Africa must help Zimbabwe stave off neo-colonialists

Black Lion · (#1 (**permalink**))

Africa must help Zimbabwe stave off neo-colonialists
Posted: Tuesday, December 25, 2007

Daily Trust (Abuja)
COLUMN
December 16, 2007

FOR seven years now, the British government has sustained a campaign against President Mugabe of Zimbabwe.

It describes his country as corrupt and non-democratic. It considers him a brutal dictator who must be voted out of power. In its estimation, he is too old; Zimbabweans deserve a democratic government, human rights, regular meals and a stable currency.

This is also the mindset of the British media on the matter. You cannot surpass the BBC or the Economist in this propaganda.

These foot soldiers of neo-imperial Britain have trekked miles to sell their campaign of calumny against (Cde) Mugabe. For example, the Economist of March 15, 2007 raised this alarm for the umpteenth time: "Once the bread-basket of southern Africa and one of the continent's wealthiest countries, Zimbabwe is now a basket-case and suffers a severe shortage of food.

"It is also the world's fastest-shrinking peacetime economy, with unemployment now standing at 80 percent. Its inflation rate is the world's highest: currently 1 730 percent, although the IMF thinks that figure could rise to over 4 000 percent by year's end.

"From infant mortality to life below the poverty line, the country's unhappiest trendlines run remorselessly upwards. To stifle dissent and quash opposition, Zimbabwe has been turned into a police state where elections are routinely rigged."

Two weeks later, on the 29 March, the tireless Economist said: "Zimbabwe's despotic leader, a man of puzzlingly different identities, is a past master at holding on." Certainly, when it comes to their interest, even the "civilised" will abandon etiquettes and embrace insults.

In its war against (Cde) Mugabe, Britain has succeeded in conscripting other European states.

Jose Barroso, the European Commission President, was reported by the BBC as telling representatives of over 80 EU and African countries that "Africa and Europe should be able to discuss human rights and governance in a true spirit of partnership... Frankly, we hope that those who fought for independence and freedom in their countries now can also accept this freedom for their own citizens."

Birds of the same feather, you will say. The occasion was a joint meeting to reinvent African dependence on Europe, now that China is stealing the show.

Yes. Let us speak frankly, Mr Barroso. What good has Europe in its suitcase that it did not offer for over 200 years now? Africans know the answer very well: nothing, but further exploitation.

And this is the crux of the matter when it comes to Zimbabwe. It is not Zimbabwe. It is not (Cde) Mugabe either. It is a long standing phenomenon of exploitation. Simple.

(Cde) Mugabe has understood this long ago. With seven degrees, he is not unlettered even by British standards.

He has read the history of his country since when Cecil Rhodes stepped his foot on his land.

Even the BBC could not hide telling us the fraud and pittance at which the British miner acquired the land from its ruler, Lobengula.

In a recent report, it said Cecil "obtained exclusive mining rights from the Ndebele king, Lobengula, in return for £100 a month, 1 000 rifles, 10,000 rounds of ammunition, and a riverboat."

Rhodes later claimed, in a typical colonial manner, that the deal included land. More settlers poured in the 1890s.

The Crown could not be left behind. It joined the loot by appropriating the entire land of Southern Rhodesia in 1918.

So (Cde) Mugabe was right when he demanded that land compensation due to white farmers should be paid by the British government. It caused the problem in the first instance, he rightly insists. It granted the settlers self government in 1923.

This was followed by a wild grab following the Land Apportionment Act of 1930, with Africans forcefully ejected out of the land they lived on for centuries. It is this robbery that is the basis of the crisis in Zimbabwe, not democracy or human rights.

The result of that grab is described in Wikepedia: "Zimbabwean whites, although making up less than 1 percent of the population, owned more than 70 percent of the arable land, including most of the best land.

However, in many cases this land was more fertile because it was titled, resulting in incentives for commercial farmers to create reservoirs, irrigate, and otherwise tend the soil.

Communal lands, with no property rights, were characterised by slash and burn agriculture, resulting in a tragedy of the commons."

This is the epitome of greed that is characteristic of British colonial practice. Yet, in spite of the robbery, it has the temerity to call Zimbabwe corrupt. Robbery is the worst form of corruption.

Therefore, Zimbabwe is not the problem as Germany's Markel put it. It is Britain.

The sins it committed in Africa will continue to haunt it. The problem in Zimbabwe is not (Cde) Mugabe. It is the injustice in land distribution which the British government is fighting hard to perpetuate in the manner poverty is perpetuated among South African black majority.

(Cde) Mugabe has refused to allow Zimbabwe to be like today's South Africa.

The British government reneged on its promise under the Lancaster Agreement of 1979. Out of the pledge of £630 million, Britain actually paid only £17 million, using cronyism as an excuse.

Lancaster, hinged on "willing seller, willing buyer principle" was one of those cleverly contrived colonial agreements which were impregnated with failure in the interest of the masters. So what Britain gave with right hand, it took away with the left.

Knowing that Zimbabwe would not have the funds to settle white farmers, it abandoned the agreement in middle of the river. Twelve years after Lancaster, less than half of the 160 000 families were settled. "Mr. Robert," it told (Cde) Mugabe, "you are on your own." The line was drawn, said the old Mr. Robert.

And (Cde) Mugabe proved a true son of Africa. I am proud of him. Ten years after Lancaster, he passed a new legislation, the Land Acquisition Act of 1992, in which he removed the "willing seller willing buyer" clause of fraud and gave government the power to acquire land compulsorily. Mu je zuwa.

The white farmers cried foul.

Wait, you will cry tears, (Cde) Mugabe silently replied. Five years later he published 1,471 farmlands that were penciled down for compulsory "purchase." The following year, (Cde) Mugabe published "the Land Reform and Resettlement Programme Phase II, which envisaged the compulsory purchase over five years of 50 000 km' from the 112 000 km' owned by commercial farmers (both black and white), public corporations, churches, non-governmental organisations and multi-national companies."

As usual donors made pledges at a conference on the programme in Harare, which, as usual, they did not redeem.

Now (Cde) Mugabe went for his last option: compulsory acquisition of land without compensation. However, a gang, composed of academics, unionists, white farmers and the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), defeated a constitutional reform in the parliament that would have given him that mandate in 2000. I like the drama that followed.

The review in Wikipedia continued: "A few days later, the pro-Mugabe War Veterans Association organised like-minded people to march on white-owned farmlands, initially with drums, song and dance . . . A total of 110 000 km' of land was seized."

Black Lion · (#2 (**permalink**))

The British government should endure its own pill. As the white settlers gladly acquired the fertile land of Zimbabwe yesterday, the blacks have gladly retrieved it today. This is not a racial war, I must quickly add. It is simply balancing the equation of justice. (Cde) Mugabe cannot spend ten years in prison and fight another decade of guerilla war for nothing. He fought it to recapture the lands of Zimbabwe from the whites. He refused to be an indolent puppet.

Understandably, we should not blame Britain either for its support to white farmers. Blood, they say, is thicker than water. It is protecting the interest of its race and Crown – something it is good at.

The propaganda will therefore continue. In addition, some Africans, claiming to be the opposition, have been recruited as mercenaries. Britain is giving them all the support it can afford to defeat (Cde) Mugabe such that democracy will return and Zimbabwean economy will boom once more in the hands of its white farmers and multinationals. What a dream!

But Africa is never short of betrayers. They were there during the slave trade.

They are here today, as Abubakar Ladan said: "A cikinmu akwai wasu 'yan iska/ Burinsu a karkasa Africa/ Su sayar da kasa eka-eka/ Su barmu a rabe cikin bukka/ Abadan ba a haka Afrika.(Among us there are rascals, whose interest is to divide Africa, to sell its land acre by acre, leaving us hiding in huts/ it will never be done (again) in Africa)."

(Cde) Mugabe will not budge either. He understands that there is an organic link between him and the African soil.

"Nothing frightens me," he told the Economist, "I make a stand and stand on principle here where I was born, here where I grew up, here where I fought and here where I shall die."

Africa understands the Zimbabwean game very well. That is why it sees (Cde) Mugabe as a hero. When the European Union barred (Cde) Mugabe from attending the "Lisbon café", other African leaders said to hell with the talks.

The Europeans acquiesced, though British Prime Minister failed to turn up. Oho dai.

At the 10th anniversary of South African independence in 2004, (Cde) Mugabe received "a deafening applause," according to the Economist. Britain and its allies could not hide their surprise that, despite the elaborate propaganda, the guy is the most popular leader in Africa.

