Messages From Zimbabwe

South African President Thabo Mbeki is to chart the way forward in stalled talks for a power-sharing government in Zimbabwe after meeting representatives from the main political parties, Justice Minister Patrick Chinamisa said in a state newspaper article published Sunday. “I can confirm that we went to South Africa for separate bilateral discussions with the facilitator,” Chinamasa, who is one of the chief negotiators for President Robert Mugabe, was quoted as saying by The Sunday Mail. “The meeting was convened because the facilitator wanted to search for a way forward,” he added. It was still unclear when Mbeki would make a pronouncement on what will happen next, after meeting negotiators from the Zimbabwe parties in South Africa on Friday. MDC spokesman Nelson Chamisa confirmed that their negotiators had met with Mbeki Friday and returned to Zimbabwe Sunday. “We remain cautiously optimistic that the dialogue is going to be successfully concluded,” he told AFP Sunday.

He added that a collapse of the dialogue would be “catastrophic” for Zimbabwe and would “catalyse suffering”. “This is why we feel as MDC we have to be committed to the success of the dialogue,” Chamisa said. The negotiations reached a deadlock two weeks ago after Mugabe and opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) leader Morgan Tsvangirai failed to strike a compromise over the sharing of executive powers. Zimbabwe’s state media on Saturday reported that Mugabe’s ZANU PF had rejected a “new but absurd suggestion” from the MDC that the country’s cabinet be co-chaired by Mugabe and Tsvangirai. “ZANU PF dismissed the suggestion, not just as insolent, but also stunning ignorance on how government works,” state daily The Herald quoted a source by Mugabe’s ZANU PF as saying. The power sharing talks followed the signing of a memorandum of understanding between Mugabe’s ZANU PF and the two factions of the MDC on July 21. In power since 1980, Mugabe retained office in June after a one-candidate, presidential run-off after the withdrawal of Tsvangirai who cited violence and intimidation against his supporters in the lead-up to vote.

(Source)

Harare, Zimbabwe’s capital, is full of buildings that look like giant matchboxes at night. Dusk was falling when, after attending a poetry session at the Book Café - an artist’s hangout at the edge of the city centre - I decided to take a walk through the streets. They rang with the patter of feet as the Saturday night crowds criss-crossed and changed direction. Because I am carrying a backpack with a laptop and a top-of-the-range camera, I keep glancing around to make sure that no mugger is lurking in the shadows of the moonlit night. Fortunately, I soon walk into a street with lamps that shower light onto the pavement. I feel safe. Two men standing outside a city apartment/business office gesture at me and inquire about the latest forex rates. When I tell them I’m not a forex dealer, one of the men begins to wax lyrical about the qualities of his favourite politician - Morgan Tsvangirai. We chat, furtively, about politics for a while before I bid him farewell and continue on my journey towards the rank to catch a minibus home.

The dark has now fully gathered; around me the matchboxes look as if they’re waiting to explode under the weight of the nation’s groaning. I cross a wide street at a little trot to avoid being hit by a fleshy black Mercedes-Benz that slides down the street at full speed. As I reach the other side, at the edge of a street named Kwame Nkrumah, a tall soldier appears from nowhere behind me, walking with wide strides. I almost miss a heartbeat, thinking he is coming after me to confiscate the wide-lens camera in my backpack. I keep my cool and he strides past; I try in vain to imitate his walk simply to test if I have a soldier in me. I am lost in my soldier thoughts for a while until a bald man beckons to me and asks for a match to light his cigarette. I offer him one. We end up talking (dialogue is a currency on the streets) about my pregnant wife and how our baby is due anytime now. Just then a text message beeps on my cellphone. Perhaps this is “the call”, I think, and I’m instantly relieved that it is just a friend asking where I am. I walk towards the Supreme Court. Opposite it stands a group of soldiers silhouetted in the dark who suddenly scream loudly into the night that a hare is crossing the street. For a moment, I stand frozen, wondering how on earth a hare could have ended up in a city filled with rock-solid buildings, until I notice that the so-called hare is just a cat. In fact, it’s two cats; one scampers away behind the court building and the other, on seeing me, dashes towards the chuckling soldiers.

