(TALKZIMBABWE) MDC-T provincial leader says Tsvangirai is a ‘Supersonic Snake’
This article was written
by Our reporter
on 23 July, at 18 : 28 PM
The current MDC-T Provincial Chairman in Manicaland Julius Magarangoma has likened party president, Morgan Tsvangirai, to a “supersonic snake” for imposing candidates on the people of Makoni Central.
Tsvangirai imposed Dr Simba Makoni as the MDC-T candidate for Makoni Central, asking Patrick Sangandira, its parliamentary candidate for Makoni Central, to withdraw his candidature. This was the deal with the Mavambo/Kusile/Dawn leader.
“Our Party is now being controlled by Supersonic Snake. It’s shameful!!!!,” Magarangoma wrote on his Facebook profile on Monday, describing Tsvangirai.
The statement attracted criticism from MDC-T supporters. Andrew Dhungare Mutonhodza wrote: “Shefu handiti ndimi chair so munoda kuti tiite sei by the way with ths circus i bet zanu pf wil win dangamvura chikanga”.
Another supporter, Moses Musekiwa wrote, “again losing the plot in makoni central.pliz helpus lord”.
Tsvangirai’s imposition of candidates has attracted a lot of criticism from within his party only a few days to the national harmonised elections.
It has also widened cracks between the national and the provincial leadership of the MDC-T party.
Tsvangirai has been accused of failing to uphold the party’s constitution by making unilateral declarations, and there have been concerns that he would not be able to respect the country’s constitution if he becomes president.
Efforts to get the two MDC-T leadership groups together have failed. Tsvangirai’s advisers Alex Magaisa, Luke Tamborinyoka and Cecil Zvidzai made a futile attempt to organise a meeting between provincial leaders and party president Tsvangirai at a motel in Rusape prior to addressing a rally in Vengere Township in Mutare. The provincial leadership refused to meet with Tsvangirai.
The provincial leadership also refused to attend the MDC-T Rusape rally, leaving Tsvangirai to be accompanied by his wife Elizabeth and MDC-T spokesman, Douglas Mwonzora.
This is a blow to the MDC-T leader and party who are trying desperately to match the resurgent popularity of Zanu-PF in many areas that they previously dominated.
These divisions will spell disaster for the MDC-T at the harmonised elections slated for next week.
Labels: JULIUS MAGARANGOMA, MDC, MORGAN TSVANGIRAI, SIMBA MAKONI
Read more...
(NEWZIMBABWE) Makoni attacks MDC's record in government
24/04/2013 00:00:00
by Moses Chibaya
OPPOSITION leader Simba Makoni on Wednesday attacked the MDC-T’s record in government, insisting that the party’s claims that it stabilised the economy through dollarisation were a fraud.
The MDC-T went into government in 2009 after disputed elections forced President Robert Mugabe’s Zanu PF party to sign a power sharing pact negotiated by Zimbabwe’s neighbours.
The MDC-T’s Finance Minister Tendai Biti scrapped the local currency and replaced it with a multiple currency regime under which the United States dollar, the Botswana pula and the South African rand all became legal tender.
The measures are credited as a key factor in bringing down the country’s trillion dollar inflation to single digits and arresting the economic freefall.
But Makoni, a former finance minister who was a losing presidential candidate in 2008 with his Mavambo-Kusile party, says neither Biti, who implemented the currency transition, nor Zanu PF’s Patrick Chinamasa who was acting finance minister and announced the measures in January 2009, can claim credit.
“The people of Zimbabwe dollarised this economy in October 2007 long before Chinamasa made his announcement in January 2009 that we were abandoning the Zimbabwe dollar… that’s when dollarisation took place,” Makoni told a news conference in Harare.
“Dollarisation is the only factor that brought some modicum of relief to the Zimbabwean economy, not the MDC.”
Makoni described the performance of the unity government as “dismal and pathetic.”
MDC-T leader Morgan Tsvangirai’s boasts that his party’s government role brought back goods to formerly empty shelves was nothing to celebrate, Makoni said, as most of the goods were imported.
“They promised to stabilise the economy,” Makoni said, “well, as far as I know the economy continues to decline. I know that Prime Minister Tsvangirai will want to boast that the shops are full of goods. It is true shops are full of goods, but whose product?
“I know that if you walked into a supermarket in 2006, I would say 90 percent of the goods on the shelves there were made in Zimbabwe and the other 10 percent that was imported were luxuries not basic commodities.”
The productive sector in Zimbabwe has continued to face severe operational constraints that have curbed production capacity, with Biti revealing that in the first quarter, exports raked in a paltry US$689 million against a bloated import bill of US$1,739 billion.
Exports for the first three months of the year declined by 10.3 percent while exports increased by 14 percent compared to the same period last year.
The decline in exports has been exacerbated by an increase in imports of manufactured and processed goods, which the minister said was not sustainable.
Most manufacturers in Zimbabwe have complained about erratic power supplies and expensive short-term capital while industries in Bulawayo are battling severe water shortages.
Labels: MDC, SIMBA MAKONI
Read more...
Makoni: Mine's leadership of values, ideas
Talking politics ... Our correspondent Chofamba Sithole interviews Simba Makoni in London
05/09/2012 00:00:00
by Chofamba Sithole
Mavambo/Kusile/Dawn (MKD) leader and 2008 presidential candidate Dr Simba Makoni, who is in the UK this week to meet representatives of business, government and members of the Zimbabwean community, says he’s on a mission to promote a culture of consensual politics and a commitment to service and integrity in public life.
In this exclusive interview for New Zimbabwe.com, Makoni sat down with journalist Chofamba Sithole to discuss a wide range of topics, from the current constitutional reform impasse to his views on the diaspora’s role in national life.
Chofamba: Dr Makoni, you’re not in government, you’re not in Parliament and you’re not a party to the Global Political Agreement (GPA). People will ask, are you a relevant actor in the current political process?
Makoni: Yes I am relevant as a citizen, and so are millions of other citizens who are not in government or in Parliament. Parliament and government are only a small component of any country and it doesn’t mean that the large majority who are not in those structures are not relevant to national affairs.
Chofamba: We have heard concerns about the current coalition government arrangement as being very elitist when, as you have intimated, everyone should be relevant actors in national affairs. What mechanisms and opportunities are there for those such as yourself who are outside the GPA and its attendant regional diplomacy to engage with the ongoing political process?
Makoni: There are various platforms that one utilises to make a contribution, and I want to underline making a contribution. Contributions to national affairs, to national development are not limited to particular, defined political processes such as the GPA. We’re building a political party and national development is about ideas - we’re putting ideas into the national debate.
Those ideas are advanced through the fora of our political party, through civil society, business organisations or even through localised institutions. So I think it is very important to make people understand that there should not be just one channel of participation and contribution to national development.
Chofamba: As somebody who belongs to a party that is engaged in the Zimbabwean debate alongside others, who also find themselves outside the GPA structures, are you happy with the nature and quality of this debate? Do you see it as critical in influencing what happens in Zimbabwe, and do those with whom you debate listen to you?
Makoni: Some listen; most, I would say, listen. The few who don’t listen are the parties to the GPA.
Chofamba: But one would expect those to be the ones who hold sway and therefore having a conversation with them is critical?
Makoni: No, I think we want to interrogate this. They are important because they’re in the institutions of state. But if we were operating normally, they would be less important than the voices of the people. This is one issue that I would like us to engage in terms of redirecting the content of our national engagement. The voices of the people must be more important than the voices of office bearers. And this is part of the agenda that I as a person, my party as an organisation and those that I interlocute with in public affairs are trying to drive very hard.
Chofamba: I’m not sceptical about that, but it just struck me that isn’t that the challenge across all of Africa, and perhaps beyond?
Makoni: Indeed, it is. That it is a challenge across all of Africa makes it even more important. A lot of the things that are happening in Zimbabwe and the way they’re happening are the same across our continent. But I wanted to come back to this question of the voices of the people and voices of the office bearers, because going back to the struggle for liberation, the definition of the purpose of struggle was not just to put black people in the offices occupied by white people. But the misfortune is, when we got independent, different faces and different complexions of skin moved into the offices and perpetuated the systems and the institutions.
Chofamba: So the structures and institutions remained unreformed?
Makoni: Absolutely. You may know that we were under the Law and Order Maintenance Act (LOMA) that Ian Smith promulgated in 1965 until 2002 when POSA (Public Order and Security Act) replaced it. But if you look at the content of LOMA and that of POSA you won’t find a lot of difference there. So the essence of the point I’m making is that whether it is in Zimbabwe today or in South Africa, toyi-toying about service delivery, or Egyptians in Tahrir Square, the key question confronting Africans and Africa is: what is the content of our liberation? Not what is the form, what is the appearance, what is the face of our liberation, but what is the content of it?
This is an issue that’s not in our discussion at home. Right now our discussion is dominated by: what do we do to remove Robert Mugabe and Zanu PF from office and probably put Morgan Tsvangirai in his place or probably put Simba Makoni in his place.
Chofamba: So the discussion hinges on personalities?
Makoni: Exactly. So we need to deepen the content of our engagement and this is what is lacking even in the debate at home which is fairly circumscribed and fairly limited in scope because the avenues and platforms for engaging that debate are very limited, not just in terms of the public media outreach but even when you go to the University of Zimbabwe and ask the professors of political science, of the social sciences, what issues they are debating about the content of our being.
Let me give you a very provocative illustration: In Zimbabwe, 32 years after independence, under the leadership of one of the most radical nationalist anti-imperialist leaders of Africa, Robert Mugabe, Shona and Ndebele are taught in Zimbabwean schools as second languages. Can you imagine that? And that is not in the debate! It’s not in the discussion; it hasn’t been for 32 years.
