust Jesse Jackson

Rev Jackson sounds dangerously paternalistic or big-brotherly, which could well be acceptable to such people as PM Tsvangirai but not to nationalist politicians like President Mugabe.
On the substance of his view, it becomes clear that his efforts are not moralistic as his civil rights pedigree points to but he is in pursuit of business for his country.
Zimbabwe has no “national interest” in the expansion of the imperial America and it is hardly imaginable that Zimbabwe allows to be so used.
The Sunday Mail

By Tichaona Zindoga
PRESIDENT Mugabe recently met an American business delegation led by civil rights leader Reverend Jesse Jackson on the sidelines of a United Nations meeting in New York.
To an observer, the meeting was quite interesting because of the context in which it took place.
First, it came hard on the heels of a meeting between President Mugabe and Ambassador Charles Ray, America’s envoy to Zimbabwe, who requested the meeting and emphasised the need for commonality between Harare and Washington.
Business was the theme, with a meeting to explore and discuss investment opportunities in Zimbabwe slated for America soon.
Secondly, Rev Jackson had earlier met Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai in Chicago, the substance of which meeting is understood to have been similar to the one he held with President Mugabe.
Factor in the fact that the American envoys are “men of colour”, deployed to do the errands of white America with this black nation of Zimbabwe and, equally, black leaders.
Addressing a meeting in Chicago, PM Tsvangirai aptly called Jackson “my brother”.
The fourth context is that of Rev Jackson’s pedigree as a civil rights activist, which renders him an acceptable voice of reason both in his country and abroad.
But there is also something even more interesting in what Rev Jackson said after meeting President Mugabe.
He said in part that he was “interested in trying to work on ways to have more reconciliation in Zimbabwe which will create more opportunities for economic investment and growth”.
He also said: “So, our interest is to try to figure out a way to get the rival forces to see that there are some values that transcend politics.
“There is a national interest in opening up access to capital, industry, technology, medical equipment, housing, deal flow and those things we have in common.”
Rev Jackson also said he looked forward “to being a factor in helping to bring them (President Mugabe and PM Tsvangirai) closer together so that Zimbabwe’s interests and growth can take place”.
Against all this is the super background of an America that is losing out on business in Africa, Zimbabwe included, to its nemesis from the East, China.
The same America has imposed sanctions on Zimbabwe that other than constricting and/or restricting commerce with Zimbabwe at multi-national institutions, prevent individuals and companies from dealing with Zimbabwe.
America sanctions and fines those who breach this regime.
Additionally, it sniffs and hounds legitimate Zimbabwean business money through the Office for Foreign Assets Control. 
But with the economic reality that has seen America managing only about half of China’s African bounty, America now wants to shift, and engage.
In particular, it is said that it now wants small and medium-scale business to lead in the gaining of ground.
Zimbabwe cries for and conduces to such investments.
Rev Jackson said the Americans were eyeing investment in health, construction, tourism and the media.
So Zimbabwe must, without questioning, accept these businessmen and women who have no connection to the American state, or have they?
It must be noted that what America is trying to do is wiggle out of its sanctions against Zimbabwe.
The leadership must be trusted to realise this.
It would do a lot of good had Rev Jackson been preaching against sanctions.
They not only punish, hurt and dehumanise the poor black folk of Zimbabwe but also America itself.
Does the Bible not have some very moralistic passage on those who set traps for others ending up falling into them or some such message?
Rev Jackson did not bring himself to comment on the issue of sanctions but chose to blabber about “Now is the time to engage and talk it out and not fight it out . . . find common ground”; etc.
Does the good reverend not consider sanctions an issue, or its very mention triggers uncomfortable situations?
If he is so dishonest, or is simply in denial, he does not have business dealing with the Zimbabwe issue.
And, by the way, since when has Rev Jackson become facilitator to the Zimbabwe dialogue?
He incredibly talks of reconciliation and bringing President Mugabe and PM Tsvangirai together.
Does this mean Sadc-appointed mediator South African President Jacob Zuma is out of his job?
Will Sadc, and the parties here, at least those that are reputed to be sensible in the GPA, accept the superimposition of the newest Uncle Tom on the scene?
Rev Jackson will, no doubt, learn that the generous amounts of melanin in his body, which about equal ours, will not be a passport to get his and, by extension, the empire’s way here.
America has not had much joy with its dark coloured agents here and these include the likes of James McGee, Jendayi Frazer (whose name it has been observed almost sounds Zimbabwean) and Condoleezza Rice.
Ambassador Ray and ultimately President Barack Obama are part of a not-so-short line of what some would call “house niggers”.
That Rev Jackson sides with the imperialist forces and plays a role similar to what the likes of Rev C. D. Helms played during colonialism, erodes his moral pretences.
In one of the quotations above, he tries to teach Zimbabwe’s principals that “there is a national interest in opening up access to capital, industry, technology, medical equipment, housing, deal flow . . .”
Without sounding paranoid, it has to be observed that as his main point, Rev Jackson blows his cover on this.
Before venturing into the implications of this statement, it has to be asked: since when have outsiders defined “national interest” of another country?
Rev Jackson represents a country that has imposed sanctions on Zimbabwe, which is an act of aggression.
Rev Jackson sounds dangerously paternalistic or big-brotherly, which could well be acceptable to such people as PM Tsvangirai but not to nationalist politicians like President Mugabe.
On the substance of his view, it becomes clear that his efforts are not moralistic as his civil rights pedigree points to but he is in pursuit of business for his country.
Zimbabwe has no “national interest” in the expansion of the imperial America and it is hardly imaginable that Zimbabwe allows to be so used.
Zimbabwe is in a process of promoting locals in industry as opposed to opening up to ravaging well-heeled foreign capital.
Although this policy provides for partnerships with foreigners, Western corporates have shown not to be partial to such an idea.
The idea of promoting the majority has never been entertained in the West and they have fought it in Zimbabwe and other countries in South America and elsewhere.
Rather, they are at least partial to comprador alliances that milk the poor countries.
Zimbabwe needs a genuine wealth-creating middle class that is home-grown and empowered.
Perhaps Rev Jackson could preach about that, too, if he were genuine about Zimbabwe’s “national interest”.
Only he is not.
Importantly, he must declare his interest as an Uncle Tom in the service of America.
After all, we are reliably informed that he sought to usurp the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission’s function when he declared Mr Tsvangirai the winner of Zimbabwe’s presidential election at his church in Chicago.

