Messages From Zimbabwe

Roy Bennett, the top pro-democracy official pursued by Zimbabwean secret police over an alleged plot to assassinate President Robert Mugabe, slipped quietly into Zimbabwe early Friday after nearly five years in political exile, sources in his Movement for Democratic Change party said. Officials who requested anonymity said Bennett had flown from Johannesburg to lend support at a critical meeting of the MDC’s national council Friday to MDC leader Morgan Tsvangirai’s decision this week to participate in a long-stalled transitional power-sharing government with Mugabe.

The MDC meeting could reverse Tsvangirai’s decision, a move that observers say could scupper the implementation of the proposed government of national unity.

The MDC has refused up to now to agree to the proposal until major demands are met, including the equitable allocation of ministerial portfolios and the release of 30 activists abducted and tortured by state security agents over the last three months.

The sources said Bennett, the MDC’s national treasurer, encountered no difficulty when he arrived at Harare airport at 8 am (0600 GMT).

“The immigration officer said, ‘Oh, it’s you Mr Bennett,” and gave him a big smile,” one source said.

Bennett was driven immediately to the MDC headquarters for a meeting of the party’s national executive, preceding the national council meeting.

Bennett, a former white farmer who was driven off his land in eastern Zimbabwe about eight years ago, is adored by many of the country’s rural and urban blacks, but loathed by Mugabe’s regime. In 2004 he was sent to jail for eight months by parliament after he shoved one of Mugabe’s ministers for calling his ancestors “murderers and thieves.” His conviction was internationally denounced as wildly excessive.

A few months after he was released, the secret police were after him again, accusing him of involvement in an alleged plot to kill Mugabe. Fearing he would be framed, he slipped into Mozambique and travelled to South Africa where, after a lengthy legal battle, the government granted him political asylum. Observers say the Mugabe regime has a long history of persecuting opposition figures with trumped-up charges.

Tsvangirai dropped his opposition to joining the transitional government on Monday under pressure from regional leaders at a 14- hour emergency summit of the Southern African Development Community, the 15-nation regional alliance, which has been mediating between the two parties but is widely seen as backing 84-year-old Mugabe who has been power for nearly 29 years.

If the MDC national council backs Tsvangirai, he will be due to be sworn in as prime minister of the new transitional government on February 11. The MDC won parliamentary elections in March last year and Tsvangirai won more votes than Mugabe in the simultaneous presidential election, but not enough for outright victory.

Mugabe was declared the winner of a run-off in June after a brutal campaign that left at least 180 MDC supporters murdered and thousands maimed and made homeless.

Tsvangirai withdrew from the poll, which was also roundly condemned, including by observers from SADC and the African Union. Mugabe remains president in the new government.

(Source)

Zimbabwe’s humanitarian disaster is far worse than anticipated with only six percent of the population formally employed and more than half in need of emergency food aid, a UN report said Thursday.

Fewer than half a million Zimbabweans have jobs, while nearly seven million need emergency aid, UN agencies said in the latest stark illustration of the once-vibrant economy’s collapse.

The new grim estimate by the World Food Programme means that more than half of Zimbabwe’s 12 million people do not have enough to eat, WFP regional spokesman Richard Lee told AFP.

The UN food agency had in June estimated that 5.1 million Zimbabweans would need aid by January, but the actual figure has proved to be 35 percent higher.

“The economic situation has worsened more dramatically than we had anticipated,” Lee said.

The crisis has deteriorated so quickly that the agency is being forced to halve the cereal rations given to hungry Zimbabweans so that all the people in need can receive aid, he added.

The WFP now plans to feed 5.1 million people, while other agencies will feed an additional 1.8 million people, Lee said.

“Basically the situation has deteriorated since we did the estimate in May and June 2008.

“Since then the economic situation has worsened more dramatically than we had anticipated,” he said. “On top of that, the government has not imported as much food as anticipated.”

Because of the increase in the number of hungry people, cereal rations will be cut to five kilos (11 pounds) per person per month, he said.

The normal ration is 12 kilos per month, but that was reduced months ago to 10 kilos in a bid to stretch the agency’s resources, he added. Beneficiaries also receive beans and cooking oil.

Food aid is being distributed in every district in the country, Lee said, as the crisis hits both the urban population — which does not have enough money to buy food — and poor farmers who have not been able to grow enough to eat.

In the cities, the crisis is compounded by the dearth of employment prospects and the struggles of living with the world’s highest inflation rate, last estimated in July at 231 million percent but now believed to be far higher.

