I Just Want To Be Free!

THE STATE, DEMOCRACY AND THE FUTURE OF ZIMBABWE

2011-03-30T01:16:00.000-07:00

(written in 2008)
The situation in Zimbabwe today represents to different opinions the complexities of class perception and more importantly the predictable trajectory of political power especially in the presence of a shifted center of mass. Whilst the behavior of the ruling class in Zimbabwe is typical of any in a troubled state, it is imperative that its actions towards the general populace be stripped in isolation then comparatively be juxtaposed to the presence of another political force acting in resistance to its existence and finally be compared to the general dictates of political order in a democracy. This way we can appreciate the political quagmire that the country is in, the possible solutions and lastly identify the possible players in the creation of a new dispensation for the country. In this regard we need to dissect the STATE, appreciate the concept of DEMOCRACY and finally relate the two in a bid to make a prognosis for the country.

In any country, the State is a powerful institution that has extracted itself from society and placed itself at a position higher than society so as to create a big brother’s hand to either restrain class struggles or in its plain sense suppress any discontent that may arise from the general populace against the ruling class. The State acts as the central reserve for the society whose main function is to collect the proceeds of production and then redistribute them according to, when the system is sympathetic; the needs of society or in extreme cases; the wishes of the State.

When the state extracts itself from society does it continue to bear a reflective color of the society or does it change? To answer this question we need to discuss the reasons that gave rise to its existence anyway. In this regard we need to appreciate three basic characteristics of human behavior:
1. There is natural human tendency to compete for resources
2. There is a general belief of possible extinction of resources
3. There is a widely acceptable phenomenon of natural kleptomaniac hoarding
which is usually referred to – rather politely- as saving for the future.

With this in mind we can state that when the resources to compete for are abundant as compared to the need, there exists a general respect for territorial integrity amongst the players. This abundance may also pacify the parties in the face of the ever-present probability of future deficit because the perception would be that the danger would probably be not within their lifetimes or probably that of their children too. In the same context the need to save for the future is not over-emphasized because of the assured availability through time. For example, no one in Zimbabwe right now is making a fuss about hoarding sand (used in building) simply because of its abundance vis-à-vis the number of people in need for it.

When the resources become scarce, there exists now a struggle for their control. There is definitely a need to save for the future. Unfortunately in this quest to gather the resources, there is usually a clear disregard for personal sovereignty as the powerful encroach into the territories of the less powerful. Along the way the less powerful are overridden and are forced to subscribe to the terms of the powerful. As the competition increases, the powerful make concessions amongst themselves to ensure a consolidation of power. Through common predicament and out of common comradeship the less powerful also seek to unite to resist the intrusion. So out of the need to control resources there arises a continual and persistent friction between the powerful and the less powerful. A good example is the Chiadzwa Diamond fields in Marange; the people of Marange used to live peacefully in that land before the discovery of diamonds, nevertheless upon their discovery, the place was secured and the original (the less powerful) people were moved out of their place by the powerful.

In all this confusion, the powerful seek to create order in the gained territories. This they do by formulating rules. In other words; they gain power (i.e. the conferring ability to distribute resources to one’s choice using one’s discretion). With the advancement of the process of resource-hoarding and the ever-present threat of loss of the gained resources, there arises the need to enforce the need to enforce the rules that govern the conduct of the less powerful within the prescribed territories of those who govern. It is this scenario and eventually the need to maintain alliances as powerful as ever coupled to the sophistication of human development and the ever multiplying force of resistance which compels the powerful to forge a universal force to administer the exploitation of the gained resources- which in this case is known as THE STATE!

In simple terms then, THE STATE is a grouping of powerful individuals who have through force or other means amassed resources beyond their capacity to utilize them and now through certain seemingly justifiable exploitative means seek to use the less powerful to add value to these resources solely for their benefit while purporting to be custodians of the society. These individuals call themselves kingmakers and they use all those objects they always refer to as belonging to the State like police, army and intelligence to consolidate power and also appoint who rules and who doesn’t.

So as we look at Zimbabwe (The State) and Zimbabwe (The Democracy) it becomes necessary that we define the relationship of the two and whether both can exist at the same time or whether there are limits that have to be put on the other for the other to flourish. In actual fact the question we need to answer is whether full democracy can be achieved when there is a State!

Many have been inebriated by the ever-so-popularized definition of democracy:

Democracy is the rule of the people by the people for the people. The fundamental features of democracies include government based on majority rule and the consent of the governed, the existence of free and fair elections, the protection of political minorities, respect for basic human rights, equality before the law, due process, and political pluralism

These are Utopian conditions which apply only in a world which has no competition. Human beings respect each other as long as their ambitions don’t converge at a common object. Once they do then there is always that rush to be the first to reach the destination and definitely the satisfaction of having outpaced the other cannot be underestimated. So can there ever be a rule of the people by the people for the people where there is competition for resources?

Firstly, the initial motive behind “Democracy” is to create a state that has got a colour of society. A state that does not represent class conflict but a general convergence of human interests. May we propose then that democracy in its virgin sense is a system of governance where the society extracts certain individuals from “within” society and confer them the responsibility to maintain order in the distribution and exploitation of resources. Can this state ever be present?

Do people in a democracy have the choice to change the order created by the State? Plainly, can people peacefully change the state in a democracy? Can we propose again that, in all these democracies citizen-participation is allowed only as far as the changing of characters within the government is concerned but as many obstacles are put to discourage the change of characteristics of the governance systems? Can citizens just wake up and say they no longer want the current hierarchy instead they want another animal X or Y with totally different composition and functions? This is treasonous!

Can we again propose that in reality, democracy does not represent participation of the people in the creation of a ‘better’ people’s state but the continuous and regular change of characters in the public face (government) of the state so as not to unmask the perpetual faces that make up the State?

May we pose and ask; in a democracy who is more powerful, the people or the Rockefellers of America, United Fruit Company of Latin America or De Beers in Botswana?

Can someone just erupt from nowhere and decide to lead the people in a democracy? No! The State would not allow that. Actually there are well-laid requisites for one to qualify to lead a democracy. These are laid out by the State through its crew of kingmakers (Ford Foundation, Heritage Foundation etc in USA). They ensure that whoever comes in maintains the order and guarantee the protection of the State whilst pacifying the majority of the people. Some of the prerequisites are as follows:
- You should be from a rich and acceptable family
- You have war credentials (i.e. you have at one point in your life shown that
you can risk your life to protect the interests of the State)
- You have reached a certain level of guided education that makes you value infrastructure more than the freedoms of the common man.

But amidst all these hidden facets, why does democracy seem more acceptable to the people?

Democracy is attractive because on face value it involves a compromise between the governors and the governed. It presents a mutual understanding where the governed offer to respect and recognize the legitimacy of the State in return for freedoms and provision of basics from the proceeds of exploitation of the resources. So a democracy would always be viewed as true when the State through the government is able to provide basic goods to the people at the same time protect individual freedoms.

Now, Is Zimbabwe a democracy or not? If it is then what can be done to make it a better democracy? If it isn’t then what can be done to make it one? These are questions we need to deal with now that we have defined the State and Democracy.

Structurally, Zimbabwe remains one of the best possible democracies in the world. Functionally though it is one of the worst. So it remains upon an individual to choose an angle he or she wishes to view the Zimbabwean democracy.

In one of my conversations with John Trimble a lecturer and Pan Africanist America; he pointed out that ZANU PF is one of the most democratic parties in the world. His assertions were based upon the fact that ZANU PF has structures from ward committees up to the Central Committee, all of these serving to represent the people.

To this I disagree because; instead of these structures acting as tributaries for inflow of ideas they function as broadcasting outlets serving only to amplify the decisions of the Central Committee. The only time these structures are involved in the process of decision-making is when they sit in a tent at the annual congress and in a populist manner give credence to dubious and autocratic decisions by way of public proclamation. So in actual fact ZANU PF has got a very effective network of information dissemination not a representative democracy.

Structurally again Zimbabwe has all the facets of democracy- a parliament, cabinet, presidium and other organs of the state. It holds elections regularly and timeously and this is important in any democracy. Functionally though there is no independence of the judiciary, there is no impartiality in application of the law; citizen participation is restricted to pro-government activities. So Zimbabwe is an autocratic democracy!

What went wrong in Zimbabwe?

Zimbabwe was like any other real democracy up to 1997. The state and the government were clearly demarcated. The government enjoyed the support of the State (the white farmers and industrialists) at the same time the government consulted with the State before any major decision. They were in tandem.

The problems started when the government failed to appreciate that the Zimbabwean State was just an extension of other bigger States through the likes of ; British American Tobacco, The Oppeinheimer family, British Petroleum, Rio Tinto etc. These have many interests in many countries including the Democratic Republic of Congo (then Zaire). So who was Mugabe to stop the influence of these institutions in such a rich country, after all he was supporting a known Marxist Laurent Kabila who in 1965 had accepted the help of Che Guevara in the fight against Mobutu. Pan-Africanism is only allowed on paper but not when it conflicts with the interests of the world superpowers. The CIA does not easily forget.

Secondly the government was supposed to distribute the few resources that the State made available to the people in a manner that did not compromise the State’s existence. How painful it could have felt for the State to see the government dishing out millions of United States dollars to non-productive people calling themselves war-veterans. After all these are the people who had disrupted the perpetuity of the Rhodesian hegemony. The loyalty of this government was becoming questionable.

In this regard the State sought to discard this unreliable government. Thus began the long struggle. The Zimbabwean dollar tumbled, the cost of basic commodities shot up, public despondency followed and a state-oriented party was formed. These events were a clear conspiracy of the Samora Machel Avenue barons, the Wall Street moguls and their typical running-dogs who later formed the opposition.

What followed next was something that is atypical of these splits. The government went away with the State machinery- army, police and Intelligence. This was very unusual, but quite obviously caused by the intellect and foresight of the government which had managed to integrate its Marxist guerillas in the State machinery.

So the split of the State and the government created an amusing scenario. A state in search of a government and a government in search of a State. The State has money and international backers whilst the government has a powerful army but no money nor international backers. The State is trying to starve the government so that it creates a ripe situation for civil uprising and at the same time the government is using State machinery to suppress any such activities.

The biggest problem that Zimbabwe faces today is a government that also functions as the State. It seeks to control all the resources and at the same time administer their distribution. Zimbabwe then is falling back into the feudal times. What is about to happen is a situation where for some time elections in Zimbabwe would be useless until the government has finished the process of transferring resources. Thus the characters in the government shall continue to lead until they are financially and politically capable of being kingmakers on their own right.

What are the options for Zimbabwe

The government on its own would take a very long time to create a State. Unlike the 1896 situation where white settlers grabbed land and immediately became rich and powerful it is virtually impossible for characters in the government to do that. Whatever they steal, they should do it in a clandestine manner in order not to invoke public outcry. Thus to amass enough wealth through this method they have to take a long time of good calculations and execution.

An option that exists for the State is to create its own force. This would eventually lead to civil war and hopefully because of the abundance of resources and support they would be able to sustain a longer struggle. Because of the infrastructure that is there war would be even more costly that is why they do not fancy it.

The other option is the return to pre-1999 situation where the State was the State and the government the government. The talks between ZANU PF and MDC as plain as they are, are just a clear attempt towards this. The reconciliation of the State and the Government is the only way that both parties may benefit; unfortunately because of the constant mistrust and hate that exist this remains a mammoth task. Secondly there are people who have made gains in this situation and therefore would want a continuation of the current situation.

The last option is that of Representative Administration. It involves the creation of a society whose state is decentralized and would eventually wither away. It is a scenario where Zimbabweans choose to agree that the purpose of a government is to administer the equitable distribution of the natural resources of the country. It enables each individual to have access to basic services and commodities but allowing for creativity and innovation in society. This option is least favored by both the Government and the State because it means a total loss on their part; but it also means a society of less aggression. In short this is a Zimbabwean form of a social revolution. We call this ZIMISM and we believe is the future for Zimbabwe.

How the Diaspora can drive the regime change agenda in Zimbabwe

2011-03-29T09:54:00.000-07:00

In my last article I proffered that Zimbabwe is completely in the hands of ZANU PF and that there is no hope for a free and fair election as long as the current cabal is intact. It seems however that many who read the article found it logical to conclude that if elections would not present a change in government, then an armed conflict would be the only way to institute structural changes. I believe there is another way that could be effective, clean and constructive.

Remember I talked about an attempt by ZANU PF at creating a new State that has foundations on its ruling elite. What ZANU PF’s inner circle is primarily seeking to do is to build an empire that has the ability to control both the national resources and the government. In controlling the national resources this group will be able to freely operate and multiply its wealth. They know they will not be able to freely operate in future if they do not have security, thus they romped in the core of the military into the inner cabal. What is left now is to ensure that they have the ability to influence who gets into government and who does not. This will be easy for them in future but not now.

If the inner cabal which revolves around Mugabe, Munangagwa and Mujuru is left unchecked by 2020, all major companies in Zimbabwe will belong to them. Right now all productive land in Zimbabwe belongs to them. They now control the primary mode of production. They now literally control the raw resources of Zimbabwe including minerals. What they are doing now is to take control of all other companies in the country. They talk of indigenization when they know that in 2008 they reduced all Zimbabweans to paupers by literally freezing all the money that they had in banks.
The plot from 2004 was to print paper money which they would use to buy foreign currency on the black market and stash it somewhere else. They allowed inflation to spiral because it was necessary to have all other Zimbabweans as beggars so that they would not in future pose as threats in the competition for resources. What we are seeing now is an attempt to clean dirty money and make it acceptable into the economy whilst asserting their influence over all other people in the country.

Indigenization demystified

The inner cabal through its banker Gideon Gono managed to collect money though the black-market at virtually no cost because they bought it with worthless paper. It is estimated that they amassed approximately US$ 2 billion over the four years. Since 2006 ZANU PF through proxy companies has been mining diamonds and secretly selling them to the Chinese and other eastern countries. The money did not go into State coffers but straight to ZANU PF. It is estimated that they make about $1.7 billion annually through the diamonds. That is about $6.8 billion over 4 years. What this means is that ZANU PF has about $8.8 billion stashed somewhere outside the official economy of the country. This money is dirty money which they can easily lose for example if for some strange reason China’s policy towards Zimbabwe changes assuming the money is in Chinese banks.

So the next stage is now to spruce the money, make it clean and send it into the official market as legit. They know that it will be a very tough decision for United Kingdom to impulsively freeze the operations of companies like Anglo American Corporation, Rio Tinto, Barclays Bank and Standard Chartered Bank which have their origins in that country. Zimbabwe has about 600 of such foreign companies. ZANU PF came up with the controversial indigenisation law which requires all foreign companies to shed 51 percent of their stakes to indigenous Zimbabweans.

ZANU PF knows that every other Zimbabwean who was not within the ZANU PF system in 2008 is now a pauper. They have $9 billion waiting to be used in the crusade. By law, all the 600 companies will cede 51 percent to ZANU PF. This time they are not going to seize companies without compensation, they are legally going to pay for the 51 percent using dirty money. If applied with speed ZANU PF will be controlling all the land and all the companies in Zimbabwe very soon.

So the concept of indigenization although very attractive to poor Zimbabweans is not meant to benefit them but to assert the authority of an inner cabal of ZANUPF. We have helped to build this empire through our sweat which was bought through worthless paper.

The toothless government in 2020

When the dust settles, sanctions will not make much sense. Production will grow. ZANU PF will now be able to invest in agriculture. This will be simple, ZANU PF will now be controlling the chain of wealth creation. They will be able to farm tomatoes on their farms, instead of selling them at Mbare Musika , they will now be able to make rich pickings at Unilever which they would own. The tomatoes will be made into Royco which they would sell and again make rich pickings through OK Zimbabwe which they will also own.

Eventually the issue of running around in parliament and government will become too tedious and dirty for the inner cabal. They will then be willing to shed offices of the government to other acceptable individuals who will be screened so that they would not put the cabal’s interests at risk. The State will then be able to pacify general Zimbabweans through fringe benefits associated with a reviving economy. Eventually jobs will be available as the companies grow and reinvest in other sectors.

When people begin to get food they will begin to worry about who is ruling them. So the final stage will be to create another political party that is again controlled by the inner cabal. This party will challenge ZANU PF in elections and win. It will be acceptable because it will in other words be another ZANU PF although with a different name and different personalities. The net effect of development is that the inner cabal’s interests will still be protected. Eventually we will have a bi-partisan country run and controlled by monsters.

Building an alternative to the ZANU PF State

I have gone to this length so that we can all appreciate the seriousness of ZANU PF. At face value the only way to stop ZANU PF is to take up arms and topple them. This is not attractive neither is it feasible because Zimbabweans are fresh from war and they know how destructive and painful it is. Secondly, for an alternative army to be built there is need for resources. Already MDC and NGOs in Zimbabwe have milked western donors since 1999 and signs of donor fatigue are showing as it becomes apparent that it is improbable for MDC to rule Zimbabwe. Lastly, there is minimal immediate gain for the West in Zimbabwe. War in Zimbabwe will be a liability to them as they would also be expected to bear the burden of rebuilding a ravaged country. Smart regime change remains the only acceptable option for them.

The hope for smart regime change lies in the Zimbabwe Diaspora. Zimbabwe has approximately 2 million people who are outside the country. This body of people is very important economically. There hasn’t been a strategy to harness the economic power of the diaspora especially from the pro-democratic side of the political divide. The importance of Diaspora remittances in propping up economies cannot be understated. Phillipines received about $16 billion from it Diaspora in 2008 whilst Ethiopia received about $780 million in 10 months in 2010. It is this strength that we ought to harness for us to create an alternative and rival State in Zimbabwe.
There are some assumptions that we have to make before positing the alternative solution. We are going to assume that of the 2 million people outside the country only 25 percent are formally employed or are productive. We will also assume that on average only 200 000 are able to spare a minimum of $1000 which can be used for investment purposes.

What we need is a Collective Investment Trust that has the ability to raise capital, engage in business, create and multiply wealth. If initially 1000 people are found who are willing to invest at least $5000 each into the CIT over a period of a year (2012), the Trust will be able to raise $5 million over that period. This money would be spun through short-term , high-turnover investments coupled to startup of sustainable businesses that need limited capital injection in the diaspora.

There is a lot of untapped business potential in the world that the Trust can exploit. A lot of brilliant business ideas are dying because we do not have access to capital. The Trust would act as an investment vehicle for its beneficiaries which are primarily the 1000 people. As the empire of the Trust grows it begins to initiate formation of other investment vehicles be it other Trusts, companies or corporations which would be under its wings but whose drive would be to harness the financial power of the diaspora through providing a platform for Zimbabwe-centric investment opportunities. Let’s assume that 200 000 people decide to invest at least $1000 into business entities controlled by the CIT. It means the Trust will have access to $200 million in raw capital. We will assume this process takes a year.

We have to remember that every human being wants a return on his investments. So for avoidance of doubt I am not suggesting an ujamaa or a compassionate entity. I am suggesting a complete profit-making empire whose primary objective is to make income for its beneficiaries but aiming at taking over the economic structures in Zimbabwe.
Investment after 2014 would be two pronged in that; the external investment will be solely to make maximum profit whilst internal investments would be aimed at starting up business along politically strategic but profitable lines. For example, Zimbabwe does not have an efficient payment gateway that has the capacity to support online transactions. We ought to look at the relationship between PayPal and Ebay to get an insight. Ebay provides a platform for people to sell and buy merchandise all over the world . PayPal processes the payments that happen so that if one buys something in Thailand yet resides in Uganda, he can send money easily by the click of the computer button. Ebay owns Paypal and most of the $2.5 billion profit made in 2010 were driven by business done through PayPal.

Zimbabwe does not have any company that has been operating these services and because of sanctions Ebay and Paypal are not accessible to inland Zimbabweans. This is just one of the many fields that are awaiting exploitation. How strategic is both Ebay-like and Paypal-like business in Zimbabwe? Introduction of these technologies will provide employment to a significant number of people which is a positive to our people. In terms of the overall political objective it means a significant angle of influence will be in progressive hands.

We will need investment into all sectors that would allow us to exert an influence in future. Investment within the country will be limited in terms of company size but expanded in terms of sector coverage. This will be done so as to avoid loss due to the possibility of expropriation by ZANU PF. The drive will be through proxy entities that are wholly owned by Zimbabweans. We need to get insight and advice from business people who have managed to stay afloat in Zimbabwe despite their opposition to the system for example Strive Masiiwa who owns Econet Wireless.

The need to have small companies scattered across sectors is to provide competition to ZANU PF where it already controls and to lay an early claim to stakes in areas it has not explored. In future, we will be able to inject capital into these companies so that they can effectively compete and possibly outwit ZANU PF owned companies in these sectors. In niche areas we will be able to silently and covertly exert our dominance.

External investment will also be aimed at capacitating the movement in areas that may become important in future exertion of force. These include military technology, satellite technology and general advanced technology. This may not be important today as this thrust is none-physical and non-military. In future we may need to counter the aging ZANLA/ZIPRA influence through provision of substitutive military influence that would enable the army to move away from obsolete methods to professional and modern methods. This will allow us to exert our military mighty on the security apparatus in the country.

The advantage that the Diaspora has over ZANU PF is that they are not subject to sanctions. They have the ability to exploit the global village without restrictions related to the current political situation in Zimbabwe. This means that the pace of growth emanating from external engagements will be much faster than that of ZANU PF . Assuming that the return from investments is 100 percent per annum then the empire can reach a $1 billion mark in 4 years.

This growth is important only if it is not coupled to a growth on ZANU PF’s empire. So it is important to maintain the economic pressure on ZANU PF so that they do not have a chance to trade meaningfully. Political pressure will be piled too to foreign companies operating in Zimbabwe either to scale down or leave. It will also be important to forge an alliance with the owners of these multi-national companies so that once ZANU PF begins to release the dirty money into their coffers they can alert the international community so that we can reclaim the money.

Is MDC necessary in this

The purpose of MDC in all this is to hold fort and continue to stall ZANU PF progress. We need MDC so that we continue to have meaningful retardation of ZANU PF’s cruise to total control. We need the MDC also to provide hope to those within the country even though it will be hard for it in its current form to wrestle power from ZANU PF. We will need to bring on board those within the MDC who have the mental and financial aptitude to sustain the crusade. It is anticipated that if MDC does not gain power in the next election donor fatigue will creep in meaning that the fluidity of the party will be compromised. The MDC would be encouraged to invest in the project so that over time it will be able to derive from the return on investments to fund its operations. This would allow us to exert a Zimbabwe-centric agenda on the party and to build on certain ideas that would have been unpopular with the current party donors. The relationship with MDC will be dependent on how open the party is to visionary leadership otherwise we will run the risk of having the economic thrust being tainted by controversies that may not be needed especially in the early years. In the event that MDC does not provide a desirable platform then an alternative vehicle will be formed that will be able to assert its power in due course.

Who Organises the Diaspora
Organising people to initiate idea is difficult given that naturally human beings have a fear of being pioneers. It will take a few willing individuals to commit themselves to the initial stages. An attempt to launch one such Investment Trust in Botswana attracted 45 Zimbabweans in 2009. This goes to show that people are willing to commit their funds to anything that will generate wealth for them. Organisations that have been formed to represent the Zimbabwean Diaspora should be approached so that they can influence their organized networks towards investment. These include the Global Zimbabwe Forum and the Development Foundation for Zimbabwe (DFZ).

In conclusion
What I have proffered here is an attempt to build a capitalist approach to toppling a dictatorship. The question that many who have a leftist inclination will ask is; what difference exist between the state that we will seek to build and the state that ZANU PF is building since both have no inclination towards the masses? The answer is simple; we will be doing this in good faith. We cannot bring all humanity to a point where they own equally but we can create an environment that allows humanity to flourish. Remembering that we are targeting 200 000 people initially, it is our hope that with the growth of the trust more people within the empire will be empowered to explore other business avenues thereby ensuring an evolution of a ruling class from a working class. The policies of the emergent government will be protecting the rights of workers and all the people of Zimbabwe.

No hope for free and fair elections in Zimbabwe

2011-03-15T21:28:00.000-07:00

Recent events in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya elicited calls for a non-military and mass-based revolution in Zimbabwe. These calls were largely by Zimbabweans living outside of the country. The Movement For Democratic Change (MDC) despite calls for its participation did not call for nor support the action then called for the 1st March 2011, rather the party said it remained committed to the Government of National Unity willing to pursue a yet-to-be-announced Zuma roadmap to free and fair elections. It is this stance that drew this article. What are chances of a peaceful, free and fair election in Zimbabwe? Given the history of violence and intimidation in past elections, what are the chances that this will not recur?

State Security vs The People
In March 2008 elections MDC made significant parliamentary gains. On paper they became the ruling party. Mr Mugabe lost to Mr Tsvangirai in the presidential elections. Reports indicate that Mr Mugabe had lost by a margin that allowed Mr Tsvangirai to become the president of the country; however after a long delay official results showed that although Mr Tsvangirai had won, the margin warranted a run-off election. The election was set for June 2008 but what followed was a horrific run of terror by all state security organs and ZANU PF supporters. 183 MDC supporters were killed during that time. None of the perpetrators were brought to book; rather Robert Mugabe in Clemency Order No. 1 of 2008, issued in June 2008 offered amnesty to perpetrators.

It is important to analyse the civil-military relationship in Zimbabwe. Civil-Military Relations broadly describes the relationship between the general population and the military authority of the country. The civil population is usually represented by a given civil authority preferably chosen through an election. In an ideal democracy, the military although autonomous in function is largely under the control of civilian authority. In this state, the civilian authority recognizes the supremacy of the military in the use of force whilst the military willingly submits itself to civilian authority. What this means is that; the military, even though it knows that it has the ability to forcibly rule over defenseless civilians agrees to be controlled by them. Core to this is professionalism and neutralism.

In Zimbabwe, there is a military structure that was derived from partisan entities that include liberation forces like ZANLA and ZIPRA. These were armed forces that had strong allegiances to political parties ZANU and ZAPU respectively. Today, the top structure of the Zimbabwe Defence Forces is dominated by former combatants of these liberation forces. The same applies to the police, intelligence and prisons. General Constantine Chiwenga, Lt General Phillip Valerio Sibanda, Air Marshall Perrance Shiri are all former ZANLA/ZIPRA veterans. Commissioner General of the Zimbabwe Republic Police, Augustine Chihuri is a former ZANLA combatant. Happyton Bonyongwe, the Director General of CIO and Rt Major General Paradzayi Zimondi, Head of Prison Services are both former ZANLA combatants. Commanders of all the Brigades of ZNA are former ZIPRA/ZANLA combatants.

This scenario serves the interests of ZANU PF best. The relationship between ZANU PF authority and the security apparatus is amicable. The trend seems to show that after retirement most of the senior members of the security system enter mainstream politics on the ticket of ZANU PF. Examples that come to mind are Air Chief Marshal Josiah Tungamirai and Rtd Lt General Vitalis Zvinavashe who are both late. They were both in the ZANLA High Command before independence.

Given this blatant partisanship of the security apparatus will any future election win by MDC be recognized by the security system of the country? To help us understand the skewed civil-miltary relationship let us revisit the statement by Rtd Lt General Zvinavashe on the eve of the presidential election in 2002.

“Let it be known that the highest office in the land is a 'straightjacket' whose occupant is expected to observe the objectives of the liberation struggle. …We (the military) will, therefore, not accept, let alone support or salute, anyone with a different agenda that threatens the very existence of our sovereignty, our country and our people."

The constitution of Zimbabwe states clearly the qualification of a President. Nowhere are the expectations as pointed out by the Generals written in the constitution. The statement clearly showed that the military had become larger than the people. Any choice that did not fit the description by the generals wouldn’t have been accepted regardless of the support by the people.

This was a testimony of the partisanship of the security forces in Zimbabwe. It did not come as a surprise then when Mr Tsvangirai won elections in March 2008 that the security forces were not amused.

ZANU PF has always labeled MDC as a puppet of the west with no ability to maintain the sovereignty of the country. The army seems to believe the same to be true. Is this belief genuine or it is just an excuse to continue hanging on to power? What are the chances that former ZANLA combatants would ditch their fellow pre-independence leaders for a man of little anti-colonial struggle credentials like Morgan Tsvangirai?

It is known that all commanders of the army are appointed by the president. Logically the president appoints people who will be loyal to him. The constitution is clear on these appointments, what is critical however is that even though the commanders are loyal to the president, they have a moral obligation to respect the citizens of the country. In this regard, despite individual political beliefs, they are expected to execute their duties professionally without discriminating anyone of different political beliefs. This is where the security services are lacking.

The new ZANU PF State
It is also important to evaluate the structure and composition of the state and government for us to predict whether ZANU PF will be able to accede to free and fair elections. Firstly, it is important again to differentiate the State and the Government. In short the State is the people, the systems, the laws, the resources, the territory and the intangibles like sovereignty. The Government is the set of individuals who run, manage and execute the programs and policies of the State.
The State in Zimbabwe owns the military, police, judiciary, jails, hospitals, schools, companies etcetera. The government of the day is supposed to run and manage these. The logic here is that; the state comprises of people and the government is chosen by the same people to administer their interests.
We have situation in Zimbabwe where the State and the government are hard to differentiate. The people in the government have become more powerful than the people. In other words, we now have a new State that recognizes only a few privileged people and serves only the interests of those privileged few. The laws of the country are being applied selectively depending on preferences of people in the government. The people are unable to remove offending representatives.
This State has the ability to exploit national resources without prior approval of the people as long as the ZANU PF politiburo agrees to it. For example, a finite national resource like land is being used to pay musicians for singing praises to the government. We have a minister like Ignatious Chombo who has amassed wealth through illegal exploitation of finite natural resources. When the people demand his investigation, the police is unwilling to because it is owned and run by the kith and kin of Chombo.