SA: When there is more than one kind of love

But when Malema espouses and expresses the collective condition of these people the courts brand it “hate speech” fearing words could trigger genocide against those that perceivably deprive.

One commentator has pointed out that the white-dominated South African courts seem oblivious of the “hate economy” from which blacks are being excluded.

By Tichaona Zindoga

When South Africa's African National Congress Youth League leader Julius Malema averred that liberation struggle songs cannot contain “love” words, during his “hate speech” trial recently, it certainly meant that there could be more than one kind of love, and hate, in South Africa.

In fact, love can mean hate; and hate, love depending on which side one stands.

“All depends on the context,” says one editorial.

It is little doubt that Malema loves his country, people and the struggle that officially ended apartheid in 1994.

The goals of the liberation struggle in South Africa have not been achieved with many pointers saying clearly that the Rainbow Nation ideal is but elusive.

Malema has shown to love and identify with the majority blacks in a country in which they are the poorest, most illiterate, unhealthiest, the shortest-living, among other ill indexes.

His love for his people and country is what is generally called patriotism.

These people identify with the struggle which they know is yet to come to fruition.

They also identify with Malema.

But when Malema espouses and expresses the collective condition of these people the courts brand it “hate speech” fearing words could trigger genocide against those that perceivably deprive.

One commentator has pointed out that the white-dominated South African courts seem oblivious of the “hate economy” from which blacks are being excluded.

This is because, he insinuated, because the victims of this “hate economy” are blacks.

This week Congress of SA Trade Union's president Sdumo Dlamini was reported to have defied the ban on the liberation struggle song "shoot the boer".

He said the ban “meant nothing to those who had sacrificed their lives for the country's liberation.”

Addressing Cosatu’s second provincial shop stewards council meeting, Dlamini urged the workers to ignore the "clueless judge" and continue singing the banned song at their gatherings.
It follows that Judge Colin Lamont can only be “clueless” as to the ends of the country’s liberation struggle, according to Dlamini.

In this vein, having given the opponents of the struggle song more than what they expected, as Malema said, Lamont be construed as hating the black people’s struggle in South Africa.

An op-ed piece on the Independent Online headlined “All depends on the context” highlights that the “hate” judgement by Lamont is tricky.

“To many it is not the discriminatory, harmful song Lamont found it to be,” said the editorial.

“They view it as South African history, part of the narrative of the Struggle.

“They reject the judge’s view that there was no justification for singing it.

“The finding has had the perverse effect of popularising Dubul’ iBhunu.

“It is being sung now by people who carefully avoided becoming part of Malema’s choir, and have done so in recent days to assert their right to their past. They argue that it is metaphorical, ‘Boer’ meaning government, not Afrikaners as people.”

“Debate has now turned to the prospect of Umkhonto we Sizwe veterans singing Hambe Kahle Umkhonto at Nelson Mandela’s funeral one day, where they voice their determination to “kill these boers”.

Yet, to demonstrate the thin line threatens the exercise of love – whatever side one might be – there could be substance in what Lamont said.