“At close of 2008, only six percent of the population was formally employed, down from 30 percent in 2003,” the UN’s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) said in a report.

Out of the country’s 12 million people, only 480,000 have formal jobs, down from 3.6 million in 2003, it said.

OCHA released the data in an appeal for 35 agencies working in the country, seeking 550 million US dollars (420 million euros) to provide food aid and other assistance.

The economy has shrunk by more than 45 percent over the past five years, leaving half of Zimbabwe’s urban population relying on remittances from friends and family overseas, the report said.

An estimated three million Zimbabweans have fled the country’s economic and political instability, and are now supporting their families with both cash and food.

The local Zimbabwe dollar is now worthless. Even small purchases require a 100,000,000,000,000 dollar bill, and currency itself is in short supply.

The economic collapse has also made it difficult for aid agencies to work in Zimbabwe, OCHA added, citing high prices for supplies, troubles ensuring payment of salaries, spotty access to food for staff and fuel shortages.

Adding to Zimbabwe’s woes are consecutive years of drought and a land reform programme launched in 2000, in which some mostly 4,000 white-owned commercial farms were seized and redistributed to blacks.

The scheme has punched a gapping hole in agricultural production, which once accounted for 40 percent of the economy, as most of the new beneficiaries lack both farming equipment and expertise.

(Source)

It was all so painfully predictable. Leaders of SADC gathered in Pretoria last Monday to break the stalemate in attempts to form an inclusive government in Zimbabwe.

A communiqué was issued triumphantly proclaiming a breakthrough. An inclusive government would be up and running by February 13, 2009. Moments later the MDC issued a statement denying being party to such an agreement. It said outstanding issues brought before the summit had not been addressed to its satisfaction. It would refer the matter to a meeting of its National Executive Council on Friday 29 January.

Recriminations followed.

The MDC’s spokesman, Nelson Chamisa said in a statement: “It is important that finality be brought to this issue and therefore our National Council will meet to define the party position.” He was right. The matter must be finalized. This will certainly be the MDC’s most important meeting since its formation. It is decision time. The outcome of the meeting will have a huge bearing on the future of the party.

The National Council passed two resolutions last November and December stating categorically that five outstanding issues had to be addressed before the MDC could join an inclusive government. These were the enactment of Constitutional Amendment 19, the definition of National Security Council legislation, equitable allocation of ministries, the appointment of governors and other senior positions and breaches of the Memorandum of Understanding and Global Political Agreement. Add to this the abductions, torture, illegal detention of MDC members and civil society activists. For months the MDC held steadfast insisting on the resolution of these issues as a non-negotiable condition for joining the government.

The obvious question the National Council must ask is whether these issues have been addressed. Honest answers must be provided by leader Morgan Tsvangirai and his negotiation team. No spin. No lies. No vague empty promises. Only straightforward answers will do.

From the information available, including that contained in the official SADC communiqué the answer is an emphatic no. Promises were made that issues raised by the MDC would be looked into but none were partially or fully addressed. The MDC got nothing from the summit. If the party is to honour its own resolutions it should not be part of an inclusive government.

If Tsvangirai buckled under pressure and agreed to what was outlined in the communiqué he had no mandate from the party to do so. Honest and principled leadership demands that the MDC says to SADC thanks but no thanks.

There is no doubt that the road ahead would be a difficult one if the MDC rejects SADC’s decision. But their honour and credibility would still be intact. That difficult road is likely to lead to victory. The alternative, abject surrender to Robert Mugabe, would certainly lead to the death of the party as a political force. They should be under no illusion that this would be the fate capitulation would bring.

The last thing that should concern them is what SADC leaders would say or do. Whatever the MDC does these leaders with one or two exceptions will remain devoted to Mugabe. The MDC’s concern should be the people of Zimbabwe and its founding principles. That is what should guide the decision on Friday.

Since the year 2000 hundreds of MDC members have been murdered by the Mugabe regime. Many more were abducted, tortured, jailed and displaced from their homes in the cruelest manner imaginable. These were ordinary folk who under the banner of the MDC were fighting for basic freedoms and democracy. They were fighting for the right to elect their leaders freely. If on Friday the MDC throws in the towel and is essentially co-opted into Mugabe’s government these people would have died and suffered in vain.