And so, when you ask about relevance and participation and involvement, I would say part of the effort is to try and redefine the content of our national politics and policies in terms of who we are and who we want to be.
Chofamba: Is it the case, therefore, that all this is because the nationalist movement after independence focused on power and its reproduction rather than engage in broad-based nation-building where such issues as national identity and culture could have found expression?
Makoni: Our whole post-independence experience has been about power and control on the one hand and self-enrichment on the other. It hasn’t been about the greater good, the wider community. It hasn’t been about us as a people, it has been about a few individuals and their welfare, as if to say the welfare of the president equals the welfare of the population.
Chofamba: You’ve noted how this debate is missing in the current constitutional reform process. What’s your view on the content and relevance of the current constitutional reform process and secondly, how do you see this process as a mechanism for unlocking the political crisis?
Makoni: First let me say that it is very important and very good for a modern state to have a good constitution that governs and guides its conduct both within itself and between itself and the other entities. But in the current situation of Zimbabwe going back ten, nearly 20 years, a good constitution by itself is not the solution to our problems.
Our crisis today is not a constitutional crisis. It’s a crisis of human failure, particularly a crisis of a failure of leadership. When the Supreme Court made its first ruling on the so-called land invasions and the response of President Mugabe was that this was a political issue and not a matter for the law, that’s when he rendered our constitution irrelevant.
The constitution could have been very good, the law could have been very good, and even the administrators of the law, in this case the courts, but when a citizen decides to disregard the constitution, and no less than the head of state and government, then your constitution is not the order that it is normally given in law abiding communities.
So, that is my first take. It is good for us to have a good constitution, but a good constitution is not going to solve our crisis of the illegitimacy of Robert Mugabe, the insensitivity of the inclusive government to the plight of the people where Parirenyatwa Hospital goes for two weeks without running water and lives are not being saved, but you have money to buy new vehicles for top people in the government and in the security agency.
Chofamba: The GPA prioritises constitutional reform as the way forward to facilitate the country’s political transition. How do you see that, and do you have an alternative view on how the country could proceed from the current political arrangement?
Makoni: Yes, I have maintained throughout this GPA process that making a new constitution is important for Zimbabwe but it’s not the most urgent priority. What I consider as most urgent now is to create conditions for a free and fair election. Secondly, under that new law, what institutions do you mandate to conduct that election, and subsequently what capacity and resourcing do you give those institutions?
What do I mean? If you take our current electoral law, even the electoral law under which the 2008 elections were conducted, it is a viable, feasible, effective legal and operational context for holding free and fair elections. The rigging of elections, whether of 2002, of 2005, or of 2008 was not because our electoral law was defective, although of course you can always improve it. It was because, again as I discussed earlier on about the president saying I will not obey the law and the constitution on this, it was certain people deciding not to obey the law and to conduct themselves according to the law.
So it will all in our situation boil down to the conduct of individuals: Is Robert Mugabe willing and ready to give ZEC (Zimbabwe Electoral Commission), which is already mandated by the law, the leeway and the capacity to conduct free and fair elections in Zimbabwe?
We’ve been on a wild goose chase over the last three years with people lining up their pockets through the COPAC process. [We need to] ring-fence – and I suggested this a long time ago – the key issues, which are around the question of whether we can have a free and fair election that can allow the people of Zimbabwe to elect a leadership of their choice. That leadership will now have the mandate to deal with the constitution, the economy, with peace, violence and intimidation. But we’ve been in a power game – and if you read the GPA, it’s about power-sharing between Zanu PF and the MDCs.
And this is why the constitution-making process right now has become bogged down by the power-sharing where one party says there is not enough power in this document for me and I want the document to give enough power to me, and the other one says no, there is more power in this document for me than the last one and so I would like it.
So, we’ve been stuck in a power game which has been given different names like constitution making, national healing and reconciliation [and so on] but all these names are facades for the power contest between Zanu PF and the MDCs, and the people are being short-changed in all this process up to this stage.
Chofamba: Do you see a referendum actually being held at all?
Makoni: Yes, a referendum will be held
Chofamba: With the Zanu PF draft and the COPAC draft?
Makoni: There will be a draft constitution which will be put to the people. At worst, there will be two drafts – this is the direction I’m sensing the facilitator (SADC facilitator, South African President Jacob Zuma) taking, that if we can’t reconcile the two, then let’s put them both to the people.
What some of us are trying to work to is to create the conditions that support free and fair elections. Let the remainder of work that needs to be done be taken over by those who will be mandated by the people in a free and fair election to work for them.
Chofamba: The year is almost out; is there scope to hold an election before then, as Zanu PF has pushed for, should the constitutional issue be resolved successfully?
Makoni: I was never convinced in 2010 or even in 2011 that Zanu PF wanted an election. Zanu PF is scared of an election because they know that they don’t have support among the people. But Zanu PF plays a very high stakes game, a game of bluff where they do what you don’t expect them to do in the hope that they will intimidate and frighten rivals.
Unfortunately, some of our compatriots, particularly in politics, are falling into the Zanu PF plot. Do I see an election in this time left? There is enough time to organise a credible free and fair election, again if we accept that we ring-fence the issues that bear on the conduct of free and fair elections and we resource the institutions that are mandated to conduct [the elections].
Chofamba: SADC looms large in our current politics, having played midwife to the coalition government. There is the view that SADC is able to rein in and will not tolerate any waywardness from any of the political actors in Zimbabwe. For instance, it is said that the kind of violence that we witnessed around the 2008 elections will not be tolerated this time round. How much power does SADC wield over our political process and does it hold the trump card?
Makoni: Yes and no. SADC is a strong influence on Zimbabwe; I can tell you that neither Mugabe nor [MDC-T leader and Prime Minister Morgan] Tsvangirai wanted the [GPA] nor to be in the inclusive government together. They each wanted their own thing by themselves, and it was the influence of SADC that brought them together. It has the influence, but I think we would also be incorrect if we folded our hands and just waited for SADC to solve our problems.
SADC is an important facilitator [and] encourager of our national processes. And to that extent there is justification for a view which says if we wanted to be wayward and we still accepted that SADC was the guarantor of this process since 2007, then certainly SADC will not allow us to be that wayward. And SADC has shown itself to be quite firm from Livingstone to Sandton, to Luanda 1, to Luanda 2, to Maputo, we have seen a different SADC in the context of Zimbabwe from the SADC before the Livingstone troika summit.
Chofamba: We had President Thabo Mbeki and his brand of quiet diplomacy before his successor President Zuma came on board. Do you put it down to the change of leadership in South Africa – is it President Zuma’s personal diplomatic style, or is it really the circumstances existing now that have informed SADC’s firmer and stronger stance on Zimbabwe?
Makoni: I think the latter. Quite frankly, our regional neighbours and the rest of the world are fed up of us. Our leaders were told in these many words in Sandton (Johannesburg, South Africa) in June of 2011 that we’re fed up of Zimbabwe and every time we meet our whole discussion is dominated by Zimbabwe. We have our own problems, we have problems of other countries and Zimbabwe either has to shape up or ship out.
I would say the change of personalities obviously does have a bearing [but] I don’t believe that there is any substantive difference in the content of the South African facilitation. If we become too intransigent, then SADC will disengage [from the facilitation] and we will be on our own, but as long as SADC remain engaged, they’re not going to whitewash a process that has no credibility or integrity.
Chofamba: Key western actors have endorsed the SADC facilitation process and pointed to the successful meeting of its benchmarks, such as the adoption of a new constitution and holding of free and fair elections, as crucial for the restoration of full relations with Zimbabwe. From your knowledge, what is the level of appetite for re-engagement with Zimbabwe among western countries?
Makoni: Many countries have goodwill towards Zimbabwe and Zimbabweans and would like us to be a normal country again. I engage diplomats in Harare and other capitals as much as I can, and I know that the official policies of their governments is that they want normal bilateral relationships with Zimbabwe which will be reinforced by the regional and international relationships. But the first line of engagement is bilateral, and they would like for that soonest.
Chofamba: Britain is said to be supportive of the idea of coalition governments in Zimbabwe for as long as even the next 10 years. Do you see the future of the Zimbabwean state as driven by coalition governments?
Makoni: I see consensus politics as being the way to solve our problems at least in the next 10 years if not even beyond, because the winner takes all route that has dominated our politics since independence is what has led us to this crisis. I can tell you that I personally, and colleagues in my party, are working to influencing the creation of what we’re calling a group of like-minded competent leaders to take responsibility for our country after the next election.
We want to persuade other entities not just in politics but in civil society, in business, and in the professions that the most competent team of people that we can put together to lead our country out of this crisis is what the country needs.
Chofamba: What are the chances of that happening given the high stakes that political parties invest in capturing state power?
Makoni: Under our current circumstances it doesn’t look like it has many chances but a good idea is worth working for. Its time may not be now, but its time will come.
Chofamba: It seems to me that you’re accepting of the fact that you may not be a party of government, at least in the immediate term, but are content to grow and spread the vision and values of your party and later on convert the benefits of such investment, even if they should come beyond your time?
Makoni: Quite. I must say that even Mugabe must accept - if he understands the nature of politics - that he may not be there even after the next election. He would not have been there after 2002 or 2008 if he hadn’t done what we all know he did. In a contest done normally under the auspices of the rule of law, there is only one winner. We would like to be that in the next election and are working towards that, but as honest and genuine democrats we also provide for the fact that we may not be the people’s choice.
Chofamba: There are people who hold you in high regard and have viewed you for quite some time as a potential successor to the national leadership, but are not convinced by the formation that you lead, Mavambo, and that your chances could have been enhanced by having a large party machinery behind you such as Zanu PF which you left or the MDC-T. What do you say to that?