The magazine reported Gareth Evans, former Australian foreign minister as saying: "I cannot figure out why he is being applauded when he has destroyed his country."

It is a matter of choice, Mr. Gareth. Possession is better than skill, as Abubakar Ladan said: Ai samu ya fi iyawa, shi/ Kwado bai mallaki do dukushi/ A ruwa aka sanshi makomarshi/ Nan ne zai samu abincin shi/ Yayi wasanni da nishadinshi.

It seems I have dwelled so much on the history and politics of modern Rhodesia. We are undoubtedly unhappy that fellow Africans are living in hardship there, as a result of British machinations.

Showing solidarity with (Cde) Mugabe is good, but Africa must do better. Zimbabweans deserve more. Our policy must not be restricted to politics. It must include economics too.

Africa can greatly help the situation by coming to the aid of Zimbabwe. (Cde) Mugabe has fought gallantly all his life. Despite the poor economy, he insists on educating his people. The literacy level in Zimbabwe is the highest in Africa: 85%! It is time we come to his aid and we have the resources to do so. If we must pay any compensation, it must not be more than the cost of the "1 000 rifles, 10 000 rounds of ammunition, and a riverboat" with which Mr. Rhodes bought the land of Zimbabwe in the 1880s. In fact, we must not pay any compensation. The lease has expired. Or we can argue that Lebengula agreed to the transaction under duress. Shi ke nan.

Instead, let us focus on equipping Zimbabweans with the resources they need to till its lands mechanically as Britain helped its white farmers. How much does it take? If we had resolved to do so since 1979, the problem would have been over by now.

A country like Nigeria was spending a million dollars in Liberia everyday for many years, just because it pleased the Americans.

It recently built a billion dollar stadium, squandered over $7 billion on roads, $8 billion on failed electricity, etc. A country that can afford these and has presently over $50billion in reserve can also be prompted by the African spirit of solidarity to spend a million dollars a day in Zimbabwe. Certainly. Certainly. Yar'adua, please listen. Just what sense does it make when Nigeria says Africa is the cornerstone of our Foreign policy when Zimbabweans are left to suffer in despair?

More so, Nigeria is not the only country that can do that without feeling the slightest pinch. Libya is there, wanting to become the leader of Africa.

To achieve his dream, Gaddafi must listen to al-Mutanabbi: the loyalty of free people is earned by generosity. Both Nigeria and Libya helped (Cde) Mugabe when he was a guerilla fighter. They should help him as a President. The war is not over. Let our leaders rise to the occasion. The wolf – Britain – that once lurch our backyard has eaten our ancestors and devoured our land. We cannot leave it to devour our Shona and Ndebele brothers.

It wants to install its puppet as it did in other parts of Africa. Giving the white farmers of Zimbabwe lands in Nigeria as their agent, Obasanjo, did is a slap on the face of Africa.

Nigerians should send them packing too. They cannot be bad for Zimbabwe and good for us.

The crown, if it has any sympathy for the white farmers, should recall them to England and distribute the royal property it usurped from peasants during the feudal past.

I am convinced that (Cde) Mugabe has fought gallantly. His defeat in the hands of imperialists, may God forbid, will be our defeat. We must come to his aid. Just as we successfully waded off British propaganda against (Cde) Mugabe, we must generously help Zimbabwe financially out of its present state of despair. – Daily Trust (Abuja).

Vickii · (#3 (**permalink**))

At last, someone who isn't brainwashed.

I really enjoyed reading your posts but wanted to add some links that others may find useful. I've been despairing, even on this site, with the complete lack of common sense black people have regarding the Zimbabwe issue. As an African/black person/member of a 3rd world country, there are some viewpoints we cannot afford to entertain if we are serious about development. Otherwise we may as well all be Condi Rice. Although there is a certain honesty about her position which I admire, in the sense that most of us diasporans are paying taxes which are a small contribution towards oppressing our own home countries. At least people like Condi go the whole hog and don't even pretend to have Black/African consciousness.

Anyway, the following are a useful antidote to the crap being served up by BBC et al;

RACEANDHISTORY.COM : Understanding how Race and History impact us today
This site has varied articles but is very good on the Zimbabwe issue with detailed analysis by different authors.

