If regard is had to the approach being taken by US President Barack Obama in respect of dictatorships in general and the ongoing crisis in Iran in particular, then the decision to persist with sanctions against Zimbabwe is not only unfair, it’s cruel.
In his new approach to foreign policy Obama has made it clear that democracy is no longer the be-all and end-all when it comes to accepting states into the fold. Indeed it is rather a case of assessing their attitude towards the US, as well as ongoing stability and their approach towards certain fundamental human rights.
Speaking from the White House today the president condemned the actions of the government of Iran in dealing with protestors but still allowed a back door to the Supreme Leader and President Ahmadinejad by confirming that if their handling of the situation on the ground was acceptable then world recognition was not beyond them.
This was in the face of clear voting irregularities, threats and violence against the people of Iran and a steadfast refusal by the Guardian Council to even entertain the vote being annulled.
Now far be it from us in Africa to prescribe to the U.S.A and indeed the West how they should conduct their foreign policy — it is a matter best left to the administration responsible therefore — what we do expect is that it be handled with a measure of consistency which is clearly not the case here.
Zimbabwe has by dint of former president Thabo Mbeki’s unwavering dedication and patience somehow managed to cram the Zanu-PF, MDC-T and MDC into a government of national unity (GNU). The fact that Zimbabwe was tantamount to a dictatorship previously is neither here nor there if the current approach of the US is to be explained. Indeed it has reached out to many dictatorships in the Muslim world and beyond.
Accordingly to single out Zimbabwe is not only unfair but counter-productive to the millions of Zimbabweans who have accepted the GNU in order to begin the long process of recovery.
The country is currently moving towards stability, starting to re-impose the rule of law and is certainly trying to reach out to the West. Surely a prime candidate to be brought back into the fold thereby benefiting not only the people in that country but the region as well.
Whatever President Mugabe’s faults — and they are too many to mention here — he has never suggested nuking an African country as is the case of the president of Iran with whom Obama openly seeks reconciliation.
As Africans living in the SADC, a healthy Zimbabwe would be of benefit to the region as a whole. Moreover if Ahmadinejad is capable of redemption then Mugabe should be given the Nobel Peace Prize.
This entry was posted
on Tuesday, June 23rd, 2009 at 8:33 pm and is filed under News & Politics.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
46 Responses to “West must lift sanctions on Zimbabwe”
Traps
Good article. I agree - SADC has a responsibility, by virtue of vested interest, to ensure that Zimababwe is healthy once again.Same for any other SADC country.
Word of caution: brace yourself for abuse by apartheid & colonialist beneficiaries!
When exactly did Iran threaten to nuke anyone? And with what nuclear missiles? Sources for this claim would be great. I’m no fan of theocracies of any kind, but play fair.
@Traps - I always thought the sanctions on Zimbabwe were preventing dealing with the leaders, not the country. Are you able to clarify?
Anyway, even if no sanctions existed whatsoever, Zimbabwe’s economic credibility is destroyed and will struggle regardless. The West did not destroy their agricultural industry, they did it themselves and in the end there was nothing left to buy from them…
Not so fast Trapido. Remember, not all of us suffer from amnesia; not so long ago (in this platform) you’ve written the following umpteenth posts about what should happen in zim.
For example on the post titled, “South African approach to Zimbabwe is a condonation of apartheid”, January 31, 2009. You’ve said,“Of course now that president Satan has been preserved, SADC will be racing off to the UN and Western powers with the begging bowl. This will be along the lines of: “Please sir, we know that we told the UN to stay out and called Western powers imperialists but we really need you to pour in aid so that they can use the aid as a tool to further oppress their people and retain most of it for themselves….Without doubt this is not the time for lifting sanctions in Zimbabwe on the part of the United States and the European Union. As SADC has made patently clear, they are the biggest danger to Africa. ..In reality they are the biggest threat to elitists because they expect accountability in respect of loans, stability for investment and democratic processes to be observed. That is why they are portrayed as demons before elections. They threaten the continuation of the elite in power by pointing out corruption, cronyism and crimes against humanity.”