They will have every right to be bitter and angry. They will know that that at a critical juncture in the struggle for democracy leaders in whom they had invested so much trust betrayed them. They abandoned them to join Mugabe at the high table to eat whatever he gave them from his plate. That for selfish reasons disguised as national interest they breathed life into an ailing brutal dictatorship. They will never forget or forgive such treachery.

Furthermore the MDC must ask itself what it can achieve in a government in which it will be marginalized and powerless. If they think they have seen the worst of Mugabe they are in for a rude awakening. They may be naïve and starry-eyed believing that the proposed government will actually work. It will not. Mugabe’s priority will remain the destruction of the MDC.

Shrewd as he is he knows that the MDC will pay a heavy political price for being his poodles in a government in which they will be mere spectators. When they are sufficiently discredited and weakened he will spit them out and call for an early election. At that point what can the MDC say to the people of Zimbabwe disgusted by their unprincipled alliance with a regime that has destroyed their lives?

A South African judge of the Constitutional Court once said that if you walk into a lion’s en an meet a lion you should not complain that you met a lion. If the MDC joins Mugabe in government it should not complain when he savages and humiliates as he will surely do. They will have nowhere and no one to turn to. One has to be a blithering idiot to believe that the so-called monitoring mechanism put in place will have any effect.

It is as worthless as SADC and AU guarantees.

This will be a government created in Mugabe’s image. All the MDC will get out of it are fat salaries and perks for a few in government. Once they are in and the enormity of their error and its fatal political consequences become obvious it will be too late. They would have lost the lifeblood of their party – the support of Zimbabweans.

There are those who argue that the MDC has no alternative to joining this government. What utter rubbish. The alternative is to continue the struggle for freedom, justice and democracy.  If the MDC leadership no longer has the stomach for the struggle it should say so. They should not tell people lies. None of their demands were met or will ever be met. Joining under such circumstances is capitulation.

No amount of spin or lies can cover that.

Nationalists who fought for Zimbabwe’s independence including Mugabe rejected solutions offered by successive white governments that fell far short of their core demands. Nobody said then that they had no alternative but to cave in. The alternative was to continue with the fight for African self-rule until it was achieved.

Mugabe is holding a big noose for Tsvangirai to put his head and neck through it. Then he will be throttled politically speaking. All for an empty title and trinkets. The GPS as it stands is a fatal trap set for the MDC. It will be incredible folly to walk right into it with eyes wide open. The Mugabe regime is at its weakest. It is barely surviving. Any opposition worth anything would hasten its quietus.

To throw it a lifeline while triggering your own demise would be an act of unbelievable stupidity.

(Source)

About  30 people were wounded when South Africa Police Service (SAPS) opened fire on a group of  about 1000 protesting Zimbabwean exiles at the on-going power-sharing talks at the Union Building, here on Monday.

Police fired rubber bullets at the protestors who wanted to confront Zimbabwean leader President Robert Mugabe, who is accused of running down the country and slowing down progress in the power-sharing process.

Those severely wounded were hospitalised at Tshwane District Hospital in Pretoria with several dozens others arrested.

Among those that were shot included Patron of the Youth Movement of Zimbabwe, Reverend Mufaro Hove, was one of the victims shot on the back and shoulders as the group attempted to break into the Union Building.

Several dozens others, including 12 Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) regional and national leaders were arrested, among them Thabitha Khumalo, MDC Spokesperson South Africa Sibanengi Dube, MDC Organising Secretary Philimon Moyo and his deputy Rodgers Mudarikwa including the Crisis In Zimbabwe Coalition Acting Coordinator for South Africa, Nixon (Mao” Nyikadzino were arrested arrested during the demonstration.

Hove and dozens of other Zimbabweans were hospitalised at Tshwane District Hospital.

“We wanted to break into the Union Building to confront Mugabe. The police reacted swiftly and started firing rubber bullets at us. Women and children were injured,” said Hove.

About 1 000 refugees from the troubled southern African country staged a demonstration outside the Union Building on Monday morning protesting the delays in resolving the crisis and demanding the removal of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) chief mediator, Thabo Mbeki.

The protestors, among them members of the Revolutionary Youth Movement of Zimbabwe, the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), Crisis In Zimbabwe Coalition (South Africa Chapter), Zimbabwe Exiles Forum (ZEF) and several other civic society organisations danced and sang at the venue of the talks demanding the stepping down of Mbeki, whom they accuse of siding with Mugabe in the power-sharing talks.

