The Herald (Harare)
Published by the government of Zimbabwe

Zimbabwe: Why is Britain Provoking Africa Over Zimbabwe?

Sam Akaki

3 June 2008


opinion

Kampala — Only with the Conservative Party in power in the UK can that country hope to salvage its rapidly deteriorating relationship with Zimbabwe and Africa.

Under the New Labour government, Zimbabwe has needlessly become to the British, what Cuba has been to the United States for the last 50 years. Just as the US has maintained an economic blockade against, and repeatedly violated Cuba's territorial independence, the Labour government has misused its influence in the UN, European Union, G8, Commonwealth, World Bank and the International Monetary Fund to ensure Zimbabwe's economic collapse.

From making disparaging remarks in Parliament and the international fora to organising self-demeaning TV gestures by the Labour-voting Ugandan-born Archbishop of York John Sentamu; from boycotting two EU Africa summits to illegally ferrying BBC reporters and Labour MPs into Zimbabwe, and organising a "citizen's arrest" against President Robert Mugabe -- since coming to power in 1977, the Labour government has single-mindedly pursued an aggressive Africa policy aimed at running down President Mugabe, ignoring African views and the dire humanitarian consequences.

The deaths of thousands of Zimbabwean children due to starvation and preventable diseases as a result of the blockade are blamed on President Mugabe.

The BBC, which is funded by the Foreign Office under a Royal Charter but now banned from Zimbabwe, recently boasted: "The BBC's John Simpson confirmed the news while under cover in Zimbabwe."

If this is not a deliberate violation of Zimbabwe's independence, the UN and AU Charters, what else can it be? The Labour government is cynically using the current political dispute in Zimbabwe to create a crisis in South Africa by promoting the view that, unlike the state president Thabo Mbeki, the ANC president Jacob Zuma wants tough actions on Zimbabwe.

Nonsense . . . African leaders are infuriated.

In April, at the special session of United Nations Security Council, they pointedly rejected British attempts to flag Zimbabwe as a threat to international security -- a move which would have necessitated the deployment of foreign troops in country.

The Labour government's obsession with President Mugabe goes back many years. Speaking at the 2001 Labour Party conference, the then prime minister, Mr Tony Blair, said: "Partnership for Africa, between the developed and developing world based around the New African Initiative, is there to be done."

And he concluded: "But it's a deal: on the African side: true democracy, no more excuses for dictatorship, abuses of human rights; no tolerance of bad governance, from the endemic corruption of some states, to the activities of Mr Mugabe's henchmen in Zimbabwe."

The Labour government demonises any other African leader who does not share their view on Zimbabwe, especially President Thabo Mbeki, who has allegedly failed to bring President Mugabe down by cutting off essential supplies.

Mr Mbeki was so infuriated that he exploded during the 4th April Conference of Progressive Centre left parties in Watford, UK, and told reporters: "Zimbabwe is not a province or a former colony of South Africa."

Any wonder that Africa is rebelling against its former colonial master, the UK, refusing to send troops to Somalia, saying they need no white faces in Darfur as peacekeepers and turning to China, a country with nothing in common with Africa except trade.

In December 2007, African leaders spoke with one voice and said they would not attend the European Union-Africa summit, held in Lisbon, Portugal, if President Mugabe was not invited, as demanded by the Labour government.

And, speaking to reporters during the

China-Africa summit, which took place in Beijing in November 2006, the then Botswana president, Festus Mogae, said: "I find

that the Chinese treat us as equals. The West treats us as former subjects. Which is a reality. I prefer the attitude of the Chinese to that of the West."

Isn't it now plainly clear that the British relationship with Zimbabwe in particular and Africa in general will not improve until the Conservative Party takes over in the United Kingdom?

After all, it was Conservative MP William Wilberforce, who spearheaded the fight against slavery in the UK.

Read comments. Write your own.

More News on allAfrica.com

Copyright © 2008 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.

AllAfrica - All the Time
Author: coops1979
Tue Jun 3 10:37:29 2008

For starters the BBC is not funded by the british government, it is funded by the british people.

Almost every fact in this article is false. I await the claims that i'm just an imperialist evil do-er.

Author: exAfrican
Tue Jun 3 12:02:05 2008

Good on ya mate! Democracy is not something they understand in Zimbabwe, as the ZBC is controlled by the State. If only the truth could get broadcast to the masses. You are certainly not "an imperialist evil do-er" in my eyes.

Author: diepondok
Tue Jun 10 16:12:51 2008

HERE IS THE TRUTH!

An interesting reflection on, and a wake-up call for, social and political organization in the cultures of Africa , published in the Nigerian Daily Trust newspaper.