Makoni: We’re building a party machinery which I believe will be larger, better, and more effective than both Zanu PF and the MDC, but it doesn’t happen overnight. But I want to underline the purpose behind our politics as MKD, which is to be at the service of Zimbabwe for the long term. Not just by occupying public office, but being the source of the ideas that assure Zimbabwe’s welfare and wellbeing for the long term.
Chofamba: So this is a leadership of ideas?
Makoni: Yes. This is not about power and control; this is about service and relevance into the future.
Chofamba: On Mavambo, people would like to understand the motive force behind it. For Zanu PF, we know it’s African nationalism and the anti-colonial liberation struggle, and for the MDC it is disillusionment with the party of liberation’s record in power. What’s yours?
Makoni: Our value proposition is about service, about integrity and honesty. You might say the motivation, like the MDC to some extent, is the disgruntlement and disappointment with the failure of the liberation struggle, which was aborted at the time of gaining power and going into office.
A key differentiator for us is not what we’re against, which is the identity of the MDC – they’re against Zanu PF and Robert Mugabe, but what are they for? We’re for service, for the common good, for equality, integrity and honesty. When in a short three years the party that was against the corruption of Zanu PF, [the obsession with] power and intolerance is itself gripped in such a profound crisis of corruption and leadership ineptitude and incompetence, you begin to see the difference. We are aiming at establishing a value system that doesn’t end with the changing of the face in office.
Chofamba: About the state of the economy, with dollarisation having come in and done away with hyperinflation, providing an economic resuscitation of sorts, is there a sense that we’re on course to a sustainable recovery, and what is it that needs to be done to achieve that?
Makoni: This could be the subject of a whole separate discussion but let me try and paraphrase. We’re still in crisis; we’re facing a critical food crisis – the 10th or 11th in a row – and we can’t feed ourselves, but we took land 10 years ago. The formal sector of our economy continues to decline, with the exception of certain aspects of mining and those of agriculture particularly tobacco. There is contraction in jobs; formal employment is now such a miniscule part of our economy; families are struggling to put three meals [a day] on the table, and there is no plan on the table by the inclusive government to deal with that.
Dollarisation has hardly been the panacea that it has been hailed to be. Yes it removed hyperinflation overnight and stabilised prices, and it even supported the growth of imports. But what are we importing? Luxury cars! We’re not importing raw materials for factories, [or] new equipment for production, we’re importing consumption goods.
Chofamba: Why is that, why is industry not importing capital goods?
Makoni: Because the limited capital and liquidity is not in the hands of industry and productive economic agents, it’s in the hands of a few speculative people who are trading diamonds and other contraband. We need to restore productivity in the economy. We don’t have time to elaborate, but fortunately what needs to be done is there already. It was there in ZIMPREST in 1996, it was there in the Millennium Economic Recovery Plan, it was there in NEDPP, it’s there in STERP and the MTP.
Chofamba: So what is lacking
Makoni: The will to do it.
Chofamba: Why?
Makoni: Because it will not benefit us (sic) who are in control; we’re pursuing our power, our welfare and our wealth at the exclusion of the majority of the population.
Chofamba: That’s very sad.
Makoni: It’s tragic.
Chofamba: Lastly, what is your attitude to the Zimbabwean Diaspora and its role in national life?
Makoni: You’re Zimbabweans, first and foremost, and you want to be Zimbabweans. You have a role to play in the making of change and creation of a new Zimbabwe. We’re not the first people who have left their home to settle and work elsewhere. If you look at the Jews, the Indians, Filipinos and Italians; the impact that Jews outside Israel make in the life of Israel is immense, and I would give that as an illustration of my attitude to the place of Zimbabweans in the Diaspora.
You [are entitled] to your rights to citizenship and rights to participating fully, and yet other parties want your money but they don’t want you to participate – they don’t want your mind and your skills; we want all that.
Labels: MDC, SIMBA MAKONI, TREASON
Read more...
I am not a politician: Simba Makoni
Saturday, 28 July 2012 22:06
Munyaradzi Huni
Former Zanu-PF Politburo member Dr Simba Makoni has said he does not regard himself as a politician and went on to declare that sanctions imposed on the country by the US were not affecting the ordinary people.
Dr Makoni, who is now the interim leader of Mavambo, also said the current indigenisation laws discriminated against whites, adding that the indigenisation programme has disempowered communal farmers. In an interview with The Sunday Mail last Thursday, Dr Makoni said the sanctions imposed on the country were only targeted at a few individuals.
He made these remarks despite the clear fact that even the MDC, which called for the sanctions, and the US, which crafted Zidera, have spoken openly, saying the sanctions were hurting the ordinary people.
When he was asked whether he is more of a technocrat than a politician, Dr Makoni said: “I don’t regard myself as a politician. I regard myself as an activist. If there is a cause for good, I will participate.
“In this case, my activism is present-ing itself in the field of politics . . . If you go through my life, you will see that I have been an activist for social change . . . I am an activist in politics, just as much as I am an activist in business, just as much as I am an activist in society . . .”
He denied that sanctions were affecting the ordinary people, saying: “What sanctions? The travel ban on President Mugabe? And the freezing of assets, whatever they are? Do you know that today, all the platinum we are producing is being sold to the West?
About 70 percent of the tobacco that we produce is being sold to Philip Morris and other Western countries? The little horticulture products that we still can produce are going to Amsterdam?
[But the money stays with the farmers. - MrK]
“The few goods that we manufacture, such as shirts, we sell to Germany, America and other countries. If you look at the statistics of our trade with the EU today, our trade with the US today, it is growing. How could it grow if there were sanctions?” he said.
[There are sanctions. They are a matter of record. Zimbabwe's economy would be growing without hindrance without them, there would be hundreds of millions of dollars available to support the New Farmers, and of course the currency wouldn't have collpsed. Simba Makoni is a moron. - MrK]
When pressed to explain whether he was implying that the sanctions, especially Zidera, were just targeted at a few individuals, Dr Makoni asked:
“What is Zidera doing to the communal farmers in Chegutu?” implying that communal farmers were not affected by the sanctions.
He went on to give an explanation suggesting that Zidera was imposed on the country because Zimbabwe had defaulted in its payments to the IMF, the World Bank and the African Development Bank in 1999. Surprisingly, when he was still in Zanu-PF, he sang a different tune.
Said Dr Makoni: “This is the reality.
“I became Minister of Finance in July 2000. We had defaulted on our payments to the IMF and the World Bank and the African Development Bank, exactly a year earlier in August of 1999.
[ZDERA was drafted in 2001, and came into force on Jan. 1st 2002. - MrK]
“And these institutions, of which we are members and President Mugabe says we are full members of these bod-ies, took resolutions that this creditor has defaulted on his repayment, we are not in a position to continue lending where we are not seeing prospects of being repaid . . .
[Actually no. ZDERA is an act of Congress and came out of the US Senate, not the IMF. It was sponsored by US senator Bill Frist, and co-sponsored by senators Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Russ Feingold and Jesse Helms. To quote the sanctions part of 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.
This credit freeze, introduced in Jan. 1st 2002 sent the Zimbabwe Dollar into a tailspin in that very year. Not 1999, not 2000 or 2001. See this chart, courtesy of the rabidly anti-Mugabe Economist Intelligence Unit in Harare. Read more about ZDERA and it's economic impact here.
- MrK]
“We don’t want to tell the truth. Zidera said the directors of the US on the boards of the IMF and the World Bank and the African Development Bank will not support extension of further facilities to Zimbabwe until it has made good of its arrears . . . so why is Zidera imposing sanctions on us?
When he was told that even the MDC, which called for the sanctions, had accepted that sanctions were hurting the ordinary people, he responded: “I don’t mind. Earlier on I spoke about different people having different views. I am discussing facts.
“If you believe I am not discussing facts, go and check because if you read Zidera, it will tell you why the US directors in the boards of these multilateral institutions were instructed not to support the extension of further facilities to Zimbabwe.”
[Actually it will tell you want they want the world to believe. If you want to know people or their motives, look at what they do. Unless it is an unambiguous statement against interest. - MrK]
On indigenisation, Dr Makoni said: “I believe that in the 21st century, the notion or concept of indigenous is very difficult to affirm.
“The world is one small village now. Let me bring us back — the definition of indigenous in our current law, if you are white, you are not indigenous, if you are black, you are indigenous. I can simulate for you today, but before I simulate, let me take you to the Zimbabwe Constitution.
“In the preamble of the Constitution, it says Zimbabwe shall be a non-racial country. Let me simulate — there is a family whose forefathers settled at Fort Salisbury in 1896. They have lived here and they are a fifth generation and have become residents of this country.
“In our law today, those people are not indigenous. Contrast this with a family that settled here as farm labourers in 1956, or mine labourers in 1976. There is even a family that settled here in 1983, they are indigenous. So that is my first position.”
When he was told that this fifth generation of whites have over decades enjoyed government support due to racial laws that discriminated against blacks and that these fifth generation whites up to this day continue to behave as if they don’t belong, Dr Makoni responded:
“Two wrongs don’t make a right. I would want us to interrogate that assertion. They are X thousands whites in Zimbabwe, I don’t believe all of them behave un-Zimbabwean.
“There are Y million black Zimbabweans; I don’t believe all of them behave Zimbabwean. So that’s my take to the position of whites who behave un-Zimbabwean. We can’t paint every white person with the same brush, particularly in the making of a law. It”s very short-sighted.”
He said the practice of indigenisation as advanced by the Government at the moment ran contrary to his party Mavambo’s value proposition
“The practice of indigenisation as advanced by our Government at the moment runs contrary to our value proposition in MKD, which is genuine empowerment. Many Zimbabweans have actually been disempowered.
