The signs are very clear: June 27 and its aftermath spell doom for Zimbabwe. Already weeks leading up to the run-off have been characterised by abductions, torture and murder. The violence is just unimaginable. As a matter of fact, what people saw in South Africa in the past couple of weeks is reminiscent of the situation in Zimbabwe. One would be forgiven for thinking the tactics were from the same author.
It is a few weeks before Zimbabwe conducts its run-off election. On June 27, Zimbabweans will once again brave the streets and cast their votes in a presidential election pitting Robert Mugabe against Morgan Tsvangirai. It is expected that the opposition leader will snatch this one just as he did in March. However the question that stood after March 29 still stands today: Will Mugabe and his Zanu-PF accept defeat if indeed Tsvangirai was voted in?
Many will recall that the answer to this question was postponed soon after the March 29 elections. It is supposed to be answered on June 27. Be assured that the run-off is nothing but a delay of the decision that was supposed to be taken in March. Will it be taken? Let’s wait and see.
I think African leaders, including the SADC, have failed the people of Zimbabwe. Allowing this run-off was a mistake, one that will come to haunt many of them. The unfortunate thing is that it is the poor who will be affected most. We have witnessed this in Zimbabwe where violence has rocked communities right across the political spectrum. Similar violence has occurred in South Africa in recent weeks. Again the most affected were the poor, especially women and children of Zimbabwean origin.
The factors pushing Zimbabweans to neighbouring countries, South Africa being the most affected, are clear. It is the political crisis in Zimbabwe that has had a negative effect on the economy. In 2006, together with two colleagues, we wrote a special chapter for the State of the Nation book on Zimbabweans in South Africa published annually by the Human Sciences Research Council. We outlined in that chapter how immigrants — especially those from Zimbabwe — were being harassed, discriminated against and attacked on xenophobic grounds. Two years down the line, the bubble has exploded. It is interesting how some of these things are predicted, yet no one takes action.
If one looked at the character of violence taking place inside Zimbabwe and the xenophobic attacks in South Africa, one might think they were masterminded and perpetrated by people of the same disposition. How does one explain setting alight a human being on the grounds that the person is a foreigner? And how does one explain burning with plastics and torching another human being’s buttocks on the basis that the person voted wrongly?
The violence that has marred Zimbabwe over the past months is symptomatic of the very character of the forces in play. Zanu-PF apparently argues that it came to power through guns and bullets and cannot be removed through a ballot box. The message is clear: no election result will be respected, not even the one of June 27. Of course in preparing for the run-off, people have been beaten up so that they will vote correctly, whatever that means. A number of opposition activists have been killed and others arrested on a variety of charges. The latest arrest is that of Arthur Mutambara, who apparently was picked up on Sunday for an opinion article he published in April.
Surely, this can only be a recipe for disaster. I see at least three scenarios emerging out of the current crisis. The first and perhaps ideal scenario is where a transitional government is established to avoid the run-off. This can only be initiated by the two political heads with the help of the SADC leadership. If this is done, a lot of unnecessary violence and loss of life will be saved. Believe me, the run-off is a big price for Zimbabwe. It could have been avoided had there been strong and visionary leadership both from Zimbabwe and from the region. Zimbabwe can still be rescued.
The second scenario is that Tsvangirai will once again win the presidential vote but fail to take power from Zanu-PF and Robert Mugabe. This has been the case since 2000. Tsvangirai has been winning but failing to take over the state. It is likely that he will win the vote but lose the count on June 27. This will be dangerous for Zimbabwe. As Tendai Biti put it at a lecture at Wits, if this happens, the MDC will be rendered irrelevant. Someone, somewhere, will call the shots and the MDC will not be able to contain the situation.
I don’t know what this means or what Tendai meant, but the signs are clear. The June 27 outcome spells doom for the country. The opposition leader might win but be prevented from exercising his duties as the duly elected president of the country. We have already heard from Grace Mugabe that Tsvangirai will not be allowed to lead the country. What better source than the wife of the president?
