6 July 2003
THE United States President George W Bush will this week set off on a tour of South Africa, Botswana, Uganda, Nigeria and Senegal - the second to sub-Saharan Africa by a US president, the first being that of former president Bill Clinton.
His aim - among other things - is to cast a high voltage spotlight on the continent's emerging democracies, economic growth and social progress, the fight against the deadly disease HIV/Aids and to promote and strengthen relationships with the United States.
Whether President Mugabe and Zanu PF choose to dismiss the visit as a non-event or not, the point must be forcefully made that each of the countries to be visited is moving ahead while Zimbabwe is definitely retreating back to the Stone Age.
This is the reality which is staring us in the face. South Africa and Botswana are benefiting from tourism at our expense. A lot of companies are closing shop in this country and relocating to South Africa and Botswana in droves - again, to our detriment!
It does not matter if the Zimbabwean President calls on Africa and his gormless battalion of faithfuls in his party not to be intimidated by Bush's African visit - the fact that Mugabe felt this is a point he should stress, is in itself an indication of his appreciation of the possible impact of the visit.
Describing Colin Powell as a "disgraceful Uncle Tom" and other such vitriol might be what Jonathan Moyo believes he is paid for, but it certainly will not bring food on to the tables of long suffering Zimbabweans. It was, in terms of foreign relations, an extraordinarily inept thing to say even for a government not known for its delicacy of diplomacy.
If these crude and undignified attacks on President Bush and US Secretary of State Colin Powell were being made from a position of strength, perhaps we would be more guarded in our criticism.
But these, we dare say, are obsessional and uncouth; this is gutter language that is not expected of self-respecting leaders , even if they are of the thoroughly discredited Zanu PF variety. We strongly feel that there is something to be said for politicians putting their criticisms of each other into some kind of perspective.
Crude insults and name calling cannot, by any stretch of imagination, be a viable substitute to workable solutions to our problems. Granted, Colin Powell may have overplayed his hand in calling on President Mugabe to step down but there is no faulting his analysis of the problems presently bedeviling Zimbabwe.
African leaders such as Presidents Mbeki of South Africa and Olusegun Obasanjo of Nigeria have stood firmly by President Mugabe convinced that the Zimbabwean leader's ruinous land reform programme is a sincere effort to correct a historical injustice. Never mind the fact that for more than 20 years Mugabe did nothing to address this thorny problem. It was only when Mugabe realised power was slipping out of his hands that he brought the land issue to the fore. In other words, Mugabe used the land issue to guarantee his own political survival - period!
But trying to explain this to a continent that is searching for dignity after centuries of colonial domination and slavery is not easy. Far easier to swallow is President Mugabe's message that his is a crusade to remove all vestiges of colonialism by ensuring that land "is returned to its rightful owners", a populist refrain among the remnant of Africa's nationalist political parties. More so when one considers that in some of the newly independent countries, land ownership still remains an unresolved and emotive issue.
These are some of the challenges those rooted in the soil of African culture face today. What must be appreciated is that when Zimbabweans say that Mugabe must go for the sake of the country, they are saying it from the heart and as products of the Zimbabwean culture and environment. Invariably, if the same calls are echoed by representatives of US, British or any other foreign governments, rightly or wrongly, African leaders become defensive and raise a hue and cry accusing the former colonial masters of hypocrisy and seeking to impose their will on the continent.
Clearly, it is here we must find the reason why Presidents Mbeki and Obasanjo choose to stand by President Mugabe against the feelings of the majority of Zimbabweans, and against the advice of well-wishers here and abroad.
However, in the light of the forthcoming trip to Africa by President Bush and the African Union (AU) summit in Maputo, questions must be asked: What would it take to tip the balance in favour of a lasting solution to the Zimbabwe crisis? What can be done to bridge this yawning gap between the ruling Zanu PF and the opposition Movement for Democratic Change so that there is dialogue and a common purpose?
This paper emphatically agrees with Colin Powell when he says that with "the peserverence of brave Zimbabweans, strengthened commitment from their neighbours and the strong support of the international community", the people of Zimbabwe can be rescued. For we are indeed stuck with a totalitarian regime which has become selfish, insensitive and indifferent to the suffering of its own people.
However, by the same token, we share the view that the US should not adopt the role of a world policeman advocating a regime change. Rather it should concentrate its energies on helping the people of Zimbabwe and African leaders resolve a specific political problem such as the one in this country.
Yes, the United States might be the leader of the free world, is a great democracy, a military super power and a nation unequalled in material wealth. But all that does not give it the right to act as a world policeman and calling for regime changes wherever there is a problem.
Our advice to the US is that acting in this high handed manner can only alienate people and needlessly lose the goodwill of its friends in Africa. Powell's dramatic language ran the risk of being interpreted as war-mongering and parallels being drawn with the Iraq war.
Africa has been a victim of historical circumstance for a long time and the key point that needs to be driven home is that persuasion and diplomacy resonates much more effectively with African leaders than the Super Power tactics that the US is inclined to resort to.
The US administration's criticism of the Mugabe regime is very valid. The Zimbabwean leader has lost any claim to democratic credentials. But in his meetings with Presidents Mbeki and Obasanjo, President Bush is advised not to display a one-eyed view of the continent.
While making his analysis of the Zimbabwe crisis clear, he must also be prepared to listen carefully to what the African leaders will have to say and move in tandem with them for the resolution of the Zimbabwe crisis.
This indeed is our advice to President Bush - an advice which is interest-free and has no repayment schedule!
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2003 Zimbabwe Standard. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
