The Flip Side with Kuthula Matshazi
After the March 11 violence and arrest of opposition members of the Movement for Democratic Change, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, speaking during question period in Britain’s House of Commons, said that African countries and particularly those around Zimbabwe were the right people to solve the Zimbabwean situation. He said that these leaders were obligated to do so if they were to demonstrate their commitment to democratic principles.
Over these past two weeks African leaders both around Zimbabwe and the respective chairmen of the African Union and African Commission John Kufuor and Alpha Oumar Konaré have expressed concern over the situation obtaining in Zimbabwe. The common message across Africa has been a call to respect democratic principles and encourage the government and opposition to engage each other in finding a solution to the problems that affect us. Nearly all the leaders have been unequivocal on the need for Zimbabweans to solve their own problems. I am not suggesting that African leaders were merely reacting to Blair’s challenge, but they were compelled by a similar belief in democratic principles.
The Southern African Development Community leaders who met in Dar es Salaam yesterday to discuss the Zimbabwean situation have now underlined this message. We are being told for the umpteenth time of the need to solve our own problems and yet, some among us, still believe that they will change this reality.
Their belief is based on past experience during the liberation war when our case was a matter of the international community. Now, it is not a matter of the international community but an internal one. The main opposition party, the MDC is refusing to recognise the current government and has attracted the support of Western countries to assist it effect a regime change (Blair told us that he was working with the MDC to do so) via the application of economic sanctions. If there is any reason to make the Zimbabwean case international, then it is the Zimbabwe people who must complain to the international community of the aggression being committed by the Western countries in disregard of international law and norms of diplomacy.
The MDC should accept the reality that the current government is democratically elected as SADC, who were observers in the last election, have reiterated that fact in their communiqué in Dar es Salaam. We would assume that their word is reliable judging by the faith both the opposition and the Western countries had in these leaders before the emergency summit, in terms of their ability to “solve” the Zimbabwean situation. Now that these leaders have spoken and like the last time United States President George Bush went to Africa, they have chosen South African President Thabo Mbeki as the mediator. Note that he will only mediate, but not SOLVE our problems.
Already, MDC secretary general of the Morgan Tsvangirai faction appeared on British Broadcasting Corporation on Thursday expressing doubts in President Mbeki’s upcoming task. He said that MDC would not put its eggs in one basket. Sure, that is usually normal not to have all your eggs in one basket but what Biti did not do was to indicate whether the MDC had faith in President Mbeki in the first place. In fact, his utterance implied that the MDC does not because it apparently, had all its eggs in one basket and then after hearing of President Mbeki’s appointment as mediator, it quickly took them out to different baskets.
The problem with such an approach is that we do not know what significant number of eggs the MDC left or will put in President Mbeki’s basket. It could be many or few. But one might be tempted to think that it would be few judging by MDC’s past relations with President Mbeki and the manner the opposition party is quickly indicating its diversification strategy. The MDC will then find it difficult to access mediation, which it has cried for all along. The alternative for MDC is to go it alone to fight its struggles or team up with the West. Both strategies have pitfalls however. The West has not only been insulated by the Zimbabwean people but by SADC as well. In Zimbabwe, the majority of people have not identified with MDC tactics as demonstrated by straight loses in elections and unsuccessful mass action. Investing in President Mbeki – although his role will also be limited – would help give MDC another avenue through which it could assist push its agenda. Needless to mention that it should be a pro-Zimbabwe agenda.
A significant resolution of the SADC leaders is a call on Britain to honour its obligations made at the 1979 Lancaster House Conference where they committed themselves to assist in the land reform. Also, the SADC leaders called on the Western countries to lift the economic sanctions against Zimbabwe. It is interesting to notice that even the SADC leaders realise that what the Western countries applied on Zimbabwe were not mere individual sanctions but economic sanctions.
More importantly, the SADC leaders have drawn bold lines that cut through the basis of MDC grievances. They have made it clear that they appreciated President Mugabe’s briefing on the situation in Zimbabwe and also expressed solidarity with his government. This is a big blow for the West and the MDC who had anchored their strategy on these factors and the hope that SADC leaders would turn against President Mugabe. Also, by pronouncing such bold declarations, the SADC leaders have undercut the West in its attempt to have Zimbabwe discussed at the United Nations Security Council. The West cannot have any basis for suggesting that the Zimbabwe situation threatens regional stability when the very neighbours are comfortable with Zimbabwe and have expressed their solidarity.