The unlikely scenario is that Mugabe wins the elections. This is unlikely given the statistics and voting patterns of the March harmonised elections. But even if Mugabe wins, chaos will reign in Parliament. Zanu-PF does not control Parliament; we will have a president presiding over a Parliament dominated by the opposition. This is catastrophic. No progress will be made. But this scenario is possible given the violence and the harassment that the electorate has been exposed to in the weeks leading up to June 27.
Where do these scenarios leave us? Although it is still possible to implement the first scenario, it is unlikely given the intransigence of the Zimbabwean leadership and the naivety characterising SADC. We have heard no word, for example, from SADC in response to the xenophobic attacks on foreigners in South Africa. One would have expected SADC to come out strongly condemning the killing of foreigners. But no, SADC has — as usual — chosen not to see what is happening in the region. We therefore do not expect SADC to call for a transitional government in Zimbabwe.
Zimbabwe is therefore left with the last two scenarios. Be very afraid. The country is on the verge of a civil conflict. The outcome of the election might just be the tipping point. When this happens, both the MDC and Zanu-PF will be rendered unnecessary. One would expect the two parties to be aware that people will soon not see them as useful forces in the struggle for a new Zimbabwe.
I am tempted to imagine an MDC government. If this happens after June 27, which is possible but unlikely given the very character of Zanu-PF, Zimbabweans are advised to be afraid still. However, to overcome this fear, Zimbabweans must demand a new constitution that will guarantee freedoms, protect human dignity, promote good governance and facilitate equitable distribution of resources.
And, as some have argued, this new constitution should be drafted and written based on mistrust. Never again should we write a constitution based on trust for our leaders. We must assume from the beginning that leaders are mischievous, untrustworthy and capable of frustrating the will of the people. The new constitution must therefore be crafted on the basis that we want to prevent abuse of power for the incumbent. We start from the premise that politicians are bad people.
Your last paragraph is the most concrete writing I have read in many years. I am, however, tempted to postulate that Mugabe’s generals will disown him at the last hour. The veterans have already showed signs. Look at Zvinavashe’s statements, consider Mujuru’s attempts at recent Politburo. I foresee a situation were Mugabe is going to be trapped in the same fallacy that made him think he would win the election outright. I also believe there are underhand negotiations in place. Mugabe is too wise not to realise he has lost the plot. His last trump card is to convince SADC to a GNU. Junior politician, Simba Makoni, has already started the chorus. Mbeki is in tenor and soon the rest of the region will think Zimbabwe needs a GNU. The truth of the matter is Zimbabwe does not need a GNU. The people are effectively on one side. Only a few rented crowds are at the heart of political violence. I believe Tsvangirai, much as some of you guys hate him, has already been destined to be the next leader. But like you say we must harness him from day one in office.
Despite massive rigging and intimidation the MDC will win the Presidential election by a landslide due to mugabe’s thugs turning on the areas that used to vote for him. So they will hate him for it, and find common cause with matabeleland and their past from gukurundhi.
1) Either they will declare the MDC won and have a coup, or declare a coup straight off, and Zanu will split between the generals on the JOC, the troops they atually have money to pay, and everybody else. They will eventually be defeated by weight of numbers, unless Mbeki sends in SA troops to defend ZANU. (Or possibly Angola will.)
2) They will admit defeat (Unlikely) in the face of running out of money. Declare him the winner and then spend the next couple of years trying to avoid prosecution, interfering withe the MDC govt, or just ignoring it. Whilst they try to transform their bribes into “clean” businesses, set up criminal empires or sell up and retire to Malaysia.
3) They will declare Mugabe the winner. And then no one will believe it, no redevelopment funds will be forthcoming, and there are no more farms to steal. Posibly ZANU will try for a govt of national unity to make things look legitimate but they wont even bother actually keeping their word at anything whilst continuing to stripe Zim behind the scenes. Eventually, sooner or later, the population will turn on them and there will be violent mass slaughter due to sheer hatred and desperation. There are already reports of people fighting back, armless against machine guns, and of Zanu members being executed by other Zanu members for not being sadistic enough and objecting to the torture of children, grandmothers and babies.
