IMF and EU sanctions affect the entire Zimbabwean economy, not just 'the political leadershiip'. From The Herald:
Western terror acts in Cuba mirror those in Zim
THE illegal sanctions imposed on Zimbabwe by the United States and the EU have caused so much suffering, which is why they have received widespread condemnation, with the latest denunciation coming at the Extra-ordinary Summit of Sadc Heads of State and Government in Tanzania. Despite this consensus, the West has not responded to the calls, the same way it has ignored the consensus in the UN General Assembly against the illegal blockade on Cuba. The Herald caught up with Cuban Ambassador MR COSME TORRES ESPINOSA to talk about these and other issues.
QUESTION: Ambassador Espinosa, you have been in Zimbabwe for almost two years now, how has been your stay, and the state of Zim-Cuba relations?
ANSWER: As I said before, our embassy staff have been busy over the past two years, especially me because I am the ambassador, but we are very glad, I am very happy because the state of relations between Cuba and Zimbabwe is strengthening. We now have excellent relations, of course it’s not something unusual, first of all because we are comrades, secondly because we share the same position for our people but also because we share common positions in international issues.
The relations between Cuba and Zimbabwe date back to the days of Zimbabwe’s struggle for independence, and from the very beginning Cuba supported Zimbabwe in the struggle and even after the struggle for liberation Cuba offered to come to the assistance of Zimbabwe. As you know more than 3 000 Zimbabweans graduated from a programme that was sponsored by Cuba and every year we have offered scholarships to the Government of Zimbabwe.
In all these years we developed co-operation with Zimbabwe in the field of health, medical brigades of Cuban doctors have been working here in Zimbabwe for many, many years. Right now, for example, we have a group of doctors, 59 Cuban doctors, that have finished their tour of duty after two years working here and next week a new group of 140 Cuban doctors will be arriving.
Q: What is the level of co-operation in the area of trade for instance?
A: One area that we do not have a high level of co-operation is trade, I think one of the reasons, of course, is that Zimbabwe has traditional commercial partners and Cuba also has traditional partners, I think this is one issue we can work on for the future.
Q: Despite the 50-year embargo, Cuba has still managed to help other countries in various sectors, how do you manage to do that given the Western siege?
A: As you know for our government and our people, the main resource of course is our people, for many years since the triumph of the revolution, we prepared many professionals with the idea not only that they will work in Cuba but also with the idea of helping other countries, 1951 was the year the first group of Cuban doctors came to Algeria to help there, and since that time more than 130 000 Cuban doctors have been working in almost 100 different countries. Right now we have more than 20 000 Cuban doctors working in 69 countries, also all these years we received many young people from Africa, Latin America, from the Caribbean, in Cuba they received degrees and are ready to help their countries.
Q: Zimbabwe and Cuba share unique experiences, as they are both under siege from some Western nations opposed to their policies. Can you tell our readers how Cuba has managed to cope with the 50-year US blockade, and the lessons Zimbabwe can draw from your experiences?
A: First of all, we do not want to give any lessons to anybody, we believe our experiences are unique and everybody has their own experiences.
Of course, in the case of Cuba you know that since the triumph of the Cuban revolution, we implemented a socialist system in Cuba. It’s a system that is supported by the majority of the Cuban people, but on the other hand, we know that for our people it’s a matter of sovereignty to support our system.
Q: Tied to the sanctions is the question of economic hardships, primarily inflation, what is the situation like in Cuba?
A: I do not know the exact figure of our inflation in Cuba but let me tell you that in the 1990s after the fall of the former Soviet Union, the socialist countries in Europe, we faced a very harsh economic situation in Cuba, we even call that time, a special period, in fact it was a second blockade of Cuba because we lost our commercial partners, our friends and so on, so all those years the economy of Cuba regressed by 34 percent, but we managed to continue developing our economy mainly because at that moment we managed to develop some sectors such as tourism. For example last year our tourism sector received 2,2 million tourists, we also managed to develop our biotechnology sector and pharmaceutical sector, right now they are exporting to 150 countries. Also all these years government was committed to continue developing social programmes, and mainly to keep the cultural levels, the educational levels of the whole population.
Q: As in Zimbabwe, one of Commandant Castro’s enduring legacies is the investment made in the social services, that is health and education, how has your country managed to maintain the high standards in the face of American subversion?
A: It’s not an easy task, for example because of the blockade this year, the damage to our economy cost the Cuban people US$86 billion, as I said before the commitment of our government was to develop free educational systems, health care systems, not only for Cuba but also for helping other countries. On the other hand, from the very beginning of the revolution, we realised it was very important for the Cuban people to have a high cultural level, that is why in 1961 we eradicated illiteracy in Cuba, that’s why after that we committed ninth class finish for everybody in Cuba, that’s why we have more than one university in every province in Cuba. So I think that the real important aspect is the social one that needs to use every cent that we get from our economy for the development of the Cuban people.
Q: And the question of brain drain, are you not losing a lot of your trained professionals to other countries, if not how do you manage to retain them?
A: One of the first tasks of the US government after the triumph of the Cuban revolution was to drain our professionals, in 1959 we had 6 000 doctors for a population at that time of around seven million people. Three thousand of them left for the United States so we decided that we need to prepare our own professionals, and in the face of the American blockade now we have 70 000 Cuban doctors. However, as I said one of the important issues was to develop professionals in Cuba so we have in Latin America, one of the highest levels of professionals in every discipline, along with professionals skills they also get ideological understanding.
Q: Cubans are also bombarded by negative images in the Western media, but these appear to have failed to sway Cubans given the support the government enjoys. How have you managed to cope with Western propaganda?
A: Well, propaganda works very well in cases where people have low levels of culture, and have dreams of something that is not reachable for them in their country. In Cuba the majority of people know that they can realise their dreams inside Cuba. To the majority of the Cuban people, it’s also very clear that this propaganda is for the benefit of Western countries, our people are very well informed.
Q: Only the US, Israel and the Marshall Islands endorse the US embargo in the General Assembly, but we have seen the UN fail to act on that consensus. You recently announced that you would move a motion in the General Assembly for the lifting of the sanctions. Why do you maintain faith in the UN, when it has apparently failed to act in the past?
A: First of all let me tell you, you are using the term embargo but it’s not embargo, it’s a blockade, a total blockade economically and politically, and in some cases even using other measures like terrorists for example. For 15 years we have pressed for the lifting of the blockade, of course the blockade is still in place, and even the Bush administration is trying to tighten it with the so-called Plan Bush that is only a plan for the annexation of Cuba. In fact this policy is trying to defeat the Cuban revolution by starvation, by suffering. The blockade has measures that try to get other countries to work for the benefit of the United States
Q: What is your relationship with the EU bloc that votes against the sanctions in the UN but backs the US out of it?
A: Traditionally, we have normal relations with many European countries, unfortunately in the last five, six years they put in place a common position of European countries against Cuba, this is a standard position. However, as you said, in the UN they are against the blockade but on the other hand they are criticising the Cuban system.
In the case of human rights they are accusing us of having human rights violations, but of course they are not accusing the US which has caused mass human rights violations on the Cuban people with the blockade. We are ready to have normal relations with any country even the United States but we are only asking for respect for Cuba, we will not accept having any conditions to having normal relations.
Only last month the minister of foreign affairs of Spain visited Cuba, we restarted relations and co-operation with Spain because there were no conditions.
Q: The US sponsors opposition political activities in countries it targets for illegal regime change, what is the situation like in Cuba?
A: The same way, in our case we have the so-called opposition, dissidents and there are some groups being fully supported by the government of the United States, and when I say fully supported I do not mean only politically, I mean also financially. They are receiving funds every year; by the way with this Plan Bush the US says it will give, every year, US$20 million towards defeating the Cuban revolution.
All these years, many, many millions were wasted in trying to defeat the Cuban revolution. So these groups receive training, they are trained by the US, the US interferes in the internal affairs of Cuba openly, they train these groups even in Cuba within their diplomatic residences and offer them full support in trying to organise them against the Cuban government?
Q: What about terrorist activities, for instance the recent spate of opposition violence in Zimbabwe, do you that in Cuba?
A: Yes, because of terrorist actions more than 3 000 Cubans have died over the years, terrorist actions are organised by Cuban-American groups based mainly in Florida, the United States. Many of them receive support and were trained by the CIA that’s the case for example of Posada Carrilles he is the mastermind of the bombing of one Cuban airline, more than 70 people died because of that bombing.
Posada Carrilles entered the United States in 2005, illegally, they apprehended him, but now they have given freedom to Carilles.
He is a man that the FBI, even the CIA recognised as a dangerous man, because of Carilles actions five young Cubans have been in jail in the United States for more than five years, because they were trying to prevent these terrorist activities against Cuba.
What happened in Zimbabwe of course is similar to what the groups based in Florida have done in Cuba, they put many bombs in some hotels in Cuba. They were trying to prevent tourists from coming to Cuba, and also to generate political instability in Cuba, so I see the same pattern in Zimbabwe.
l Feedback: caesar.zvayi@zimpapers.co.zw
http://www.herald.co.zw/inside.aspx?sectid=17522&cat=10
Salomao’s visit timely, vital for Sadc
WITH the arrival this week of its Executive Secretary Dr Tomaz Salomao, Sadc has started a process of seeing what the regional bloc can do to help Zimbabwe put its economy back on its feet. Zimbabweans sometimes tend to forget, in hard economic times, that the country’s blocked access to international financial institutions and the global banking system has repercussions on the rest of the region.
For when Sadc’s second most sophisticated economy faces troubles, then the waves break across most of its neighbours.
If Zimbabwe’s economy was fully functioning and if there was adequate access to organisations like the International Monetary Fund and the global banking system, then obviously Zimbabwe would benefit and so would its people.
But the other really big group of beneficiaries would be the people and businesses of the other Sadc countries. Zimbabweans would be able to buy more and import more, providing a very convenient market for many.
The illegal sanctions, largely pressed by the US and Britain but applied by the European Union and the IMF as well, go far beyond the "travel" sanctions trumpeted by the West and its allies in Zimbabwe.
Those are not really worth worrying about.
The real sanctions are those that are not announced. These involve the US Government and the British Government, largely through its European connections, assembling adequate blocs of votes to stop Zimbabwe receiving any support from the IMF and the World Bank.
That lack of support, in turn, makes it very difficult for Zimbabwe to access the sort of normal banking services from major western banks that most countries need to ensure trade flows freely.
It also makes it a lot harder to attract direct foreign investment, if only because potential investors are worried about how to get their fair dividend income out.