Then again, on another post titled, “United States of Africa…” February 03, 2009, you’ve written something like this,“If regard is had to how the SADC and
Then again, on another post titled, “United States of Africa….,” February 03, 2009, you’ve written something like this, “If regard is had to how the SADC and AU “dealt” with Zimbabwe then anyone who was able to decipher the standards that they applied must surely be worthy of having a crack at the Enigma codes. Why wasn’t it a case of the AU and SADC demanding a free and fair election, acceptable standards of behaviour in the build-up thereto and insisting that Mugabe immediately accept the result? Instead of watching as the people of that country were butchered and starved to death while a genocidal dictator refused to budge. The result is a country on the brink of the abyss with an economy that defies calculation and which is destabilising the entire region. Last year, while Zimbabwe was burning to the ground, Mugabe paid a visit to the AU. If you recall the visit you would remember him lambasting the other African leaders for daring to judge him while so many of them had committed far worse atrocities than him. Imagine how bad you have to be to be a bigger thug than Bob?”
And again again on these following posts:
Your argument rests on the two pillars of
- using US realpolitik as a moral compass and
- comparing Mugabe (favourably) with Ahmadinejad
Both of these pillars are, to me, flimsy strawmans (strawmen?). Whatever the merits are of lifting sanctions, I am not a fan of your argument. And I’m normally a big fan of your arguments.
All human rights activist groups in Zimbabwe want the sanctions to remain in place until such time as real change to democratic norms are in place. Pulling sanctions now would be a really dumb move, especially whilst Mugabe has all the machinery of terror on the ground ready for action.
I agree - whatever the problems in Zimbabwe, they are no North Korea or Iran. The Zimbabwean people have suffered enough and need a chance to do the best they can with what they have - resources and government.
uh, trapido. the “sanctions” are on 143 [this may be slightly higher or lower] INDIVIDUALS, and not on the government.
with that in mind, re-write the article.
it’s *personal*, not political. they’re against bob and his friends.
i have several acquaintances who are *direct* beneficiaries of bob’s goons’ ill-gotten gain. and, really, if i were in a less charitable mood, i would put a link to the personals page of one of them, who has a house in joburg’s northern suburbs solely for parking his cars. [said cars are on his personals page.
and really? the zimbabwean economy was wrecked by the implementation of the land restitution programme — something about which people in luthuli house must certainly have taken note. because honestly? don’t think that all of the gold and diamonds would save south africa from a cataclysmic economic collapse if it went the zimbabwe route. zim has more platinum and palladium than south africa, and almost as much gold. and yet… look what happened anyway.
Thanks for showing some compassion for the people of Zimbabwe and some confidence in the government of national unity. I must admit your call for the removal of sanctions against Zimbabwe surprised me because you’ve been very critical of Zimbabwe leadership, particularly President Mugabe. I know mistakes were made in the land reform program but I still feel land reform had to happen in Zimbabwe.
I hope the ANC in South Africa will press harder to correct the imbalance in land reform in South Africa because its a very important issue for the security of the country. I’m smiling as I write because I’m very happy that you’ve changed course.
todd kidd, new orleans. I can’t wait to attend the World Cup in South Africa.
I have a friend who is a member of the MDC and lives here in South Africa as his life was tghreatened. He has been reliably informed from his contacts within MDC, that the R30,000,000 (or thereabouts) that was given to Zimbabawe, to buy agricultural products, by the ANC using South African citizens money was used by Mugabe to buy his house in Hong Kong and to pay his thugs.
Do not under any circumstances give any money to Zimbabwe whilst Mugabe and his gang run the banks.
Mugabe has been stealing money for almost 3 decades and there is no reason why he should now stop.
Excellent article. Being practical is all Africans need to be. Continuing looking at the negative benefits no-one, and crisis like those in Somalia, Darfur and the War in Angola should remind the Africans about the Double Standards of the West. One side they talk about democracy and fight against terrorism, but on the other hand they try and remove elected government by all means necessary and using force on proxy. Terrorism is only when someone attacks the west, not the other way. Thatyou for your objective, its productive and positive critic. There are those who never seen evil in the west except in Africa. Evil is found in all, and wrong is wrong despite who is doing it.