Cats have joined soldiers in my thoughts as I walk on quickly towards the shop that sells one of the best things still available in Harare - ice cream. It’s usually packed, but surprisingly, tonight it is deserted. Perhaps it’s the price increase; overnight price hikes in Zimbabwe can bring on a heart attack and new tactics have to be employed all the time. Anyway, I purchase a huge cone of clear white ice cream that tastes like real cream; of all the things in Zimbabwe, I daresay, the ice cream at that shop competes with any other in the world. As I lick away, my photographer’s eye can’t help but notice the post-election posters still plastered all over the city walls. They’re an eyesore given that the election was a stillborn. I go for my camera to take a picture of the posters for posterity or perhaps just to record a piece in the process of human history. At the back of my mind I know I could get arrested and spend a night in jail in this expression-stifled city if the police or soldiers see me. I put the camera back. Walking on I suddenly sink into a mass of human flesh. On the pavements are numerous men and women selling an assortment of agricultural produce in season - it makes sense for them to trade at night because the municipal police have already gone home. I buy a green maize cob for a total of Z$20, approximately US$0,05. And then I careen my way through the madding crowd, till finally I reach the rank where I find a minibus to take me home through the Harare night.

(Source)

Southern Africa’s regional body SADC, in a thinly veiled criticism of Zimbabwe’s President Robert Mugabe, on Thursday urged all parties in power-sharing talks to respect commitments to negotiate a unity government. “We will be disappointed if the parties renege on their commitment,” Southern African Development Community official Tanki Mothae said in Gaborone, headquarters of the 15-nation bloc. The parties had agreed at a SADC summit on August 19 “that all Zimbabwe stakeholders should go and sit and finalise all outstanding issues, which will pave the way for establishing a stable and peaceful government,” Mothae said. He was speaking after Mugabe on Wednesday announced his intention to form a new government without the opposition, which said it would not participate in a cabinet formed before power-sharing talks are concluded. “All parties concerned must abide by all the agreements,” said Mothae, a retired army colonel who heads the SADC Organ on Politics, Defence and Security. Government newspaper The Herald on Wednesday quoted Mugabe as saying: “We shall soon be setting up a government. The MDC does not want to come in apparently.” Zimbabwe’s political unrest has worsened an economic crisis which has seen widespread unemployment and inflation now officially at more than 11,2-million percent - while experts say it is even higher. The 84-year-old Mugabe lost to opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai in the first round of the presidential election in March but was re-elected in a one-man run-off after Tsvangirai boycotted the poll alleging intimidation and violence. SADC mandated South African President Thabo Mbeki to mediate power-sharing talks, which have been stalled for over two weeks.

(Source)

I think the most significant contribution to the Zimbabwe debate came from a South Africa ANC stalwart, Kadar Asmal, last week. In a speech delivered in South Africa, he stated that the democrats who have struggled so long to secure democratic rights and practices in Zimbabwe and who clearly won the last election despite irregularities, must not be abandoned. He called on other countries, including his own, to support the struggle for democracy in Zimbabwe.

A careful review of all that has gone on in the past 10 days will show that Mr Mbeki constructed a trap for Morgan Tsvangirai, working in the final throws of the negotiations with both Mugabe and Mutambara in the process. On Tuesday last week Morgan walked into the final negotiating session in Harare and was presented with an agreement that had already been approved by both Mugabe and Mutambara. He was asked to sign and was told that the deal offered an end to the long nightmare of struggle and suffering for himself, his family and his country.

He asked for time out to discuss it with his colleagues and after a period brought back to the gathering a counter proposal. The changes were small but made all the difference. In the first document Mbeki and the others offered Tsvangirai the post of Prime Minister, but to be appointed by the President (Mugabe) and not allowed to chair cabinet - taking responsibility for all the ministries that Mugabe could not give a damn about - finance, education, health, labour and social welfare. It not only recognised Mugabe’s election on the 27th June under appalling conditions but also left him in power with all his current privileges and rights. MDC would hold 13 of a 31-seat cabinet; Mutambara and Welshman Ncube, both heavily defeated in the March 29th election would be rewarded with non-elected posts and a significant role.