The piece concluded with this: “…words are powerful weapons. All genocides, he argues on, start as simple exhortations. Agree or not, it is food for thought.”

This means that it must be admitted that the context could very well be a factor.

But what are the implications on the ongoing struggle over the struggle songs?

The ANC was appalled by the banning of “dubul ibhunu”.

It said the judgement is “an attempt to rewrite the South African history which is not desirable and unsustainable.”

“This ruling flies against the need to accept our past and to preserve our heritage as an organization and as a people,” it said.

There are “higher ideals” in Lamont’s judgement, argues Henrietta Klaasing Groblersdal in The Citizen.

One of these was “that members of society are enjoined to embrace all citizens as their brothers.”

Said Groblersdal: “Hence the Equality Act allows no justification on the basis of fairness for historic practices which are hurtful to the target group but loved by the other group. Such practices may not continue to be practised when it comes to hate speech.”
“Does the Youth League’s arrogance in singing the same song immediately after the court adjourned show that they did not bother to listen to the finer points?

“Or maybe they are not at all interested in the high ideals mentioned by Lamont?”

This is a view that is perhaps recognizing that Lamont invoked the notion of “Ubuntu”, as one blogger, Pierre de Vos points out, which Chief Justice, Mogoeng Mogoeng has apparently been championing.

The protection of dignity and adherence to the values of ubuntu requires a radical limitation on the right to freedom of expression, says de Vos.

For his part, de Vos notes an important implication of Lamont’s judgement.

“Judge Lamont divided South Africa into the majority and a minority and suggested that minorities (defined as white South Africans or as white Afrikaners) are therefore in particular need of protection from words that could be construed as having the intention to be hurtful to that minority,” he said.

“This means that religious and sexual minorities, say, might be entitled to special protection in terms of this Act and that a court should take note of the sensibilities of such groups when they judge whether a reasonable homosexual or a reasonable Muslim would have viewed a specific communication as having the intention to be hurtful to them as Muslims or as homosexuals.

“Almost any cartoon that depicts the prophet Mohammed, say, might therefore constitute hate speech. Statements by a pastor that homosexuals are perverts that will burn in hell would also, most probably, constitute hate speech if this line of reasoning is followed.

“I am also fearful that if I were to call devout Christians ‘bigots’ because of their views on homosexuality, I might be found to have had the intention (judged by these religious fundamentalists) to be hurtful to them and hence that I am guilty of hate speech.”

He accused he judgement of “rather essentialistic and simplistic division of South Africans into different race groups” which could be problematic.

But there is another grave implication; that of a history ignored.

De Vos notes that the Equality Act – passed by the democratic Parliament – does not allow a court to take into account historical practices.

That the Equality Court ignored the historical case of Malema implies that the history of subjugation – and south Africans have suffered about 300 years of it – is well water under the bridge.

And with such might go efforts towards real equality in South Africa, economically, socially and politically.

Bilateral hatreds and quarrels or ulterior motives must not be allowed to creep into considerations of matters pertaining to international peace and security, or to the principle of Responsibility to Protect.


The Herald

By Morris Mkwate
PRESIDENT Mugabe says the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation is abusing the United Nations Charter to loot Libya's vast oil reserves and impose leadership on its people.
Addressing the 66th session of the United Nations General Assembly here yesterday, the Head of State and Government and Commander-in-Chief of the Zimbabwe Defence Forces said Western powers deliberately misinterpreted their mandate to protect civilians to settle bilateral scores with Libya.
He said the African Union preferred a peaceful resolution of the conflict compared to "murderous Nato bombings".
The AU should not be undermined, but must be allowed to complement UN peace and security efforts on the continent, he added.
"The newly minted principle of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) should not be twisted to provide cover for its pre-meditated abuse in violating the sacred international principle of non-interference in the domestic

affairs of states because to do so amounts to an act of aggression and destabilisation of a sovereign state," he said.
"Moreover, to selectively and arbitrarily apply that principle merely serves to undermine its general acceptability. Indeed, more than other states, all the five permanent members of the Security Council bear a huge responsibility in this regard for ensuring that their historical privilege is used more to protect the UN Charter than to breach it as is happening currently in Libya through the blatant illegal, brutal and callous Nato murderous bombings.

"After over twenty thousands Nato bombing sorties that targeted Libyan towns, including Tripoli, there is now unbelievable and most disgraceful scramble by some Nato countries for Libyan oil, indicating, thereby, that the real motive for their aggression against Libya was to control and own its abundant fuel resources. What a shame!
"Yesterday, it was Iraq and Bush and Blair were the liars and aggressors as they made unfounded allegations of possessions of weapons of mass destruction. This time it is the Nato countries the liars and aggressors as they make similarly unfounded allegations of destruction of civilian lives by (Colonel Muammar) Gaddafi."