Africa is a Black hole of proportion. It never looks after itself and always has some excuse attached to its failure. It can be a success but its people stop that from happening. It will always be a burden to the much-vilified West.
It is time that the West says eneough is enough and let them sort out their creations without help.
But I thought these were targeted sanctions primarily against Mugabe and his criminal cohorts and not against the people as a whole. By all means give aid to the people but make sure it does not get into the hands of these criminals, whose tenure in power is being perpetuated with SADC’s collusion.
Of course Tsvingirai has to be supported somehow in his efforts to revitalise the economy. If he fails then MDC, in particular, will be blamed and Mugabe further entrenched. With support of SADC, Mugabe has got the best of both worlds. He retains control of the levers of power and continues to flout the spirit and the letter of the so called global agreement. His criminal cohorts remain in their jobs including the hopelessly incompetent Gideon Gono. Land grabs by s-called war veterans (actually Zanu PF thugs) continue, opposition members detained and so on. Mugabe has ensured that Tsvingirai and Biti are, at the risk to their political futures, given the most onerous tasks in trying to get the country back on its feet.
Until proper power sharing takes place with a new constitution and fresh elections, targeted sanctions against Mugabe and his henchmen should continue. At the same time however, aid must get through to the people who need it.
Used to believe everything coming out of the west as honest and true, until I found out the truth. The problem of corruption, cronyism and crimes are more hidden in Europe and the West. Hillary Clinton is a former first lady, how come she is in the Obama Government. Frédéric Mitterrand,the nephew of François Mitterrand, the late Socialist leader of France was named by President Nicolas Sarkozy, as his culture minister in a major cabinet reshuffle. The US Congress is stuffed by relatives, let alone the UK Parliment’s rot is beyond any word which is in the dictionary. So Africans should be aware of their history and never forget why the concern on Zimbabwe. Angola had a war for a long time, why and what was the reason? The horn of Africa is a strategic shipping area, why was their President Overthrown, and who was supporting the warlords in Somalia? Please know the major Geo-Politics power struggle that is what matters, not who is the Mugabe. Mugabe is fighting a major war which most Africans are not aware off. Why is history being rewritten and for whose benefit and why always exploiting the Africans. Some day when you know the facts, you will sing differently, and that is the reason why Obama refused to take money from Interest Groups and Pressure Groups. Tsvangirai has seen the facts, and how is singing from the same pages as Mugabe.
The acceptance, endorsement and involvement of the main protagonists in the Zimbabwean Government of National Unity, necessitates that we all - especially those who always had a cynical view of the-then President Mbeki’s efforts in brokering a peace deal - publicly eat a humble pie and acknowledge that it is what the Zimbabweans themselves want that is important. The Zimbabweans have not only accepted the GNU but also embraced it as the beginning of the healing process that had characterized their ways of relating to one another at the time some (notably the West, the disgruntled ex-Rhodesians residing in South Africa and Australia) wanted to see a regime change in Zimbabwe.
It certainly is not for the pale-skinned South Africans (nor is it for those with sectarian interests in Zim) to determine what is best for Zimbabwe. It is, rather, the Zimbabweans themselves (currently through ZANU-PF, MDC-T, MDC) to determine the direction of Zimbabwe. Is it not astonishing that the Prime Minister (Tsvangirai) is heckled off-stage in London when he adopts a rational approach on his country’s affairs, as he sure should? Am certain he’s already called names by those who wanted to use him for their own ends.
As always, I think the calls for the moratorium on the Western-imposed economic sanctions on Zimbabwe are, at best, significantly belated. They should happen as in “last 5 years” already!
Obama is a good student of Mbeki’s “Quiet” Diplomacy. He knows how to walk a fine line in order to be effective. To lambast a dictator through “megaphone” diplomacy but not willing to go to war to enforce your views is counter-productive and only plays to the peanut gallery of arm chair foreign policy experts. There is only one form of effective diplomacy in real-politics.
