Published by the government of Zimbabwe
Caesar Zvayi
1 August 2007
opinion
Harare — THOSE in the MDC have created the impression that they have failed to dislodge Zanu-PF at the polls because "the playing field is not level".
MDC faction leader Morgan Tsvangirai religiously threatens election boycotts at every opportunity, a habit that saw him go against the majority decision in his party ahead of the 2005 Senate elections with severe consequences for the union of convenience that was the original MDC.
Converts of the illegal regime change agenda have swallowed Tsvangirai's claims in their entirety without considering that the field may actually be tilted in favour of the opposition.
If the playing field was tilted in favour of Zanu-PF, how does the MDC explain the impressive statistics that make it one of the best-represented opposition parties in Africa, particularly when it can't articulate any meaningful policy position to sway voters?
For the record, the MDC has a stake at every level of governance in Zimbabwe. It has seven senators in the Upper House of Parliament, and probably would have more if it had not split ahead of the elections.
It has 41 MPs in the House of Assembly, against Zanu-PF's 78.
At local government level, the MDC has five mayors in Bulawayo, Kwekwe, Gweru, Masvingo and Kariba.
Its mayors for Harare, Mutare and Chitungwiza were fired in terms of the Urban Councils Act for incompetence.
It also has 82 councillors in seven of the country's 10 provinces.
A look at the MDC's performance in all elections shows that it routs Zanu-PF in the metropolitan cities of Harare and Bulawayo and, to an extent, other smaller towns.
Why is that so?
It is because the playing field in these areas is tilted in favour of the MDC.
How?
These are the areas that bear the brunt of the illegal economic sanctions MDC leaders campaigned for.
The sanctions behind the hardships are hounding the urban electorate, which in turn -- with the complicity of the MDC -- dutifully blames Zanu-PF for alleged bad governance.
This is why, despite being on record calling for and supporting the imposition of economic sanctions, MDC leaders deny that there are economic sanctions on Zimbabwe, claiming the only sanctions in place are "targeted" at top Government officials.
MDC leaders concede the so-called "targeted sanctions" oblivious of the fact that even the so-called smart sanctions also have deleterious effects on the economy as they prevent Government officials from engaging foreign investors on their own turf or marketing investment opportunities to potential investors.
However, a look at the cocktail of punitive measures imposed on Zimbabwe in the wake of the land reform programme shows that MDC leaders are unforgivably economic with the truth where sanctions are concerned.
The United States has a sanctions law on Zimbabwe, the so-called Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act, that cut Zimbabwe's lines of credit from all multilateral lending institutions with dealings with the US, which is about all the banks in the world.
The sanctions law, which was drafted with the assistance of the MDC legal desk, compels American officials in the International Monetary Fund and multilateral development banks to "oppose and vote against any extension by the respective institution of any loan, credit, or guarantee to the government of Zimbabwe".
And to vote against any reduction or cancellation of "indebtedness owed by the government of Zimbabwe".
What is more, ZDERA also interdicts debt relief to Zimbabwe forcing the country to spend its scarce foreign currency reserves servicing debts instead of investing in economic development, particularly boosting the ailing industry that was sabotaged by the MDC and its allies.
We all saw how, in 2003, the IMF was compelled to lay siege on Zimbabwe by instituting compulsory withdrawal procedures and giving the country ultimatums to clear arrears in the General Resources Account when countries like Liberia that had worse arrears were not subjected to similar pressure.
The European Union has also sanctions on Zimbabwe, because in addition to the travel ban imposed on top-Government officials on February 18 2002, the EU announced that it had also suspended budgetary support to Zimbabwe and terminated "financial support for all projects" except "those in direct support of the population", a euphemism for opposition non-governmental organisations intrinsically linked to the MDC.
Apart from these overt sanctions, Zimbabwe is also under covert sanctions that saw the West politicise the HIV and Aids pandemic, which is why Zimbabwe gets an average of just US$4 per HIV-infected person compared to the US$74 given other countries.
The net effect of the sanctions is the worsening of the socio-economic situation with severe consequences for innocent people.
Not only that, the lies MDC leaders and their allies peddle about Zimbabwe have foisted an artificial investment risk tag on the country, a tag that scares away potential investors and tourists.
It is only because of the MDC's support for sanctions that Western countries got the pretext to impose them, and it is the opposition's continued support that sustains them.
So as long as those in the MDC play to the foreign gallery by refusing to renounce the sanctions, they tilt urban constituencies in their favour at the expense of the livelihoods of millions of suffering Zimbabweans.
This is why the ongoing Sadc initiative on Zimbabwe should be used to get the MDC to concede its nefarious role in the suffering bedevilling Zimbabweans today.
It is important to note that the agenda of the two MDC factions centres on their need "to level" the playing field as they are reportedly demanding the following, among other things:
It is important to note that most of what the MDC is demanding is already in place, courtesy of the Sadc guidelines and principles on the conduct of democratic elections, but they still feel inclined to make noise regardless.
Because of the MDC's fixation with elections, the Zanu-PF delegation should also demand that the MDC facilitate the levelling of the playing field, particularly in urban areas, by renouncing the sanctions that have been condemned by progressive people and organisations the world over.
Sources say Zanu-PF has modelled its terms along the Sadc resolution demanding, among other things, that the MDC:
This is a fair agenda that should not present a problem to any party that lays claim to being Zimbabwean, more so since it's in line with the Sadc resolution on Zimbabwe that proposed the inter-party dialogue in the first place.
However, judging by the MDC's reaction to the ongoing price freeze, whose overall effect would be to level the playing field, MDC leaders are finding it hard to walk the talk.
As Independent MP for Tsholotsho constituency Professor Jonathan Moyo once pointed out, the biggest opposition to Zanu-PF is the economy, which is why those in the MDC must renounce sanctions if, as they say, they are committed to a level playing field.
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2007 The Herald. 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.