What then is the probability that someone who is not willing to protect the interests of the new owners of the State would be allowed to take over the government?
Critics will point out that already MDC is part of the government. Reality however shows that MDC is not part of the government that runs the new State, rather it is being allowed to run the remnants of the old State. For example, the police that is usually under the minister of Home Affairs is now reporting directly to the President bypassing Theresa Makone who is an MDC minister. She does not have power to direct the police to investigate the owners of the new state. The nominal power she wields is only for purposes related to the old State.

Tendai Biti runs the ministry of finance. He administers only that part of government that controls the proceeds of the old State. The financial muscle of the new State is controlled by Gideon Gono. That is why Gono sits in the JOC and not Biti.
Given this scenario it is clear that ZANU PF will not accept a free and fair election in Zimbabwe because it would accelerate the disintegration of the State that it is building. Given the vast wealth they have amassed so far, the ZANU PF stalwarts are willing to sacrifice unimportant people in the old State for them to cling on to power.

The Zuma Roadmap
MDC is banking on a roadmap that is being prepared by the South African President Jacob Zuma. What are the chances that ZANU PF will abide by the recommendations?
In 2002 a Commonwealth troika comprising of Thabo Mbeki, Olusegun Obasanjo and Tim Howard announced the suspension of Zimbabwe from the Commonwealth due to the violence and human rights abuses in the run-up to the 2002 elections. In 2003 Mugabe pulled Zimbabwe out of the Commonwealth.

In 2004 SADC Adopted the Mauritian Protocol on Elections. Zimbabwe held its Parliamentary elections in 2005. These were supposed to be held in line with the SADC guidelines but a lot of irregularities were noted. South Africa however declared the process free and fair despite glaring flaws.

When 79 white commercial farmers approached the SADC Tribunal in a bid to stop compulsory acquisition of land by the Zimbabwe government and the tribunal ruled in their favor, the Zimbabwe government responded by pulling out of the Tribunal.
These examples show how arrogant the ZANU PF government is. Whenever the government comes under international scrutiny it responds by unilaterally ending any relationship that could have given credence to such scrutiny. Secondly, the South African government has an amicable see-no-evil relationship with ZANU PF as shown by their “silent diplomacy” even in the presence of compelling human rights abuses.
Given the demonstrated arrogance of ZANU PF and its biased relationship with the South African government, what are the chances that any roadmap will be followed when it seeks to limit the intransigencies of ZANU PF?

A glimpse of the current GPA might give us insight. ZANU PF has maintained its dominance over MDC by dictating what is and is not implemented. The issue of the governors, issue of Roy Bennet, appointment of permanent secretaries, issue of Gono and the issue of Tomana are evidence of clear ZANU PF supremacy over MDC in government. What has been the response of South Africa- the supposed guarantors of the GPA?

The Election Commission
Elections in 2000, 2002 and 2005 were presided over by Tobaiwa Mudede who many allege to have played a part in rigging all of the elections. He remains the Registrar General even up to today as an affirmation of ZANU PF’s supremacy.
Robert Mugabe appointed Justice George Chiweshe as chairman of the Zimbabwe Election Commission. He presided over the 2008 elections and declared them free and fair despite the atrocities. What more did Zimbabweans expect from a former ZANLA combatant, ZANU political commissar and a former Brigadier General of the partisan Zimbabwe National Army?

His loyalty to Mugabe was unquestionable and he was rewarded in august 2008 when he was promoted by Mugabe to the rank of Rt major general. He was further promoted by Mugabe to be the Judge President of the High Court despite protestations by MDC .
The current Zimbabwe Election Commission retained Joyce Kazembe and Theophilus Gambe from the previous commission that dubiously allowed the re-election of Mugabe. The loyalty of the current chairman Simpson Mutambanengwe is hazy. All we know is that he was a member of ZANU’s Dare Rechimurenga before he fled for his life to Malawi after supporting the Nhari rebellion in 1974. He later joined the UANC and became a member of the Zimbabwe-Rhodesia government. He was part of the Zimbabwe-Rhodesia delegation to Lancaster House Conference in 1979. After independence he was appointed by Mugabe to the bench. He was later seconded to Namibia by Mugabe. When Justice Paradza was arraigned before the courts in 2006, Mugabe called on Mutambanengwe who had already retired to come and preside over the case.

Without insinuating that Simpson may be loyal to Mugabe, we know that rarely does Mugabe allow the appointment of a person of questionable political loyalty to such an important commission. It remains to be seen if the commission will be able to resist political manipulation.

In conclusion, the stance that MDC has taken to commit itself to upcoming elections is tantamount to political suicide. The structures that have retained Mugabe to power over the past decade are still intact. The army, police, intelligence and prisons are still in total control of ZANU PF. A few individuals in ZANU PF still maintain a firm grip of the State. There are doubts on the impartiality of the Election Commission. It is safe therefore to say that until such a time when Zimbabwe opposition has the power to dismantle the structures of power built on ZANU PF loyalty; there won’t be any free and fair elections in Zimbabwe.

It Is Possible To Remove Mugabe Through Popular Mass Demonstrations!

2011-02-21T20:08:00.000-08:00

I write this in solidarity with the ISO-Zim comrades who are in detention in Zimbabwe. Their crime being that they met to discuss events in Tunisia and Egypt. This has prompted me to interrogate the feasibility of non-military and non-violent street engagement with the Mugabe regime.

I have read a number of discouraging articles speculating that it is impossible to remove Mugabe through popular demonstrations. I would like to posit the contrary.
Zimbabwe has a rich heritage of organizational ability towards political and non-political mass engagement. We have a people that have, from the time of the 25th July 1960 Bulawayo Mass demonstrations, through the 1973 Chimukwembe demonstrations to the 2002-2005 mass action been able to organize and against all odds challenge the system of oppression. This alone gives us the assurance that either by genetics or by conscious will Zimbabweans are predisposed towards rejecting any form suppression through mass engagement.

Others will point out that the mass action called by MDC were largely ineffective against the regime. Here people should note that, there is no mass action in Zimbabwe that was ever called by MDC to specifically topple the regime except the 2 June 2003 “Final Push” which was aborted and renamed at the last minute.

I remember one of our most successful mass protest was the 18 March 2003 Mass Action that shut the whole of the country for at least 2 days. Indeed it was a mass action but one that was ‘mass’ in the sense that many people took part but rather lacked on the ‘action’ part because most people resorted to staying at home. With a bit of hindsight we can see some of the weakness of the Stayaways. Firstly, they were time specific but without specific measurable outcomes of success. We wanted the Mugabe regime to feel the power of the people. Actually MDC then issued 15 demands to Mugabe during this Mass Action which were supposed to be met by the end of that month or risk an all out mass action to remove him.

To me, this was the highest point that the people of Zimbabwe reached in their peaceful struggle against the Mugabe dictatorship. We had put the government in a tight corner. ZANU was smelling an end as witnessed by the numerous pleas for people to return to work. What we lacked was a specific announcement of a clearly spelt action to remove the regime. Had the energy we wasted in sporadic battles in Chitungwiza, Budirio, Kadoma, Mbare, Glenview etc been channeled towards a single well-organised action towards the centre of Harare we could have achieved far greater results although I think at some expense of human life.

Spurred by the successful response to the 18th March Stayaway, the MDC decided that it was ripe to tackle the regime in a penultimate showdown dubbed the “Final Push” on the 2nd June 2003. This action was supported by the traditional allies of MDC- labor and students. I still remember the zeal that students showed when they attended an all-night prayer at a church in Avondale just across the police station. We wanted change and were willing to die for it. Ironically as we left the church there were fireworks at Celebration Center and we all thought the soldiers were mutineering at the State House. We wanted to run there at that moment. Such was the zeal and preparedness for change.

On the eve of the demonstrations Mr Tsvangirai received a court order barring MDC from participating in the Mass Action. This is where things began to go wrong. We began to receive mixed signals on what we were supposed to do next. We were told MDC had resolved that the demonstrations were no longer about going to the City Centre then the State House. They were now supposed to be localized in different suburbs. We were heartbroken but as students we resolved that we were going to continue with the march.

On the 2nd June we woke in zeal and resolved not to march to town but to take a shortcut to the State House. Indeed we were confronted by helicopters, water-cannons , dogs and guns. We lost the battle. There were lessons to be learnt. The mighty of the army was all concentrated against the University of Zimbabwe and a few others in isolated areas like Budiriro and Mabvuku.

These events show that Zimbabweans have the capacity to challenge the regime. Some argue that Zimbabweans have been beaten to submission. I would like to say that there is no better time than now. We have a youth that has so far not yet experienced the brutality of the Mugabe regime. Most of the youths in the age range of 16-22 were about 8-14 during that time making them too young to have been part of these demonstrations. These are the crucial factor in any demonstrations especially in the initial stages. They have not much in terms of property and less responsibility coupled to enthusiasm of youth. Once we are able to harness this energy then Zimbabwe will be ready to explode.

But the soldiers! Indeed the army and police in Zimbabwe are not neutral. They are controlled by the regime. Some of them are very overzealous as witnessed by the verve with which they carried out Operation Murambatsvina . I have two incidents that have shaped my thinking on this issue.

It was in December 2002 at Makoni Shopping Center in Chitungwiza. About 500 Border Gezi Youths descended on the place beating people randomly. They were housed at the notorious Madzibaba Nzira’s shrine. We re-organised ourselves and began to fight back. We were joined by the local police and we managed to drive them back before the arrival of riot police. Actually the police were the ones at the forefront of mobilizing beer-drinkers and vendors to retaliate. We knew most of these policemen because they stayed with us.

In another incident, I was put under room arrest when we wanted to go and address the students in 2004. I was with Arthur Masuka. A senior police officer from Avondale Police Station entered my room holding a revolver. He told us that he wanted to arrest us but because he was sympathetic with our cause he would not. After about 15 minutes he said “You know what just go and demonstrate but make sure you don’t get arrested!” This policeman later became one of us and would give us information on students on the wanted list.

These two incidents give credence to the fact that there are many within the force who are willing but unable at this time to support the popular will. This may not be easy but where there is a concerted and coordinated effort to remove the regime the army and the police would be left with no option but to join the people or risk being left to the mercy of the people. A few weeks ago this statement would have been dismissed as wishful thinking but events in Libya today give it weight.

The biggest question is how to bring Zimbabweans to protest. Everyone is putting an eye on Mr Tsvangirai but I know that neither him nor MDC leadership are in a position to. Firstly Tsvangirai is Prime minister of the same government that we want to remove. Secondly, he is an easy target for persecution and lastly his involvement may polarize the protests and affect the neutrality that such action may demand. The same applies to the party he leads.

What they can be are just tacit supporters of the initial moves by availing their structures and resources towards the buildup. We have a civic movement in Zimbabwe that used to be vibrant. There used to be a ZCTU and a ZINASU that could rally people at any level to resist the regime but incessant economic , political and physical battering has left these organizations a shadow of their selves. Do they still have the capacity to organize? I would say no but they have the capacity to influence.
So who can organize? I would say there is no demonstration that can be called purely spontaneous. All demonstrations have an element of organization. The responsibility lies on all of us. The major voices of Zimbabwe’s oppressed should agree on a date on which the protests should begin. This date should be publicized to all and sundry. They should avail their structures towards the organization of the movement unconditionally.

Once a date has been set, the duty falls now on the media and other communication agents. The power of the internet should not be overlooked as statistics show that about 22% of adult Zimbabweans may have access to it. We would expect online news platforms like NewZimbabwe, Daily News, Nehanda, Zim Diaspora, Zim Online and others to be on the forefront in publicizing the event. On the ground all pro-people newspapers like NewsDay, The Standard, Zimbabwean and The Independent should be found in the fore front of beaming positive messages towards action. Finally we would also expect mobile operators like Econet to avail their facilities through sms towards the movement. The media is the ignition of resistance.

Finally the demonstrations should not be central to Harare alone, rather I envisage a situation whereby Masvingo , Bulawayo, Mutare and Gweru are taken simultaneously even before Harare. This allows the regime to be stretched. Secondly we have a cunning system that deploys soldiers born in Matebeleland to Mutare and those from Masvingo to Matebeleland. Usually these soldiers would be ruthless towards these people because they are not related to them, but a situation of simultaneous uprising may force conscience on soldiers because they would realize that their mothers and fathers too could be subjected to the same ruthless treatment as that they would be intending to subject other protesters in areas away from their origins.

There is no better time than now. Mass Demonstrations are appealing in that they are shorter and less destructive as compared to civil war. There will be casualties. It could be me, it could be you but that should not discourage us because death is a definite end which we all have to go through. To me, death in the line of national duty is more honorable than life in the shackles of self-pity.

I am convinced more than ever that if Gaddafi; he who troubled Americans, he who evaded assassinations, he whose army we called invincible, he whose entourage can jam cellphones wherever he goes can be so shaken by a people whose only weapon is determination; then even Robert Mugabe is just a flea on the thumb of people’s destiny!

In the mean time I salute ISO-Zim- they inspire Zimbabwe!

Your Truly

Africa can do better with less rhetoric and more action

2010-05-25T10:55:00.000-07:00

I write to you on Africa Day; the day we put aside to celebrate our unity as Africans. Our problems are there for everyone to see. There are many academics who have built their standing from the study of African politics and economy. We have a vast array of literature that deals on African economy; but why is it that despite all that knowledge at our disposal Africa is not progressing?

Politically, we have witnessed coups, civil wars, electoral fraud, violence and an increased emergence of dictatorships. Economically; even though Africa’s GDP is expected to grow from 5.5 to about 6% in 2010; there are millions of people living in extreme poverty and as it stands there is a chance that Africa is going to miss the Millennium Development Goal of halving the number of people living on less than US$1 per day. Africa is still struggling to cope with the burden of HIV/AIDS pandemic which in developed countries is no longer regarded as a killer disease yet in Africa millions die every year.

These are manifestations at a macrocosmic level. We know that we can blame the West for colonialism, we can blame USA for destabilizing Africa through its regime change policies that claimed the lives of people like Patrice Lumumba and plunged DR Congo into this crisis they have up to today. Indeed, we can blame whites for apartheid and colonialism that has left many of our people marginalized but the question we ought to ask ourselves is: assuming that colonialism had not taken place, would we as a people been any different today?

Let us take Ethiopia as an example. Save for five years under Mussolini, Ethiopia was largely uncolonized. Under Haile Selassie, the distribution of wealth was skewed towards the ruling elite, the landowners and elements of the clergy. The plight of the peasants is well documented. Upon the deposition of the emperor, the Derg adopted Marxism and communism as their working ideology. Hundreds of thousands were killed due to red terror, forced deportations, or from using hunger as a weapon. Despite the egalitarian rhetoric of the Derg, high-ranking government officials retained privileged economic positions. Even today under Meles Zenawi government officials and a few high-ranking professionals control the country’s mode of production.

There are many people who give colonialism as an excuse for Africa’s failure to thrive. Here is a country that has never been fully colonized, a country that had African rulers from time immemorial- a typical African country that we fantasize about in our excuses. Why is it that we still find oppression and suppression of voices in such a country? Why are Ethiopians amongst the poorest in the world? Why isn’t there such camaraderie as that punctuates our rhetoric when we speak of “WE AFRICANS”?

We give excuses that we had limited access to basic education thus our failure to engage in meaningful economic activity largely due to colonialism and apartheid. Let us look at a country like Zimbabwe which has the highest literacy rate of 92% in Africa. If educating an African was such a factor why do we find such levels of poverty and oppression in Zimbabwe? Why don’t we see Africans in Zimbabwe sitting down in true “African spirit” to discuss amongst them how to lift each other from poverty?

Is it really that “WE AFRICANS” are victims of history or we have inherent characteristics that predispose us to poverty?

Firstly, we as Africans lack the drive for scientific adventure, neither are we inclined towards innovativeness. Have we ever asked ourselves why it is almost everyone’s dream to be a medical doctor? It is because of job security. We are more worried about failing to get employment than our ability to be our own employers. No one wishes to study natural sciences like Physics in Zimbabwe because all of us are afraid of ending up as secondary school teachers somewhere in the deserted lands of Dzaramba. None of us ever think that we could be the Isaac Newtons of our time.
I remember one day being fascinated by a toy bird made by the Chinese which could balance on anything solid using its beak. There were no electronics used, nor expensive material, just plastic. It took me a while to figure out that whoever made that toy applied see-saw physics that we learn in the first few years of secondary education. When we are learning that, do we ever think that this could be harnessed to generate wealth?

In contrast, the level of research in the field of sciences in Asia and the West is so advanced to the extent that we sometimes feel that they major on minors. What we fail to realize is that we are the ones who drive these researches as we are the ones who end up buying finished products from them feeding their inventors with royalties from patents.

Maybe this also has to do with our lack of vision and our acute inclination towards consumerism-without-production. How many of us look into the future and plan for it? We seek instant rewards without investment. It is our expectation that one can miraculously wake up with a bank account pregnant with money without working for it.
There have been efforts by some Africans especially those in the diaspora to bring together their few resources in various collective investments schemes. This was after a realization that what we earn from a regular job will never be enough to cater for our ambitions and secondly that access to capital is limited in Africa. Unfortunately not many of our people understand the power of collective investment. This is usually because as human beings we desire to be powerful. We desired to be on top, thus the aspect of collectiveness- where we rise together as a group- is not attractive lest we may not have those to whom we can show off. Secondly we do not want to start small. We feel that by saving a dollar and investing it to get a cent is not worthy it; rather we hope to start after we have saved a thousand dollars. Unfortunately, we rarely manage to reach that stage when we have a thousand at our disposal; thus we die hoping and blaming.

We blame the Americans for what they do to us; but do we ever stop to think about our own inadequacies when it comes to money and power? If we are as morally upright (botho, unhu, ubuntu) as we always claim to be why is it that the Americans always find people amongst us willing to be paid to do mercenary work for them. People like Mobutu and Savimbi. Even amongst us right now we have people especially in destabilized economies like Zimbabwe and Eritrea who go about preaching things that do more harm than good disguised as Civic Society at the instigation of donor agencies whose agenda in most instances is to propel American Foreign Policy. It is again this love for riches without sweat that drives us to lose our conscience.
Perhaps we need to first look at what power means to an African. I think from time immemorial power in Africa meant proclamation of self and total submission of others. Power to us means influence to expropriate and not inspiration to nurture. Many of us at individual level do not appreciate that our children can teach us to be wise. Many still believe that women are objects for suppression even within marriage. It is because of this bigoted behavior that we find geriatrics like Mr Mugabe looking with contempt at people of younger age. It is again because of this wrong understanding of power that we find people like Joseph Kony, Charles Taylor and Al Bashir using death as a means to prevail over others.

The big reason why we as Africans fight each other every day is usually because of our wish to expropriate things that do not belong to us. We have a severe failure of positive imagination. When a man builds his house out of his own sweat, we find it worthwhile to seize and own it. This behavior dates back beyond the times of Shaka. Idi Amin, chased Asians from Uganda because he was jealousy of their hard work. What did he do; expropriated their possessions to the same African man whose poor vision drives him to make drums out of his own house’s roof forgetting that rain will one day pound him. Out of sheer vengeance and jealousy Mugabe did the same in Zimbabwe; the people he gave land found it sensible to sell pipes instead of using them for irrigation.

So if “WE AFRICANS” are like this, what should be done? This is the question that we need to explore to its fullest extent, apart from that we have to go beyond mere rhetoric and work towards tangible results.

We have to primarily change our focus. Let us educate our children to be productive. African education should not just be academic but should reflect empowerment. Beyond elementary education, a student should be allowed to follow his career out of passion not as a product of how much she can recall in an examination. A student who is able to tend to two pigs until they multiply to six in a year should be graded better than one who sits in an examination and recalls the theory of tending pigs without practically showing that indeed she can do that. Likewise we do not expect a person to graduate from a University without showing that beyond the theory he can actually harness it to produce a gadget or product that can be useful to society. This should not be misconstrued to mean that arts and social sciences should to be sacrificed. Summarily, the education system should be changed.

It does no good however to change the education system of a society that does not understand the value of such education. Doing so is tantamount to giving a torch to a baboon. Thus as Africans we should begin to teach our children to strive to be innovative, self-sufficient, independent and dignified. When your kid makes a wire car that is a stage above those made by his peers, reward him for that so that he appreciates hard work and inventiveness. Our children should know how to create and multiply wealth from a tender age. Give him a stone and tell him to carve something of better value out of it, pay him and tomorrow he will sell you purified oxygen! In all that he does tell him to value his conscience; tell him bloody money is dangerous. Teach him to do good.

Why put emphasis on the individual? We know that by concentrating on the atomic make up of a substance we may as well influence its gross appearance. If we build a generation that knows how to work and create wealth; who knows maybe we will be able to choose our member of parliament from them.

It is only when we have people who have been groomed to work hard, to respect others and to be innovative that we can possibly have a government that protects Intellectual Property Rights, General Property Rights and Human Rights. A government that can do away with the so-called Development Aid and use home-grown and less-expensive solutions to wiggle out of debt and poverty. We cannot expect a child soldier who eventually grows into a head of junta to respect the power of a mere ballot paper. To him it is only a bullet that matters and indeed; in Africa the bullet is still mightier than the pen.

These few thoughts are by no means exhaustive. It is my hope that we can build upon the rich history that we have; use it as pool of knowledge that can inspire us into a more successful people without marginalizing each other. Africa can do better with less rhetoric and more action!

INDIGENISATION: A mosquito seeking to treat malaria

2010-03-02T11:28:00.000-08:00

There has been a flurry of activity following the gazzeting of the Indigenisation and Economic Empowerment (General) Regulations. A lot of emotions have been expressed: joy, dismay, anger and indifference. These have been the typical responses to most of the sensitive issues that have challenge our country and it is expected in such a highly polarized country. This divergence has done a lot of disservice to our country in that public opinion is usually dictated by voices wearing political and therefore blinkered voices. Indigenization and Economic Empowerment are issues that need to be looked at holistically as they are the cornerstone of justice and ultimately peace in any country.

There are number of facts that we need to note before probing the status quo. It is true that prior to 1980 non-white Zimbabweans were discriminated against economically, socially and politically. Economic discrimination took root on inaccessibility of Education, mode of production and business freedom. Blacks in Rhodesia were restricted from economic activity. Commercial agriculture was skewed towards whites as they alone had unfettered access to commercially viable land. Blacks had other restrictions too which included bottle-necking at schools. One had to be exceptionally brilliant and lucky to reach university while whites found comfort in numerous whites-only schools, scholarships and government assistance. In short; historically blacks were disadvantaged.

Independence brought with it freedom and schools. People could now walk freely in Harare’s First Street. People could now drink brown bottled beer and whisky which used to be a criminal offence prior to independence. Primary and Secondary Schools mushroomed all over the country and education was opened up to every Zimbabwean. In 2000 Zimbabwe had more than six universities as compared to one in 1980. Zimbabwe had reached a milestone in education.

Did political independence bring with it economic independence to blacks? This can be answered by examining the distribution of wealth and resources across races.

The Land Apportionment Act of 1930 prohibited blacks from owning land in the lucrative “European Areas”, it even prohibited them from owning land in Tribal Trust Lands which were of ecologically poor. This act guaranteed that less than 1% of the nation owned approximately 80% of arable land in Zimbabwe. Very few blacks managed to purchase land in urban and commercial farming areas where private ownership of land was allowable. Most of them had to be contend with life in the communally owned Tribal Trust Lands. The implication of this Act on black empowerment can never be overlooked as it unfairly disadvantaged blacks especially regarding access to capital. Communally owned lands cannot be used to guarantee loans whilst title deeds from private ownership of land are major collateral. Secondly, this Act forced blacks into marginal areas where economic activity was minimal reducing them to cheap labor and not a people capable of economic activity.

Let us look at the distribution of industrial and commercial enterprises in Zimbabwe after independence. In a report done by OTM Consultancy for IBDC in 1994 it was noted that blacks who happened to be 95% of the population owned only 1% of these. Whites who were 3% of the population owned 30% of the industries and commercial enterprises whilst the Zimbabwe Government owned 4%. The rest was owned by foreign multinational companies. These figures show us that despite their huge population, blacks in Zimbabwe were owned very few businesses.

It is clear therefore that political independence in Zimbabwe did not come with economic empowerment of those who had for long been marginalized. The question we now ought to examine is whether this lack of economic power was all due to historical injustices or some other causes. This interrogation can help us approach the issue of Indigenization with an open eye.

Firstly let us look at the government’s policies towards private business. When the Marxist government of Robert Mugabe took over, it adopted a socialist approach towards business. More emphasis was placed on formation of cooperatives and not private business. A lot of Ujamas erupted across the country. These flourished for a short while but because a cooperative is usually tedious and full of mistrust and suspicion many crumbled. Those who dared to enter into private business found the environment hostile to capitalism. The government introduced price controls between 1980 and 1981 which made it economically unviable for emerging business people. These restrictions stifled growth.

The financial system that the government inherited and adopted was risk averse with more emphasis on conservatism than business adventurism. What this meant was that most financial institutions demanded high collateral for any loans that they would issue. Despite the knowledge of the handicaps that blacks faced, the government did not intervene to assist; rather it left everything in the hands of institutions like Small Enterprise Development Corporation (SEDCO) which issued short-term and long-term loans which obviously were guaranteed by collateral.

This is the issue that led to phenomenon that was then called “Institutional racism”, where blacks failed to gain loans from financial institutions whilst whites seemed to easily secure them. Blacks had no collateral, whilst whites could afford it.

Not all blacks didn’t have start-up capital; some did have but why did they fail to start thriving businesses in Zimbabwe? Let us again examine the Zimbabwe Government’s hand in this. There were pieces of legislation in Zimbabwe that made starting up a business tedious rather than exciting. Let us for example consider the processes that were involved in starting up a company. First there was Company Name Search, followed by Memorandum and Articles of Association, then Certificate of Incorporation. This alone could take up to a year to complete even though officially it was projected to be a month. If one wanted to then enter into Hotel and Catering, he would have to apply to the Zimbabwe Tourism Authority which was under Ministry of Environment and Tourism, if he intended to then ferry his clients around in a bus he would have to apply for another license from the Ministry of Roads and Transport. His premises had to be inspected by the Local Government and he also needed a clearance from the Ministry of Health. All this could take another two years. How on earth did the government expect its people to participate in economic activities under such strenuous and unfriendly demands?

The government knows about these restrictive laws that are present because in 1994 the Deregulation Committee set up by the government to look into the laws identified 28 Acts that were impediments to business and therefore needed to be amended urgently. Unfortunately very few were amended and even today the government still uses these shamed laws to act on its citizens.

We need not look further than Strive Masiiwa’s battle to set-up Econet wireless to identify the hypocrisy of the Zimbabwean Government. In 1993, Masiiwa secured a US$40 million loan from Standard Chartered Bank to launch his telecommunication business. Here was a black man with a brilliant idea, who approached a foreign owned-bank in Zimbabwe and secured a loan. He approached Post and Telecommunications Corporation (PTC) for licensing but they told him that only PTC could do such a business under the Zimbabwe PTC Act. Initially he had approached them for a joint venture but they declined saying that there was no immediate demand for mobile technology in Zimbabwe. He appealed to the High Court and got a favorable verdict from Judge Gibson. PTC appealed to the Supreme Court and they won.

Masiiwa then made a constitutional challenge which ruled in his favor in August 1995. Unfortunately, President Robert Gabriel Mugabe invoked the Presidential Powers Act to issue a Presidential Decree requiring private parties to obtain a license from the Ministry of Information, Post, and Telecommunications before setting up a cellular network effectively overturning the decision of the Supreme Court and restoring PTC’s monopoly. The battle took another two years and it was only after the intervention of Joshua Nkomo to force Rejoice Mujuru then the Information minister and currently the Vice-President to license Econet.

Masiiwa is not the only black businessman who has been persecuted by Zimbabwe’s government and its horrendous laws. Many names come to mind, Mushore, Muponda, Kuruneri, Makamba and many minor ones like Daniel Chingoma whose dream of flying his helicopter will never see light of the day due to restrictions imposed by the aviation laws.

Let us not forget the then emerging black businessmen like my brother Tobias who owned five tuckshops in Chitungwiza which were all razed down during the infamous Operation Murambatsvina in 2005. I have no doubt that if the ZANU PF government had not destroyed his tuckshops he could be having a decent supermarket maybe employing ten more people. Today he is a pauper selling matches and cigarettes at Makoni Bus Rank.

The question we ask today as Minister Kasukuwere gazettes his regulations is whether the Government of Zimbabwe is being truthful in its quest for indigenization or it’s another ploy to empower a few using the guise of futile populism.

Let us not forget that this is the same government that has presided over Zimbabwe for the past 30 years. It is the same government that has presided over the demise of the country. It is the same government that been brutal to its own people and it is the same government that has grabbed and expropriated land amongst itself. What has really changed today that this brutal government has suddenly become sensitive to its people?

I ask these questions not because I want to scare people away from riches. I am only saying; let us not develop a tendency of expropriating wealth. Let us create wealth. Historical injustices are not made right by just multiplying the people that eat the cake but by multiplying the cake and the people who eat it.

If ZANU PF is serious about black empowerment I challenge it to walk the talk and begin by accepting that most of the damage to black entrepreneurship in the past 30 years was due to its bad governance and impunity. After that we share its proceeds of corruption and plunder before we demand the 51% from foreigners!

