Back Issues

A warm thank you to Grace Kwinjeh

2008-03-25

http://pambazuka.org/en/category/editorial/46921

We would like to extend a warm thank you to Grace Kwinjeh, a Zimbabwean journalist based in South Africa whose active assistance made this issue possible.

Mugabe could be history

Mary Ndlovu

2008-03-24

http://pambazuka.org/en/category/features/46869

Mary Ndlovu argues that in spite of the obstacles placed by ZANU-PF, Zimbabwean people must at a minimum strive to vote Mugabe out of power and elect a leadership that will unite Zimbabwe, rebuild the economy and deliver justice and healing as opposed to revenge

Anyone trying to predict the outcome of the Zimbabwean election must be either bold or foolhardy or both. No sooner has a prophesy gone to press than a new factor slips into the equation and everything has to be re-calculated. Commentators are reduced to scenarios – and the number of scenarios required to cover all eventualities and twists of fate multiplies by the day.

And yet six short weeks ago it all looked sealed and delivered to Robert Mugabe. Morgan Tsvangirai’s formation of the MDC had refused, against their own party’s and President’s apparent interests, to form a coalition with the Mutambara faction. Without a united opposition, ZANU PF could not fail to win. Nothing would change, our downward rush to disaster would not be halted.

If a week is a long time in politics, six weeks is an eon. Enter Simba Makoni, and it all looked different. For the first time, the long talked-of split in ZANU PF would make a difference at the polling stations. For the first time, there would be a three-way contest for the top position. For the first time, Mugabe might not know who would do his bidding and who would subvert it. For the first time, there could be a run-off vote.

As campaigning has picked up to full steam, several further factors have come into play. The economy deteriorates at a faster pace than ever, with the value of the Zimbabwe dollar dropping by mid March to one tenth of its value in the middle of January. Food is either unavailable or unaffordable, and ZANU PF seems to be short of supplies to give out to their loyal supporters (if they can identify them). The civil service goes on strike and has to be enticed back by massive salary increases, which in fact, it seems will mostly not be paid before the election. Even the army have yet to be paid the amounts promised. The salary increases will further increase the pace of the downward plunge in standards of living as inflation spirals upward.

Even more important, as opposition candidates move into the rural areas, a miracle seems to be happening – the rural voters are awakening from the trance which made them believe that ZANU PF was their party and Robert Mugabe their man.

But the questions only multiply. Who will the rural voters support in place of Mugabe – Makoni or Tsvangirai? And who will they vote for in the parliamentary elections, where instead of the straight ZANU PF-MDC choice of the last three elections, there are sometimes two ZANU PF candidates and two or even three MDC candidates, plus several others, including independents supporting Makoni.

What kind of chaos will result as the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission attempts to stage a highly complex election composed of four ballots being cast and counted in 11,000 polling stations? What will Mugabe do if he realizes that he has lost any possibility of winning the vote and at the same time can’t rely on a dedicated rigging system? Will he rely on the military brass, who insist they will not allow anyone else to win? And will they be able to rely on their troops, reportedly supporting opposition candidates, and even said to be short of ammunition? All or at least some of these questions will be answered very soon, but to try to predict them requires a high level of audacity.

Are there any certainties regarding this election? Two very important ones.

The first is that there is no minutest possibility of a “free and fair” election. Those observers from SADC who boast that it can still be so are only destroying their own credibility. The government has totally ignored amendments to the Electoral Act, to POSA and AIPPA. There is no independent electronic media, there is blatant campaigning for the ruling party in the state media, there is bias in the behaviour of the police, the arrangements for the electoral process are shambolic, with ZEC even having to withdraw some of their own information pamphlets, no meaningful voter education has been allowed, not to mention the chaos of the voters’ roll, the partisan nature of the delimitation which went before and the uneven allocation of polling stations. And now the familiar process of last-minute amendments to the Electoral Act has begun – using the Presidential Powers Act to reverse changes made by agreement during the Mbeki-led mediation

The second certainty is that this election presents the electorate with two tasks: getting rid of the incumbent President in spite of the unevenness of the playing field, and replacing his government with one which can unite Zimbabweans to renew and rebuild the Zimbabwean nation in all its aspects.

Are Zimbabweans capable of using the seriously flawed electoral process to remove Mugabe, or will he manage to hang on once again? That is the first issue, and there is no doubt that with the entry of Simba Makoni into the game, it becomes a distinct possibility. Why? Because Makoni has created the necessary split in ZANU PF, and he has offered a three-way contest. This makes it very difficult for any of the three to win over 50% of the vote. But who will the ZANU PF deserters vote for? Sizes of crowds and results of rudimentary opinion polls can not be relied on, and people in rural areas are still making acquaintance with the challengers. Makoni apparently believed that he needed to present himself as ZANU PF in order to gain the disaffected vote, but he could be wrong. Once the spell is broken, people may desert not only the leader but the party as well. