COMMENT - I have e-mailed Violet Gonda and others at SW Radio Africa on the false claim published by them, that Zambia's bumper maize harvest was the result of white Zimbabwean farmers, when it was produced by small scale African farmers. They did not respond to that e-mail, nor have their retracted their misinformation. Also, there has been no comment from SW Radio Africa on the existence of economic sanctions against Zimbabwe, even after the introduction of the
Zimbabwe Sanctions Repeal Act of 2010 by senator Jim Inhofe. Violet Gonda did an extensive interview in which she asked interviewees whether they 'felt' that there were economic sanctions against Zimbabwe. SW Radio Africa is located in the UK, and is funded by the UK and US governments. Prepare for more back-paddling and sidestepping and obfuscations from the ambassador. Who at this time can still talk about 'so-called sanctions'? The game is up, mr. Ambassador.
Swedish Ambassador refutes sanctions claim
by
28/08/2010 00:00:00
OUTGOING Swedish ambassador to Zimbabwe Sten Rylander has refuted claims made in the state-run media that he called for the lifting of European sanctions against Zimbabwe. Rylander also denies allegations that Sweden helped “sponsor the split in the opposition vote in the 2008 elections” by providing financial backing to Dr Simba Makoni’s presidential bid. He speaks to SW Radio Africa’s Violet Gonda for the programme Hot Seat.
Gonda: Ambassador, you have concluded your term in Zimbabwe, what would you say you have achieved and do you have any regrets?
Sten Rylander: Well I’m leaving after some few years here and I leave on a note of optimism and positive achievement.
We’ve been through so many difficulties and problems but right now I feel that Zimbabwe is turning a corner and that we are on the right track and moving in a better and good direction.
Gonda: There are others who may feel a bit different from what you have said in terms of the achievements you have seen. Can you spell some of them out for us and also, do you have faith in the inclusive government and on what basis?
Rylander: Well of course there are differing views on this but we have the government of national unity up and running although there are some tensions and some lack of implementation still of the Global Political Agreement but the constitution making process is on-going, we have a efforts to heal the nation, healing and national reconciliation also going on.
There is much less violence now than what it used to be certainly in 2007 and 2008 which was a very bad and very dark period in Zimbabwe’s history, and we have contacts going on between Zimbabwe and the European Union and the United States about the restrictive measures.
They have not yet resulted in a positive outcome but that will come after some time.
Gonda: Critics ask how you can say there is progress when there is still complete arrogance and also disregard of the rule of law and little progress on social issues. How would you respond to that?
Rylander: Well I think that you see some very nasty negative examples still but democratic space is opening up and it’s more tolerant in the society. I certainly see a clear trend in that direction.
We have the media reforms coming, we have the media commission up and running, we have permission for the new dailies coming out and hopefully soon also community-based radio, so space is opening up and there is another climate in the country.
Gonda: From your observations, where does power reside in Zimbabwe right now?
Rylander: Well that is a difficult question to answer because we don’t really know but we have the government of national unity.
I said they’re supposed to run the country, but we also have the military sector exercising quite a lot of influence, I think.
And we need to proceed with further reforms in that area in order to reach back to a normal situation. Security sector reform in particular, I would think is very important.
Gonda: And you are widely reported as saying that the sanctions imposed on Zimbabwe should be lifted immediately as they are not serving any good and this was in The Herald newspaper.
Rylander: That is not the correct quote from me, I never said that.
I said that there is a process going on, there’s been a visit by Zimbabwe in Brussels, contacts are going on and I can foresee that after some while and with intensified dialogue on both sides that we could have positive results sooner rather than later.
I never called for an immediate lifting of sanctions. I think we need to have some more progress, certainly on the Zimbabwean side.
I have pointed out the fact that implementation of the GPA and the solving of outstanding issues is a key factor in this regard.
Gonda: So at what stage do you think the European Union and other western countries, who have imposed the sanctions, should start thinking about this?
Rylander: Well we are thinking about that all the time in various capitals and I think you have picked up that there’s a new government in London, for instance. There is some movement in Washington.
We are trying to find ways and means to think outside the box.
I think we need some more progress though until we can see definite results in this dialogue.
Gonda: What exactly do you mean when you say ‘we need to find ways to think outside the box’?
Rylander: Well I cannot go into that in this interview now.
I think we have been stuck on both sides and we’ve been pushed into corners and I think there is a need to realise that the situation cannot continue for long.
And on our side I think we need to recognise the fact also that the government of national unity have a solidified unit and common position on this now.
That was not the case last year for instance when MDC-Tsvangirai was fairly quiet on the whole issue of so-called sanctions.
That has now changed and so there is a common position, we have a common view also in SADC and the region and we need to take that into account I think.
Gonda: And do you believe that conditions in Zimbabwe now warrant some sort of removal of the sanctions?
Rylander: Well I see them coming together on a common position on this and that is a new factor that we need to recognise.
What is very important in the next few months is to see how the constitution making process goes and how the healing efforts proceed and so on.
I think that is very important.
Gonda: Right, and so far, how do you see things in terms of the constitution making process because some of the reports we’ve been getting show that people are still being abused in some of the rural areas in the country?
Rylander: That is true, there have been quite a few examples of negative developments.
But the overall assessment that I make at this point is that this process is going better than what we had expected and that it is under control and that these difficulties are being dealt with.
But I think there are some problems but the main trend I think is positive.
Gonda: How do you respond to people who say Robert Mugabe has stolen elections; he has used extreme violence against his own people and is still being allowed to get away with it?
Rylander: Well I say, as I see it there has been a lot of violence and the elections have not been credible and they’ve not been free and fair, certainly not the last election according to regional observers and so on.
But it’s been a very, very difficult situation to deal with and the way out in Zimbabwe was to find ways and means for the three parties to negotiate and form the government of national unity.
I think it was a good step in Zimbabwe but I cautioned also against this as a problem solving mechanism in Africa as a whole, because if you do that in every situation when you have stolen elections you undermine democracy and you cannot have such situations develop in Africa as a whole.
Gonda: So in what way was it a good step in forming the government of national unity with what you have said?
Rylander: Well, because the problems have been so entrenched and there has been deep divisions in the country for a long time, for many years … for them to come together to talk about the nation and the problems in the nation and how to solve these problems has been a good thing.
And that has been, we can see that on a daily basis and also in my interactions with the Prime Minister and Mr Mutambara and others, I can see that they are coming together, they are making it more easy to deal with the national problems.
Gonda: Some senior MDC officials have said that some Nordic countries, especially Sweden, played a role in the delay to a democratic transition by sponsoring the split in the opposition vote in the 2008 elections and that it’s now not a surprise to hear you calling for removal of sanctions right now. What is your response to this?
Rylander: Well I cannot understand, I did not hear this before that we have been sponsoring a division of the opposition.
We have been in favour of opening up democratic space, in favour of free and credible elections and that’s the only thing we’ve been going for.
We have a close and good relation with all parties along the whole political line.
Gonda: Some in the opposition or in the MDC say that you were a key figure in supporting private talks in South Africa before the formation of the GNU and that it was your alternative approach that helped produce a stalemate. Can you comment on this?
Rylander: I never, never heard that before and I take the strongest exception to that.
It is true that there have been platforms operating in South Africa through various organisations that we have been also been supporting.
But that has been a helpful avenue in the difficult road to opening up space and to find a more normal situation in Zimbabwe and the two MDC formations, Dumiso Dabengwa, Simba Makoni, all people who have been involved in this, have been participating in these talks and I think they have found them very valuable and useful.
Gonda: So did you go on a venture to sponsor the Simba Makoni presidential campaign and later on the MDC-Mutambara’s role in the unity government?
Rylander: We have never supported political parties like that.
There has never been any direct support to the Mavambo Movement, but I was one of many who looked upon this as an interesting situation when Simba Makoni came out late 2005 and I’ve been following his efforts with a keen interest but there’s been no support as such.
Gonda: You are quoted in the Herald newspaper also saying that the MDC-Tsvangirai’s disengagement from government last year was a major set back to negotiations between Zimbabwe and the European Union. Can you explain?
Rylander: Well it was a set back in the sense that we were just about to strengthen and intensify the dialogue between the European Union and Zimbabwe at the time.
Sweden held the EU presidency if you remember from July to December last year and we had a good team in place in Harare and we were trying very hard to find ways and means to reach results but then came the disengagement by Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai and it meant that there was no counterpart on the other side, the government was not working properly so we lost momentum and we lost some time.
For the rest of our EU presidency we couldn’t achieve much so we just had to wait until the government of national unity was back up and running again.
Gonda: But do you not believe their reasons for disengagement were legitimate?
Rylander: I can, I don’t question that.
It’s just a statement of fact that it was not possible to pursue the dialogue and to negotiate under these conditions but I’m quite sure that MDC-Tsvangirai had good reasons to do what they did.
So I’m not criticising them per se just because of that.
Gonda: Even though they returned to the negotiating table, what progress has been achieved since the time that they disengaged and later went back to work in the GNU? Has there been any progress in terms of the fundamental issues that they were calling for?
Rylander: Not enough progress but what was achieved by the disengagement was that that prompted a much more determined line on the part of SADC and the South African government.
If you remember there was a meeting in SADC I think in Mozambique towards the end of the year and it was a much more hands-on effort by SADC and South Africa to help the parties to make further progress, so in that sense you can say that.
Again there were efforts by the South African mediation to pinpoint the outstanding issues and try to deal with them and that has been a protracted and difficult process ever since but I think after the disengagement we have had more interaction between SADC and
South Africa on the one hand and the Zimbabwean parties on the other hand.
Gonda: And in your opinion, what strategy would work right now to resolve the political crisis in Zimbabwe because there is this stalemate.
Rylander: Well I wouldn’t call it a stalemate.
They are stuck on some issues but they are still dealing with the outstanding issues, they are discussing them, there are progress here and there, they are discussing electoral reforms for instance and there’s quite a large degree of agreement on those and the commissions are up and running and as I’ve said before, the constitution making process is there.
They are also dealing with a very difficult issue about the sale of diamonds and how to deal with that in the future and there we also see some progress although we are a long way from an orderly, transparent and accountable system for that.
Gonda: And on the issue of diamonds that you have just mentioned, do you think that the diamonds in Zimbabwe, which are now being sold, do you think they will benefit the finances of the nation?
Rylander: Well according to what has come out in the media and from my interactions with the Minister of Finance Tendai Biti and others, steps have been taken and some money is now coming into the national fiscus, and you can imagine that this is a very delicate and difficult process and will take some time until you come back to a system that is perfect so this is also progress.
What I take note of is that good negotiations and talks are going on and they reach results and there is gradual progress in this.
Gonda: It’s been said that ten percent of the diamonds sold will go to the fiscus. Is this what you are referring to, this ten percent?
Rylander: That is what I am referring to. It’s not all money from this sale coming into the national fiscus but a large step has been taken.
Gonda: Do you think this ten per cent is enough to run the country?
Rylander: No I don’t think so. You want to have a normal situation that you have in other countries. Look at Botswana; look at Namibia; look at South Africa.
It’s a long way to go until, and I don’t want to discuss in terms of percentages, but there must be transparency and accountability in this whole operation as it is in most other countries.
Gonda: Right, and you also, you also talked a bit about the constitution, do believe with what you’ve seen on the ground in Zimbabwe so far, believe there’s a chance of Zimbabwe actually having a decent constitution after this process?
Rylander: I believe so, yes. I’m not underestimating the difficulties but I’m rather positively surprised to know by the openness and the process that has taken place so far.
I think there is an open debate on many very sensitive issues in most places where these discussions are going on.
Gonda: But is there really an open debate when people are being forced to follow a particular angle, a particular line, especially in the rural areas - where they are being intimidated by war veterans and other partisan groups?
Rylander: Well we have to follow what is happening and these so-called war veterans, some of them are really not very helpful and they must be dealt with. They must not be allowed to disturb the process as has happened on a few occasions already.
Gonda: And do you think more could have been done to express Europe’s view over the rigged elections of 2008 and the consequent violence?
Rylander: Well I think we had done a lot, not only us but in the broad international community has expressed their very firm views about what happened in 2008 and certainly about the widespread violence that we saw, especially in May/June 2008 and that came not only from the so-called west but it came also from the African observer missions and from the South African government.
Gonda: And there have been calls for elections in Zimbabwe, in your view, is Zimbabwe really ready for elections or the only option right now is this inclusive government?
Rylander: I have been cautioning Zimbabwean friends not to rush into new elections too quickly because there is a very great chance that you can slide back into old negative patterns of a lot of violence and so on, but this is for Zimbabweans to decide but my hope is that you lay a good foundation first by having a new constitution, pushing through electoral reforms and then go for elections.
That will mean not before end of next year, possibly later, 2012 or so would be a safer solution I think and a better election that would be credible and democratic.
Gonda: And Ambassador Rylander you are ending your mission in Zimbabwe, lessons learned?
Rylander: Well there are many lessons learned.
I’ve been in this region, dealing with this region for 30 years and I lived in southern Africa for 20 years but one lesson that I picked up also in Namibia and other places is that liberation movements have difficulties sometimes to make the transition into a modern democracy and to a democratic party and they have been struggling with that, both the ANC, SWAPO, ZANU and so on and that has been very interesting to follow and I think there’s been particular difficulties here in Zimbabwe on that score.
Gonda: And a final word?
Rylander: I wish this nation good luck and I really hope that the positive trends that we see now in the direction of coming together as a nation and national healing that this will continue during the next year or two.
That will be very critical for Zimbabwe.
Gonda: Where to from here? Are you going to another country or what next for you?
Rylander: I’m going back home and I will retire very soon.
Early next year in February I’ll reach the upper limit, age limit, 67 so then I will retire and I will have more time to nurture my African roots and reflect on my vast experiences from this region.Feedback can be sent to violet *** swradioafrica.com
Labels: SANCTIONS, STEN RYLANDER, VIOLET GONDA, ZDERA
Read more...
Beware fanaticism of the new convert
THE Bible gives us the story of the murderous Saul who after being smote by blinding flash of proselytising Divinity, transforms and becomes the good disciple Paul: a new man in the full employ of God, thought to deed.
This violent encounter with Divinity reduces the rampaging murderer to a pleading wretch, suing not just for peace but also for a new mission.
Munoda kuti ndikuitireiko Ishe?
To which the triumphant God responds: "Ita basa rangu."
Thereafter, the new man Paul becomes a staunch disciple, a true servant of God, one never to be swayed from the path of righteousness.
And his value far surpassed the number of converts he brought to the Church, his new taskmaster.
His real value derived from his status and person as an antichrist-turned-Christian disciple, thereby proving God’s overwhelming power.
His status as a "turned" murderous heathen proved a more persuasive sermon than anything the Church could ever muster.
"Turns" are a vital expression of triumphant power, proof that a cause is convincing, indeed is potent enough to overwhelm, to subdue, to convert and then to redeploy.
Britain’s Saul who became Paul
In the world of realpolitik, my readers will know someone called George Orwell, lesser known as Eric Blair — his real name.
Famed for writing Animal Farm and the futuristic 1984, this Englishman in fact began as the Saul of British politics, but ended up as the Paul of the British Intelligence Establishment.
He was a communist to begin with, a dominant player of the British Left, and thus a splitting headache to the paranoid British State. It helps to recall that the threat of communism reached spectre proportions soon after the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution.
Europe, more specifically Britain, lived in mortal fear of this "noxious" ideology that seemed to breed in harsher social conditions so abundant under aggressive capitalism.
Not helped by the aggressive "Soviets" who preached "world revolution".
Britain, as the more mature form of capitalism, saw itself as especially vulnerable to this incendiary ideology.
After all Marx, the father of this deadly ideology, lay on her soil and had predicted that the conditions of the working class in Britain were ripening fast for a social revolution.
And looking at the matter, they indeed appeared so.
Animal Farm?
Using the Labour Party as a foothold, the Soviet Union was very active in this land of monarchs, winning many converts, particularly among the British intelligentsia.
Britain had a definite crowd on the left, much to the great worry of its State.
And the great October Revolution was elaborating itself aggressively, extending its tenets to practically all disciplines.