The challenge for the MDC now continues to be that of being a political party informed by national interests and Pan Africanism as opposed to Western interests. By identifying with the West, even if it were to have all the good intentions, people would reject it. They would ask what is it that the Western countries expect in return for investing in MDC? Surely, they cannot be throwing away money into a bottomless pit when they have pressing social issues in their respective countries. And for as long as African leaders and indeed Zimbabweans view the opposition party as Western puppets, it would find it difficult to garner support. The electorate would not vote for a party with interest opposite to theirs.
The greatest tragedy coming out of this emergency summit that has befallen the MDC is that its neighbours have failed to identify with some of its key demands such as the illegitimacy of the government and questioning the manner government is handling the political situation in the country. Like in many other places, time is precious in politics and MDC has to start doing the right things. The first could be replacing Morgan Tsvangirai with a capable patriotic and Pan Africanist leader.
10 comments:
The outcome of the SADC meeting is exactly as I expected. This puts paid to some of the hype about President Mugabe being hated by SADC leaders. That the leaders are concerned about the goings on in Zimbabwe is clear and they should be. However, to interpret it to mean that the leaders would then call for the elected Government should to step aside and an unelected individual (whose western sponsored abitions are well known to those who care to know) takes over is the height of idiosyncracy and is disrespectful of the leaders. They have re-affirmed that Zimbabweans have a right to choose their leaders and that must be respected by all, including those in the opposition. We need a strong and loyal opposition to ensure democracy in Zimbabwe. We do not need an opposition that is pushing the agenda of another nation, particularly the former colonial power. Zimbabwe will never be a colony again. This reminds me of a seminar in Harare just before the 2002 elections. One progressive economics lecturer observed that the outcome of the 2002 elections, whichever way it went would not on its own restore economic growth to Zimbabwe. He suggested that the quality of the opposition would always be crucial for the restoration of social and economic progress! He had foresight. Please MDC, go back to the drawing board. You should be courting us Zimbabweans with good alternative programmes. Your current agenda means that us right thinking Zimbabweans will not vote for you unless you change quickly. 2008 is round the corner and already you are repeating the boycott threats that have made you a discredited lot.
Writing as 'The Conservative'
An excerpt of the Catholic Bishops of Zimbabwe's Easter statement :
The Roots of the Crisis
"The present crisis in our Country has its roots deep in colonial society. Despite the rhetoric of a glorious socialist revolution brought about by the armed struggle, the colonial structures and institutions of pre-independent Zimbabwe continue to persist in our society. None of the unjust and oppressive security laws of the Rhodesian State have been repealed; in fact, they have been reinforced by even more repressive legislation, the Public Order and Security Act and the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act, in particular. It almost appears as though someone sat down with the Declaration of Human Rights and deliberately scrubbed out each in turn.
Why was this done? Because soon after Independence, the power and wealth of the tiny white Rhodesian elite was appropriated by an equally exclusive black elite, some of whom have governed the country for the past 27 years through political patronage. Black Zimbabweans today fight for the same basic rights they fought for during the liberation struggle. It is the same conflict between those who possess power and wealth in abundance, and those who do not; between those who are determined to maintain their privileges of power and wealth at any cost, even at the cost of bloodshed, and those who demand their democratic rights and a share in the fruits of independence; between those who continue to benefit from the present system of inequality and injustice, because it favours them and enables them to maintain an exceptionally high standard of living, and those who go to bed hungry at night and wake up in the morning to another day without work and without income; between those who only know the language of violence and intimidation, and those who feel they have nothing more to lose because their Constitutional rights have been abrogated and their votes rigged. Many people in Zimbabwe are angry, and their anger is now erupting into open revolt in one township after another.
The confrontation in our Country has now reached a flashpoint. As the suffering population becomes more insistent, generating more and more pressure through boycotts, strikes, demonstrations and uprisings, the State responds with ever harsher oppression through arrests, detentions, banning orders, beatings and torture. In our judgement, the situation is extremely volatile. In order to avoid further bloodshed and avert a mass uprising the nation needs a new people-driven Constitution that will guide a democratic leadership chosen in free and fair elections that will offer a chance for economic recovery under genuinely new policies."