Posted to the web 25 October 2007

I Agree with Dr Watson - by Idang Alibi A few days ago, the Nobel Laureate, Dr James Watson, made a remark that is now generating worldwide uproar, especially among the blacks. He said what to me looks like a self-evident truth. He told The Sunday Times of London in an interview that in his humble opinion, black people are less intelligent than the White people.

Since then, some of us cannot hear anything else but the outrage of black people who feel demeaned by what Watson has said. So many people have called the man names. To be expected, some have said he is a racist. Some even wonder how a "foolish" man like Watson could have won the Nobel Prize. Even white people who, deep in their heart, agree with Watson want to be politically correct so they condemn the man. Why are we blacks becoming so reactive, so sensitive to any remarks, no matter how well-meaning, about our failure as a race? I do not know what constitutes intelligence. I leave that to our so-called scholars. But I do know that in terms of organising society for the benefit of the people living in it, we blacks have not shown any intelligence in that direction at all. I am so ashamed of this and sometimes feel that I ought to have belonged to another race. Nigeria my dear country is a prime example of the inferiority of the black race when compared to other races. Let somebody please tell me whether it is a manifestation of intelligence if a people cannot organise a free, fair and credible election to choose who will lead them. Is it intelligence that we cannot provide simple pipe-borne water for the people? Our public school system has virtually collapsed. Is that a sign of intelligence? Our roads are impassable. In spite of the numerous sources that nature has made available to us to tap for energy to run our industries and homes, we have no steady supply of electricity. Yet electricity is the bedrock of industrialisation. When you agree with the school of Watson, some say you are incorrect because all these failures are a result of poor leadership. Why must it be us blacks who must always suffer poor leadership? Is that not a manifestation of unintelligence? In the name of international trade, bilateral co-operation, globalisation and other subterfuges, the norm in the world today is for smart people to appropriate the wealth of other people for themselves and their countries. But more among the blacks than any other race, the practice is to steal from their own country and salt away to other people's country. Is it intelligence that our leaders steal billions of naira and hide in other people's country? Anywhere in the world today where you have a concentration of black people among other races, the poorest, the least educated, the least achieving, and the most violent group among those races will be the blacks. When indices of underdevelopment are given, black people and countries are sure to occupy the bottom of the ladder. If we are intelligent, why do we not carry first when statistics of development are given? Look at the African continent. South Africa is the most developed country because of the presence of whites there. This may be an uncomfortable truth for many of us but it exists nevertheless. If the whites had been driven away after independence, we would have seen a steady decline of that country.

In terms of natural endowment, Africa ought to be the richest of the continents but see the mess we have made of the potential for greatness which God in his infinite wisdom has bestowed upon us. We have proved totally incapable of harnessing the abundant natural resources to become great. Today, there is a renewed scramble for the wealth of Africa. China, our new "friend", does not bother about the genocide against fellow blacks in the Sudan by the Arabs who control the affairs of that country. They say they do not want to interfere in the internal affairs of any country. All they want is the oil in Sudan to run their industries. Yet, we blacks have not seen the Chinese action as an affront to our sensitivities. Every race takes us for granted because we are so weak and so foolish, if you permit me to say it.

I am really pained by our gross underachievement as a race. Instead of regarding bitter truths expressed by the likes of Watson as a wake-up call for us to engage in sober reflection, we take to the expression of woolly sentiment. For me, this type of reaction is a further evidence of our unintelligence. A man of intelligence recognises genuine criticism against him and takes steps to improve himself in order to prove his critics wrong. But for us blacks, our reaction is to abuse the man who expresses worries about our backwardness. Other races are deeply worried about us because we are a problem to the world. We suffer from the five Ds: disorderliness, debts, diseases, deaths and disasters. Our disorderliness affects others or else they won't be too bothered about us. Many are afraid because our diseases could infect them. Polio has been eradicated all over the world yet it is still found in Nigeria here. When they give us money to help us eradicate it, our thieving officials will embezzle the money; the virus will spread and endanger the health of not only our people but other people as well.

Out of a shared sense of humanity, some cannot bear to see how we die in thousands almost every day from clearly preventable diseases and causes. For years now, our people die extremely painful but perfectly preventable deaths from buildings which collapse because they were poorly constructed. How can you tell me we are as intelligent as others when we set traps for ourselves in the name of houses and others do not do so? Some people are extremely frustrated about us. If they have a way of avoiding us, they will be too glad to do so because we are a problem.