In a brief interview with CAJ News this morning, MDC spokesperson for South Africa, Sibanengi Dube, said Zimbabweans were fed up with Mbeki’s open bias towards Mugabe’s ZANU PF in the negotiations with the MDC .

“The protesting Zimbabweans here are sending a clear message to the SADC leaders that they are sick and tired of Mbeki’s antics. Our message should be correctly taken to the United Nations (UN) and the African Union (AU) for further discussion with a view to finding a lasting solution to this problem.

“We are saying to Mbeki, ‘please, you have failed, so go in peace and leave us alone’. We do appreciate what he did in making the two warring parties meet, but this has been done in bad faith with a view to re-invigorate Mugabe,” said Dube.

Hove earlier told CAJ News that Mugabe’s government had turned Zimbabwe into a failed state.

“The talks being mediated by Mbeki will not yield anything. This is the reason we are calling for both the United Nations and the African Union to intervene. We need a solution now or else Mbeki should be removed from being the SADC chief mediator because of his bias towards ZANU PF,” said Hove.

Mugabe leads the ZANU PF delegation at the extra-ordinary summit of SADC, which is hoping to bring the MDC formations led by Morgan Tsvangirai and Arthur Mutambara to agree to work with the country’s ruling party in a government of national unity.

(Source)

A lot has been written in the media concerning the possible indictment of President Robert Mugabe to the International Criminal Court (ICC) relating to crimes against humanity or other. Whilst condemnation of the humanitarian situation obtaining in Zimbabwe today is called for, one wonders what will be the efficacy of these prosecutions. The most fundamental question that confronts Zimbabwe is whether to undertake prosecutions of the leaders of the former or ousted regime together with its officials for the violations inflicted on the nations during their rule or to pardon them.

Political concerns are important. Making them accountable for their crimes on the nation might actually upset the often-fragile transitional peace settlement that would have been reached in most instances at great cost in terms of loss of life. In most cases the outgoing regime would have made their departure conditional that they will be no prosecutions after their departure.

There are those that are arguing that trials and punishment of the Mugabe regime are an essential element to a nation undergoing transition and therefore essential to achieve some degree of justice and confidence in the new government. Prosecutions it is argued are necessary in order to draw a line between the old and the new regime

The more sober will argue that trials are unbefitting of a democracy and that they manifest a victors’ justice. They further argue that to use criminal sanctions against those that lead the old regime may actually not have the desired effect and may in fact run directly counter to the development of a democratic nation. They further argue that a program of forgiveness is the best way forward in order to reconcile and rebuild a nation by leaving the past behind by means of an amnesty.

Whatever decision Zimbabwe takes, it will have long-term implications on its stability, economic and political development. In an ideal world a balance is often required between justice and peace.

Any attempt to hold those accountable without risking instability or the country reverting back into anarchy is often a major consideration. Whilst those who are guilty of committing crimes of impunity against the people should be held to account, the idea of accountability is often fraught with contradictions in that trade offs and compromises are often the norm. The reality of these negotiations and decisions often involve various actors that may include international organisations attempting to get the most on the accountability continuum without risking the stability of the new regime.

The old adage “no one size fits all” probably sums the inherent dilemma faced by Zimbabweans in reckoning with how to deal with past atrocities committed by previous regimes. Competing interests often derail agreements often contemplated by the various parties to the decision making process.

The solution so often arrived at in most transitional governments usually take into consideration the various historical, cultural, and political realities of the country in question. Zimbabwe despite having ratified other treaties under international law, the Rome statute is not one of them. This is the statute that brought into existence the International Criminal Court.

The International Criminal Court opened its doors in July 2002 and its first indictment was the former warlord Thomas Lubanga Dyilo from the Democratic Republic of Congo.

The International Criminal Court was able to indict Thomas Lubanga Dyilo for war crimes and other crimes against humanity because the Democratic Republic of Congo has ratified the Statute of the International Criminal Court.

The recent arrest of General Nkunda by the Rwandese authorities has brought this topic back into the limelight. It excites many. The Congolese government issued an international arrest warrant against him for alleged war crimes in 2005. It says it wants Gen Nkunda to be sent back home to face trial.

The International Criminal Court has been conspicuously quiet over whether to bring him to the ICC. The old adage kicks in again “no one size fits all” probably sums the inherent dilemma faced by the International Criminal Court.

This is because General Laurent Nkunda has long sought to portray himself as the only man who can protect his Tutsi community in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo from Hutu forces.