President Mugabe said contrary to Nato's position, the AU would have preferred a peaceful resolution of the Libyan conflict.
"It (the peace process) was deliberately and blatantly excluded from shedding positive influence over developments. There was quick resort to invoking Chapter VII of the Charter with gross deliberate misinterpretation of the scope of the mandate originally given Nato to oversee and protect civilians.
"Bilateral hatreds and quarrels or ulterior motives must not be allowed to creep into considerations of matters pertaining to international peace and security, or to the principle of Responsibility to Protect.

"We are yet to be convinced that the involvement of the mighty powers in Libya's affairs has not hindered the advent of the process of peace, democracy and prosperity in that sister African country.
"Our African Union would never have presumed to impose a leadership on the fraternal people of Libya as Nato countries have illegally sought to do. At the very least, the African Union would have wished to join those principled members of this august body who preferred an immediate ceasefire and peaceful dialogue in Libya.
"The African Union was and remains fully seized with this crisis and will spare no energies in fully complementing the UN so that peace returns to Libya and its tormented people. We wish that process God's speed."

Cde Mugabe said the UN Charter was "a set of commandments" that must be upheld to maintain world peace.
He said: "The theme, ‘The role of mediation in the settlement of disputes', is most apt. But, how do we, the UN members, measure in relation to it in our activities here at the United Nations and out there in the real world.
"It is my principled view that we must be duty and honour bound to operationalise the principles upon which the Charter of the United Nations is based. We must not be guilty of manipulating that Charter to serve our particular or sectional designs and ambitions.
"The Charter is our set of commandments that must be strictly obeyed by each and every member if international and regional peace is to be maintained.

"We cannot honestly say this is the position today in regard to Nato states versus Libya. Whatever political disturbances might have first occurred in Bengazi, the process of mediation and peaceful negotiation was never given full play."
The President added that some Western countries continue to vilify Zimbabwe for correcting racial and colonial prejudices through the acquisition of natural resources. He said Zimbabweans condemn the Western-imposed sanctions against the country as expressed by the two-million signature anti-sanctions petition.

He thanked Sadc and the AU for demanding the scrapping of the embargo. He said Zimbabwe supported a "revitalised" UN General Assembly and reform of the Security Council.
"When we in Zimbabwe sought to redress the ills of colonialism and racism, by fully acquiring our natural resources, mainly our land and minerals, we were and still are subjected to unparalleled villification and pernicious economic sanctions, the false reasons alleged being violations of the rule of law, human rights, and democracy.

"My people have condemned these illegal sanctions and recently, over two million signatures of protesters have demonstrated their antipathy to them. We thank Sadc and the African Union for supporting us and demanding the immediate removal of the illegal sanctions.
"We in Africa are also duly concerned about the activities of the International Criminal Court (ICC) which seems to exist only for alleged offenders of the developing world, the majority of them Africans. The leaders of the powerful Western States guilty of international crime, like Bush and Blair, are routinely given the blind eye. Such selective justice has eroded the credibility of the ICC on the African continent.

"My country continues to work with others for a revitalised General Assembly. However, our ambitions extend to the need to reform the Security Council as well. Africa's call for at least two permanent seats for its members on the Security Council has been constant for decades. Africa cannot remain as the only region without permanent membership in the Security Council."
The President upheld the centrality of the African Union in resolving conflict on the continent. He said Zimbabwe would remain committed to the UN, adding that the body should also embrace legitimately sovereign states.
"My country fully supports the right of the gallant people of Palestine to statehood and membership of this UN Organisation. The UN must become credible by welcoming into its bosom all those whose right to attain sovereign independence and freedom from occupation and colonialism is legitimate. Similarly, the tormented people of the Saharawi Arab Democratic Republic must not be forgotten. We call for immediate progress in the engagements for a solution to their long-running saga.

". . .Let me reiterate my country's full belief in the aspirations enshrined in the Charter of the UN. We must all resist any abuse to which it may be exposed through the unwelcome behaviour of a few. My country celebrates the UN-Women entity as it addresses the position of more than half of humankind in all our countries.
"The African Union must not be undermined. Rather, it should be allowed to complement the UN's efforts for peace and security on the continent. Zimbabwe is a peaceful member of the AU, Sadc, Comesa, NAM and many other international economic and trade organisations and thus desires to continue to play its part in creating a peaceful environment in the world. The United Nations can count on the unqualified support of Zimbabwe as required, even if only in our modest way."

Homecoming for Lucia Matibenga?