IC Publications | African Business | New African | The Middle East (New African)
I would say that a subscription to New African magazine is a must for any Pan Africanist. click on special reports and read the comprehensive articles about Zimbabwe. These are some of the most in depth articles I have read about Zim - everybody gets a say. And for those who wept for MDC victims there's interesting stuff about THEIR victims of violence.

The Herald
Fair enough it's a state owned newspaper which may bother some people but one should be able to discern sense when they see it. Some of their journalists like Nathanial Manheru are among the few people talking with real insight about the hand of the US and the UK with regard to the MDC and NGO's.

Vickii · (#4 (**permalink**))

Forgot to add;

Please can other people add their own sites (if they have found any). Those are the only 3 I have as well as being in Zimbabwe on and off.

fredblack 2 · (#5 (**permalink**))

Vicky, I don't think things are as simple as that are they.

.Because there are thing taking place in Zimbabwe which nobody of principle can support...Just like in the French Revolution we aint so stupid to think in the defence of the revolutions some absolutely morally repugnant shit aint going on and old scores being settled which is abusing the external support you suggest should be forthcoming.

.

Vickii · (#6 (**permalink**))

Fredblack and other diasporans -

I'm going to apologise in advance for any ranting/insults in my next post. I am just so vexed. Fredblack, you appear to respond to my post with generalisations and very undetailed at that.

If you read anything on any of the links I posted, you hid it well. I would've thought that you would read something and then at least comment on either the content or viability of the source etc.

I dare anyone to at least read some of the articles in New African and then tell me they have not now considered at least a tiny possibility of an alternative to all this Mugabe bashing.

Vickii · (#7 (**permalink**))

'....which is abusing the external support you suggest should be forthcoming.'

What external support? From whom? In what form? If you're thinking along the lines of what black lion said then fair enough. If you're talking about the black African diaspora then probably forget it. Most of these brainwashed souls couldn't think a Pro-African thought if Shaka Zulu rose from the dead and whispered it in their ear. Most of you are waiting for some 'brave' (probably white) investigative journalist from The Guardian/Independent to suggest something other than what you've already been exposed to. Or you're waiting for that 30 year classified doc thing to lapse when u.k and u.s govt may fess up to some of the underhanded things they've been up to. The evidence is already out there...........

‘Vicky, I don't think things are as simple as that are they’

How simple did I say they were?

‘Because there are thing taking place in Zimbabwe which nobody of principle can support’

Like what? Please specify and give me your sources.

‘morally repugnant shit’
What morally, repugnant shit and who is dishing it out?

You’re asking me (it sounds like) to give guarantees and perhaps vouch for Mugabe’s good character. This is a good clean revolution folks! Everything you said is completely besides the point as well as being inaccurate.

This is politics not a fairy story and yet somehow you’ve swallowed whole the west’s classic of good leader vs bad leader not the reality of my interest vs your interest. Or the usual of might equals right. If Mugabe for some crazy reason decided to reverse the land reform as it was before 2000 the western media would change their reporting about the country (and him).

I love the way they go on about the way HE has damaged the economy. Seven years of sanctions and closed credit lines would give any 3rd world country an inflation headache. If I was talking about the UK economy would I harp on about the prime minister or the chancellor? DOES ANYONE KNOW THE NAME OF THE MAN IN CHARGE OF ZIMBABWE’S ECONOMY? HOW ABOUT THE NAME OF THE RESERVE BANK OF ZIMBABWE GOVERNOR who was recently given an award by EMRC. EMRC? Who are they? Even when they were going on about no rule of law in Zim the europeans under some Interpol auspices were honouring Zimbabwe’s top policeman. Why? Do you even know when this happened? No. All you know is that there is no rule of law in Zimbabwe because that's all they want you to know.

You will only read/see bad news about Mugabe. You will not read, for example, about ‘terrorist’ activities by the opposition party in the western media. Why? Because it is their aim to change the regime in Zimbabwe (the u.s only recently admitted it). Why do they want to change the regime in Zimbabwe? Not for any of the generalisations you suggested in your post. Before you talk about 'morally repugnant' find out how these western countries treat suspected terrorists and it didn't start with the muslims BTW. At one stage it was us (black people) and in our own yard. 'Morally repugnant?' Do you mean the 10 white farmers who got killed refusing to leave 'their' land? Any loss of life is regrettable but do you know how many black lives were lost in Zim when they took the land, when the blacks fought for the land? This is a story repeated throughout Africa and 3rd world countries.

