21 - 27 February 2002
Issue No.574
|
Al-Ahram Weekly Online 21 - 27 February 2002 Issue No.574 |
||
| Published in Cairo by AL-AHRAM established in 1875 | Current issue | Previous issue | Site map | ||
Sanctions showdown
EU sanctions in retaliation for Zimbabwe's deportation of the head of the EU observer mission ahead of next month's election have left the country's leadership stoically unfazed. Gamal Nkrumah reports
The European Union's unprecedented decision on Monday to impose comprehensive sanctions against Zimbabwe sent shock waves throughout Africa. Not only does it augur ill for the country's immediate political and economic future, but it also casts a shadow on the improvement of African-European relations.
The EU's imposition of a travel ban on Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe, his family and 20 of his top associates bars him from entering EU member states. Under the sanctions, Mugabe's and his aides' banking and financial assets have also been frozen with immediate effect. In addition, development assistance has been suspended, even though humanitarian relief will continue to flow into the troubled country.
Last week, the Zimbabwean authorities summarily deported the Swedish head of the EU electoral observer team, Pierre Schori, who had already been snubbed once when he was issued a tourist visa. The move, which prompted the EU's retaliatory measure, has led Zimbabwean officials to deride what they term the EU's "organised economic terrorism" and "colonial bullying," while vowing never to succumb to European pressures.
Zimbabwe claims that Schori became embroiled in politicking, tantamount to gross interference in the country's domestic affairs. Sweden is among six EU countries whose nationals are banned by Zimbabwe from assuming observer status during the Zimbabwean presidential poll -- the others are Britain, Denmark, Finland, Germany, and the Netherlands. Originally, Zimbabwe permitted 30 EU observers to monitor the elections and electioneering process but this latest development has dramatically altered the relationship. "The EU shouldn't continue to supervise us because we do not go to their countries to supervise them," a furious Mugabe protested. "It's really all about protecting the interests of the white minority which, in Zimbabwe, are threatened by the needs of the [black] majority," concurred Zimbabwean Minister of Information Jonathan Moyo.
Incidents of violence committed by Mugabe- backed militias are on the rise. According to human rights organisations, pre-election violence has cost 25 Zimbabweans their lives. Last week, a convoy of prominent opposition figures, including the main opposition party's Movement for Democratic Reform's (MDC) Welsh Secretary-General Ncube, was attacked by pro-government militias brandishing machetes and throwing stones as they tried to win voters near the Zimbabwean capital Harare. In a separate development, Basildon Peta, the secretary-general of the Zimbabwe Union of Journalists, fled the country for South Africa after claiming to have been fired by the pro- government Financial Gazette and received threats on his life.
The political crisis has taken its toll on the Zimbabwean economy, and, in particular, the agricultural sector. Tobacco exports, the country's main export earner, have plummeted. With a maize deficit of half a million tons, Zimbabwe has been obliged to solicit food aid from the World Food Programme (WFP). The WFP estimates that 550,000 Zimbabweans are in dire need of emergency food aid.
Supporters of Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe in a strong show of support for his fast-track land reform policy (photo:AFP)
While the economy has suffered a negative growth rate of 5.3 per cent in 2001, trading on the stock market has emerged unscathed. The services and financial sector seems to be thriving, and foreign tourists still flock to the country's game parks, natural reserves and historical sites in record numbers.
One grave consequence of the EU's decision has been to polarise the contenders in the upcoming elections, scheduled for 9-10 March. Supporters of the main opposition MDC and its leader, Morgan Tsvangirai, were exhilarated and welcomed the sanctions enthusiastically.
Meanwhile, the rank and file of Mugabe's ruling Zimbabwe African National Union- Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF) were incensed and overzealous youths went on the rampage, ransacking the MDC headquarters in Harare on Tuesday. Nationwide demonstrations featured placards reading, "Zimbabwe will never be a British colony again," and "Stop your racist politics in our country."
But the current social and economic climate is also poisoning the political air. Grinding poverty has sent violent crime spiralling and social unrest threatens political stability in the southern African country. The possibility of it spilling over into neighbouring countries -- with similar colonial legacies of European settlers and large, restless labour reserves with no land -- are growing.
Indigenous Zimbabweans are hungry for land and Zimbabwe, while not exactly a thriving democracy, is far more democratic than some of the West's more dubious darlings in Africa.
There are an estimated 40,000 British nationals in Zimbabwe today. Fewer than 4,000 European settlers own commercial farms, and many are absentee landowners. Much of the country's most fertile agricultural land has been lying fallow for years, or is used for the cultivation of profitable export crops such as tobacco and flowers which are of benefit to European markets instead of the Zimbabwean population. Meanwhile, the indigenous Africans -- many of whom survive on the verge of starvation -- subsist on donor handouts.
Mugabe stresses that his African neighbours are sympathetic to his cause and supportive of the fast-track land reform and resettlement programme he officially instituted in June 2000. The ZANU-PF has given its tacit support to those liberation war veterans who stormed European-owned farms and evicted the owners, many of whom have now fled the country. Some 6,500 farms have been listed for acquisition and over 9.2 million hectares are earmarked for resettlement by landless African peasants.
According to the 1979 Lancaster House Agreement, former colonial power Britain agreed to pay European farmers compensation and resettle African peasants on abandoned farms. However, only five million hectares have been set aside for resettlement. The Zimbabwean authorities say that Britain did not keep its side of the bargain and reneged on its promises.
The opposition argues that the question is one of democracy rather than land reform and that talk of economic injustice is nothing more than a deliberate evasion tactic by a government seeking to avoid discussing the real issues at stake.