Capitalism looked embattled and dangerous people like Eric Blair had to be watched, won or "slept eternally".
Blair was a communist agitator, a compelling producer of "agitprop", agitation propaganda.
He moved places and countries, all the time focusing on the proletariat urging them to rise to lose their chains.
Such a role, quite naturally, drew the interest of the British intelligence establishment, with the ultimate result that Eric Blair — fortuitously going through a phase of disenchantment with communism — got "turned" and redeployed as an operative of the British Intelligence, against Russian-aligned leftist cells in Britain and Europe.
Declassified documents released by the British government in the late 1990s, make Blair match the biblical Paul in serving a new cause.
Few know that the famous book — Animal Farm — was actually an M16 project meant to fight communism at the level of ideas.
By the way, America was doing the same, and even deploying such "turns" to mainland Europe, to fight the ideas of Communism.
Blair’s value lay in that he had been a devout communist who had undergone a Damascene conversion.
I wonder if politicians shall ever be able to pay back what they owe the Church and its great book, by way of tips on how power is defended and vouched for.
The Saul who remained a Saul
Sweden’s Sten Rylander has come to a realisation that sanctions against Zimbabwe do actually exist, are hurtful and have been counter-productive both to their proponents and their intended beneficiaries, the MDC-T.
How sudden that moment of epiphany was, I cannot say.
But he now wants them removed, and pledges to convince his home government and possibly Europe that these sanctions must now go.
And for that realisation, he gets acres and acres of space in our papers, which look more grateful for this change of heart than Government.
But there is one small, yet very important, detail which the Press has buried in the haystack of wordy excitement.
The man is "outgoing" not only from Zimbabwe — his latest and apparently last mission — but from government service in Sweden!
Paradoxical equation
Impolitely put, the man simply no longer matters to Sweden and for exactly that reason, to Zimbabwe too.
He matters no more, except as a small and useless footnote announcing that the man was once here, once upon a time — soon to be a long, long time.
Of course, his folly will stand up, and the generation that follows us will certainly find it humorous that he only "saw" sanctions he busily implemented here, on the eve of his departure.
Rylander the private person appears more discerning than Rylander the Ambassador of the People’s Republic of Sweden!
When he mattered in the equation he was blinder than a mullet.
When he had the power, he could not see; when he finally saw, he no longer had the power, status and influence over events and inter-State affairs.
The evil that the man did
In his days, Rylander did much that got him to see and work for harsh sanctions against this country.
He organiaed against this country, for the realisation of Sweden and Europe’s selfish goals here.
Was he not part of the Fishmonger Group, in fact a leading part of it?
Was he not being used by the British and Americans to listen in corridors, used precisely because of his wartime contacts with the nationalist leaders?
Was he not responsible for recruiting ambassadors from very respectable African countries in order to turn these against Zimbabwe?
How many regime-change institutions did Sweden fund during his tenure?
How many errands did he run for MDC-T, including the fund-raising one held not far back this year, in Pretoria, involving the likes of Judith Todd?
Who does he want to mislead?
Who does he want to ingratiate himself with? Who funded Mavambo?
Who is part-funding Dabengwa?
And all those stupid media projects? Who funded Madhuku and his weird programme?
Who funded the Chibebes?
He must think us quite daft.
Haunting losses of Belgian-Congo
But Rylander is a Saul who can only be a Saul. He is a useless "turn", a Saul who cannot be a Paul.
He is past use to the Church. He has lost his limb, his eyes, his power — whether to kill or convert.
I will never forget his damaging input in framing the way Europe views Zimbabwe; a role he played on claims that he was one of the most senior Africanists around, well known and knowing the Native as to provide guidance.
Alongside his colleagues, he stalled the Zimbabwe-EU dialogue, he together with Xavier Marchal, the EU’s outgoing man here.
Both jellied, but for different reasons.
Rylander sought to use his tenuous association with liberation movements to anoint himself Godfather of governments formed by those movements.
It is a typical liberal trait, to want to control and de-radicalise liberation movements to make them safer for capitalism.
Marchal interpreted his role here as rescuing the white farmer from "his" lost land.
Marchal was Europe’s representative to the CFU, never to this country.
And this was not fortuitous.
I will let him speak for himself: "I think Zimbabwe was special for me because I have gone through that, because I was born in the Congo . . .
"My father had a plantation which he lost and I witnessed that when I was a teenager so I have been exposed to that and I think that is the reason I became involved in Zimbabwe."
Ruined by two nostalgias
And you thought he would be involved on the side of the black peasant?
In the two men, Zimbabwe became a victim of two nostalgias: of a liberal who got involved in the revolution in order to have credentials for controlling that same revolution once it ascended to power and became a government; of a son of a white plantocracy in Belgian-Congo who used his deployment here to seek a vicarious repair to what his father lost in the Congo, by taking on the cause of the white settler farmer here.
Neither nostalgia could have saved Zimbabwe in its present struggles, and — yes — time moved too; too slowly, during the tenure of these two most hostile men.
I played a part in warding off threats spawned by their activities here.
I am gratified they both go away bitter and defeated and though it is early in this piece I must say: "Icho!"
Two factories of falsehoods
Last week there was a public spat between Chamisa and Charamba, all centred around the Sadc Summit, then pending, and the so-called outstanding issues that seem to come, go, come, come, go, come and ad nauseam, depending on what season it is in the MDC-T camp.
