Maravi

Zimbabwe: War Against Land Reform Unwinnable
Reason Wafawarova
17 April 2009

Harare — THE three-party agreement that established the inclusive Government currently running the affairs of Zimbabwe cannot and will not be a licence for the reversal of the gains of the Land Reform Programme.

As we celebrate the Independence of Zimbabwe from colonial repression, let us not be fooled into believing that the fuzzy feelings we get about the prospect of the inclusive Government bringing economic success to the country can over-ride the success of those who lost lives and limbs so that we could reclaim the heritage that had been systematically stolen from us -- the land.

There are sudden and increasing voices that are trying to paint a picture that President Mugabe's commitment to the success of the inclusive Government is to be measured by a measure of capitulation on the land policy.

The same voices have been painting the blatantly false picture that beneficiaries of the Land Reform Programme are, by definition, "Mugabe cronies."

The beneficiaries of land reform in Bolivia are equally labelled Morales' cronies and so has been the case with the beneficiaries of Venezuela's land reforms who are, by imperial definition, all cronies of Hugo Chavez.

Those farmers with long standing cases of fighting Government authorised eviction notices are now portrayed as victims of "fresh farm invasions."

It is clear that Sadc's position is that new farmers on acquired farm land should be equipped and helped to increase farming production so that Zimbabwe can once again be a net exporter of food in the region and abroad.

Yet for the same goal some people are for the unachievable objective of restoring land ownership to farmers who were evicted during the Land Reform Programme.

It must be noted that when the land occupation took place, the problem was not who owned the land but who did not have land and why that was so.

The issue was not whose property rights were to be protected but whose heritage had been stolen in the name of property rights and anti-people land tenure laws.

If Zimbabwe was a vast country with colonial beneficiaries occupying the same land space as was the case prior to 2000, but with indigenous people equally settled on productive land then there was never going to be a need for land reforms.

The Land Reform Programme sought to address, and still seeks to address, the issue of deprivation through dispossession and that underlying reality will remain the motivating factor that turned the agrarian tables upside down in Zimbabwe.

The issue of production is fundamental and cannot be downplayed by any sane person. However, addressing production by reinstating inequality is plain stupid and cannot be tolerated from whichever angle one may want to argue.

Production based on deprivation of the masses and a reinstatement of colonial imbalances will not do the future of Zimbabwe any good.

It is simply unacceptable. The only viable option is to follow the Sadc lead in empowering the new farmers with inputs, training and giving them the political will and support they deserve.

As Deputy Prime Minister Mutambara recently said, the focus must be on figuring out how best to make our new farmers produce. The issue of the revolution going into reverse gear does not arise.

Denigrating the new farmers as "Mugabe cronies", "unskilled Zanu-PF supporters" or "incapable of farming" will not help increase agricultural production and neither will it help return the land to those who have already been moved off the land or those yet to be moved.

What the inclusive Government must be addressing are matters of multiple farm ownership, underutilisation of land, comprehensive support for the resettled farmers and a logical conclusion to land acquisition.

Without doubt, the inclusive Government must deal decisively with the issue of those who may be motivated by selfish and greedy short-term benefits like nice farm houses and ready harvests when in fact they have no serious plans on long-term commitment to serious farming.

The attempt to cheer some Zimbabwean politicians into a warpath with new farmers is ill-advised, dangerous and futile.

No Zimbabwean politician is too popular to the extent of reversing the land reform programme without dire repercussions.

Equally, the attempt by some economically powerful groupings to limit the potential damage on political mileage for some purported friendly political parties in Zimbabwe by suggesting that President Mugabe must be used to reacquire lost land cannot be a sensible suggestion, if only for the known principles of President Mugabe.

Some argue that if the MDC formations are going to help clean up the economic mess in the country by calling for the lifting of sanctions and helping mobilising aid for the country, then President Mugabe and Zanu-PF must "play ball" by reversing land reforms and reinstating ousted former commercial farmers.

The euphemism used for this is "restoring property rights" or simply "establishing the rule of law". The fact of the matter is that the land question in Zimbabwe is no longer about the former land occupiers but about the current occupiers.

The former land occupiers had their tenure by historical and political privilege and the new farmers have assumed their tenure based on moral justice and the inalienable right to a country and space to dwell and subsist.

If there are willing new farmers that wish to partner with the former occupiers from a position of strategic business partnership, that can only be encouraged.

However, the real focus should be to make sure that a comprehensive empowerment programme is adopted to ensure that the new farmers are adequately supported so they can produce.

The agreement that set up this inclusive Government in Zimbabwe is broad-based and cannot be measured on the radar of agricultural production alone.

It must be measured on national healing concerning matters of the most unfortunate polarity that had taken control of all our political faculties.

Its success must be measured on economic stability. This stability includes sectors such as mining, tourism, retail, manufacturing and the service industry.

There is this most expressive opinion in the West that the acquired land is in the hands of minority Zanu-PF elite and the masses that helped acquire the land have all been sidelined back to their original status of peasantry.

The assertion is that "an elite of a different skin colour" merely displaced another elite.

This is a diversion from the traditional line that the new farmers were unskilled and incapable of producing.

Now they are non-existent as they have been replaced by the Zanu-PF elite and that notorious club of "Mugabe cronies".

If indeed this were true, the question would be the measure of genuineness in the Western sympathisers purporting to be dead worried about the said poor displaced peasants.

Are the advocates of this most admirable truism of social justice on the part of Zimbabwean peasants really worried about the welfare of these people?

Labels: INTERNATIONAL MEDIA, LAND REFORM, PROPAGANDA

posted by MrK @ 1:58 AM