I tend to endorse the Catholic chruches position as they were the most vocal and active religious organization opposed to white minority rule in Rhodesia.In the early eighties they were active in speaking out against the atrocities committed by the 5th brigade incursions into Matabeleland.
I hope our Catholic educated head of state heeds their words.....
The Conservative,
I accept that the Catholics played a key role during our independence, but that does not automatically mean that they will also play a key role in the post independence struggle. For instance, some Western countries were helpful in our independence and yet now they are the ones who are siding with Britain and the United States in thwarting our efforts for post independence struggle for economic justice.
Another issue that demonstrates the misalignment of the Catholic churches’ position and the mainstream political view is that they say there were no free and fair elections. In other words, they are singing the same Western song, which SADC discredited on Friday, when they CLEARLY spelt out that the elections in Zimbabwe were free and fair.
One interesting point you make is that "our Catholic educated head of state heeds their words". I could equally urge you to take heed of the words of Mugabe merely because you were educated under his education system, But you realise that this is not a compelling reason why someone should heed someone else's words?
'The Conservative'
Kuthula , one would think that you would closely examine the message of the Catholic bishops.You nit-pick the contentious issue of "free and fair elections" inorder to further your agenda of supporting the status quo that currently persists in Zimbabwe. If SADC declares that the last election was free and fair , then using your logic this is a plausible observation because the decision is in favour of the victor (which in this case was Zanu-pf).Hypotheically speaking , if the same SADC were to issue a statement which would be contra to the interests of the ruling party....you would argue that SDAC was western influenced ! A case in point is the UN report prepared by Ann Tjibukwa on Operation Murambtsvina , the woman was discredited as a Blair puppet before the ink had even dried on her report ! She was called a liar and other unfavourable names , despite being sent by Kofi Annan and being of African origin herself.Her numbers were rubbished , yet empirical evidence by none governmental agencies such as civic and church groups supported the assertion that close to 700 000 were left homeless.
As far as education goes ,Mugabe did not create an educational system in Zimbabwe ,what he did was to improve the delivery of an educational system inherited from the British.Why do you think that I should heed the words of a senile 83 old tin-pot dictator , why, because you idolize him ?
What are your comments about the Catholic churches assertion that many of the oppressive laws from Rhodesia were not repealed and are still used to repress the citizenry ? What of the still existing social inequalities between the rich ruling elite and the general populace ? Has the prosperity gap between wealthy and poor not increased in the last decade ? Is it not a well known secret that many within the Zanu-pf hierarchy are fabulously wealthy individuals of whom some have sent their kids to be educated abroad ?
Kuthula , make an attempt to be balanced in your analysis.In the three years that I have followed your political writings , you have been explicit in your condemnation and disdain for the opposition in Zimbabwe.Yet on the other hand , with regard to the state of Zimbabwe behaving like a thug upon the citizens of Zimbabwe your silence has been deafening.Mugabes' abuses of human rights is something that you conveniently side-step and act like it is a fiction......Are you not from Matabeleland ? Did you not give me personal accounts of how some of your loved ones perished under the 5th Brigade atrocities in the 80's ?If you are the same Kuthula you will definitely remember that. And quite recently......were you not advocating the formation of a political movement aptly named P.U.M.A part of whose agenda was to secede Matabelelands resource control from Harare.If you memory is not blurred you will recall that the member spearheading the group raised the very contentious issue of the Ghukurahund atrocities....
Kuthula , you need to be clear where your heart lies in these heavy matters.Because at one time you appear to be a Zanu-pf apologist , then at another time your position is absolutely unclear.
But let me conclude by saying that if indeed you support the current regime , that is your perogative and choice as an individual , nobody will beat you up , or arrest and torture you for supporting Zanu-pf.
No, I did not nit-pick to “further my agenda of supporting the status quo”, rather I nit-picked on issues that I thought needed addressing. But I am happy to address those issues that you think I “evaded”.
I wonder why you think if SADC said the elections were not free and fair I would say the West influences them. You only give a hypothesis that you think furthers your agenda to label me. Why would you not think, for instance, that if SADC said the elections were not fair, then I would go with them? After all, they are the ones who do the observing and not government or I. What would be my basis for arguing against SADC? Or hypothetically speaking, if there was some inconsistencies in the report then of course I would argue my points and if it warrants me opposing the SADC findings, then I would do so without any reservations.