Chamisa said Zimbabwe would be discussed, spurred by a raft of outstanding issues which the "duplicitous Zanu-PF" will not want to attend to.
Charamba took a different line, stressing that a progress report would be tabled for noting by the Organ Troika, which in turn would present it to Summit, again for noting.
Far from being intractable, Charamba added, the so-called outstanding issues had shrunk to a mere three, out of the 27 incrementally (not originally) raised by the MDC-T.
He added the three principals had in fact conveyed this to the mediating President Zuma, through a letter penned by one of them, Mutambara, and
signed by them all.
Bolstering that letter to Zuma was an implementation matrix setting out timelines for each action envisaged in that agreement. Chamisa dismissed all this, throwing a slur at Charamba whom he described as "a factory of falsehoods".
When numbers do add up
A day after the Summit, MDC-T secretary-general and co-negotiator Tendai Biti, called a Press brief at which he issued a statement that read in part: "It will be recalled that pursuant to the Maputo Troika meeting of 5 November 2009, the negotiators of political parties were asked to deal with 27 agenda items of dispute, a task they concluded on 3rd April, 2010.
"Following this, the principals debated the negotiators’ report on 8th June 2010, and forwarded a report to the Sadc facilitator, President Zuma, on 10 June 2010.
"Of note is that of the 27 dispute issues, the principals agreed on 24 leaving outstanding the deadlocked issues of (a) the swearing of Roy Bennett (b); the appointment of the Attorney-General, Johannes Tomana; (c) the appointment of the RBZ Governor Gideon Gono.
"Also of significant is that on the 4th August, 2010, the principals agreed on an implementation matrix on the 24 agreed issues." Twenty-seven minus 24 gives you three, does it not?
I don’t know how, gentle reader, you read the foregoing.
As for me, I am left with a distinct impression that Tendai Biti has become a second "factory of falsehoods", after Charamba, which is why the world needs less of these two "mendacious" men, and more of Chamisas who must multiply for truth’s sake!
But that is to skate the real point.
The bloated factory
I have been watching closely how the MDC-T and its information factory has been working, especially after claims of a rift between Tsvangirai and Biti, and certainly after the withdrawal of Mudzuri and company from Government, at the behest of their leader and Prime Minister of this country.
You will also remember that this recall percolated right down to affect staffers in the Prime Minister’s Office.
These had to be moved over or around, depending on the severity of judgment against them.
That, too, created its own problems as MDC-T confused civil servants under PSC, with its own activists who are answerable to its hierarchy at Harvest House.
You will also recall that I was dismissive of all those changes, arguing they portended little if anything at all, to national politics. I still stand by that position.
Relevant to that whole movement (or is it vibration?) is Jameson Timba, now Minister of State in the Prime Minister’s Office, and Ian Makone, the man blamed or praised (depending on where you stand) for being the man behind the Prime Minister and leader of MDC-T, Morgan Tsvangirai.
The great retreat to Government
But one thing I underlined was that the MDC-T leader had triggered a vicious power struggle which could very well swallow him up.
I still underline the same today, and with better confidence now that what then was incipient and thus a matter of speculation and conjecture, seems quite well pronounced, quite evident, now.
The fault-lines are clearly etched, and are taking a heavy toll on the faction.
Hence the apparent disjuncture in its supposedly homogenous voice.
MDC-T suffers from multiple images.
It is interesting that the eye of this storm is the Prime Minister’s Office, not the MDC president’s office located at Harvest House.
MDC-T has beaten a hasty retreat from itself as a party, to embrace the structures of a Government it does not own, let alone control.
Governmental offices and ministerial instruments have now become lairs for its haunted, frightened members, real offices of political asylum for a buffeted leadership.
Another violent split?
There is so much confusion at Harvest House, some of it quite dangerously violent.
It remains a mystery to me why the appalling violence that took place at Harvest House — right in the City Centre — this last Sunday, ahead of Chitungwiza party elections, went unwitnessed or unreported by the media.
It was so engulfing that even the Americans through their Studio 7 could not hide it.
Harvest House is no longer an easy habitat for the party, with signs analogous to what preceded the breakaway of Welshman Ncube and company now abounding.
As we move closer and closer to the party’s congress deadline, the fight will become even more vicious.
And the retreat to Government offices is threatening the integrity of those offices too, at the very least by way of their functionality.
Warring factions are seeking to reorganise and recruit from their ministerial portfolios.
MDC-T is revealing politically significant schizophrenia, with disenchanted officers talking, if not organising against the party.
New promotions and appointments in the Prime Minister’s Office have bred zealots, enthusiastic new converts bursting with fanaticism.
These men know no measure and are responsible for the infantile publicity I alluded to last week.
Trading loyalties
Much worse, there is continuous movement(s) between factions, between personalities, as fortunes and misfortunes see-saw, as loyalties are traded, pawned and auctioned to the latest bidder.
Erstwhile comrades become inveterate foes, and vice-versa.
It is appalling for MDC-T, sumptuous news for Zanu-PF and MDC.
And MDC’s push for leadership change can only embolden those in MDC-T seeking the same, will it not?
Much worse, it is set to shake MDC-T’s power base in Matabeleland, which is why Tsavngirai’s show in Bulawayo only two weeks back remarkably revealed panic.
Matabeleland is going for narrow politics and hey, MD and Dabengwa’s Zapu will ascend, albeit temporarily.
After all both are not seeking presidency of this country, in fact cannot seek it.
They seek leverage for negotiating with Zanu-PF for concessions, for comfort.