So the claims that the "sanctions" affect "only the leaders" is baloney. That may be true over the trivial travel sanctions, but the financial sanctions hit the whole population, and the poor more than the rich. And they hit the people of the neighbouring countries, who all need a prosperous Zimbabwe able to trade normally.
At the recent summit the Sadc leaders made it clear that they, and no other foreigner, will decide whether the elections in a member country have produced a legitimate Government. We assume that Sadc would, if there ever was a case of stolen elections, be just as harsh as its West African equivalent has been over some inadequate polls in that region.
It looks as though Sadc are now going to be pressing that point ever more strongly and telling the world to stop meddling in the region, which is quite capable of policing its own members.
The West needs to accept that the Zimbabwe Government is legitimate, even if it really does not like it, and that Zimbabwe’s neighbours are satisfied that the majority voted freely for that Government.
And those impediments to trade and growth need to be removed so that the people of Zimbabwe and the people in the neighbouring states can all benefit.
Labels: IMF, SANCTIONS, THE HERALD, ZIMBABWE
Read more...
From The Herald, interview with the Cuban ambassador to Zimbabwe.
Western terror acts in Cuba mirror those in Zim
THE illegal sanctions imposed on Zimbabwe by the United States and the EU have caused so much suffering, which is why they have received widespread condemnation, with the latest denunciation coming at the Extra-ordinary Summit of Sadc Heads of State and Government in Tanzania. Despite this consensus, the West has not responded to the calls, the same way it has ignored the consensus in the UN General Assembly against the illegal blockade on Cuba. The Herald caught up with Cuban Ambassador MR COSME TORRES ESPINOSA to talk about these and other issues.
QUESTION: Ambassador Espinosa, you have been in Zimbabwe for almost two years now, how has been your stay, and the state of Zim-Cuba relations?
ANSWER: As I said before, our embassy staff have been busy over the past two years, especially me because I am the ambassador, but we are very glad, I am very happy because the state of relations between Cuba and Zimbabwe is strengthening. We now have excellent relations, of course it’s not something unusual, first of all because we are comrades, secondly because we share the same position for our people but also because we share common positions in international issues.
The relations between Cuba and Zimbabwe date back to the days of Zimbabwe’s struggle for independence, and from the very beginning Cuba supported Zimbabwe in the struggle and even after the struggle for liberation Cuba offered to come to the assistance of Zimbabwe. As you know more than 3 000 Zimbabweans graduated from a programme that was sponsored by Cuba and every year we have offered scholarships to the Government of Zimbabwe.
In all these years we developed co-operation with Zimbabwe in the field of health, medical brigades of Cuban doctors have been working here in Zimbabwe for many, many years. Right now, for example, we have a group of doctors, 59 Cuban doctors, that have finished their tour of duty after two years working here and next week a new group of 140 Cuban doctors will be arriving.
Q: What is the level of co-operation in the area of trade for instance?
A: One area that we do not have a high level of co-operation is trade, I think one of the reasons, of course, is that Zimbabwe has traditional commercial partners and Cuba also has traditional partners, I think this is one issue we can work on for the future.
Q: Despite the 50-year embargo, Cuba has still managed to help other countries in various sectors, how do you manage to do that given the Western siege?
A: As you know for our government and our people, the main resource of course is our people, for many years since the triumph of the revolution, we prepared many professionals with the idea not only that they will work in Cuba but also with the idea of helping other countries, 1951 was the year the first group of Cuban doctors came to Algeria to help there, and since that time more than 130 000 Cuban doctors have been working in almost 100 different countries. Right now we have more than 20 000 Cuban doctors working in 69 countries, also all these years we received many young people from Africa, Latin America, from the Caribbean, in Cuba they received degrees and are ready to help their countries.
Q: Zimbabwe and Cuba share unique experiences, as they are both under siege from some Western nations opposed to their policies. Can you tell our readers how Cuba has managed to cope with the 50-year US blockade, and the lessons Zimbabwe can draw from your experiences?
A: First of all, we do not want to give any lessons to anybody, we believe our experiences are unique and everybody has their own experiences.
Of course, in the case of Cuba you know that since the triumph of the Cuban revolution, we implemented a socialist system in Cuba. It’s a system that is supported by the majority of the Cuban people, but on the other hand, we know that for our people it’s a matter of sovereignty to support our system.
Q: Tied to the sanctions is the question of economic hardships, primarily inflation, what is the situation like in Cuba?
A: I do not know the exact figure of our inflation in Cuba but let me tell you that in the 1990s after the fall of the former Soviet Union, the socialist countries in Europe, we faced a very harsh economic situation in Cuba, we even call that time, a special period, in fact it was a second blockade of Cuba because we lost our commercial partners, our friends and so on, so all those years the economy of Cuba regressed by 34 percent, but we managed to continue developing our economy mainly because at that moment we managed to develop some sectors such as tourism. For example last year our tourism sector received 2,2 million tourists, we also managed to develop our biotechnology sector and pharmaceutical sector, right now they are exporting to 150 countries. Also all these years government was committed to continue developing social programmes, and mainly to keep the cultural levels, the educational levels of the whole population.
Q: As in Zimbabwe, one of Commandant Castro’s enduring legacies is the investment made in the social services, that is health and education, how has your country managed to maintain the high standards in the face of American subversion?
A: It’s not an easy task, for example because of the blockade this year, the damage to our economy cost the Cuban people US$86 billion, as I said before the commitment of our government was to develop free educational systems, health care systems, not only for Cuba but also for helping other countries. On the other hand, from the very beginning of the revolution, we realised it was very important for the Cuban people to have a high cultural level, that is why in 1961 we eradicated illiteracy in Cuba, that’s why after that we committed ninth class finish for everybody in Cuba, that’s why we have more than one university in every province in Cuba. So I think that the real important aspect is the social one that needs to use every cent that we get from our economy for the development of the Cuban people.
Q: And the question of brain drain, are you not losing a lot of your trained professionals to other countries, if not how do you manage to retain them?
A: One of the first tasks of the US government after the triumph of the Cuban revolution was to drain our professionals, in 1959 we had 6 000 doctors for a population at that time of around seven million people. Three thousand of them left for the United States so we decided that we need to prepare our own professionals, and in the face of the American blockade now we have 70 000 Cuban doctors. However, as I said one of the important issues was to develop professionals in Cuba so we have in Latin America, one of the highest levels of professionals in every discipline, along with professionals skills they also get ideological understanding.
Q: Cubans are also bombarded by negative images in the Western media, but these appear to have failed to sway Cubans given the support the government enjoys. How have you managed to cope with Western propaganda?
A: Well, propaganda works very well in cases where people have low levels of culture, and have dreams of something that is not reachable for them in their country. In Cuba the majority of people know that they can realise their dreams inside Cuba. To the majority of the Cuban people, it’s also very clear that this propaganda is for the benefit of Western countries, our people are very well informed.
Q: Only the US, Israel and the Marshall Islands endorse the US embargo in the General Assembly, but we have seen the UN fail to act on that consensus. You recently announced that you would move a motion in the General Assembly for the lifting of the sanctions. Why do you maintain faith in the UN, when it has apparently failed to act in the past?
A: First of all let me tell you, you are using the term embargo but it’s not embargo, it’s a blockade, a total blockade economically and politically, and in some cases even using other measures like terrorists for example. For 15 years we have pressed for the lifting of the blockade, of course the blockade is still in place, and even the Bush administration is trying to tighten it with the so-called Plan Bush that is only a plan for the annexation of Cuba. In fact this policy is trying to defeat the Cuban revolution by starvation, by suffering. The blockade has measures that try to get other countries to work for the benefit of the United States
Q: What is your relationship with the EU bloc that votes against the sanctions in the UN but backs the US out of it?
A: Traditionally, we have normal relations with many European countries, unfortunately in the last five, six years they put in place a common position of European countries against Cuba, this is a standard position. However, as you said, in the UN they are against the blockade but on the other hand they are criticising the Cuban system.
In the case of human rights they are accusing us of having human rights violations, but of course they are not accusing the US which has caused mass human rights violations on the Cuban people with the blockade. We are ready to have normal relations with any country even the United States but we are only asking for respect for Cuba, we will not accept having any conditions to having normal relations.
Only last month the minister of foreign affairs of Spain visited Cuba, we restarted relations and co-operation with Spain because there were no conditions.
Q: The US sponsors opposition political activities in countries it targets for illegal regime change, what is the situation like in Cuba?
A: The same way, in our case we have the so-called opposition, dissidents and there are some groups being fully supported by the government of the United States, and when I say fully supported I do not mean only politically, I mean also financially. They are receiving funds every year; by the way with this Plan Bush the US says it will give, every year, US$20 million towards defeating the Cuban revolution.
All these years, many, many millions were wasted in trying to defeat the Cuban revolution. So these groups receive training, they are trained by the US, the US interferes in the internal affairs of Cuba openly, they train these groups even in Cuba within their diplomatic residences and offer them full support in trying to organise them against the Cuban government?
Q: What about terrorist activities, for instance the recent spate of opposition violence in Zimbabwe, do you that in Cuba?
A: Yes, because of terrorist actions more than 3 000 Cubans have died over the years, terrorist actions are organised by Cuban-American groups based mainly in Florida, the United States. Many of them receive support and were trained by the CIA that’s the case for example of Posada Carrilles he is the mastermind of the bombing of one Cuban airline, more than 70 people died because of that bombing.
Posada Carrilles entered the United States in 2005, illegally, they apprehended him, but now they have given freedom to Carilles.
He is a man that the FBI, even the CIA recognised as a dangerous man, because of Carilles actions five young Cubans have been in jail in the United States for more than five years, because they were trying to prevent these terrorist activities against Cuba.
What happened in Zimbabwe of course is similar to what the groups based in Florida have done in Cuba, they put many bombs in some hotels in Cuba. They were trying to prevent tourists from coming to Cuba, and also to generate political instability in Cuba, so I see the same pattern in Zimbabwe.
l Feedback: caesar.zvayi @ zimpapers.co.zw
Labels: AMBASSADOR, CUBA, ZIMBABWE
Read more...
Dirt Poor Above Ground, Precious Metals Below
This report comes from our friends at Inter Press Service News Agency.
by Tito Drago
A coalition of non-governmental organisations from Europe, Africa and the United States launched an international appeal that the exploitation of mineral wealth in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) should yield a fair share of benefits for the Congolese people, and not only for the big foreign mining companies. The campaign for "A Fair Share for Congo!" calls on the Congolese government of Joseph Kabila and its international 'partners' to "renegotiate, revoke or cancel the contracts inherited from the war and the transition" some of which are "extremely unfavourable for the DRC" and will affect it for decades into the future, according to a press statement.