What it means to be Zimbabwean: A search for identity

2010-01-25T05:53:00.000-08:00

I have stayed in foreign lands for some time now. I have seen Zimbabweans being killed, I have seen them being segregated and I have seen them living worse than dogs. Back home I have seen my people degenerating into thieves, fraudsters and murderers; our once righteous women turning into nocturnal body-sellers. Out of pain, I decided to undertake a dialectical journey to the core of our existence; to explore what it means to be Zimbabwean, what it should mean and why it means what it means right now to be a Zimbabwean. This could be the works of a troubled mind but my hope is that someone would find sense out of it.

Sometimes I sit wondering why some people behave the way they do. I wonder why Robert Mugabe is that arrogant, why General Zvinavashe agreed to pronounce that infamous statement on the eve of the 2002 Presidential elections, why Jonathan Moyo keeps vacillating like a pendulum and why Morgan Tsvangirai overruled a democratic consensus that later led to the split of MDC. Most of the times, I end up indifferently concluding that maybe that’s how human beings behave. This time I decided to interrogate the source of these behaviors even deeper without giving myself a chance to resign.
The first question that I asked myself was; “what makes a man a man?” Apart from the physical how can we differentiate between a man and a dog? This question came about because of some things that we have seen happening in Zimbabwe that we would normally say; they are not fit to be done by human beings but by dogs or savages. So what is it that makes a man a man and a dog a dog?
There are certain characteristics that are common between a man and a dog which compel us to conclude that a man is primarily an animal. They both desire food, water, shelter and other basic needs. They both have the five scientific senses. They are both calculative- a baboon may bury wild fruits in sand to facilitate ripening just like a human being. Most importantly, they both act instinctively in the face of danger to avoid death. But still a baboon is a baboon and a man is a man- why?
Somebody argued that a man is a man because he can differentiate between good and bad. Again we ask; is good universal to all men? Why is polygamy good in some societies but bad in some? Who defines good? If we can follow the dictates of society on good and bad can’t that be said of a dog that is conditioned to know what is acceptable and what is not acceptable to its master?
However, even if good or bad is not universal to all men the concept of goodness and badness is common across all people. But even this concept derives from a deeper intrinsic awareness in man which is I prefer to call the consciousness of value. It is therefore arguable that apart from the physical and the genetic make-up, human beings also share a common characteristic- attaching value to nature.
Notwithstanding the fact that animals also attach value to things out of instinct, it is only man who has the ability to attach value and defend it on worthless material and on non-material things. For example, man fight to defend religion, they fight to defend their rights because they place value unto these things and they are willing to risk death for things that are intangible.

Man in as much as he places value on other things also places value upon himself. He believes that he is worth a certain value. This is what is called self-worth. The product of this self-evaluation is called dignity. Because man is naturally a social being, that is he desires to be desired by other man. He expects other man to evaluate his worth by other man, he expects other man to evaluate his worth to its real value. When they undervalue him, he gets angry and when the evaluate him to his real worth he feels pride. This desire to be recognized by other man, is the one that drives man to behave in ways that defy natural animal instinct.
Let us look at Zimbabwe. On one hand we have a ruling class that is unwilling to recognize other ordinary Zimbabweans as people amongst other people, on the other we have a people that is yearning for such recognition. This ruling class which is mainly ZANU PF , behaves in a manner that seeks to undo history.
I say ZANU PF is seeking to undo history because it is taking the human philosophical function back to the primitive state when man , although social beings, interacted with each other violently. A period in history when man’s worth was evaluated on how much one was willing to risk death for pure prestige. Remember Alexander or Chaka .
Unfortunately, other Zimbabweans are unwilling to engage ZANU PF in such a primitive manner which to some may appear as cowardice. In circumstances, where one part is willing to engage in violence and another is unwilling there is greater possibility that their relationship terminates in lordship and bondage in which as is in Zimbabwe, ZANU PF gains the recognition of being the master and everybody else looses the dignity of being a man and becomes a slave.
But is the unwillingness of Zimbabweans to engage in violence a symbol of cowardice? The answer could be both YES and NO.
YES in that, cowardice itself begins when a man fails to overcome the fear of death and let his animal instinct of self-preservation override the human characteristic of seeking recognition. So out of cowardice, Zimbabweans decided to forfeit their worth for a chance to live.
NO in that, a human being is also calculative and can temporarily forgo his human desires for a particular reason. For example a man may choose not to eat even if he is hungry because he is on hunger-strike. So there could be a reason why Zimbabweans chose to forfeit their worth. One of which could be that they know that most of the primitive members of ZANU PF are close to death due to aging. From their calculations, they can do without dignity for a few years until this generation is wiped out. They can derive hope from the fact that a number of younger ZANU PF members have been attracted to the idea of change like Simba Makoni, Daniel Shumba, Walter Mzembi and others.
What is certain in Zimbabwe however is that the ZANU PF regime is not evaluating its people’s worth justly. Zimbabweans are conscious of this, unfortunately; as in all dictatorships, two groups of slaves arise. One that feels unjustly evaluated and is willing to regain its dignity and another that knows and feels theindignation but is content to live like that as long as they are alive.

The first group knows that an honest reason for its situation is simply that they are cowards but because they deem themselves to be of certain worth they can’t accept that they are after all mere animals whose fear drives them into submission. So, instead of confronting their fears, this group devices methods by which it can fool itself that it is still capable of functioning as human beings. They feel the anger because firstly they lost dignity in the eyes of the master and secondly because they have been reduced to ordinary amongst the ordinary. They begin to seek to be recognized again as extra-ordinary by their fellow ordinary peers.
They know that they can never be recognized as extraordinary by acts of bravery because already their peers know that they are mere cowards. They are left with no option but to be industrious. They now relate their value to the value of their ability and what they own. Their motive becomes to amass as much as they can so as to attract attention and recognition from primarily their peers and eventually the ruling class. This is what happened in America after independence where those who had not participated in the revolution ended up also part of the ruling class because the ruling class was rational enough to recognize these people’s dignity through their ability and what they owned.

The driving force behind this kind of man is the will to be free- to be a dignified human being capable of unrestricted moral choice. But this kind of man is also caught up in the conflict of desire to be recognized and the desire for self-preservation. It is this man who becomes capable of defining what is good and what is bad because he has consciousness of slavery and a will to be a master. He is capable of defining good because he feels that all things that lead to perpetuation of life (self-preservation) represent morality and good whilst those that lead to violence, war, animosity and death (out of the need to be recognized) are bad. It is this group that is dangerous to TYRANY and ZANU PF knows it.

ZANU PF knows that a man who is unwilling to fight may become even more dangerous if he becomes prosperous because prosperity without freedom is not satisfying to man. They know that man derive satisfaction from owning property not because of necessity but because other man recognize it as theirs and they have made sure that nobody owns property beyond necessity. To them a slave should not be capable of being industrious and if by chance he does so; they are more than happy to grab and expropriate.

Under these circumstances it becomes totally impossible for the ordinary to be extraordinary. Two realities now exist for this group; they are no longer a people amongst people and there is no chance to redeem their dignity through work. Only two options remain: to leave the country altogether or to revert into the lower group that survive as if they do not exist.
When the desire to live supersedes the desire to be human, men begin to drift towards primitiveness. He loses his dignity; he also loses the consciousness of being human. Survival becomes the primary object of his existence. He loses the basis of morality and ultimately the basis of humanness.

When the whole society loses the basis of morality it becomes hard to differentiate or dictate what is good and what is bad. Corruption for survival becomes good, so becomes prostitution, theft, fraud and murder. The feeling of guilty is gone because we are no longer able to evaluate ourselves to our real worth; rather we become worthless and therefore incapable of understanding justice or even to judge ourselves.
This is what happened in Zimbabwe. We had a people that earned less than one dollar a day but survived on five dollars every day. It did not matter where the money was coming from because EVERYBODY was doing it. We celebrated thieves and fraudsters because they were the symbol of survival.

Now, let us turn our sight to those who decided to leave Zimbabwe. These people had lost dignity but not the ability to evaluate themselves. They hoped to transfer their perceived value in Zimbabwe to other societies. They hoped that those societies would assess their worth justly.

What most did not realize was that dignity is built through interaction. They hoped to be given back their dignity in foreign lands through work since these foreigners respected and recognized each other’s property. But what happens when those in the foreign lands realize that you are mere animals running away from death. You lose the basis for just evaluation and revert to being less than the ordinary of that society.
Eventually it becomes hard to get dignified work. It becomes a matter of survival. One needs to eat, drink and shelter. So even in foreign lands we then sacrifice our dignity for survival. Teachers become housemaids, Nurses become child-minders and accountants become gardeners. Those who had hope become prostitutes. This becomes the basis of xenophobia. We become animals, as worthless as a wild dog which can be axed to death in the townships of Alexandria.

Logically, it becomes easier to define who a Zimbabwean is and what it means to be a Zimbabwean today. A Zimbabwean is an animal which is nothing, owns nothing and is ever loitering in search of survival! This is what ZANU PF has reduced us to.
So when I evaluate the so-called Government of National Unity, I have to base my assessment on whether this government has restored dignity to its people. Are Zimbabweans now man amongst man? Do they own something or are they free to own something? Have they gone beyond scavenging for survival?
A friend called me and said “man the shops are full, everything is there”. The first question to strike my mind was- if everything is there, is everything there for everybody?

If a slave master opens a shop at his farm to sell sugar which was not locally available at the farm, if he sells unto them at wild prices so as to confiscate their meager savings and orders them not to buy anywhere else; should we call that freedom? Should we call that prosperity? Is it a change in history? No, the slave is still a slave and the master still the master only that the slave is able to point at the grocer and say, “ A long time ago we had to scavenge as far as South Africa but we now have our own dumpsite here!”
If the slave was able to build the shop, sell his sugar and multiply his wealth without restriction from the master then that would be significant because the slave would have regained his dignity firstly by having the master recognize his rights to private property and freedom to be industrious and secondly because he would have re-ignited and re-calibrated his consciousness of value to that which reflects the progress in history.

So abundance in Zimbabwean shops does not necessarily reflect a gain in dignity rather it only assures Zimbabweans that if they commit their labor to their slave-master they will be able to buy food and survive. Other than that they would die.

The challenge we have s to differentiate between the appearance of freedom and the reality of freedom. For how else can we explain the phenomenon in Zimbabwe: you are only free as long as you are willing to live like an animal but that freedom ends when you decide to be a human being- when you begin to interrogate the truth and seek your worth? So yes Zimbabweans are free today as is a dog that is only free when it is willing to track behind its owner who would not hesitate to shoot it if it decides to challenge him.

Having sacrificed a lot of time on what is and has been happening in Zimbabwe; we have an obligation also to enquire on ways that may help us be human again. That, I hope will become the object of my next article but as it is let us think clearly about whom we are , what we want to be and build ourselves for the future battles to regain our dignity!

Exploring the possibilities of non-violent reform in Zimbabwe

2009-10-31T17:15:00.002-07:00

When Morgan Tsvangirai was sworn in as the Prime Minister of Zimbabwe in a loose coalition with Robert Mugabe, there was hope that his presence could influence reform in the country. This government is only a few months old but it has become clearer that ZANU PF is not willing to give up its autocratic hold on power. It has become necessary again to take a closer look at past and present events and try to predict the likely course of future events. This way, pro-democratic forces in Zimbabwe may live conscious of what may become of them or may be required of them when such events begin to unfold.

There is substantial evidence that MDC holds minimal power in the current setup. Examples that quickly crop up are the continual invasion of farms at the instigation of ZANU PF leadership despite calls by the Prime Minister for them to stop. MDC members continue to be persecuted and harassed by ZANU PF supporters with no action from the police. The Reserve Bank continues to engage in quasi-fiscal projects despite Finance Minister Biti’s order. Reserve Bank Governor Gideon Gono and Attorney General Johannes Tomana are still occupying their positions despite MDC’s protestations. Robert Mugabe continues to make key appointments to government unilaterally and most of those appointments have stood. So, it could be argued that ZANU PF is still the core of the Zimbabwe Government with MDC coming in as auxiliaries.

It is also evident that little reform to the political and economic systems of the country has occurred since the Unity Government was formed. The constitution-making process has stalled amidst claims that ZANU PF is sabotaging the process. Draconian laws like AIPPA and POSA are still being used to maintain the state’s grip on civil liberties. Government-assisted hostile takeovers of businesses are still common in the country. There has been a noticeable change though in the economic climate of the country since the introduction of the United States Dollar as the official trading currency. Most notably is the massive decrease in inflation and an end to shortages of basic commodities in the country. There is little hope that substantial reforms will be instituted in the near future given the public contradictions in beliefs held by the two parties.

Given the little influence that MDC seems to be holding in the GNU, it is also evident that its presence in this government is unlikely to bring much positive reform to the country. Changes in ZANU PF on the other hand seem more likely to bring considerable reform in the political and economic terrain of the country. Let us explore such changes, their likelihood and their likely impact on the country:

Voluntary reorganization of ZANU PF

This explicitly refers to change of leadership within ZANU PF. People have discussed the need to revamp and restructure the party particularly the succession of its geriatric leader Robert Mugabe. A wholesome change of leaders in ZANU PF might result in the party being led by reform-minded young people who appreciate the need for contemporary reforms and modernisation of the political and economic systems of the country.

Are there people like that in ZANU PF? This question is hard to answer when looking at the current crop of the party’s leadership even from its youth ranks. There are a number of people who were nurtured by ZANU PF who eventually decided to leave it because of its unwillingness to embrace change. This can point to the presence of people within its system who may not be averse to reformist ideas.

How likely is this change? Succession in ZANU PF is not an idea that can be thrown around without scars and scalps. When Eddison Zvobgo brought the issue of Mugabe’s succession in 1990; the results were not pleasant. He was sidelined from government and his closest ally Dzikamai Mavhaire was suspended from the party for 2 years. The infamous Tsholotsho Declaration was allegedly hacked by some senior members in ZANU PF to influence the structure of the presidium. The results were not pleasant; six provincial chairmen were suspended from the party and eventually Jonathan Moyo had to leave ZANU PF. Currently, there is commotion over the successor to Joseph Msika with the old guard again throwing spanners to ensure that another geriatric takes over.

As convenient as it may sound, there is no indication that the executive of ZANU PF is willing to retire and leave power to younger and competent people. Moves by certain sections of ZANU PF to declare Mugabe the Supreme Leader of the party may as well signal that Mugabe wants to die in office.

It can therefore be concluded that the possibility of ZANU PF reorganisation in the lifetime of Robert Mugabe is close to impossible.

Forced reform of government

There are situations where a government can be forced to reform due to unsustainable internal and external pressure. The reformation of the Soviet system in the 90’s was a result of both the constraints that the global economy was placing on its government and the overwhelming reformist sentiments shown by the massive support that Boris Yeltsin got when he became president in 1990. Pressure from within and without also helped bring down authoritarian rule in Hungary, East German and South Africa.

Is domestic pressure feasible in Zimbabwe? In 1989, Arthur Mutambara and Munyaradzi Gwisai led University of Zimbabwe students in protests against ZANU PF’s intention to impose a one-party state in the country. They were arrested and brutalised. So was Morgan Tsvangirai when he wrote to the Herald newspaper in support of the two.

When food prices rose by about 40% in 1998, people decided to take to the streets in protest. There were reports of a massive crackdown is high density suburbs of Chitungwiza, Budiriro and Glen View by the army and police to quash any dissent.

From 2000 to 2003 ZCTU and MDC led a number of successful boycotts to force the government to reform. Successful in terms of popular response but rather ineffective in forcing the government to change. It appears as though, these earlier demonstrations and boycotts served to sensitize the regime towards the use of brutal force as a means of containing dissent. The response with which the regime quelled the June 2003 Final-Push goes to show that the system had completed its mutation into a senseless, brutal and unashamed dictatorship with no respect for life at all.

To cap this revolutionary mutation, the establishment went own to disintegrate the social and economic livelihood of its people through operation Murambatsvina. This was clandestinely aimed at silencing the opposition’s powerbase although hidden behind claims of cleaning up the Harare.

If this was under disguise, then the ruthlessness that was blatantly shown in June 2008 run-off elections was a show of how the regime was prepared to kill those who did not submit to its existence.

Despite the culture of resistance that Zimbabweans had developed in the first five years of this decade, ZANU PF managed to beat them into submission. The globalisation of world economy did not help matters too as the middle-class which is usually the most vocal in such situations was the first to flee the country followed by a massive exodus of the generally populace into surrounding countries.

Only a people that had been brutalised into submission remained of Zimbabwe. Their only hope was elections. They voted overwhelmingly for change but their vote did not count. Today they are again stuck with the same violent regime with no hope whatsoever.

It seems as though it is impossible to challenge the system with bare hands. Any further challenge to ZANU PF seems to require that people arm themselves or that they totally lose the fear of death. These are hard choices.

International pressure through disengagement and sanctions has been instituted on Zimbabwe by USA, The EU and Australia. Sanctions are designed to force the targeted government or institution to change. Sanctions on Zimbabwe although designed to target specific individuals had other far reaching consequences on the general populace of Zimbabwe.

Instead of forcing the regime to bow out, sanctions actually gave them an excuse to act irresponsibly and ruthlessly. One example is when Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe diverted about $4, 5 million from Global Fund on HIV, TB and Malaria towards other unknown activities. The result was that donors found it hard to channel resources into the country resulting in massive starvation and health crises.

The government seemed to respond to sanctions by sanctioning its own people too. In 2008 at the height of food shortages, they barred relief agencies from operating in the country. They further barred World Vision, Care International and Catholic Relief Services from moving food from Zambia into Zimbabwe.

What could have contributed to the ineffectiveness of sanctions in forcing reform was the inability by Zimbabwe’s neighbours and other African states to augment western efforts. Only Botswana, Kenya and Tanzania seemed willing to apply pressure on Mugabe.

So, can international pressure force change in future? Sanctions can hopefully bring change in Zimbabwe if they are a concerted global initiative which every country is obliged to observe. The ideological differences amongst members of the UN Security Council remain an impediment. The unwillingness of Zimbabwe’s neighbours to support sanctions is based mostly on reluctance to commit resources to sustain the burden of refugees who would be anticipated to cross into those countries.

Apart from sanctions, international pressure can indirectly be applied on the current regime by constantly and lucratively supporting alternatives in the country. As an example, students’ relief schemes can be put in place to assist those students persecuted by the regime. This would not only assist courageous students but would also serve as incentives for more students to come out and challenge the regime.

It has become hard to find people who are willing to challenge the government through non-violent means; but with proper education and assurances of alternatives people of Zimbabwe may rise again but not within the foreseeable future.

Circumstantial changes in ZANU PF leadership

What will happen if Mugabe dies today? There are many scenarios: The Vice President Amai Mujuru can constitutionally be elevated to the post of President and take care of the transition. A rational woman with limited ego could be what Zimbabwe needs to manage the pressures that may arise from such a situation. What if Emmerson Munangagwa - the current Minister of Defence- decides to challenge her? Remembering that The Tsholotsho Declaration was meant to impede the rise Joyce Mujuru, their rivalry is documented.

If Munangagwa decides to challenge Joice Mujuru, two things may occur; she can give in or decide to fight. If she gives in then Munangagwa becomes the President and given his history of brutality; from the persecution of the Hamadziripi group in the late 1970s, his involvement in the Matebeleland massacres and his subsequent involvement in the 2008 elections, then Zimbabweans would most probably have to brace for a tougher time.

If Joyce Mujuru decides to fight on then we can expect a split of ZANU PF along factional lines. Both factions are guaranteed substantial military support. Solomon Mujuru was the commander of the Zimbabwe National Army until 1992. He still has substantial influence in the army and can be the pillar that his wife can rest on. Not to be outdone, Munangagwa was the Minister of State Security from 1980 to 1988, he is currently the Minister of Defence sealing his control over the military and intelligence of the country.

A civil war may occur. The impact and duration of such an event is beyond the scope of this article but suffice to mention that a civil is the last thing that Zimbabwe needs right now.

It has become clearer that reform in Zimbabwe is dependent more on events within ZANU PF that other things. With Mugabe unwilling to retire, it remains logical that Zimbabweans wait for his death for reform to occur. Unfortunately his death may also signal a cascade of events likely to cause more pain than happiness to Zimbabweans. Finally, let it be known that no condition is permanent- change may as well be on the cards for Zimbabwe.

The heroes of our time: a Heroes Day message.

2009-08-10T12:50:00.000-07:00

Our constant exposure to ZANU PF propaganda has made us to believe that a hero is a person who is dead and is buried at the National Heroes Acre. We have never heard them conferring such a treasured title to anyone alive. They all become heroes when they die. What is the point of waiting for death before we can appreciate the works of our people? I am going to break tradition or propaganda and appreciate the works of some of the people I believe are heroes of our time.

Strive Masiyiwa; we all know him as the rich owner of Econet but it is not the money that makes him a hero. It is the struggle that he endured for us to have free airwaves. I cannot imagine how Zimbabwe could have turned if ZANU PF had continued to have monopoly over the Telecommunications industry. Indeed he fought his own war to set up his own business but in that war he managed to unshackle some of the chains that Zimbabwe was bound with. We are aware of the Supreme Court challenge that he made against the Post and Telecommunications Act which at that time gave monopoly to PTC. The argument was that this act violated Section 20 of the Constitution which stated “Every Zimbabwean has a right to receive and impart information without hindrance.” He pioneered the struggle for Freedom of Expression in an unprecedented manner. He helped to unmask Mugabe at a time when most people were busy worshiping him. Today we build our struggle on his humble contributions full of the wisdom that no matter how small our contribution is, we are adding a vital brick to the House of Zimbabwe. For this he is a hero.

Margaret Dongo. In 1995 she broke ranks with ZANU PF and decided to stand independently for the Harare South after the politburo refused her application to run again on a ZANU PF ticket. They favored Vivian Mwashita who was viewed more as Mugabe’s blue-eyed girl. Margaret lost to Mwashita but she took the matter to the courts where it was realized that about 41% of the people on the voters’ role were inaccurate. The election was annulled and she won the resultant rerun. She is one of the very first women in our society who have openly disagreed and challenged Mugabe. She is one of the first people who opened our eyes to the electoral fraud that ZANU PF has come to be synonymous with. She is a hero of our time.

Morgan Tsvangirai. There is no man in Zimbabwe today who can claim that he has sacrificed more than this man for the country. He lost a wife, he lost his freedom and on a number of occasions came close to losing his life. From as far back as 1989 he has been in the struggle for the total emancipation of the people of Zimbabwe. It is always easy to criticize those seated on higher ground but when all is said and done his contribution to the well-being of our political fibre is unparalleled. He is a living hero.

Arthur Mutambara. More often than not people tend to forget the good that people have done as they wallow in the inertia of the status quo. This man is the pioneer of the post independence struggle for democracy in Zimbabwe. His exploits inspired many of us into activism. He still continues to inspire many more people even now as Deputy Prime Minister. He is a hero.

Geoff Nyarota. This man gets onto this list because of his exploits in 1988 when he, together with Davison Maruziva unearthed what was by then the biggest corruption scandal involving high-ranking government ministers. Zimbabwe was still basking in the euphoria of independence when people like Enos Nkala and Maurice Nyagumbo were busy embezzling public funds. Given the barbaric history of ZANU PF when dealing with people perceived to be enemies, it had to take men of courage to carry out such a risky investigative journalism.

Nkululeko Sibanda, Tinashe Chimedza, McDonald Lewanika. These make it to this list as representative of the generation of student leaders who graced our land in the early years of this decade. These people took the struggle for academic freedom to levels that had never been reached in Zimbabwe. They openly challenged the ZANU PF hegemony and constantly organized Zimbabweans to rebel against the despotic rule in Zimbabwe. We should appreciate that the system had by then metamorphosed into a ruthless creature that did not hesitate to kill and to have people who are willing to organize the nation against such powers is just a privilege. The Final Push remains the biggest confrontation between Mugabe and the people. Students led this event. They are heroes of our time.

We have many more people who have selflessly served the people of Zimbabwe but are living somewhere in this world probably oblivious of the difference that they have made in our lives. So, the onus is on us to proclaim the value that these people have added to our lives so that even when they continue they know that the world notices!

Zimbabwe Youth Movement will soon provide the only genuine alternative for the people of Zimbabwe.

2009-08-04T14:10:00.000-07:00

When MDC beat ZANU PF in the March 2008 elections, I said; there goes the power of money. When ZANU PF forced MDC out of the run-off election that followed, I said again; there goes the power of the gun. Today as I watch people celebrating the return of food onto the shelves I say to myself; behold the oppressed singing praise hymns to their slave masters!

The lesson we draw from the 2008 elections is that, given an option of food or hunger, human beings would choose food; but given the option of life or death people would rather choose life. Consequently economic pressure on a country ruled by the gun will never bring democratic change. Economic pressure can only bring change to countries whose leadership respects life. We have seen it in Iraq, North Korea, Burma, and Cuba; people died but the regimes continue to flourish.

The point I am trying to drive home is that, the strategy that MDC sought to apply in order to remove the Mugabe regime could have worked if the Zimbabwean political system was such that they (ZANU PF) respected the right to life. We all know they don’t. We have an unending list of people who lost their lives in the hands of ZANU PF and I am not fearful to label them as barbarians.

Before the 2008 March election I wrote an article published in The Zimbabwe Standard in which I warned Morgan that the Mugabe regime would celebrate popular vote only if it was the one winning. I warned him that even if he was to win, the ZANU PF maniacs would never allow him to rule because they believed in the superiority of the gun over the ballot. In the same article I advised him to beef up his claim to power through military coalitions especially with those who were sympathetic to Simba Makoni. I was labeled a Mavambo activist, and when reality began to unfold unto them; I could not help but feel dejected at the inability of my colleagues to read the signs.

A few years ago an argument on whether Zimbabwe was under blanket economic sanctions would have drawn a strong response from pro-MDC supporters but today given the public acknowledgement by Honorable Tendai Biti that the sanctions existed it has become common knowledge to every body. So ,with a bit of wisdom one can extrapolate that an MDC win in March was more about the stomach than an endorsement of MDC leadership. This dates back to that day in March 2002 when Morgan Tsvangirai came out in the open urging South Africa among other countries to institute blanket sanctions on Zimbabwe. The point here is that; MDC’s approach was as evil to the common man as was the barbaric butchering of people by ZANU PF because we also have evidence of people who died directly or indirectly from the effects of these sanctions.

Some may point to the fact that I was a strong MDC activist especially during my days at the University of Zimbabwe. My response is that, at that time MDC seemed to be on course to revolutionise the way business was done in Zimbabwe. It had always been my hope that it was going to realize its faults and mend them. Unfortunately along time these faults became cracks and allowed selfish elements to take control of the struggle albeit with undesirable consequences.

In an effort to give clarity to those who may be in doubt: The Worker and The Boss were housed together in MDC. It is common knowledge that the primary enemy of the worker is the boss. The food riots in 1998 were a demonstration against the poor working and living conditions of the worker in as much as it was a demonstration against the government. The Worker brought numbers while the Boss brought finances to the movement. The question was always going to be how MDC was going to manage this uncomfortable alliance to its advantage. The worker made all the dirty work, the Student made all the noise against privatization of education but on the policy document of MDC appeared anti-worker policies and pro-privatisation policies.

MDC failed to clearly state its position regarding the redistribution of land going only as far as saying it would not accept the pre-2000 situation nor the current situation. This was a testimony of its willingness to appease both the peasant and the former white farmer. Our expectation as landless peasants was that our party would advance clearly our interests unfortunately it seemed as if our importance would only be noticed when they come around looking for our votes.

We have seen however how the The Boss has used his financial muscle to wrestle power from the once vibrant Worker. It is the unwillingness of The Boss to partake in actions that may result in his loss that made the Mass Actions lose luster. It was the The Boss who betrayed the students when on 2 June 2003 instead of joining, rather chose to chicken out of the Final Push. It was The Boss who led to the split in the party, once upon a time when we had no cent we were one family. We never asked for money when duty called but slowly Mr Boss brought in the culture of mercenarism and loyalism. We began to live with warlords amongst ourselves whose word was final and any divergent view met with thorough bashing. Ask Peter Guhu who was almost thrown from the sixth floor of the Harvest House.

Today people celebrate the Government of National Unity as if it is a creation meant to serve them. What they fail to see is that, both MDC and ZANU PF are simply two evils in search of one another in the midst of darkness. ZANU PF is still the same machinery that killed thousands in Matebeleland, it is the same machinery whose hands are dripping with raw blood of our gallant comrades whose only wish was to be people amongst other people- Lookout Masuku, Solo Maimbodei, Zororo Duri, Talent Mabika, Batanai Hadzizi, Learnmore Jongwe and many more whose names are engraved in our virtual roll of honour. MDC is no longer the party that we cherished in the early years of this decade, it has become a party where the fundraiser is more important than the one in the trenches. A party whose leadership claims to care about us but does the opposite in return.

The GNU was formed to divert the attention of the people from the core of their problems. It was formed because both MDC and ZANU PF realized that people were beginning to question the authenticity of their claims that they cared about them. We all know that these two slave-masters have been fighting for supremacy whose measure could only be from the number of people they have managed to hoodwink. And here they were risking rejection from the same people. My prayers go to Morgan Tsvangirai, he could be genuine but Mr Boss has his leashes on him.

Wait and see the contents of the Constitution!