Subtle damages
But within this whole boiling pot are very subtle, skillfully managed moves deployed, seemingly in the course of loyal service, of diligent performance, yet designed to chisel away the standing and credibility of targeted leaderships.
And then you have "loyal" officers who do not seem to know how to save the whole formation from embarrassment, and thus end up overreaching and thus compounding the party’s woes.
To all this mess add the hand of the outsider and the whole thing gets thicker than a witch’s brew.
MDC-T’s dilemma
How does all this relate to the Sadc Summit? Let it not be forgotten that the verve of MDC-T is media-based and defined. Bereft of a real cause from the beginning, the MDC-T as a component of an inclusive Government finds itself firmly immersed within a Zanu-PF defined agenda.
The issues of the day relate to initiatives introduced by Zanu-PF: the land, agriculture, indigenisation, mining, sanctions, etc, etc.
All these are brand names for Zanu-PF with the MDC-T haggling over how best to present and implement what is preponderantly a Zanu-PF programme.
As a player in Government, the MDC-T has unveiled no programme that gives it identity.
Retiring the MDC manifesto
Meanwhile, by attending to the MDC-T’s outstanding issues, Zanu-PF has been dismantling and retiring MDC-T’s manifesto, well ahead of elections.
And the contents of the matrix sent to Zuma, most of which came from MDC-T, clearly shows a party clutching at straws.
Just try and picture a submission to Sadc focusing on "transport arrangements for principals"!
Or "security aides" for the principals! Or timeline for circulating Cabinet and Council of Ministers rules to the public!
You call such petty administrative matters "outstanding issues" worthy of a whole Summit of 14 countries?
Little wonder that the Summit simply told the Prime Minister to please go home and getting those little matters implemented.
MDC-T’s strategy of using summits and lobbying to validate its cause has worn very thin.
Its promise to "share power in order to take it" rings louder for its hollowness.
The rush to compile non-existent outstanding issues, the rush to Sadc is a plea for consequence against yawning emptiness.
And time can only make matters worse which is why the faction agitates for early elections it is most ill-prepared for.
The vain hope is to induce unity, founded on a self-preservation instinct. Except that after the unexpected recall of ministers, few now locate this instinct within the structures of MDC-T.
It opens a whole can of worms I rather not deal with for now.
Deflection exercise
Clearly the so-called outstanding issues play a role other than a desideratum of matters to resolve.
They amount to a "Biblical Star" before a warring Israel on a difficult and trying journey out of bondage.
It is an outward point of focus, to minimise debilitating introspection.
This is why Chamisa needs to keep popping up enormous figures. It’s a deflection exercise.
MDC-T needs issues which remain outstanding forever, for its survival sake.
The real strategy is to wear down these so-called issues, until they slim and become wafer thin, until the formation becomes even more ridiculous even to itself, and before all.
Enduring Zanu-PF
And it’s interesting that the real issues on the matrix belong to Zanu-PF: sanctions, external radio stations, external interference, parallel government and the role of subversive NGOs.
Equally interesting is that to all these is no definite timeline, meaning Zanu-PF can politic over them into the next election, suitably using them to rehash the image of MDC-T as a puppet of the West.
And looking in the horizon, sanctions are not about to go away, which means Zanu-PF can continue to organise around them.
As for MDC-T, it can only hope that some madcap in Zanu-PF bashes its head hard enough for a photogenic image, around which it can draw sympathy.
This is why the phony stories of arrests and violence are coming back, in order to rehabilitate its image as the persecuted party.
Except the MDC does not see a mighty sea-change going though Zanu-PF which has been re-inventing its own image, away from the temptations of violence.
After all, there is a lot going on for it, as its long gestating programmes begin to bear fruit, as testified by the MDC-T itself, through the Finance Minister.
It is called third-party endorsement in marketing.
I wonder what name we give such endorsement when it comes from competition itself.
Another Saul-turned-Paul?
Icho!
nathaniel.manheru@zimpapers.com
Labels: NEOCOLONIALISM, SANCTIONS, STEN RYLANDER, ZDERA
Read more...
Sweden breaks ranks over EU sanctions
by Staff Reporter
18/08/2010 00:00:00
SWEDEN has become the first European Union country to call for the removal of sanctions imposed on Zimbabwe following disputed elections in 2002. The Nordic country’s outgoing ambassador to Zimbabwe said Wednesday he was “disappointed” to be leaving after a five-year posting with the travel and trade embargo targeting government officials and state-owned firms still effective.
“I am disappointed that I have to leave with most of the restrictive measures still in place,” Sten Rylander said in an interview with the News Day newspaper. On Tuesday, Rylander bade Vice President John Nkomo farewell before he leaves the country this week to return to Sweden. He retires from the government early next year.
Speaking to reporters after the meeting, the ambassador said: “I told the Vice President that I hope that something will happen sooner rather than later.
“A lot of things are happening in different capitals in Brussels, London and Washington because we can’t maintain the so-called sanctions for long.”
The European Union imposed the travel embargo on President Robert Mugabe and progressively more than a 100 other government officials following disputed elections in 2002. The EU also barred trade between its citizens and Zimbabwean state-owned enterprises, including banks.
Rylander revealed his country had tried to use its Swedish presidency of the European Union last year to move for the embargo to be lifted in response to the formation of a power sharing government between President Robert Mugabe and former opposition rivals Morgan Tsvangirai and Arthur Mutambara which ended a decade of political conflict.