How fast this happens after 27th March and how many die depends on how much the SADC countries are willing to let people die, refuse to let the UN use their countries for bases for refugee camps and pile more rhetoric on until God intervenes by waving a magic wand and letting mugabe die and the Generals have a spiritual experiene and start keeping their word.
In light of SADC’s past history on the problem they seem willing to let ZANU steal the election kill anybody left in Zim, and wait for an Act of God, whilst stating that this is an “Afrian solution to African problems.”
Unless SA suddenly undegoes a “Regime change” in the not too distant future.
Your article is very inspiring.
Xenophobia has been allowed to flourish ever since Mugabe came to power in 1980 and probably before that. Mugabe being the clever politician that he is has used this weapon selectively throughout his leadership. He could have done away with the whites way back in 1980, but he knew that he could play the race card when ever he became desperate to hold on to power.He tried to eliminate the Ndebele claiming that it was them that were rising up against the state. If one studies most of his policies they always lay the blame of failure at the door of something that is crafted to incite the masses.
Looking back at the French revolution, it was those that incited the masses to guillotine the royalty that eventually met the same fate.
Perhaps this is what is going to happen in the long run. However June 27 looks to be just a “time buying” scheme just as was the mediation process by Mbeki.
Mugabe, SADC, and Mbeki have created a stew in Zimbabwe. It may boil over to encompass the whole region.
What a good article Beki!Good insight.lets instruct people to boycott the elections and SADC to refuse to send any election Observers.We now need smart leadership from zimbabweans , not MDC or Zanu PF.Beki! lets avoid this bloodshed today before its too late.I am going to make calls to SADC asap, by the end of the day i will post thier oppinion.If anything happens after refusing our warnings..they will be accountable.
Tak5,
Berlin.
Hevo Moyo
I see you are the only African or Zimbabwean who is castigating your leadership and motherland, the others are strangers, the van de Berlins etal, I would give credit to your script if more Africans shared your view.
In Britain or America they can differ on some issues but when it comes to their country to defend their nationality, ethos, independence, all the white will be one, but come to Africa you will see the Moyos siding along the strangers.
No wonder in South Africa a Zulu and Xhosa now calls foreigner a Ndebele who crossed the Limpopo river with Muzilikazi two centuries ago northwards while a Dutch who came from far lands from the Netherlands with Van Reebeck five centuries ago a real African and brother.
The naivety of some Africans is what has brought us down.
If we use track record as an indicator, the elections will go ahead in ramshackle form at the end of June, be legitimized by SADC (on the basis of observers who fly in at the last minute, and fly out again before the results are announced) and declare Mugabe to have won. ZANU PF will then contest seats in parliament which, with the help of a friendly judge, will ensure they regain a majority, and we’re back on track to more of the same. Mugabe’s military leaders have too much to lose for anything else to happen. But the wild card is inflation. Within months it will have got so out of control that the Rand or US dollar will move from parallel market to mainstream. No one will want Zim dollars. And since Bob and the boys can’t print Rands and US dollars, their power of patronage will be abruptly diminished. Of course they still have remaining bits of mining, commerce and industry available to steal and give to friends, but after that it gets difficult to see how the country can avoid disintegrating into a Mogadishu-like maelstrom. Only South Africa can change things – just as it performed regime change on Ian Smith by closing the border. But the SA government is not willing or able to do this. Even Nobel Peace prize-winning Mandela can’t bring himself to condemn Mugabe’s genocide.
This opinion piece is pregnant with key scenarios that await Zimbabwe after the 27 June charade. We hope and pray that our fellow African brothers and sisters will not let us down this time as they have in the last 8 years.
Hey Bheki,
You have clearly portrayed how both Mugabe-Zanu PF and Tsvangirai-MDC are active candidates of political masturbation. While other forms of gratification are possible, especially the people-friendly-people-centred approaches, MDC and Zanu PF won’t think of them. So what happens when a nation is caught between a rock and a hard place and the only form of squeezing leaves millions unhappy?