The NGOs that launched the appeal were the African Association for the Defence of Human Rights (ASADHO), the Study Centre for Social Action (CEPAS), and the Network of Christian Inspired Human Rights and Civic Education Organisations (RODHECIC) from the DRC; the Coalition of the Flemish North South Movement (11.11.11) and Brotherly Sharing, from Belgium; the Netherlands Institute for Southern Africa (NiZA); Rights and Accountability in Development (RAID) from the U.K.; the Bank Information Center (BIC) from the U.S.; and the international group Fatal Transactions.
The NGOs said last month that the new Congolese government and its international partners should "clarify and revise all mining contracts inherited from the past, set up an independent mechanism to monitor the implementation of contracts, and ensure transparent and fair management of mining resources."
The coalition calls on NGOs, civil and public institutions all over the world to sign the appeal, which will be delivered to the president of the World Bank, the government of the DRC and the partner countries of the DRC on the occasion of the spring meetings of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, on Apr. 14 and 15 in Washington.
Signatures in representation of groups that support this appeal can be added at
http://www.11.be/fairshare.
Over 75 organisations have signed the appeal to date.
After 30 years of dictatorship and more than 15 years of war and transition, "the needs of the Congolese people are immense. Unless there is a fair division of the benefits from mining, the reconstruction and development of the country will be compromised," said Pere Minani of CEPAS in Kinshasa, speaking on behalf of the Congolese organisations.
Paul Dianne, a young Senegalese who migrated to Spain five or six years ago, told IPS that he could never have imagined the magnitude of the social differences between Europe and Africa "when our countries have such great natural wealth."
"I have never been to Congo (DRC). I am told that their natural wealth is greater than my country's, but also that people are even poorer there... I find it very hard to imagine how that could be, because in Senegal people are very badly off, especially compared to Spain."
The DRC, a former Belgian colony, became independent in 1960 and has suffered two internal wars since then. The most recent took place from 1998 to 2003 and involved troops from nine countries and 20 internal armed factions. It resulted in the deaths of 3.8 million people, mostly by starvation and epidemics.
Violence continues today with occasional bouts of armed conflict, although at a lower level.
The DRC exports mainly to Belgium, which receives 38.2 percent of total exports, while 17.9 percent is exported to the United States.
None of the DRC's exports go to other countries in Africa, although it imports a significant amount from the region. South African goods account for 16.5 percent of total imports, Belgium 16.1 percent, France 9.1 percent, Zambia 6.9 percent, and Kenya 5.7 percent.
The DRC possesses 30 percent of world cobalt reserves and 10 percent of all copper, as well as gold, uranium, oil, and between 40 and 50 percent of Africa's water reserves, including the Congo River which crosses its territory and is comparable to the Amazon in South America in terms of its importance to the continent.
But per capita gross domestic product (GDP) is only 700 dollars a year, while in Belgium and the United States, which absorb most of its exports, per capita GDP is 30,600 and 40,100 dollars a year, respectively.
A group of United Nations experts reported in 2006 that seven to 10 airplanes a day fly illegally from eastern DRC across the border into Rwanda, each loaded with two tons of cassiterite, from which tin is extracted. But there is also illegal traffic in gold, diamonds, copper and cobalt.
Congolese gold is a particularly good bargain, because while the world average yield of gold per ton of earth removed is only 11 grams, in the DRC the average yield is between six and seven kilograms, and in some areas the yield is as much as 15 kilograms per ton.
Another abundant mineral in the DRC, which is estimated to possess 80 percent of world reserves, is columbite-tantalite or "coltan", an essential constituent of mobile phones because of its lightness and high electrical conductivity.
In fact it was the attempt to control coltan mines that was the principal, if not the only, motivation behind the U.S.-backed 1998 occupation of part of DRC territory by Rwanda and Uganda. During the 18 months that the occupation lasted, Rwanda made a profit of 250 million dollars from sales of the mineral.
There is no longer an ongoing civil war, although violent conflicts still break out sporadically in this country where 75 percent of its 60 million people live on an average of one dollar a day, 10 million people have no access to drinking water, and a similar number have no electricity.
Labels: DRC, MINING CONTRACTS
Read more...
West’s agenda there to instil lack of confidence
By Reason Wafawarova
THE US western alliance is currently at full throttle waging wars for imperial authority and supreme control of the international system while trying to fool the rest of the world into believing the false pretexts upon which those wars have been premised.
While the European (western) foreign policy favours the waging of wars on "threatening" or non-pliant weaker states through arm twisting diplomacy and economic sanctions, the US foreign policy has assumed a muscular approach with a highly infamous addition of military threats.
That a country like Zimbabwe finds itself surrounded by members of the notorious imperialist club called the European Union, all wielding the lethal weapon of economic sanctions in one hand and an equally dangerous media of mass deception on the other just goes to show how determined the west is in its quest to stamp imperial authority in every corner of the world.
The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are pretty much the same wars in Zimbabwe, Venezuela, North Korea, Palestine and Iran; the difference only being in the pretexts and strategies adopted for each of the countries.
The world is meant to believe that the western alliance is in Afghanistan for purposes of hunting down Osama bin Laden and his elusive Al-Quaeda network. That rhetoric is of course tired even in the eyes of the west who now want to posture as crusaders of some noble democratisation programme whose success is supposed to be based on the eradication of the Taliban. That is despite the fact the same western "democratic forces" created the Taliban in the late seventies as a proxy force to counter the Soviet Union’s influence in Afghanistan.
The illegal war on Iraq has been premised on any lie the west can make up from time to time without the western ruling elite caring much about how ludicrous some of these lies have been to the rest of the world including in heartland America itself.
The lie that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction is incontestable as the lie of the 21st century. Tony Blair chipped in with his own piece of history when he skilfully put up a straight face and boldly told the world that Iraq was within 45 minutes of striking the world with the same non-existent weapons of mass destruction. When both lies exposed themselves, as lies always do, the world was told that actually the western alliance was in Iraq to fight terrorism.
They could not come up with a link between Saddam Hussein and Al-Quaeda and they said in fact they were in Iraq to build a democracy and to bring freedom to "oppressed" Iraqis, they even murdered Saddam in a show trial to give a face to this "democracy" project but the world has not been fooled and pressure and criticism keeps mounting on the heartless liars and murderers.
Now they claim that they are training the Iraqis to be able to look after themselves and some are coming clear that they can’t pull out in defeat since that would be a blow to the western reputation, by which they mean western imperial hegemony.
It may be important to look at Zimbabwe and Iran as targets of the western alliance’s imperial wars and to do that it is quite relevant to look at what Nick Burns, the under-secretary of state in the US State Department recently said about Iran.
Said Burns, "It is clear to us that concerted international pressure is helping to undercut the Iranian regime’s sense of ascendancy, unnerve its overly confident leadership and clarify to it the cost of its behaviour."
That sums up the western agenda on Iran.
They want to contain Iran’s influence in the Middle East, to stop its ascendancy from dependency on western hegemony, to instil a lack of confidence in its leadership and to punish it for its temerity to wean itself of dependency on the west.
This is also the context the economic and political war on Zimbabwe by the west should be viewed. By embarking on a programme to dispossess white commercial farmers of the inherited stolen land the Government of Zimbabwe was not only upsetting the set-up of western imperial authority, but also setting a dangerous precedent that colonial structures can be dismantled.
The "loverly confident" leadership of President Mugabe, like that of Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had to be unnerved and the behaviour of both the Zimbabwean and Iranian governments should have a big cost tagged onto it in order to get the economies of the two countries "screaming" as Nixon would put it.
For Iran, the US and its allies are putting the squeeze on Teheran through diplomatic pressure, economic pressure and gross provocation to create the pretext for military invasion. The US is hoping to create puppets in Iran by first of all depriving ordinary Iranians of basic welfare support through economic sanctions. They hope to capitalise on the disgruntlement of the suffering masses to create a puppet opposition that they can then fight to prop up into power for the benefit of their hegemony.
For Zimbabwe, the lapdogs in the puppet opposition MDC are well in place, so are the sanctions and the media frenzy about alleged bad governance.
What has been elusive to the opposition in Zimbabwe is victory as a result of the resoluteness and resilience of the popular Zanu-PF and the Government it leads whose liberation war legacy resonates with the majority of Zimbabweans.
It is the same resilience in Iraq where the US has been forced to announce a new policy to manage the ruinous effects of the humiliation the western coalition has been subjected to by the Iraqis. Bush’s new policy on Iraq is quite similar to his new policy on Zimbabwe after his sponsored street troopers from the MDC were swiftly swept from the streets.
The similarity is in that the so-called new policy on Iraq is entirely based on what the Iraqis can do and not what the US can do in Iraq. In the same way the US says it will increase sanctions on Zimbabwe and will add funding to its puppet activists in the MDC and some civic organisations. By so doing the US hopes that the time will come when the pain from the sanctions will force everyone onto the streets, with all roads leading to State House for a dramatic removal of President Mugabe.
What naivete?
Zimbabwe enjoys regional support as was recently proved at the Extra-ordinary Summit of Sadc Heads of State and Government in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania where African leaders left the western community together with its puppet MDC in deep shock and shame.
The western alliance has underestimated the resolve of Iran, the same way they underestimate Zimbabwe. Hugo Chavez is quite right in championing the anti-US and anti-imperialist campaign in Latin America. More and more countries should stand up to these racist imperialists so that the world can challenge them with as many war fronts as possible to weaken their capacity.
If ever the world has stood a good chance of getting the west screaming the way they screamed with the collapse of colonial empires it is now. They have to contain China, India, Malaysia, Venezuela, Russia, Iran, Zimbabwe, Bolivia, North Korea, Indonesia, Iraq, Afghanistan and countries like Somalia and Sudan.
This is the best time to stretch the monster to its knees and the anti-imperialist war has to be upheld in the spirit of a revolution.
While it might be true that the economy of Zimbabwe has been weakened, it is also true that the Government recently soundly sent the west screaming through their powerful media houses as they resolutely thwarted a western sponsored attempt at illegal regime change.
Despite the ongoing genocide in Iraq, the western alliance is screaming in that country too. Iran recently sent them on a two-week screaming session when it captured trespassing British spies in Iranian waters.
Condoleezza Rice says she is deeply concerned with the activities of Chavez and that’s the screaming some would want to hear from the empire.