Most African leaders, including South African President Thabo Mbeki, have stood in support of the Zimbabwean president. Mugabe's African critics, however, include influential men such as South Africa's Archbishop Desmond Tutu, a Nobel laureate, who recently warned against reelecting Mugabe and accused him of desperately holding on to the trappings of power. Mugabe denies the charge, claiming that he stands for his landless peoples' rights to their ancestral lands.
'The EU shouldn't continue to supervise us because we do not go to their countries to supervise them,' a furious Mugabe protested. 'It's really all about protecting the interests of the white minority which, in Zimbabwe, are threatened by the needs of the [black] majority'
Listening to some of the uglier epithets hurled at Mugabe, one sadly suspects that the former European colonial powers have learnt nothing from the bitter liberation struggle, the Chimurenga. British politicians have come down Mugabe like a ton of bricks and the Western media has been systematic in its demonisation of the Zimbabwean president. Britain has been egging on its European partners into action against Mugabe. "Today is the end of the road," explained British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw. The EU wants him to realise that "things have changed," as EU External Affairs Commissioner Chris Patten so presumptuously put it: "Our argument is not with the people of Zimbabwe, but with Mugabe and his cronies." What Patten conveniently held back was that the sanctions are bound to hurt the people of Zimbabwe more that its ruling elite, as is increasingly evident from similar cases elsewhere.
Moreover, Mugabe is a democratically-elected leader and not a military dictator. He has a constituency and the sympathy of neighbouring African countries for his stand on the land question. And he has shown willingness to take on tasks that few other African leaders would relish.
Equally, Tsvangirai is no angel. A curious controversy erupted when Ari Ben Menashe, head of Montreal-based political consultancy Dickens and Madson, told Britain's Daily Telegraph that he had unearthed a plot to do away with Mugabe by Tsvangirai. Black and white video footage of Tsvangirai discussing Mugabe's "elimination" was shown on Australia's SBS Dateline television programme. Menashe, formerly embroiled in the notorious Iran-Contra arms scandal, is a former Israeli intelligence agent with solid connections to a number of African regimes. The case is currently under investigation by Canadian police. Menashe explained to the Daily Telegraph that Tsvangirai had "knocked on the wrong door."
No other African country faces such an election marathon as Zimbabwe's next month. The outcome will determine the fate of an entire generation of Zimbabwean politicians, both those who built their political careers as warriors for democracy by distancing themselves from or openly advocating rebellion against the ZANU- PF, as well as those ruling party stalwarts who refuse to abandon what critics deride as a sinking ship. The determining factor, however, is that unlike many other African elections, foreign powers are using this occasion to interfere.
The EU, in particular, has taken a keen interest in monitoring both the elections and the electioneering process. The Zimbabwean government charges that the EU has pinned its hopes on a landslide opposition victory. Tsvangirai, in turn, accuses the Southern African Development Community (SADC) of backing Mugabe. At their last summit meeting in Malawi, SADC leaders supported Mugabe's policies and cautioned against interfering in Zimbabwe's domestic affairs. The EU, Africans argue, cannot dodge the perennial question of land reform in Zimbabwe.
While opinion polls reveal the ZANU-PF to be trailing behind the MDC, observers are unanimous in saying that the two parties are, in all probability, running neck and neck. With the ruling party calling the shots in rural areas, opposition strongholds have so far been restricted to urban areas. Therefore, it is clear that the Zimbabwean political impasse will not be eased in the event that there is no clear winner.
The two main contenders' reluctance to associate themselves too closely with foreign powers is indicative of an accurate reading of the popular mood. Too close an association with the EU by Tsvangirai is bound to cost him many votes. Mugabe, on the other hand, plays the anti-neo-colonial card, which goes down well in a country such as Zimbabwe that has a history of struggling against European settler colonialism. But one point on which both Mugabe and his opponents agree is that the indigenous black Africans must come out in force to have their say on polling day. "Don't leave this decision to the whites," Mugabe exhorted.
The EU has withdrawn its observers from Zimbabwe but observers from the Commonwealth -- comprising the former English- speaking British colonies -- the SADC, the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) and the US National Association for the Advancement of Coloured People (NAACP) will monitor Zimbabwe's elections next month. The disciplinary Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) split along broadly racial lines with the predominantly white nations of Australia, Britain and Canada urging Zimbabwe's suspension. African and Asian countries, meanwhile, have opted for a softer and more reconciliatory approach towards the Zimbabwean government.
The Commonwealth's compromise is a watered down statement calling on the Zimbabwean government to ensure free and fair elections in March. But, again, the Zimbabwean case graphically illustrates emerging patterns in international relations.
With trust in such short supply, the EU's obsessive preoccupation with Zimbabwean democracy is putting talk of African-European cooperation at risk. The EU's position leaves many questions unanswered. Why single out Zimbabwe? Is it because of its settler farmer community's present predicament?
There are other factors that the EU has failed to take into account. Zimbabwe's military top brass -- which props up President Joseph Kabila's beleaguered government in the Democratic Republic of Congo and has been accused of cutting lucrative diamond deals-- stands squarely behind Mugabe. The army was instrumental in quelling rioting in October 2000. The commander of Zimbabwe's defence forces, General Vitalis Zvinavashe, stated recently that he would only take orders from a political leader who had taken an active part in the Chimurenga. His statement implies that the military will not support Tsvangirai, who did not take part in the war of liberation. Mugabe, in sharp contrast, has an impeccable record as the leader of the ZANU-PF, the country's chief liberation movement.
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved
 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
| ARCHIVES Letter from the Editor Editorial Board Subscription Advertise! |
WEEKLY ONLINE: www.ahram.org.eg/weekly Updated every Saturday at 11.00 GMT, 2pm local time weeklyweb@ahram.org.eg |
 Al-Ahram Organisation |
Recommend this page