THE Confederation of Zimbabwe Industries’ position on sanctions is informed by the resolution passed at congress in July 2010 on the subject. This has been further clarified and fully amplified on several occasions through the media, including live Press conferences.
As business, we have unequivocally declared that sanctions are harmful to business and have significantly wrought incalculable harm to our nation’s economy — causing much suffering to the ordinary woman and man in the street. Sanctions have created massive unemployment, wreaked havoc on our infrastructure and ravaged our nation’s social deliverables such as education, health, water and sanitation. People have died from lack of medicine and from easily preventable diseases.
All businesspeople in Zimbabwe are of the same view that sanctions are not good for our economy. This stance of business is not a sign of supporting any political party but is simply how the businesspeople feel and perceive the sanctions regime. We are supporting this (anti-sanctions) petition as a national programme with various captains of industry having come voluntarily, propelled by the serious negative impact that sanctions are having on Zimbabwe as a whole, rather than simply affecting those so-called targeted individuals and companies. Furthermore we are here to clarify what we believe are serious misunderstandings regarding the situation in Zimbabwe. The Western media had portrayed the situation in what is, in our view, a very one-sided manner.
We do not know to what extent these one-sided views are held in official Western circles, nonetheless from official pronouncements coming from the West, we see an apparent lack of understanding of the complexities of the Zimbabwean situation. We also discern little or no understanding of the history of Zimbabwe since 1890 when a British private company clearly plundered land and cattle from the natives. It must be stated that the war of liberation in Zimbabwe went beyond the question of democracy, but embraced the reclamation of the country’s resources and allowing access to these and seeking opportunities for the country’s indigenous blacks.
When Western countries take unilateral decisions to accuse, judge and assign punishment, they lose support of objective Zimbabweans currently leading industry who previously experienced this treatment before independence. Such an approach strikes at the heart of the Zimbabwe’s “unhu” as we say in the Shona language, or “ubuntu” in the Ndebele tongue. Put simply, unilateral action is not consistent with natural justice and so-called Western norms of fair play, and smacks of paternalistic and condescending attitude.
Impact of sanctions
CZI is on record as opposing the sanctions that have been imposed on Zimbabwe. Whilst the sanctions are touted as targeted, whose stated aim is ostensibly to promote democracy in Zimbabwe, we believe strongly that they have the opposite effect. They have caused untold harm to business and untold suffering to the populace as well as other unreported and unintended consequences. The effect of such measures as Zidera has disabled Zimbabwe from dealing with its national debt.
It is, in the most polite way, being economical with facts and at worst naive to say that Zimbabwe’s ineligibility to access funding through multilateral agencies was only because we had arrears since 1999.
Zimbabwe and other countries have accessed resources with arrears before. What, if I may ask the embassies that keep on peddling this lie, is the point of having the IMF and the World Bank if they cannot allow you to reschedule country debts? Why did Europe get the Marshal plan?
Come on, Zimbabweans, revise your “O” Level history and read ZJC Introduction to Economics to see this cynicism that we are educated but perhaps we can be fooled by not interpreting what is in books, on Google and is happening in Europe now!
Zidera has impacted negatively on all State companies dealing with utilities as the multi-lateral agencies who traditionally funded major projects have held back. State entities constitute about 40 percent of Zimbabwe industry and their lack of performance affected every non-targeted company and individual in this country.
We concede that some have been removed from the least, but the damage was done and continuous to be done as others are still on the sanctions list. The sanctions are, on paper, targeted sanctions. The stated purpose of the targeting is to ostensibly minimise the impact on ordinary Zimbabweans.
The sanctions do, however, have practical negative impacts on all Zimbabweans. These include but are not limited to the following:
The Zidera clause in prohibiting the United States from supporting financial assistance to Zimbabwe from multi-lateral institutions has the very practical effect of deterring the Government from embarking on necessary steps for economic reforms. If Zimbabwe believed that there was a realistic chance of financial assistance, the motivation to undertake these reforms would be far greater. Whilst we accept the argument that any government should do whatever is necessary for economic management irrespective of whether or not external financial assistance will be forthcoming, both practice and experience have demonstrated that the availability of external financial assistance is very important in giving governments the courage to accept the pain of necessary reforms. Recent rescue packages for European countries are a case in point.
The existence of sanctions and the associated negative publicity deter serious investors. The huge outcry that accompanied a recent tiny investment by a leading UK fund manager in the recently listed Masawara Investment fund is a good example. It would be very difficult for the board of a large Western multinational to justify a major investment in Zimbabwe. We fully accept that Zimbabwe needs to do a lot more to make itself an attractive destination for investors. The sanctions have the practical effect of significantly demotivating on the part of Government from making these improvements to the investment climate.
Zimbabwe is not a big market, a number of foreign companies have taken the view that it is not worth doing business with Zimbabwe. Why take the risk that one of your sales clerk’s will ever sell to a person on the targeted list? It’s far easier to ban all transactions with Zimbabwe. A Zimbabwean residing in Zimbabwe cannot open an account with PayPal. Zimbabweans travelling abroad sometimes have problems cashing travellers’ cheques. American Express has stopped issuing cards to Zimbabweans resident in Zimbabwe. However, notwithstanding the above the major reason that we at CZI believe that sanctions are undesirable is that they are interpreted as unwarranted interference in Zimbabwe’s internal affairs. The reason they are interpreted as such is linked to the historical context of Zimbabwe’s relations with the United Kingdom as explained below.
TO BE CONTINUED
SEE ALSO:
Sanctions: US freezes Zim funds
Audit impact of sanctions on Zim, Sadc
Sanctions evil, cruel: Dokora
Sanctions: the day the lion learnt to draw
No comments:
Post a Comment