Maravi

(NEWZIMBABWE) UK must have courage to bring Zimbabwe in from cold

COMMENT - Britain will 'bring Zimbabwe in from the cold'? This has a "Fog in Channel, Continent Isolated" feel to it. Zimbabwe is going to do fantastically without interference and sabotage by the United Kingdom and the USA. So own up to your economic sanctions and their effects, apologize to the people of Zimbabwe, pay compensation, including to the families who died during the cholera epidemic, admit that through Clare Short's letter to minister Kumbirai Kangai it was the British Government that blew up the Willing Buyer, Willing Seller land reform program, and show you will never go down this path again. And stop using unsourced political claims about violence and report them as news.

UK must have courage to bring Zimbabwe in from cold
18/07/2012 00:00:00
by Peter Orbone I Daily Telegraph

The European Union meets next Monday to consider lifting sanctions imposed on Zimbabwe in 2002. The plan has been criticised by some British lawmakers, including Labour's Peter Hain. But influential political journalist and columnist Peter Orbone, writing in The Daily Telegraph, says lifting the sanctions is an "entirely sensible step":

A NUMBER of political reputations have been shattered over the past six months. Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt and Chancellor George Osborne are both shadows of what they were, while questions are being asked even about David Cameron.

Yet one senior Cabinet reputation has done nothing but soar. When he became Foreign Secretary just over two years ago, William Hague indicated that he would take a new approach. He promised to draw fully on the institutional strengths of the diplomatic service, which had been at best neglected and at worst treated with contempt under New Labour. British foreign policy, so often handed over to the United States when Tony Blair was in charge, would pursue British interests.

Above all, Hague promised a more intelligent policy. New Labour had a notorious tendency to divide the world into black and white, and act accordingly. The twin disasters of Iraq and Afghanistan were the result of this naive failure to acknowledge that the world is a complicated place, and that simple or morally satisfying solutions do not often work out well in the long term.

It has taken Hague a long time to modify the culture he inherited and revert to traditional diplomacy, and his task is not complete. For example, the US still determines much of British foreign policy in South Asia and the Middle East, greatly to the frustration of our diplomats.

But elsewhere, results are beginning to come through. One of the earliest manifestations of the Coalition’s more sensitive and pragmatic foreign policy was Burma, where Britain has moved steadily towards engagement and away from confrontation.

Another concerns Zimbabwe, a pariah state ever since President Mugabe unleashed his programme of farm seizures at the turn of the century. For the past decade, almost every measure short of military invasion has been taken to isolate the Zimbabwe president and his Zanu PF supporters. Aid has been suspended and heavy sanctions targeted at senior members of the regime, while Zimbabwe was forced out of the Commonwealth in 2003.

[And an credit freeze of the Zimbabwean government from 2002 onwards destroyed the national currency, which did most of the damage. - MrK]

This week, that policy was reversed. In a statement in the Commons on Tuesday, Foreign Office minister Alistair Burt announced that Britain now wants many of the sanctions on Zimbabwe to be lifted. Burt’s speech has hardly been reported, but that does not mean it was unimportant (by contrast, events that dominate the headlines for weeks can later turn out to have had almost no significance at all).

British policy towards Zimbabwe has taken an entirely new turn. Rather than seeking to drive the country out of the comity of nations, we are now endeavouring to bring her in. As the former colonial power, our new understanding has already changed many minds in the European Union, and the United States may well alter course too. Eventually, so long as mishaps do not occur, Zimbabwe is likely to return to the Commonwealth.

This change of stance was received with dismay in the Commons. Peter Hain, who played such a brave and honourable role as an anti-apartheid campaigner in the Seventies, probably reflected the mood of the majority of MPs when he demanded more sanctions on Zimbabwe, not less. Furthermore, he provided frightening new evidence that profits from so-called blood diamonds in eastern Zimbabwe have been hijacked to build up a parallel state apparatus capable of being

used by Zanu PF thugs for sinister and bloodthirsty ends.

[Well done, Daily Mail. Do you factcheck any of those claims? - MrK]

So why defy Hain’s powerful analysis? The answer comes down to the underlying purpose of the sanctions. The last government, understandably, deployed them in order to express a strong repugnance against the immorality of the Zanu PF regime – in other words, as a rhetorical gesture.

[A rhetorical gestures that led to world record hyperinflation, as intended. - MrK]

By contrast, the Coalition is asking a different question: what practical good do they achieve? Here, the answer is more difficult. Many people who really know Zimbabwe have argued for some time that, while sanctions were of course justified by the scale of human rights violations

[Economic sanctions are human rights violations. They killed half a million women and children in Iraq. - MrK]

when they were imposed a decade ago, they have in practice been a propaganda gift to Mugabe’s Zanu PF. Even though they have been targeted only at a relatively small number of named individuals, skilful politicians have been able to blame them for many of the economic calamities of the past few years.

