---

---

Published by the government of Zimbabwe

Zimbabwe: Tsvangirai Driving Rhodesian Agenda

Alexander Kanengoni

6 November 2009

---

opinion

Harare — POLITICAL events happening over the past two weeks have been so quick it took some time to understand them.

First, there was President Mugabe opening Parliament two weeks ago challenging the West for engagement.

Then followed Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai's surprising announcement that he was "disengaging" from the inclusive Government.

Then there was the flurry of movement from Sadc that culminated in the visit by the DRC president, Joseph Kabila of course this does not include UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, Manfred Nowark's unscheduled visit that unceremoniously ended in the VIP lounge at Harare International Airport.

The case for engagement with the West as part of efforts to get Zimbabwe out of the current economic problems cannot be over-emphasised.

But it is Tsvangirai's announcement to disengage from the inclusive Government that is quite revealing.

The observation that the Rhodesian lobby could be controlling MDC-T, and therefore responsible for most decisions that the party takes, is frightening.

It was the Rhodesians that we fought against during the liberation war.

Although they may agree on many things, the West and the Rhodesian lobby are not the same. The two major distinguishing features of the Rhodesian lobby are:

• rabid racism and;

• a misplaced belief that they will one day, return to the farms

The Rhodesian lobby has always had disagreements with the West, particularly the British.

The lobby disagreed with the British over their view of Africans who the lobby regarded as unfit to rule the country.

A political deal the British had struck with nationalist leader Joshua Nkomo in London in 1960 envisaged a gradual increase in African representation in Parliament that would take up to 100 years for blacks to attain a parliamentary majority to enable them to elect the country's first black ruler.

It was that deal that gave rise to popular euphemisms like: "The country is around the corner!" or "The country is in my briefcase!"

The Rhodesian lobby was livid. It would never give the blacks such a chance! "Not in a thousand years!" Ian Smith would boast three years later in 1963 after his Rhodesian Front party wrenched power from Winston Field's Dominion Party.

Two years down the line in 1965, Ian Smith would rebel against the British Crown and declare independence.

Harold Wilson, the British Prime Minister promised to crush the rebellion by force, but he never did it.

It must be noted that it was the rise to power of the Rhodesian lobby that precipitated the split in the nationalist movement.

Hardliners, who included Robert Mugabe, Ndabaningi Sithole, Leopold Takawira, Enos Nkala, Edgar Tekere etc broke away from Zapu to form Zanu arguing that there was not much to expect from the British but to take the Rhodesians head-on through armed insurrection.

We are our own liberators! was the rallying call at the Gwelo (now Gweru) congress where the new party was launched.

The point is the British and the Rhodesians have not always agreed. In his book, The Great Betrayal, Ian Smith accused the British of selling out the Rhodesians at Lancaster House, declaring Rhodesians were prepared to fight the nationalist guerrillas to the last man.

Implicitly, he was still holding on to the myth that blacks should never have been allowed to rule. The man went to his grave clinging to that delusion believing strangely the war between the Rhodesians and the nationalists had not yet been settled.

The tragedy is Ian Smith was not an eccentric voice speaking on the fringes of a defeated community.

He was speaking on behalf of a community that had regrouped in South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Britain and Canada.

It's one thing to see the Rhodesian lobby in other countries outside our borders but quite another to see it rearing its ugly head in our midst, through the opposition (MDC-T is still an opposition by virtue of opposing in the inclusive Government).

Because, when a high-ranking opposition leader, Eddie Cross, recently said the clause in the GPA that the land reform programme was irreversible be revisited, one could not help seeing a frighteningly Rhodesian agenda.

The Rhodesians still dream of going back to the farms.

His secretary for information, Nelson Chamisa tried to douse the anger and panic the statement had ignited but it was too late because the Rhodesians had spoken.

When Tsvangirai decided to "disengage" from the inclusive Government primarily over the case of Roy Bennett, most people were surprised by the power and influence that the Rhodesian lobby wields within the opposition movement.

There have been other black MDC-T leaders, including Government ministers, arrested in the past for various offences, but the party's response had not been as swift and as resolute as it was in Bennett's case.

If anyone ever doubted that MDC-T was at the beck and call of Bennett, it was time to awaken to the fact.

There has been idle talk that MDC-T queues at Bennett's office at the end of each month for its stipend.

It's hard not to believe it now.

The other interesting point is the choice of Bennett for the ministry of agriculture.

But considering the power that he wields in MDC-T, he must have assigned himself to that ministry.

The question becomes why he gave himself that ministry. But it is easy to understand within the context of Rhodesians' delusion of returning to the farms.

The anger reflected in the vandalism that one sees along the highways and the country's infrastructure, most of which is senseless, can only be attributed to people with the mentality: if we can't have it, then no one else should have it.

All the road-signs along the highways are gone.

Some of us thought it was the aluminium that the vandals wanted for resell. But when they also destroyed the concrete blocks showing the distances along the roads, then the agenda became purely Rhodesian.