Some of us pushed for the two to form a GNU simply because we felt they both needed to take responsibility of rebuilding what they had both helped to destroy. I am happy that they are discovering how hard it is to rebuild Zimbabwe. Next time they will act responsibly.

I have tried to explain why MDC faltered. There is no way that it can still be revamped because Mr Boss has all the strings tied to his pockets. The only alternative is to build another movement that has clearer terms of interaction between conflicting entities. Mr Boss cannot be allowed to dictate nor lead a movement whose goal is seek the emancipation of the Worker. The Feudal Lord cannot lead a movement whose intention is to seek the empowerment of the Peasant. They are not us. They do not know what we have gone through. They do not identify with our tribulations. Our problems are but comfort under their beds. We need a movement that maintains its independence even in the face of financial temptations.

Mr Boss can help on his own will but knowing fully well that his help is not a passport to having his ideas getting priority. If Mr Boss has his own struggles, he should know that we are not prepared to fight on his behalf. If we are fighting the same enemy that does not necessarily make us friends but alliances can be built specifically to tackle a specific problem. In the process of forming alliances however Mr Boss should know that we would however not compromise our ultimate goal – to emancipate ourselves. Where we feel that he is an impediment to our progress, we will then not hesitate to confront him too, head-on. The choice is his.

Building such a movement is not an easy task but it is possible. The most important part of such an exercise is building an understanding of what Freedom is. In this regard Education becomes the pillar of our struggle. People should be able to understand that our struggle goes beyond the right to vote, is a struggle for our lives. Fortunately, the many brilliant heads in our movement have been working on how best to educate each other. The result has been the crafting of the Zimist Manifesto which clearly articulates our ideas.

Since its formation in January 2007, Zimbabwe Youth Movement has managed to show the world that a movement of genuinely committed people does not necessarily need donor aid to be effective. We have managed to build the movement into a genuinely independent platform where the youths of Zimbabwe can openly interact and explore their political beliefs without fear of reprisals.

We are where we are today due to commitment and selflessness. There are many comrades in our movement who sacrificed their stomachs simply to be able to board a bus to Chitungwiza to organize the movement there. We have many who have been arrested for volunteering to assist the movement as far as Shurugwi. This is the fabric that builds a true movement. It will be a great disappointment if the future leadership of ZYM shall choose to ignore such selfless comrades in our struggle.

At this point in time, given the overwhelming response that we have gotten from our membership in and outside the country, it will not be an overstatement if I conclude that one day- not so faraway from today- Zimbabwe shall wake up to a new generation of people that is willing to confront the devil head-on. They say the most dangerous man is one with an IDEA and a CONVICTION!

Freeman Forward Chari
Secretary General
Zimbabwe Youth Movement

ZIMISM: Another foundation for our thrust on the New Constitution

2009-07-09T12:25:00.000-07:00

PRINCIPLES OF ZIMISM

Zimism is founded based upon the following principles:

1) Zimbabwe is a sovereign state whose independence shall never be tempered

- The Mutapa, Rozvi and Ndebele states build the foundations of Zimbabwe today
- Colonialism is an unfortunate incident in our history but we have forgiven each other, it is our responsibility now to build a Zimbabwe without a colour bar.
- Many were sacrificed and many sacrificed themselves in the hope of a free and independent Zimbabwe and we should never forget this.
- Nobody owns the freedom of Zimbabwe but every Zimbabwean has an obligation to protect it.
- A Zimbabwean will always be a Zimbabwean and nothing can take that away from him.
- We believe in Western technology but maintaining Zimbabwean dominion.
- Zimbabwe is our country we shall not want

2) Zimbabwe comes first, Africa second and the world third
- We are Zimbabweans, we are Africans and we are also human beings
- We believe in the unity of Zimbabweans, Africans and all human beings
- For anything that Zimbabwe produce let it be for Zimbabweans, if we have in abundance let it be shared with Africa, if Africa has had enough then let it be for the whole world.
- Africa cannot be united at atomic level rather unity of Zimbabweans coupled with the unity of other African states makes it easier for universal Pan-Africanism. So seek yeh first the unity of your nations and everything else shall follow!

3) Zimbabwe is for Zimbabweans and everyone else is a brother
- The destiny of Zimbabwe is in the hands of Zimbabweans
- The fate of Zimbabwe should be churned by Zimbabweans, anyone else who meddles in it is an enemy of the people of Zimbabwe
- It is only by invitation that brothers may come in and mediate, other than that Zimbabwe remains for those who love Zimbabwe!

4) Zimbabwe is Zimbabwe by virtue of its boundaries, history and culture
- We respect the sovereignty of our country and that of other nations
- We have a history as a people and we respect that history
- We have a culture as a people and we will continue to observe such without fear of victimization whatsoever.
- We shall speak our languages anywhere in Zimbabwe and nobody can deny us that.
5) The voice of the people of Zimbabwe is the voice of God.
- We speak peace, love and harmony
- We speak justice
- We speak the truth
- Our God is a God of Peace, Love and Harmony
- Our God is Truthful and is Just
- So when the people of Zimbabwe speak it is the voice of God speaking, it should be respected by all mortals!

What type of government do we need?

1) The government should be a reflection of the wishes and aspirations of the people of Zimbabwe
2) The government should be a true representative of the people of Zimbabwe
3) The government should be one that is directly accountable and answerable to the people of Zimbabwe
4) The government should be elected by popular vote
5) The government should be appointed by the people and be removable by the wishes of the people.

What type of governance do we need?

If the government of Zimbabwe is defined within the above confines, then how should it govern the country

- The distribution of Zimbabwean resources should be a true reflection of the demographic distribution of the people of Zimbabwe. (More resources should go to where more people are settled.)
- Priority should be given to uplifting the lives of the majority of the people of Zimbabwe. In this respect, the government should give priority to provision of basic needs before thinking of profit.
- The transactions of the government with the people of Zimbabwe should not be aimed at making profit but to provide for them- profit comes from foreign interactions.
- It is the obligation of the government to ensure the protection of the poor from the machinations of the rich.
- The government should have an obligation to reduce the gap between the rich and the poor.
- The government should only be a trustee and steering committee to administer the country’s resources and diligently and impartially distribute them to the people in a manner transparent and acceptable to the people.

The seven policies we need

- One man one vote
- Multiparty democracy
- Free education
- Free health
- Free access to land
- Equal access to employment
- Workers should benefit from their labor.

How would the government implement these?

One man One vote

- There would be representation of the people from the village committee up to the national structures.
- The parliament should be made up of people chosen by the people of a given constituency
- The drawing up of constituencies should be based upon the following
• Common neighborhood
• Common lifestyle
• Common welfare
• Common beliefs
- Elections are run by an independent commission that is funded from the coffers of the government and made up of respectable people/individuals of good moral and social standing. All classes of people should be represented and the choices should be endorsed by the people through their representatives at microcosm level.
- Every man’s vote would be counted as equal to everybody else’s.
- Representation of the people would be ultimate and by popular vote, this would mean;
• A minimum of 66.6% of the electorate should vote in any election; if less than that this number turns out for any election, then the result would be null and void a rerun would be done after further education and lobbying of the electorate.
• The winner of an election should be a convincing representative of the people of his constituency. In this case he/she should garner more than 50% of the cast votes. If there is no one with a simple majority then the elections should be rerun between the top two representatives.

Multiparty Democracy

- There would be no repression or suppression of political views, ideas or beliefs in which every citizen would be allowed to participate politically in any national agenda as allowed by agreed laws of the country.
- Every party would be granted equal access to state facilities like media, security etc
- Every party would be allowed unreserved access to the people as is acceptable by commonly agreed laws of the country.
- Every party would be allowed access to state resources based upon the percentage of the electorate it represents.

Free education

- there would be free access to basic education
- free in the sense that the government would mandated to add value to the country’s natural resources, in return it would use such profits to meet the cost of education.
- the government would subsidize secondary and tertiary education, the amount of subsidy should be such that every child who wishes to continue with education would do so without stress.

Free health

- There would be free access to health facilities
- Every person would be granted specialized health care at a cost that would be sustained by the government of Zimbabwe. ( Every Zimbabwean has a right to the resources of the country, when the government sells the country’s gold; there is a percentage of it for everybody thus this percentage should go towards sustaining the livelihoods of the people of the country)

Free access to land

- Every Zimbabwean citizen would have access to land depending on the type of lifestyle of that person. In this regard, those in the urban areas would be given building stands free of charge, which shall be theirs and for their families. Those in rural areas whose life is sustained by agricultural activities would be given land to farm on reasonably fertile lands which can sustain them and the nation too.
- The purpose of the government is to oversee that the land is equitably distributed based upon need and to ensure that no one owns benefits at the expense of others.
- Commercial agriculture would be encouraged and the lands reserved for such would not be interfered with in the process of land redistribution.

Equal access to employment

- Every Zimbabwean who has reached the age of majority and wishes to be employed would be employed based upon his/her ability and qualifications.
- People of the same qualifications would have equal opportunity for any job.
- People doing the same job at the same establishment with the same qualifications would be entitled to the same treatment.

Workers should benefit from their labor

- The government would put policies that ensure that workers benefit from the profits of their labor. This particularly includes:
• Gazetting from time to time realistic minimum wages in line with the costs of basic needs.
• Stipulating a certain percentage to be shared from every company’s annual profits by its workers.

- There would be laws enacted by common agreement to protect the workers from abuse and misuse.

How do we organize ourselves towards this type government?

- A movement of the people should be formed
- it is the responsibility of the intelligentsia of the society to strategize and educate the people on what needs to be done and why it is supposed to be done.
- The people should own the revolution and through public agreement choose their own leaders.
- The leadership of the movement should abide by strict conduct and seek to uphold the values and principles of the revolution
- Education is the greatest weapon against the facets of oppression; therefore in the anticipation of the revolution the movement should put more effort on educating the people of Zimbabwe.
- Every Zimbabwean has a responsibility to sustain the revolution.
- The power of persuasion rather than the power of coercion should be used in all the engagements of the Movement.
- Violence should not be tolerated within and without the movement: We have more to lose in hostility than in diplomatic engagement but ……...

Our guide to a democratic constitution: THE ZIMBABWE YOUTH CHARTER

2009-07-08T09:06:00.000-07:00

ZIMBABWE YOUTH CHARTER

GUIDED by The Universal Declaration of Human Rights,

DIRECTED by the vision, hopes and aspirations of the People of Zimbabwe,

ENCOURAGED by the basis of the resolution of the Heads of State and government during the 1999 Algiers Summit for the development of the Pan-African Charter,

UPHOLDING the values and ideals of the Zimbabwean tradition and history as the foundation of a truly Zimbabwean identity,

FULLY AWARE of the diversity of Zimbabwean cultures and their bearing to our unity as a people,

CONVINCED that because of perpetuity, the youths of Zimbabwe are the only sustainable resource in the fight for national development,

REAFFIRMING the need to take appropriate measures to promote and protect the rights and welfare of children as outlined in the Convention of the Rights of the Child (1989) and through the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (1999),

NOTING with concern the situation of Zimbabwean youths , many of whom are marginalized from mainstream society through inequalities in income, wealth and power, unemployment and underemployment, infected and affected by the HIV/AIDS pandemic, living in situations of poverty and hunger, experiencing illiteracy and poor quality educational systems, restricted access to health services and to information, exposure to violence including gender and political violence and experiencing various forms of discrimination.

RECALLING the United Nations World Programme of Action for Youth to the Year 2000 and beyond and the ten priority areas identified for youth (education,
employment, hunger and poverty, health, environment, drug abuse, juvenile
delinquency, leisure-time activities, girls and young women and youth participating in decision-making), and the five additional areas (HIV/AIDS, ICT, Inter-generational dialogue,..) adopted at the 2005 UN General assembly,

VALUEING the role played by youths in the struggle for independence

REITERATING that youths are the vanguard of independence and democracy in Zimbabwe ,
SALUTING the continual efforts by the youths in protecting the integrity of Zimbabwe as a democracy and as a sovereign state,

ENCOURAGED by the endeavours by African states to come up with a comprehensive African Youth Charter and noting the enshrinements in the African Youth Charter

ACKNOWLEDGING the increasing calls and the enthusiasm of youth to actively participate at local, national, regional and international levels to determine their own development and the advancement of society at large,

ACKNOWLEDGING ALSO the call in Bamako (2005) by the youth organisations
across Africa to empower youth by building their capacity, leadership, responsibilities and provide access to information such that they can take up their rightful place as active agents in decision-making and governance,

CONSIDERING that the promotion and protection of the rights of youth also implies the performance of duties by youth as by all other actors in society,

HAVE AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
DEFINITIONS

“Government”
shall mean the Government of Zimbabwe
“Charter”
shall mean the Zimbabwe Youth Charter
“Diaspora”
shall mean people of Zimbabwean descent and heritage living outside
the country.
“Minors”
shall mean young people below the age of 14

“Youth”
For the purposes of this Charter, youth or young people shall
refer to every person between the ages of 14 and 35 years.

PART 1: RIGHTS AND DUTIES
Article 1: Obligation of The Government of Zimbabwe
1.
The Government of Zimbabwe shall recognize the rights, freedoms and duties enshrined in this Charter.
2.
The Government of Zimbabwe shall undertake the necessary steps, in accordance with Constitution to adopt such legislative or other measures that may be necessary to give effect to the provisions of the Charter.

Article 2: Non-discrimination
1.
Every young person shall be entitled to the enjoyments of the rights and freedoms recognized and guaranteed in this Charter irrespective of their race, ethnic group, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, fortune, birth or other status.
2.
The Government of Zimbabwe shall take appropriate measures to ensure that youth are protected against all forms of discrimination on the basis of status, activities, expressed opinions or beliefs.
3.
The Government of Zimbabwe recognize the rights of Young people from ethnic, religious and linguistic marginalized groups to enjoy their own culture, freely practice their own religion or to use their own language in community with other members of their group.

Article 3: Freedom of Movement
Every young person has the right to leave the country and to return to safely into country.

Article 4: Freedom of Expression
1.
Every young person shall be guaranteed the right to express his or her ideas and opinions freely in all matters and to disseminate his or her ideas and opinions subject to the restrictions as are prescribed by laws.
2.
Every young person shall have the freedom to seek, receive and disseminate information and ideas of all kinds, either orally, in writing, in print, in the form of art or through any media of the young person’s choice subject to the restrictions as are prescribed by laws.

Article 5: Freedom of Association
1.
Every young person shall have the right to free association and freedom of peaceful assembly in conformity with the law.
2.
Young people shall not be compelled to belong to an association.

Article 6: Freedom of Thought, Conscience and Religion
Every young person shall have the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.

Article 7: Protection of Private Life
No young person shall be subject to the arbitrary or unlawful interference with his/her privacy, residence or correspondence, or to attacks upon his/her honour or reputation.

Article 8: Protection of the Family
1.
The family, as the most basic social institution, shall enjoy the full protection and support of The Government of Zimbabwe for its establishment and development.
2.
Young men and women of full age who enter into marriage shall do so based on their free consent and shall enjoy equal rights and responsibilities.

Article 9: Property
1.
Every young person shall have the right to own and to inherit property.
2.
Young men and young women shall enjoy equal rights to own property.
3.
The Government of Zimbabwe shall ensure that youths are not arbitrarily deprived of their property including inherited property.
Article 10: Development
1.
Every young person shall have the right to social, economic, political and cultural development with due regard to their freedom and identity and in equal enjoyment of the common heritage of mankind.
2.
The Government of Zimbabwe shall ensure that the economic development of the country is equally reflected by the growth of the youths, in this regard the government shall undertake to assist in the empowerment of youths through provisions of grants, loans and other facilities aimed at improving the lives of the youths.
3)
The Government of Zimbabwe shall provide access to information and education and training for young people to learn their rights and responsibilities, to be schooled in democratic processes, citizenship, decision-making, governance and leadership such that they develop the technical skills and confidence to participate in these processes
4)
The Government of Zimbabwe shall not adopt extremist economic policies that compromise the development of youths
5)
Nationalisation of natural resources shall have a fair share for the youth.

Article 11:Youth Participation
1.
Every young person shall have the right to participate in all spheres of society.
2.
The Government of Zimbabwe shall take the following measures to promote active youth participation in society:
In this respect it shall:
a)
Guarantee the participation of youth in parliament and other decision-making bodies in accordance with the prescribed laws; more importantly it shall ensure that:
i)
there is a parliamentary youth committee specifically dealing with issues of that concern the youth of Zimbabwe .
ii)
The minister responsible for youth affairs be a youth below the age of 35 years by the date of appointment.
iii)
Every ministry have a youth office dealing specifically with youth issues pertaining to the duties of such ministry.
b)
Facilitate the creation or strengthening of platforms for youth participation in decision-making at local, national, regional, and continental levels of governance;
c)
Ensure equal access to young men and young women to participate in decision-making and in fulfilling civic duties;
d)
Provide access to information such that young people become aware of their rights and of opportunities to participate in decision-making and civic life;
e)
Provide technical and financial support to build the institutional capacity of youth organisations;
f)
Institute policy and programmes of youth voluntarism at local, national, regional and international levels as an important form of youth participation and as a means of peer-to-peer training.
g)
Include representatives as part of delegations to ordinary sessions and other relevant meetings to broaden channels of communication and enhance the discussion of youth related issues.

Article 12: National Youth Policy
The Government of Zimbabwe shall develop a comprehensive and coherent national youth policy.

a)
The policy shall be cross-sectoral in nature considering the inter-relatedness of the challenges facing young people;
b)
The policy should identify challenges facing youths and should articulate mechanism of addressing such.
c)
The policy shall advocate equal opportunities for young men and for
young women;
d)
The policy shall be adopted by parliament and enacted into law;

Article 13: Education and Skills Development

1.
Every young person shall have the right to education of good quality.
2.
The Government of Zimbabwe shall take all appropriate measures with a view to achieving full realisation of this right and shall, in particular:
a)
Provide free and compulsory basic education and take steps to minimise the indirect costs of education;
b)
Make all forms of secondary education more readily available and accessible by all possible means including progressively free;
c)
Take steps to encourage regular school attendance and reduce drop-out rates;
d)
Strengthen participation in and the quality of training in science and technology;
e)
Revitalise vocational education and training relevant to current and prospective employment opportunities and expand access by developing centres in rural and remote areas;
f)
Make higher education equally accessible to all including establishing distance learning centres of excellence;
g)
Avail multiple access points for education and skills development including opportunities outside of mainstream educational institutions e.g., workplace skills development, distance learning, adult literacy and national youth service programmes;
h)
Ensure, where applicable, that girls and young women who become pregnant or married before completing their education shall have the opportunity to continue their education;
i)
Allocate resources to upgrade the quality of education delivered and ensure that it is relevant to the needs of contemporary society and engenders critical thinking rather than rote learning;
j)
Adopt pedagogy that incorporates the benefits of and trains young people in the use of modern information and communication technology such that youth are better prepared for the world of work;
k)
Encourage youth participation in community work as part of education to build a sense of civic duty;
l)
Introduce scholarship and bursary programmes to encourage entry into post-primary school education and into higher education outstanding youth from disadvantaged communities, especially young girls;
m)
Establish and encourage participation of all young men and young women in sport, cultural and recreational activities as part of holistic development;
n)
Promote culturally appropriate, age specific sexuality and responsible parenthood education

3.
The value of multiple forms of education, including formal, non-formal,
informal, distance learning and life-long learning, to meet the diverse needs of
young people shall be embraced.
4.
The education of young people shall be directed to:
a)
The promotion and holistic development of the young person¢s cognitive
and creative and emotional abilities to their full potential;
b)
Fostering respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms as set
out in the provisions of the various African human and people's rights
and international human rights declarations and conventions;
c)
Preparing young people for responsible lives in free societies that
promote peace, understanding, tolerance, dialogue, mutual respect and
friendship among all nations and across all groupings of people;
d)
The preservation and strengthening of positive African morals,
traditional values and cultures and the development of national and
African identity and pride;
e)
The development of respect for the environment and natural resources;
f)
The development of life skills to function effectively in society and
include issues such as HIV/AIDS, reproductive health, substance abuse
prevention and cultural practices that are harmful to the health of young
girls and women as part of the education curricula;
g)
The promotion of patriotism and cherishment of our history as said orally, written or depicted in other forms.

Article 14: Sustainable Livelihoods and Youth Employment
1.
Every young person shall have the right to gainful employment.
2.
Every young person shall have the right to be protected from economic exploitation and from performing work that is likely to be hazardous to or interfere with the young person's education, or to be harmful to the young person's health or holistic development.
3.
The Government of Zimbabwe shall address and ensure the availability of accurate data on youth employment, unemployment and underemployment so as to facilitate the prioritisation of the issue in National development programmes complemented by clear programmes to address unemployment;

4.
The Government of Zimbabwe shall take all appropriate measures with a view to achieving full realisation of this right to gainful employment and shall in particular:
a)
Ensure equal access to employment and equal pay for equal work or equal value of work and offer protection against discrimination regardless of ethnicity, race, gender, disability, religion, political, social, cultural or economic background;
b)
Develop macroeconomic policies that focus on job creation particularly for young and for young women;
c)
Develop measures to regulate the informal economy to prevent unfair labour practices where the majority of youth work;
d)
Foster greater linkages between the labour market and the education and training system to ensure that curricula are aligned to the needs of the labour market and that youth are being trained in fields where employment opportunities are available or are growing;
e)
Institute incentive schemes for employers to invest in the skills development of employed and unemployed youth;

Article 15: Health

1.
Every young person shall have the right to enjoy the best attainable state of physical, mental and spiritual health.
2.
The Government of Zimbabwe shall undertake to pursue the full implementation of this right and in particular shall take measures to:
a)
Ensure free access to secondary health.
b)
Avail subsidised post-natal, infant and child health care, in this respect it shall undertake to;
i)
Provide free immunisation to infants and children against infectious diseases
ii)
Provide subsidised nourishment to all infants and children up to the age of seven years.
c)
Make available equitable and ready access to medical assistance and health care especially in rural and poor urban areas with an emphasis on the development of primary health care;
d)
Secure the full involvement of youth in identifying their reproductive and health needs and designing programmes that respond to these needs with special attention to vulnerable and disadvantaged youth
e)
Provide access to youth friendly reproductive health services including contraceptives, antenatal and post natal services;

f)
Institute programmes to address health pandemics in Africa such as HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria;
g)
Institute comprehensive programmes to prevent the transmission of sexually transmitted infections and HIV/AIDS by providing education, information, communication and awareness creation as well as making protective measures and reproductive health services available;
h)
Expand the availability and encourage the uptake of voluntary counselling and confidential testing for HIV/AIDS;
i)
Provide timely access to treatment for young people infected with HIV/AIDS including prevention of mother to child transmission, post rape prophylaxis, and anti-retroviral therapy and creation of health services specific for young people;
j)
Provide food security for people living with HIV/AIDS;
k)
Institute comprehensive programmes including legislative steps to prevent unsafe abortions;
l)
Raise awareness amongst youth on the dangers of drug abuse through partnerships with youth, youth organisations and the community;
m)
Provide rehabilitation for young people abusing drugs such that they can be re-integrated into social and economic life;
n)
Provide technical and financial support to build the institutional capacity of youth organisations to address public health concerns including issues concerning youth with disabilities and young people married at an early age.

Article 16: Peace and Security
1.
In view of the important role of youth in promoting peace and non-violence and the lasting physical and psychological scars that result from involvement in violence, armed conflict and war, The Government of Zimbabwe shall:
a)
Strengthen the capacity of young people and youth organisations in peace building, conflict prevention and conflict resolution through the promotion of intercultural learning, civic education, tolerance, human rights education and democracy, mutual respect for cultural, ethnic and religious diversity, the importance of dialogue and cooperation, responsibility, solidarity and international cooperation;
b)
Institute mechanisms to promote a culture of peace and tolerance amongst young people that discourages their participation in acts of violence, terrorism, xenophobia, racial discrimination, gender-based discrimination, foreign occupation and trafficking in arms and drugs;
c)
Institute education to promote a culture of peace and dialogue in all schools and training centres at all levels;
d)
Condemn armed conflict and prevent the participation, involvement, recruitment and sexual slavery of young people in armed conflict;
2.
The Government of Zimbabwe shall ensure the protection of the youth against the ideology of genocide.

Article 17: Law Enforcement
1.
Every young person accused or found guilty of having infringed the penal law shall have the right to be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person.
2.
The Government of Zimbabwe shall in particular:
a)
Ensure that youth who are detained or imprisoned or in rehabilitation centres are not subjected to torture, inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment;
b)
Ensure that accused minors shall be segregated from convicted persons and shall be subject to separate treatment appropriate to their status;
c)
Build rehabilitation facilities for accused and imprisoned youth who are still minors and house them separately from adults;
d)
Provide induction programmes for imprisoned youth that are based on reformation, social rehabilitation and re-integration into family life;
e)
Make provisions for the continued education and skills development of imprisoned young people as part of the restorative justice process.
f)
Ensure that accused and convicted young people are entitled to a lawyer.

Article 18: Sustainable Development and Protection of the Environment
1.
The Government of Zimbabwe shall ensure the use of sustainable methods to improve the lives of young people such that measures instituted do not jeopardise opportunities for future generations.
2.
Encourage the media, youth organisations, in partnership with national and international organisations, to produce, exchange and disseminate information on environmental preservation and best practices to protect the environment;
3.
Support youth organisations in instituting programmes that encourage environmental preservation such as waste reduction, recycling and tree planting programmes;

Article 19: Access to Land
1.
The Government of Zimbabwe shall ensure equal access to land for all youth regardless race, ethnic group, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, fortune, birth or other status.
2.
The Government of Zimbabwe shall in particular;
a)
Set aside national lands which shall be made available for lease to youths willing to undertake agricultural activities.
b)
Set up facilities to assist youth start agricultural projects, these may include grants, loans or assistance in the form of materials or implements
c)
Ensure that for any farms acquired for resettlement, fifty percent of the beneficiaries be youths

3)
With respect to the Land reform programme the government should undertake to;
a)
Set up an audit of the Agrarian reform programme
b)
Gazette farms to be redistributed to the landless people
c)
Set up an Independent Agrarian Reform Board with a full youth voice to oversee a well-managed redistribution
4)
The Government of Zimbabwe shall ensure that in the process of land redistribution it does not jeopardise opportunities for future generations, in particular it shall
a)
Set aside land for future use which may in the mean time be leased to the current youths
b)
Give specific timeframes of lease to the current beneficiaries of the land redistribution so that at the expiry of such, other people; particularly the youths of the day may benefit also.

Article 20: Youth and Culture
1.
The Government of Zimbabwe shall take the following steps to promote and protect the morals and traditional values recognised by the community:
a)
Eliminate all traditional practices that undermine the physical integrity and dignity of women;
b)
Recognise and value beliefs and traditional practices that contribute to development;
c)
Establish institutions and programmes for the development, documentation, preservation and dissemination of culture;
d)
Work with educational institutions, youth organisations, the media and other partners to raise awareness of and teach and inform young people about youth culture, values and indigenous knowledge;
e)
Harness the creativity of youth to promote local cultural values and traditions by representing them in a format acceptable to youth and in a language and in forms to which youth are able to relate;
f)
Introduce and intensify teaching in Zimbabwean languages in all forms of education as a means to accelerate economic, social, political and cultural development;
g)
Promote inter-cultural awareness by organising exchange programmes between young people and youth organisations within Africa and across the globe.

Article 21: Youth in the Diaspora
The Government of Zimbabwe shall recognise the right of young people to live anywhere in the world. In this regard, it shall;
a)
Promote and protect the rights of young people living in the Diaspora, in particular
i) All Zimbabwean youths in the Diaspora above the age of 18 shall be granted the suffrage right in any election to which they are duly registered.
b)
Establish structures that encourage and assist the youth in the Diaspora to return to and fully re-integrate into the social and economic life in Zimbabwe;
c)
Promote and protect the rights of young people living in the Diaspora;
d)
Encourage young people in the Diaspora to engage themselves in development activities in Zimbabwe.
e)
Government shall have development plan agreement with host nations to integrate youth in Diaspora.
f)
Government through its Embassies shall have an obligation to undertake educational and cultural activities to remind the youth of their culture and African history.

Article 22: Leisure, Recreation, Sportive and Cultural Activities
1.
Young people shall have the right to rest and leisure and to engage in play and recreational activities that are part of a health lifestyle as well as to participate freely in sport, physical education drama, the arts, music and other forms of cultural life. In this regard, The Government of Zimbabwe shall;
a)
Make provision for equal access for young men and young women to sport, physical education, cultural, artistic, recreational and leisure activities;

b)
Put in place adequate infrastructure and services in rural and urban areas for youth to participate in sport, physical education, cultural, artistic, recreational and leisure activities.

Article 23: Girls and Young Women
The Government of Zimbabwe shall acknowledge the need to eliminate discrimination against girls and young women according to obligations stipulated in various international, regional and national human rights conventions and instruments designed to protect and promote women’s rights. In this regard, they shall:
a)
Introduce legislative measures that eliminate all forms of discrimination against girls and young women and ensure their human rights and fundamental freedoms;
b)
Ensure that girls and young women are able to participate actively, equally and effectively with boys at all levels of social, educational, economic, political, cultural, civic life and leadership as well as scientific endeavours;
c)
Institute programmes to make girls and young women aware of their rights and of opportunities to participate as equal members of society;
d)
Guarantee universal and equal access to and completion of secondary education;
e)
Provide educational systems that do not impede girls and young women, including married and/or pregnant young women, from attending;
f)
Take steps to provide equal access to health care services and nutrition for girls and young women;
g)
Protect girls and young women from economic exploitation and from performing work that is hazardous, takes them away from education or that is harmful to their mental or physical health;
h)
Offer equal access to young women to employment and promote their participation in all sectors of employment;
i)
Enact and enforce legislation that protect girls and young women from all forms of violence, genital mutilation, incest, rape, sexual abuse, sexual exploitation, trafficking, prostitution and pornography;
k)
Develop programmes of action that provide legal, physical and psychological support to girls and young women who have been subjected to violence and abuse such that they can fully re-integrate into social and economic life;
l)
Secure the right for young women to maternity leave.