WHO ARE YOU SHEDDING TEARS FOR?
Mugabe's innocent black victims?

Seems to me that we Africans starve regardless of whether we have a 'good' leader or a 'bad' leader (See Julius Nyere of Tanzania as an example. Also look to Malawi. Their country gave good famine pictures to the world recently which were rarely used because of course the west were saying that Zimbabweans were starving. Why woz Malawi starving? Is it coz they have a 'bad' leader too?
Like Tony Bliar said;
EXPLOITATION EXPLOITATION EXPLOITATION

Please click on some of the links I posted plus I suggest you scroll back up and read the first two posts by black lion plus another link I should’ve added was

How Europe Underdeveloped Africa by Walter Rodney.
If Rodney hadn’t been assassinated then I’m sure in this day and age he would be helping us to understand neo colonialism in all its shapes and forms. The West developed itself on the back of exploiting Africa and maintains its wealth on the back of exploiting Africa (an unknown fact to all the Geldolf loving, let’s help Africa B.S**tters) and if it were up to the West, this exploitation would continue. This demonisation of Mugabe is simply what happens when you try to challenge Western capitalist domination. Zimbabwe's failure (God forbid) will be Africa's failure.

I agree 100% with black lion in that Mugabe is actually a hero. Whose propaganda is greater? Mugabe with his ZBC (1 channel not 4 tv plus radio channels like BBC)? And yet somehow Africa sees Mugabe as a hero. Why? If they are just closing ranks then why aren’t they hailing Darfur or Sierra Leone politicians as heroes? And when the rest of Europe and U.S gang together to condemn Mugabe are THEY closing ranks? Or are they the only honest, sensible people in the world?

A lot of flat out lies/misperceptions have being told about Zimbabwe in the name of regime change. I could go on and on (I already have, sorry). One example; Apparently he stole the elections according to EU monitors. However monitors from SADC and the Caribbean ruled that the elections were free and fair. Hmmn, Who to trust?

One last thing. I was away in Zim recently. Did Blacknet cover the million man and woman march in Zimbabwe? Did you get any news reports or pictures about it?

Vickii · (#8 (**permalink**))

Finally (for today)

Try to find a transcript of the speech R.Mugabe gave to the U.N assembly in New York this year then tell me the man doesn't speak sense. You might have to search for it. Knowledge is power as they say and no one (particularly in the west) is gonna give it for free.

I'm going to bed now. Happy New Year!!!!!!

fredblack 2 · (#9 (**permalink**))

Vicky said' This is politics not a fairy story and yet somehow you’ve swallowed whole the west’s classic of good leader vs bad leader not the reality of my interest vs your interest.'

Sis with great respect respond to me specifically and don't make presumptuous speeches..I doubt you could lecture me in serious or real politics and I have nothing against real or serious politics and supported Mugabe a very long time..It is the general gist of your posts which implies their is an US defending revolution or regime V THEM who are a uniformed brainwashed pro west anti..If only life were so simple.

Neither do I rely on my enemy for information be they black or western media for that matter..Tend to get them from brothers sisters/Comrades i served with in Zimbabwe, South Africa, including people well known to Mugabe and senior people within and outside government. In fact one good friend was there when the village was cleared over that Chinese deal business and said it was handled appallingly and said so.

However, I saw an interview on Barbados news in the Caribbean where a leading Editor, don't ask me his name, but a very close and pro Mugabe man up until very very recently broke ranks and spoke out..He cited two key incidents which he went into detail on and if you are from there and follow events must have heard about them..But one in particular struck me.

Now before I take anything anybody says i tend to ask a range of questions to establish what their motivation is as is my training and background given I am cynical by disposition and most anti Mugabe stories with sufficient experience it is possible to work out what most likely took place. The editor described in detail a killing he and a whole heap of others witnessed by a government official or senior officer, who saw a member of the opposition in his car from his government buildings office left the building with what I can only work out from what he described as some mini rocket launcher, hand held but small..He is not a military man so he could not tell the make of the weapon..