The same applies to the other infrastructure that is being destroyed without any intention to resale.

The Rhodesians want to come back.

If it is true that Prime Minister Tsvangirai wants the power and influence of war veterans in state institutions like the army and police force diluted before he can return to the inclusive Government, that is another frightfully Rhodesian agenda.

War veterans symbolise the defence of the gains of the liberation war.

They are the people who toppled the Rhodesians from power and the last people Rhodesians want to see.

Calling for the dilution of their influence is tantamount to calling for their demobilisation from the army and the police force.

It's like calling for the people to lay down their arms in the middle of a war. Prime Minister Tsvangirai is driving a Rhodesian agenda.

The Rhodesian lobby is Tsvangirai's burden.

But the problem with him for us is when he tries to facilitate their return.

When President Mugabe talks about engaging the West, he is certainly not talking about engaging the Rhodesians.

The only place to engage the Rhodesians is the battlefield.

That has been the nature of the relationship.

Ian Smith went to his grave, less than a decade ago, still believing blacks were not fit to rule; that it was the British who sold out the Rhodesians at Lancaster House.

He died unrepentant. But is it not said shamelessly that Rhodesians never die?

Several years after independence, Peter Godwin, a former Rhodesian, published a book with the title Rhodesians Never Die.

The case for engaging the West that President Mugabe raised in his opening address to parliament recently is significant.

It is such an engagement that will eventually lead to the lifting of economic sanctions. To expect the opposition to tell the West to lift sanctions would be folly because the powerful Rhodesian lobby will not allow them to do it.

There will be other voices besides ours, calling for the lifting of sanctions; Sadc and the AU for instance. But it will be us engaging the West, particularly the USA and Britain, that is key to getting sanctions lifted.

I don't think there is much difficulty in that regard because the basis for such engagement already exists -- the Lancaster House Agreement.

Both the British and the Americans were there and are signatories to the agreement.

There are still outstanding commitments agreed at Lancaster House.

The British pledged 36 million pounds towards paying off the white farmers and supporting a future land reform programme.

The Americans pledged an equal amount. I believe those commitments need to be revisited. We should ignore the letter by the then British secretary for International Development, Claire Short in November 1997 that reneged on her government's commitment, as agreed at Lancaster House, to pay for the land because it is dishonest.

I believe it was that letter which was largely responsible for the tragedy that occurred between 1998 and 2008.

I do not believe the case for re-engagement with the Americans to repeal the US sanctions law; ZDERA (Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act) is complicated either.

If we accept that the Americans enacted ZDERA in return for British military support for the invasion of Iraq and that Obama was elected on the promise of getting the Americans out of Iraq, then theoretically, the reasons for ZDERA fall away.

There are other reasons that make re-engaging the Americans less complicated.

There are many things about us that must fascinate the Americans, our resilience and prowess. The attempt to lure Reserve Bank Governor, Dr Gideon Gono to the World Bank was a clearly American initiative.

I believe there are two things they wanted to achieve.

They had correctly identified that he was the man preventing the country's economic collapse and they wanted to remove him to hasten the process.

They were fascinated by how he had, literally single-handed, managed to save the country from economic collapse.

There is no doubt that the Americans are fascinated by our military prowess in Mozambique and the DRC. Our army cleared Renamo from the Beira Corridor and stopped Kinshasa from falling.

Who would not envy an army with such a string of accomplishments? There are many things about us that fascinate the Americans that they would jump at the slightest opportunity to work with us, sometimes at even the level of individuals as they tried to do with Dr Gono.

As far as the British, the land reform programme is a fait accompli.

It's the powerful Rhodesian lobby and their own huge ego that they have to deal with. The lobby wants President Mugabe out of power in order to go back to the farms.

The British would want President Mugabe out of power not to facilitate the Rhodesians back to the farms, but as a way to exact revenge on the man who challenged their global supremacy openly and embarrassed them.

Such vengeance would soothe their bruised ego.

But I am sure they are already looking at their interests in Zimbabwe beyond the land reform programme.

An MDC-T official confessed recently in a discussion that the inclusive Government was the best thing to happen because if MDC-T had tried to govern alone, that government would have collapsed from ignorance and inexperience.

I cynically quipped his fears were unfounded because the Rhodesians would govern for them.

A colleague with us encapsulated the implications: "If the Rhodesians come back, then it will be another war!"

Read comments. Write your own.

More News on allAfrica.com

Abusive Behavior in Puntland In late October, the Puntland government arrested five men of ...	HIV Drops in Wa The Wa Municipality recorded a drop in HIV prevalence rate from 5.8 percent ...
2010 - Port Committed to Single Hulls Phase-Out January 1 As Nigerian maritime regulators ...	Imo Orders Contractors Back to Site Contractors handling various roads and building ...
European Investors Eye Unlisted Firms The uninspiring granite exterior of the London Stock ...	World Day for the Prevention of Child Abuse Celebrated African Democracy and good ...

---