Maravi

(TALKZIMBABWE) Virgin in Zimbabwe: beware vultures disguised as angels

Virgin in Zimbabwe: beware vultures disguised as angels
By: Tendai Midzi
Posted: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 10:24 am

A VERY very interesting article on the Reuters website in which Virgin boss and billionaire Richard Branson urged 'people' to invest in Zimbabwe, saying the world was wrong to wait instead of helping the country to develop.

This was a very interesting statement coming after The Economist's revelation that Zimbabwe could stage an economic recovery within two years and a best case scenario could see it "back as one of the most successful countries in Africa" within 10 years.

The statement also comes after Tendai Biti's very Right Wing and intellectually flawed argument about the national bourgeoisie in Zimbabwe.

A close look at this media hyping up of Zimbabwe, without a corresponding high level of engagement with the country, shows that Zimbabwe is under attack more than it was under the first wave of colonialism. It is the new battleground for a new "Cold War".

Branson's entry into the fray is predicated at having access to the huge Africa (Zimbabwean) resource. It is also about countering the power of China.

The new initiative was hatched by a Virgin 'philanthropic group', Virgin Unite, and the Nduna Foundation. Virgin Unite brought together a group of partners to create the Zimbabwe Trust "to facilitate investments in small and medium sized enterprises".

Who is Isabella Matambanadzo? She has worked for the Soros Foundation’s Open Society Initiative for Southern Africa, and was Chairperson of the Board of Trustees of Radio Voice of the People (RadioVOP Zimbabwe). One should read what VOP broadcasts on Zimbabwe to have a clue of what exactly is going on here.

RadioVOP has been there for as long as the sanctions against Zimbabwe have been there. They recently celebrated their ten year anniversary. Their links with the BBC, Reuters in aiding the onslaught on Zimbabwe and Zanu-PF leaves a lot to be desired.

The Nduna Foundation was founded by Amy Robbins – a corporate banker and founder and former Chief Operating Officer of the multi-strategy NY-based hedge fund, Glenview Capital.

The two, Mr Branson and Ms Robbins are financial backers of the so-called "The Elders" who last year wanted to come into Zimbabwe and "assess the impact of the cholera crisis in Zimbabwe", but were denied visas.

The Elders include former Irish President Mary Robinson, Mr Richard Branson, former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, former US president Jimmy Carter, Cde Samora Machel's ex-wife Graca Machel, retired Archbishop Desmond Tutu, former South African president Nelson Mandela, etc and Mr Branson.

Bishop Tutu has advocated military action to topple President Mugabe and is connected with many other "charities" that purport to help Zimbabwe.

These people are relentless in their desire to "support" Zimbabwe; and one wonders why. They don't make as much noise about the illegal sanctions imposed on the country. Their desire to help from within the country is a cause of concern. They could do more from their own countries–firstly by urging their governments not to interfere in the internal affairs of Zimbabwe.

Mr Branson's philanthropy comes a little too late. It comes as Eastern countries have shown an unrelenting desire to work with Zimbabwe.

The country has been under illegal sanctions imposed by the United Kingdom, United States and their allies for the past ten years and Mr Branson has been investing next door in South Africa and elsewhere watching the country deteriorate. When he established a school of entrepreneurship for young people in Johannesburg did he think about the dying people next door?

When we were mocked by the international community for having the highest inflation and our people died of curable diseases like cholera he was there; with all his capital investing in safari-related businesses and air transport just next door.

Such statements should be taken with a pinch of salt. Zimbabwe does not need investments disguised as "philanthropic work" now. We reached rock bottom by ourselves and our people worked hard to lift themselves out of poverty; and are still doing so, despite the inhumane onslaught on the country.

The international community has now realised that this jewel we call Zimbabwe, having discovered the largest deposit of diamonds, is now able to lift itself out of the poverty that the West helped create in the first place.

No one would argue that had Mr Branson come to our rescue four five, ten years ago, he would have been more honourable and believable. Why now?

When Tony Blair and Gordon Brown went to the United Nations Security Council to convince them to impose sanctions on a tiny landlocked country Mr Branson and Ms Robbins and The Elders should have used their influence to bring them to the negotiating table. South Africa, China and Zimbabwe's other friends (countries and individuals) did.