He said the government official walked up to about six feet of the car and shot it into the vehicle and it basically blew up burning the guy alive where he sat..Now you have to appreciate Caribbeans news is slightly biased towards Mugage and the Barbadian presenter was not going to leave that there and asked my man plenty y of follow up questions each were answered to my satisfaction. He said he had given the government the benefit of the doubt almost as a matter of course, and defended Mugabe from day one. He showed even recent pictures of him and Mugabe, but what he said basically extended on what i said here a long time ago under the circumstances there are many things Mugabe simply is unable to control like parts of his security services or police force or some supporters..Anyone who knows anything about how these organisations work will know that..

But as the guy said Mugabe knew about this incident, because there was no one in Zimbabwe who did not know about it and the killer just walked backed to his government office like he had just come off his lunch break and nothing happened to him..Ordinary people in numbers witnessed this and many tried to put the fire out, but there was not much left of this guy...He said when he saw that and another incident, the only conclusion he could draw which is not unreasonable that in order to remain in power Mugabe has done a deal with the devil and will give certain forces free reign.

Ask yourself this..I have heard 100,000 allegations against Mugabe and never accepted any because with experience you can read behind the lines to how particular things have transpired and the rationale or whether Mugabe actually knew anything about it etc..But I believed this editor and every word he said. Basic things comrades don't bail out on each other easily after 20 plus years..Mugabe is as tough as they come and has gone through the worse the West can do to him, so no reason to bail out when you've been through the worse together. He is not a political rival who wants what Mugabe has. The man clearly liked and respected Mugabe and did not speak or reflect any anger towards him in any way...Just pure sorrow and he was clearly emotionally conflicted..

Moreover,every thing he said was objectively verifiable if one had the resources or inclination to investigate..The date, the time, who was there ,the name of the victim, the name of the perpetrator where he worked..I mean not easy to hide a man who got a massive hole in his chest after being hit by a grenade or rocket launcher type weapon.

Don't make no sense making up a shabby lie in the world of security or intelligence work..Got to be good to mean anything..

Nope..I am quite convinced on the balance of probabality that this brother was not lying....unlike others the western camera love. not that they are lying but the interpretation they invite us to take..

The issue for me is not the use of violence not at all..Its about the legitimate and moral use of violence and by whom on whom..You see when I was a young security officer these things were rammed into us and part of our training as leaders who would have to use violence in given circumstances or instruct others to..But with that came a serious and non compromising moral obligations to up keep and maintain a clear ethical framework..You see that's what separates us the good guys from animals, the same as professionals be they police officers, members of the armed forces, naval services etc..These things are not just words, but the basis of all revolution and society, because the security and intelligence services, its armed forces are the backbone of any revolution or social order. We decide ultimately what goes on and us alone. As Weber said we hold the legitimate monopoly of state violence.

What i heard in that interview reminded me of the French Revolution where someone said that the revolution had devoured its own children and the context of defending it from external aggression, spies and informers provided a blanket excuse for wide spread atrocities, paying back personal scores and other hideous criminal acts all in the name of saving the Republic..

You see hears the way I look at this thing practically. I don't know whether that guy who got killed in that way deserved it or was an enemy of the state or actually just screwing the woman he likes god knows worse has happened. But what i do know is this, when he can be killed in that way in broad day light not even waste energy with some night time covert action and in front of ordinary Zimbabweans going about their day to day business. It says to me that a people and an ideal has been betrayed, even in its very defence..Because i have a duty to those poor people who watch that man being killed in that way to protect them from evil tyranny, but by the same token such actions sends what message to those people....

It tells them that I am now their oppressors and such is my arrogance and power and my gun, that i don't even have to hide it from them..

Chariman Mao who should know a bit about being in this type of mess..Did say one thing of value that no conflict is ever them versus US and that is my take on the Zim situation..I don't support the white man or west in anything and will oppose him through pure spite..but never ever again going to wave the Mugabe banner..What i heard in Barbados was a disgrace and morally repugnant..

Vickii · (#10 (**permalink**))

Thank you for responding to my post with some detail but I will maintain that the nature of your first response warranted my ‘presumptuous speech’. You did give the impression of not having read any of the links I posted. But as you’ve suggested,

‘I doubt you could lecture me in serious or real politics and I have nothing against real or serious politics.’

You know what you know already and that i