Article 24: Mentally and Physically Challenged Youth
1.
The Government of Zimbabwe shall recognise the right of mentally and physically challenged youth to special care and shall ensure that they have equal and effective access to education, training, health care services, employment, sport, physical education and cultural and recreational activities.
2.
The Government of Zimbabwe shall work towards eliminating any obstacles that may have negative implications for the full integration of mentally and physically challenged youth into society including the provision of appropriate infrastructure and services to facilitate easy mobility.

3.
The Government of Zimbabwe shall take appropriate measures to make every Zimbabwean learn sign language especially at basic level for easy of communication.

Article 25: Elimination of Harmful Social and Cultural Practices
The Government of Zimbabwe shall take all appropriate steps to eliminate harmful social and cultural practices that affect the welfare and dignity of youth, in particular;
a)
Customs and practices that harm the health, life or dignity of the youth;
b)
Customs and practices discriminatory to youth on the basis of gender, age or other status.

Article 26: Responsibilities of Youth
Every young person shall have responsibilities towards his family and society, the State, and the international community. Youth shall have the duty to:
a)
Become the custodians of their own development;
b)
Protect and work for family life and cohesion;
c)
Have full respect for parents and elders and assist them anytime in cases of need in the context of positive Zimbabwean values;
d)
Partake fully in citizenship duties including voting, decision making and governance;
e)
Engage in peer-to-peer education to promote youth development in areas such as literacy, use of information and communication technology, HIV/AIDS prevention, violence prevention and peace
building;
f)
Contribute to the promotion of the economic development of Zimbabwe and Africa by placing their physical and intellectual abilities at its service;
g)
Espouse an honest work ethic and reject and expose corruption;
h)
Work towards a society free from substance abuse, violence, coercion, crime, degradation, exploitation and intimidation;
i)
Promote tolerance, understanding, dialogue, consultation and respect for others regardless of age, race, ethnicity, colour, gender, ability, religion, status or political affiliation;

j)
Defend democracy, the rule of law and all human rights and fundamental freedoms;
k)
Encourage a culture of voluntarism and human rights protection as well as participation in civil society activities;
l)
Promote patriotism towards and unity and cohesion of Africa ;
m)
Promote, preserve and respect African traditions and cultural heritage and pass on this legacy to future generations;
n)
Become the vanguard of re-presenting cultural heritage in languages and in forms to which youth are able to relate;
o)
Protect the environment and conserve nature.

Article 27: Popularization of the Charter
The Government of Zimbabwe shall have the duty to promote and ensure through teaching, education and publication, the respect of rights, responsibilities and freedoms contained in the present Charter and to see to it that these freedoms, rights and responsibilities as well as corresponding obligations and duties are understood.

Article 28: Duties of The Government of Zimbabwe
The Government of Zimbabwe shall ensure that all Parties respect the commitments made and fulfil the duties outlined in the present Charter by;
a)
Collaborating with governmental establishments, non-governmental institutions and developmental partners to identify best practices on youth policy formulation and implementation and encouraging the adaptation of principles and experiences among States Parties;
b)
Instituting measures to create awareness of its activities and make information on its activities more readily available and accessible to youth;
c)
Facilitating exchange and co-operation between youth organisations across national borders in order to develop regional youth solidarity, political consciousness and democratic participation.

PART 2: FINAL PROVISIONS

Article 29: Savings clause
Nothing in this Charter shall be taken as minimising higher standards and values contained in other relevant human rights instruments ratified by Zimbabwe or rational law or policies.

Article 30: Signature, Ratification or Adherence
1.
The present Charter shall be open to signature by the Government of Zimbabwe. The Present Charter shall be subject to ratification or accession by the Parliament of Zimbabwe.
.
Article 31: Amendment and Revision of the Charter
1.
The present may be amended or revised if any member of the Zimbabwe Youth Council makes a written request to that effect to the Parliament of Zimbabwe, provided that the proposed amendment is not submitted to the Parliament of Zimbabwe for consideration until all members of the Zimbabwe Youth Council have been duly notified of it.
2.
An amendment shall be approved by a simple majority of the Parliament of Zimbabwe. Such amendment shall come into force after it has been made public through the government gazette or any other form of media deemed to be accessible to the majority of the youths.

Prepared by: Zimbabwe Youth Movement
Free-Zim Youths
2007

Locating the role of the Diaspora in the struggle for a democratic Zimbabwe.

2009-07-01T13:46:00.000-07:00

After Morgan Tsvangirai was booed by his expatriate audience in the United Kingdom for calling on them to return home, there arose the need to identify the real role of the Diaspora in the struggle against the dictatorship in Zimbabwe.

The Movement for Democratic Change has grown so many tentacles that it now boasts of structures in all countries where Zimbabweans populate in large numbers like USA, UK, Canada and South Africa. This growth has come at a cost though: the South Africa branch was nearly brought down to its knees by allegations of tribalism while the UK branch had to be reconstituted after bickering.

There are numerous organisations in the Diaspora who claim to be fighting the against the Zimbabwe dictatorship. A number of coalitions have also been built within and outside Zimbabwe. There are also numerous newspapers and radio stations which operate from the Diaspora and have a huge followers within and outside Zimbabwe. Has the existence of all these entities added value to the struggle?

The strengths and weaknesses of the Diaspora.

Most of the people in the Diaspora have access to communication technologies that may still be out of reach for ordinary residents of Zimbabwe. These include Internet and mobile technology. These have assisted them in providing real-time, cross-sectional information about what is going on nationally and globally. This has allowed them to make informed decisions based on current trends and also to conveniently interact with one another without having to meet physically. We cannot therefore, ignore the role of the Diaspora in publicising the crisis in Zimbabwe and mobilising the international community to take a stance on the Zimbabwe regime.

There are many people in the Diaspora who are in formal employment. These people have ready access to finances which can be used to undertake programs that support the struggle. We have seen Zimbabweans contributing financially to the struggle. So the Diaspora remains a raw source of financial resources for the struggle.

What also makes the Diaspora fertile is the presence of intellectuals who are willing to tackle both the ideological and tactical challenges that the struggle faces. These are the people who can give a meaning and a vision to a feeling. It is also this intelligentsia that can shape the interaction between the resident fighter and the expatriate fighter.

The biggest limitation of the Diaspora is its inability to experience the struggle within Zimbabwe first-hand. They cannot tackle the Mugabe regime head-on. Firstly they are not able to vote, thus inline with the school of thought that favours democratic resistance; these people are not able to add value to the struggle because what counts at the end of the day is the number of votes that the pro-democratic forces garner. Secondly, they are not able to directly defend their fellows who may be in danger because what exists is a virtual link between the two fighters. Lastly, the Diaspora is not able to influence those who do not have access to technology.

Way forward

Having identified the strengths of the Diaspora, it can be extrapolated that their most strategic roles in this struggle involve publicity, fund-raising and advising. The execution of the struggle within Zimbabwe should therefore be left to those who are strategically placed to influence, participate and experience the action. This literally means those who are on the ground.

The Diaspora should continue to intensify the struggle by alerting the world to factual violations that are taking place in Zimbabwe. It should also continue to lobby amongst itself and other stakeholders to contribute financially towards the struggle. The finances should not be used to sustain organisations outside the country but to motivate the people in Zimbabwe. For example; people can contribute to meet tuition fees for expelled student leaders outside the country so that other students can feel the solidarity and come out to challenge the system.

Finally, disagreement within the pro-democratic family should not be ballooned extraordinarily as this tends to alienate other people from the struggle although their services would be valuable. Disagreement should be viewed positively as a way of building tolerance to diversity. In short, leadership within the Diaspora should seek to work together instead of competing for space!

Our ideas will die unless we challenge the capitalist syndicates running business the world over!

2009-06-09T15:02:00.000-07:00

One day I was watching a friend go through her Cisco simulations when something struck my head. She was drawing computers and routers trying to come up with something she called a network topology (whatever that is). When I asked what she was trying to do we ended up concluding that until there is a strategy to harness our brilliant ideas and transform them into action the poor will always be poor.

In an attempt to explain the concept of networking to me, she picked our internet connection. We pay our Internet Service Provider (ISP) and we also pay our telecoms provider for the line rental. Our ISP has a small network which we are also part of blah blah blah and here ended our original discussion but started another one which eventually inspired our realisation.

To access internet we pay an ISP, which in turn pays an upstream ISP for Internet access, this upstream ISP also pays another ISP which has a bigger network, which in turn pays another one and so continues the sequence until we reach a network that is called a Tier 1 carrier.

A Tier 1 carrier is one that connects through the entire internet without paying for that access. There are about ten of these truly Tier 1 networks in the whole world. They include Sprint , AT&T, Verizon, Level 3 Communications (L3), TeliaSonera, Quest and Global Crossing. All the Tier 1 carriers are headquartered in USA except Global Crossing (Bermuda), NTT (Japan) and TeliaSonera (Sweden).

This brings me to the core of our observation. When I visit Quick n Easy Internet Café in Harare I will pay $1 to access the internet. Quick n Easy would take a chunk and pass another to its ISP which will get a chunk and pass the other chunk to somebody who will pass to somebody. There is 70% chance that a chunk of my $1 will end up shoring the USA balance of payments.

To those who have tried to own a website they may know that for you to have one you need to have an internet domain name. Unless you want to use a country code top-level domain like .co.zw then one needs to pay domain registrar to register that domain. There are five notable registrars in the whole world, the biggest being GoDaddy in USA.

The point I am trying to drive here is that, the advances in sciences that we embrace entrench certain levels of monopoly of the economic space by the rich over the poor. The technological advances demand that there be a computer. One cannot use a computer unless he purchases an operating system like Windows which was developed by Microsoft- a USA company.

This scenario does not embrace innovation from the lower end of the consumer ladder. This is present in most business atmospheres where regulatory agencies are created to put stringent measures which do not only curtail innovation but serve to entrench the dominance of certain powerful entities in such markets.

I will give an example

There is a man in Zimbabwe who has struggled for the past ten years to have his helicopter- which he built from scratch- fly in Zimbabwe. The Zimbabwean authority CAAZ has denied him permission to test his invention calling the chopper unworthy to fly. Instead of CAAZ rewarding such determination and innovation, they choose to let him be an object of ridicule. I am of the opinion that, had he been given necessary support by now Zimbabwe would have been able to build its own helicopter, or maybe a tractor. I am sure if Daniel had been a Professor of Robotics from overseas he would have been allowed to try his chopper yet Bill Gates revolutionised the world despite being a school dropout!

Daniel Chingoma, has got a brilliant idea but does not have the financial capacity sustain his idea. Unless there is somebody who has the finances and is willing to support him, it is possibility that his chopper will never see the skies.

How many of us have got clear ideas but do not have the financial capacity to bring them into action?

I have always wanted to operate a Medical Laboratory that would have the capacity to diagnose such diseases like leukaemia and cancer in Zimbabwe. For the past four years I have been visiting banks and financial institutions within and without Zimbabwe. They all tell me that “Brilliant proposal now what collateral do you have?” I am just a 28 year old who does not even have a stand to build. So until I am able to amass wealth in immovable assets or am able to convince somebody with his houses to act as surety then this dream will die a stillbirth.

I work in a hospital, my salary even if I save it for ten years without eating anything it would never come near the amount needed to buy a BD FacsCalibur machine for such a laboratory.

Faced with these challenges one begins to think of how he can surmount them, and many ideas and scenarios fly across. As a Zimbabwean who has been denied access to loans because I do not have title deeds one option is to also go and grab land like what ZANU PF bigwigs are doing.

This is a rational idea given that if I stand in a queue with Munangagwa and Mr Hirtchkens (a white farmer with 200 hectares of land) both of them stand a better chance of accessing the loan despite the fact that they both would not have a legitimate claim to the land they would be using as collateral. So why not grab too?

Like in the well knit system of internet business, the sugar business has an upstream cascade that makes it difficult for me as a common man to be part of. Triangle Ltd owns the canals that carry water from Tokwane-Ngundu dam to its fields, it owns the sugar milling company and has big claims in the sugar refineries. Even if I get land in Nuanetsi Ranch, I would not be able to farm sugarcane unless if Triangle allows me to use its water. In the event that it allows me, I may not be able to sell the sugarcane to its milling company unless it allows me to. Otherwise I have to sell the canes to people at Ngundu Bus Terminus.

Under these circumstances why not violently seize a part of this chain and start playing a part? After all it is situations like these which necessitated revolutions in Russia and China.

Another option is to use our cumulative economic power to create a pool of resources which we can tap into if one of us has an idea that is worthy supporting. This is a concept that has been used by Indians much to their benefit. If I can save $5 and 1000 other people can do it every month. Each month we would be having $ 5 000 which can be invested. In a year we would be having a relatively large pool of capital. Unfortunately the circumstances that we find ourselves in make this even harder. My salary is break even. My employer gives me enough to feed my family, pay rent and school fees. Where will I get the extra cash without straining myself?

I can go on and on but the situation that we –the poor – find ourselves in demands that we radically shift our gaze from what we are made to believe is happening and takes a deep stare at the machinations below. Otherwise we are going to get poorer and poorer whilst the world seems to be developing.

As I retire to bed, I cannot help listening to Thomas Mapfumo’s munhu mutema. “Hona tingabhenga sei vamwe vakabhenga kare zvinotigumbura isu” (How can we bank when others banked a long time ago, it frustrates!)

Cdes, Gono must Go Today!

2009-06-01T11:47:00.000-07:00

I am not an economist but I have lived the years and I have seen crimes and criminal intentions in my society. Sanctions or no sanctions a man of integrity must act with morality and so was expected of Mr Gono but he fell short of it. For this and other crimes GONO must GO today!

Cdes and friends; Idi Amini is known to have been fascinated by watching how starving prisoners scrambled for crumps of bread that he threw at them. To him that was power, at the same time he felt he was doing good to them by at least feeding them. How dehumanising!

Our Gideon Gono like Idi Amini found joy in showing off his power. Do you remember how he made us scramble to the dust bins in search of coins which he had made obsolete only to wake up in the middle of the night and tell us they could now buy? He enjoyed the sight of our desperation from the comfort of his RBZ offices whilst we foraged through the stinking dumpsites. In his mind he could not hide the sarcasm; “Gono is our shepherd we shall not want!” How dehumanising!

Cdes and friends, we worked so hard just to put something in our mouths. We did not sleep. Our mothers broke their backs carrying food and wares to sell and make a living. We had legitimate money in the banks. Gono froze them. Why? Because he never wanted to see anyone who is not Mugabeish or Gonoish making a decent living? Gono the landlord!

Why did Gono lock our monies in the banks when it rightfully belonged to us? Will we ever get that money? I tell you, Gono took our money and bought his wife mansions and underwear, he then locked the figures in the bank so that they could be mowed by inflation. His intention was for the money to rot and lose value so that when ZANU PF eventually kills the Zimbabwe dollar, Mugabe and his cronies would not have any debt to clear. Gono fuelled inflation claiming he was fighting it!

Gono, the same Gono you call your governor sponsored the death of many innocent souls. He gave out farm implements to ZANU PF thugs under the guise of farm mechanisation simply to buy their solidarity and support. He fuelled the tensions and at the worst he ignited fires. Our brothers and sisters died because of this man’s shameless policies and adventures.

How many of our brothers and sisters who were making an honest living through gold panning and diamond-picking were killed at the behest Gono’s cabal? Yet some still defend him?

Sanctions or no sanctions Gono was not supposed to abuse his power. The power that he was given by Mugabe who had also stolen from us! Stolen power?

For these and other crimes Gideon Gono should be sacked, summoned before a court of law and barnished from society!

Leadership renewal still to be embraced in Zimbabwe's political culture

2009-05-23T15:04:00.000-07:00

Many of the problems that face Zimbabwe stem from the failure by ZANU-PF to cope with the demands of time. The call for change has reverberated across the whole world in different forms and manners but it all round off to a call for leadership renewal within the country. The world is in a dynamic state of continuous change which demands an innovative, industrious and wise leadership to harness and manage its products without being counter-productive. This demand has not spared the pro-change sector of the Zimbabwean society; unfortunately, the same proponents have been found wanting when their institutions come under the same challenge for change that they advocate for.

Robert Mugabe has been the sole occupant of the highest office in the land since independence. Time has demanded that there be separation of powers – he was found wanting mostly because there are certain interests that he could not sacrifice. Times demanded that there be a competent and knowledgeable cabinet – he was found wanting because he had a cocoon of loyalists which he had to appease for him to cling to power. Today we have people like Emmerson Munangagwa, Didymus Mutasa, Stan Mudenge and many more who have traversed through different ministries in the past 29 years despite glaring evidence of incompetence that they have exhibited. Had Mugabe left maybe his replacement could have been more able to cope with these demands than him.

Lovemore Madhuku, the current chairman of the National Constitutional Assembly took over the reigns from Morgan Tsvangirai. In 2006 when his two terms were up he called for the amendment of the constitution to allow him to stand for re-election after changing the length of the terms of office. Whilst NCA was formed out of a genuine desire to represent the interests of the people, the failure to cope with the demands of time again have eroded the posture of this institution. Today, it can be argued that it no longer commands the same follower-ship as it had in 2000.

The same crisis seems to be eroding the credibility and effectiveness of the International Socialist Organisation in Zimbabwe where Munyaradzi Gwisai has stayed at the helm of the institution for longer than necessary. Although ISO-Zim claims that Gwisai has never been in the highest office of the institution, it baffles the mind how he could have made authoritative statements on behalf of the organization if he was only a librarian. The scuffle in January 2009 that resulted in the arrest of some of the members only serves to affirm the need for leadership renewal at the institution.

Internationally, we can draw inspiration from the recent events in Botswana, Mozambique, Ghana, South Africa and the US. Public opinion is as fluid as the demand for change itself and a failure to read the trends might result in unprecedented consequences. Thabo Mbeki is a good example. He went to Polokwane with an intention to perpetuate his hegemony in ANC and he was embarrassed. South Africa has to thank its people’s impervious vigilance otherwise it could be wallowing in stagnation.

Locally, we have evidence of what renewal of leadership can bring to organisations. Although Mcdonald Lewanika is the founder co-ordinator of Students Solidarity Trust, he recently passed the baton to Masimba Nyamanhindi and it seems he has acquitted himself well. The same can be said of Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition and ZIMCODD.

This challenge also falls on the Movement for Democratic Change. Without clearly pointing out whether anybody has to leave or not, the demands of time may put a burden on the party to renew its leadership in line with the metamorphic demands of the present-day challenges. Chairman Chitepo co-opted Kumbirai Kangai, Josiah Tongogara and Rugare Gumbo into Dare ReChimuenga to specifically cater for contemporary demands.

In conclusion; when Dr Madhuku was confronted on the question of his extended stay at NCA, he said:
"You see, to some of us, the idea was not the amendment of the constitution. This was a strategy to continue the fight for a new democratic constitution. Someone can’t just come from nowhere and claim to be the leader of the NCA. That’s not possible."

Aldof Hitler in his book, Mein Kampf contends;
“For this reason it is necessary that a movement should, from the sheer instinct of self-preservation, close its lists to new membership the moment it becomes successful. And any further increase in its organization should be allowed to take place only with the most careful foresight and after a painstaking sifting of those who apply for membership. Only thus will it be possible to keep the kernel of the movement intact and fresh and sound. Care must be taken that the conduct of the movement is maintained exclusively in the hands of this original nucleus. This means that the nucleus must direct the propaganda which aims at securing general recognition for the movement.”

The question is; where are we headed for?

History is permanent but the future of Zimbabwe is in our hands

2009-04-18T07:03:00.000-07:00

I did not take part in the liberation war but my father did. He represents the burning desire of his generation to free Zimbabwe. He spent seven years dodging bullets in the Chiurwi mountains of Buhera, running through the marshy lands of Chivhu and nursing horrible injuries that today still bring trauma to him. All this in a hope for a free Zimbabwe. A Zimbabwe devoid of colour. A Zimbabwe of equal beings. A Zimbabwe that respects human rights. We celebrated the culmination of his efforts on 18 April 1980. That day will always be precious in our hearts.

He saw that something was not right and he was prepared to pay the ultimate price for the freedom of his country. A vision with an action can change the world. For this, I salute him. I salute him because at that time there were others who were as oppressed as he was but they chose not to do anything about it. To them the Rhodesian machinery was invincible. They represent the section in society that is willing to be subservient to injustices as long as they life is guaranteed. These are the enemies of change. We have them today in our society.

He is there in Tokwane-Ngundu, farming on his small plot at Village 8 that he was allocated in 1987 during the resettlement of people from Manyuchi Dam. He left Chibi Mission School where he was doing form three but the person he sat next to in class continued school until he graduated at the then University of Rhodesia. That person went on to become an officer in the Rhodesian Army. They were both conscripted into the Zimbabwe National Army in 1980, my father at a lower rank and him as a Captain.

So in 1980, the new Zimbabwe was rewarding those who did nothing about the freedom of the nation with better opportunities whilst those who fought had to struggle for the crumbs. That was the burden of managing a diverse society that the new government had to bear. My father decided to leave the army and become a nurse back in his home village in Chivi.

In 1994 I asked him what he was fighting for; he told me- freedom, one-man-one-vote and land. He felt free because he could now travel from Chivi to Harare without being asked to produce a pass. He could now kill his cow and not be expected to turn in the head at the District Assistant’s office as proof. He could now walk in First Street and he could stand in a queue in front of a white man without fear of prosecution.

He could now vote and his vote would count. Gone were the days when only Stanlake Samkange and Jasper Savanhu represented seven million Blacks whilst 60 000 whites had fourteen representatives in parliament. This made him satisfied.

His biggest worry was THE LAND. I remember one day in 1988, when we were in a bus to Triangle. We had travelled approximately forty kilometres of fenced land full of cows that were just loitering without anybody manning them. I asked him whose they were and he told me that they belonged Jackson. Who was Jackson? Why did he have so much land and so many cows? He just laughed and said “The time will come”.

In 1996, I was mature enough to understand the feelings that existed amongst those who had fought the liberation struggle. In 1979 Murray MacDougalls estates in Triangle belonged to Anglo American Corporation, in 1996 they still belonged to Anglo American Corporations. Jackson still had a farm in Gutu, another near Triangle and another in Beatrice.

He took me to the newly built Tokwane-Ngundu dam. We saw how big it is. He took me to Village 10 in Tokwane-Ngundu Resettlement area. A big canal carried water from Tokwane-Ngundu Dam to Triangle Estates and passed through that village. No one, even in the times of drought was allowed to fetch water from this big canal. The water was private!

At village 12, there is a gigantic powerline that I am told carries electricity from Hwange Power Station to Triangle Estates. People were moved to make way for this powerline. No one in the whole vicinity has ever benefited from this powerline. They sleep in darkness, walk kilometres in search of firewood yet thousands of electrons travel just above them.

This is not what my father fought for. My father fought for equal access to land, equal access to national resources, not that some capitalist master monopolises them because he has greater access and power!

So it is with background that in 1997; at my tender age of sixteen I supported unreservedly the re-allocation of land. To me, it represented the fulfilment of the dreams of freedom that my father and all those who had died in the struggle shared. I thought the government had the power to order those with multiple farms to vacate and the landless to occupy it.

There was no way that issue wasn’t going to be racial since very few blacks owned multiple farms. The only black that I knew who owned a very big farm was Joshua Nkomo because I had recited a poem for him on one of his visits to Nuanetsi ranch and had been told he owned a very big chunk inside that massive ranch. But I knew Jackson had three farms.

I supported the people of Svosve for their gallant efforts to force Mugabe’s government to do something about the Land Issue. This was the continuation of the struggle. When my father was given $50 000 in 1997, he gave me $2 000 to buy whatever I wanted. Because then the spirit of the struggle was also overwhelming me, I spend half of it on books like No easy Walk to Freedom (the earlier version of Long Walk to Freedom), Matigari, With the People. I started listening to Joseph Hill and Culture, Simon Chimbetu and Cde Chinx.

I was shocked to see the brutality that followed especially after the Constitutional Referendum in 2000. I witnessed the horrific deaths of Talent Mabika and Chiminya that year in Murambinda. I was at the scene of the accident since it was just two kilometres from my mother’s house. There were people like Konan’ale and Kitsiyatota who purported to be War veterans and went about beating people for not supporting ZANU PF. Konan’ale was just a violent rank-tout aged around thirty. He killed in the name of ZANU PF disguised as a war veteran.

The death of white farmers at the hands of purported war veterans could not be condoned. No life was that cheap. Mugabe allowed it because it served his interests. The blame however should go to war veterans themselves because they failed to rise and demand an end to the abuse of their name. Nevertheless, I forgive them because there were bigger powers at hand which were determined to kill and maim in the name of power.

Who could have guessed that Elliot Manyika never fought the liberation struggle? He was at the forefront, singing and beating. He had taken the liberation struggle to be himself. He grabbed land, he maimed and he brutalised. Elliot Manyika the clerk in the Rhodesian Ministry of Public Works became the champion of Chimurenga 3. What I ask is; where was he during Chimurenga 2?

Elliot Manyika had multiple farms when real war veterans had nothing. Elliot Manyika had many farms but the people who deserved land had nothing. But ask anybody he will tell you: War Veterans killed the country!

At one point I confronted my father on that issue, and all he said was; “the truth shall come out. Real freedom fighters don’t behave like that because each one of us made a covenant with the people and we used to sing it day and night- ‘Kune nzira dzemasoja, dzekuzvibata nadzo…’”

We all know the fact that Jabulani Sibanda is not a war veteran, Chinotimba never fought the liberation war, so did Border Gezi. But they claimed they fought the war.

So, today we commemorate 29 years after independence from Colonial rule; there are many things that we have seen that make us question whether we are free or not.

My father fought for freedom. Today we have draconian laws in our country that limit our freedoms. We can no longer criticize that which Mugabe does. We cannot express ourselves. We cannot choose for ourselves. We cannot have our own meetings without getting a pass from Mugabe! Is this freedom?

My father fought for one-man-one-vote. Today we have one vote and that vote belongs to Mugabe. Voting otherwise does not count. The bullet is mightier than the pen. So what does this independence mean?

My father fought for land. They took the land and shared it amongst themselves. Those who deserve it either do not have it or were resettled in the semi-arid lands of Chivhu which are only fit for cattle rearing. So what independence should we celebrate?

On this day we do not celebrate freedom from oppression, rather we celebrate the gallant sacrifice that the people who fought in the bushes offered for this nation. Lest we forget, many good-intentioned people died in the bushes, many were maimed, and many carry the cicatrices of horrific events during that struggle. They fought for a reason and that reason has not yet been achieved.

On this day, we celebrate the foundations of our conscience as a people that love freedom. They played their part in the struggle for total emancipation of Zimbabwe.

On this day we are reminded of the fact that we have a generational responsibility to preserve the ideals of the struggle that our fore-fathers and our fathers fought for. We are clear about what we want for Zimbabwe.

We want a peaceful, democratic and prosperous Zimbabwe. Our struggle should therefore reflect our aspirations. Whilst others find solace in fighting within defined political entities it should be emphasised that the struggle is dynamic. The people whom we entrust with the responsibility to lead us may become our worst enemies. It remains our responsibility to hold them accountable for their actions.

Today we witness the inclusion of MDC into government. We should be aware that the primary responsibility of any politician is himself and his family, everybody else come second. So, we should not expect Morgan Tsvangirai to throw a loaf at us when his family is hungry. Even the much revered Barack Obama bought a dog for his family when victims of Katrina are dying of hunger.

We should know that our future is dependent on us. If you are not there when others are hunting don’t expect to be given a share. So when Nelson Chamisa gets a Mercedes Benz, we should not frown because he is being rewarded for being there in the thick of things.

We are the change that we wish to see. If you feel that your destiny is to be a successful business man, this is the time to hustle your way into business. No one will invite you to come and partake of the national cake; you have to fight your way to it.

To those who care to listen, history is there for wisdom but the future is untapped. Our behaviour today reflects what we will be in future!

Madhuku is right in demanding a people-driven constitution

2009-04-16T12:46:00.000-07:00

A few days ago the National Constitutional Assembly declared that it would reject the proposed constitution on the basis that it is not “people-driven”. This has led many to ask themselves what “people-driven” means. Is it a verb that defines a clear status of an action or it’s just sweet sounding rhetoric? It has become necessary that we examine the logical validity of this compound word, its relationship to the constitution and finally its implications to the proposed process.

A constitution of a country is a system for government that defines the fundamental principles of the country and the structure, behaviour and composition of its government. It explains which organs of the state has the responsibility and powers, to make new laws (legislative), implement the laws (executive) and arbitrates or adjudicates(judicial); further to this it defines the limits of these powers. Most modern day constitutions also have guarantees of certain rights to the people. In short therefore, a constitution is a set of rules on how the governors should make rules and implement them without impeding on certain fundamental rights of the governed.

