Maravi

(HERALD) Mbeki: A man among men

Mbeki: A man among men
By Peter Mavunga

I KNEW it was only a matter of time before they turned their venom on South African President Thabo Mbeki. And that moment is here — now that Mr Mbeki has remained his own man, refusing to become a spokesman for the West. The United Kingdom’s Daily Telegraph’s article earlier this week, headlined "Questions over Mbeki’s role in Zimbabwe talks", is one example of the way this principled African leader is being vilified.

He would have been spared their spleen had he chosen the easy route of doing as he is told. But, no. He has let them down, so he is getting it fast and furious.

According to the West, President Mbeki has been a disappointment, especially over Zimbabwe.

If only he had agreed to act resolutely to abet illegal regime change north of the border, he would have been their blue-eyed boy.

What is more, he would have been showered with superlative degrees of comparison only: like "the most far-sighted statesman of Africa".

I know this because this is what happened to our own President Mugabe at independence.

Having been described as "the Hitler of Africa" in a British tabloid before independence, the then Prime Minister Mugabe became the statesman of Africa almost overnight, thanks to his policy of reconciliation.

That policy announcement at a time the white population was shell-shocked by the victory of Zanu-PF at the polls was the best thing they had heard since sliced bread

Many had packed their bags ready to go and, indeed, many left (though some of them returned afterwards.)

It was a policy that endeared the then Prime Minister to the white population that felt safe enough to unpack their bags and stay on in the new Zimbabwe.

Their interests were clearly not being threatened, hence Cde Mugabe was cool.

President Mbeki, too, would have received similar accolades if, on Zimbabwe, he had condemned the country in the same terms the British are using in trying to consign the country to the dust heap.

All Mr Mbeki needed to do was extend the illegal sanctions imposed by the West.

In other words, they would have been pleased if he had done their dirty work.

But the South African leader is a shrewd and perceptive politician.

He is an African to boot and knows there is dignity in being African.

He believes there is such a thing called an African perspective, an agenda that cannot and should not be ignored.

In the case of Zimbabwe and his own South Africa, this has meant recognising the injustices meted out to indigenous Africans.

This has meant standing up to be counted and being prepared to stand up to the West.

This has meant, above all, being objective in his attitude towards President Mugabe rather than swallowing other people’s agendas.

Trouble is that this does not fit in with the all powerful West’s agenda and he who does not fit into the system is treated like an outcast or rather he is castigated in a condescending way as they have been doing against President Mugabe.

Now President Mbeki is having a taste of the same treatment in the Mark Gevisser’s book, "Thabo Mbeki: the Dream Deferred", the subject of the Telegraph article.

"Even though I’m certain Mbeki believes (Cde) Mugabe needs to go, he has proven he is not the right person to facilitate (Cde) Mugabe’s departure," Gevisser told the Telegraph.

This illustrates the problem.

It was not my understanding that Sadc set up the Mbeki commission, if I could call it that, in order to facilitate President Mugabe’s departure.

I thought it was set up to work towards a rapprochement between the Zanu-PF and the MDC factions and to work towards free and fair elections.

When a man devotes a book to discussing a political process, though, the least he could do is get the basic facts right.

Yet the author’s lack of grasp of the facts could be excused.

He probably could not help it. There is group-think mentality here, especially in the media and the BBC.

For the politics and economics of Zimbabwe to flourish and improve, one thing ought to take place: Mugabe must go.

Even a minister in Tony Blair’s government, Peter Hain, lashed out: "Mugabe must go and go now."

Funny enough, I have often associated statements like this with good examples of interference in the internal affairs of another country.

I would have thought that the task of voting in or voting out leaders is the preserve of the Zimbabwean people, however incompetent they may appear to the West.

But Western governments often abuse their power and impose their will on smaller nations.

This involves telling the smaller nation when the leader of the country should go when it is none of their business.

It is difficult for Western governments, so it seems, to take into account the fact that Zimbabwe has a constitution that allows the President to stand for re-election again and again.

Until the Constitution is changed, say through the ongoing Sadc initiative on dialogue, it is always baffling to find such clamour for unconstitutional regime change.

The proper way of doing things is to empower the people of Zimbabwe so that they, not anyone else, not even the British or Americans, should poke their nose into the internal affairs of a sovereign country.

President Mbeki has been criticised for all sorts of things, including alleged lack of transparency, being too close to President Mugabe and, above all, ‘‘working too slowly’’.

But there are others who think negotiations such as those taking place between Zanu-PF and the MDC factions are delicate and ought to be conducted in private away from the public gaze to have a realistic chance of success.

I belong to the latter.

l Feedback: p.mavunga @yahoo.co.uk

Labels: THABO MBEKI, ZIMBABWE

posted by MrK @ 6:35 AM