How about looking outside MDC and Zanu PF? I think it’s time for SADC and all concerned Africans to choose a president for Zimbabwe outside the two masturbators. An Ex-president would do in this case, say ex-president Chisano. He would be neutral to the people and the government, and considering the swell award of ‘good people’ that he received, he won’t be a bad politician to begin with. He would steer Zim in this transition crisis until Zim is ready to do without Chisano. After all that is what African leadership, union and African-ness should be about. Forget the usual nationality saga, Zim has crossed the margin, let’s all support Chisano for Zim, or any other potential candidate, who will have the country in heart and mind, and won’t be money or power hungry to engage in self induced political toying.
I cannot agree with you more on the fact that we should be very afraid of June 27, mainly because whichever way this result goes it will not provide the required solution for Zimbabwe’s current crisis. If Mugabe wins by fair or foul means (and right now it can only be through foul means given the targeted violence which has been taking place and the fact that hem has become unmarketable politically), the result will be contested locally and internationally. Such a contested result, as has been the case with the previous results, will mean that the international community (led by the current rulers of this world and Mugabe’s chief opponents- the US and UK) will not lift the sanctions. In fact I forsee a situation where they will intensify the current pressures and this can only mean more bleeding for the country and its population. If the MDC wins, the hardline Generals in Harare will definitely not allow Tsvangirai to take over given their mistrust for him and his party. The mentality that the MDC is a proxy of the Western powers is entrenched within hardliners within the military top brass who have a different understanding of the causes of the contemporary crisis in Zimbabwe and how it can be resolved.
Many Zimbabweans understand that the current crisis is a result of misgovernance, economic mismanagement, controversial elections and the international isolation resulting from the country’s pariah status. But the hardliners among the securocrats and military generals believe the crisis is exclusively a result of ‘Zimbabwe’s siege from Britain and its international and allies, which include the MDC. They favour disengagement from the international community and international institutions and have denounced all those willing to reform and normalize Zimbabwe’s relations with the international community as ‘sell-outs’. On a more practical level, the hardliners, like Mugabe, are more concerned about their fate after the transition. They are worried about what happens to them and their accumulated wealthy and privileges under a new political leadership which they cannot control or trust.The military and securocrats’ plan to hold on to power by keeping Mugabe in office is thus part of a self-preservation strategy. They do not trust Tsvangirai and his party, and will not trust him in the absence of concrete security gurantees as the ones ZANU PF and ZAPU agreed to with the Rhodesia Front in the 1980 transition. Those guarantees were concretised in the Lancaster House constitution.
The daunting challenge for Zimbabwe at the moment is not just about how to retire President Mugabe from politics but also how to get the military to respect the country’s constitutional provisions and political outcomes emanating from these constitutional provisions. Put differently, the fundamental challenge is how to get the military to underwrite electoral outcomes or whatever political settlement is made by politicians, including a post-retirement package for Mugabe.
The death toll will be the measuring stick as to when outsiders will become involved in Zim. The leaders of SADC all have a threshold as to when they will react. Let’s hope that it is not too high. All conflicts around the world have been measured by this factor. So far only 50 or so people have died over the election and clearly this is not enough to elicit any reaction from SADC leaders. My personal belief is there has to be at least 1000 corpses visible on television screens around the world before action is taken. All we have is rhetoric by politicians and NGO’s about the violence and the number of dead.
Zimbabwe is no longer a functioning country as we know it. There is nothing normal about their situation except that you see people driving cars and walking around the streets. It looks normal but go deeper and try imagining an average day for most. You go into a supermarket to buy bread…oops no bread…WHAT!!! it’s our staple diet, obtainable in any other country in the world…Go buy a car….take a truck with you to carry the bank notes to pay for it…then you get told that the price you were given this morning has unfortunately gone up 20% by this afternoon…But you now realise that your monthly salary equates to half a chicken at Nando’s (if there are any to cook!!!)
That is not all. There is no working government (MDC own more than half the seats), can you imagine a debate in Parliament??? The army and police are owned by individuals (generals etc)..the courts rulings are totally ignored by them. Must I go on!
