Finally, I have the data for the Zimbabwean currency. Notice what happens in the year 2002, the year that the Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act of 2001 put the Zimbabwean government on a credit freeze. I have already demonstrated the collapse of the 2001 trade surplus in the year 2002. Case closed. It were the Bush Administration sanctions.
UPDATE 28/03/2012: Correction - George W. Bush signed ZDERA into law on December 21st, 2001, and the law came into effect on January 1st, 2002, not December 31st 2001, as mentioned on the chart.
Notice the SUDDEN collapse of the Zimbabwean Dollar against the US Dollar in the year 2002.
The precise nature of this credit freeze, illegally put on the Zimbabwean government (and people) by the Bush Administration, aided by the African diamond interest driven, corporatist Neo Democrat wing of the Democratic Party - Hillary Clinton, Russ Feingold and Joe Biden:
SEC. 4. SUPPORT FOR DEMOCRATIC TRANSITION AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY.
(c) MULTILATERAL FINANCING RESTRICTION- ... the Secretary of the Treasury shall instruct the United States executive director to each international financial institution to oppose and vote against--
(1) any extension by the respective institution of any loan, credit, or guarantee to the Government of Zimbabwe; or
(2) any cancellation or reduction of indebtedness owed by the Government of Zimbabwe to the United States or any international financial institution.
These are the financial sanctions that put the country of Zimbabwe on a credit freeze in the year 2002, the year the Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act of 2001 came into force.
The banks which are directly mentioned and to which this credit freeze applies:
SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS.
In this Act:
(1) INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS- The term `international financial institutions' means the
multilateral development banks and the
International Monetary Fund.
(2) MULTILATERAL DEVELOPMENT BANKS- The term `multilateral development banks' means the
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the
International Development Association, the
International Finance Corporation, the
Inter-American Development Bank, the
Asian Development Bank, the
Inter-American Investment Corporation, the
African Development Bank, the
African Development Fund, the
European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and the
Multilateral Investment Guaranty Agency.
The effects of this 2002 credit freeze on the trade surplus:
Table 1: Zimbabwe - Key economic indicators, 2001–2008
Trade Deficit in million USD (negative deficit is a surplus)
2000* 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
-295.6 -323 18 108 305 388 467
Notice the collapse of the 2001 trade surplus in the year 2002.
The Zimbabwe Dollar was deliberately sunk by the Bush Administration, with the help of the MDC, in order to prevent the success of the Fast Track land reform program, and to ready Zimbabwe for a neoliberal takeover by the MDC - privatisation of parasdtatals and mines, deregulation of labour and environmental laws, and free markets for corporate capital - unlimited expatriation of profits and no taxes for corporations.
This is the treasonous role played by the MDC, for which, as the cowards they are, tried to blame President Mugabe and the ZANU-PF.
In the words of Chester Crocker: In order to separate the people of Zimbabwe from the ZANU-PF, we have to make their economy scream, and I hope you senators have the stomach for what you have to do.
In contrast, these are the words of then Democratic congresswoman Cynthia McKinney on the introduction of ZDERA in 2001 on December 4th 2001, 3 weeks before the Act was signed into law by President Bush:
SPEECH OF HON. CYNTHIA A. McKINNEY OF GEORGIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, December 4, 2001
* Ms. McKINNEY. Mr. Speaker, at the international Relations Committee meeting of November 28, 2001, which considered the Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act of 2001, I asked a question of my colleagues who were vociferously supporting this misdirected piece of legislation: ``Can anyone explain how the people in question who now have the land in question in Zimbabwe got title to the land?''
* My query was met with a deafening silence. Those who knew did not want to admit the truth and those who didn't know should have known--that the land was stolen from its indigenous peoples through the British South Africa Company and any ``titles'' to it were illegal and invalid. Whatever the reason for their silence, the answer to this question is the unspoken but real reason for why the United States Congress is now concentrating its time and resources on squeezing an economically-devastated African state under the hypocritical guise of providing a ``transition to democracy.''
* Zimbabwe is Africa's second-longest stable democracy. It is multi-party. It had elections last year where the opposition, Movement for Democratic Change, won over 50 seats in the parliament. It has an opposition press which vigorously criticizes the government and governing party. It has an independent judiciary which issues decisions contrary to the wishes of the governing party. Zimbabwe is not without troubles, but neither is the United States. I have not heard anyone proposing a United States Democracy Act following last year's Presidential electoral debacle. And if a foreign country were to pass legislation calling for a United States Democracy Act which provided funding for United States opposition parties under the fig leaf of ``Voter Education,'' this body and this country would not stand for it.
* There are many de jure and de facto one-party states in the world which are the recipients of support of the United States government. They are not the subject of Congressional legislative sanctions. To any honest observer, Zimbabwe's sin is that it has taken the position to right a wrong, whose resolution has been too long overdue--to return its land to its people. The Zimbabwean government has said that a situation where 2 percent of the population owns 85 percent of the best land is untenable. Those who presently own more than one farm will no longer be able to do so.
* When we get right down to it, this legislation is nothing more than a formal declaration of United States complicity in a program to maintain white-skin privilege. We can call it an ``incentives'' bill, but that does not change its essential ``sanctions'' nature. It is racist and against the interests of the masses of Zimbabweans. In the long-run the Zimbabwe Democracy Act will work against the United States having a mutually beneficial relationship with Africa.