There are two main forces to have your ideas implemented by any independent govt ie: cohesive force (war) and persuasive force (diplomacy). Lambasting a dictator is not the best start to persuade the dictator. Mugabe always used the colonialist (Britain) and imperialists (US) words to appeal nationalist sentiments and presented himself as a victim of external interests. The Iranian and North Korean regimes do the same.
Bush did not have direct influence to North Korea and he left himself at the mercy of China and Russia who had direct access to North Korea via the six party talks. Sanctions do not give the US any leverage in bargaining and negotiating with North Korea. South Africa has negotiation leverage and access to Zimbabwe because SA still trades with Zimbabwe and has not embarked on futile “megaphone” diplomacy. Similarly, in case of North Korea with regard to Russia and China.
On a more constructive note, if you think the travel ban and asset freeze (NOT ECONOMIC) are unfair then why dont you ask Brazil, South Africa, China, India and Indonesia, why they dont fund it, since they have no sanctions whatsoever on Zim?
Or are you finally going to realise that an “African Solution to an Africa Problem” means that SA and the SADC put their money where their mouth is and pay for it, instead of begging from the West after ten years of race hate.
And anytime you’d finally stop parroting Mugabe and ZANU (the “ANC comrades”) and learn from the Latin America, SE Asian, Pacific, Middle Eastern countries; China and Japan etc. that when someone invests they expect a set of accounts and an audit, even if they are Black African, instead of an inverted race card from an incompetent thief.
You think its unfair, you go to Zim and invest with your money. I prefer the Co-opewrative society and Fair Trade’s ethical investment policy, because they dont machine gun the peasants for fishing without a licence:
I agree - there is no point anymore in continuing the sanctions. Let us admit that Mugabe and ZANU-PF has prevailed… they rule, they have more or less completely destroyed the hated white community in Zimbabwe, they have taken back the farms, for good, and most of all, the still have the support of the ANC and much of the rest of Africa. Mugabe is admired widely in the third world for the way in which he has dealt with whites and their properties. It is over, so let us then continue elsewhere, admitting that this has passed by and what was lost cannot be regained.
If those who preside over SADC and the AU had a scrap of humanity in their souls they would have sidelined Mugabe long ago.There would be no need for sanctions, which are in any event targeted at Mugabe and his elite.
This is not about oil or nulear power or world domination.This is about the tremendous suffering of the humble people of Zimbabwe who have been let down by their by the leaders of Afica who are too weak to stand up to Mugabe.
If the West now lift sanctions they will only endorse this.
PS I am neither a colonialist nor apartheid beneficiary just a concerned person who really feels for the pain and suffering of ordinary Zimbabweans and many other nations as a result of the despicable actions of their leaders, with the complicity of many other african leaders.
Slowly and imperceptibly, over time, the personal sanctions against Mugabe and his individually named cronies now seem to have become “Sanctions Against Zimbabwe”.
It has now apparently become accepted theory that, if you freeze Mugabe’s personal foreign bank accounts, containing the funds he has mugged from his own people, you are punishing the people of Zimbabwe.
So Trapido you are of the opinion that every Situation should be treated exactly the same. cultures, countries and leaders differ.Obama certainly has a foreign policy strategy to deal with Iran and George bush style criticism is not part of that. Did you write this article out of boredom?
What about the money Trapps? Mugabe and his cronies have plundered Zimbabwe’s coffers and treated the country’s economy as their own personal piggy bank. They should be required to repay all those millions of $’s that are in frozen bank accounts before there is any mention of lifting sanctions, which we must not forget are not sanctions against Zimbabwe, but restrictions against its past rulers. So to lift these sanctions would mean releasing stolen oney in frozen bank accounts. Who is in agreement with this?
Zim is not North Korea or Iran. On that we can agree, Traps. But ask yourself what that difference is based on: nuclear power. If Mugabe had nuclear weapons do you really believe he wouldn’t use them? Would you trust him or Zana-PF NOT to abuse that sort of power?