The west should change its foreign policy so that it can peacefully share the world with everyone else otherwise we stand to see a very unstable world.
l Due to circumstances beyond our control, we regret that we are unable to carry the Nathaniel Manheru column today, any inconvenience is sincerely regretted.
Labels: THE HERALD, ZIMBABWE
Read more...
Published on Friday, April 13, 2007 by Inter Press Service
World Bank Staff Seek Wolfowitz’s Ouster
by Emad Mekay
WASHINGTON - The World Bank’s Staff Association, which represents 10,000 employees, asked Bank President Paul Wolfowitz to step down Thursday amid charges that he gave his girlfriend, a Bank employee, improper pay raises and attempted to cover it up.The association made the call during an informal press conference inside the Bank at which dozens of employees showed up, the first time anyone inside the Washington-headquartered institution has demanded his ouster. 0413 02
The gathering became dramatic when Wolfowitz himself appeared uninvited and sought to defend his actions.
“The president must acknowledge that his conduct has compromised the integrity and effectiveness of the World Bank Group and has destroyed the staff’s trust in his leadership,” said a statement from the Staff Association signed by its chairwoman Alison Cave. “He must act honourably and resign.”
The call came less than an hour after Wolfowitz issued his own statement. “I made a mistake, for which I am sorry,” said the 64-year-old World Bank president.
The Staff Association said it decided to call for his resignation even though the Bank’s Board, which runs the institution’s day to day affairs, announced that it is prepared to officially investigate the allegations that Wolfowitz used his position to enrich Shaha Riza, a Bank employee with whom he had a personal relationship, through large pay hikes that violated Bank protocols.
The association said it feared that the Board may not act quickly enough, and called for the release of all relevant documents, including a memorandum from Wolfowitz to the human resources vice president instructing him to second Riza to the U.S. State Department on a generous package that brought her salary to 193,000 dollars a year — 7,000 dollars more than that earned by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.
Wolfowitz defended himself on Thursday, saying that he had already sought the advice of the Ethics Committee at the Bank and that he acted “in good faith”.
He also said he was trying to ward off a possible legal problem for the Bank. He did not elaborate on whether Riza had threatened to sue the Bank if she was involuntarily assigned to the State Department — a necessary move since Bank employees who are personally involved may not work together.
“This was an involuntary reassignment and I believed there was a legal risk if this was not resolved by mutual agreement,” he said. “I take full responsibility for the details.”
But Wolfowitz’s statement did not allay concerns among staff that he may have placed his girlfriend’s interests before the institution’s.
The Staff Association says, for example, that there was no representation by the Bank’s legal counsel during negotiations of the new contract for Riza, although her own attorney was present.
Wolfowitz has taken several hits over the past week, the last of which came from Ad Melkert, former chairman of the ethics committee, who denied that the committee directed or agreed to Riza’s contract terms, as the Bank president alleged.
The Staff Association also says that the former general counsel of the Bank, Roberto Danino, rejected the terms for Riza’s reassignment, leading to his exclusion by Wolfowitz from the actual contract negotiations.
The association said the affair is taking a toll on morale inside the Bank. “It therefore seems impossible for the institution to move forward with any sense of purpose under the present leadership, especially in our endeavor to assist governments and their people in improving their own governance,” it said.
The controversy has been particularly embarrassing for Wolfowitz and the Bank because since he came to office in 2005, Wolfowitz has sought to make an anti-corruption crusade the signature of his tenure.
Last year, he announced a “long-term strategy” for using the Bank’s funds and expertise to help developing countries rid their governments of bribe-taking and other dishonest practices.
But even as he assumed responsibility for decisions related to Riza, Wolfowitz went on the offensive, implying that the staff’s reaction may have been motivated by displeasure with his role in the Pentagon as a main architect of the U.S. invasion and later occupation or Iraq, now in its fifth year and exacting huge human and financial costs.
“For those people who disagree with the things that they associate me with in my previous job, I’m not in my previous job,” Wolfowitz said in a statement. “I’m not working for the U.S. government; I’m working for this institution and its 185 shareholders.”
Wolfowitz came to the World Bank in mid-2005 from his post as the U.S. deputy secretary of defence.
His appointment to the World Bank sent ripples through many at the institution and within development circles who feared that his neo-conservative credentials and close association with the carnage caused by the Iraq war could undermine the Bank’s image as one of the world’s leading development agencies.
But the controversy over Riza’s salary increases has mostly skirted his role in the Iraq war — with Wolfowitz himself bringing it up.
Labels: PAUL WOLFOWITZ, World Bank
Read more...
Thieving civil servants
By Editor
Saturday April 14, 2007 [04:00]
Revelations coming from the Public Accounts Committee of the failure by government’s controlling officers to account for billions of kwacha are not shocking to us but merely go to show how corruption is now deep-seated in our ministries. Almost all the permanent secretaries who have so far appeared before the Public Accounts Committee have failed to account for the billions of kwacha allocated to their various ministries as revealed by the Auditor General’s office.
This is a worrying trend which should be followed with the appropriate vigilance. It is clear that billions of our people’s money are not reaching the intended targets. They are being diverted for personal benefits by our civil servants.
But this is not a new discovery, it is just the latest. Year in and year out, the Auditor General’s reports expose glaring financial irregularities in our government departments and ministries. Millions of kwacha are reported stolen, misapplied or misappropriated but little or nothing is heard about what happens to those who steal, misapply or misappropriate public resources. And this is not the first time such revelations are coming out of the Public Accounts Committee.
The question is, why is there such inertia in dealing with plunderers of national resources? Why is it that our investigative wings of government do not take up these matters for investigation with a view to prosecuting those found wanting?
It is said that grey jackals know each other because of their speckles. One is comfortable with those who are similar to oneself. And we know that a log may stay in the water for a long time but it does not turn into a crocodile. One cannot be what he is not, even if he mixes with plunderers.
But our public systems are so rotten that corruption has permeated all ranks. That is why it is difficult for us to see action taken against all those exposed in the Auditor General’s reports. It’s like we are asking a thief to catch another thief. It’s not possible!
It cannot be denied that our permanent secretaries, as controlling officers, have not lived up to public expectations. That is why President Levy Mwanawasa, in suspending the slogan “zero tolerance on corruption” recently declared that the fight against corruption would be refocused to direct more attention at civil servants who administer public resources. This is as a result of a realisation that there will be no financial leakage without the involvement of controlling officers because they authorise all expenditure.
But as we are seeing from the reports, it is not just top civil servants who are involved in the plunder of national resources. The whole system is rotten. And as things stand today, we do not see any measures in place to curb this. All we hear every day is the same rhetoric about the fight against corruption. Known corrupt permanent secretaries are shielded and let loose to continue marauding public resources. Instead of being fired, we see some corrupt top civil servants being promoted and given more responsibilities. Sometimes those who are reported to be corrupt are even shielded from the long arm of the law. This is the paradox or irony about Levy’s fight against corruption. But Levy should be reminded that a leopard licks both its white and black spots. Justice should be administered fairly to all by those in authority.
We do not want to believe that there is not one among our permanent secretaries or indeed other top civil servants who is blameless. Some of these characters have accumulated or amassed a lot of wealth which our Anti-Corruption Commission or the money-laundering unit in the Drug Enforcement Commission do not seem interested to investigate when all eyes can see that these characters are living beyond their means. What the ACC and DEC do is to hoodwink the public with announcements of arrests and prosecutions of the smallest fish in the pond whose theft is almost insignificant compared to the millions and billions of kwacha that are stolen by the top civil servants.
It appears to us that Levy, in his fight against corruption, has gone in search of the fantastical birds of the sea. His dreams and ambitions in this fight will not be fulfilled if he does not change his approach. We have not seen or heard anything after he refocused his fight against corruption to put more attention on thieving civil servants.
Levy has to move and move fast to show that he means what he says, otherwise he will be laughed at even by the birds. If he is not careful, Levy will be like a person who is on a futile mission; one that is so unlikely to be fulfilled that even the birds will laugh at him.
Levy has correctly identified the source of plunder or corruption in government by singling out controlling officers. But his legs now seem to be too heavy to move to stop this plunder. Without doubt, corruption will be kept to its limits if controlling officers are not corrupt. What would stop junior officers from engaging in corrupt activities if their seniors are deeply immersed in that? Definitely nothing because we do not expect a thief to run after another thief.
Levy has to move and act now before it is too late. He should not choose to cross the river when it is flooded because he will be swept away by the strong currents. He has to move and decisively act now before these corrupt elements consolidate themselves against him, using plundered resources.
Labels: ACC, EDITORIAL, PAC
Read more...
ACC will probe matters from Parliament - Banda
By George Chellah
Saturday April 14, 2007 [04:00]
ANTI-CORRUPTION Commission (ACC) director general Nixon Banda yesterday said ACC will investigate matters emerging from Parliament's Public Accounts Committee where corruption or abuse of office is suspected. And Banda said ACC was worried with the 347 corruption complaints against government officials in the first quarter of 2007.
Meanwhile, Banda said decisions are soon to be made in the next week or two on effecting arrests on the Ministry of Lands saga suspects. Addressing the first 2007 quarterly press briefing at ACC headquarters in Lusaka, Banda - who was asked about matters that are emerging from the Public Accounts Committee - promised that ACC would move in.
“Clearly these are matters which have already taken place and some of them I know that administrative action has been taken. But where corruption or abuse of office is suspected definitely we will move in,” Banda said.
In the last few days, various permanent secretaries appearing before the Public Accounts Committee have failed to account for billions of kwacha allocated to their respective ministries.
And on the K36 billion missing public funds, Banda said investigations in the matter were ongoing. “Others have been dismissed and there are those we are still investigating. And I must say here that we working jointly with DEC, and sooner or later you should be learning that people will be appearing in court about these allegations,” he said.
Banda also said ACC was worried with the 347 corruption complaints against government officials in the first quarter of 2007. “Yes, we are worried; we are saying that maybe our workshops are not being understood,” Banda said. “Again, this is why we have brought in the integrity committees in public institutions to see whether the existence of integrity committees will actually reduce this number. So we are monitoring if you find that something is not happening, definitely we will find some ways of actually trying to reduce as much as possible this number.”
Banda further said investigations into allegations of corruption at the Ministry of Lands have reached an advanced stage. “Investigations have now reached an advanced stage to an extent that cases have been isolated, possible offences identified and decisions are soon to be made in the next week or two on effecting arrests on the suspects,” Banda said. “However, I wish to say that it would not be appropriate for me to give details of who is likely to face the wrath of the law or the possible offences they would be facing as this could jeopardize investigations.”