I do not know what your argument on Tabaijuka has got to do with me. I never queried the figures neither did I endorse them, (just like all figures, I treated them with caution) but was only worried about her denial that Zimbabwe is under economic sanctions, her decision to go beyond her mandate on the issue of referring Zimbabwe to the International Criminal Court for crimes against humanity. I am not saying if there were grounds to do so, it should not have been done, but that suddenly out of nowhere, she went beyond her mandate. I wonder why you make it a scandal for people to contest the numbers, after all there was no physical counting Conservative. These were estimates and for all we know they could be right or wrong and therefore subject to contest.
No, I do not think you should heed the words of Mugabe, but take the context within which I argued the issue of taking “heed of words”. You simplistically argued that if Mugabe went to Catholic schools then he should take heed of their words. And then I too, simplistically said that since you went to schools funded by the government of Zimbabwe, then you should take heed of his words. I realise you strongly resent this comparison. Could it not have occurred to you that your comparison could also have been annoying intellectually?
You suggest that the Zimbabwe govt. did nothing for education. Don’t you think that I could also ask you the same question about the Catholics: What did they do to a British educational system to make their words worth heeding? But still, in the issue of the govt doing anything for education, I think that you let your emotions have the better of you. The govt. did a lot for you. One good thing they made was to make education accessible to everyone and Zimbabwe has one of the highest literacy rates. Certainly it was not the Catholics or Smith. Am I sounding like a ZPF apologist? Is this false information? Or maybe just plain political incorrectness to praise what the government of Zimbabwe achieved?
It is simple truth that some (as opposed to many) of the laws that were from Rhodesia were not done away with. Using “many” please outline those laws. Did you expect a wholesale change of laws? Was that feasible? Of course inequalities exist. If you read my posting Inequality widens as CEOs rake in millions you will realise that I even give Gini Coefficient figures. It’s a big problem of access to resources, income and opportunities. But I ask you, where in the world has that gap not increased. While not condoning it, I want to discourage you from making it sound like it’s a deep secret that only happens in Zimbabwe under very secretive conditions. I would like to hear from you, so interestingly a conservative, how you could close that gap. In fact, it is the economic structure coined by the conservatives that is fuelling these scourges.
Yes, I have been critical of the opposition more because I was of the opinion that it was a supposed democratic movement and therefore expected more from them, but alas, as we have all seen we were utterly disappointed. Hear this…they actually called for sanctions against Zimbabwe. And hear this again…they worked with foreigners to effect a regime change in Zimbabwe. No person in their right mind would be happy about that, hence my explicit condemnation. As regards to my perceived silence, I do not know what you mean. Give an instance. I am of the opinion that I am the only Zimbabwe online communication channel that had an ANTI-VIOLENCE message. Obviously you chose not to see it for your own good reasons.
I am glad you know that I acknowledge the Matabeleland atrocities and have even spoken out about them, not only to you but also in many of my articles that I wrote. But now that you want to put across a point you conveniently forget. But your confession that I talk about them simply undercuts your argument.
I am glad that you also know that I have spoken passionately about the right of PUMA to form a party. I have not changed and will defend them and everyone else who wants to form a loyal Zimbabwean party. The only wrong thing about PUMA is that you say they want to secede. I do not know where you get that idea from when we both saw their constitution and there was no mention of secession. Are you using secession only to make sure that you undercut their democratic right to fight for federalism?
I am very clear about where my heart lies: my heart lies in a united (unity in diversity), prosperous Zimbabwe and not that driven by foreign interests. Also, my heart lies in facts. I cannot solely use emotions to discuss national issues. Unfortunately, many times you might see me as a ZPF apologist, if I happen to be inclined with them in any policy issue, especially RADICAL LAND REFORM, ANTI-IMPERIALISM and PAN AFRICANISM. I will not regret getting into bed with anyone who can pursue these issues be it Mugabe or Tsvangirai. I hope this time, for the umpteenth time I am clear.
I am glad that noone will demonise me, insult me, and issue veiled threats and blackmails for the views that I hold. On the contrary I hope they engage me to discuss issues based on facts.