[No, lying British and US politicians and ambassadors have blamed the collapse of the Zimbabwe Dollar and the economic ramifications of that act on 'mismanagement by Mugabe' (TM), rather than admit that ZDERA destroyed the Zimbabwe Dollar. To quote from ZDERA:

SEC. 4. SUPPORT FOR DEMOCRATIC TRANSITION AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY.

(c) MULTILATERAL FINANCING RESTRICTION- Until the President makes the certification described in subsection (d), and except as may be required to meet basic human needs or for good governance, 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.

***

Notice that these are not 'targeted' at individuals, but at The Government Of Zimbabwe, a term which is literally mentioned twice. - MrK]

More important by far, it is not just Zanu PF which wants them lifted. So do its opponents. Morgan Tsvangirai, leader of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), told Mr Cameron in March this year that he was certain the sanctions regime should be dropped. Mr Tsvangirai would also like Zimbabwe to be readmitted to the Commonwealth.

The fact is that Zimbabwe has been a success story after reaching rock bottom during the hideous violence, accompanied by hyperinflation, of the 2008 elections. The smell of fear was palpable on the streets of the big cities, while armed bands roamed the rural areas inflicting terrible bloodshed and brutality.

[Source? - MrK]

Of course, the coalition government led by president Mugabe and prime minister Tsvangirai has had many problems, but the essential thing is that it has survived. The political atmosphere feels very different. Meanwhile, the economy, in deep depression only four years ago, is now powering ahead under the skilful management of the MDC finance minister, Tendai Biti.

The great question is how to sustain this progress, especially with Zimbabwe facing presidential elections (in which the 88-year-old Mugabe insists he will stand) next year. Fundamentally, there are two opinions. There is the morally purist view – powerfully articulated in the Commons this week – that Zanu PF has done terrible things and must be punished. Or there is the realistic position, now being pursued by the Foreign Office, which holds that sanctions are not just for show but should serve some purpose. This position requires a great deal of political courage because it exposes ministers to the charge that they are going soft on murderers and dictators.

But it also stands in a respectable tradition of British statecraft. There would have been no peace in Northern Ireland if ministers had not been happy to talk to men of violence. In Afghanistan, we now acknowledge that no solution is remotely possible unless Mullah Omar and other Taliban leaders are granted a central role.

The lessons of Afghanistan and Northern Ireland show that if we are really serious about reconciliation in Zimbabwe, the international community will need to go much further than simply dropping sanctions. Take the example of defence minister Emmerson Mnangagwa, who was head of state intelligence during the Gukurahundi, which saw the slaughter of tens of thousands of innocent people in the 1980s. Mnangagwa remains hugely powerful. If men like him are even to countenance the possibility of peaceful regime change, they will surely need solid, bankable reassurances that they will be protected from prosecution after leaving office.

This is just one of the hideously complex moral problems that lie ahead as Zimbabwe enters one of the most dangerous, but most hopeful, election years of its short history. Meanwhile, Britain has taken a entirely sensible first step.

*******

COMMENTS FROM THE NEWZIMBABWE WEBSITE:


datbrotherfromthestates

sorry to be the messenger of bad news to the bigoted brits from Number ten,or "buckingham Abbey" or "westminster palace" (palace,and abbey,I love putting a GHETTO spin to them) but sanctions or no sanctions,ZIMBABWE will NEVER be a colony or a "member of their white commonwealth EVER AGAIN!!
the bigots from number ten had a chance back in the year 1996 to do the right thing and honor the deal at lancaster and pay for land reform but Blair,being the bigot and white supremist that he was then and is today,didnt want to pay those BLACK AFRICANS one british pound.
he thought that mugabe would cave to the white skin and british passports of the bigoted rhodesians.....he was wrong. at least tihs author had the decency to tell the truth and admit that the problems in zim started when mugabe took back his countries land from the white brits,but that is the only truth he told.
william hague is one of the most evil white men to EVER exist on this planet.he is no better than hitler,or botha or de klerk. he just commits his crimes against black and brown people under the disguise of white western democracy.
how can he claim that ZANU-PF must be punished for taking back its countries land when their white kith and kin in apartheid south africa still walk free today because of the ignorance of the zulu and the xhosa?
who will "punish" the white brit for all of the crimes that they STILL commit against africans as they just did in LIBYA?
when will the white brits be brought to book for the Mau Mau massacre that they committed in Kenya? to the people of zimbabwe,sanctions or no sanctions,the brits are your mortal enemies,and so are the americans who side with them. there will be no need for "protection from prosecution when they leave office" because they will defend their land and resources til death,as they should!
*
vamoyo

pipe down american dude.
*
datbrotherfromthestates

vamoyo......you should be glad that I am defending IDIOTS as yourself,if you are black. here is the comment from a Mr.John Devries in england from that article in the london telegraph.......
All that has ever been necessary is the assasination of Mugabe. To allow him to kill white farmers for their land in order to give it to his friends was an outrage. As soon as he started he should have been stopped. What benefit has there been to the world or Zimbabwe in having this reptile alive?
*
MweniTafara