“Zimbabwe was self-sufficient and had food surplus not from the white commercial farmers, not from the resettled farmers, but from the communal farmers . . . but today no A1 farmer, no A2 farmer, no resettled farmer and no communal farmer has food on their table, but we have got more land in our hands. Those people have been disempowered.”
[Oh and where have the communal farmers disappeared to? When did the communal farmers 'forget' how to grow food? Maize production has been sabotaged by the MDC's finance minister Tendai Biti, in favour of tobacco. Make people dependent on food imports, and you can kiss any sovereign government goodbye - that is the game the MDC's World Bank handlers are playing. - MrK]
Labels: LAND REFORM, MDC, SIMBA MAKONI
Read more...
The Zanu-PF ambush that never was
Saturday, 21 July 2012 21:27
by Munyaradzi Huni
Former Zanu-PF Politburo member Cde Dumiso Dabengwa has revealed that Mavambo leader
Simba Makoni was supposed to ambush Zanu-PF and register to stand as a Zanu-PF presidential candidate at the last minute in the 2008 elections.He said according to their plan, Zanu-PF was supposed to have two presidential candidates — President Mugabe and Makoni, but this plan was thrown into disarray after the Mavambo leader rushed to announce his candidature, leading to his dismissal from Zanu-PF.
In an exclusive interview with The Sunday Mail last Wednesday, Cde Dabengwa, who is now the Zapu leader, said during the Zanu-PF December Congress of 2007, he and the late Cde Solomon Mujuru wanted to field a candidate to contest President Mugabe for the leadership of the party, but the process was allegedly manipulated.
“I decided at the end of December after the 2007 congress when President Mugabe was re-nominated as presidential candidate and I said no I think we have lost direction. The President has grown old. I think he needs to step down and let somebody come in. We were together with the late Rex Nhongo (the late Cde Solomon Mujuru).
When he was asked whether the late Cde Mujuru was really in support of this move, he said: “Absolutely. We actually had meant in 2007 at that congress to have an opposing candidate to be nominated, but everything was manipulated to ensure that there was no debate about the presidential candidate.
He, however, refused to disclose the candidate they had settled for to challenge the President, saying: “No, no, no, that’s not relevant, but we had meant to have another person nominated. It didn’t matter who it was. I think as a party, if we had sat down together and said the President is stepping down can we have an alternative to take over from him, we would have found a candidate.
“The party would have decided, but when that failed and we realised what was going on outside, what people were saying out there, we realised that Zanu-PF would lose dismally in the elections and if that happened that would mean the end, probably the end even of the history of the liberation struggle like what happened in Zambia when Kaunda was defeated by little Chiluba.
“UNIP (Zambia’s liberation movement) to this day has disappeared and all those struggles that were done by UNIP are almost forgotten now. We said after losing so many of our colleagues who died during the liberation struggle, Chitepo, Parirenyatwa, JZ Moyo and others, that’s going to happen to us in Zimbabwe. We saw it happen and we said no. We said we are going to see the President and ask him to step down.
“We met with Msika, Vice-President, both myself and Mujuru (the late Cde Solomon Mujuru) and pleaded with him to ask the President to step down and allow the party to choose another candidate. We said it doesn’t matter who it was.
“Msika afterwards said ‘yes I told him’ and we said ‘what does he say.’ Msika said he had not been successful and we even told him that we wanted to see him about it.
“When that failed that is when I decided, and I said look we are going to lose this election, that’s going to be the end of Zapu, that’s going to be the end of Zanu. What do we do? Let’s have an alternative candidate who will make sure there is no winner in this thing and that’s how we came around to support (Simba) Makoni. And Makoni was able to make that difference and to make sure that there was no winner in that thing and that what’s caused the GNU.” Cde Dabengwa said the move to support Makoni was meant “to save the history of the liberation struggle and we succeeded in doing that.” He, however, said Makoni “jumped the gun” and made a mistake: “Yeah, we had support. First there was a mistake. At that stage we did not want Makoni to fight as an independent. “We wanted Makoni to fight as a candidate of Zanu-PF and there would have been two candidates in Zanu-PF and people would have to choose between Mugabe and Makoni. We were confident that the majority of the people would actually choose Makoni. That was the strategy, that was the target. “This failed because Makoni made a mistake. He announced his candidature before the nomination day and he was sacked from the party.”
When he was asked whether the strategy to have Makoni as another Zanu-PF presidential candidate was sort of an ambush, Cde Dabengwa said: “Yes, but he went on to do what he did and it was too late to stop him. He had already decided he would do that.”
He said he was disappointed “absolutely” by the move that Makoni had taken; “But all the same I said, it’s been mishandled but let’s make sure there is no winner.”
Labels: DUMISO DABENGWA, SIMBA MAKONI, ZANU-PF
Read more...
The bogeyman of white supremacy
Wednesday, 16 May 2012 21:17
The documentary “Mugabe and the White African” is quite unbearable to watch, more for its outrageous propaganda content and much less for the vile and depraved image of Robert Mugabe it vainly attempts to portray — itself the evident credo to the authorship and intention of the film-maker, one Ben Freeth, an avowed Christian victim for the purposes of this documentary.
The pungent attacks on the character and person of Robert Mugabe have to be immortalised through literature and films — and this is precisely because Robert Mugabe has been diagnosed as a viral cause to a disease that threatens the soundness and continuity of white supremacy.
To reinvigorate the increasingly apolitical Western populace, it is important that African revolutionaries like Robert Mugabe, Kwame Nkrumah, Muammar Gaddafi, Abdel Nasser, Thomas Sankara and Samora Machel are portrayed as authoritarian with a zero sense of human decency.
This is why people like Simon Bright and Ben Freeth find it necessary to invest in reducing the 2000 rise of the black man in Zimbabwe to a compendium of Mugabe lunacy — even packaging it in books and films so as to immortalise the bastardised image of an African politician who has become the bogeyman of white supremacy.
Author and academic Blessing Miles Tendi recently had a panel discussion with film-maker Simon Bright and Crisis Coalition in Zimbabwe director McDonald Lewanika. This was after the sell-out showing of the propaganda film “Robert Mugabe — What Happened?” in Oxford.
As Tendi later wrote, Robert Mugabe the person continues “to captivate the British public.” This captivation is not a result of the British public’s independent view of Mugabe, but a true reflection of the propaganda model that has steadily manufactured public consent over the unacceptability of what Mugabe stands for in politics — disguised of course under the image of an atrocious conduct “towards his own people.” We will come back to what Mugabe actually stands for in global politics.
Tendi raises an important question on whether the interest in Robert Mugabe is about the real problems Africa is facing or is about other interests. He questions if Zimbabwe at this time has ever been worse than the Democratic Republic of Congo, or the troubled land of Madagascar. This writer would add the Sudans, Nigeria, Somalia, Mali, Guinea Bissau and even Egypt.
As Tendi concludes there seems to be an apparent “disproportionate amount of international focus” on Zimbabwe, compared to other more severe crises across the African continent. Zimbabwe only interests the West for the most daring thing that ever happened to it since the fall of colonial empires, most daring not only for Zimbabwe itself, but by way of history-making and the shaping of Africa — West relations.
The reclamation of land that happened in Zimbabwe in 2000 was not only outstanding in the principle sense of it all but in the manner through which it was executed. It was a departure from the West’s favoured roundtable approach where weaker nations are manipulated and arm-twisted into humiliating compromises that often perpetuate white hegemony at the expense of all others.
Land reclamation in Zimbabwe was done not by Mugabe or Zanu-PF party but by the masses of Zimbabwe. The people simply went out to occupy land that belonged to them and Robert Mugabe and his Zanu-PF only jumped in to provide leadership — more for their political ends and less for their prior commitment to the cause.
The commitment to reclaim land had been temporarily neutralised by the niceties of the Lancaster House roundtable talks where the nationalists emerged with a proud sense of success — envisaging themselves as incoming rulers even over the wealthy white commercial farmers. That became more important than dispossessing these people and getting them to vacate the black land they illegally occupied.
Tendi correctly notes that Simon Bright’s choice of interviewees for the production of the film “Robert Mugabe — What happened?” was nothing more than an effort to contrive a pre-conceived verdict on a man he seeks to portray as the villain behind the eviction of white commercial farmers in Zimbabwe. Of course Bright expectedly dismissed this charge for obvious reasons. He either has forgotten the real cause of his anger against Mugabe or he knows that such a cause is unsellable to any people with a sense of morality and conscience.
Edgar Tekere was chosen more for his later day political troubles outside Zanu-PF than for the more credible part of his life when he added the much-needed sense of radicalism to the liberation struggle. In his last days of political bitterness, Tekere became a target of Western agents seeking to legitimise their demonisation of Robert Mugabe.
If Tekere fell out with Robert Mugabe, it must mean Tekere is the legitimate voice to tell us how evil Mugabe is — so the reasoning goes. It is like trying to seek an objective characterisation of a woman from her ex-husband who blames the same woman for the breakdown of the marriage.
Geoff Nyarota has his own personal bitterness about how he left The Chronicle’s position of editor after the Willowgate scandal — to be honest an unfair predicament of the time. He tried so hard to use the Daily News as an opportunity to settle scores with old foes in the establishment.
But that did not make Nyarota the owner of The Daily News newspaper as implied by Bright when he wrote “Geoff Nyarota, whose Daily News newspaper was bombed . . .” It is important for Bright to realise that Nyarota is currently hitting back at the Daily News the same way he has been trying to hit back at Robert Mugabe for what he perceives to be the man’s vicarious liability for his unceremonious departure from the Zimpapers stable.
It is hard to understand how Nyarota can be an independent and authentic source of an objective rating on Robert Mugabe.
Simba Makoni was chosen for his departure from Zanu-PF in 2008, and as such his utterances must justifiably be seen from a political context of a competing rival. He collectively shares responsibility for Zanu-PF policies, good or bad, from 1980 all the way to 2008. This Tendi correctly outlined and it is hard to imagine Simba can provide an objective and honest view on Mugabe.