The MDC counter proposal was totally consistent with the Parties position from day one. It said that the results of the March 29th election had to be respected in all aspects. That Parliament should appoint both the President and the Prime Minister. It established a system that allowed Mugabe to remain as President but with diminished power and responsibility. He would still be Commander in Chief of the Armed forces. The Prime Minister would have all the powers and responsibilities that are normally associated with such a post in other countries.

The trap lay in what Mugabe then expected to happen; he had always known that this was the key issue and that the MDC would never accept such a proposal. So he carefully plotted with Mutambara to go for a deal that excluded Tsvangirai and his Party, forming a Government with the Mutambara faction of the MDC based on the deal negotiated over the past 18 months with both the MDC groups but with the variation outlined above.

When the MDC rejected the deal and demanded that it be amended to reflect the changes suggested, they fully expected Mbeki to go along with the subterfuge. In fact he did not immediately do so - he advised them that a deal that was not signed by Tsvangirai would have little weight in international and African circles and that he would take the final areas of dispute to the SADC for arbitration.

First stop in that process was Angola, “that haven of democratic process” that is yet to hold an election for its own leadership. Angola held the Chair of the SADC organ on Security and Politics. Then he returned to South Africa to prepare for the SADC summit due to take place in Johannesburg that weekend.

At the summit the South Africans gave all participants a full written report on the discussions that had taken place since March 2007. This included the draft constitution crafted in the discussions and signed by all parties at the Kariba meeting in September. You should know that we, the people of Zimbabwe, who are most affected by all of this, have yet to see these same documents.

Mr Mbeki, acting as the new Chairman of the SADC and as the official mediator, told the grouping that the agreements reached represented a “power sharing deal” that was fair to all parties and should be signed. Although the MDC was represented at the meeting by a high powered delegation, they were not allowed to address the leadership of the SADC and Mugabe was allowed to sit in his allotted seat as President of Zimbabwe, even though he has no right to do so and his election in June is not recognised by the great majority of the SADC and other African States. Only Botswana said they would not attend if he were given recognition.

At the conclusion of the SADC meeting Mugabe had just about all he could have wanted - the majority of the SADC had accepted him as President, they had told the MDC that their refusal to sign the power sharing deal was unreasonable, and left it to a weak and indecisive Mbeki to carry on with his mediation. Tsvangirai, in a desperate attempt to rescue the talks visited a number of countries in the immediate aftermath and then returned to South Africa. To no avail. No substantive help or support has emerged for a final agreement.

Mugabe, encouraged by a call by Mbeki for Parliament to be convened and by the lacklustre approach of the SADC leadership, has set about doing just that. Mutambara has reiterated his stance that the deal is reasonable and declared they are going to cooperate in Parliament. ZANU and the Mutambara leadership have selected a candidate for Speaker - Paul Temba Nyathi, who will stand for this post on Monday. Threats have been made against any Mutambara people who might vote against him and for the MDC candidate.

It is a dangerous move - if Mbeki fails to endorse the arrangements then Mugabe and Mutambara are acting alone and without the formal endorsement of the SADC. If they lose the Speaker battle (and they could) then we are in for a period when they might not be able to pass legislation and budgets to run the government. They are also running the risk of total alienation from the electorate and if they cannot pay the armed forces at the end of the month (and I cannot see how they can) then they run the risk that the armed forces might take matters into their own hands.

We, in the MDC, have said since 2000, that we want a peaceful, orderly, legal and democratic transfer of power in Zimbabwe. We have fought 4 elections on this premise, been subjected to campaigns of terror and abuse on a massive scale, seen hundreds of our leaders murdered and thousands beaten and tortured. We have been subjected to continuous propaganda, have campaigned under grossly unequal conditions and voted in a system that has been manipulated and distorted by a corrupt and totalitarian regime.

Yet despite all the provocation we have not raised a finger in support of violence. When our members have demanded a violent response, we have restrained them. When an armed struggle has been proposed, we have rejected the proposals and repudiated the people who made them. Despite all of this we won the March 29th election - because we were able to secure minimal improvements in the way they were conducted. We still believe that 60 per cent of the ZANU seats were won by means of rigging.

Now - at the final hurdle, we are told that we are being unreasonable in demanding recognition for what we are - a Party that has won the right to govern. We are prepared for the sake of a peaceful transition to work together with ZANU on a transition back to democracy in two years and to share power in the transition even though ZANU does not deserve this. South Africa will pay a high price for this dereliction of duty when it mattered most.