He said during the first quarter of the year, ACC received a total of 446 corruption and non-corruption reports. “As expected, Lusaka recorded the highest number of reports with 168, whilst Mongu recorded the lowest with 12 reports. Out of these 446 reports, 195 were categorized as corruption complaints whilst 251 were non corruption related complaints and treated as information received,” Banda said. “From the 195 corruption complaints, only 141 cases were authorized for investigations while 54 cases where not authorized for investigations as they were deemed not to be pursuable.”
He said there were 347 complaints against public officials while complaints against the private sector totalled to 99. “The total number of cases closed in the first quarter, including those brought forward from the previous year is 119,” Banda said. He said ACC recorded a total of seven arrests for various offences of corruption and registered seven new prosecution cases. “Within this period, we had four convictions and two acquittals, one is still pending,” said Banda.
Labels: ACC, PAC
Read more...
Levy reaping what he sowed in VJ - Miyanda
By Brighton Phiri
Saturday April 14, 2007 [04:00]
PRESIDENT Levy Mwanawasa is reaping what he sowed in Vernon Mwaanga, Heritage Party president Brigadier General Godfrey Miyanda has said. And Women for Change executive director Emily Sikazwe asked Zambians to follow up all the issues that had arisen from former information minister Mwaanga's visit to the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).
Commenting on Mwaanga's dismissal as information minister, Brig Gen Miyanda said he sympathised with President Mwanawasa's predicament because the man (Mwaanga) he chose to be in his Cabinet and whom he entrusted to deliver his special message to the DRC President Joseph Kabila regarding border problems had revealed top secrets that had roots from the 2001 elections.
"But fired or not, Zambians still want to know what he was really sent to do in DRC and why him instead of Minister of Defence, commerce minister, director general of Zambia Intelligence Security Services or indeed one of his special assistants at State House?” Brig Gen Miyanda said.
“Mr Mwaanga was one of the prominent witnesses in the presidential petition of the 2001 presidential election and gave very strong evidence against President Mwanawasa. What made President Mwanawasa to invite him to join his Cabinet and not discard him like he did with Levison Mumba who gave strong evidence against him.”
He said there was no clear reason for President Mwanawasa to have continued using Mwaanga as a trusted member of his Cabinet. “President Mwanawasa is reaping what he had sown in Mr Mwaanga,” he said.
Brig Gen Miyanda said when the Supreme Court delivered its judgment in the presidential election petition in 2005, he predicted that although the case had been concluded in the Supreme Court, the matter would finally be determined in the people’s court.
“That hour has now come for the people’s court to examine the conduct of the 2001 elections. The truth of the use of public resources during the 2001 elections will never be buried,” he said. “I believe that Mr Mwaanga went to negotiate private settlement with Mr Katumbi. This is why there was a directive to him not to discuss the matter in public.”
Brig Gen Miyanda challenged President Mwanawasa to state categorically that there was no government contract on maize with the DRC Katanga Province governor Moses Katumbi or Chani Fisheries. He said everyone knows that Katumbi supplied maize to MMD which was used in the 2001 election campaigns.
“In spite of my views, I continue to believe that our nation needs healing. Such healing cannot or will not take place in the face of cover-ups if leaders continue to believe that Zambians are fools with no eye or ear and with such low intelligence, that it does not matter how many times leaders lie to them, they will accept their lies,” he said.
Brig Gen Miyanda said President Mwanawasa should not act as though he knew nothing of what transpired in the 2001 elections. He challenged the President to disclose the person who authorised the payment of billions of kwacha to Katumbi during his early years in office.
Brig Gen Miyanda urged President Mwanawasa to own up and admit that he knew what transpired in 2001 elections and seek forgiveness. “What I am saying has nothing to do with legal defences. I am simply saying some of us are tired of quarrelling in newspapers over this matter, which can be ended by an apology,” he said.
And Emily Sikazwe commended The Post and Zambians for putting up a gallant fight against Mwaanga’s double-dealings.
“We are also pleased to note that we have been vindicated as well as The Post for constantly saying that the fight against corruption is a people’s fight and not a fight championed by a few politicians. We know that our politicians are double dealers in many ways...this is why we should continue as a people to safeguard our resources which are jointly owned by all Zambians; those alive, those gone and before us and the unborn,” Sikazwe said. “We believe that many more issues have been revealed by the VJ-Katumbi saga. These too need to be followed up.”
She reminded Zambians that former vice-president Nevers Mumba got fired over the DRC.
“What is it that got our vice-president and now information minister fired?” she asked. “What is it about DRC that gets people fired? Is it about the dealings during the 2001 elections?”
Sikazwe asked Zambians to demand for the truth so that all those involved in the plunder of the country’s resources could be exposed.
“The struggle continues...we want to see more fired and issues followed just like those involved in the Vulture Fund scandal,” said Sikazwe.
Labels: DRC, EMILY SIKAZWE, GENERAL MIYANDA
Read more...
Kitwe council has no capacity to discipline erring councillors - Simwi
By Zumani Katasefa in Kitwe
Saturday April 14, 2007 [04:00]
KITWE town clerk Ali Simwinga has Kitwe City Council has no capacity to discipline councillors involved in illegal land allocation. During a full Kitwe council meeting on Wednesday in the council chambers, Simwinga said the council had no capacity to discipline erring councillors as they were the leaders of the local authority.
He said it has been so difficult to handle and discipline councillors involved in illegal allocation of land.
“We have no capacity of handling you leaders. That is the dilemma we face. Respectively political parties must have a code of discipline to discipline such leaders,” he told councillors.
He added that the local authority had in the past written to respective political parties to discipline councillors who involved themselves in illegal activities but nothing had been done.
However, Simwinga said there were no difficulties disciplining council officers involved in illegal allocation of land.
He said that the council had so far fired five officers who had committed such offences.
And Wusakile constituency member of parliament Barnabas Chela said law enforcement agents had been very selective in dealing with perpetrators of illegal land allocation.
He alleged that only opposition leaders have been visited by the agents.
There are 178 plots illegally allocated to residents in Kitwe and all of these are in Kawama compound.
Kwacha East Patriotic Front member of parliament Lombe Mulenga bemoaned the state of township roads.
He said the state of buildings in the city were also not good and wanted to know what the local authority was doing about the problem.
“There are very serious potholes in the township roads of Kitwe. Vehicles and even people find it difficult to walk in these roads,” he said.
In response Simwinga said the council was currently working on major roads in the city.
Labels: COUNCILS
Read more...
Donor-dependent development
By Frank Chiluba
Saturday April 14, 2007 [04:00]
Editor,
Most African countries in general, Zambia inclusive, are living and surviving dangerously. The dependance on foreign countries to finance almost every project or programme is sinking in the heads at a fast rate at every leadership levels in the African states. Of particular interest is our situation in Zambia where most of the programmes embarked on by our government have to be funded by the donor countries.
This has become very dangerous because it has become a syndrome. At any leadership levels you may think of, you will hear the leaders either pleading to be funded by the donors or you will hear complaints that donors have not responded well to their cries.
If I may ask, what will happen to developmental programmes that are dependant on donor funds? Should the donors one day decide enough is enough? Will the cutting of funds by the donors imply the stopping of such development programmes?
Is our government thinking and planning development beyond donor funding? What about the many Non Governmental Organisations (NGO) that have been formed in the recent past years? Will they continue existing providing the help to the underprivelleged or is their "compassion love "to serve others, driven by the fact that they themselves are beneficiaries directly of such donor funds?
It is very possible and can happen that one day the donors will stop sending financial assistance to Zambia. But the questions are :
1. Are we ready as a country to foster development in our nation even without donor funding?
2. Are the many NGOs ready and prepared to continue to exist, serving and helping the underprivelleged even if donors were to cut funding today? I am getting scared at how everything now calls for foreign funding. It is a dangerous sydrome which unfortunately has taken root in the minds of most of our leaders at all levels.
http://www.postzambia.com/post-read_article.php?articleId=25200
Mwaanga's dismissal
By Benjamin Zulu Ndola
Saturday April 14, 2007 [04:00]
Mwaanga’s dismissal has not come as a suprise to the people of Zambia. The man asked for it for not being honest to the Zambians.
Mwaanga is known to be one of the most experienced veteran politicians and yet what he does is contrary to the people’s expectations.
You can have a good beginning and always have a poor finishing if you are not careful. This should serve as a warning to those who want to go where the wind blows. Thank God because we are free at last.
Labels: DONORS, LETTERS, VERNON MWAANGA
Read more...
ZANACO, another ride?
By Gabriel Banda
Friday April 13, 2007 [04:00]
THE recent giving of Zambia National Commercial Bank, widely known as ZANACO, to Rabobank raises issues around economic processes, governance, democracy, and justice. The deal was done under the protest of minority shareholders, MPs, some members of government, and much of the public. Throughout the process, many people have noted that, except for the defective but pre-determined direction of de-Africanisation of the bank and Zambia’s economy demanded by the IMF-World Bank dictatorship, there is little justification for the privatisation of ZANACO, or the way it was done.
The textbook reasons for privatisation do not apply. Even at the time of transaction and the April 3, 2007 agreement announcement, ZANACO has been known as big, strong, and widespread. It was a major competitor to big external banks.
Concerns about the Rabobank deal include the pathetic price, reportedly around $8.2 million only, paid for 49 per cent shares, closed nature of the transaction, an undemocratic process, possible opportunities lost to local people, and impact of after effects of the transaction on various aspects of life. Goal posts were adjusted to enable Rabobank get more than the legal 25 per cent limit allowed to one shareholder.
The ZANACO transaction is a sign of limitation in the process of democracy. ZANACO is an enterprise public-owned and, thus, the public has the right to make comments and suggest direction. MPs have the right to promote the public interest and, if necessary, reverse negative transactions.
Sadly, to move on an unpopular path, in line with IMF and World Bank policies being imposed and thriving through dictatorship, the ZANACO transaction side-passed the public and some representative institutions.
ZANACO has been owned by the public, through their government. The transaction affects the public. ZANACO was not supposed to be a closed decision of few individuals. They do not personally own the bank.
It was not good enough to assure the public that they would be told the details after the transaction was sealed. The details should have been known before the deal was sealed. With a wide range of ideas, this would enable errors to be corrected before harm was done. Transparency is important for the prosperity of democracy and business.
We have not learnt from poor privatisation. With the disputed mines prices and agreements in mind, many people believe the ZANACO price has not been fair. It seems an underestimate in terms of the assets, size, strength, profits, and opportunities of the bank. The price, based on old figures, seems not to reflect true worth.