So, a constitution represents a consensus between the governors and the governed. An examination of the evolution of constitutionalism shows that most constitutions were written after a period of revolt, uprising or revolution. Such circumstances demand that there be a clear demarcation of duties, jurisdictions and responsibilities to avoid anarchy. Zimbabwe is no exception; the fall of Rhodesia signalled the transfer of power from a largely white minority to black majority. All man became equal in Zimbabwe and so arose the need to collectively relinquish certain powers to what is termed THE STATE. The state is the molecular sum of individual influence.

From time to time; there is need to choose characters that we would extract from society to govern the affairs of the state- that is to exercise the powers that we would have relinquished to the invisible being called the state. This we do using the minimal power that we would still remain with; that is the power to choose who rules us.

Since the power that would be used to rule us in essence belongs to us, there is need to define how those people should use that power. This becomes the constitution: an agreement on who should use our power and how he should use it!

We have managed to define the relationship between the people and the constitution. Logically, it is the people who should define how their power is to be used and not the other way round.

Why then should the people whom we have elected with our minimal power to vote seek to describe how we should define the constitution? This becomes the bone of contention for NCA. The political leaders in Zimbabwe are seeking to retrospectively influence the process of defining how they should manage the State. What NCA is calling for is simply that; we start from point one. None of us has power that is above the other. We pool our power and define how that power should be used. Not that people use the power they have gotten through the use of a flawed system to define how they should use our power.

At this point in time we should appreciate that The State exists but we want to remould it to represent our undying desire for peace, prosperity, growth and democracy. We want to create a State that is dynamic enough to respond to the needs of time but rigid enough to preserve our social and cultural fabric. In this regard we need MDC and ZANU PF legislators not as characters managing the State but rather as simple leaders within society without special power over others.

What we need are people who are leaders in society; that is priests, coaches, civic leaders, teachers and many others to listen to what people want and put it in writing. This is what we would call a draft constitution. The authenticity and truthfulness of this document would then be tested by way of a referendum.

The purpose of the State in all this is simply to avail the required resources for the smooth running of such a process. Political leaders should either be spectators or contribute as simple citizens like anybody else. This makes Article Six of the Global Political Agreement incongruent with the aspirations of the people of Zimbabwe.

Conclusively therefore; Zimbabwe needs a PEOPLE-DRIVEN CONSTITUTION !

Africa and the challenge of good governance

2009-04-02T12:31:00.000-07:00

The issues that surround good governance and sound leadership in Africa although diverse and numerous basically revolve around ideologies- what set of ideas a government or leadership values. More often than not, a government is faced by questions about which path to follow: should it be capitalism, socialism, democracy, autocracy or monarch? Frequently those who have chosen the wrong path have met a lot of complications in their reign.

Primarily, there is a conflict between the responsibilities of a government in an economy. Whilst the business sector would be striving to make profit, the poor in the society would be striving to afford the basics. So at the end of the day the government is faced by the problem of how it can protect the people against the machinations of the rich at the same time allowing for business to prosper. This now boils down to whether it should be socialism or capitalism.

Whilst capitalism is mainly characterized by a free market, where economic forces determine the price of a commodity; socialism is mainly characterized by a controlled market where prices of certain commodities or services are controlled for all to afford. In Africa, where the majority of the people are poor, it becomes a responsibility of governments to ensure that the people can afford these basics which include food, water, shelter, health and education. At the same time governments are faced with issues of stimulating production and trade; thus at the end of the day it requires acumen to strike a balance.

Unfortunately, African countries have had a good share of leaders who lack compassion and wisdom to balance these responsibilities. Many leaders have become part of syndicates to reap their countries of returns resulting in the rulers amassing personal fortunes at the expense of the country. This has happened through a conspiracy between the rich and the government, typical examples being Mobutu Sese Seko and Charles Taylor of Liberia.

There are also certain countries where the need to sustain reign has superseded the need to ensure productivity; such that a government becomes irresponsible to the extent of using finite national resources to campaign for power. This is typically a case in Zimbabwe where a government is going out of its way to hysterically redistribute every resource in the name of citizen empowerment. Although some of these policies are good for the common citizens; the biggest challenge that the countries face is that of leadership within a government who during the day a champions of citizen empowerment but during the night mutate into sole beneficiaries of the same policies at the expense of the people.

In some instances; Africa being so depended on international aid has been forced to follow the prescriptions of the so-called donors without pausing to think if this would be in line the dictates of social empathy. For example, many economic packages have been accompanied by stringent requirements of liberalization of the economy and limited government subsidy. These have been the demands of New Partnership of Africa’s Development (NEPAD) and also the Economic Structural Adjustment Program (ESAP) implemented in Zimbabwe in the early 90’s.

So this issue of capitalism versus socialism requires a leadership that has intelligence, wisdom, compassion and patriotism to balance and articulate.

Africa also is faced by a challenge of type of rule. Whilst democracy is viewed as the best type of rule and defined loosely as ‘the rule of the people, for the people, by the people’; Africa has noticed an increase in the number of dictatorships and other forms of rule that defy the norms of democracy.

Whilst many countries in Africa are considered democracies or moving towards that such there has been little appreciation of the fact that democracy entails competition for power. In a democracy competition for power is shown through the ballot, with whoever winning the elections taking the office ahead of the loser. Unfortunately, there are cases where competition for power has been taken outside the ballot usually with fatal consequences. A recent example is Kenya, where more than a thousand people died in political clashes. The clash a few years ago in Madagascar is another good example.

More commonly though has been the tendency by incumbent leadership to use state machinery to fend off competition for power. This has resulted in many competitors resorting to the use of force or other means to usurp power, like in the case of Laurent Kabila who used war as a means and Ravalomanana of Madagascar who used public disobedience as a tool. In Zimbabwe, the army, police and militias are used to sustain ZANU PF hegemony.

In many African countries citizen participation in issues of governance is limited to the electoral processes only. Whilst it would be appreciated that in a democracy citizen participation is important especially in the formulation of national policy very few governments have opened up the space for freedom of association and expression. One country that has managed to harness the people in its government is Botswana where leadership takes time to give feedback and get views of the people in the different chieftainships (dikgotla). The result has been a fluid society with less suspicion.

In a democracy, there are certain basic rights which are guaranteed under international law which the state cannot take away. These include the right to say and write what one likes, the right to associate and many others. However, there are many governments that are failing to respect these rights resulting in persecution and murder of innocent people. Ken Saro Wiwa, a writer from Nigeria was executed during the reign of Gen Sani Abacha for expressing his views. Ngugi wa Thiongo lived in exile during the rule of Daniel Arap Moi in Kenya and we have seen people like Lovemore Madhuku being assaulted in Zimbabwe for exercising their right to express themselves. These reflect badly on the type of governance we have in Africa.

Democracy is a system of rule by laws and not individuals thus the rule of law is also important in a democracy. Every citizen should be equal before the law. There are certain instances in African countries where governments do not respect the rule of law; where certain individuals are spared from prosecution just because of their status in society or government whilst some innocent people are also detained arbitrarily for opposing the government. The corruption cases against former government officials in Zambia point to this whilst the prosecution of Jacob Zuma for fraud in South Africa is a good example of equality before law.

Besides, the issues discussed above good governance also entail a system and leadership that is transparent, honest and accountable to the people. The Willowgate, Ziscogate and War Veterans Fund scandals in Zimbabwe where public funds were either abused or misused by government officials are typically some of the cases that are rampant in Africa. This has resulted in reduced public trust and eventually friction between the governors and the governed. Many leaders who have left power are accused of having secret offshore bank accounts with monies fraudulently acquired from the state.

Finally, although Africa is striving towards democracy, it has on many occasions found itself a victim of the imperialistic tendencies of some superpower states. This has resulted in other countries outside the continent imposing and supporting rulers that do now reflect the wishes of the people just because such individuals support such countries. Any leader from a resources-rich country who resist the imperialistic maneuverings of usually is targeted for regime change and usually the replacements turn out to be dictators. Mobutu Sese Seko, Idi Amin, Mengistu Haile Miriam are some of the classical examples. The revelation by Simon Mann, a mercenary arrested and deported to Equatorial Guinea that United Kingdom and Spain were involved in the plot to topple the president of the oil-rich Equatorial Guinea goes a long way to prove how some of the states are making good governance hard to achieve in Africa. Another good example is the hypocrisy shown by America by declaring a blatantly flawed electoral process in Kenya ‘Free and Fair’ just because Mwai Kibaki has been touted in America as a democrat but at the same time denouncing Zimbabwean elections as flawed even before they are done. This has shown that whilst Africa would be better off maintaining its sovereignty, its destiny is still being shaped by its relation with the industrialized superpowers.

A discussion on governance and leadership in Africa is always a complicated subject; nevertheless with the issue of globalization, advent of new information technologies and general advance in technology there is hope for transformation. Better education and exposure of Africans to the developments in the Diaspora has equipped them with the sense of pride and appreciation of their continent and as I write a number of prototypes are emerging. The election of Mrs Johnson in Liberia, the prosperity of Angola in the newly-found democracy and smooth passing of power from one individual to another in Mozambique and Botswana gives an extra assurance to Africans that what is needed for Africa to boom is just PEACE and GOOD GOVERNANCE!

Western democracy is a deliberate distortion of reality!

2009-03-28T18:14:00.000-07:00

Comrades and Friends.

There are a number of things that have happened in our society that has prompted us to question our judgement, our behaviour and the whole concept of democracy. For example; in 1980 we all celebrated the leadership of Mugabe with such euphoria that any feelings to the contrary were not acceptable yet today we are lamenting the viciousness of the same man. What happened? Who is to blame for letting a monster into office?

Many say democracy is the rule of the people, what I wish to know is; what happens when the majority is wrong. In a real democracy the expectation is that, what the majority wants rules the day! So, if the majority believes that one plus one is equal to three, that should sail through despite known knowledge to the contrary!

Who should therefore restrain society from making bizarre choices? This brings me to the core of my thinking. The rule of the people does not exist in the absence of political, social and economic parity; rather what exists is the continual aspiration by human beings to progress away from a state of deficiency towards a state of happiness.

Deficiency is relative to one’s knowledge. Since knowledge is also dependent on the environment, by extrapolation deficiency is also relative to the environment. In this regard, poverty- which is a deficiency in what is perceived as basic-is qualified differently depending on one’s environment. Since nearly everybody in America can afford a cell phone; it might be viewed as being poor if one does not own a one. There is however a bushman in Kgalagadi who does not know what a phone is; so failure to possess something that one has no knowledge of does not necessarily amount to deficiency.

There are basic needs that are common across humanity; food, water, shelter and clothing. These determine the threshold of human needs. At any moment in life; unless by voluntary deprivation, every human being seeks to have them. These make up the atomic unit of happiness.

Happiness or good life is a perceived state of parity between one’s desires and what one owns. As basic needs are met, humans tend to shift their attention to other needs that knowledge necessitates. The more advanced our knowledge and aspiration of good life, the more our needs. That is why people have different desires in life.

The American Declaration of Independence lays what is accepted by many as the basis of democracy:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by the Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

The equality spoken of here is that of access to power and not that they have equal power. Power cannot be created or destroyed but can be changed from one form to another. In modern day life, there are certain predetermined enablers of access to power that offers an advantage to other people. These include environment, inheritance, intellect and they can force those of lesser circumstances to unwillingly give up competing for power.

When people are born they do not have the same ability to control the environment around themselves. It is true that in a democracy people have certain inalienable rights like life, liberty and pursuit of happiness but in all non-suicidal human beings the desire to live supersedes the desire to be happy. Nevertheless, because of the basic needs some people would stumble or get stuck in the struggle to live while those from advantageous environment go ahead to pursue happiness.

Those who are left wallowing in the basic struggle to live are always in an altered state of consciousness, and are unable to ascend the aspiration ladder. This ultimately means that they forfeit or postpone their opportunity to access power.

When people forfeit their right to power, somebody takes their share. The person who takes that power unfortunately does not have the authority to use that power. In other words he does not have the justification or the right to use that power. So he needs to come back to he rightful owner of that power so that he/she authorises him to use that power.

So elections however free they might be are not a process of collectively and voluntarily using people’s power to make a decision; rather, they are a way of giving authority to somebody who has, due to other advantages illegally claimed their power.

Most of those who claim power illegally do not seek the authority openly; rather they use a proxy amongst those in deficiencies - one whom they assist to rise from the manacles of deficiencies- so that people are hoodwinked into believing that one of theirs has now ascended to help them.

So, when we look at Mugabe, we realise that he was extracted from society and people authorised him to use their power for pursuit of happiness of certain other people whom he protected for 18 years until they dumped him for another proxy.

Since then people have been authorising the abuse of their power either by Mugabe or by the new proxies. Both sides have been feeding people with half truths and half lies; consequently people have been committing their authority to people who wrongly claim that they would alleviate their dire deficiencies.

As stated above; those whom they give authority are always pre-occupied with the pursuit of their personal happiness and not their concerns.

For example, those in MDC whom we thought had the conscience to make moral choices, chose to accept the blatantly expensive Mercedes Benz as parliamentary packages despite the humanitarian (threat to life) situation in Zimbabwe.

Nelson Chamisa is quoted as saying: “It’s a symbol of authority and power … If you don’t have it; people will think you don’t have power. They feel good when they see one of their own in power.”

HL Mencken once said “If experience teaches us anything at all, it teaches us that a good politician, under democracy, is quite unthinkable as an honest burglar.”

So Comrades and Friends remember, Western Democracy is the rule of some people for some people by the authority of the people!

Creative leadership the best way to overcome hypocrisy and treachery!

2009-03-24T14:20:00.000-07:00

Before the current Government of National Unity, proponents of the theory of exclusive governance were of the belief that an MDC government in Zimbabwe would signal the end of Zimbabwe’s economic quagmire. This was premised on the assumption that once MDC gets into power, western governments particularly USA would pour economic aid into the government’s coffers. Today, we are wallowing in the realisation of the painful truth about the basic rules of engagement with these countries.

There are a few lessons to derive from this:
1) The interests of USA in Zimbabwe go beyond the desire for good governance
and democracy.
2) USA is not a friend of MDC, rather MDC was perceived as a front to create
an alternative American influence in Zimbabwe.
3) Zimbabweans are their own liberators.

The hypocrisy shown by America is a clear betrayal of its allies. It remains therefore, MDC’s responsibility to extricate itself from the precarious situation that it is in today. There are two options; either to betray the hopes of the people of Zimbabwe by reclining into its previous subservience to American ideologies or to churn a new dispensation that unites the willpower of the people of Zimbabwe in creating alternatives to the status quo.

I am in support of the latter. The reason why the world is trembling at the manacles of the current Global Recession is because most countries are over-dependent on American existence. Thus, when America sneezes the whole world coughs. The recession however has served to remind us that America is not as immune as it claims to be and therefore economies need not sleep but seek alternatives to American interventions.

So, in the face of this unwillingness by western powers to assist in the economic revival of our country what then can we do?

The situation now demands brains that are able to educate, lead and produce in hostile conditions. There are a few points that we need to note. Firstly, society remains in a state of rest or continuous random and aimless motion until a force is exerted to it. Secondly, every human being has a motivation within himself which remains dormant until a drive is exerted to give it direction. Lastly, human beings tend to conserve their energy unless if expending it entails a bigger reward to self.

What this basically means is that naturally human beings are lazy but have a potential to produce if there is an opportunity for them to gain more at individual capacity. Unfortunately, the dynamics in our culture doesn’t reward individuals for mobilising people to solve the tough problems facing them, rather; people are willing to mobilise themselves in pursuit of a solution postulated to them by another person. So in this regard; Zimbabwe needs a leadership that can harness the individual energies of its people and re-channel them towards a collective pursuit of specific and achievable national goals.

There is no doubt that for this to be attainable the government should uphold the principles of democracy. What the government should actually appreciate is that humans naturally want to feel free and that there is always a craving by humans to criticize and oppose that which they do not own or have interest in. So, in all its interventions the government should seek not to compromise the basic freedoms of its nationals and also formulate these interventions in a manner that encourages ownership by the people. Lastly, the government should then ensure commitment by protecting private investments.

What I am saying is that if the government is able to identify its priority areas, collect data and required knowledge, find allies across the boundaries of authority and design a strategy that gets people to re-examine their values; I see no reason why Zimbabwe can fail to retain its status as the bread-basket of Africa.

What comes into my mind right now is that Zimbabwe simply needs to get agricultural production up on its feet. The dollarisation of the economy has helped to stabilise the market. In the mean time the market can be left to float so that business regains its viability. What is more important is to ensure that the limited resources that are available be channelled towards the revival of SEEDCO, Dorowa mine, Sable Chemicals and Zimphos so that come the 2009 rainy season Zimbabwe will have enough seeds and fertilisers for the season.

Given the high unemployment rate in Zimbabwe today it is clear that the government no longer has a tax-base to derive funding for its day-to-day activities. This situation should spur it into being inventive. One way is to tap from its human resource exports. In this regard the government can engage all its citizens working abroad to see ways by which they can assist in the rebuilding of the country.

With over a million Zimbabweans in formal employment across the world and over three million people in the diaspora, Zimbabwe has a potentially fertile ground to tap from. Of importance is the need to convince Zimbabweans in the Diaspora to remit their foreign currency to Zimbabwe and also to invest in Zimbabwe. Even though remittances do not directly add to Government’s budgetary resources, they raise the level of national saving and add to the availability of foreign exchange for the day to day transactions.

Secondly, as in the case of Eritrea government can compel all Zimbabweans in formal employment outside the country to pay ‘voluntary’ tax; even 0.5% of their earnings per month and as an incentive, residential stands in urban areas would be developed which would then be offered to those who would have consistently remitted tax when the cumulative value of their remittances reach a certain value.

Central to all these interventions is also the need to create institutions that are ethical, morally upright, transparent and accountable. This means that if Zimbabweans in the Diaspora are to remit any tax, they need assurances that their money is going directly towards meeting the developmental commitments of the government and not into the pockets of some corrupt officials. So in line with such a vision institutions like the Reserve Bank and Zimra would need a complete overhaul.

These are just some of the ideas that are flying within my head but what I am clear about is that given the current circumstances Zimbabwe simply needs visionary and creative leadership for it to sail out of predicament that it is in.

Beware of false prophets

2009-03-22T12:25:00.000-07:00

Has anybody ever wondered why the dull always celebrate the fall of the bright? Why the poor enjoy the demise of the rich or why failures usually relish the episodes when the successful stumble?

How many times have we encountered people who discourage us from executing certain positive ideas simply because they feel it’s impossible? And; how many people have we seen in our society who feel that if something is not done their way it is bound to fail?

I have encountered many of these in my short life; from my family to my numerous schoolmasters to fellows in the struggle. I still remember the heated argument that I had with my mother when I told her that I no longer wanted to go to school but rather wanted to study at home. My mother sold clothes and other wares for us to go to school. She had always wanted the best for us, that’s why I ended up at Mutare Boys High School despite the cost of fees there.

I could see how she struggled to raise such amounts and I offered to transfer to Serima Mission whose fees was half that of Mutare Boys High. She gave in after a struggle. Life got tougher and tougher and I offered to drop out from Serima, she refused. Fortunately I was suspended from school for disobeying orders and I ended up staying at home for four months. I wrote my A levels and I passed.

I talk about this freely with my mother now and she has grown to understand why certain people do certain things that certain people would be unable to do. That is the uniqueness that exists in us. Unfortunately, society does not appreciate this exclusivity rather it views it as being a renagade.

Along the way, I have also grown to appreciate age, wisdom and intelligence. I respect my elders because they deserve my respect. I know that sometimes age comes with wisdom, however; sometimes it comes alone. Wisdom means the ability to use a known solution to a known or similar problem. Intelligence means the ability to prescribe a new solution to a new problem or to prescribe a better solution to a known problem.

Armed with these experiences, my intellect and my drive to be creative I have confronted the challenges that we have in our struggle head-on. I have made enemies because of my conviction that the truth should be told except where one is bound by a code of ethics that dictates that there be confidentiality. We should not fear to reprimand each other even if it means confrontation.

In our struggle, we have had circumstances where resources fall in the hands of the greedy, where failures are entrusted with the responsibility to make the society successful and where the dull are supposed to churn a vision for society. In all these circumstances conflict has been inevitable.

Closer to reality, we have people who have had the privilege to be at certain positions that allow society to listen to them when they speak. Some actually have the ability to influence public opinion. What happens when these people use their status to mislead people into pursuing futile and infertile objectives?

I mean, what should happen when people who call themselves leaders of the civil society discourage MDC from joining the Government of National Unity, MDC defies them and joins, today they are the ones at the forefront demanding positions in the same GNU which they were vehemently opposed to?

What should happen to our learned Constitutional Expert at NCA who seems to believe that a good constitution for the country cannot be in place unless it is done his way? The aspect of collective opinion is dependent on how information is passed to a body of people. Society gets a combined impetus only after complex concepts are chewed for them to consume. Whose responsibility is it then to chew? What should happen when a political space is occupied by people who dogmatically stall progress because the status quo has more benefits to them than when there is change?

What happens to the have-nots when the haves stand on top them and tell them our pain is the labour-pain for prosperity? Who should tell them it’s a lie? What should happen to the learned professor who presides over the downfall of the education system and tells the youth that they are fighting for their rights?

It pains me today that the people whom we respect are the ones punishing us. They went to school; today they do no care if we don’t have school. They have business but they tax us when we seek to start ours. They have jobs in big offices but they do not care if we lose ours. They have a life but they do not care when we die. These are the people we call our elders, WISE and INTELLIGENT elders?

Society has eyes, children have tears and the boys have ears. The old are shaking at the events in Madagascar, they know; the youth are like dynamite, once there is a matchstick, be assured of chaos!

I rest, but I have made my point: BEWARE of false prophets!

ZIMBABWE: A CAPITALIST STATE IN TATTERS Only mediation between Mugabe and the Queen of England can save it

2009-03-16T04:41:00.000-07:00

(Please Note this article was written and published on 23 June 2008, I posted it here for regurgitation. It is always good to look back and see where we were and where we are today!)

The current crisis in Zimbabwe has been done a great disservice by the enormous existence of narrative journalism which has evolved into outrageously subjective propaganda serving different motives and interests. The dearth in informed and analytical discourse has not helped matters either. The result has been a permanently polarised and paranoid public opinion that is in most cases misinformed or half-informed much to the satisfaction of the hands behind the drive. Many a time, we have been confronted by questions that need to be addressed with sober judgement, but because of the political jackets that we wear we have been unable to utter the right sentences, rather we have been forced to reverberate the propaganda or risk isolation or loss. In this article however, I intend to take off any political jacket that I may be associated with and articulate the Zimbabwean crisis from an independent position.

First of all Zimbabwe was built and moulded using a democracy template. It was envisioned to be a democracy. In this regard it was visualised as having, The State, The Government and The People. I mean a politically organized society, with a central authority, operating over a territory that monopolizes the legitimate use of force and has a wide range of policy competences (employment, environment, health, product safety, domestic security, research/development, etc.) which it discharges through a few individuals that get their mandate through public consensus.

The State 1980 - 1999

The question that we ought to explore in our quest to elucidate the source of conflict in Zimbabwe is; who is the State in Zimbabwe? The only way we can truly define the State in Zimbabwe by evaluating the distribution of property from 1980 up to today.

At independence, the large-scale commercial farming sub-sector of 6,000 white farmers, owned 15.5 million hectares, more than half of which lay in the high rainfall agro- ecological regions where the potential for agricultural production is greatest. On the other hand the small-scale commercial farming sub-sector comprising 8,500 black farmers held 1.4 million hectares of agricultural land located mostly in the drier agro-ecological regions. Finally the communal areas, inhabited by the bulk of the populace of 4.3 millions people worked 16.4 million hectare of agricultural land, 75 percent of which was located in the drier agro- ecological regions where the soils are also poor. This qualifies the 6 000 as the agricultural elite of Zimbabwe.

Secondly we may need to look at financial property and mining rights. There is a long list of companies that contribute to the balance of payments of foreign governments notably the British government: British American Tobacco,Barclays Bank, Standard Bank, Stanbic Bank, Standard Chartered, CABS Building Society, Old Mutual (insurance and real estate), Rio Tinto (gold miners), Anglo American Corp (agro-industry and mining), Impala Platinum, Zimplats (majority owned by Impala), Freda Rebecca (gold miners), Falgold (gold miners), Metallon Gold, Aquarius Platinum, Rio Tinto (Murowa diamond mine), Mimosa Mining Company (platinum), River Ranche Diamond Mine, Unki (platinum), Murray & Roberts (construction), Border Timbers, Hippo Valley Sugar Estates, Triangle Sugar Estates, Chevron, BP (British Petroleum), Shell, David Whitehead (textile), Edgars Stores (clothing), National Tyre Services, Delta Corporation (beverages), Circle Cement (Circem), Price Waterhouse, Bata Shoe Company, Spar (grocery chain),Coca-Cola among the long list. Thus the vast British interests qualify it to be part of the State.

We also have to take a closer look at the interests and claims of rights by the ZANU PF (at individual and collective level) whose tentacles stretch from Jongwe printers, M & S Syndicate, ZUPCO, Dairiboard through the Nuanetsi ranch to all those that Emmerson Munangagwa runs on behalf of individuals in ZANU PF. In this regard, Mugabe, Munangagwa, the Mujurus, Nkomos, Chiyangwas and a whole lot of others within the ZANU PF congregation qualify to be part of the State.

Summarily, up until 2000 the State consisted basically of three groups; white commercial farmers, the British state and the ZANU PF moguls. Nevertheless, the white commercial farmers (the majority of whom were British) and the British State because of lineage and economic symbiosis behaved as one. For lack ofa better term I will refer to this grouping as the British/white State heretofore.

As Engels puts it,

"The second distinguishing feature is the establishment of a public power which no longer directly coincides with the population organizing itself as an armed force. This special, public power is necessary because a self-acting armed organization of the population has become impossible since the split into classes.... This public power exists in every state; it consists not merely of armed men but also of material adjuncts, prisons, and institutions of coercion of all kinds, of which gentile [clan] society knew nothing...."

The State fortified its existence through the use of specialised bodies like the army, police, CIO and prisons.

To me, the crisis in Zimbabwe started at the Lancaster House in 1979 when the British and ZANU PF reached a blatant agreement meant to perpetuate the strength of the status quo. Joshua Nkomo asked three vital questions:

"The essential questions we have posed constantly to ourselves and which we insist must be understood by all seriously concerned with a solution include the following:-

…
2. Whose army shall defend Zimbabwe and its people? It must be noted here that 60% of the present white army are mercenaries.
3. Whose police force shall protect the people of Zimbabwe?
9. What will be the future of the people's land?"

The British answered by allowing Mugabe to control the Army and the Police but at the same time inserting the Section 16 which guaranteed the immoral perpetuation of flawed distribution of property in its favour, at least for 10 years.

The complexities of defining the Zimbabwean State unravel when we look at the control of the specialised bodies of power. The deposed State gave up military power and allowed Mugabe to build his army according to his own will and Mugabe responded by ensuring that loyalty becomes the basis of conscription into that army. This explains the isolation of the ZIPRA forces and the subsequent clashes typified by the Entumbane battle.

The power of the gun allowed Mugabe to force the State to give him a say in its affairs thereby making him a beneficiary and a player. Concessions were again made, the Old State and the New Military Order united. This explains the joint operations between the white farmers and the Army in Matebeleland from 1980 to 1987. It also explains the token control that was given to "The ZANU PF state" over major companies in the name of indigenisation and black empowerment.

Mugabe became the custodian of British imperialism. As Stromm puts it "the government continued to give political statements of intent by announcing agricultural revisions such as the Land Acquisition Act (1985), but in reality the whites were co-opting government into their main stream, rather than vice versa". This collusion became a well-oiled oppression machine.

ZANU PF and The British connived at Lancaster house to legitimise banditry. At the centre of the crisis in Zimbabwe then was property. They used political power to appropriate and expropriate property that had not been generated within any economic platform. Through political power they conspired to draft laws to legalise and confiscate the property from the supposed rightful owners. Thus, today we find ourselves in a quandary because of their deeds.

What made things work out well for the first ten years? The State and the government were in tandem. The State financed the urgent activities of the government in return for protection. With this perfect relationship, the state found no reason to wish for a change of characters within the government, rather its generous involvement ensured that there was excess capital which pacified the government and ultimately the people.

Summarily, the events after the Lancaster House agreement point to a grand plan which included the gradual conscription of the custodians of the specialised bodies of power into the mainstream thereby guaranteeing perpetuity of the elitist order.

Evolution of the ZANU PF State

Within the ZANU PF assembly existed classes of status which determined the level of influence and ultimately the quantity of benefits from the interaction of the ZANU PF state with British/white state and also from the exploitation of natural resources.

The early years after independence, only a few elite in ZANU PF notably; Mugabe in his capacity as the Prime Minister, Mujuru as the Commander of ZDF, Mnangagwa as the Minister of State Security, Sekeramai as the Minister of State (Defence) in the Prime Minister's Office, were in direct influential relationship with the British/white state and represented the ZANU PF State.

Another few, notably those who did not have military background but had been influential in the struggle for independence were allowed to form the bulk of the government. These did not have a direct influence on the dealings of the state rather; they acted as the intermediary between the people and the state obviously taking instructions from Mugabe and others, who were part of the Zimbabwean State.

The government without those in the State was not powerful. They did not have the power to buy nor confiscate property for personal use. This scenario resulted in the development of a gap between those around Mugabe and those in the government. With progression of time, the people in the government realised that the only way to get property was through "robbery" especially in the dominions in which they had power, i.e. ministries. This heralded the looting that we have grown to associate ZANU PF with, which includes the Willowgate scandal, the Ziscogate scandal, the War Veterans Fund scandal to name but a few.