(Source: by email)

Zimbabwe’s President Robert Mugabe says he will form a new government despite stalled power-sharing negotiations with the opposition, state media reports.

“The MDC (Movement for Democratic Change) does not want to come in apparently,” he is quoted as saying.

The BBC’s Karen Allen says such a move would be the death-knell for the South African-brokered talks to end the post-election crisis.

Meanwhile, three MDC MPs were arrested on Tuesday when parliament was opened.

Two other opposition MPs had been arrested the day before, although one was later released.

“MDC views this continued harassment and arrest of MDC legislators by the state security agents as a direct affront to the will of the people of Zimbabwe,” the party said in a statement.

The police have said the arrests were in connection with rape, attempted murder and political violence.

Our correspondent in Johannesburg says Mr Mugabe was speaking in bullish mood about forming a government alone, after being booed and jeered by opposition MPs at the formal opening of parliament on Tuesday.

Following the March elections, Mr Mugabe’s Zanu-PF lost its majority in the House of Assembly for the first time since independence in 1980.

The president looked annoyed and raced through the final lines of his speech and it must have been humiliating for him, as the speech was broadcast live on national television, our reporter says.

“We shall soon be setting up a government,” the Herald newspaper quotes him as saying.

At the start of his speech on Tuesday, Mr Mugabe had said there was “every expectation” that a power-sharing deal would soon be agreed.

The MDC says it still wants the talks to continue.

“We remain committed to a dialogue process that is going to produce an acceptable outcome for all the players, an inclusive government,” Reuters news agency quotes MDC spokesman Nelson Chamisa as saying.

Last week, MDC leader Morgan Tsvangirai said the balance of power between the president and the prime minister - a new post Mr Tsvangirai would take - was still a stumbling block at the negotiations.

Mr Tsvangirai won the first presidential round in March, before pulling out of a June run-off, citing a campaign of violence against his supporters.

The president said he regretted the “isolated cases of political violence” earlier this year and blamed all parties.

The MDC says some 200 people were killed and 200,000 forced from their homes.

(Source)

Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe opened parliament in defiance of opposition objections on Tuesday and said there was ”every expectation” of a power-sharing deal to end a post-election political crisis.

But heckling by parliamentarians from the main opposition party drowned out Mugabe’s speech, underscoring the bitterness of the divide.

”Landmark agreements have been concluded, with every expectation that everyone will sign up,” said Mugabe, 84, who has ruled Zimbabwe with his ZANU PF party since independence from Britain in 1980.

But parliamentarians from the opposition Movement for Democratic Change chanted ”ZANU is rotten!” and ”We have a pact with the people.”

The MDC said Mugabe had no right to open the chamber and warned that the move would endanger the deadlocked negotiations.

But the party’s parliamentarians nonetheless attended the opening of parliament, backing the MDC official who was elected to the powerful Speaker position on Monday.

ZANU PF also holds a key post as head of the Senate, intensifying a power struggle as the two parties come under mounting pressure to reach a breakthrough that could allow them to deal with Zimbabwe’s growing economic catastrophe.

ZANU PF won a vote for the presidency of the upper house of parliament, the Senate - where it has a majority - meaning it can block legislation passed by parliament.

Negotiations between ZANU PF and the MDC have stalled over what the opposition says is Mugabe’s refusal to give up executive power after 28 years in office.

(Source)

Zimbabwe’s ruling ZANU PF party did not nominate a candidate for the key post of parliamentary speaker on Monday, leaving the role to be filled by the opposition, a Reuters reporter said. Zimbabwe’s parliament is due to elect a new speaker later on Monday but only Morgan Tsvangirai’s main opposition Movement for Democratic Change and a breakaway faction nominated candidates for the post. The parliamentary speaker is one of the most powerful posts in Zimbabwe politics.

(Newspaper Source)

(Sources on the ground report that Tsvangirai’s man, Lovemore Moyo, was elected as the Speaker of the House.