Zimbabwe is inevitably on the recovery path and international capital is now coming disguised as philanthropy. South Africa today has useless mobile phone projects and leadership academies when its people are living in poverty.

They can bring as many textbooks as they want to hoodwink the people of Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe needs the lifting of sanctions. It will create or buy its own textbooks. Zimbabweans are educated and are conscious of they own struggle. The leadership in the country will never allow this backdoor entry by international hedge funds, international capital and Western foreign policy agents into Zimbabwe.

Reuters reports that: "The founding of Virgin Unite, the philanthropic arm of Branson's Virgin Group, has helped create Enterprise Zimbabwe, a nonprofit group connecting philanthropists and commercial investors with business and social development opportunities."

This is interesting because it comes at a time when Zimbabwe least needs philanthropy; and the leadership of the country is not involved; at least the Zanu-PF side of the leadership.

The renewed interest in Zimbabwe, just prior to the elections next year should be read in its right historical context. This happened again in 2007. Many governments, media and companies voiced their opinions about Zimbabwe, how it could recover only if the Zanu-PF government was to relinquish power.

Desmond Tutu (an 'Elder') and Archbishop of York John Sentamu voiced their opinions on behalf of the West Archbishop Sentamu even went on to cut his dog collar in protest against the leadership of President Mugabe.

Mr Branson in June last year met with Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai and details of their meeting were never made public. If he got some business concessions from that meeting we hope that they are in the best interests of the people of Zimbabwe; not in the form of the Rudd Concession.

The New York Times was right in its editorial when it said: "Zimbabwe is considered to be one of the most difficult nations in Africa to help." that is true. Zimbabwe does not need help. It has resources. It needs to be engaged in the international community like any other country. This should be done by the lifting of illegal sanctions.

It doesn't need the Clinton Global Initiative, without the lifting of sanctions.

Zimbabweans that remained in the country and busted sanctions from within will not tolerate this backdoor entry by "vultures" disguised as angels. What has changed? Is it Chiadzwa diamonds, or a realisation that there could be huge profits to be made from the vast mineral deposits in the country?

Is it lack of comparable viable investments elsewhere with a return like that of Zimbabwe?

Is Mr Banson sincere in saying: "Zimbabwe is a magnificent country that has had a really rough few years and either the world can continue to wait and see and not invest."

Mr Branson goes on: "The idea of Enterprise Zimbabwe is to have a sort of safe haven for people to invest through." He should know that there are mechanisms in Zimbabwe for investment already. Why does his group not use those mechanisms? We have government departments in the country that he can utilise for that purpose. Why another charity?

The NY Times reports: "Enterprise Zimbabwe has attracted the money that has helped those things happen and now wants to attract more. Established quietly a year ago, it will have its official debut on Tuesday before one of the biggest gatherings of billionaires and other wealthy people dedicated to making social change, the Clinton Global Initiative."

Why are they launching this organisation elsewhere and not in Zimbabwe and not engaging authorities in the country?

Why do 'donors' think Zimbabwe needs urgent help when their countries do not think so? Are these real donors or simply investors? Who is Isabella Matambanadzo?

Mr Branson says "the world can help Morgan Tsvangirai and the coalition government get Zimbabwe back on its feet". Why Tsvangirai when he is not Head of State and Government? Why not President Mugabe? This is the contempt with which they treat oiur leadership and that contempt will be reciprocated.

Mr Branson wants to create a "safe investment haven". Yes, safe for himself and his backdoor Zimbabweans. Where were they all this time? Zimbabweans are building diamond centres and creating institutions that will threaten global businesses like Virgin.

Our friends in China, India, China, Venezuela, etc – all weather friends – did not wait. Who is Mr Branson referring to as "the world community" or is it a sudden realisation that the West has been left behind in the rush for Zimbabwe?

These people should read President Mugabe's words loud and clear: "Zimbabwe will never be a colony again".

Thanks Mr Branson, Mr Soros, but no thanks. Our Chiyangwas and other vibrant businesspeople in Zimbabwe and our friends elsewhere will do it for us.

Labels: NEOCOLONIALISM, NEOLIBERALISM, RICHARD BRANSON, TENDAI BITI

posted by MrK @ 6:32 PM