This led to accusations that he was a stooge of the Tutsi-led Rwandan government. In other words in some African circles he is regarded as the friend of the people. He is considered by some countries in the region a necessary evil for the balance of power in the region. Power politics I might add. Remember the Rwandan genocide.

In Zimbabwe, despite the continued call for President Mugabe to be indicted for crimes against humanity or other no statement has been forth coming from the ICC or the UN Security Council for that matter. It is usually the competing interests of the parties, the trade offs and the compromises considered that largely determine what decision a government or institution takes.

It is the magnitude and the quality of physical repression, the extent and degree of the impunity by way of atrociousness that will often determine the approach taken by governments attempting to strike a balance between peace and justice. The more brutal the crimes against its people, the more the number of perpetrators taking part, or the existence of large numbers of collaborators, supporters, the more transparency that is required in dealing with it. It is argued that if institutions of the state, the army and the police were used in the repression and brutality, this will contribute significantly to the approach used. A standard so often used to determine this is to what extent those outgoing regimes had militarised the state institutions.

It is generally argued that the more a regime relied on the military for its day-to-day governance issues; it would normally follows that there would be a direct correlation or an ambiguous link between the armed forces and the commission of atrocities.

Zimbabweans can readily point to two major events in their history that possibly fit this criteria, notably the Gukurahundi massacres in the 1980’s and more recently Operation Murambatsvina.

Unfortunately, since the ICC Statute does not provide for retrospective investigations or trials (that is trials for events before July 2002), the Gukurahundi massacres do not fall within its Jurisdiction.

The second event raising the possibility of Mugabe being brought before the ICC is for the Operation Murambatsvina human rights violations under Customary International Law .This makes the assumption that a country does not have to ratify the ICC treaty in order for it to be bound by international laws for crimes against humanity.

Custom or an established pattern of behaviour by States binds all States. I would, however, hasten to say that Customary International Criminal law has not been tried and tested yet on a sitting or former head of State.

The Security Council route whereby a unanimous vote by all the permanent members to prosecute President Mugabe is also fraught with its own problems. China and Russia are long time friends of Mugabe dating back to the war of liberation. Any hope of a Security Council mandate to arrest Mugabe is wishful thinking.

Anyway, however one conceives these issues, complex ethical, legal and practical concerns always accompany decisions in transitional democracies. The way forward on the road to democracy and economic prosperity for Zimbabwe is going to be a difficult exercise. The concept of justice, the legacy of the past political repression can be both an emotional and practical burden affecting the stability of Zimbabwe as it tries to deal with past atrocities. Questions will arise on how to peacefully integrate former officials associated with past repressions with its victims.

How does a new Zimbabwe respond to the demands of a new democracy, address the needs of the people without creating new injustices for others? It remains to be said that even after his ouster from power, President Mugabe will still have his defenders, who will either deny that the atrocities ever took place or will claim they were committed by somebody else or worse still argue that at the time these atrocities were committed they were legal under the country’s laws and therefore justified.

Lloyd Msipa is a Lawyer writing from the United Kingdom. He can be contacted at lmsipalaw@googlemail.com

(Source)

When a struggle becomes long, and the end becomes as illusionary as a mirage, opportunism, hypocrisy and mendacity creep in.

In all these situations, principles are sacrificed on the altar of self-interest. The struggle, already arrested by exhaustion, becomes commodified and bastardized.

History also shows that those struggles that have survived have only done so because a few have stayed the course and have refused to be seduced by myopic soft-landings.

It is this sort of mentality that has given rise to a new school of thought that seeks to revise our recent history and has peddled myths about the limited options available to the people of Zimbabwe and have therefore sought to compromise the one thing that can never be compromised. This is the sacrosanct principle that it is only the people that have an inalienable right to decide their course and their destiny.

The revisionist school of thought and its disciples constitute a bunch of tireless, airport lounge activists and a beehive of “people representatives” who are nothing but a cocoon of neo-liberal, elitist mafia.

Oftentimes, their ideology is betrayed by a series of pseudo-intellectual, high-sounding superfluous blur and the sepulchral mucus oozing from this camp. It is a pure distillation of anger and frustration masquerading as political strategy.

Let us begin with the fiction and contention that there was no winner in the 29th of March election. But indeed there was a winner! We contested this election without resources, without access to the media, without access to vital electoral information and data.

Contrary to the provisions of the Electoral Act, we were not availed the voters’ roll, neither did we know the number of polling stations. The law kept being changed in the course of the game and it was more like playing tennis with a continuously moving base line.