Voting was:

99 MDC Tsvangirai MPs
7 MDC Mutambara MPs
4 ZANU PF MPs - ‘debvhu)

WPP, the world’s second largest advertising company, has quietly offloaded its interest in a Zimbabwean agency involved in President Robert Mugabe’s re-election campaign. The 25 per cent stake in Imago Young & Rubicam was sold by WPP last month for just $1 to the majority shareholder, Sharon Mugabe, who is also chief executive. WPP, run by chief executive Sir Martin Sorrell, had been assured that she was no relation to the president. As part of the deal, Imago Young & Rubicam is changing its name to remove all references to Young & Rubicam and associated brands. Y&R is one of the most powerful agencies in Sorrell’s global empire. The sale followed revelations in June that Imago was advising President Mugabe on advertising for his re-election campaign, which was blighted by allegations of violence, intimidation and vote-rigging. British companies have come under fire for remaining in the country and the British Government has suggested they could be forced to leave. A growing number of Western companies are pulling out, including Shell. Tesco has said it will no longer source food from Zimbabwe. Barclays, Standard Chartered and the mining corporations Anglo American and Rio Tinto have all so far decided to stay. In June WPP distanced itself from Imago Young & Rubicam, saying it had “no legal control” of the business, and that it shared “the world’s outrage at what is happening” in Zimbabwe. WPP added: “This could never happen with our knowledge or approval and we investigated the situation as a matter of urgency.” Last week it emerged that Zimbabwe’s inflation rate had surged to 11.2m per cent in June. Some observers fear that Mugabe is planning “corporate seizures” similar to his land grab of white farms eight years ago, which helped precipitate its descent into economic chaos.

(Source)

Thabo Mbeki’s briefing to the media after the SADC summit held in Johannesburg on August 17. 

Questions and answers

Question: Mr President I would like to know if you have any sense of when we can expect to see a final agreement signed by the negotiating parties in Zimbabwe? Can you also give us a sense of the concerns around the outstanding agreements?

Answer: It is clearly not possible to say when the negotiations would be concluded. It is a matter of the negotiating parties convening to look at whatever matter might be outstanding. One cannot allocate a date to this and the SADC Organ did not indicate a date by which this matter should be concluded with regard to the completion of this process, except to indicate the urgency of the matter. So, it is not possible to say when the negotiations would be concluded.

Q: Mr President, you said that the Organ agreed that the documents provided form a good basis on which to conclude the negotiations. Does that mean that you feel that there is no need to negotiate over the documents?

A: I am not aware if this communiqué has been distributed. You will see that that particular paragraph expresses the strong opinion of the Extraordinary Summit of the SADC Organ having studied the documents to which I referred earlier, came to that conclusion looking at those documents relative to the decisions/resolutions of SADC and the African Union on the matter, expressed that opinion but said that negotiations should continue and that would include concluding negotiations and signing any outstanding agreements as a matter of urgency.

So essentially, what the Extraordinary Summit was saying was that negotiations should continue but of course, having had the possibility for the first time of looking at the entirety of the documentation, the Organ felt it should express its own view about this because bearing in mind, these two resolutions - SADC and the African Union - so, it says that negotiations need to continue but it is of that view with regard to the quality and extent of the work that has already been done by the Zimbabwean negotiators that they have produced a set of documents that in the view of the Organ do indeed address the issues that were raised in these two resolutions and to that extent, they believe form a good basis for a speedy resolution of outstanding matters but that the negotiations must of course, continue.

Q: Mr President, what are the outstanding issues in the agreement?

A: Let me explain something before we get more questions. I am speaking here not as the facilitator but as the chair of SADC. Now you are asking me to get involved in a discussion that deals with the facilitation and I must say that I cannot answer questions posed to the facilitator.

I can answer questions posed to the chair of SADC but bear in mind that there is an agreement in the facilitation process arrived at by all the parties that we would not handle the process of negotiations through the media and indeed I am sure you will remember this because it is also included in the Memorandum of Understanding so to that extent, there is a limitation that is imposed with regard to how much detail we can express but that is a matter that belongs to the facilitation process.

But with regard to what the Organ discussed I think it is properly and fully reflected in the communiqué of the Extraordinary Summit of the Organ.

Q: Mr President, yesterday, when you were speaking as the chair of SADC, you said that the negotiations needed to be concluded to extricate the Zimbabwean people from the dire situation in which they find themselves. Could you give us an impression of what you see as the humanitarian urgency for a deal?