And banks and businesses keep on changing hands. What is the position of Rabobank acquiring controlling shares and then selling to another business, which may eventually move into another direction, leaving Zambia without expected support?
The ZANACO transaction could have been helped by continuous disclosure as it proceeded. When people are surprised by outcomes, it is easy for some to speculate about the process. But transparency limits suspicion and loss of confidence.
Complaints about some privatisation include: low purchase prices, redundancy of workers, poor work and environmental conditions, changing of business, and little tax benefits to the public as the conditions favour the buyer. The public purse has also unfairly taken on debts and liabilities of the privatised businesses. Sometimes public enterprises are re-capitalised only to be sold at a low price.
Some have knocked out local business competitors through buying them and dismantling the machinery or business, or disusing buildings, so that there is no local production. They then bring in products produced elsewhere and use Zambia just as a market. That should be prevented from happening in a situation like ZANACO’s.
As mentioned in our column of December 2, 2004, the biggest in Zambia, ZANACO’s potential was that its services could go to some areas where private banks were not in or were withdrawing from. ZANACO could be affordable to many. And it could use the huge resources at its disposal to support ventures that would uplift the quality of life of people.
Many talented men, women, and young persons in rural and urban areas are in need of resources to help fulfil ventures in various fields but have problems with access to credit. Many external banks leave out such local potential. ZANACO could be useful. It can help transform Zambia’s economy. In fact, ZANACO has been giving dividends and profits to its major shareholder, the government. It was also able to help government and public institutions when in great need.
Sadly, ZANACO itself has not been doing the great work it could have been doing. Like private banks, it seems to hoard a lot of resources while people in need continue struggling. It should have been trying to make itself more relevant.
To many, it seems self-evident that, on many points,the ZANACO-Rabobank transaction is defective and unjust. It is another step in the bondage and exploitation of Africa’s people and resources while we watch.
Recently, an IMF advisor dealing with corruption is reported to have expressed surprise at conditions entered into over the sale of mines. Besides transparency, it must be a requirement that major financial and economic transactions are watched by institutions of anti-corruption. This limits suspicion and enhances citizen support for ventures.
Being proactive is helpful. It is costly to be reactive. As they say, prevention is better as curing can be more costly. As experienced in many places, it is also easier to monitor and rectify events as they happen than to try to rectify and rebuild after things happen.
Private sector without parallel presence from other enterprises such as publicly owned ones, and publicly owned firms without paralleling by private sector have in cases led to unfair practices against consumers and workers. It is no surprise that with the decline of state firms in Zambia, many private businesses are exploiting workers.
Some people point out that one way of dealing with monopoly, cartel, and exploitation by big private business is the building of public enterprises, owned by government, councils, cooperatives, and shareholding open to the wide public. These are also able to get involved in ventures the private sector does not.
Parastatals and publicly owned firms still exist in Europe and industrial areas of the world. From surface train companies, underground transport systems, buses, airlines, and oil companies and beyond, they range.
Observers point out that, even after the ones destroyed by the privatisation process, it is still possible to set up public enterprises. We believe nothing stops councils and cooperatives from starting ventures for the common good.
Many people are sure there could have been other ways and outcomes to the transition of ZANACO. Meanwhile, why do governments in Africa continue to listen to, and borrow from, that negative machinery of bondage, poverty, social instability, and death - the IMF-World Bank machinery, a duet whose defective programmes the maker of evil is proud of? Many of us believe: no further loans from World Bank and IMF.
gabipost at zamtel.zm
Labels: ZANACO
Read more...
The Battle over Zimbabwe's Future
By Gregory Elich
Global Research
April 13, 2007
Amid heightened tension, an all pervading crisis is afflicting Zimbabwe. The economy is close to collapse, the standard of living has plummeted, and the political scene is marred by recent violence. To hear Western leaders tell it, it is Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe who has brought this state of affairs upon his nation through economic mismanagement and repression, and what would have been an otherwise prosperous country is instead on the edge of ruin. The U.S. and Great Britain trade barbs with Zimbabwe, and relations are perhaps at their lowest point, with pressure mounting in the U.S. and Great Britain for harsher measures.
There are many in the West who have joined the chorus denouncing the Mugabe government and call for its replacement with a "democratic government." The hostile reaction against Zimbabwe is not surprising when one considers that the flood of news reports is notable for its uniformity and lack of context. A single message is repeated in the media. The ruling party, the Zimbabwean African National Union – Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF), rules through undemocratic means, we are told, while the opposition party, the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) enjoys wide support and is kept from power through repression. Western leaders seek only to promote democracy and prosperity in the region. This is the popular image in the Western press, and few question its veracity. How information is formulated, including what does not get reported, demonstrates some of the ways perception is managed and support for policy objectives is generated.
The beating of several MDC members while in police custody following their arrest triggered the latest upsurge of condemnation of the Zimbabwean government. MDC supporters were arrested merely for holding an innocuous prayer meeting, we were told, and the government's resort to violence was unprovoked.
The "prayer meeting" was in fact a demonstration that was part of the MDC-led Save Zimbabwe Campaign's month-long "defiance" campaign. By calling the demonstration a "prayer meeting," organizers hoped to get around the government's four-month ban on demonstrations that had been instituted after a rally the month before resulted in running battles between the police and crowds of MDC supporters. The "prayer meeting" tag was also useful for managing Western perception. (1)
Troubles began on the morning of March 11 when a handful of demonstrators were arrested as they headed to the rally site. At around noon, a group of MDC supporters attacked three unarmed police officers. One officer managed to escape, but the other two were beaten and suffered serious head injuries.
During the next hour several more demonstrators were arrested as they attempted to enter the rally site, including Arthur Mutambara, leader of one faction of the MDC. A while later, MDC gangs at a shopping center hurled rocks at a bus, smashing its windows, and then attempted set an army vehicle afire. (2)
Despite a determined effort by the police, more than a thousand demonstrators did make it to the rally. When Morgan Tsvangirai, leader of a second MDC faction, arrived with his arms raised in the air, the crowd responded noisily. According to an MDC supporter, "the situation was getting heated" after police attempted to keep Tsvangirai apart from the crowd. "Tsvangirai and the police were arguing, and we were carrying on singing and shouting, louder and louder. In all there were only about thirty police and there were more than one thousand – we were too many for them. They could not control what was happening." Police lobbed tear gas canisters to disperse the crowd and Tsvangirai and other MDC officials were hustled into two police cars and driven away. (3)
Demonstrators responded by throwing rocks and tear gas canisters at the police, while some in the crowd used slingshots to fire metal bolts. The crowd advanced, as the police fired 19 warning volleys in the air without effect. At this point, one officer aimed his rifle at a demonstrator and shot him dead. "Then everything became worse," recalled an MDC supporter. "We went on the rampage and we did not even fear for our lives. There was a lot of action" as demonstrators "threw punches." Chased by the crowd, the police ran to their pickup trucks, but not all of the officers were lucky enough to escape. "About six or eight of them were left with us," said the MDC supporter. "As they ran some of them dropped their batons so we picked up their discarded sticks and used them to beat" them. "The police were badly beaten," after which the crowd "left the police on the side of the road and ran away." (4)
Meanwhile, MDC supporters elsewhere in Harare overturned a commuter omnibus and later stopped a kombi (commuter van). After looting the luggage, they doused the vehicle with gasoline and set it afire. A number of cars were stoned and one was overturned. (5)
Demonstrators who had been taken into custody and were brought to police stations in Avondale and Harare Central were treated with respect. A different fate awaited those taken to the Machipisa station, where detainees were ordered to lay down in the courtyard, whereupon they were kicked and beaten with clubs for about an hour. It is not entirely clear who administered the beatings, and at least one report suggests that it was not police but either a commando group or a pro-government militia that was responsible. (6)
Western governments and media wasted no time in condemning the government of Zimbabwe. The beatings were severe, and several individuals suffered broken bones. Western critics ignored MDC violence and singled out the government for sole blame, making the most of the incident's propaganda value.
Faced with a barrage of criticism by its Western detractors, Zimbabwe badly mishandled the situation. That no attempt was made to investigate the beatings only fueled the anti-Zimbabwe campaign and handed the opposition a catalyzing issue. The government's inaction contrasted with the period of the run up to the March 2005 parliamentary election, when President Mugabe declared a policy of "zero tolerance" for political violence, during which members of both parties were arrested for such acts.
It was clear by its behavior that the government of Zimbabwe felt threatened, as it had reason to. Years of sanctions and Western meddling, coupled with an increasingly truculent opposition, had indeed menaced ZANU-PF's ability to govern the nation. Western intervention followed well-established patterns. Soften the target nation with sanctions and cripple the economy. Blame the resulting economic disaster on government "economic mismanagement," in order to build support for the opposition. Fund the opposition party and press, as well as anti-government NGO's, to tilt the democratic process in a direction favorable to Western interests. If the opposition lacks sufficient support to come to power through democratic means, then encourage and sponsor "regime change" through mass action, as in Yugoslavia, Georgia and the Ukraine.