For instance, the law made it clear that every candidate in the four-in-one harmonized election would be entitled to an agent inside the ballot booth but this was ignored. On the 20th of December Mugabe himself signed a law that kept policemen outside polling booths but by the 10th January he had reversed that law through a presidential decree.

Furthermore, as we exposed at the time, all State agents manning the polls were carefully handpicked to exclude anyone thought to be sympathetic to us. Indeed, over 5000 teachers were excluded as a result of this. What monstrous fraud!

Beyond legal shenanigans was the massive vote buying spree authored and executed by the insufferable onyx, Gideon Gono . In March, trillions of dollars were splashed in the so called Phase Two of the farm mechanization program.

On the ground, hundreds of our meetings were denied. Indeed we went to court on this and other issues and not once did this fantastically marinated judiciary pronounce judgment in our favour. At the same time, Zanu PF gallivanted freely across the countryside. Mugabe roamed the thirsty countryside in three state of the art helicopters whilst Tsvangirai and the rest of us drove like maniacs in dilapidated jalopies in the dusty and cracked cheekbones of Zimbabwe’s countryside.

In short, the political, legal and contextual frame-work could and did not justify an incontestable election. The fact that the election was run by a totally partial body, that there was no access to the media, that there was proscription of free movement, the abuse of state resources and the denial of access to information is evident of the fact this was a limping election whose ethos fell below international standards.

The achievements of the MDC and indeed of the people of Zimbabwe were Herculean. That the opposition in all its forms won this election under these circumstances was hardly surprising. The result would certainly have been more emphatic were it not for the gerrymandering of constituencies by deliberately creating more rural constituencies and indeed the absence of an even and equal playing field.

Morever, Zanu PF narrowed the gap in two constituencies i.e. Red cliff and Gwanda South which it won in the violent 27th June event.

To suggest that the MDC did not win the election on the 29th March is intended to obfuscate the Zanu PF decline while inflating the over-inflated egos of some who were severely defeated in that election! Their self-proclaimed mantra as kingmakers is a by product of this myopic venery. More importantly, it underlies a deep and inveterate contempt and disrespect for the people .It is the people that decide their fate and not some overfed google-addict sitting on a table. Politics is not a chess game of fluent gambits or over elaborate flip-charts.

A second fraud is to try and equate Tsvangirai with Mugabe. This, with all due respect, is sick populism intended not to defile Mugabe for he has done that on his own, but to ridicule and demonise Tsvangirai and the MDC.

The attack is personal and is no different from the daily diatribe of defamatory vituperations churned in the Herald. In short, to both Mugabe and others, Tsvangirai is the red flag that has generated anger and hatred of Satanic proportions.

Is it an accident that a rocket scientist can be so ahistorical and so revisionist as to equate the sins of this regime with any other person?  Can the failure of this agreement be visited upon our shoulders?

One thing has to be emphasized for the benefit of those conducting the symphony of hatred and discord at Herald House. Tsvangirai is the undisputed and uncontestable leader of the MDC. Not only that, he is the leader of this struggle. Every struggle has a face and a leader.

Thus, Vladmir Lenin was the face of the Bolshevik Revolution despite the array of luminaries in the Bolshevik party. Equally, Nelson Mandela is the face and leader of the struggle against apartheid despite giants like Albert Luthuli, Govan Mbeki, Sisulu, Oliver Tambo and others.

For the record, it is Mugabe alone and his acolytes who have been responsible for the castration of Zimbabwe’s manhood. It is not land reform or so-called sanctions that have created the phenomenal decline of this economy to levels unheard of in modern economics. Gukurahundi and Murambatsvina, the post 2000 violence and the post 29th March violence are a progeny of this violent thugocratic state run by a securocracy or, as I described recently in Parliament, a juntacratised State.

Now where does Tsvangirai fit into all this?

The answer is simple. It is not Tsvangirai who is frustrating the consummation of this deal but rather Mugabe himself. In this regard let’s put into perspective the MDC position on the dying dialogue.

It is that there must be a satisfactory legal framework to underpin the agreement . Secondly that there must be an equitable distribution of ministerial portfolios. In short, responsibility with authority.

Thirdly there must be defined the constitution and composition of the National Security Council. In view of the juntacritisation of the State surely this overseeing body is essential to ensure the gradual weaning of State Institutions from the breast of Zanu PF.