At the core of most the problems that Zimbabwe has had is the aspect of appeasement. The British/White State sought Mugabe's continued backing through pacification. They chose at the least, to remain silent about many atrocities and iniquities of ZANU PF against the people of Zimbabwe mostly because they (ZANU PF) on the other hand protected their interests. Typical examples were the low-tone voices during the Matebeleland crisis, the one-party state proposal and the violence against Zimbabwe Unity Movement.

The elitist strata in ZANU PF began to blatantly manifest itself at the turn of the first decade of independence. The freedom fighters who had laid their souls for the country on the belief that freedom would bring them prosperity began to see that the "chefs" had forgotten them. Their enemies during the struggle were getting even richer and richer. This prompted the formation of the Zimbabwe National War Veterans Association in April 1989.

There were also growing anti-government sentiments by the general population of Zimbabwe as witnessed by the support given to the ZUM-an opposition party. One of the reasons was the failure of the government to address the land disparity in the country. For ten years the government had only managed to resettle about 71 000 households on about 3.5 million hectares a number way below the demand.

Diminishing support from traditional supporters signalled a need for redress. Mugabe sought to deal with the grievances within the legal framework, which resulted in the crafting of a number bills and laws like the War Veterans Administration Bill (1991), the War Veterans Act (1992), Land Acquisition Act (1992) and War Victims Compensation Act (1993). This was a significant departure from the norm and it unsettled the British/White State as exemplified by the objections of the Commercial Farmers Union to the LAA.

In a gesture of its willingness to continue with the symbiotic arrangement ZANU PF approved the Economic Structural Adjustment Programme which for all its complexities sought to reduce the burden of financing government expenditure from the State by instituting a number of reforms including privatisation and reduced subsidies. Unfortunately, it coincided with the 1990---1993 drought which brought a scourge on the nation.

More and more pressure continued to pile on Mugabe, and the open calls for his departure from the helm of ZANU PF by the likes of Eddison Zvobgo and Dzikamai Mavhaire moved him to cocoon himself by loyalists. Consequently, the ZANU PF state began to pull loyalists and abandoned friends from the dust towards it. In appeasement, the ZANU PF state in 1997 impulsively approved the disbursement of a one-off lump sum of Z$50 000 each which was not budgeted for.

Government expenditure increased but the burden fell on the British/White State and the workers of Zimbabwe. The worst was to come when in June 1998 Mugabe sent the first of the eventually 11 000 soldiers into the Democratic Republic of Congo. As usual the load fell on the British/white state and the workers of Zimbabwe. It is alleged that the funds that the Zimbabwean government eventually used in the DRC conflict was money that was originally earmarked for poverty alleviation and resolving the land problem. One thing for sure, the penchant for spending by ZANU PF did not augur well with the interest of both the British/white state and the workers.

Inflation soared, the Zimbabwean dollar tumbled and life became expensive. Workers were angry at the tax policy of the government whilst the ex-combatants and peasants united in their displeasure of the government's land policy. The echoes of the growing impatience with the government reverberated even through the former tpraise-singers of Mugabe like Simon Chimbetu who sang "zuva raenda" (It is late- in apparent reference to the late resolution of the land question) and Thomas Mapfumo who sang a song entitled "Set The People Free". The calls climaxed with invasion of Igava farm by the Svosve people in June 1998.

The food riots that followed hit the final nail on ZANU PF and heralded a new era where the trade union increased its political presence in Zimbabwe. The signal was that ZANU PF's time in government was up.

Mugabe was left with only one option for him to stay in power; to persuade the British/white state to sacrifice on the key question of land. More blatantly Mugabe sought to compel Britain to pay for its own loss, while allowing him to entrench his rule.

The 1998 Land Donor Conference in Harare was the turning point in that it heralded the first incident of direct British rebellion towards Mugabe. 48 countries were represented including Britain and an agreement was made to set up a taskforce of major donors to work out the modalities for a two-year Inception Phase of the Land Reform Program. Britain refused to join the taskforce insisting a consulting firm undertake an initial economic returns analysis of the programme and assess how far it would alleviate poverty among the poor in Zimbabwe.

This excuse was not without basis given the history of ZANU PF in abuse of donor funds for personal aggrandisement; however there could have been other reasons. Firstly, the 118 farms that were on offer were mainly owned by the British/white state and any successful implementation of the redistribution could have been the beginning of a long phase in which the British/white state would cede control of the Zimbabwe state to the ZANU PF state. Secondly, there had emerged a possibility of change within the political landscape of Zimbabwe as more and more people shared anti-ZANU PF sentiments.

Still ZANU PF sought to deal with the land question in a manner that was not going to largely alienate it from the British/white state. Again it sought to deal with the question of property within the legal framework provided for by the Land Acquisition Act (1992) but met stiff resistance form the white farmers. For example, when Government designated 1471 farms for compulsory acquisition in December 1997 a total of 1393 objections were received of which 510 were upheld. For the remaining 883 farms Government had to go through lengthy judicial processes.

Seeing its impending departure from power, largely because of the British/white state's unwillingness to sacrifice, ZANU PF began the process of transfer of power. The first attempt was Constitutional referendum which was rejected mainly at the instigation of organisations like the National Constitutional Assembly which was largely a coalition of disgruntled groups in Zimbabwe. It brought together the workers, students, peasants and the white commercial farmers.

What should be noted here is that, whilst the Constitution was rejected there is evidence that it was not rejected by the majority because of its inadequacies on the land question but its failure to clearly deal with the issue of the president. People wanted change in leadership because they felt short-changed by Mugabe and this also coincided with the same feeling within the British/white state.

This coalition was viewed by ZANU PF as an attempt by the British/white state to destroy its existence which actually was true. Upon realising this ZANU PF decided then to forcibly eliminate the British/white state's control over property. All along ZANU PF had sought to transfer property ownership through economic acquisition but because this had failed, it resorted to acquisitions based on power and coercion.

The Constitutional Amendment Number 16 of 2000 was an attempt similar to the Lancaster House agreement which sought to legitimise the forceful acquisition of property.

So, by December 2000 ZANU PF had finished setting up the framework for a cohesive unilateral state that controlled the government, had the power to influence laws, influence policies and had a monopoly on the legitimate use of force. This is how the powerful ZANU PF State entrenched itself in Zimbabwe.

Emergence of the Movement for Democratic Change

As noted above, a number of factors united the workers, students, peasants and the British/white state against ZANU PF. The victory of the "NO" vote in the constitutional referendum in 2000 gave the NCA the momentum to progress towards a fully-fledged movement that could challenge the ZANU PF hegemony politically.

The MDC was formed primarily as a front against Mugabe. It was a baobab tree with multiple satisfactions. Those who wanted shade got it, those who wanted fruits got them. In this regard, the workers found it as a front against exploitation, students as a front against deprivation of academic freedoms, peasants as a front against deprivation of the basic right to land, the white farmers as a front against ZANU PF expropriation of property and Britain as a front against ZANU PF interference with its economic interests.

Thus at its inception, MDC represented a coalition of disgruntled groups all united by the presence of a common enemy. Indeed for a time the coalition worked, as shown by the massive support it got from the electorate in 2000 and 2002 elections.

One major point of note here is that, of all the five groups listed above only the white commercial farmers and the British state could sustain the financial requirements of the movement, hence their blatant influence in the policy frameworks developed by the movement and the ambiguous ideologies that dogs it.

The strength of this partnership came under test when Mugabe implemented the controversial Fast Track Land Reform exercise. Generally, Zimbabweans agreed that there was urgent need to redress the disparities in land distribution and even MDC acknowledged this fact; however its inability to concisely articulate this issue has led many to believe that it is not committed to resolving the issue in favour of the black majority. Even its written policies seem to be engulfed in the quagmires of diversities under its umbrella;

"When the MDC forms the next government in Zimbabwe, it will accept neither the status quo that existed prior to 2000 nor the position it will inherit after eight years of mayhem and destruction by a criminal elite." (A new Zimbabwe, a new Beginning; Policies of the Movement for Democratic Change 2008)

The emergence of MDC as a political challenger to the ZANU PF government increased the complexities of the crisis in Zimbabwe. It managed to take the rift from the level of the State, to the government and in the end to the people of Zimbabwe.

The crisis in Zimbabwe defined

The crisis in Zimbabwe today is about power. Since 1998, the two former allies have been fighting an economic battle where, ZANU PF sought to destroy the control of the British/white state over Zimbabwe by unilateral plunder and expropriation of its assets whilst the later sought to cripple the capacity of the ZANU PF State to fund the activities of the ZANU PF government by sabotaging its production capacity. The long-term intention of the British/white state is to ensure the withering away of the ZANU PF State and eventually government, both of which would be replaced.

The purpose of the MDC in this struggle is to allow the British/white state to counter the ZANU PF State's ability to seek legitimacy through popularly elected individuals. This has been ZANU PF's trump card, for ; all its deeds have been punctuated by the rhetorical reference to "The people of Zimbabwe's will".

Unfortunately, now that ZANU PF has been rejected by the same people it used to hide behind; it seems the struggle has been taken from the economic level to the military level. The question is whether the British/white State is willing to fight at that level.

The solution

Except in a revolution or violent overthrow of an incumbent government conflicts of this nature can only be solved through negotiations. There has been an effort towards this but it seems the negotiations have been between the ponies of this struggle. The MDC does not have the capacity to make swift decisions that are not approved by the British/white State, at the same time Chinamasa and company cannot make the same without the approval of the Mugabe-led ZANU PF State.

The best solution within the current capitalist setting is for Zimbabwe to have negotiations similar to the Lancaster House Conference in which the two States sit to iron out their differences and draft a clear modus operandi and guidelines of interaction that do not prejudice any of the sides. Both ways sacrifices and compromises have to be made but whatever they would agree, they should ensure that they decisively address the issue of property rights and land tenure because along time it would again erupt as tool for oppression and suppression of innocent people.

It is only when the two States have resolved their differences that a proper functional government can be constituted; either through the ballot or off the ballot. As it is now, the crisis continues and only the rabble bears the pain!

Tribute to Gandi Mudzingwa

2009-03-15T04:55:00.000-07:00

Many a times people wait for the worst to happen for them to come out and appreciate the good works that their fellows have done. Humility and dedication is usually noticed after death, rather society seems to have eyes only for those who have charisma. Who could have pointed at Mai Tsvangirai as one of the most influential change advocates in Zimbabwe, but here we are today wallowing in the realisation that we had an angel amongst us but she is gone!

It is after this introspection that I have realised that, the responsibility lies on those who have worked with somebody to public eulogise his works so that society realises the value of his existence. Those who worked with Jestina Mukoko did it and today we all respect her, so did those who worked with Roy Bennet. So on this regard; I will chronicle what I know of Gandi, what he has done for me and other activists and what he has done for the struggle.

Today, four months after his abduction in Msasa area Gandi Mudzingwa is still in custody. He was detained at Chikurubi Maximum Prison before he was moved to Avenues hospital because of his deteriorating health. He is charged with recruiting people for banditry, insurgency and terrorism training in Botswana.

The first time I met Gandi Mudzingwa was in May 2003 just before the fate “Final Push”. He was in the company of Dennis Murira and Last Maengahama. Then he did not strike any difference in me because he didn’t talk much during that meeting.

I later worked with him on many occasions and to be frank he is the person who necessitated my very first face-to-face meeting with Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai in 2004.

It is a fact that many people in MDC who did not come through student activism are sceptical of student leaders. Gandi is the one of the very few people in MDC whose office was open to us when we were students. Yes, he was an aide of President Tsvangirai and his duties did not include entertaining us but he never showed that.

One occasion that he showed this was when Collen Chibango, Arthur Masuka and Killion were arrested for demonstrating against the Treason charges against Mr Tsvangirai. As the then Chairman of the UZ MDC branch I approached Harvest House for legal aid and was referred to one Musekiwa who took the whole day without doing anything. I later called on Nkululeko Sibanda who referred me to Gandi and within a very limited space of time he had engaged the services of a lawyer from Kantor and Immerman.

Of course, I later learnt that although he had not made a name as a student leader, he had been involved in a number of demonstrations against the government even though he was on government scholarship in Russia. This was at the height of Gukurahundi. Contrary to the belief that he is a relative of Morgan Tsvangirai, it was after these demonstrations that he caught the eye of Morgan on one of his early visits to Russia. Since then they have worked together.

This is not the first time that Gandi has been arrested on a number of occasions since 2000 but this has not deterred him from serving the struggle.

It is my hope that with this little information I can also spur others into coming out to condemn the continued detention of this man and two others namely Shadreck Manyere and Kisimusi Dhlamini.

My thoughts are with them

A rare show of good leadership from both Tsvangirai and Mugabe!

2009-03-11T12:47:00.000-07:00

Whilst leadership is generally defined as a process of social influence in which one person is able to enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task; I wish to define good leadership as the meticulous use of power and influence to guide other people towards a positive objective. This time I think both Mugabe and Tsvangirai have shown good leadership that this country has been yearning for.

Tsvangirai is the president of MDC and the Prime Minister of Zimbabwe. He has power, clout and influence. There is no doubt that he has millions of disciples who look up to him for light, to them he represents the alpha and omega of their ambitions. Without implying anything, there are people out there who can be dared into saying “Tsvangirai is my shepherd I shall not want!”

It would have taken just a sentence from him for Zimbabwe to explode: “This was planned to kill me!” We were all anxious for his word. Emotions were high, suspicion was at its highest and the atmosphere was charged. For any power-monger this would have represented a ripe situation for cheap point-scoring but like a visionary he chose a different path. He calmed them, he decisively allayed any suspicions and he diplomatically diffused the tense atmosphere.

This and this alone differentiates him from Raila Odinga. When confronted with an opportunity to get rich but at the expense of a life and we choose to remain poor but with a life to cherish that’s what I call being righteous!

Robert Mugabe is the president of ZANU PF and the President of Zimbabwe. He has power to influence who gets what, when and how. There are people who have done horrible things in the name of Robert Mugabe. There are many of his supporters who have been inspired by his violent speeches. In 1982 he said “ZAPU is like a snake that has entered a house, the only way to deal with it is to hit the head” and we saw what happened in Matebeland thereafter.

We heard him say “tinodashura” (we bash) when Morgan Tsvangirai was assaulted by the police in 2007. He pardoned those who killed during the 2002 elections. He at the most urged his supporters to beat MDC supporters in June 2008 and at the least watched and did nothing about the persecution of MDC supporters by his supporters. On all these occasions he had an option to make a better decision but he chose not.

To highlight the difference, when he condemned violence before the March 2008 elections; we witnessed the most peaceful and tolerant election ever imagined in our country.

When he stood in front of the congregation at Mai Tsvangirai’s memorial service and condemned violence, he signified a major shift towards good leadership. His mere presence at the clinic and the memorial sent a message of solidarity even down to his supporters. For once no one in Zimbabwe celebrated death of a fellow human being; even The Herald was in a state of mourning!

Let us not under-estimate the significance of Edwin Tsvangirai’s words “I want to thank his excellency the President of the Republic of Zimbabwe for the kind words that changed my understanding of him." This is a testimony of how good leadership can easily sway public perception towards that which is good.

To show how deep this depiction of good leadership from both Mugabe and Tsvangirai has influenced public behaviour we may need to draw comparison on the death of Elliot Manyika and that of Rtd General Zvinavashe.

Many MDC supporters felt it was a punishment for Manyika to die but today we see a nation that is grieving for death of one of its gallant sons. We have chosen to ignore the bad that he has done, like the proclamation that the Office of The President is a straightjacket. Rather, we have chosen to celebrate the good that he has done like his sacrifice during the liberation struggle and his commitment to uplifting the education standards in Zimbabwe.

That is what good leadership can bring to our country; unfortunately it had to take the life of Mai Tsvangirai to open our eyes to it.

Let me close by urging all Zimbabweans to turnout in the same numbers and in the same spirit at the burial of Rtd General Zvinavashe he deserves our respect.

With all my love!

They killed Susan Tsvangirai, no doubt about it!

2009-03-07T14:05:00.000-08:00

Constant mistrust, constant mobility and constant vigilance is the advice I gave to fellow comrades when they opted to enter the Government of National Unity with ZANU PF. Today I mourn the death of Mrs Susan Tsvangirai and I repeat the advice; constant mistrust, constant mobility and constant vigilance.

Many would want us to believe that this was just a normal accidental accident, I will not buy this. I have reasons to. I know my enemy. I know how he operates and I know how ruthless and cunning he is. This has Z ANU PF in capital letters written all over it.

Cdes, do you remember what happened in 1975 in Zambia. Who killed Herbert Chitepo? Well officially it was a car bomb planted by the Rhodesian forces but who can explain to me why it only happened when somebody had been released from jail after détente?

Do you remember how Webster Gwauya, Henry Hamadziripi and many more were tortured and kept in dugout prisons in Mozambique for simply questioning the conduct of Robert Mugabe in 1978. Emmerson Munangagwa and Robert Mugabe presided over the kangaroo court that found them guilty. I am speaking here of a system that knows how to swallow its own people whenever they question the built of the same house they are in.

ZANU PF comrades is a octopussian system that knows no mercy nor man except those at its core. It has little regard for life whether innocent or dirty. All it knows is the art of death and covert operations.

I want to prove to you today that the death of Mai Tsvangirai was not accidental, rather it was a well-planned attempt on Morgan Tsvangirai’s life. Firstly, this comes at a time when ZANU PF has realised that they can no longer continue to hold ultimate power in the presence of Morgan Tsvangirai. There is no other option but to eliminate him.

Time was ripe now and the setting had been managed. ZANU PF has great plotters but I think this time they went too far with their elaborate plan. Firstly, they know very well that the world would be asking questions like:

They could have killed him before so why would they do it now given the GNU?

To answer this question; ZANU PF tried on many occasions to kill Mr Tsvangirai but most of the time it was half-hearted. It was so because Mr Tsvangirai posed little danger then to the hegemony of ZANU PF. To them, they still had total control and the existence of Mr Tsvangirai was in no way a threat to their existence. All this changed after the March 2008 elections. Since those election results it has dawned on ZANU PF that Mr Tsvangirai means nothing but an end to their domination. The refusal of the Germany company to assist Reserve Bank in printing worthless money, pressure from neighbouring countries and the solidarity given to MDC by many entities across the globe served to hammer the nail on ZANU PF. Morgan needed to be exterminated.

But ZANU PF is not an idle mind, it has very complex thinkers and strategists. Killing Tsvangirai was always a last resort; rather there existed other means by which they could curtail the MDC momentum. They are there for all to see. They sought to immobilise him by refusing him a passport, they trumped up mercenary accusations by bombing their own police stations. They arrested Gandi Mudzingwa, Jestina Mukoko and many more to try and discredit Tsvangirai as a bloodthirsty and unpatriotic war-monger. This failed.

They were forced by global and public pressure to enter the power-sharing deal. Mugabe was clear even on September 11. He had been forced. They have continued to frustrate the whole process of transition, unfortunately the more they try the more they realise Morgan is resilient and unwilling to walk away from the deal.

They have seen the potential of MDC to deliver at a time when the country is crying for a saviour and that alone is not acceptable. So, it has become the priority of ZANU PF to derail the agreement so that they retain unilateral power. Why is Gandi Mudzingwa still behind bars? He is collateral. What about Roy Bennet – a bargaining chip! But MDC is also saying “This time NO NO NO!”.

The only option now is to eliminate the head and face of the struggle. So indeed, there is a GNU on paper but in reality MDC is a threat to ZANU PF and can never be tolerated.

But there is no sign of ZANU PF here, the car they collided with is from USAID?

Like I said, these are elaborate thinkers; unfortunately we now know their behaviour. We have studied their trends and we know them. The Herald reports that Mr Tsvangirai’s landcruiser was hit by a truck belong to an American aid agency. Let us revisit a number of events that ZANU PF has been involved in before.

In February 1982, when arms cache were discovered at Ascort and Hampton farm, ZBC-the state broadcaster – was at hand to report the discovery! Emmerson Munangagwa actually flew from Harare so that he would be there when it happens. Who had told ZBC? Was ZAPU, with one of the country’s best trained intelligence expert Dumiso Dabengwa so dull to the extend that they could hide such a massive horde of arms at such a publicly accessible farm like Hampton? Why was Nkomo not told yet only the night before he had met Mugabe, and had also travelled on the same plane with Munangagwa and Sekeramai to Bulawayo. I know the arms cache was planted by ZANU PF to give credence to the impending pesercution of the Ndebele and Nkomo in particular.

In 2001 we had the case of Cain Nkala who ZANU PF at an instant including Robert Mugabe blamed MDC for his death. I still remember the event so vividly as it was broadcast live on Zimbabwe Television. Who can forget the sight of a visibly terrorised Khetani Sibanda as he pointed exactly on the shallow grave that Nkala had been buried alledegly by the MDC youths. So many questions have been asked. Why was ZBC present? Who had invited them? Why was ZBC that confident that indeed Sibanda would lead them to the place where Nkala was buried. There was a reason and that’s ZANU PF for you.

There are many covert operations which Zimbabwe’s CIO has undertaken on behalf of ZANU PF. Remember the Ari Ben Menashe and Morgan Tsvangirai’s alledged plot to kill Mugabe? Typically, ZANU PF seems not to be a part of all these events yet we know that it has invisible hands controlling the show. The motive was to undermine Morgan’s moral standing.

Who silenced Arch-Bishop Pius Ncube? We all know what happened but we choose to be quiet about it because; just as the CIO intended it to be, it is shameless. We are told it was the husband who engaged a private investigator to plant surveillance equipment in Pius Ncube’s house but we know it was ZANU PF. How can a private investigator afford such expensive material in a country where the police force fails to raise enough to buy speed detectors? Even the husband could not have afforded to pay such services. It is known- they did it.

How many within ZANU PF have died mysterious deaths; Josiah Tongogara, Willie Musarurwa, Chris Ushewokunze, Zororo Duri, Maurice Nyagumbo, Moven Mahachi, Border Gezi, General Gunda , Peter Pamire and many others. We are all made to believe they are just normal accidental deaths or suicides. But why is it that all these people at one point in time would have represented a threat to the continued hold on power by Mugabe?

Just to ask: who is accused of shooting Perence Shiri – Frank Muchirahondo a driver for USAID. Who is accused of causing the death of Susan Tsvangirai – a USAID driver. I smell a rat. There is no sign of CIO or ZANU PF- PERFECT!

I can go on and on by here it is: believe what you want but here is the advice I give to Morgan Tsvangirai – tsuro haiponi ritsva kaviri (You don’t dodge death twice!). Do not trust these people; remember constant mistrust, constant mobility and constant vigilance.

Rest in Peace Susan

We will always remember and cherish the motherly part that you showed to us!

Should I return to Zimbabwe?

2009-03-01T11:37:00.000-08:00

I have followed the events back home with keen interest and hope. A new government has been unveiled and efforts seem to be underway to address the humanitarian challenges that Zimbabwe is facing particularly the cholera outbreak. I remember Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai saying that he would put incentives to attract medical professionals who have left the country in their thousands. As a medical laboratory scientist I instantly started weighing the option of packing my bags and returning, unfortunately it seems there isn’t much to convince me that going back to Zimbabwe would be the best decision.

There are many things that a professional has to consider before he or she decides to join or in this case rejoin an entity. When I left Zimbabwe there were circumstances that had driven me to leave my country of birth, have these changed? Let me examine them.

I left the government of Zimbabwe in November 2005. My salary then was about US$40. At that time it was enough to buy my groceries, transport me to work and nothing more. Indeed we were some of the highly paid civil servants then because despite the shortages of basic commodities one dollar could buy 2 litres of cooking oil.

When I look at the situation today, all civil servants were given $US100 as vouchers but 2 litres of cooking oil is about $4, which means that in 2005 I was actually getting more than which I would get if I decide to go back. Further to this; I am getting a lot more in my current employment. So, which would be better to stay or go. As for me; I might choose to go back because money is not everything but is there a guarantee that if I go back home I will not die a pauper?

The prime reason that drove me from the civil service was the unprofessional and political nature that it was taking. In October 2005 Dr Obadiah Moyo who was the CEO of Chitungwiza hospital tried to force the laboratory to concoct results so that we could corroborate his allegations of a dysentery outbreak simply because Mugabe wanted the then Mayor of Chitungwiza out. I understand Dr Obadiah Moyo is still the CEO of Chitungwiza hospital and I ask: will professionalism return if the health delivery system remains in the management of all these ZANU PF apologists and zealots?

I examine the behaviour and composition of the Health Professions Council in particular the Zimbabwe Medical Laboratory and Clinical Scientist Council. This is a body that must regulate my profession and do so in a transparent and professional manner but how many bear the scars of its political nature. Imagine a body that charges registration fees that is thrice the salary the same government is giving to a scientist. Where do they think one would get such money? I fought a long and protracted battle to secure a certificate of good standing which sucked even the Zimbabwe Lawyers For Human Rights all because I did not subscribe to its partisan behavior. The same people still occupy these offices; how will I work with them knowing fully their orientations and ruthlessness.

These are just my circumstances but some are common across the professions. So in as much as we are patriotic and feel for our people; it still remains suicidal to return to Zimbabwe unless of course some real reforms are done to the whole service delivery system. Will this happen? I wait.

Soldiers come and go but our struggle is constant.

2009-02-09T11:23:00.000-08:00

History is littered with comrades who sacrificed themselves to the struggle for total emancipation of humankind. From Mbuya Nehanda to Malcolm X, from Herbert Chitepo to Che Guevara and many more whose names we may never know but whose legacy we bear witness today. Unfortunately, history is also littered with many individuals who sought to dehumanize humanity through oppression, slavery and barbarism. These have come in different shapes and sizes, yet the lesson we draw from this history is that; however dynamic the oppressor may be, evil will never triumph over good!

So, today as we witness the agreement between Mugabe and Tsvangirai we remain cognizant of the fact that the oppressor can never sympathize with his subjects. We are also mindful of the fact that many who at one point championed this struggle turned to be even worse tyrants.

Faced with these realities, should we place our faith in human beings? Some may say no, we should place our faith on the constitution. But laws are made by humans and we still find it hard to trust one like us. How can we trust the constitution when we have witnessed one of ours piercing and shredding this consecrated document and getting away with it? How can we have faith in a constitution?

We struggle everyday to make this world a better place to live in, but the more we fight the more we realize that man just has an unquenchable affinity for evil. This has been there since time immemorial. Jews chose Barabbas- a murderer- over Jesus Christ. Today, we stand aside and cheer as the good man of our society are tortured, abused and hanged in broad day light. We also cheer when the corrupt defile the innocent. Who killed Josiah Tongogara? Who killed Batanai Hadzizi? Who killed Learnmore Jongwe, Talent Chiminya, Gift Tandare? What will happen to the murderers?

Yes shaking hands is not a crime and we know that a hand that drips of blood can never be cleaned by shaking with a clean one, but vigilance still remains the only asset that revolutionaries have, for; the devil will seek day and night to convince us that it is not blood but strawberry juice. Lest you lick it, beware!

Some say power corrupts. With all the testimonies scattered in contemporary history, Idi Amin, Mobutu, Kamuzu Banda, Robert Mugabe are we not compelled to believe so? How many lifted the fist in jubilation after the hard won independence only to be hammered by the thud of the same fist? How safe am I?

Today we usher in a new dispensation; we celebrate hoping for a better future. They celebrated in 1980 but how many got what they fought for? Maybe we need to celebrate with caution because; the poor are known to get poorer while the rich get richer. Can one of our own change that?

Tim fought for equality, will he be equal? Job fought for jobs, will he be employed? Susan for peace will she get it? Will the people of Matebeleland get water, food, roads and electricity that the people of Zvimba are enjoying today?

What of the child whose priceless year was taken away from her by idleness. Will she be compensated? Will that son of a peasant at University of Zimbabwe finally have the decency of not sleeping under a bridge before attending lectures? Will he? My hopeless sister who has been lying on the mat of death, will she finally get medical care? Will she?

They fought for these long before us, we have been fighting, we will continue to fight for these but the hand of the slave-master is also getting stronger. We cannot keep watching from the terraces, rather we have to be there in the thick of action.

When they pull away from us, we pull them back. When they pull towards us, we complement. Still, we need constant mistrust, constant mobility and constant vigilance.

One soldier may falter but from him many more will be born and the struggle for a peaceful, just and free Zimbabwe continues.

Zimbabwe: Time to regroup, re-energise, restrategise and confront the devil with his spear!

2009-01-18T04:20:00.000-08:00

A movement that fails to renew and regenerate its ideas in line with the demands and expectations of its people risk becoming redundant. This could become the case in Zimbabwe unless we reorient ourselves.

There was a time when I was so convinced that a change in government could be achieved without confronting Mugabe's physical mighty. When we voted in 2000, I thought ZANU PF would be removed by the cumulative strength of our ballot. We failed. Lesson 1: ZANU PF could not be removed through the ballot.

In 2002, having noticed the euphoria across the nation in anticipation for change I was compelled to believe that indeed change was just a matter of time. I still vividly remember how I stayed awake the whole night as Mudede announced the results. It was a shock. My first reaction as Mugabe's numbers ballooned was to call the guys at Harvest House and told them that this could not be tolerated; but they too were as shocked as I was.