A: What drove SADC in the first place to last year convene an extraordinary Summit of the Organ in Dar-es-Salaam in March to discuss Zimbabwe - there were other matters on the agenda like the DRC and so on - was driven by very serious concerns about the matter you have referred to, the humanitarian situation in Zimbabwe.

And the discussions that have taken place over the last three days focused us on really trying to assist to speed up the process of the conclusion of the negotiations and the implementation of the agreements that would come from these negotiations. It is driven precisely by these very deep seated concerns in the region that the political concerns must be created so that with the greatest urgency this humanitarian, economic and social condition in Zimbabwe can be addressed as a matter of urgency by an inclusive government.

So it is a matter of fundamental concern to the region - this socio-economic and humanitarian condition of the people of Zimbabwe. But we believe that we need this inclusive government to drive this process of addressing these challenges but this consideration of the humanitarian situation of the people of Zimbabwe is fundamental to all of the statements that are made and this decision of SADC emphasising the urgency of this matter. It is not just to address the political stability but also to create the conditions so that you have an inclusive government that would then address these other urgent issues.

Q: Mr President, as the chair of SADC, do you believe that any deal that leaves President Mugabe with any power is going to be acceptable to the international donor community and is it going to be a long-term solution to the crisis in Zimbabwe?

A: The two resolutions that bind the facilitation - the first one said specifically that could the facilitator please get the ruling party and the opposition to meet and discuss in order to resolve the political challenges facing Zimbabwe.

The African Union resolution said the same thing. And so, we have indeed been working over this period with the ruling party and the MDC led by Mr Tsvangirai and the MDC led by Professor Mutambara and the decision that will be reached about what needs to happen will come from the Zimbabwean parties.

It certainly would not be correct for the facilitator to hand down any prescriptions to say that the person or group that should be part of the inclusive government to which these parties have agreed so it would be a matter really that the Zimbabwean parties would agree to - who is in that inclusive government and the role that they would play in that inclusive government.

That must truly come from the Zimbabwe parties because I think of all of us, they know best what is good for Zimbabwe and the thing is that everybody - the facilitator, SADC, the international community - would have to respect what the Zimbabwe political leadership says about Zimbabwe and I am quite certain that the Zimbabwe political parties would answer the question you have posed on the basis of what they think is right for Zimbabwe, what they think is required in Zimbabwe.

It is not any determination that can, nor indeed should, be made by anybody. Let’s really allow the people of Zimbabwe to determine their future. This is critically important because any solution that is imposed from outside will not last, it will not last, unless it is a common product that is owned by this entire collective of the leadership of Zimbabwe. I think if the facilitation tried to impose any solution we would be creating a situation that actually would amount to creating conditions for the failure of whatever might be incorrectly described as a solution.

(Source)

Leaders of Zimbabwe’s so-called war veterans say they support the opening of Zimbabwe’s parliament next week over the objections of main opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai.

In comments published in Friday’s edition of Zimbabwe’s state-run Herald newspaper, war veterans leader Jabulani Sibanda say President Robert Mugabe won the June 27 runoff election and it is his prerogative to open the parliament.

Opposition leader Tsvangirai has said if Mr. Mugabe does open parliament Tuesday, - as he has indicated he will - power-sharing negotiations between the two sides could collapse.

But Sibanda told the Herald that Tsvangirai is merely -  the “protégé” of the United States and Britain which, he says are trying to promote illegal regime change in Zimbabwe.

He says the more Tsvangirai demands, the more sanctions the west imposes on the Mugabe government.

The so-called war veterans are hard-line militant supporters of President Mugabe and the ruling party who have been accused of leading violent attacks on opposition members.

Tsvangirai’s Movement for Democratic Change’s secretary-general Tendai Bill has said reconciliation talks are dead if parliament convenes.

The parties earlier agreed that parliament would convene only if the negotiations failed, or if a national unity government was agreed upon.

Tsvangirai said Thursday talks are progressing but that he and Mr. Mugabe disagree on how to distribute powers between the president and prime minister.

Tsvangirai finished ahead of Mr. Mugabe in the March election. But the opposition leader boycotted the second round of voting held in June, citing widespread state-sponsored violence against his supporters.

(Source)