I hope I answered all the issues you raise. If I “evaded” anything please feel free to highlight those points.
testing
‘The Conservative’
Kuthula do not let my pen-name cause you sleepless nights , it’s simply a pseudonym , can we just leave it at that ? It seems I touched a raw nerve when I highlighted Operation Murambatsvina and Ann Tjibukwa’s report , why do you rush to the conclusion that it had anything to do with you (Kuthula) ? If you noticed I was using it as a case in point to illustrate what I believe to be the denial or adversity to criticism that the Zimbabwean government displayed and is renowned for doing.
Your highlighting corporate greed and quoting Gini co-efficiencies is just a smokescreen and an attempt to mask and undermine the argument against the largesse of the so-called ‘liberators’ of Zimbabwe (read the ruling elite).You could have done a better job…..but for now I’ll not labour the point.
You wrote : “The govt. did a lot for you. One good thing they made was to make education accessible to everyone and Zimbabwe has one of the highest literacy rates.” You make it sound like before the govt of Zimbabwe came into being there was no educational system in Zimbabwe , forgetting that many actually acquired their education during Rhodesia. Are you insinuating that were it not for the formation of a Zimbabwean govt I would not have acquired a seconday school education ? Here I think your argument turns against itself. Does Zimbabwe still have one of the highest literacy rates , in where - the world , ? As you assume yourself to be someone based on facts , how did you come up with this groundbreaking revelation based on what criteria and how recent is this information ? If Zimbabwe’s educational system is still one of the best then , please tell me why the head of states’ eldest child is enrolled in a British school in England ? So much for an educational system with the ‘one of the highest literacy’ rates………
You wrote : “I am of the opinion that I am the only Zimbabwe online communication channel that had an ANTI-VIOLENCE message. Obviously you chose not to see it for your own good reasons.” I find this statement laced with hypocrisy and mistruth. Please forgive me if I missed one of your writings , but did you clearly and unequivocally condemn the shooting death of political activist Gift Mtandara by the ZRP , and the beatings of women old enough to be our own mothers’ such as Sekai Holland and Grace Kwinje by the same state agents ? If indeed I missed this , then you have my unreserved apology. Do you recall that in one conversation you said that you did not care if Morgan Tsvangirai died from his injuries (in the aftermath of his beating)…..Am I missing something here from someone who espouses ANTI-VIOLENCE ?
The message of Anti-violence is a poignant issue, and I’m quite delighted that you brought up such an important topic as we all could benefit from it – that is those who do not condone violence of any shape or form. Let me end by quoting a renowned non-violence advocate who twisted the tail of the British lion , ….:
“I am not a visionary. I claim to be a practical idealist. The religion of nonviolence is not meant merely for the rishis and saints. It is meant for the common people as well. Nonviolence is the law of our species as violence is the law of the brute. The spirit lies dormant in the brute and he knows no law but that of physical might. The dignity of man requires obedience to a higher law-to the strength of the spirit....The rishis who discovered the law of nonviolence in the midst of violence were greater geniuses than Newton. They were themselves known the use of arms, they realized their uselessness, and taught a weary world that its salvation lay not through violence but through nonviolence.” M.K Ghandi
In fact, you touch many raw nerves when you discuss these issues. I do not know how you differentiate their importance. But I do not see why people should not deny things that they have problems with. What is wrong with denial? Should the government, for instance have said YES, YES, YES just because its Tabaijuka or UN? Its not bad per se to be known for denial, especially when there are grounds to do so. And in all fairness you know quite well that if the government had not denied a lot of these things they would have been smeared by lies and slander.
I am surprised that you are attacking me for raising the Gini Coefficient and indeed highlighting a clearer picture of the inequalities. What was I supposed to do? If I had ignored the issue you would have criticised me/accused me of burying my head in the sand. Now I highlight it, even with statistics and then you dismiss me. Contrary to your belief, there is no way the current inequalities can be “masked” unless you are disregarding stats. But if you do, you would be running away from your weapon with which you attack the govt. with on Murambatsvina. In fact, in criticising govt. you deflect the sins of business in aggravating inequalities. (see last point about economic violence).