By Tichaona Zindoga
With indications that trade unionist and MDC-T Kuwadza MP, Lucia Matibenga is set to assume the position of Minister of Public service left vacant following the death of Eliphas Mukonoweshuro recently, it is almost a case of a home coming for her.
Those familiar with the inner workings of the party led by Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai might be familiar of how the premier leads his party in a fashion that contrasts the democratic pretences he and his cheerleaders have.
In particular is his propensity towards the politics that favours tribe, which has compelled him to surround himself with men and women of the Karanga tribe.
This dates back to his days at Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions, through the formation in 1999 and inaugural congress of MDC when he ensured that he stuffed his tribesmen like Nelson Chamisa, Isaac Matongo, Lucia Matibenga, Tendai Biti, Learnmore Jongwe, Job Sikhala, and Sekai Holland into influential positions.
These and other Karangas Tsvangirai was to ensure “safe” Harare seats at the general elections in 2000 while filing subsequent vacant seats with more Karangas.
The same rang true at when Tsvangirai – having successfully split the original MDC because of his alleged tribalism and dictatorial tendencies – entered Government in 2009 under the GPA in 2009.
He almost appointed 16 members of his favoured Karanga tribe to fill 19 posts for ministerial and deputy ministerial positions.
The GPA configured that MDC-T had to fill provide 13 ministers, which Tsvangirai all filled with his tribal favourites; and six deputies, of which he threw three of his tribal kins.
As of August 2010, during a mini-reshuffle, Tsvangirai added more of his tribesmen Tapiwa Mashakada, Obert Gutu and Tongai Matutu to cabinet.

The Karanga homegirl

Yet something happened to “Karanga girl” Lucia Matibenga along the way to heaven.
In a twist of fate, in 2000, came Theresa Makone whose husband, Ian, was the director of elections at the MDC as well as advisor and funder of Tsvangirai.
Theresa was also believed to be a relation of Tsvangirai’s wife, Susan.
In that stroke, Matibenga who had considerable influence, to the extent of being viewed too powerful for the comfort of some women including the leader’s wife, was shunted aside by Tsvangirai as he unconstitutionally dissolved the leadership of the Women’s Assembly of which Matibenga was leader.
A power struggle ensued, with Matibenga on the losing side, as the Makone party holding the winning of two congresses that the warring sides convened in Bulawayo at a downtown restaurant owned by Thokozani Khupe, vice-president of the party and now deputy premier.
A bitter Matibenga, who had the support and sympathy of the majority of the party membership, bemoaned how Tsvangirai had abused his relationship with Makone.
She called him dictatorial.
As bitterly, she complained that “(a)n HIV virus (sic) has attacked our party and an enemy has risen in the party…”
She also led a demonstration against Tsvangirai, denouncing the “kitchen cabinet” of handpicked Tsvangirai loyalists.
Matibenga said of Makone then: “You come into the bus and you find the conductor busy issuing tickets and all of a sudden you want to take away the pen – that’s impossible. I am the conductor here.”
Yet she was to be consigned to the cold world outside, almost into oblivion as she wallowed in the world of trade unionism.
In fact, her fall from grace even provided ammunition for feminist theses on how chauvinistic Zimbabwe’s politics was and how women were being ill-used by their male counterparts.
Interestingly, 11 years on, it was MDC-T party that pulled the strings to allow for her recent elevation to become ZCTU third vice president.
Ironically, the labour body’s congress was held in Bulawayo.
Now Matibenga might have to kiss her new position goodbye to become minister.
“It is basically about tribalism as Tsvangirai seeks to bring back his ‘home girl’,” explains David Muzhuzha former editor of ZCTU monthly publication The Worker, who has also written a magnificent book “A travesty of democracy: The untold story”.
The book focuses on the rise of the MDC from the labour movement and points out the Machiavellian nature of Tsvangirai.
Muzhuzha says Tsvangirai is not only “whole-heartedly fascinated with men and women of his tribe, but he also sometimes, willy-nilly manipulates his party processes to favour persons not of similar origins, as long as such persons serve his main selfish interest: to hold the reigns (sic) of power tightly and undisputedly, wherever he goes.” (pp75)
But there is another dimension, which in fact might hold true for this latter expose.
“Tsvangirai is also trying to reconnect with labour by taking Matibenga who has a trade union background and whom he had alienated,” explains Muzhuzha.
And need it be pointed out that Matibenga and Mukonoweshuro shared the same “Masvingo netara”?