Why worry if a little English island with little or no resources wants to sanction itself against the Great Zim, its actually to our benefit, the only problem is that politicians who were used to visiting London are missing it.
*
lawrencestoke

haha maakuda kudya mari yemaminerals ka maona taakukutorerai ne51-49 yedu. Miraimuone henyu mabhunu. Mati madii. By the way, how is the Eurozone economy doing these days? lol I see. Welcome back.
*
Mampara_Jexe

Why should Zimbabweans be punished for taking back what is theirs??
*
TLN_Economics

REMOVE ILLEGAL ECONOMIC SANCTIONS
*
Mbango Sithole

Can the EU and the US truly and frankly claim that they have helped the situation in Zimbabwe? The answer is an obvious NO. Their measures have not helped the ordinary man in the street or countryside. They only served to harden hearts of some of our leaders by giving credence to the notion that there was an onslaught on the independence and sovereignty of Zimbabwe.
By laying out conditional lifting of sanctions, the EU is displaying a gross ignorance of African politics. They are complicating matters. It only serves to undermine those who are fighting for democratic reforms in Zimbabwe. Their failure to understand how to deal with the African problem has perpetuated the sorry state of many of our countries. The African issues can only be effectively dealt with in the light of the history we had. Our democracies have clearly not yet matured. The clouding of historical perspectives can only be ignored if one decides to be a novice in African politics.
The EU should just lift the sanctions without conditions as he conditions will only serve to strengthen the regime change agenda theories that Zanu PF has peddled for over a decade since the advent of the MDC. We all know that the sanctions have been branded “illegal” and only serving to effect regime change. Attaching conditions which have to do with elections was not a wise move on the part of the EU. The sanctions have clearly failed to achieve their intended mission apart from making life difficult for the poor and vulnerable. The changes that we seem to see coming through cannot be attributed to the sanctions. SADC and AU through their point man Jacob Zuma have achieved much more than the sanctions in as far as arm-twisting Zanu PF to agree to the acceptable reforms. SADC and the AU have complained that the sanctions are impeding their efforts in resolving issues in Zimbabwe and have called for their unconditional lifting on numerous instances.
*
ZuuluShaka

You got to love Britain hypocrisy trait they are cut above the rest in the West . .This is the government half the cabinet are millionaires inherited ,never grafted a hard days work has no clue how to put the economy on the right track.They talk about cutting spending and yet the system functions on debt bingeing.

Red top tabloids and spread sheet newspaper right wing editorial drivel a mouth peace for tanget by bashing immigrants as symptoms whenever there is an embarrassing scandal .i.e Libor and HSBC Mexico drug money laundering.

Peter Hain has something to say of course ,these stifling liberals are responsible for Zimbabwe unmitigated though justified land reform ,War monger tanned prime minister .The blue bloods coalition rubber stamped the same idiosyncrasies in Libya ,inflamed tribal wars .The biggest trading patterns US and Europe are in trouble because of poor monetary and fiscal policies.

When a so called 'developed" country ,a former Empire is going through self inflicted destruction policies".It doesn't hurts to swallow your pride to even do bussiness with Somalia.The footing to stand on morals is gone .
*
ZuuluShaka

Bvvvg
*
bolk

I hope this story is true, so if elections come anytime soon Bob won't have any excuse for blaming sanctions, but other than that it's high time they are lifted so our beloved nation can move forward without limiting factors.
*
truth0001

what a lier, he claims Biti is careffully managing the economy!! its laughable! sanctions or no sanctions, these malleable stooges of the west will never rule zimbabwe!!! and the sharp minded of UK politics know that its causing them lose out economic opportunities in zimbabwe and southern africa and the easterns..china and india and soon the russians are grabing those opportunities ...they/smark UK politicians know they are not going to let thier racial allegance to white zimbabweans cost that much to them. with or without mugabe ...the land can NEVER GO BACK to whites. MDC can never stop mines from giving communities $ as mugabe has been doing. There would be an uproar if not a real war and the smart british know that, they know the battle is lost and what they need to win is a war on not losing more economic benefits from trading with southern africa. they know there can never be a libya stlye invasion of zimbabwe...ANC bomping zanu for giving land to people, can that happen???

Labels: EU, PROPAGANDA, SANCTIONS, UK, ZDERA

posted by MrK @ 3:21 PM