What’s the answer? Tell Mugabe that an SADC peace-keeping force is about to move into the country and take up positions to protect the population. All existing Zim forces to be confined to barracks and all armaments removed from their possession. Any resistance will be met with force. They will inform him that once elections have been run the peace keepers will depart after an elected government is in place and safeguards secured. Anyone who argues against this scenario must realise that mass bloodletting will be the order of the day.
Lastly lets stop using ‘nice’ words like diplomacy, accountability and dialog. Tell the SADC (especially Mbeki) that they are f*&$%ng up big time in the handling of Zimbabwe because they are either too respectful and scared of Robert or they have personally got a lot of money to lose. What other logical, practical or humane reason can it be????
I get the feeling that many people are very angry about the situation in Zimbabwe. And that they are disgusted by African leaders, and their “efforts” so far.
I would also like to point out to people that they can vote most of them out if they wished (apart from Angola, still waiting for another eletion.)
And that we, in the UK, are unable to help when SADC wont even allow a refugee camp to be organised by the UN on their soil, and Zanu is now stopping aid agencies from handing out aid, unless they let the Govt distribute it. (To Zanu members only and with a large skim off the top.)
Mr Moyo
Talking about the affected poor, especially the rural poor-is it not time that we start urging the USA to pass an act that will do away with the Zimbabwe Economy and Recovery act of 2001 that effectively imposed sanctions on Zimbabwe?
Let me point out a few things:
Ever since EU and the USA said they placed travel bans on Mugabe, it is a fact that they are the same people who rolls out red carpets for him at summits held in their respective territories.Consider that even now he is rubbing shoulders with these same pretenders yet no aid comes forth because of the above act and yes its the poor who suffers. Remember even today he roams Rome like any president who has attended the food summit and is free to visit any exclusive shop that the monied of this world can buy from, yet the much needed grants and aid are withheld that could enable the poor at least visit a spaza shop around the corner in zim. Consider that it is the same Mugabe who these hypocrites are claiming to have imposed targeted sanctions on him who is being driven around Rome under the highest security and in a convoy of fuel guzzlers that consume enough petrol in 2km that would have powered a poor rural dwellers old tazz 100km to take their ailing child to a hospital.
consider that these same hypocrites are feeding this same Mugabe they claim not to want with food, the price of which can feed a poor family in a rural place for a month atleast.
And quiet frankly we are made to believe that Mugabe is not allowed to travel to Europe, he is, as we speak in Europe, he shops, dines and runs all the errands that anybody in Italy will want to run. Yet the much needed aid, grants and loans for ordinary Zimbabweans are not coming. Hypocrites!
LETS WAIT FOR THE NEXT SUMMIT, where, you guesses right, a red carpet and a presidential guard will be waiting for him-i hope its not going to be in Australia.
I like your last paragraph
Finally reality sinks in to the minds of Black Africans! No matter how well intentioned politicians may be when they take office, the nature of the political process makes them vulnerable to corruption. Checks and balances in political systems that limit the power of any single person and in any one branch of government are absolutely essential, and even then the possibility exists that with determination, the limits on power can be circumvented. The USA has a well designed three compartment system and yet it has been undermined to such an extent that the USA is only a small step from rule by decree by a President who represents a political party that is expert at stealing elections and undermining democracy. Back in 2000, Bush was declared the winner by twelve men who were appointed to the Supreme Court by his father. 2004 was not quite so blatent, but the election was rigged nonetheless.
Yes, start from a presumption that politicians are inherently bad people, or at the least that they are fallible and prone to corruption and the influence of rich people and rich corporations with intentions to circumvent democratic processes.
Design a political system where the potential for any one person or group of people to manipulate political processes for their own purposes is minimised. Make provision for processes where decisions that have potential to favour or enrich a segment of civil society are reviewed by other parties, review committees and the like.
Fundamental to maintaining the impartiality of politicians is ensuring that they cannot be bought off by campaign contributions. That is where the USA system (and those of most European countries) have broken down; in effect, it is lobbyists who decide what happens in Congress and the Senate (and the European parliaments).