Fourthly there must be an equitable and fair distribution of key public positions including Governors , ambassadors and permanent secretaries.

Lastly, there must be a reversal and cessation of all breaches of the MOU and the GPA. This includes the  unconditional release of Jestina Mukoko, Gandi Mudzingwa and all abductees and the reversal of all executive appointments unilaterally made after 21 July 2008.

Surely there is nothing extraterrestrial about these demands. The demands are not domiciled at Albus Dumbledore’s  Hogwarth School of Magic and Wizardry.

There is nothing British or American in the same. In fact the demands are a logical platform if not precondition for any viable Government of National Unity. That however is not the view of others. Just get in there and sort everything while you are inside! In short, put your eggs in the basket of hope and faith. More plaintively, trust  Zanu PF.

Trust is exactly what we did when we signed the GPA on the 11th September and attended the glittering ceremony of a doctored document of the 15th September when so many issues were outstanding. We genuinely assumed that Zanu was ready and bona fide. Alas, we were naive. We ignored the fundamendal construct that Zanu PF sees itself as being endowed with a divine right and obligation to rule Zimbabwe.

The sense of entitlement common in many nationalist parties is disproportionately overdeveloped in Zanu PF, particularly when one considers the role of the peasant countryside in the war of liberation.

The sense of entitlement is the tumor at the epicenter of ZANU PF’s power retention mantra which is the sole reason for its existence and not any other ground norm. Thus, engaging the MDC through the GNU is a strategic retreat in the power retention project. A retreat that is necessary for the party to regroup following what Mugabe has called the “lapse” of the 29 th March.

The events of the last three months following the execution of the GPA have shown beyond reasonable doubt that no self respecting person can ever trust Zanu of. Daily have been episodes of the clear lack of paradigm shift on the part of Zanu PF.

First has been the interference and frustration of food and humanitarian assistance in breach of agreements. Second has been the unleashing of a fresh wave of violence, this time characterised by an evil spate of extra legal abductions. The case of Mr and Mrs Chinanzvavana,  Gandi Mudzingwa, Chris Dhlamini,  Jestina Mukoko and others reflects beyond a shadow of doubt the mindset of this voodoo regime and it’s lack of bona fides.

The reappointment of Gono and the appointment of Johannes Tomana as Attorney General add to the body of incontrovertible evidence of this lack of paradigm shift. Quite clearly, these are the things that others will not talk about. But that we are expected to gloss over these issues and pretend they don’t exist eludes our wisdom.

One can understand the desperate shrill of some to make this agreement work despite the clearly foreseeable Golgotha. After all this is the one God-given  opportunity of holding public office to many of us who cannot in the immediate to short-term  win any election.

What is clearly as hypocritical as it is obnoxious is the populist attack on the West. Two things are particularly appalling.

First is the attempt to frame an anti Mugabe position as being mothered and authored by the West. Therefore we in the MDC can’t think for ourselves but must wait for Condi and Jendayi. What philistine madness!

Second, for some having cut our teeth in the West and some of its best universities to try and reinvent ourselves as latter day Che Guevaras is a humourless banality. It does not fool any one. Not at all.

The struggle for democratisation in Zimbabwe has been a long and arduous one. Indeed the struggle for independence itself was a first step in this gravel road. This generation has a duty is to fulfil the unfinished business of that struggle. On this we stood with Joshua Nkomo, Edgar Tekere and Ndabaningi Sithole as they were persecuted by Mugabe.

We were there when thousands were violently displaced killed and maimed during Gukurahundi, Murambatsvina the post 2000 violence, the Final Push and other great demonstrations.

We were proudly there in Hillside at the National Working People’s Convention on 26 February 1999. We were also there on that sunny, lovely Saturday afternoon at Rufaro stadium on 11 September 1999 when Gibson Sibanda arrogantly told Mugabe that “We have accepted your invitation to form our party. This is our party.”  We were there inside Matapi police station as Isaac Maphosa told us the results of the Constitutional referendum on a smuggled mobile phone. And yes, we have buried comrades, from Tichaona Chiminya, Talent Mabika, Trymore Midzi, Nomore Sibanda and the irresistible Learnmore Jongwe.  Tonderai Ndira still looms large in our dreams,  the peerless Gertrude “Diesel” Mthombeni will not leave our hearts and the pillar of our struggle, Isaac Matongo, continues to lift us on his bulky shoulders.