Lovemore Madhuku is a discredited and abandoned political entity. That is why his National Constitutional Assembly has crumbled after his unilateral amending of its constitution for the sole purpose of enabling him to retain power. Donors and supporters have abandoned Madhuku and whatever he stands for.
John Makumbe is the typical academic lunatic in the park. He long abandoned intellectual responsibility, and this writer once wrote about that, with Tendi partially concurring, but sharply rebuking this writer for selectively isolating Makumbe from a host of other culprits. Indeed the culprits are more than just Makumbe, but the man showcases extra outstanding insanity on the matter.
Bright chooses Makumbe as a credible interviewee simply on the basis of the man’s unverified claims of victimhood, and this has a lot of bearing on Bright’s own credibility as a researcher and a film-maker.
Wilfred Mhanda was arrested and detained in Mozambique during the armed struggle on allegations of betrayal, he tells us. True or false, the man’s post-independence life has not proved any better. He glorifies Lord Soames for rescuing him from the cells in Mozambique, continues to fellowship so well with those against whom the war he once commanded was waged, and he always takes his bitterness more to the white people than he does to his fellow blacks. Nathaniel
Manheru caught him at it in Avondale a few weeks ago, and he informed us so through his Saturday Herald column.
Trevor Ncube was chosen for his ownership of newspapers that are sympathetic to the anti-Mugabe rhetoric and that is not surprising. But that makes Ncube a weak witness, if not an incredible one.
Dennis Norman was obviously chosen to make the glowing praises of Mugabe’s early years in governance — praises for Mugabe’s compromising compliance with British and Western interests, including the mesmerising agreement to ESAP in 1991.
He took time to tell us how much President Mugabe is fond of the Western dress, and Bright is convinced that must be an earth-shattering revelation.
If a white man praises Mugabe for “liberation and development,” that should make the subsequent criticism on tyranny and dictatorship more valid — so the reasoning goes.
After interviewing these indisputably biased people Bright concludes that the interviews provide “a definitive account” of Robert Mugabe’s life. In fact the whole exercise provides a definitive account of Simon Bright’s worthlessness as a competent film-maker, and his unmeritorious pedigree as a researcher.
Simon Bright’s calculated idea is to portray Robert Mugabe as a hero who turned out to be a villain. This is a script he grabs from the hard work of the committedly propagandistic Western media, clearly with the intention of capturing an audience from the Western public. Good business thinking but incredible ethics!
Expectedly Bright informs us that his film has sold out in Amsterdam, Brussels, New York, Cape Town and the white community sections of Johannesburg. Why not in Harare, Lusaka, Gaborone, Accra, Kinshasa, Luanda, or Nairobi, one would ask?
As Tendi correctly asserts it is bad film-making for Bright to conclude his production by declaring “a legacy of genocide” for Robert Mugabe. This writer will unapologetically declare that there has never been anything like a genocide in Zimbabwe, and elevating unfortunate incidences of civil conflict to the status of genocide is an unforgivable abuse of the true victims of that episode, especially if the elevation is from a white person seeking to use the fate of black people to discredit another black person, and to pursue his own selfish ends. It becomes totally intolerable and absolutely unforgivable, not least when Mike Auret is deemed to be the definer of the alleged genocide, and the self-anointed custodian of Ndebele memory.
Bright concurs with Tendi that his selection of Mugabe as a villain was misplaced. His defence is that Robert Mugabe is “the subject that interests me.” Of course he is, not exactly because Mugabe is the subject in question, but because the land he allowed to be reclaimed by the people of Zimbabwe is the subject that interests Bright and his Western audience.
Bright flatly denies “misplaced sympathy for white farmers,” and argues that all he has is “an interest in what has happened in Zimbabwe under Mugabe’s leadership.” Strangely Bright goes on to accuse Tendi of “misjudging the complexities of Britain and Zimbabwe”. By reducing everything in Zimbabwe to Mugabe’s leadership Bright himself believes he is providing sound judgment on the complexities of Zimbabwe. Everything that has gone wrong in Zimbabwe has become “It’s Mugabe’s Fault” (IMF), Bright opines.
Bright even dares to challenge Tendi that the political culture in Zimbabwe has no other players but Mugabe alone. Contrary to what Bright says, his film spends a great deal of time explaining and lamenting the fate of the white commercial farmers; and he does so by extensively using the alleged plight of the “black opposition voters” as a catch button to attract sympathy for the white farmer, who we are told used to employ these “black opposition voters,” now made to be unemployed by Mugabe’s “unsound policies.”
Contrary to what Bright declares, his film is all about creating a psychological portrait of a villainous Robert Mugabe, and he openly expresses disdain that “Mugabe has made it his business to stand for Zimbabwe.”
Stripped of the Hitler content, Bright acknowledges through a Robert Mugabe quote that the Zimbabwean leader “has only one objective,” and I quote, “justice for his people, sovereignty for his people, recognition of the independence of his people and their rights over resources.”
How a man of such legendary principle can be turned into a villain by the mere act of an obscure film-maker remains to be judged by history and posterity.
Zimbabwe we are one and together we will overcome. It is homeland or death!
Reason Wafawarova is a political writer based in Sydney, Australia.
Labels: BLESSING MILES TENDI, PROPAGANDA, REASON WAFAWAROVA, ROBERT MUGABE, SIMBA MAKONI
Read more...
Makoni vows to make Zimbabwe 'ungovernable'
24/04/2012 00:00:00
by Gilbert Nyambabvu
MAVAMBO Kusile Dawn (MKD) leader Simba Makoni has
threated to make “the country ungovernable” if President Robert Mugabe forces an election this year without political reforms opposition parties insist are needed to ensure a credible vote.
In a statement Tuesday, Makoni said: “(We are) strongly warning President Mugabe not to go ahead with the holding of elections before instituting all necessary reforms which guarantee a free and fair result.”
The MKD leader – a former Finance Minister and senior Zanu PF official before bailing out ahead of the disputed 2008 elections -- said much needed to be done before the country could hope to have an election whose outcome is not disputed.
[The MDC would have to win, before they would stop disputing the outcome. - MrK]
“The people of Zimbabwe want a clean voters’ roll,” he said. “The issue of dual citizenship should be addressed so that nationals in the Diaspora are (also) allowed to vote. All political parties should be allowed to campaign freely without harassment from opponents.
“Elections (are not like) ritual ceremonies, where (the) lives of innocent people are sacrificed … For the record, we are not afraid of elections. MKD has no problem if elections are held tomorrow, the day after or in a week’s time, as long as the electoral environment is conducive.”
President Mugabe wants new polls held this year to end the coalition government and has warned his rivals he could name an election date before on-going constitutional reforms are completed.
“We just have to go for elections this year. We have to have elections this year and leave next year clear,” the Zanu PF leader told state media over the weekend.
However, Makoni warned his ex-boss that he has another thing coming if he thinks he can force elections under conditions that allow him to manipulate the vote.
“We will not dance to the whims and caprices of President Mugabe …We will not allow President Mugabe to tamper with the people’s will this time around. This is no idle threat but a promise,” he said.
[Well I can tell you one thing right now, the people's will is not a return to ESAP and austerity. Or a fire sale of the nation's mines. Or a reversal of land reform. - MrK]
“M.K.D leadership will not speculate on the course of action to take, since it is the people that will decide. One thing for certain is that in the event of President Mugabe tampering with the peoples’ wishes, we will make this country ungovernable.”
Mugabe and his coalition partners agree they can no longer work together and that new elections are needed to choose a substantive government but the parties differ of the timing of the new ballot.
MDC-T leader and Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai recently said new elections were only possible in March 2013.
"It's just not possible to hold elections this year, there is no constitution and no referendum has been held," he said.
"Elections will be held at the outer limit; that is in March 2013 when the current term of the lawmakers would have constitutionally expired."
Labels: MAVAMBO KUSILE DAWN, SABOTAGE, SIMBA MAKONI
Read more...
Makoni promises Mugabe ‘rude awakening’
12/04/2012 00:00:00
by Gilbert Nyambabvu
FORMER Finance Minister and Mavambo Kusile Dawn (MKD) leader Dr Simba Makoni has dismissed snide remarks by President Robert Mugabe that he has no followers and warned the Zanu PF leader he faces a “rude awakening” at the next polls.
Addressing a recent Zanu PF central committee meeting in Harare, Mugabe said this of his former charge: ‘…ndakamubvunza kuti unaani... ko uneParty here? ... iye akati aah! vanhu vanondivhotera… hanzi vanhu vanonditera nekuti ndinonzi Simba Makoni.’ (I asked him whether he has any supporters and he said people will support me because I’m Simba Makoni).
In a statement Thursday, Makoni said he was “not moved” by Mugabe’s churlish remarks which, he added, “display the height of political intolerance” on the part of the Zanu PF leader.
“We do not need the endorsement of intolerant political competitors. We would be worried if such remarks were coming from thirteen million Zimbabweans,” he said.
“President Mugabe’s utterances do not reflect a popular sentiment and M.K.D will give him a rude awakening come next elections, which we hope will be conducted in an environment that guarantees a free and fair outcome.”
For years touted as a potential successor to Mugabe but frustrated by the veteran leader’s refusal to make way, Makoni challenged him for the presidency in 2008, claiming several Zanu PF big wigs backed his bid. But only Dumiso Dabengwa and a few lesser lights publicly supported him.
In the end he managed about 8 percent of the vote and, with that, the wrath of critics who accused him of helping keep Mugabe in power by taking away part of the opposition vote which could have handed Morgan Tsvangirai of the MDC-T an outright win in the first round of the Presidential ballot.