The only other difference between Mad Bob and Crazy Kim Il Jong is geography.
Show me one incident where foreign aid, in any form has trickled! down to the poor masses of Africa. Africans are poor and starving because their leaders are inherently corrupt,immoral and feel squat for their people. That goes for investors that use corrupt leaders to further their own wealth. Its people like you that further the demise of African people by propping up their eligitimate goverments.The world bank, Bob Geldof and his cronies have been pumping money into Africa for decades and the pictures we see coming out of Africa looks the same if not worse now, then what it did 60 years ago. The people have to be empowered to look after themselves and not rely on AID!(Education,Skills,Job creation) The only way to achieve this is to forcibly remove self serving dictators and their goverments,freeze their assets overseas and plough it back into the countries they stole it from.This can only be achieved by foreign(UN) appointment of local goverment and monitering of how the money is spent on the ground.Once the people are out of this poverty cycle they can vote for a new leader.And if the PEOPLE dont like this well then you get who you voted for and NO AID.Dont confuse IRAN with Africa, They still feed themselves,under Sanctions, and still have spare cash to build a few missiles.
you lot make it seem as if the “sanctions against zimbabwe” are anything like helms-burton. if they were, you would have a case.
there is no law saying that companies are not allowed to invest in zimbabwe, or if they do, they are not allowed to invest in the united states [which is the crux of helms-burton re cuba]. what led to the divestment of companies from zimbabwe was the actions of bob et cie stemming from the first election that bob actually lost.
insane internal policies, ongoing civil wars, megalomaniacal dictators, and mass starvation are really no hindrance to business doing their work. in fact, until very recently, german companies that paid bribes in other countries in order to obtain contracts could actually deduct them from their german taxes.
forex is only affected when property rights are not seen as being secure. *that* is when zimbabwe’s economic problems started, otherwise the economy would have fallen apart in the 80s, during the matabeleland invasions.
yet again, reading the comments, it becomes more and more clear who has, to put it mildly, neither a sense of global realpolitik nor actual business acumen.
the manner in which bob effected land reform killed the economy, as it killed investor confidence. as a businessman, it would make no sense for me to set up shop if at any given moment, someone could claim my property. are you lot THAT DOF not to realise this — or don’t you know any business owners?
Give Zimbabwe a break?? You mean, give ZANU-PF a break, Traps!
They have done a wonderful job of convincing everyone that “sanctions” are operating. What sanctions?
- assets freeze and travel ban on a small elite group of kleptocrats who’ve spent years salting away money they stole from the people of Zimbabwe and who are in any case unproductive
- restrictions on further soft loans which are due to failure to meet current repayment obligations. Even the much criticised ZIDERA doesn’t amount to more than this.
- There are no enforceable trade sanctions, except for arms deals, though some companies have independently stopped trading on principle or because the risk is too high.
- Thanks to the spinelessness of SADC and the tendency of Zimbabweans to flight instead of fight, the so called “smart sanctions” are now the only means by which Mugabe and ZANU-PF can still, perhaps, be nudged towards compliance with the terms of the GPA which THEY signed.
- What is negotiable about respect for the law, for human and civil rights? How can anyone invest without security? How’s North Korea doing for trade these days?
- Ask the ex-Rhodies about life under sanctions. Except for a few secret deals, Rhodesia consumed only what it could produce itself, and still managed to function.
Principled refusal to supply Government aid where none can be certain of who will benefit, is not “sanctions”. Think again Traps and those joining the chorus. Precious little has really changed in Zim.
The reason for the upheaval in London is one that needs empathy. Have you known what it is like to live your life with the possibility of deportation? Where you are unable to build your life because you are not regularised? and when you get deported where do you go? To a Harare of party cronies driving Brabuses and Hummers while the rest scrounge for a living. Earning a salary of US$100.00 and paying a basic electricity bill amounting to half of that. How about the carnage of jobs in the formal sector? the displacement of those formerly thriving in the informal sector. The financial services sector that I’m really conversant with having worked in it is in a bad state. Many employees retrenched or on indefinite leave. Unaffordable tertiary and basic education?