Wikileaks, again

True enough, revelations by the whistle-blower website Wikileaks are fast becoming too hot to handle.
Suffice to say, the revelations have let in on the inner workings of the political systems of Zimbabwe, revelations of which most players have not been too comfortable with.
But then when Wikileaks became a hit for the first time, it let in on the leadership qualities of Tsvangirai, which even the recent leaks in which Obert Gutu and Nelson Chamisa (oh, these ungrateful kinsmen!) even corroborate.
Dell described Tsvangirai as a “flawed figure, not readily open to advice, indecisive and with questionable judgment in selecting those around him.”
Today, if Tsvangirai manages to bring Matibenga into his bosom, it does not quite vindicate him, does it?
It only serves to highlight how he is so flawed as to, as earlier demonstrated, seek security in a particular clique of individuals with whose feathers he identifies.
Admittedly, this same clique has some of the best brains in the country, which won’t do anybody good to deny.
On this score, though, Matibenga would not fit, just as Tsvangirai is not noted for sharpness in letters.
So how should the rest of the country, especially those that believe in him, take Tsvangirai’s fascination with those that identify with Masvingo road?
It does not take much to notice that this is a politically and morally unhealthy situation.
Tsvangirai might as well be sowing the seeds of division in his party, just as he was accused of causing the split not so many years ago.
If one were to go by the assumption that by bringing Matibenga into the fold Tsvangirai is trying to reconnect with labour it therefore confirms that he is indecisive and poor in judgement, as Dell diagnosed him.
This means he is manipulative, too, and runs the MDC-T as a tuckshop.
But it may be homecoming for Lucia Matibenga, all the same.

Unmasking Theresa Makone

Yet who will sacrifice their pots and pans; life and limb for Theresa Makone, a self-professed beautician who has achieved nothing so far in Government?
Not the poor women of Zimbabwe!
Maybe Tsvangirai who is a beneficiary of her financial services and other ends like her alleged go-between the premier and his love interest with one Locadia Tembo, a relative of Goromonzi West legislator Beatrice Nyamupinga.
Makone is also reported to have been influential in bringing former disc jockey James
Maridadi, to the PM’s office.

By Tichaona Zindoga

The biggest talking point of the recent 12th annivessary celebrations of the MDC-T at Gwanzura stadium is arguably the violence that occurred at the function.

However, if that was blight enough of and in itself, the statement by the party’s women’s assembly chair and Home Affairs co-Minister Theresa Makone sticks out in equal notoriety.

Makone, addressing the crowd, preached violence and said women would “take pots and pans” in fighting Zanu-PF.

It will be noted that this statement is a variant of what she had said about 60 days earlier in defence of her party boss Tsvangirai when he preached the same gospel in Masvingo, much to the disdain of the peace-loving people of Zimbabwe.

Makone said then: “Zanu-PF used to beat us like drums and you expect us to say ‘thank you.’ “When I was young my mother told me that if someone beats you, you should hit back.”

For a moment, one would be tempted to think that she is just another vigilante from the street or some college activist willing to impress colleagues with a showing of brawn.

But Theresa Makone is a whole – make it half perhaps – minister of Home Affairs, which brief she shares with Zanu-PF’s Kembo Mohadi in an arrangement born out of the so-called Global Political Agreement.

It is a role that has oversight of the Zimbabwe Republic Police which naturally is tasked with maintaining peace and order in the country.

Now, if Makone, the supposed boss of the police, instigates violence it becomes quite curious of the establishment obtaining in Zimbabwe today.

It will be recalled that Makone and her party have in the past blamed police for not prosecuting offenders, in particular alleged perpetrators of violence against MDC-T supporters and members.

So, if the law should take its course, surely a person who instigates violence like Makone has done must be prosecuted?

On the other hand had she the latitude, she could as well prosecute and persecute her opponents.

Questions ought to be raised in relation to this so-called “Iron lady” of the MDC-T.

What is she trying to achieve by preaching violence?

Is it not a case of a politician bereft of any substance trying to cause chaos and gain from it?

Makone is noted for lacking grassroots support within the MDC-T, having ghosted from nowhere to now claim an enviable position at the labour driven party.

What does Makone have in common with the women of his party save for their relation to pots and pans that entail their station in life?

Makone needs reminding that the same pots and pans are better committed to their culinary role than being used as weapons.

Interestingly, she trained in Human Nutrition in the UK!

So does she not feel the irony that the MDC-T has not brought food on people’s tables as it promised, instead taking every opportunity to make life harder for people by denying them salary increments and raising the prices of commodities?

From this, the world has a chance to see the caliber of Makone as a politician and as a Minister of Home Affairs.

She is not only criminally reckless and dangerous and a misfit as a minister but also empty as a politician.

Yet her character is somewhat representative of the dilemma afflicting the MDC formations.

They simply cannot outgrow their opposition days.

Many times have politicians from the formations donned party hats when they were supposed to be representing the bigger, party-less institution called Government.

It possibly explains why there seems nothing amiss should the MDC formations be referred to as opposition, like many people are given to, when they ceased to be such at the birth of the inclusive Government in 2009.