But Makoni said Thursday his party was ready to pull a shocker at the next elections which are likely to be held this year if Mugabe has his way.
“President Mugabe’s utterances do not reflect a popular sentiment and M.K.D will give him a rude awakening come next elections, which we hope will be conducted in an environment that guarantees a free and fair outcome,” he said.
“Simba Makoni and M.K.D are here to stay and not going anywhere. By now, at least President Mugabe should know better. He would not have been so jittery if Makoni was not an issue in the country’s body politic.
“We are a serious game changer and neither an easy pushover nor cry baby in this field. We will stand our ground with equal measure. M.K.D has all it takes not only to contest, but win elections, govern effectively and efficiently and make this country work again.”
Fresh polls to replace the coalition government could be held this year if the country completes constitutional and other political reforms in time.
Even so, Mugabe has warned he could name an election date without the new constitution, accusing his rivals of deliberately undermining the reform process in order to delay the elections.
Still, Tsvangirai has insisted that the Zanu PF leader cannot unilaterally call elections under the terms of their coalition deal, adding his party would not contest the elections unless conditions are in place to guarantee a “free and fair” vote.
Labels: MAVAMBO KUSILE DAWN, SIMBA MAKONI
Read more...
Makoni party funded by UK: WikiLeaks
09/09/2011 00:00:00
by Staff Reporter
SIMBA Makoni’s 2008 presidential bid was in part funded by the UK government, leaked United States diplomatic cables reveal. The former Finance Minister quit Zanu PF to run as an independent, the result of growing disenchantment within the party over President Robert Mugabe’s reluctance to give up power.
Makoni ran against Mugabe and the MDC-T leader Morgan Tsvangirai, finishing third in the first round vote with 8,3 percent behind Mugabe (43,2 percent) and Tsvangirai (47.9 percent).
Former United States ambassador James McGee, in a March 13, 2008, diplomatic cable leaked by whistleblower website, WikiLeaks, admitted his country had also offered Makoni financial support.
“The negative impression of the U.S. as a supporter of regime change had made it difficult for Makoni to accept Western support without becoming tainted.
“Therefore, Makoni did not want our financial support,” McGee said.
But McGee found this position slightly inconsistent, adding: “British ambassador to Zimbabwe Andrew Pocock told the Ambassador on March 12 that the UK has provided financial assistance to the Makoni campaign.
“We have also received reports that South African businessmen are supporting Makoni.”
The Political Parties (Finance) Act prohibits political parties and candidates for public office from receiving funds from foreign donors, whether channelled directly or indirectly, and Poccok’s claims would seem to suggest Makoni broke the law.
While the law exists, few are under the illusion that any of Zimbabwe’s political parties are supported only by internal donors.
In a February 2010 cable, current US ambassador to Zimbabwe Charles Ray said MDC-T treasurer Roy Bennett had admitted that his party was bankrolled by the United States and some unnamed European countries.
Ray said in the memo: “According to Bennett, Western aid (primarily EU and U.S.) has had a strong focus on the MDC as a party. While this has been appreciated, it has not done enough to build the party's capacity to provide government services or manage the bureaucracy.”
Labels: CHARLES RAY, MDC, SIMBA MAKONI, WIKILEAKS
Read more...
Mujuru behind Makoni party: WikiLeaks
05/09/2011 00:00:00
by Staff Reporter
THE late Rtd General Solomon Mujuru initiated Simba Makoni’s 2008 presidential bid and actively supported the former finance minister before chickening out at the last minute to save his wife’s career and business interests.
Leaked United States embassy cables say Vice President Joice Mujuru’s husband, who was burnt to death when an as yet unexplained fire razed his farm house in Beatrice last month, was the mastermind of Makoni’s candidacy after failing to build sufficient momentum within Zanu PF to force President Robert Mugabe to step down.
Mujuru’s moves against Mugabe were revealed by his key aides, Tirivanhu Mudariki and David Butau, in private meetings with officials from the United States embassy in Harare, according to diplomatic cables released online by WikiLeaks.
In a summary of discussions with Butau following a meeting held in May 2007, US Ambassador Christopher Dell wrote: “David Butau, Zanu PF MP and member of the faction allied to ex-military commander Solomon Mujuru, (told us) on May 31 that Mujuru had determined that the time to unseat President Robert Mugabe was now.
“Mujuru had flexed his muscle and wrested control of the party structures in Masvingo and Bulawayo, and his subordinates had begun to chip away at Mugabe's key backers. Butau added that while pressure on Mugabe was needed, the USG needed to quietly weigh into this intra-party battle to help block Mugabe's bid for another term.”
After failing to stop Mugabe’s nomination as Zanu PF’s Presidential candidate at the December 2007 congress, the conspirators apparently initiated Makoni’s bid while maintaining pressure within the party.
Mudariki told Dell’s successor, Ambassador James McGee, that Mujuru’s efforts culminated in a meeting with Mugabe on March 30, 2008, where the General was however outwitted by the veteran Zanu PF leader.
Wrote McGee: “(Mudariki) reports that Mujuru, in a meeting March 10 with President Robert Mugabe, urged Mugabe to step down, Mugabe declined, subsequently telling the press that Mujuru supported him and not presidential candidate Simba Makoni.
“Mujuru is now attempting to rally Zanu PF politburo members to put additional pressure on Mugabe at a scheduled Wednesday politburo meeting to resign. Mujuru continues to actively support Makoni, although he has not come out publicly.”
Advertisement
Mujuru’s involvement in Makoni’s Mavambo/Kusile project was also confirmed by Dumiso Dabengwa, one of the few prominent Zanu PF officials to leave the party ahead of the key 2008 elections.
McGee adds: “Dabengwa averred that Makoni had substantial support in the country, even though high-profile leaders had, for personal reasons, chosen not to publicly express their support.
“He commented that General Solomon Mujuru also was one of the initiators of Makoni's candidacy; Mujuru was still solidly behind Makoni, but Dabengwa was unsure when and if he would make his support public.”
Mujuru is said to have balked at publicly endorsing Makoni for fear of possible “prosecution for corrupt business practices”.
Butau said Mujuru’s bid to get rid of Mugabe was driven by increasing alarm at the impact the country’s economic collapse was having on his vast business empire.
“The Mujurus believe Zanu PF cannot solve the economic mess and they need a regularisation of the business environment so that they can continue to conduct their many businesses,” Mudariki allegedly told Ambassador McGee at another meeting in October 2010.
The General had complained bitterly about the impact of Western sanctions on his business activities in a rare meeting with Ambassador Dell in 2006.
“Demonstrating that even he was hurt by the financial sanctions, Mujuru complained bitterly about a US$7 million line of credit he had arranged which had been frozen by OFAC,” Dell said.
“Mujuru added that the targeted sanctions were impacting other regime leaders and making them less eager to engage.”
The revelations could be a hammer blow to Vice President Mujuru’s waning dreams of succeeding Mugabe at the helm of Zanu PF.
Political commentators say already weakened by her husband’s death, VP Mujuru now risks being sidelined by Mugabe who bristles at any challenge to his rule.
Labels: CHRISTOPHER DELL, JOICE MUJURU, MDC, SANCTIONS, SIMBA MAKONI, TREASON, WIKILEAKS
Read more...
Viewing cable 07PRETORIA356, C) EXILED ZIMBABWEAN BUSINESSMEN FLOAT ZIMBABWE
If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs
Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
* The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
* The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
* The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.
Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #07PRETORIA356.
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
07PRETORIA356 2007-01-30 16:04 2010-12-08 21:09 CONFIDENTIAL Embassy Pretoria
VZCZCXRO2660
RR RUEHMR RUEHRN
DE RUEHSA #0356/01 0301607
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
R 301607Z JAN 07
FM AMEMBASSY PRETORIA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 7972
INFO RUCNSAD/SOUTHERN AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY
RUEHDS/AMEMBASSY ADDIS ABABA 2015
RUEHBS/AMEMBASSY BRUSSELS 0983
RUEHLO/AMEMBASSY LONDON 1112
RUEHFR/AMEMBASSY PARIS 0998
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK 0343
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHINGTON DC
RUEKDIA/DIA WASHINGTON DC
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
Tuesday, 30 January 2007, 16:07
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 PRETORIA 000356
SIPDIS
SIPDIS
DEPT FOR AF/S
EO 12958 DECL: 01/29/2017
TAGS PREL, ZI, SF
SUBJECT: (C) EXILED ZIMBABWEAN BUSINESSMEN FLOAT ZIMBABWE
POWERSHARING IDEA
Classified By: Acting Deputy Chief of Mission Elizabeth Hinson. Reason s 1.4(b) and (d).
(U) This message has been coordinated with AmEmbassy Harare.
¶1. (C) SUMMARY: Exiled Zimbabwean businessmanXXXXXXXXXXXX is quietly floating an idea to shift executive power from President Mugabe to a “technocratic” Prime Minister. To get Mugabe to accept the deal, Mugabe would remain President until 2010 with some power over the security apparatus, but the Prime Minister would run the economy and get the country back on its feet. All parties would work together to draft a new constitution. XXXXXXXXXXXX was open to ideas on who best to sell the plan, but suggested new UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, working through an envoy like former Malaysian PM Mahathir, as possible mediators. We cannot comment on the merits of the plan, but find it encouraging that senior Zimbabwean exile businessmen are discussing solutions to their country’s political and economic crisis. Embassy Harare notes that the concept is increasingly in circulation in Harare and may not require outside intervention. END SUMMARY.
