Published by the government of Zimbabwe
Obi Egbuna
4 November 2008
analysis
Washington, DC — MANY Africans worldwide are anxiously anticipating the outcome of today's United States presidential election and the manner in which George W. Bush's successor addresses the question of Zimbabwe will be watched carefully.
Barack Obama's campaign has chosen to take Senator John McCain to task for supporting Bush's policies 90 percent of the time over the past eight years he has presided over the country.
But Obama, too, has been supportive of Bush's call for a racist illegal regime change in Zimbabwe and it would be interesting to see how he will proceed should he win today's election.
During the first US presidential debate on September 26, 2008, which was the only platform for both candidates to share their views on US foreign policy, McCain and Obama focused almost exclusively on the Middle East.
The only exception was when McCain raised the point in passing that Obama would be willing to meet face-to-face with Cuban President Raul Castro.
It is for this reason that US citizens who believe that these debates give them complete insight on the views of these candidates is at best idealistic and at worst naive.
On March 11, 2007, Obama wrote to Bush exhorting him not to lift sanctions on Zimbabwe until the Cde Mugabe was out of office.
At the same time one can only imagine what the warmongering McCain would do about Zimbabwe.
McCain is strongly influenced by Ronald Reagan, the same Reagan who told Cde Mugabe that he did not feel obliged to honour the commitments made by the Carter administration during the 1979 Lancaster House talks.
Another dynamic is that McCain, as the highest-ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, would encourage Ambassador James McGee to vigorously pursue the military option.
After all, the two are veterans of the genocidal Vietnam War.
On Obama's side, his running mate Joseph Biden is the chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations and everyone knows these people have never viewed Zimbabwe kindly for daring to empower its own people.
Remember that in March 2007 Obama and the late Congressman Tom Lantos introduced a joint resolution condemning Cde Mugabe without even seeking to establish what was really happening on the ground.
Obama, the most junior member of the Senate Sub-Committee on Africa, was even listed as the architect of the resolution.
Obama has received the support of a man called General Colin Powell -- a Republican stalwart -- and there are many interesting sideshows here.
Powell and McCain are both graduates of the National War College. They both fought in Vietnam (Powell volunteered for a second tour of duty). McCain was born in Panama and Powell bombed it during Operation Just Cause in 1987.
In June 2003, Powell took time out of his busy schedule as Secretary of State to write an article for the New York Times in which he viciously attacked Cde Mugabe.
Then there is the issue of the involvement of Congressman John Lewis in the campaign.
Lewis, a civil rights pioneer, recently compared McCain to the racist former governor of Alabama George Wallace following chants at Republican rallies for Obama's assassination.
At the same time, Lewis has been a staunch supporter of sanctions
against Zimbabwe and perhaps he should be explaining why he and his fellow Black Congressmen do not see the damage caused by the economic embargo.
If Lewis fails to recognise the connection between George Wallace and Ian Smith, maybe he can see the similarities between Cde Mugabe and the late Pan-African revolutionary and first president of Guinea Ahmed Sekou Toure.
Lewis visited Guinea in the 1960s to pay homage to the positive action campaign by the Democratic Party of Guinea that liberated the country from French colonial rule.
When President Toure rejected the neocolonial overtures of Charles De Gaulle, it sent a statement to our former colonial and slave masters that political bribery and the continuation of the master-servant relationship were things of the past.
This is the same bravery President Mugabe and Zanu-PF are demonstrating by refusing to let the US and British governments dictate Zimbabwe's and Southern Africa's future.
When daughters and sons of Africa study US presidential campaigns past and present, it is of paramount importance to pay attention to key individuals the candidates surround themselves with.
The roles of former secretary of state Madeline Albright and former assistant secretary of state Susan Rice in the Obama campaign should raise more than a few eyebrows.
The two main vehicles that Albright has at her disposal are the National Democratic Institute and the Council of Foreign Relations, which can be arguably viewed as the twin towers of Western liberal think-tanks.
Albright chairs the NDI's international affairs branch, which lists the pro-Western Zimbabwe Election Support Network as a partner organisation.
There is also a strong personal relationship between Albright and Rice -- despite their differing political affiliations -- and many will recall that the latter has been very aggressive when it comes to supporting illegal regime change in Zimbabwe.
Rice's father was the first dean of the Graduate School of International Studies in Denver and he persuaded her to switch her academic concentration from music to international studies.
Then there is the presence of someone called Susan Rice in the Obama campaign matrix.
She is a senior policy advisor to Obama and more than likely will be the next US Secretary of State.
Susan Rice is a Rhodes scholar and did her doctoral dissertation on Zimbabwe and one can imagine what kind of advice she will give Obama on the Southern African country.
Another key point arises. Susan Rice was also an advisor to John Kerry when he ran for President four years ago, and Kerry was a co-sponsor of the resolution Obama presented to the US Senate and Congress attacking President Mugabe.
She is an ardent supporter of Africom, the US military base in Africa, and this says a lot about her attitude towards the continent's sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Malcolm X, a victim of the racialised politics that plague the US, once remarked: "The difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is like the one between a fox and wolf; in the final analysis, both belong to the canine family."
So while people might celebrate the ascension of an African to the US presidency, the truth is that we could be in for more of the same old stuff.
Read comments. Write your own.
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.
you an never equate USA elections with those in Zimbabwe. US is a democratic country and ZIM is far from it. Elections in Zim are con games.
Clearly the writer knows nothing about Zimbabwe. I am Zimbabwean so I know quite a lot more. Mugabe has not empowered anyone but himself and his cronies. He does not care about the people of Zimbabwe and never has. He had thousands of Ndebeles killed during the '80s so clearly you are being paid to write such rubbish or you are a Zanu PF person using a fake name. Either way, you are a disgrace to Africans.