There are two main systems in use in the modern world. In the First World, it is essentially the global corporations who control trade, foreign policy and most decisions that affect ordinary citizens. In Africa, there is a nasty tendency toward “One man, one vote, once” and then a spiral down toward one party rule and finally the dictatorship of one of the former liberation heroes.
If Africa is to ever make a real go of democracy, it will be by realising the need to limit the power of individual politicians and parties and ring-fencing the measures in the constitution in such a way that they cannot be undone by any one political party, even if that party has an overwhelming majority in Parliament. Major changes to the Constitution of a democracy should require a decisive majority in a democratic referendum, not simply a vote in Parliament.
Of course, that’s no guarantee either. After losing a referendum, Mugabe did what he wanted by governing by decree.
Preventing the excesses of power from going to a person’s head is a difficult matter, but starting from a position of mistrust is sure to achieve a better result than one of trust.
According to an old joke, politicians are like bananas because they like to hang around in bunches, they’re all yellow, and there’s not a straight one among them.
Bilal I think the reason Mugabe was allowed into Rome for the summit is because it was under the auspices of the UN and not the EU who has placed a travel ban on him.
Bilal
Various countries have imposed sanctions on Mugabe; but the UN could not – blocked by SADC and AU countries. The Rome meeting is a UN one – that is why he can travel to it.
Mildred
You have a supreme cheek. Mogan is the legitimately elected leader of Zim – since 2002, but because an illegitimate regime hangs on to power and refuses to accept defeat, they must be appeased, the people ignored, and someone else found to rule?
@Ariel
I get your point…what i was saying is, though there are exceptions on when and how Bob can enter the EU, why cant these same hypocrites sitting with him at that UN summit realise that exceptions should also apply in the case of sanctions imposed on Zimbabwe(the coutry). if IMF can see that there are no medications in Zimbabwe cant they[IMF] accept the sufferings of the ordinary poor zimbabwean and lend a helping hand. If Zimbabweans cant get jobs yet Zimbabwe needs infrastructure like roads, hospitals and schools cant the African dvt Bank see that there is life during after Mugabe.
I am saying that yes he is in Europe now and of course enjoying all the priviledges of a visiting dignitary thanks to Italy on behalf of UN.
Bilal
Who do you think is feeding the people now? Mugabe has stopped the NGOs feeding as well!
Help can only be given AFTER Mugabe has gone. He stole all the help given for the people previosly for himself and his cronies.
In 1980 they had schools, hospitals, roads, infrastructure. Mugabe did not maintain them.
Lyndall Beddy
You are making very bold claims about Morgan Tsvangirai being an elected leader of the people since 2000. I wish that was the case but wishes have never been horses and are not likely to be any time soon. Another claim you make is that we the people that have been dealing with Mugabe in the face of all danger, and in the case of the Matebele people at a time when the very organisations that you claim have been kicked out by Mugabe from providing aid, necessarily need to forget how many enermies we have because we need aid. To hell with that domination. If the people of Matabeleland survived the murders of Mugabe and the absence of AID, as Mugabe did not allow it then, why should we now have Tsvangirai, in the same subtley forms of control to be thrown down our throat.
Remember Mugabe who was hailed by international organisations as the hero on the War of Liberation was not a factor in Zimbabwe’s struggle until the last half of the decades long struggle, but as at 1980 he was the panancea. This is the same situation with Morgan Tsvangirai who has been made a panacea over night.
How on earth do you know that Tvsangirai won the 2000 elections? I agree there was rigging but the presence of that does not mean he won the election! These claims are both a form of oppression and control not very different from that of ZANU PF and Mugabe.
Nkululeko
I get you. i have also always asked before that when Matebele were being massacred, Britain as a matter of fact had its own military men in Zimbabwe training the Zim army. it was that very same time that the British were tripping all over telling anyone who cared to lesson how Mugabe is their ally, how times change.
and now that they can no longer benefit from Mugabe their eyes just opened wide enough to know that ZANU PF is now the enemy of the Zimbaweans.
Lesson to draw from:
USA took 14 years to declassify ANC and the likes of Mandela as terrorists, MDC tread carefully.