¶2. (C) A group of prominent Zimbabwean businessmen living in South Africa, led by XXXXXXXXXXXX, discussed with visiting NIO for Africa, PolCounselor and PolOff January 27 a possible strategy for transferring executive power from President Robert Mugabe to a “technocratic” prime minister. XXXXXXXXXXXX was joined by XXXXXXXXXXXX, XXXXXXXXXXXX, and XXXXXXXXXXXX. The four businessmen agreed that there is a “window of opportunity” to bring positive change to Zimbabwe, opened by the deteriorating economic situation and Mugabe’s advancing age and declining health.
¶3. (C) XXXXXXXXXXXX’s strategy builds on the assumption that Mugabe will never voluntarily give up power. He fears for his future if he steps down -- citing the Charles Taylor example XXXXXXXXXXXX.
¶4. (C) Under XXXXXXXXXXXX’s (somewhat convoluted) plan:
-- Mugabe gets the extension of his presidential term to 2010, but would share power with a “technocratic” Prime Minister during the 2007-10 period.
-- The PM would have to be acceptable to 85 percent of the parliament, thus requiring opposition MDC support, and could only be removed by an 85 percent vote in parliament.
-- The President would still appoint the key security ministers of Defense, Home Affairs, and National Security. The PM would appoint the other cabinet members, particularly in the economic area. However, deployment of troops would require the approval of both the PM and President.
-- The PM would not be eligible to run for President in 2010, thus ensuring his or her political independence.
-- Between 2007-10, the Constitution and electoral system would be reviewed, and a new constitution put in place.
-- In return for these “reforms,” the international community would agree to the phased lifting of sanctions, the “acceptance” of the extension of Mugabe,s term to 2010, and perhaps most importantly to provide economic assistance to help rehabilitate the Zimbabwean economy.
¶5. (C) XXXXXXXXXXXX said that a number of Zimbabweans could play the role of technocratic Prime Minister. XXXXXXXXXXXX.
¶6. (C) On the question of who sells this plan to Mugabe, XXXXXXXXXXXX was open to ideas. He said that Moeletsi Mbeki, a
PRETORIA 00000356 002 OF 002
South African businessman and (estranged) brother to the President, recommended against South Africa playing the mediation role, arguing that ForMin Dlamini-Zuma is too close to Mugabe. Moeletsi Mbeki recommended involving the new UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, working through an envoy like SIPDIS former Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir.
¶7. (C) COMMENT: We cannot comment on whether Mugabe might accept a power-sharing plan like XXXXXXXXXXXX proposes or who is best to convince Mugabe, but it is encouraging that four senior Zimbabwean businessmen are actively discussing ideas to resolve their country’s political and economic crisis. For the last seven years, most exiled Zimbabwean businessmen in South Africa have avoided any political involvement in their home country. We are not as quick as Moeletsi Mbeki to dismiss a possible South African role in any proposed transition deal, even if they are not the ones to sell it directly to Mugabe. The South African Government is increasingly frustrated with Mugabe’s intransigence and Zimbabwe’s economic decline, which impedes regional integration and growth; President Thabo Mbeki wants to see Zimbabwe “resolved” before he leaves power in 2009; and the last thing South Africa wants while hosting the 2010 World Cup is a messy and violent election in Zimbabwe. END COMMENT.
¶8. (C) EMBASSY HARARE COMMENT: The concept described by XXXXXXXXXXXX is increasingly in circulation in Harare. Morgan Tsvangirai told Emboffs on 30 January that this is Mugabe,s
SIPDIS Plan B as he runs into growing resistance to 2010 and that the candidate for PM would be Simba Makoni. Significant outside intervention, therefore, may not be necessary; however, gentle encouragement from Pretoria is unlikely to be amiss. UN SYG Ban may not wish to engage on this issue at the beginning of his tenure, especially in view of the way Mugabe treated former UN SYG Annan. END EMBASSY HARARE COMMENT.
BOST
Labels: MOELETSI MBEKI, NEOCOLONIALISM, ROBERT MUGABE, SIMBA MAKONI, WIKILEAKS
Read more...
Axed MDC minister to join Mavambo Party
Posted: Friday, July 9, 2010 4:42 am
RECENTLY axed Movement for Democratic Change (MDC-T) minister Fidelis Mhashu is not taking his sacking lightly and is mulling joining the Mavambo/Kusile/Dawn party led by former finance minister Dr Simba Makoni.
Mr Mhashu was fired from cabinet by Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai is a move that is meant to cull all his opponents in the embattled former opposition party. He was the Minister of National Housing and Social Amenities.
Sources say Mr Mhashu -- who is now a mere executive member for the Chitungwiza constituency -- has held at least two meetings with Dr Makoni.
Other MDC-T House of Assembly Members for Chitungwiza South and St Mary’s, Mr Misheck Shoko and Marvellous Khumalo respectively, are also said to have met Dr Makoni at Imire Game Park near Marondera.
They are said to have held "extensive consultations" aimed at joining the party. The three key MDC-T members will join Dr Makoni's party if they are not elected in this weekend's provincial elections.
MDC-T is scheduled to hold elections for a new executive in Chitungwiza this weekend.
Dr Makoni denied that such meetings ever took place.
Ten other members of the Chitungwiza provincial executive who were suspended earlier this year by the prime minister are also said to be considering their options before this weekend's elections which might see them booted out for good.
Meanwhile, a group of MDC-T supporters who want Mr Tsvangirai retained as party leader after his mandatory two terms expire next year, are alleged to have started a vilification campaign against Mr Mhashu.
Mr Mhashu is a close ally of MDC-T Secretary General and Finance Minister Tendai Biti, who is widely tipped as likely to take over from Mr Tsvangirai as party leader.
The MDC-T party is expected to hold its Congress next year and party leader Mr Tsvangirai is expected to step down after his two terms.
MDC-T said the vilification campaign had been sanctioned by senior MDC-T leaders who wanted to "put the final nail on Mhashu’s coffin and ensure he becomes totally irrelevant".
The flyers bore the MDC-T logo and accused Mr Mhashu of gross corruption and neglecting his constituency since he was elected into office as House of Assembly Member for Chitungwiza North 10 years ago.
They also carried allegations of a criminal nature, claiming the ex-minister was an incestuous rapist.
Labels: FIDELIS MHASHU, MAVAMBO KUSILE DAWN, MDC, SIMBA MAKONI
Read more...
Interview: Simba Makoni on MDC 'disengagement'
by Lance Guma
24/10/2009 00:00:00
Mavambo/Kusile/Dawn party interim President and former presidential candidate Simba Makoni was a guest on SW Radio Africa’s Behind the Headlines programme. He tells reporter Lance Guma the MDC’s “disengagement” from Zanu PF is “confusing” and believes the party should focus internally instead of outside to find solutions:
Interview Broadcast: October 22, 2009
Lance Guma: Hallo Zimbabwe we welcome you to the programme Behind the Headlines. Our special guest today is the interim president of the Mavambo Kusile Dawn movement and former Finance Minister, Dr Simba Makoni. They recently held a press conference offering their views on the MDC’s disengagement from the government. Dr Makoni, thank you for joining us on the programme.
Simba Makoni: Thank you very much, it’s my pleasure.
Guma: Your press conference touched on the MDC disengagement, for the benefit of our listeners could you maybe summarise your position, how did you react to the MDC disengagement?
Makoni: Well first we are perplexed and dismayed by the form of the action; it’s called formal disengagement from Zanu PF. We’re having difficulties understanding what exactly that means in real terms. They say that they are not leaving the inclusive government, they’re continuing to execute their functions but they are disengaging from Zanu PF.
The one explicit action they have taken is to abstain from Cabinet meetings. One isn’t sure how abstaining from Cabinet meetings is disengaging from Zanu PF, so in essence, the first position is one of misunderstanding, confusion and lack of clarity about exactly what does this action mean in practical terms.
Guma: But the MDC will say the action they took was designed to get a reaction from the region, and there has been some movement towards the troika meeting so they’ll point to that and say this is what it was designed to achieve.
Makoni: Well it was designed to precipitate a crisis and generate a reaction from the region. We think we must first focus on what we can do ourselves. This I think is one of the difficulties with the strategies that say let outsiders solve our problems for us.
Guma: Mmm, but I suppose the problem Dr Makoni is that it has been eight months since this government was formed, there does not seem to be a desire from Zanu PF to get any of the agreed commitments in place and so a lot of people are saying the MDC is left with little choice.
Makoni: Well quite clearly, the people of Zimbabwe did not expect anything from Zanu PF. The reason why they voted for change in March 2009 and in other elections before is because they have ceased to have expectation of any positive developments from Zanu PF and the MDC should have known that and this has been pointed out to them right from the time of the negotiation of the Global Political Agreement. To have expected Zanu PF to behave differently would have been a gross misunderstanding of Zanu PF and its nature and character.
Guma: Now in your press statement Dr Makoni, you talked about the fact that the MDC, in your view, are disengaging from Zanu PF based on issues of jobs for the boys and girls. Can you explain that position?
Makoni: Well basically, Prime Minister Tsvangirai made a statement which said that the fact that Roy Bennett has not been installed as Deputy Minister of Agriculture and provincial governors and ambassadors and other public officers that the MDC expected to have been put in place have not been put in place … that’s why they are disengaging from Zanu PF because people have not been put in jobs. That’s what we mean by the jobs for the boys and girls.
It would have been much better for the people of Zimbabwe to be told by Morgan and the MDC ‘we are disengaging from Zanu PF because we are not agreeing on policies to solve the country’s problems’. Policies that stop the country declining, the people’s lives being threatened, policies that enable the economy to recover so that people can have better lives than they had before. This is what the people of Zimbabwe voted for and this is what they expected from the MDC component of the inclusive government.
The people of Zimbabwe had no expectation of anything out of the Zanu PF component of the inclusive government because they have lived with it for 28 years until March 29. And if Prime Minister Tsvangirai and his national executive were saying they are disengaging from Zanu PF because they had not moved policies, programmes and strategies to change the lives of Zimbabweans, we would be applauding them.