Although the party indulgently calls itself a party for the future it would seem it belongs to the opposition – infantile opposition at that.

Kitchen cabinet

But Makone is a controverssial character.

She is part of what has been referred to as Tsvangirai’s kitchen cabinet which is made up of his loyalists.

(Is this where she gets her ideas of pots and pans?)

Makone and her husband Ian, a top Tsvangirai advisor and financier, came in 2000 “as ordinary members”, like she puts it.

But she quickly rose quickly from the obscurity of a district treasurer in Wedza, to women’s leadership in Mashonaland East right to being the chairperson of the Women’s Assembly in October 2007.

And it was her rise to the top of the women’s ladder that sparked outrage as Tsvangirai controversially dissolved the leadership of trade unionist Lucia Matibenga to pave way for Makone.

The highlight of the congress in Bulawayo that swept Makone into the fold was the controversy which saw two separate “congresses” with Makone’s faction holding its own at a restaurant belonging to Thokozani Khupe, the party’s vice president.

So intense was the dislike for Makone, at least from the perspective of bona fide party members that had been around for long, that Matibenga complained that “(a)n HIV virus (sic) has attacked our party and an enemy has risen in the party…”

She, like many other party members who had seen Tsvangirai allegedly violate the constitution to make room for Makone, decried that Makone and Tsvangirai’s friendship had been abused.

Matibenga, who said Makone had come “yesterday”, complained that “someone who came as a donor suddenly wants to take over.”

And take over Makone did, even if it divided the party right through.

She said defiantly: “I was duly elected…It does not matter whether the congress was held on a tree or in a river…”

Makone was to consolidate her hold on the women’s leadership at the party’s congress in Bulawayo last April.

By then she was already a co-minister of Home Affairs, having entered Government in 2009 as Minister of Public Works.

Bullet or ballot?

When she returned to Bulawayo in June, Makone said her party had to win elections and the right to govern.

She told supporters: “We are not going to take this country by fighting. We will take it through the ballot box…As a party we have resolved to remain focused through on the ultimate goal of taking over power through the ballot box and with the support of Zimbabweans.”

Less than two weeks later, she was singing a different tune and promising to hit back.

She has not looked back since.

It now remains to be known what Makone is up to.

A safe guess will be to fear that the woman will continue on her warmongering path.

Yet who will sacrifice their pots and pans; life and limb for Theresa Makone who has achieved nothing so far in Government?

Not the poor women of Zimbabwe!

Maybe Tsvangirai who is a beneficiary of her financial services and other ends like her alleged go-between the premier and his love interest with one Locadia Tembo, a relative of Goromonzi West legislator Beatrice Nyamupinga.

Makone is also reported to have been influential in bringing former disc jockey James Maridadi, to the PM’s oiffice.

So it is clear who should expend energy on, or lose sleep over Makone, isn’t it?

A step towards real engagement with US, EU?

It is to be hoped that the West is not trying to run away from its economic war crimes of sanctions.

Whereas the West is given to making demands and setting conditions, Zimbabwe must throw its hurt back at it.

This is not just about vindictiveness or intransigence: it simply is to say that if the West is so hurt about the  human rights of which it is a self-proclaimed champion and policeman, its sanctions have hurt Zimbabwe so.

Only after such openness will the relations be healed.

By Tichaona Zindoga

In the last couple of days Zimbabwe has been involved in a not-so-usual diplomatic engagement with the United States of America and the European Union.

The latter have imposed sanctions on Zimbabwe at the instigation of Britain which was stung by the loss of colonially-gotten lands in Zimbabwe through the fast Track Land Reform which Government instituted to benefit marginalized black majority.

Of course, the Western countries do not say so, preferring to hide behind the discourse of human rights, which they allege members of the Zimbabwe Government violate.

Zimbabwe believes that both sets of sanctions are illegal as they were imposed outside the ambit of the United Nations Security Council.

In fact, it has become almost customary for various commentators to prefix “sanctions” with “illegal’ when talking of the punitive measures that the West has invoked!

Re-engagement with the West, which was formalized under the Global Political Agreement, has yet to bear meaningful fruit.

The US and EU authorities have even had the temerity to maltreat and ostracise some members of the so-called re-engagement team.

But then something happened recently that might be the game changer.

The Zimbabwe Government, through its chief legal office of the Attorney General, wrote to the EU asking the bloc to furnish Zimbabwe with reasons for the sanctions or face litigation.

The litigation would be executed on the very European soil whereon sanctions were rashly and illegally imposed against Zimbabwe.

It is a safe guess that the move by Zimbabwe jolted the EU into action and dispatched its managing director for Africa Nick Wescott into the country in the wake of the two-week ultimatum.