Regretfully, the ambassador said, Tsvangirai’s MDC party briefly pulled out of the coalition in October 2009 – frustrating Sweden’s effort to normalise relations between Zimbabwe and the EU.
“ … we lost momentum because we could not have someone from the government to talk,” Rylander said.
Rylander said a recent visit to Brussels by a delegation from the Zimbabwe government to negotiate a normalisation of relations was a “credible process”, and hoped the coalition partners would move quickly to resolve disagreements.
“There is now a consolidated and united opinion on this (sanctions) within the Zimbabwean government and this will make progress easier. I am trying to encourage our side to be more forthcoming, and to think outside the box,” ambassador Rylander said.
Sounding an upbeat message about Zimbabwe’s turnaround, the ambassador said “the formation of the inclusive government and the work done up until now has been quite impressive in many areas”.
He added: “Zimbabwe has turned the corner and is now on a much more positive track. Progress is more clearly seen in the economic and social sectors. There is, no doubt, slow movement in some areas, which is regrettable.
“There is also no doubt, I think, that the blame for this slowness cannot be put on the MDC formations.”
He hoped the “huge diamond find” in the eastern parts of the country would “help Zimbabwe to come out of the cesspit”, adding: “Much remains to be done to arrange for orderly, transparent and accountable procedures for the production and sale of the diamonds.
“The proceeds of these sales must not continue to disappear over loose borders but be benefiting the national fiscus.”
Rylander’s comments on sanctions will be welcomed by Southern African leaders who at their two-day summit which ended in Namibia on Tuesday called for their removal.
SADC “reiterated its call on the international community to lift all forms of sanctions imposed on Zimbabwe in view of the negative effects they have on Zimbabwe and the SADC region in general”, the leaders said in a communiqué.
The leaders mandated the new SADC chairman Hifikepunye Pohamba of Namibia and South African President Jacob Zuma “to engage the international community on the issue of sanctions on Zimbabwe.”
Labels: JOHN NKOMO, SANCTIONS, STEN RYLANDER, SWEDEN, ZDERA
Read more...
Rylander: Just another Western diplomat
By: Tichaona Zindoga
Posted: Tuesday, June 1, 2010 12:44 pm
ON a fine day, he would be imbued in the ambience and aesthetics of Zimbabwean culture and speak glowingly about how "Zimbabwean works of art in their various forms dominate capitals throughout the world."
On another, typical of any European who by the Mighty Will of the Above happens to be in this part of the world — which Europeans christened the Dark Continent — he would be spreading a helping hand to people afflicted by hunger, disease and poverty.
Better still, on another, he would be preaching the sanctity of private property rights and other rights and freedoms accruing to the liberal individual, the typical obsession of that high sounding Eurocentric ideology.
But outgoing Swedish Ambassador to Zimbabwe, Sten Rylander, despite coming from a country that supported Zimbabwe’s liberation struggle and opposed apartheid in neighbouring South Africa could not help kow-tow to European Union gangersterism against Zimbabwe.
Rylander came to Zimbabwe with a long track record in the region and having lived 16 years in Southern Africa before coming to Zimbabwe.
He had been to Angola, Namibia, Botswana and Lesotho. A lot of good will had been expected of him.
He had the extra stripe of having supported liberation movements in the region, characteristic of his country where the Swedish International Development Co-operation Agency has been synonymous with progressive humanitarianism.
But having landed into a Zimbabwe that had in the six years to his date of appointment in 2006 been at the centre of a Western illegal regime change agenda spawned by Britain’s displeasure with land reform, Rylander was soon singing a different tune, or so it appeared.
At the occasion of his country’s National Day celebrations on June 6, he advocated "change" saying it was "a positive thing".
Coincidentally, "change" happened to be one of the watchwords of a Western-sponsored regime change outfit called the Movement for Democratic Change.
"Many people seem to be afraid of change for some reasons; or they try to resist change because the process is driven by change agents they cannot fully control," he said.
"But the message is almost always a positive thing. Remember Charles Darwin: ‘It is not the strongest species which survives, nor the most intelligent ones. Rather those who are most responsive to change’."
It did not take long for the ambassador to show which "change" he had in mind.
Apart from rebuffing reports linking him to a softening of the illegal EU stance against Zimbabwe (deriving from imposing sanctions against the Cotonou Agreement Article 96), he also moulded himself into a de facto opposition activist and spokesperson for Zimbabwe’s opposition outfits.
Rylander complained about the de-licensing of Western sponsored anti-Zanu-PF government papers, Daily News and Daily News on Sunday, which had wilfully defied the laws of the land to register.
In March 2007, he was one of the EU diplomats — along with American Christopher Dell — to throng the Harare Magistrates’ courts where MDC leaders were appearing for remand hearing for inciting violence in Highfield.
Part of a charade that could easily be mistaken for a diplomatic meeting of European ambassadors, he spent the greater part of the day at the court waiting to hear the fate of the opposition leaders.
Without any sense of irony, Rylander later wrote in a Western-sponsored weekly about his day at the court, elevating the Western-sponsored MDC’s struggle to unseat Zanu-PF to the South African anti-apartheid struggle.
The West generally supported apartheid in South Africa, with varying degrees of openness among countries.
Rylander was among Western ambassadors seen in the company of MDC activists on different dates, occasions and events undertaken by the so-called Broad Alliance involving the MDC, National Constitutional Assembly, Crisis Coalition, Women of Zimbabwe Arise, Zimbabwe National Students Union, Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights and Christian Alliance.