Guma: But a lot of people will say…
Makoni: When we said we will support the inclusive government it was because we wanted the inclusive government to change the lives of the people of Zimbabwe, to move Zimbabweans from drudgery and poverty into welfare and wellbeing and this is not what the MDC are doing in the inclusive government.
Guma: But surely Dr Makoni, as a technocrat yourself, you would appreciate the importance of having the right people in the jobs, in government to carry out their mandate and implement the policies properly?
Makoni: Oh absolutely. I don’t know if I’m a technocrat or not but I am a practical and pragmatic Zimbabwean but I appreciate fully the need for competent people, by the way competence is one of the core values of our party, but I will say to you with more than half of the ministers in the Cabinet of the inclusive government and a handful of deputy ministers and a smaller number of bureaucrats from the MDC, that’s sufficient competence to have made a mark on the policy formulation front.
If we had a list of new policies that have been proposed by the MDC for implementation which had failed because there are no ambassadors and there are no governors and there are no deputy ministers, we would be very understanding and accommodating, even supportive of such a position but unfortunately we don’t have those things.
Guma: But the point remains – why should Mugabe be allowed to get away with making unilateral appointments? I refer here to Reserve Bank governor Gideon Gono and Attorney General Johannes Tomana, the point remains the Agreement specifically stated that the parties had to consult on senior appointments and that did not happen?
Makoni: Oh precisely, he shouldn’t be allowed and Prime Minister Tsvangirai took the Oath of Office in the inclusive government knowing that there were those issues and those are the issues indeed which would form part of the agenda for change but not be the agenda for change itself. That’s where we’re making the distinction.
Guma: Let me give another example. You are a former Finance Minister so you probably appreciate this point even much better. The appointment of Gideon Gono -- the MDC have argued that during his tenure as Reserve Bank governor a lot of things have happened including the raiding of corporate foreign currency accounts and that this has damaged the confidence of people who are pouring money into Zimbabwe, so his continued presence at the Reserve Bank is an impediment to government moving forward. Would you not accept such a point?
Makoni: Lance, I considered that there are issues, but remember Gideon raided corporate FCAs before the inclusive government. We drew a line from February 13th when the inclusive government took oath and went into office. We are measuring the performance from there, we are not going back.
Indeed impediments should be removed, but what we are saying is we would be understanding and sympathetic, supportive even, if what the Prime Minister was saying to us was look at what we tried to do from February 13th going forward, this policy we proposed, it was blocked by Robert Mugabe, this policy we suggested it was blocked by Gideon Gono, we would be very understanding and sympathetic of that point of view. But again I repeat, we haven’t been presented with that position.
Guma: Let me get what you would have done in similar circumstances. You are in this coalition with Zanu PF, some of the agreed positions have not been implemented including the swearing in of one of your deputy ministers, what would you do?
Makoni: Well, first I wouldn’t have entered into such a terrible Agreement. You know that our first reaction to the GPA was that this was a terrible Agreement, it was unworkable, it was unbalanced and it was going to make life very difficult for Prime Minister Tsvangirai and the MDC. We said that at the beginning long before they took Oath of Office on 11th and 13th February.
So the first point I would have done is not to enter into a terrible Agreement like that and so I would have worked for a better Agreement which would enable me to function effectively, and if that had happened I think a lot of the problems we are confronting today would have been obviated.
Guma: Some will say you are underestimating the kind of creature that the MDC had to deal with. I mean you were looking at a party, which probably as a former member, you yourself will appreciate how stubborn some of the individuals are and how resistant they are to change so some will say why would you not accept the fact that compromises had to be made for the sake of the people?
Makoni: Oh I’m not denying that compromises had to be made. Remember that my whole thrust of campaigning was about accommodation, cooperation and compromise but it’s the kind of compromise and the content of compromise.
If it’s compromise for its sake, then I think we will be missing the point. Was it compromise that would have enabled effectiveness? As we can see now, this compromise did not make the Prime Minister effective and that is where the first problem lies.
Guma: Someone would say to you Dr Makoni, what’s the point of being in power if you can’t nominate your own people? I mean ideally, it seems pretty clear the MDC are trying in the power matrix to position themselves in such a way that they can effectively deliver the change that everyone is talking about and so would you not be at risk here of belittling genuine complaints that the MDC feel that they have against Zanu PF?
Makoni: No it would be a misunderstanding of our position. We are not belittling the MDC contribution. What we are saying is that the MDC should have been wiser at the beginning and we are saying that the MDC contribution would have been better and more substantive if it was addressed at policies, strategies, programmes and actions that changed the lives of the people of Zimbabwe, that enabled Zimbabwean farmers to grow food for themselves, that enabled Zimbabwean teachers to teach at school, that enabled Zimbabwean doctors to treat diseases in hospital.
But because the focus is on ‘get Gideon Gono out of office’ and ‘put Roy Bennett into office’ that’s why we are saying that the focus is on jobs for the boys. And jobs for the boys do not necessarily deliver change for the people of Zimbabwe.
We would like Prime Minister Tsvangirai to succeed, we would like the inclusive government to succeed we said this, but succeed on substance. Not fight over motorcars, not fight over the kind of furniture and TVs in the office of the Minister but fight over policies that change the lives of the people of Zimbabwe.
Guma: Now this dispute Dr Makoni has been taken to the Southern African Development Community, you yourself spent more than a decade at the helm of that organisation, if I might ask you to speculate – what do you think is going to happen from here? Do you think the regional grouping has what it takes to deal with this issue?
Makoni: Well first let me tell you that the SADC that I was involved in was very different from the SADC that we have today so the dynamics in the organisation are quite different.
Secondly, I think you want to appreciate that SADC’s principal anchoring from January 29, 2009, was that ‘Zimbabweans, we have given you an instrument of management of your national affairs – inclusive government and JOMIC. If anything goes wrong, sort yourselves out through those institutions’.
We went to the DRC last month and Prime Minister Tsvangirai is now crisscrossing the region. I have no different expectation from the region than you have the institutions through which to solve your own problems, go ahead and solve them yourselves.
Guma: But it’s eight months and nothing has been solved and the regional grouping is one of the guarantors of the Agreement so shouldn’t they do something?
Makoni: Well look, the primary responsibility for solving Zimbabwe’s problems lies with Zimbabweans and since February 13th it lies principally with the inclusive government. These people (Zanu PF and MDCs) came to the country and said ‘we are offering ourselves as a partnership to solve your problems because we believe we are competent to do it’. Let them show their competence.
Guma: To end the programme Dr Makoni, I’ll just ask one final question. Your views on pending or impending elections in 2011, in terms of your own political party, how do you see things going?
Makoni: Well first, I don’t know that there’s a timetable for the next elections. The requirements for a free and fair election as stipulated in the Global Political Agreement are not yet in place and they don’t seem to be coming into place. It’s one of the issues over which we have concerns about the performance of the inclusive government, but that said, we are preparing ourselves now as a fully fledged political party, not only to contest the next election whenever it comes but to win the next election and that’s our position.
Guma: That was Dr Simba Makoni joining us on Behind the Headlines.
To listen to the interview Click Here
For feedback e-mail lance *** swradioafrica.com
Labels: MDC, SIMBA MAKONI
Read more...
Makoni's new party promises 'real change'
by Lebo Nkatazo
01/07/2009 00:00:00
FORMER presidential candidate Simba Makoni finally launched his political party on Wednesday, promoting it as the best alternative to the bickering parties constituting Zimbabwe’s power sharing government.
Makoni, who was introduced as the “interim” president of Mavambo-Kusile-Dawn (MKD), told close to 300 supporters, journalists and diplomats -- mainly from western countries -- that the unity government formed between Zanu PF and two Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) formations was failing to respond to people‘s needs due to bickering over trivial matters.
“I now offer myself not as an independent Simba Makoni, but as a team of fresh leaders, a team of young leaders, a team of leaders that carry no baggage, that carry no prejudices,” Makoni said, speaking in front of banners proclaiming The Real Change.
“If I am talking like a missionary it’s because we are here to clean the politics of Zimbabwe,” he added.
Makoni said his party would safeguard the welfare and assure the safety of those in the Diaspora and work to understand the desire of the youth “not to be prisoners of the past”.
“We are committed to balanced national development. This whole nation of Zimbabwe needs to move forward together at the same pace. No Zimbabwean should feel excluded, undermined or deprived,” said Makoni, a 59-year-old former finance minister who ran for president as an independent last year, coming third in the first round.
The party’s interim chairperson Godfrey Chanetsa, President Robert Mugabe’s former press secretary, said they had heeded Deputy Prime Minister Arthur Mutambara’s statement during his speech on the occasion of the formation of the inclusive government that there was no more opposition party in Zimbabwe.
“On that day rose an old man who stated unreservedly that the problem of opposition parties in Africa is that they want to take over from ruling parties (without real change),” said Chanetsa.
The party’s statement of principles and policies says it will champion the division between resources of the state and those of the party.
The party advocates “decentralisation of government authority and responsibility to as close as possible to the people it is expected to serve” and advocating for a “competent, efficient and non-partisan civil service, including the security sector, which will serve the interests of all Zimbabweans”.
Some members of Makoni’s presidential campaign team including newspaper publisher Ibbo Mandaza, former legislator Kindness Paradza and retired army major Kudzai Mbudzi did not attend the launch.
The three are part of a High Court action against Makoni – a battle for the control of the party and assets. Mandaza said: “This launch is null and void. The issue is before the courts.”
Labels: DECENTRALIZATION, GODFREY CHANETSA, IBBO MANDAZA, KINDNESS PARADZA, KUDZAI MBUDZI, MAVAMBO KUSILE DAWN, MKD, SIMBA MAKONI
Read more...