The West began to apply significant pressure on Zimbabwe late in 2001. In September of that year, the IMF declared Zimbabwe ineligible to use its general resources, and three months later President George W. Bush signed into law the Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act of 2001. The law directed the U.S. Treasury Department to instruct U.S. members of international financial institutions to oppose and vote against any extension of any loan, credit or guarantee to Zimbabwe. The law also authorized President Bush to directly fund opposition media as well as "democracy and governance programs," a euphemism for organizations opposed to the government. (7)
Western financial restrictions made it nearly impossible for Zimbabwe to engage in normal international trade. External balance of payments support was eliminated and nearly all external lines of credit were obstructed. "The current wave of declared and undeclared sanctions is negatively affecting the image of the country, thereby distorting how financial markets assess the risk profile of Zimbabwe," pointed out Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe Governor Gideon Gono. "As a result, Zimbabwean companies are finding it extremely difficult to access offshore lines of credit because of the perceived country risk." Zimbabwean companies are therefore compelled to deal "with their international suppliers strictly on a cash up front basis, with very minimal credit terms." If companies are fortunate enough to secure external financing, it is generally only at very high interest rates. "A vicious circle has thus evolved since the imposition of sanctions on Zimbabwe. The resultant decline in economic activity emanating from the sanctions has given rise to rising external payment arrears, and high country risk, which in turn, has adverse effects on economic activity." (8)
It was not only the U.S that was using its influence to hamper Zimbabwe's economy. British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw revealed that he was "building coalitions" against Zimbabwe, and he stated that Great Britain would "oppose any access by Zimbabwe to international financial institutions." (9) British officials threatened to eliminate financial assistance to southern African nations unless they imposed sanctions on their neighbor. President Benjamin Mkapa complained that African Commonwealth members had "endured a bombardment for an alliance against Mugabe." (10)
The World Bank and IMF played an important role in the economic sabotage of Zimbabwe's economy, and sought to dissuade others from extending financial credit to Zimbabwe. According to one source in Zimbabwe, "Our contacts in various countries have indicated that these institutions are using all sorts of tactics to cow all those who are keen to assist Zimbabwe." (11)
For a nation that had to import 100 percent of its oil, 40 percent of its electricity and most of its spare parts, Zimbabwe was highly vulnerable to being cut off from access to foreign exchange. Any modern economy must rely on international financial institutions in order to transact normal trade. But Western nations had largely disrupted Zimbabwe's ability to do so, and the result was immediate and dire. The supply of oil fell sharply, and periodically ran out entirely. It became increasingly difficult to muster the foreign currency to maintain an adequate level of imported electricity, and the nation was frequently beset by black outs. The shortage of oil and electricity in turn severely hobbled industrial production, as did the inability to import raw materials and spare parts. Business after business closed down and the unemployment rate soared above 70 percent. Inflation raged, driving incomes in real terms to a point so low that people struggled just to survive. (12)
U.S., British and Western European governments sought to exploit the resulting discontent by bankrolling the opposition MDC, supplying it with tens of millions of dollars. But passage of a law in Zimbabwe making it illegal for political parties to receive funding from abroad forced both the MDC and its Western backers to be more circumspect about their relationship. The West had reason to feel that it was not getting its money's worth, as the MDC's electoral performance was generally disappointing. Although the party could count on substantial support in urban areas, the more populous rural areas stood solidly behind the ZANU-PF government. There was little appeal for the rural population in the MDC's program, which called for near total privatization of state owned firms and government services and a return to neoliberal economic policy. The ZANU-PF government, on the other hand, had done away with the land ownership pattern inherited from apartheid Rhodesia, with its extreme concentration of land and wealth in the hands of a relatively few white commercial farmers. The MDC's adherence to neoliberal principles, on the other hand, posed the potential risk of a reversal of the land reform process, in whole or in part.
Left to its own merits, the MDC would have little prospect of coming to power through electoral means in the foreseeable future. The option of bringing down the government through non-democratic means therefore has considerable appeal for the opposition and Western governments. As early as 2000, MDC leader Morgan Tsvangirai told a rally, "What we would like to tell Mugabe is please go peacefully. If you don't want to go peacefully, we will remove you violently." (13) The MDC has since that time periodically organized mass actions against the government, including one that Tsvangirai dubbed "the final push."
Tsvangirai had at one point even contacted a Montreal-based public relations firm led by a former Israeli intelligence official, believing that the company would have contacts with the CIA. Disturbed by Tsvangirai's requests, the firm taped their final two meetings. The first tape, in which Tsvangirai was more explicit, proved to be inaudible due to nearby construction work, but the public relations firm did warn the Zimbabwean government and the second tape was sent as evidence. Tsvangirai was more careful with his words at the second of the recorded meetings, and it was therefore not entirely clear whether he was seeking the assassination of President Mugabe, as the public relations firm claimed, or a coup d'etat. Tsvangirai talked of the "elimination" of President Mugabe, and worried that the army would take over instead of him in the ensuing "chaos." Tsvangirai went to trial on charges of treason over the case, but was found not guilty. The tapes were fairly incriminating but not specific enough, and the charge of treason carried the prospect of the death penalty. Furthermore the prosecution's case was not particularly well prepared. Despite all that, the most charitable view of the content of the tape was that at a minimum Tsvangirai planned to come to power through extra-legal means. (14)
The opposition eventually split over the issue of whether or not to even participate in the electoral process. The MDC was trounced in the last election, partly due to the Tsvangirai faction's decision to boycott the process and partly due to lukewarm public support for the party. Tsvangirai met with Western officials following the election, after which he announced that the way forward for the opposition would be "an era of democratic mass confrontation with the dictatorship - an era of non-violent mass resistance." (15) Power was to be seized through "mass confrontation," which in reality would be neither democratic nor non-violent. Washington and London dreamed of another "color revolution," such as the one that had overthrown the government in the Ukraine, and the installation in power of a compliant leader eager to take orders.
On January 9 of this year, both factions of the MDC met with U.S. Ambassador to Zimbabwe Christopher Dell, who urged them to unite. Soon thereafter, the MDC launched its "defiance campaign," marked by a series of demonstrations and sporadic acts of violence, including the knifing of a police officer. By the time of the March 11 "prayer meeting," the political atmosphere had become highly charged. (16) By relentlessly roiling the political waters, the U.S. and Great Britain had created an intensely contested political culture in Zimbabwe, and it was no secret that the aim was to topple the government. In such circumstances, political passions had reached the point where patience with the MDC and its efforts to bring down the government had worn thin.
Encouraged by the unreserved backing it was receiving in the West since the beatings at Machipisa station, the MDC stepped up its efforts. Arthur Mutambara announced that the MDC was "in the final stages of the final push," and planned to continue with the defiance campaign. "We are talking about rebellion, war." (17) This was followed by a flurry of violent acts. A police station in Harare was fire bombed, causing serious facial injuries to two policewomen. The demonstration at the funeral of the slain MDC demonstrator turned violent, and MDC supporters battled with police for several hours. A passenger train passing through a Harare suburb was fire bombed, causing five injuries, and the next day another police station, this time in Mutare, was the target of a gasoline bomb. By the end of a three-week period, the tenth target was bombed, a business owned by a former ZANU-PF member of Parliament. (18) The West's high dudgeon over the issue of violence was nowhere to be seen and the incidents went without comment. After two gasoline tankers were bombed, a sweep by police nabbed 35 MDC suspects along with more than 50 explosives and two dozen detonators. It was said that the explosives were of the same type as those used against the passenger train. (19) Western media, silent on the wave of bombings, castigated the government of Zimbabwe for the arrests, and falsely asserted that Tsvangirai had been arrested in the sweep.
The Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) called for a general strike to be held on April 3-4, and the MDC and its Western backers held high hopes that the strike would degenerate into such chaos that the nation would become ungovernable. Relations between the MDC and ZCTU are closely intertwined, and indeed it was the ZCTU that launched the MDC. Tsvangirai was at one time the leader of the trade union organization and in its early years, the MDC used the ZCTU's offices and facilities. So cozy is the relationship that it is probable that the strike was in fact an MDC initiative. The opposition regarded the strike as part of its larger strategic plan. "You are going to see more of these actions coming," warned MDC spokesman Nelson Chamisa. (20) Expectations, however, were to be disappointed when the strike fizzled as businesses continued to operate as normal.
Internal pressure on the government of Zimbabwe was combined with external threats. The U.S. and Great Britain were once again urging African nations to pressure Zimbabwe. Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer said that African nations should impose sanctions. Western leaders arrogantly lectured African leaders in a demeaning manner, trying to dictate to them how to act, and treated them as if they were mere servants to do the West's bidding. When the Southern African Development Community (SADC) met to discuss regional matters, the subject of Zimbabwe was high on the agenda. Western political leaders and media did not hide their expectation that Zimbabwe's neighbors would choose the occasion to join the Western campaign.
Instead, the SADC issued a firm rebuff to the West. The statement issued by the organization pointed out that "free and fair democratic presidential elections were held in 2002 in Zimbabwe," and the SADC "reaffirmed its solidarity with the government and people of Zimbabwe." South African President Thabo Mbeki would work to facilitate dialogue between the government and the opposition. In a clear message to the Western powers, the SADC appealed to Great Britain to "honor its compensation obligations with regard to land reform," and called for "the lifting of all forms of sanctions against Zimbabwe." (21) Zimbabwe's neighbors knew that Western sanctions had inflicted severe harm on the economy and had in large part turned the political environment into a fight to the death that only encouraged violence. If what was wanted was a reduction in violence and political passions, then that could best be achieved by removing sanctions and allowing the economy to recover.
U.S. Ambassador to Zimbabwe Christopher Dell spurned the appeal a few days later by saying that the U.S. would not lift sanctions against Zimbabwe. "It's simply not going to happen." (22) The U.S. and Great Britain liked to point to the targeted sanctions against selected officials in Zimbabwe, which consisted of restrictions on travel and financial transactions abroad, claiming that such sanctions could not affect the economy of the entire nation. That claim was disingenuous, leaving out as it did the substantial efforts to block Zimbabwe's access to foreign currency and international trade. "They use the term targeted sanctions," observed Zimbabwean information minister Sikhanyiso Ndlovu, "yet any company that deals with Zimbabwe – they have been threatened; ordered not to deal with Zimbabwe. External financial institutions and banks have been told not to deal with Zimbabwe...so that the country does not have foreign currency. These targeted sanctions are a smoke screen." (23)
Further measures are in the works. In addition to current sanctions, U.S. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said, "it's really a matter of looking at what else we might do with the international community, and part of that effort is to work with states in the region to get them to increase the pressure" on Zimbabwe. (24) This was confirmed by U.S. State Department deputy spokesman Tom Casey when he said, "There's always other tools in the toolbox, though, and I certainly expect we'll look at those." (25)
The Western destabilization campaign coupled interference in the internal affairs of Zimbabwe with sanctions. In addition to aid and advice to the MDC, funding is provided to media and NGO's in support of the opposition. Due to the illegality under Zimbabwean law of many of their actions, the U.S. and Great Britain have generally avoided spelling out too many specifics. But the aim is clear, as indicated by the U.S. State Department: the strategy is "to maintain pressure on the Mugabe regime" and "to strengthen democratic forces," that is, the MDC. The campaign against Zimbabwe is international in scope, and "the United States emphasized international cooperation and coordination. U.S. officials engaged multilaterally and bilaterally to expand international support of sanctions against government and ruling officials." The U.S. also sponsors "public events" inside Zimbabwe, which are intended to "discredit" the government's claim that sanctions are harming the economy, and to shift blame for economic decline onto the government. The U.S. provides what it vaguely refers to as "support" to the political opposition, and which in fact is quite extensive. (26)
Training has been provided to some opposition members of Parliament, as well as to "selected democratically oriented organizations." The United States also directly funds "a number of civil society organizations" (NGO's) and provides them "with training and technical assistance to help them advocate to the parliament on issues of national significance." In other words, so-called civil society organizations are being paid and trained to influence legislation in an amenable manner for Western interests. Opposition media are generously funded in order to "fortify" their efforts to swing public support to the opposition. Nearly a third of a million dollars was given to the U.S. Solidarity Center to establish a program "to assist trade unions in Zimbabwe to become more accountable and responsive to their members." (27) It would be more accurate to say that the intent was to encourage trade unions to become "more accountable and responsive" to Western interests. Affiliated with the AFL-CIO, Solidarity Center receives funding from the National Endowment for Democracy, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the U.S. State Department, and it often acts as an extension of U.S. foreign policy. (28) Among the myriad organizations involved in Zimbabwe on behalf of U.S. interests are Freedom House, the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs, the National Republican Institute, and a host of others.