No I do not suggest that there was no education before Zimbabwe, but that you were, for over 10 years enjoying the benefits of Zimbabwean education, unless of course you refused subsidised fees and requested to pay the full amount. I am not insinuating anything but saying you got a Zimbabwe education. Its unfortunate that Rhodesia disintegrated, but if it had persisted, you would have continued to enjoy their education. But alas, the racist government was banished and I guess unfortunately Zimbabwe had to provide the education…and unfortunately again it happened that you started school.
I don’t know whether Zimbabwe has the best education. You are saying it and then attributing it to me. I never said that. Having the best education and having a high literacy rate are two variables. I do not know how you merge them into one. Remember that it was lies that Mugabe’s child is enrolled in UK.
I did not condemn the beatings and the arrests of these people because of the circumstances under which they happened – riotous situation. The best I could say is that they do not engage in unnecessary confrontation with the State and the State should be measured in their response. But basically I do not condone violence from both sides. But if Tsvangirai will go to any lengths to cause violence then he should get what he deserves!!!
If I am guilty of turning a blind eye to this physical violence, then you are guilty of turning both eyes away from the assault on Zimbabwe by imperialist forces as well as the economic violence against the people of Zimbabwe actively promoted by the opposition and you in particular. Do you support economic sanctions? Answer this question.
'The Conservative'
For the sake of progress , I'm going to narrow down this wide-ranging debate to a few core issues :
You wrote "I did not condemn the beatings and the arrests of these people because of the circumstances under which they happened – riotous situation. The best I could say is that they do not engage in unnecessary confrontation with the State and the State should be measured in their response. But basically I do not condone violence from both sides. But if Tsvangirai will go to any lengths to cause violence then he should get what he deserves!!!"
From the above statement you clearly have a bias in favour of the state.When you say that the MDC were engaging in "riotous behaviour" , how exactly do you define this behaviour and based on whose accounts ? They should not engage in "unnecssary confrontation with the state" , but Kuthula.....is politics not about confrontation of opinion and views ? By your admission you are effectively saying that opposition parties should not engage in activities to galvanize and solicit public support from citizens lest they incur the wrath of the state.......This underlines the obstacles that the MDC faces in its campaign.
Again you danced around the question of the activist who was shot to death , you refuse to condemn the act.Your last sentence regarding Tsvangirai is mean-spirited and unbecoming of somebody who purports to be a non-violence advocate , and confirms my earlier assertion that you have a deep seated pathological hatred of Morgan Tsvangirai.
I furnished you with Ghandi's statement on nonviolence inorder to set the tone for a discussion of non-violent conflict resolution , but sadly this was wasted on you.......
Kuthula , I put it to you do not promote or espouse non-violnce , in fact I think you are not very familiar with the concept as indicated by your response.
Your question regarding sanctions , I think you should dedicate a thread for this because we are discussing too many issue on this thread.
On an aside , why has this debate turned into a 2 horse race , would we not benefit from the opinions of other contributors ?
In this case, yes you can say that I have a bias in favour of the state. The MDC went on to beat four policeman and passers by. MDC did not dispute it. You are doing it now on their behalf. Also, the MDC went ahead to have a gathering despite their ban. Whether the ban was legal or not is an issue of the courts to decide. You read me as saying, “opposition parties should not engage in activities to galvanize and solicit public support from citizens lest they incur the wrath of the state”, but that is not what I am saying or said. That’s not debating in good faith.
No. Politics is not about confrontation, but engagement and working together to find solutions. I do not know why you prefer to make confrontation the threshold or the basis of politics. Maybe it demonstrates your disposition in this regard. Sure, the opposition has obstacles, both in terms of law and one that emanate from themselves. The legal one is easy: obey it and then challenge it in the courts.
Yes, but I strongly oppose Tsvangirai for the economic violence that he is inflicting on Zimbabweans and for his constant selling out.
Yes, but we all can quote different people from everywhere but that does not mean they are applicable generously. Situations are different.
I would be happy if you could help me understand what peace is. All these issues are topics on their own just as sanctions. So why not include even one sentence to tell us whether you support or oppose sanctions that have brought unprecedented suffering to the people of Zimbabwe. Do you support economic sanctions? If a thread is to develop, it will develop from your response.
I am not quite sure why it’s only the two of us. Maybe its because this story has been archived and people lost track of the debate. The bottom line is that I’m not really sure.
Post a Comment