Nkululeko
Why do you need Aid? Ian Smith managed without it – under real sanctions, sanctions against trade, not against thieves taking the peoples money out of the country.
There was a referendum in 2000 – Mugabe lost. Every election after that has been rigged. Even Mbeki’s own advisors told him so.
Bilal
You are right that Britain stuffed up – they believed Mugabe and not Ian Smith, who was telling the truth. They will not be so gullible again.
Lyndall
You are so wrong to think the west was gullible, the truth is that as long as you advance their agendas, you are their man and yes you ll be given all knighthoods, get foreign aid(with its attached conditions), grants, loans, cancellation of debts(they know they can gain even more afterwards) and FDIs. But watch out at the end of the day everyone wants to control their destiny and make their decisions-think of Saddam, The Taliban, Osama Bin Laden, Mubuto Sese Seko, Tshombe, Idi Amin, Jonas Savimbi and the list goes on and on. All these people we once friends of the west, they were considered freedom fighters(savimbi) until he[savimbi] got to realise that he can get super rich out of the mines in Angola and actually stopped passing the loot[minerals] to the west but sold for personal gain.if the west was gullible then we still see oppresive regimes in Africa and elsewhere-think Pakistani’s Musharaff, think of the Saudi monarch(women are even denied the right to drive), think of israel(gaza blockade). these are examples that show clearly that if the west benefits, it sees no evil and hears no evil.
And you think the west was ever gullible, yes it witnessed the massacre of the ndebeles in the eighties, it is a fact that then Britain had military officers in zimbabwe training the zimbabwe army(for carryin out the massacre? yours to ponder.)and Britain just ignored that tragedy, no white farms were being forcefully re claimed.
And now enter Morgan, tell me the west is no longer gullible. History will judge your words- the west is never gullible. Consider when they were building up to the Iraq war, yes, you know the justification for the war was all lies and they continue with the war, they maim and kill civilians(innocent women and children), they continue to bomb on a daily basis, schools and hospitals and claim wrong intelligence. no they bomb these public places for the simple reason of giving their companies reconstruction contracts. and they dont care if any civilians get killed in the process-afterall its collateral damage. these are the human rights advocates that up to as i type this have continue to defy those who advocate for the banning of cluster bombs-the same bombs that are killing innocent children in Afghanistn, Palastine and Iraq. Lyndall, human rights are human rights, they apply in the same fashion whether the victim happens to be Zimbabwean, a palestine, in Saudi national, a pakistani, a prisoner in quantanamo…the list goes on. If EU thinks Zimbabweans are being denied their human rights, tell me that the same EU is gullible enough not to know that the prisoners in quantanamo are being treated less that human beings! tell me that USA is being gullible enough to know that Israel is committing a genocide in the Gaza strip by turning a whole country side into a prison- do you know how many babies die daily as a result of that blockade, starvation, lack of medication etc, painful indeed, and the only crime those people committed was to vote for HAMAS! Tell me the west is gullible again and i might spit in your face! seriously!
Tell me the west does not know that in Swaziland there are no political parties allowed, no elections being held, and you think they are gullible-whether elections are held or not in Swaziland the west will not lose anything.
Why Zimbabwe alone, why obsession with Mugabe, why sacrifice only one president out of all the devils that commit atrocities in the world over-Bush in Iraq and Afghanistan, Olmert in Palestine, Tony B-liar in Iraq, Musharraf in Pakistan, Egypt, Bush quatanamo prison, Mswati denies people the right to vote in Swaziland, Saudi Arabia… and the list goes on… why Zimbabwe?
Bilal
Because it was the Brits who funded Mugabe in the first place when he claimed to be a freedom fighter.
Because it was the Brits who ignored allegations of his atrocities and intimidation tactics and handed over power to him.
Because it was the Brits who encouraged their own people to emigrate to the “New Democratic” Zimbawe of Mugabe and invest their pensions.
Because it was the Brits who bought 30% of the farmland for the poor – which Mugabe gave out as political favours.
The Brits feel guilty – AND THEY SHOULD!