As I write this, I do so with great pains in my heart because I know that God has given intelligence in equal measure to all his children irrespective of the colour of their skin. The problem with us black people is that we have refused to use our intelligence to organise ourselves socially and politically. It should worry us that we do not invent things. We do not go to the moon. Our societies are not well-organised. We have the shortest lifespan of all the races. Something must be wrong with us. Why are we not like others? Our scholars will be quick to say that these are not the only ways of measuring intelligence. They will quote other scholars to adumbrate their point, but the fact remains that we are not showing intelligence. Others are showing it more than we're doing. If they are not more intelligent than we are, let someone tell me how to put it. God himself must be frustrated with his black children. They must be an embarrassment to him. He has given us everything he has given to other of his children; why are his black children not manifesting their own gift? A few years ago, the whites used to contemptuously call the Japanese "little Japs". Today, the Japanese and other Asians have pulled themselves up by the bootstrap and have arrived. No one speaks of the Japanese or Asians with contempt anymore. When people like Watson speak about us in unedifying terms, we should take it as a challenge to prove them wrong by sitting down to plan how we can become world-beaters. If our political leaders are the reason for our backwardness, we should resolve to get the kind of leaders who will be instrument for our rapid progress. I may not know how intelligence is measured but my limited knowledge of intelligence is that it can also be measured by the kind of leaders a people decide to have. If, for instance, our professors preside over the massive rigging of elections, it means that we do not have very intelligent professors. Such rigged elections will no doubt produce unintelligent leaders. Such unintelligent leaders will do stupid things which will prove that we are not as intelligent as other races. Do I sound confusing or intelligent? I am ready for some of our 'patriotic' intellectuals who will write and abuse me for the 'outrage' I have expressed here but I stick to my guns: we lack intelligence and as stated in the Bible, anyone who lacks intelligence should cry unto God who is the custodian of wisdom to bestow some upon him. We should go on our knees today and ask God why we do not appear as intelligent as our other brothers. I am confident God will reveal to us what we must do, and urgently too, to change our terribly unflattering circumstances.

Author: Phiri
Wed Jun 4 01:06:40 2008

The BBC is a subsidized news media outlet and the truth of the matter it is not a private news media like CNN, New York Times etc. That is why there is so much rubbish about Zimbabwe. The overemphasis on Zimbabwe, as if it is the only African country, has lowered BBC standards. Everything about Zimbabwe goes, even the most idiotic propaganda on Zimbabwe can be found on BBC. Most Africans now consider BBC just another British tabloid. If I want to see ugly pictures of my fellow country men, I go on the BBC website! Even, Morgan Tsvangirai supporters find the pictures of Zimbabweans fun and most of them from people who are in hospital or posed. What a waste of talent. The whole whole African section entirely on Zimbabwe for what! for 30,000 anglo Britons in Zimbabwe?

Author: mindpower
Wed Jun 4 13:45:46 2008

Phiri don't you ever give up? Time and time again I have proven to you that Zimbabwe only gets a few articles at most out of a large number on the BBC Africa news page.

At this moment BBC Africa has 3 articles on Zimbabwe out of 45. Anyone can verify this by going to:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/default.stm

YOU CANNOT HIDE FROM THE FACTS PHIRI. ENOUGH OF YOUR LIES!

Author: awt_independent
Tue Jun 10 21:45:44 2008

a quote from Phiri... "Zimbabwean leaders are good at blaming everybody, but themselves. Mugabe blasts President Mwanawasa and Tsvangirai, at every opportunity blasts President Mbeki, as if he is the sole source of the problems in Zimbabwe." I couldnt believe it.

Author: mindpower
Wed Jun 11 09:12:50 2008

I couldn't believe it either, but then I suspect it's because he has Zambian relatives and Mugabe / Herald were attacking Zambians. Funny how people change their tune when their family is affected by something huh!

Author: turnex
Fri Jun 6 02:32:58 2008

Phiri, going along with your assertion that the BBC is highly biased against zimbabwe and mugabe solely because it is a provisional arm of the British Govt as it receives a subsidy and falls way short of high calibre media organisations like CNN...why is it then that CNN is banned from zimbabwe???

The only idiotic propaganda I manage to read without putting my fist through my monitor is the crap oozing out of the Herald...a wholly owned govt mouthpiece that sees absolutely no wrong in mugabe. And in an attempt to disparage Sentamu for speaking out against mugabe it portrays him as a labour mouthpiece by stating he votes labour...where is the evidence for this bit of fiction?? Such sloppy journalism belongs in the gutter mate and no wonder the Herald is outsold daily by the other journals telling the truth. you cant lie to the people all of the time mate...if people's experience on the street is shortages after shortages and violence at the hands of uneducated thugs called green bombers..you cant then write columns the next day blaming the west for this! people are not as stupid as the rest of the zanupf voting lot..they can see through the tissue of lies spun daily by this substandard rag! which is why govt agents went as far as bombing the press that printed the only paper that was telling the truth...and why they recently intercepted a truck ferrying newspapers from SA filled with the truth and set its cargo alight!

We can only pray your eyes will one day be open to the abuses of this evil little hitler and his goons the Criminal Idiotic Organisation...i.e CIO!!!

See all comments (64).


SELECT
SELECT

Topics