The interventionist liberal-left in the West has jumped on the bandwagon of support for Bush and Blair's campaign to topple the government of Zimbabwe. But critics who call for a Western-imposed "transition process" in Zimbabwe forget that the nation already has a transition process -- an election which is scheduled for next year. No amount of imperial posturing can change the fact that it is only the people of Zimbabwe that have the right to choose their government -- not the U.S. and Great Britain. The Zimbabwean people made their choice in the last presidential and parliamentary elections, both of which were deemed free and fair by African observers on the ground. Predictably, the U.S. and Great Britain, having no election observers, condemned the elections from afar as fraudulent even before they took place in a blatant attempt to discredit election outcomes that every poll had foretold. Western condemnation was prompted by the uncomfortable realization that a different outcome could not be imposed, no matter how many tens of millions of dollars were pumped into the coffers of the opposition.
If the Western-funded MDC has been incapable of coming up with a program that would appeal to a majority of voters, it is because the party has preferred to focus its attention on policies that would benefit Western corporate interests. For the Western liberal-left to call for the U.S. to "mediate" in a transition process is nothing less than a demand for U.S. meddling to initiate a coup to remove the legally elected government of Zimbabwe. There is something unseemly in the attitude that the U.S. and Great Britain have the right to dictate the fate of other nations and to determine who shall hold power, and that it is the duty of activists to support imperial domination.
If the police in Zimbabwe have acted harshly at times, it is because Western interference has created a life or death struggle for survival in Zimbabwe. That the U.S. and Great Britain are using every means possible to effect regime change and to encourage the opposition to bring down the government through mass action can only have resulted in a deeply polarized society. The government of Zimbabwe is cognizant of previous Western-backed campaigns that successfully removed the governments of Yugoslavia, Georgia and the Ukraine and installed compliant puppets in their place. Zimbabwe is vigilant against Western attempts to incite opposition supporters to bring about a violent change of government.
It is dismaying that so many would call for U.S. and British intervention in the affairs of a sovereign nation. It was British colonialism that stole the land from the African people and introduced the horrors of the apartheid system in Rhodesia. Over the decades of colonial rule, the British government expropriated untold billions of dollars from the land, labor and resources while depopulating the rich farmland regions and herding those expelled from their homes into the most barren areas. Is it not ironic that the U.S. and Great Britain condemn government violence in Zimbabwe when they have done so much to create the circumstances that almost guarantee such an outcome? Is it not relevant that the West has fostered myriad acts of violence by the opposition? And what could be stranger than for the U.S. and Great Britain to act as self-appointed moral authorities on the subject of violence and democracy as they crush Iraq and Afghanistan under the boot of occupation? Whatever acts of violence may have taken place in Zimbabwe pale in comparison to the vast numbers of victims of Western firepower in Iraq. If the U.S. and Great Britain are as committed to peace, democracy and the rule of law as they claim to be, then let them leave Iraq now, without delay.
Western liberal-left critics demand more meddling by the U.S. and Great Britain in the affairs of Zimbabwe, under the delusion that Western-imposed regime change would be a "democratic"act. It is only corporate and elite interests that would be served, for Zimbabwe's crime in the eyes of Washington is that it jettisoned the ruinous structural adjustment program several years ago, rejected the neoliberal economic model and redistributed land on a more equitable basis. It is not lack of democracy in Zimbabwe that worries Western elites; it is the fact that democracy has produced a government that those in the halls of power in Washington and London wish to remove. What the West wants is to overturn democracy in Zimbabwe and impose a government of its choosing. Zimbabwe, to its credit, has refused to bend to intense pressure and remains committed to the course it has charted, in which the economy is geared to the interests of its own people, not that of Western corporate interests.
"Zimbabwe is a strategic country for the United States because events in Zimbabwe have a significant impact on the entire region," points out USAID. (29) Indeed, President Mugabe says that the struggle Zimbabwe has embarked upon is nothing less than Africa's second liberation. The continent, having freed itself from direct colonial rule, has yet to free itself of economic domination. In Namibia and South Africa, the formal end of apartheid rule has done nothing to undo the concentration of land in the hands of the wealthy white few, while millions of black peasants remain without land. Throughout Africa, the neoliberal economic model has crippled prospects for development. Zimbabwe's example, were it allowed to flourish unhindered, might threaten to set an example that would make an indelible continent-wide impression. Conversely, the U.S. and Great Britain hope that a defeated Zimbabwe would send a signal that resistance to Western economic domination is futile. There is much that rides on the outcome of Zimbabwe's struggle against its imperial enemies -- perhaps the fate of Africa itself.
Gregory Elich is the author of Strange Liberators: Militarism, Mayhem, and the Pursuit of Profit
Strange Liberators: Militarism, Mayhem, and the Pursuit of Profit Strange Liberators:
Militarism, Mayhem,
and the Pursuit of Profit
by: Gregory Elich (Author),
Mickey Z (Afterword), Michael Parenti (Introduction)
Publisher: Llumina Press,
Released: 01 May, 2006
price: $20.48 (new), $22.00 (used)
NOTES
1. "More Arrests, Tension Rises," UN Integrated Regional Information Network, March 12, 2007.
2. Cesar Zvayi, "It's the MDC: See, Hear, Say No Evil," The Herald (Harare), March 15, 2007."Man Shot Dead as MDC Thugs Attack Police," The Herald (Harare), March 12, 2007.
3. "Eyewitness: Harare's Brutal Clash," BBC News, March 13, 2007.
4. David Samuriwo, "Deal Decisively with Security Threat," The Herald (Harare), March 16, 2007. "Eyewitness: Harare's Brutal Clash," BBC News, March 13, 2007.
5. David Samuriwo, "Deal Decisively with Security Threat," The Herald (Harare), March 16, 2007.
6. Sarah Huddleston and Dumisani Muleya, "Mugabe's Henchmen Unleash Torture Fury," Business Day (Johannesburg), March 15, 2007.
7. "IMF Declares Zimbabwe Ineligible to Use IMF Resources, IMF Press Release, September 25, 2001. "Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act of 2001," Public Law 107-99 – Dec. 21, 2001.
8. Gideon Gono, "An Analysis of the Socio-Economic Impact of Sanctions Against Zimbabwe: Supplement 7 of the Fourth Quarter 2005 Monetary Policy Review Statement, January 24, 2006.
9. "Stop Talking and Start Acting Against Mugabe, Say Tories," Daily Telegraph (London), March 15, 2002."Zimbabwe Steering Towards Sanctions," Afrol News, November 30, 2001.
10. Peter O'Connor, "Zimbabwe Decision Reveals Deep Rift," Associated Press, March 5, 2002.
11. "Standoff Against Zimbabwe Taken to Extreme Levels," The Herald (Harare), December 12, 2002.
12. For a detailed account of Western sanctions and the effect on the economy of Zimbabwe, see: Gregory Elich, Strange Liberators: Militarism, Mayhem, and the Pursuit of Profit, Llumina Press, Ft. Lauderdale, 2006.
13. Grant Ferrett, "Opposition Warning to Mugabe," BBC News, September 30, 2000.
14. For a detailed account of the case, see: Gregory Elich, Strange Liberators: Militarism, Mayhem, and the Pursuit of Profit, Llumina Press, Ft. Lauderdale, 2006.
15. Tony Hawkins, "Mugabe's Real Election Victory: An Opposition Split Down the Middle," Financial Times (London), November 30, 2005.
16. Caesar Zvayi, "It's the MDC: See, Hear, Say No Evil," The Herald (Harare), March 15, 2007.
17. Jam Raath, "Mugabe Arms Police as Opposition Prepares 'Final Push' to Oust Him," The Times (London), March 17, 2007.
18. "Harare Base Fire-Bombed, Two Cops Suffer Serious Facial Injuries," Real Time Traders, March 15, 2007."Slain Activist Buried Away from Public View," Institute for War & Peace Reporting (London), March 21, 2007."Sakubva Police Station Bombed," The Herald (Harare), March 24, 2007."Zim Train Petrol-Bombed," News24 (Johannesburg), March 24, 2007."Wholesaler Bombed," The Herald (Harare), April 2, 2007.
19. "Police Nab 35 MDC Activists, Confiscate Arms, Explosives," The Herald (Harare), March 29, 2007."Petrol Bomber Arrested," The Herald (Harare), March 28, 2007."Seven Petrol Bombers in Court," The Herald (Harare), March 30, 2007.
20. Craig Timberg, "Few Honor Strike in Zimbabwe," Washington Post, April 4, 2007.
21. "Communique from the 2007 Extra-Ordinary Summit of Heads of State and Government Held in Dar es Salaam, United Republic of Tanzania 28th to 29th March 2007," SADC.
22. Ndimyake Mwakalyelye, "US Ambassador Rebuffs Southern African Call to Lift Zimbabwe Sanctions," Voice of America, April 4, 2007.
23. Tendai Maphosa, "Sanctions May be Key to Political Reform in Zimbabwe," Voice of America, April 5, 2007.
24. Daily Press Briefing, Sean McCormack, Spokesman, U.S. Department of State, March 30, 2007.
25. Stephen Kaufman, "Additional Sanctions Possible, State Department Says," U.S. Department of State, March 14, 2007.
26. "Supporting Human Rights and Democracy: the U.S. Record 2006," U.S. Department of State, April 5, 2007.
27. "Supporting Human Rights and Democracy: the U.S. Record 2003-2004," U.S. Department of State, May 17, 2004.
28. Alexandra Silver, "Soft Power: Democracy-Promotion and U.S. NGOs," Council on Foreign Relations, May 17, 2006.
29. "USAID/Zimbabwe Annual Report, FY 2005," U.S. Agency for International Development, July 16, 2005.
Reprinted from:
www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=view
Article&code=ELI20070413&articleId=5373
Email: zimbabwecrisis@yahoo.com
Labels: ZIMBABWE
Read more...