The thing is this.There are two issues to contend with. A collapsed economy and the fight for democracy.As in Les Miserables we agree that the stomach paralysed the heart when we helped heap pressure on Morgan Tsvangirai to sign the King’s Charter. We have not seen any tangible benefits in terms of civil liberties. The state papers were accusing Tsvangirai of being on a party mission. There is no free press. People still look behind their backs when they talk politics. In fact Tsvangirai is according to the partisan state papers still to honour commitments to close pirate radio stations not even owned by his party.
Far be it from me to be abusive but i am sorry to read such absurd sewer material from a person who is obviously ignorant and been brain washed by the Zim regime. What sanctions are you talking about? Are you so ignorant to the extent you are not aware these are sanctions supported by the generality of Zimbos? Have you ever heard of a company stopped from doing business except what would benefit Mugabe and his friends being denied or censured by the west? You need to come to Zim and see what is happening before you waste resources to prop up a derelict and defunct government. The west did what had to be done and for your info it was not enough. ZANU peoples kids are in school in RSA and europe whilst the rest of the nation suffers. They buy their groceries from RSA and Asia as they plunder the country. Travel sanctions that exist were put in place to try and stop the rot and the Mbeki you credit with whatever has business interests in Zim too. So before you starting representing me Mr writer ask me first.
The MDC and other organisations stands accused of terrorism.I wonder what would happen if those accused and left to dry by Tsvangirai by some means implicate him in the alleged plots. I just heard the Letta Mbuli song go “Mhlaba wakithi bo usemindawonye, akukho mehluko kulelizwe. Thina asinavoice,sihleli ovalweni, qhawula lapha Madhuku, Kagoro, Magaisa, Chibhebhe*2. Not yet Uhuru, Not yet Uhuru”.
Mugabe has not reliquinshed his hold on the forces of repression. Zanu PF ministers do not respect the authority of the Prime Minister.
As an aside my suggestion is while Tsvangirai heads West with the begging bowl Mugabe should take another bowl and head East. Surely the likes of Russia, China, oil rich Gadaffi, Chavez, Ahmadinejad whom he has always ingratiated himself with can assist? or maybe it is case of forced and claimed friendship
Poor article. Typical flip-flop knee-jerk liberal thinking conveniently “forgetting” your previous blogs.
Bob and his generals are fixated with power, enrichment and survival - not power sharing.
Any weakness by the West would only play into Bob’s hands.
JZ is merely (conveniently) following Thabo’s lead.
Does he have a mind of his own?
Did the world lift sanctions when PW Botha (supposedly) held out some form of olive branch? Certainly not. And if they had, imagine the outcry. I sense what the West needs to see is some positive action in Zim before they contemplate lifting sanctions. GNU (window dressing) is not enough. Investor confidence is absolutely right mundundu!
Looking at it another way, Iran is seen as a threat; Zimbabwe isn’t. All things being equal, then we could have a discussion about fairness in the application of sanctions.
Ah the lure of all that lovely lolly in US$. This is just some spin on a wheedle to get the more affluent countries to pay off Mugabe and his mates credit cards. As a few have said, you put in some cash, let SA politicians put in some personal cash, then maybe. Traps has really embraced the ANC model.
If you are going to sell your soul, at least get a good price. Ask for aid to Zim to resume but through the offices of M Traps & Ass.
There are a number of countries that do not have sanctions against Zimbabwe and they are probably the culprits who are propping up Mugabe’s ZANU-PF with donations to them.
This aid certainly does not seem to be finding its way to the desperately poor, nor will any further handouts.
If there was a mechanism that ensured that the needy were to benefit from the lifting of sanctions I would give it my full support, otherwise they must remain until change is implemented and guarantees are in place.
Despite all the tricks Mugarbage has tried to con the west in ripping them off, nothing worked as well as he thought it would, for the simple reason that the west is not so naive as they to be in just pouring money into the pockets of African dictators, regardless.