Although Wescott has been singing the same old hymn  concerning his (divided) bloc’s stance on Zimbabwe, saying that the sanctions were imposed legally and that they would be removed if Zimbabwe met certain conditions, something can be read in EU’s reaction.

A Sunday Mail editorial critically observed that the EU had “blinked too soon”.

And Wescott gave away that Zimbabwe could give the EU a taste of its own medicine.

He admitted Zimbabwe could seek recompense at the European courts.

“The measures (read sanctions) we have taken were done legally,” he said.

“If anybody disagrees with that they are free to challenge it.”

Whatever Wescott might say, even bordering on Dutch courage, it would seem that Zimbabwe might after all have its day to stand up to the bully in the EU, whatever the outcome.

Matter-of-factly this is not unprecedented.

Industrialist and Zanu-PF member Senator Aguy Georgias has successfully challenged the deportation of his children from the UK where they have been studying.

He has been urging that a class suit be instituted against the EU over the sanctions.

Interestingly, Georgias has been removed from the EU hitlist.

A layman’s observation is that the EU authorities did not want to be embarrassed and so had to remove, and muzzle Georgias.

And surely what Zimbabwe can do against the EU it can against the US, and perhaps succeed to sling the twin goliath with the same pebble?

It will not be quite safe to surmise that the same force that drew Wescott here is what drove US Ambassador here, Charles Ray to request to see President Mugabe.

However, apart from the interesting coincidence, the developments are important.

Call them positive, if you like.

(This writer recently counseled the American diplomat to engage Zimbabwe in a respectful fashion.)

The US envoy regretted that so much time was being spent on disagreements rather than areas of convergence. He identified that “every coin has two sides” and that it was time to paint a more realistic picture.

Expectedly, he said he had no control over the offending Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act which his country promulgated against Zimbabwe.

But he promised to make recommendations to the effect of removing the same.

Now, it will be interesting to see how Zimbabwe’s relations with the West fare in light of such developments.

On one level, it must be admitted that just as Ray points out of the two sides of the coin, and Wescott says the EU “will continue to watch events”, inevitably there ought to be, and there will be compromises on both sides.

As it is, these compromises will be both political and legal.

The West has been coercing Zimbabwe via sanctions which are intended to make the economy scream.

The sanctions are a form of terrorism covering the economy, politics and media among other sectors.

December 21, 2001 on which day former US President George W Bush signed Zdera is Zimbabwe’s equivalent of September 11 1999, terrorist attacks.

So how would our principals engage on the issue?

Zimbabwe’s reply to the sanctions terror of the West, outside of the near-futile reengagement, has been to challenge it in the courts where hopefully there can be an even playing field.

If this latter recourse presents the West with a nightmare, if EU’s apparently fast-blinking knee-jerk response to the ultimatum is anything to go by, does it not present a pointer to how a wronged Zimbabwe should go ahead?

A wronged Zimbabwe has lost so much during at the hands of sanctions.

Academic Dr Tafataona Mahoso recently gave a glimpse into how and what Zimbabwe had lost due to sanctions:

• The cost to the whole economy of having to pay cash upfront for imports over 11 years;

• The cost of higher transport and energy expenditure due to lack of credit, restricted access to spare parts and relying on outdated machinery;

• The value of lost export revenue over 11 years;

• The value of lost income tax resulting from shrinkage of jobs and eroded salaries over 11 years;

• The value lost through the emigration of professionals and other skilled workers to foreign jurisdictions;

• The cost of environmental damage resulting from the shrinkage of power generation, power imports, and the shelving of rural electrification programmes;

• The cost of induced smuggling and other corruption caused by rising costs and acute shortages of goods and services;

• Health costs arising from the collapse of infrastructure, the rising prevalence of eradicable diseases, the failure to repair or replace water and sewerage systems and inability to import medical equipment and drugs;

• The cost of hyperinflation and the collapse of the national currency which wiped out pensions, medical aid schemes, insurance policies, mortgages and savings;

• The cost, in business terms, of the propaganda war which was mounted by the Anglo-Saxon countries and their sponsored lobbies and parties to justify and maintain illegal sanctions; and

• The cost of sabotage activities meant to accompany and intensify the illegal embargo.

  In light of the foregoing, Zimbabwe, if it has its day in the court, will have to find redress.

It is to be hoped that the West is not trying to run away from its economic war crimes of sanctions.

Whereas the West is given to making demands and setting conditions, Zimbabwe must throw its hurt back at it.

This is not just about vindictiveness or intransigence: it simply is to say that if the West is so hurt about the  human rights of which it is a self-proclaimed champion and policeman, its sanctions have hurt Zimbabwe so.

Only after such openness will the relations be healed.

·       tichaona.zindoga@zimpapers.co.zw