During his tenure, Rylander was consistently identified with such groups, which dramatically mushroomed in an era of Zimbabwe-EU stand-off and whose sole aim has been to unseat President Mugabe.
In October that year, Rylander even sank so low as to make unsubstantiated claims about Government-sponsored violence against the opposition.
During the Zimbabwe United Nations Development Assistance Fund review meeting in Nyanga, Rylander alleged that Government was sponsoring violence against the opposition but when he was challenged to make good of his claim, he only undertook to "bring concrete evidence", which he never did.
This prompted the Chief Secretary to the President and Cabinet Dr Misheck Sibanda to write to the United Nations Development Programme resident representative Dr Agostinho Zacarias registering Zimbabwe’s displeasure about Mr Rylander’s conduct.
"It was unfortunate that such an allegation was made at the ZUNDAF meeting which to me is a development forum not a political one," Dr Sibanda wrote.
"The ambassador could surely have addressed his concerns with the appropriate authorities, that is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. For him to throw his salvo at the Government of Zimbabwe in a development forum is not only discourteous but also undiplomatic.
"These are serious allegations he is making against a sovereign state. He therefore needs to substantiate them," said Dr Sibanda, in the letter dated November 7, 2007.
It later turned out that the diplomat got his information from a Western sponsored organisation, the Zimbabwe Human Rights Lawyers’ Association, who went on to produce a report with similar claims two weeks after.
Rylander’s baseless claims appeared in sync with the EU’s move to bring Zimbabwe to the agenda of that year’s EU-Africa Summit in Lisbon, Portugal, for alleged human rights abuses.
Earlier, during his summer holiday in July, Mr Rylander had flown home and held a number of interviews with the Swedish radio and television, attacking Zimbabwe for alleged human rights violations, State-sponsored violence and suppression of democratic space.
So the Swedish ambassador, who on the eve of his posting to Zimbabwe had noted the unfairness and predatory instincts of big powers against smaller countries like Zimbabwe, became responsive to British capitalist-inspired change.
Whether by design or consequence, Rylander turned out to be a trifle more than his predecessor, Kristina Svensson who was condemned, even by her own countrymen, for her biased reporting on the situation in Zimbabwe.
However, where Svensson could say Sweden was "motivated to support the future leaders of this country" in reference to the MDC, Rylander could afford to be more circumspect.
He could talk of the so-called individual rights and freedoms with the same regime change notion in mind, witness his celebration of anti-Zanu-PF "independent" media, masking his intentions by reference to his country’s history in media freedom.
Yet it all boiled to the same regime change agenda, which the two fruitlessly tried to precipitate on behalf of Britain.
Three years ago, one analyst reminded Rylander that Zimbabwe did not free itself — even with some Swedish help — to be subjected to Swedish neo-liberal lordship and that Sweden should not fight Britain’s war against Zimbabwe.
"We hate white paternalism," the analyst wrote, "and we are not going to pay for Swedish goodwill by our sovereignty.
"If Rylander and his country do not understand the nature and cause of the present standoff between us and the British, maybe let Sweden never understand it at all. What difference would it make anyway?"
Rylander just never understood, nor cared.
Labels: AMBASSADOR, NEOCOLONIALISM, STEN RYLANDER
Read more...
Zim, EU begin formal talks
Ralph Mutema
Wed, 22 Jul 2009 03:52:00 +0000
ZIMBABWE will begin formal talks with the European Union this week, almost a decade after the block imposed illegal sanctions against Zimbabwe following a bilateral dispute between Zimbabwe and Britain. Critics say the dialogue might open doors for more financial support for Zimbabwe'a inclusive Government.
Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai last month took an exploratory visit to Europe to re-engage with the bloc. Zimbabwe and the EU had their first meeting in Brussels after almost seven years.
Swedish Ambassador to Zimbabwe, Sten Rylander whose country holds the rotating EU presidency said he held fruitful preparatory meetings with the Zimbabwean authorities to lay the groundwork for the talks.
“Formal meetings might start before the end of the week,” he said this week.
“We are talking… its not that we are at a standstill.”
An EU troika — comprising Sweden, the EU representative to Zimbabwe Xavier Marchal and Spanish Ambassador Ms Pilar Fuertes — was set to meet with Zimbabwe’s technical team made up of the permanent secretaries of five ministries.
The Zimbabwean technical committee is chaired by Foreign Affairs Secretary Ambassador Joey Bimha.
The talks are to be held in the context of Article 8 of the Cotonou Partnership Agreement, which provides the parameters for engagement between the EU and the African, Caribbean and Pacific ( ACP) bloc.
The ACP bloc is expected to stand by Zimbabwe in the discussions as it has done since the EU prematurely invoked Article 96 of the Cotonou Agreement in 2002 to slap sanctions on Harare ahead of that year's presidential elections.
A 2007 study on the implementation of Article 96 of the Cotonou Agreement by the EU itself admitted that Europe had slapped the sanctions in a bid to manipulate the outcome of the 2002 Presidential elections and to punish Harare for embarking on the revolutionary land reform programme.
Zimbabwe says it needs at leads US$8 billion in the next three years to finance the reconstruction of the country after almost a decade of economic decline.
Hopes of a turnaround were raised in February when President Mugabe formed an inclusive Government with his arch rival, PM Tsvangirai after intense political infighting.
Six months after its installation, the inclusive Government has halted hyper inflation that peaked at a quadrillion per cent and put the economy on a recovery path.
Labels: EU, MORGAN TSVANGIRAI, STEN RYLANDER, ZIMBABWE
Read more...