That is our history. No one then can bastardise the same and seek to frame it on a template of a neo-liberal, British or American creation or construction. That is the greatest insult to the people of Zimbabwe and to our history as a social liberation movement completing the unfinished business of the liberation struggle.

Finally, a myth has been peddled that there is no other strategy or option other than that of a GNU. This can only be a Freudian dislocation. Dialogue and the GNU are the conscious by-product of a roadmap we crafted in May 2006. They are the baby and not the mother.

They are a means and not the end. They are an adjectival issue and not the substance.

The substance is to achieve democratic change in Zimbabwe through peaceful, democratic, constitutional and non-violent means. To then suggest that this can only be achieved through a GNU chaired by Mugabe is somewhat cataleptic.

In short, we remain committed to the cause of change in Zimbabwe as we remain committed to the GPA, subject to the resolution of our demands.

However, we are not naïve to allow Zanu PF to trap us in the cul-de-sac of any sterile processes. Our party might be 10 years old, but our experience is of gerontocratic proportions.

Tendai Biti is the MDC Secretary-General

(Source - via email)

The European Union will add 28 individuals and 36 companies to a list of banned allies of Zimbabwe’s President Robert Mugabe on Monday because of their links to suspected human rights abuses, an EU official said.

The move, due to be finalised at a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels, will add new government members and relatives of Mugabe allies to an existing list of around 170 individuals banned from travelling in the 27-country bloc.

“It will for the first time include EU companies,” the official said, without giving further details of how the ban would affect their activities in the EU.

Zimbabwe is in the grip of a humanitarian and economic crisis. Despite growing international calls for him to step down, power-sharing talks between Mugabe and opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai are deadlocked in a row over cabinet posts.

The EU ministers will also look to step up pressure on Mugabe by urging a probe into whether diamond sales are being used to support his government, a draft obtained by Reuters earlier this week showed.

The draft urges the Kimberley Process - an international certification scheme set up to ensure diamonds do not fund conflict - “to take action with a view to ensure Zimbabwe’s compliance with its Kimberley obligations”.

The World Diamond Council industry body has put Zimbabwe’s production of rough diamonds at 0.4 percent of world output, mostly exported with the Kimberley Process certificate. However in December it raised concern about possible illegal exports “for the personal gain of a few”.

Critics say Mugabe’s policies, such as the seizure of white-owned farms, have ruined Zimbabwe’s economy, but the ruler - in power since independence from Britain in 1980 - blames Western sanctions for the crisis.

(Source)

People in Zimbabwe continue to die from cholera as the death toll in Zimbabwe has now hit 2755, with 48 623 people suspected to be infected, according to latest World Health Organization statistics published on Thursday. The numbers show a sharp rise in fatalities and new infections from statistics published earlier. The new toll is 260 more than the 2495 reported by the WHO earlier on Thursday, while the number of people affected soared 1124 from 47 499. The UN’s humanitarian coordination office (OCHA) said last week in Geneva that preventions measures were not working and that a growing number of deaths were occurring beyond the reach of health workers in rural areas.

(Source)

Zimbabwe’s main opposition party said on Tuesday it was doubtful another regional summit next week would rescue a fragile power-sharing pact between President Robert Mugabe and his rivals.

Mugabe and Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) leader Morgan Tsvangirai failed to reach a deal on forming a unity government at a meeting on Monday which was attended by regional leaders.

They agreed to try again to break the deadlock at a summit in either Botswana or South Africa next week held by the regional Southern African Development Community (SADC). But the MDC said hopes for success were slim.

“We are doubtful whether SADC will be able to deal with this issue,” MDC spokesperson Nelson Chamisa told Reuters.

A unity government is seen as the best chance of preventing total collapse in once prosperous Zimbabwe, where prices double every day and more than 2 000 people have died in a cholera epidemic.

But, a September power-sharing agreement has stalled amid fighting over who should control key ministries and regional leaders have failed to secure a compromise, despite international calls for stronger action.

Mugabe’s government accuses Tsvangirai of frustrating efforts to form a new government but the MDC says Mugabe’s ZANU PF is trying to relegate it to being a junior partner and has vowed not to join any new administration if its demands are not met.

These include control of powerful ministries such as finance, home affairs and information.

“We cannot afford to be in an inclusive government where we don’t feel included,” Chamisa said.

Tsvangirai won a presidential election last March but by too few votes for an outright victory. He pulled out of the subsequent run-off, citing violence against MDC supporters.

(Source)