They got wise after their trillions into the bottomless African pit for humanitarian aid achieved absolutely ZERO results.
[…] Thought Leader » Michael Trapido » West must lift sanctions on …Without doubt this is not the time for lifting sanctions in Zimbabwe on the part of the United States and the European Union. As SADC has made patently clear, they are the biggest danger to Africa. ..In reality they are the biggest threat to elitists because they expect accountability …. Frédéric Mitterrand,the nephew of François Mitterrand, the late Socialist leader of France was named by President Nicolas Sarkozy, as his culture minister in a major cabinet reshuffle. … […]
” @Traps - I always thought the sanctions on Zimbabwe were preventing dealing with the leaders, not the country. Are you able to clarify? ”
You have bought into the MDC/UK/USA propaganda, which tried to blame Robert Mugabe for the effects of US sanctions, instead of the sanctions and Bush Administration themselves. Their ultimate victory would be to blame the victim for the acts of the aggressor.
Zimbabwe (that is the government and economy) has been under a credit freeze since 2002, when the Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act of 2001 came into effect. From this act, I quote:
(c) MULTILATERAL FINANCING RESTRICTION- … the Secretary of the Treasury shall instruct the United States executive director to each international financial institution to oppose and vote against–
(1) any extension by the respective institution of any loan, credit, or guarantee to the Government of Zimbabwe; or
(2) any cancellation or reduction of indebtedness owed by the Government of Zimbabwe to the United States or any international financial institution.
Notice the mentioning of ‘the government of Zimbawe’ twice - no mention of ‘Mugabe and his cronies’, ‘members of ZANU-PF’, etc. but the government of Zimbabwe. These are financial sanctions against the government, equivalent to the credit freeze the West is going through today. Notice the combination of no new money or credit coming in, but no existing loans being rescheduled or cancelled…
(Continued…) money kept going out. This is why the government responded with the printing press, and why Zimbabwe had world record hyperinflation. And notice that Hillary Clinton is a co-sponsor of these sanctions.
My guess is that Clinton is involved, because a certain contributor and long time family friend (Maurice Tempelsman - google: tempelsman lumumba) has huge concessions in the DRC, which President Mugabe threatened when he helped out ‘renegade’ president Laurent Kabila, against the US/UK sponsored coltan ‘rebels’ in the Eastern DRC. And of course the ultimate threat to western property rights is the discontinuation of private ownership of the world’s largest goldmines in South Africa.
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS- The term `international financial institutions’ means the multilateral development banks and the International Monetary Fund.
(2) MULTILATERAL DEVELOPMENT BANKS- The term `multilateral development banks’ means the
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the International Development Association, the
International Finance Corporation, the
Inter-American Development Bank, the
Asian Development Bank, the
Inter-American Investment Corporation, the
African Development Bank, the
African Development Fund, the
European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and the
Multilateral Investment Guaranty Agency.
The institutions these sanctions applied to, were the institutions where the Zimbabwean government had most of it’s credit lines. It is an obvious abuse of US veto power in the world’s financial institutions, to put sanctions on a country, outside of the United Nations.
All comments must be approved by our editors, click here to read the editorial guidelines for comments. Please allow some time for our editors to approve your comment after posting.
Themba Maseko, the spokesperson for the Cabinet, today confirmed that the government is committed to accommodating the views expressed during public h...
Professor Steven Friedman in an article in Business Day says that the media has it wrong about secrecy law’s victims and that the failure of the med...
On Saturday, Pat Boone, a conservative political commentator, Christian activist, writer and preacher, put the entire American cat population among th...
As the National Prosecuting Authority bask in the afterglow of having obtained a conviction against former top cop Jackie Selebi in Johannesburg on We...
Once upon a time in a land at the southern tip of Africa, there lived a people so adept at making the rest of the world scratch their heads until thei...
Loading ...
Traps
Good article. I agree - SADC has a responsibility, by virtue of vested interest, to ensure that Zimababwe is healthy once again.Same for any other SADC country.
Word of caution: brace yourself for abuse by apartheid & colonialist beneficiaries!
(Report abuse)