They decided to go to the courts, I thought otherwise. All they would say to me: "we are in search of democratic change". This was the same Morgan Tsvangirai who once said "if you do not go peacefully, we will remove you violently!" Why was MDC playing with precious time like that? I was however soothed by the fact that patience sometimes pays.

We managed to force the aspect of direct confrontation on MDC leadership in 2003 when they decided to force Mugabe out through civil disobedience, or I thought they had realized Mugabe's intransigency. We organized the "final-push".

I was under the impression that MDC was serious about taking over regardless of the challenges we faced. Then MDC had a strong network of activists at any level across the whole country. In Harare for instance, we had militant cell-groups even at ward level. It was easy to organize and discharge any activity without having to hunt for people or pay them to be part of it. The country was ready.

The sight of more than 5 000 University of Zimbabwe students marching towards the State House on 2 June 2003 was an inspiration to me. I was under the impression that thousands were also making their way towards the State House from all angles. Intelligence information indicated that Zimbabwe had only fourteen Israeli Water Cannons and very limited supply of teargas which obviously could not work against the thousands spread out across the city.

I was disappointed. The response from the state was emphatic. Students were brutalized and battered. They were shot at as if they were armed. Many later died from these injuries, others still carry the cicatrices. To my surprise, the then spokesperson for MDC, commented on BBC from South Africa, yet it had been made clear to us at a meeting in Harvest House that everyone would be in the thick of things. We were beaten into submission. Lesson 2: Mugabe could not be removed through peaceful civil action.

Every possible action outside physical confrontation had been tried but with failure. There was general agreement that if nothing radical was tabled then that was the end of it all. I still remember the sentiments passed at numerous Broad Alliance meetings that I attended. We had to change our approach to the struggle.

Whilst the general populace felt we needed this change in physical orientation- which we never hid even to Morgan- the party never seemed to take heed. By 2005 many were becoming frustrated by the apparent lack of decision by the party and feelings against the leadership were beginning to simmer. I still remember telling Ian Makone and Gandi Mudzingwa on our way to a BA meeting in 2005 that the idleness at the party would simmer into wildness. Sadly a few weeks later, violence broke out as camps fought for power. Eventually there was a split.

There was panic, even Morgan was overwhelmed. I remember finding the whole of Harvest House deserted save for Gandi, Dennis Murira and Nelson Chamisa. The advice that I remember giving these guys was that this was a chance for the party to regenerate itself. The challenge then was to allow for change within the party based upon loyalty to the party, commitment, competence and popular will and not loyalty to individuals. Unfortunately, the congress in 2006 was not conducted on these terms.

I am still of the opinion that the popularity of Morgan Tsvangarai cannot be doubted but the blunders, poor judgement and lack of impetus that are characteristic of MDC today is because of the blunders of March 2006 congress. Like ZANU PF today, there is no challenge of the ideas of elite. The elite itself does not sharpen each other. At the end of the day even the dullest of ideas may sail through simply because of loyalty to individuals and not loyalty to the cause.

Having said this, MDC remains the biggest player in the pro-change side of the struggle. Even some of us who do not entirely subscribe to its ideology cannot just ignore the fact that indeed MDC has played a key role in transforming our political landscape. In short, MDC is still important as a vehicle for change.

Who then fuels the vehicle? This is where we need to appreciate the dynamics of our struggle. We have reached a point where we are all convinced that indeed ZANU PF will use force to remain in power but for obvious reasons our leadership is hesitant to challenge this force in a decisive showdown.

This hesitancy is typical of any people-based movement. The only way the idea of force has been appreciated is when a dynamic front is opened that has an independent leadership but with a clear subscription to the cause of the broader movement. Dare ReChimurenga never called itself ZANU but subscribed to the ideas of ZANU. Umkhonto weSizwe never called itself ANC yet subscribed to the broader agenda of ANC.

I do not wish to dwell much on why MDC would never openly support the use of force to institute change in Zimbabwe, but I am more than convinced that deep down they too are contemplating this. What is needed now is for the committed within and without MDC to seek an alternative entity that at the beginning has independent leadership which loosely subscribe to MDC's broader agenda. This entity would operate independently with silent support of the MDC leadership.

As of the status quo, it remains MDC's responsibility to handle the GPA diligently but given Mugabe's behaviour it is high time that MDC goes on the offensive. A decision should be made, but frankly Mugabe is not willing to work for Zimbabwe.

Yes, I am a fervent critic of MDC's policies but MDC is better placed to bring down the dictatorship than anybody else. What is needed now is to build upon where MDC is and work together to provide the momentum and cutting edge that is currently lacking in this struggle. SACP and ANC taught us that minor differences can be put aside to achieve a broader goal.

We have reached a point where I think we need to confront the devil with his spear.

May we begin now!

This political impasse cannot be allowed to continue

2009-01-07T07:01:00.000-08:00

I am of the opinion that the current political stand-off should not be tolerated. It remains my humble view that both Mugabe and Tsvangirai are failing to appreciate the gravity of the situation on the ground. To both of them what is important is political point-scoring even at the expense of the people whom they represent.

Mugabe is brutally exposing the people of Zimbabwe to his recklessness and carefree attitude. Since the day he claimed there is no cholera in Zimbabwe the deaths have doubled. He has chosen not to care about all the hardships the people of Zimbabwe are going through. Indeed he is to blame for the collapse of the country but where does that leave Morgan?

Morgan has chosen to be actively inactive about the humanitarian crisis that he has also led the country into choosing to concentrate more on that which is around him. By signing that GPA he was making a commitment to the people of Zimbabwe that he was willing to be their servant even in the hardest of times. What good does it do to make demand after demand when the people are dying. Didn’t Chairman Mao say to Chiang-Kai-Shek “Brothers quarelling at home unite in the face of national challenges” or something like that? Today he is sitting afar taking a bird’s eye view of the suffering the heroic people of Zimbabwe have to inure. All because of POWER?

Maybe Morgan does not appreciate the magnitude of the situation in Zimbabwe. I will help him understand.

One of my distant relatives on my mother’s side in Shumbayarerwa in Gutu (Sekuru Phineus) had gone two weeks without putting a roll of Sadza in his mouth surviving on shomwe (I don’t think you have had about that but it is the core of dry marula seed). It was only when a cousin went there that we got to know of this predicament and when we visited that area with 200kg of maize meal we were met by horror. Imagine, we found the whole village waiting for barley porridge to be served. They had managed to get a 5kg tin from Vhondo village and about 50 people were waiting to eat the porridge from that amount. We gave Sekuru phineus’s family 50kg but he could not sit up to thank us. All he could do was cry. Yet we need the Police Ministry!

I went to Murambinda Mission hospital (the only fully functional public hospital probably in the whole of Zimbabwe) People were coming as far as Gokwe, Mwenezi, Rusape and Chipangali for medical help. The tales I got from the nurses and other patients are just something else. Imagine a person being ferried all the way to a hospital after getting into diabetic coma only to be given porridge and becoming fit again? What of the HIV patients who came from that far only to be told that there are no drugs? What of those who died because electricity went off during essential operations. And we are told we will have to wait for AU, then UN blah blah?

In Chivi, I went to my home village in Masunda. When I got to my uncle’s house I found him with his 5 year old son, I asked him where the others were. He told me that three of his children all below twenty together with their mother had crossed the border into South Africa all without passports! Cdes, how terrible is it that in a village wthat, only a year ago had more than 60 youths, just one remained obviously because he was nursing dog-bite injuries sustained at Chiadzwa?

So I ask, if Morgan is fighting for democracy, which one is he fighting for? A democracy that ignores the right to life but upholds the right to arrest? Come on Mugabe, unoda kuzvitonga kupi? One where you will rule yourself after everybody has died?
If Mugabe is a DEVIL I then I challenge MORGAN to wear the DIVINE jacket.

I urge all those who call themselves civil activists to reflect on the pathetic situation in our country and make the right calls. POWER is meaningless when there is nobody to preside over.

This should come to an end even if your salary is from the crisis!

THE STRUGGLE FOR REAL CHANGE IN ZIMBABWE: The challenges and the solutions.

2008-12-06T04:19:00.000-08:00

The biggest challenge that we face as champions and agents of social and economic change is that of building a coherent set of ideas that are timeless, pragmatic, sustainable and achievable. These ideas should reflect the perpetual endeavour by humankind to be free and equal. In this article, I will try to examine this challenge and also postulate some solutions.

A lot of demonisation has gone around the world about ZANU PF’s behaviour in Zimbabwe but at the same time it seems as if it is only ZANU PF that owns the good ideas about how life ought to be in my country. We have a situation where ZANU PF does horrible things in the name of Pan-Africanism and Socialism. At the end of the day Zimbabweans have begun to associate these ideas with the tainted image of ZANU PF to the extent that they are willing to settle for anything outside of this as an alternative.

Is there anything bad about Pan-Africanism and Socialism? To me, these ideas are constants which we need as yardsticks for human evolution towards an ideal and civilised society. However, because of a variable in the form of ZANU PF, many of us have become paranoid of the concepts much to the detriment of the struggle and to the advantage of the capitalist vampire. So, how do we extract the ideals of the struggle from the grip of ZANU PF, spruce them and again sell them as the rallying point of our struggle for emancipation?

This is where we need to expose the intricate hand of the capitalist in turning us from an enthusiastic, dedicated and united people to a withdrawn, sombre, resigned and careless people. Is it practical that Zimbabweans who bravely fought the longest and bloodiest struggle against colonialism could so suddenly turn into cowardly servants of dictatorship? No, Zimbabweans are not cowards but there is nothing for them in this power struggle – so why fight?

The U.S as part of the problem
The biggest blame that I lay on the United States is its treacherous and coercive behaviour when dealing with Africa. The desire of the U.S in Zimbabwe which of course is consistent with its capitalist objectives has never been to see the social or economic development of ordinary Zimbabweans, rather its intentions were meant to entrench and sustain a capitalist hegemony in Zimbabwe especially led by big American corporations.

Firstly, a closer analysis of the Economic Structural Adjustment Program (1991-1994) would reveal the conspiracy between the Zimbabwe Government and the World Bank to undermine the livelihood of general Zimbabweans. Although the package came veiled under the cosy intent to promote higher growth and to reduce poverty and unemployment, it was the strategy that raised more questions than applauses.

1. How does retrenchment of civil servants result in increased employment?
2. How on earth can removal of maize subsidy to the generality of the people be expected to increase their standards of living?
3. How does the reintroduction of health and school fees help develop the disadvantaged child?
Since the World Bank is (by default) owned by the United States and also since US has the biggest quota in IMF I find the United States equally responsible for the mismanagement of the Zimbabwean economy and for dehumanising the poor of Zimbabwe.

Secondly, the other excuses by the IMF and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development for stopping financial support to Zimbabwe in 1999 raise more questions than answers:

1. Undemocratic tendencies by Mugabe- Since independence has Mugabe ever been democratic in his rule? Where was the IMF when the Matebeleland massacres occurred? Where was IMF and the World Bank in 1990 when ZUM was brutalised and the likes of Patrick Kombayi were shot? If this isn’t pure hypocrisy, where did the WB get the guts to approve the US$125 million loan to Zim in 1992?

2. Zimbabwe’s involvement in Democratic Republic of Congo- I do not justify the reasons that I gather Mugabe entered DRC for but it has been common knowledge that Zimbabwe had been on many peace-keeping and other military operations in Africa before the DRC. Why was DRC that important? I guess this question is beyond the scope of this article but suffice to say Mugabe tampered with the long-standing interests of the American capitalists which dated back to the days of Mobutu. Why hasn’t Angola been punished by the IMF or WB despite its continued involvement in DRC?

I am of the conviction that these were just excuses to punish Zimbabweans for choosing the path of social equality at the expense of the capitalist interests.

Lastly, after carefully studying the excerpts of declassified CIA material, I cannot help but be convinced that the complexities of our struggle in Zimbabwe have been brought about by a clear American hand that would rather have a docile, pro-American party ruling Zimbabwe instead of a truly revolutionary and people-oriented alternative to ZANU PF. I will dwell more on this.

I find it worthwhile to refer to the Memorandum Prepared by the Joint Chiefs of Staff on the COURSES OF ACTION TO COUNTER COMMUNIST PENETRATION OF GHANA, GUINEA AND MALI (31 January 1962). I will particularly, concentrate on the recommendations:

“The following courses of action, lying primarily outside of the capabilities of the US Military Establishment, would enhance our position in Ghana, Guinea, and Mali, and would contribute to the success of the courses of action listed in paragraph 8 which utilize primarily the resources of the Military Establishment.

a. Expose by all means [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] Communist Bloc activities in Ghana, Guinea, and Mali, which are inimical to the rights and aspirations of the individual. (This program should be carried on not only by the appropriate US agencies, but by the use of the third party principle.)

b. Discredit [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] Communist oriented or Communist trained governmental personnel. (The third party principle should be used to the fullest extent.)

c. Assist [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] pro-Western opposition parties, individuals, or refugee groups in gaining prestige and in building a strong opposition movement to Communism.

d. Assist pro-Western groups in gaining control of news media by [less than 1 line of source text not declassified] providing funds and assistance.

e. Assist personnel in categories c and d above, in gaining prestige by orientation visits to the United States.”
By carefully studying the implications of the above prescriptions one cannot help but wonder whether the same strategies are not being applied today in Zimbabwe. Whilst, I do not have anything against the exposure of human rights abuses in Zimbabwe, I find it rather fishy that there is a constant and unrelenting coverage of only the bad in Zimbabwe and never the good. This program is clearly being carried out by the now so ubiquitous civic organisations that are directly linked to the US agencies that operate in the country.
The huge media coverage and the open carpet that exist for Movement for Democratic Change makes it quite impossible for one not to suspect that as was the resolution in 1962, there could be a direct symbiotic relationship between this party and the US. Many radio stations have also erupted notably the VOA’s Studio 7 and SWRadioAfrica which for all the good they say they are doing never beam any positive news about Zimbabwe.
There are many Zimbabweans who have been invited to the US for prestigious awards and other program including the current president of the MDC, Mr Tsvangirai. The purpose of these people is to spur others into activities that necessitate the removal of the current regime in the hope that they too may also be recognised by the US. However, only those that prop up the ideas of the capitalist get recognition; the same reason why people like Munyaradzi Gwisai of the International Socialist Organisation Zimbabwe would find it difficult to get American recognition despite his gallant stance against the regime.
Finally on this note, I want to affirm the point that the 1960s strategy is still being used in Africa, including the laws that were passed then for the purposes of curtailing the spread of communism. It does not need a divine stimulus for one to see the similarities between the above and the contents of ZIMBABWE DEMOCRACY AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT OF 2001 (ZIDERA):

“Sec 5: Support for democratic institutions, the free press and independent media, and the rule of law.
(a) IN GENERAL.—the President is authorized to provide assistance under part I and chapter 4 of part II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to—
(1) Support an independent and free press and electronic media in Zimbabwe;
(2) Support equitable, legal, and transparent mechanisms of land reform in Zimbabwe, including the payment of costs related to the acquisition of land and the resettlement of individuals, consistent with the International Donors’ Conference on Land Reform and Resettlement in Zimbabwe held in Harare, Zimbabwe, in September 1998, or any subsequent agreement relating thereto; and
(3) Provide for democracy and governance programs in Zimbabwe.
(b) FUNDING.—of the funds authorized to be appropriated to carry out part I and chapter 4 of part II of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 for fiscal year 2002—
(1) $20,000,000 is authorized to be available to provide the assistance described in subsection (a) (2); and
(2) $6,000,000 is authorized to be available to provide the assistance described in subsection (a) (3).”

America as part of the solution

America can still be a valuable positive asset in our struggle only if becomes pro-people and allow for the people of Zimbabwe to choose a path for their own freedom without coercion or duress.

Sustainable change in Zimbabwe can only come if the people choose to move in tandem not only united by a common enemy but also by a common goal and vision. The only way we can build a common goal and vision is when we cease to be survival scavengers. Right now it is a matter of priorities; people simply have to choose between “politics of the stomach” and “national politics”, the former obviously taking precedence.

Although USA would want to hide behind a finger and proclaim that there are no blanket sanctions against Zimbabwe it is clear to all and sundry that this is not the case. To prove this point, I will quote the US Ambassador to Zimbabwe, James Mcgee when he was asked by Violet Gonda of SWRadioAfrica about the removal of sanctions against Zimbabwe:
“The financial sanctions that have been brought against Zimbabwe are there for a good reason and the good reason is the fact that Zimbabwe has refused to pay back the loans outstanding to this country. They have refused to service their debt and that is why there are financial sanctions against Zimbabwe. You are not going to find any international lending institution willing to lend money to Zimbabwe because Zimbabwe has a long track record of not paying this money back.”

By extrapolation; indeed the sanctions are there, and also the US is using its muscle in international financial institutions to deny Zimbabwe access to loans. So, dull as we may be, it is clear that the US, has been acting as the saviour on the public arena yet behind the scenes is busy cooking us (the general Zimbabweans) in a hot pot.

It is this nicodemus behaviour that has been retrogressive to our struggle. I therefore urge the Americans to lift these sanctions so that Zimbabweans can have food and other social services. This would allow for soberness of the brain and a clear conscience which are both important in building consciousness and commitment to the struggle.

We are also encountered by a dearth in leadership simply because of the American strategy of assimilating all potential revolutionaries into its system by the lure of the dollar. This is typified by the fact that nearly all former radical student leaders are employed by various civic organisations which are funded by USAID or other American institutions like NED. This has stifled intellectual discourse as most of them lose their innovative conscience and begin to echo counter-revolutionary and structuralist ideas consistent with where their bread is buttered.

I believe the liberation of Zimbabwe can be spurred by the intelligentsia of the society which at this point is being uprooted in its infancy.

America should provide unconditional support to the struggle as a matter of moral commitment to the liberation of Zimbabweans regardless of our ideological differences. This contemporary analysis applies also even to other Western countries especially United kingdom.

Having said this, I doubt that America as harsh and ruthless as it is can be that generous or benevolent to this struggle; rather, we are on our own and only our faith and commitment will free us.

Extracting the values of the struggle

Yes, like the Movement for Democratic Change correctly points out; our struggle is for democracy but which kind of democracy? We are fighting for a democracy that understands our values and foundation as a people, a democracy that appreciates our history as a people and also commits to our vision as a people.

These values are stated below:

1. Zimbabwe is a sovereign state whose independence shall never be tempered with.
2. Zimbabwe comes first, Africa second and the World third
3. Zimbabwe is for Zimbabweans, everyone else is a brother
4. Zimbabwe is Zimbabwe by virtue of its boundaries, history and culture.
5. The voice of the people of Zimbabwe is the voice of God.

Having understood these, the democracy that we are fighting for would then appreciate a number of facts that exist in our society. These facts include, tribal and linguistic diversity, poverty, racial diversity, colonialism and its legacy, religious multiplicity and a lot others. This democracy should therefore be able to address these without bias, vengeance or fear guided by our general vision of a free, united and prosperous Zimbabwe that exists based on principles of egalitarianism. Pragmatically, this democracy should be in a position to build a united movement of all Zimbabweans and then weed a path that this movement would follow, confident of the fact that that path would lead them towards their collective destination!

Am I not echoing a lot of things that ZANU PF has used against us? Indeed I am, but the fault is ours; we are the ones who have allowed ZANU PF to bastardise our values. We allowed ZANU PF to define to us what patriotism is, we allowed it to monopolise the liberation struggle, and we allowed it to own our heroes and our history. It is a shame that even MDC has been caught up in this maze of ignorance to the extent that it views anything that extols our anti-colonial liberation struggle as detrimental to its struggle.

Defining the Democracy

What type of government do we need?
1) The government should be a reflection of the wishes and aspirations of the people of Zimbabwe
2) The government should be a true representative of the people of Zimbabwe
3) The government should be one that is directly accountable and answerable to the people of Zimbabwe
4) The government should be elected by popular vote
5) The government should be appointed by the people and be removable by the wishes of the people.

What type of governance do we need?

If the government of Zimbabwe is defined within the above confines, then how should it govern the country?

- The distribution of Zimbabwean resources should be a true reflection of the demographic distribution of the people of Zimbabwe. (More resources should go to where more people are settled.)
- Priority should be given to uplifting the lives of the majority of the people of Zimbabwe. In this respect, the government should give priority to provision of basic needs before thinking of profit.
- The transactions of the government with the people of Zimbabwe should not be aimed at making profit but to provide for them- profit comes from foreign interactions.
- It is the obligation of the government to ensure the protection of the poor from the machinations of the rich.
- The government should have an obligation to reduce the gap between the rich and the poor.
- The government should only be a trustee and steering committee to administer the country’s resources and diligently and impartially distribute them to the people in a manner transparent and acceptable to the people.

The seven policies we need

- One man one vote
- Multiparty democracy
- Free education
- Free health
- Free access to land
- Equal access to employment
- Workers should benefit from their labour.

How would the government implement these?

One man, One vote

- There would be representation of the people from the village committee up to the national structures.
- The parliament should be made up of people chosen by the people of a given constituency
- The drawing up of constituencies should be based upon the following
• Common neighbourhood
• Common lifestyle
• Common welfare
• Common beliefs
- Elections are run by an independent commission that is funded from the coffers of the government and made up of respectable people/individuals of good moral and social standing. All classes of people should be represented and the choices should be endorsed by the people through their representatives at microcosm level.
- Every man’s vote would be counted as equal to everybody else’s.
- Representation of the people would be ultimate and by popular vote, this would mean;
• A minimum of 66.6% of the electorate should vote in any election; if less than that this number turns out for any election, then the result would be null and void a rerun would be done after further education and lobbying of the electorate.
• The winner of an election should be a convincing representative of the people of his constituency. In this case he/she should garner more than 50% of the cast votes. If there is no one with a simple majority then the elections should be rerun between the top two representatives.

Multiparty Democracy

- There would be no repression or suppression of political views, ideas or beliefs in which every citizen would be allowed to participate politically in any national agenda as allowed by agreed laws of the country.
- Every party would be granted equal access to state facilities like media, security etc
- Every party would be allowed unreserved access to the people as is acceptable by commonly agreed laws of the country.
- Every party would be allowed access to state resources based upon the percentage of the electorate it represents.

Free education

- there would be free access to basic education
- The government would subsidize secondary and tertiary education; the amount of subsidy should be such that every child who wishes to continue with education would do so without stress.

Free health

- There would be free access to health facilities
- Every person would be granted specialized health care at a cost that would be sustained by the government of Zimbabwe. ( Every Zimbabwean has a right to the resources of the country, when the government sells the country’s gold; there is a percentage of it for everybody thus this percentage should go towards sustaining the livelihoods of the people of the country)

Free access to land

- Every Zimbabwean citizen would have access to land depending on the type of lifestyle of that person. In this regard, those in the urban areas would be given building stands free of charge, which shall be theirs and for their families. Those in rural areas whose life is sustained by agricultural activities would be given land to farm on reasonably fertile lands which can sustain them and the nation too.
- The purpose of the government is to oversee that the land is equitably distributed based upon need and to ensure that no one owns benefits at the expense of others.
- Commercial agriculture would be encouraged and the lands reserved for such would not be interfered with in the process of land redistribution.

Equal access to employment

- Every Zimbabwean who has reached the age of majority and wishes to be employed would be employed based upon his/her ability and qualifications.
- People of the same qualifications would have equal opportunity for any job.
- People doing the same job at the same establishment with the same qualifications would be entitled to the same treatment.

Workers should benefit from their labour

- The government would put policies that ensure that workers benefit from the profits of their labour. This particularly includes:
• Gazetting from time to time realistic minimum wages in line with the costs of basic needs.
• Stipulating a certain percentage to be shared from every company’s annual profits by its workers.

- There would be laws enacted by common agreement to protect the workers from abuse and misuse.

How do we organize ourselves towards this type government?

- A movement of the people should be formed
- it is the responsibility of the intelligentsia of the society to strategize and educate the people on what needs to be done and why it is supposed to be done.
- The people should own the revolution and through public agreement choose their own leaders.
- The leadership of the movement should abide by strict conduct and seek to uphold the values and principles of the revolution
- Education is the greatest weapon against the facets of oppression; therefore in the anticipation of the revolution the movement should put more effort on educating the people of Zimbabwe.
- Every Zimbabwean has a responsibility to sustain the revolution.
- The power of persuasion rather than the power of coercion should be used in all the engagements of the Movement.
- Violence should not be tolerated within and without the movement: We have more to lose in hostility than in diplomatic engagement but ……...

Conclusion

I have sought to unravel the complexities that we face within the struggle for total emancipation in Zimbabwe, I have also tried to extract and compact our values as a people and finally to postulate a way forward. It is not my wish to demoralise those who are fighting today nor is it my wish to alienate anyone from his supporters; however it remains my humble conviction that the path that the current players are taking leads nowhere but to doom and the sooner we, together with the international community realise it the better.

The struggle continues…!

Freeman Forward Chari
Secretary General
Zimbabwe Youth Movement

CHANGE WE DESIRE: Democracy without transfer of wealth is meaningless.

2008-12-05T01:30:00.000-08:00

Each time that I pose to check the content of our struggle, I am confronted by one question- what are we fighting for? Some say freedom: but how many times have I heard people shouting, what is freedom with hunger? How many people have I heard saying Smith was better than Mugabe? Some say democracy: but if democracy is the rule of the people by the people for the people why is it that so many things are being agreed upon and implemented without the people ever knowing? In short, we are frustrated with the lives that we live and we think that by transferring power from Mugabe to Tsvangirai our lives will be better.

When we talk of better, we are saying from this point, I will move to another point that is bigger. We expect a translational growth. So the question I ask again is: in 1998 my father had a total wealth amounting to US$20 000, today his wealth is around US$5 000, in the event that political change occurs, from which reference point will he measure the betterness of his life? If he was seeking political change in 1998 because he felt his government then was stifling growth, what will stop him from seeking political change if his wealth stagnates at US$18 000?

The point I am trying to put across here is that, what we are primarily fighting for is not political power but wealth. The reasons why we may seek political change are dynamic. In 1998, we wanted Mugabe out because he had failed to deliver on the "wealth aspect" of promises of the liberation struggle. Today we want him out because we are uncontrollably loosing wealth on an hourly basis.

Why is it then that when our wealth stagnates or when we get poorer we seek political change? It is because of Democracy! We expect that when we choose people to represent us, their choice of decisions should reflect the needs and aspirations of the people. Now, when we choose you because we aspire to be wealthier; and after a certain period of time we realise that we haven't grown; we are left with no option but to chuck you out of that office. What we do not ask ourselves is whether the failure of that person is because he made wrong decisions or because he could not make the right decision. We do not ask ourselves; if he couldn't make a decision is it because he is dull or because he is incapacitated to.

This takes me to the core of my thinking. If we elect somebody but in the course of his duties he stumbles on a challenge that needs radical use of power but discovers that his power is actually limited what happens? Do we go back and check as the electorate, the collective strength of our power. If so, do we also check the collective strength of our power relative to other powers that exist within our dominion?

Power is the basic energy needed to initiate and sustain an action or the capacity to translate intention into reality and sustain it. It is that which confers the ability to influence decisions, about who gets what resources, what goals are pursued, what philosophy is adopted, what actions are taken, who succeeds and who fails. If we can only change characters that govern us but our power is limited when we wish to change the distribution of economic wealth and the policies that govern such then we are not our own rulers. And therefore democracy as by its definition would be non-existent.

So, what do we need? We need the ability to choose whoever we wish to govern us, but more importantly we need the ability to confer that person with real power to implement our policies without restriction whatsoever.

What does this entail to the current Zimbabwe struggle? It means that as a people we have to first of all identify the reason why we are poor and why we are becoming poorer by the day. Secondly, we poster the solutions, thirdly, we choose our governors and mandate them to deal with the reasons in the way that we have postulated for them.

To me, wealth is the collective value of what one owns apart from his body and mind. The biggest impediment that we as Zimbabweans have had under Mugabe is that, there is nothing meaningful to own for a common man because everything meaningful is already owned by somebody! We could not venture into commercial agriculture because all the land was being owned by some few people. We could not tap into the produce of these commercial farmers because; either all grain had to be sold to Grain Marketing Board or the same farmers had prior network supply contracts. For example, Triangle Ltd would never, under any circumstances sell a bundle sugarcane to me so that I could resell at Mbare Musika because it was more interested in creating more wealth by making brown sugar, which they would not sell directly to me so that I could sell at a cheaper price but with a profit, rather they would supply N. Richards (Pvt) Ltd which is a wholesaler, that would not sell to me as an individual but would supply OK foods (Pvt)Ltd. So, the common man has been on the margins of the agricultural wealth-creation chain of Zimbabwe.

The same happened in any other sector that you might think of. When Rio Tinto (Pvt) Ltd mined gold at Renco Mine, I am not allowed to purchase that gold and resell it even if I have the resources to. Rather the Reserve Bank has the sole right to buy from them. Since mining is considered illegal for individuals in Zimbabwe, it meant then that as a common man I continued to be on the margins of the mining wealth in Zimbabwe.

So, real democracy should mean real power to the people. Indeed, we want land reform but not all of us want that land. Some of us want to take advantage of the produce from this land, thus we seek reform of the way agricultural-oriented business is done in Zimbabwe. We need mining reform, yes; but we also need a reform on the way mineral-oriented business is regulated and managed.

So in conclusion; our struggle is about control of the mode of production, it is about the distribution of wealth and the liberalisation of the mode of creating wealth. It is not about power but about real power. It is not about the right to vote but the strength of that vote!

Aluta Continua!!!

2008-12-04T05:26:00.000-08:00

Coming soon ......!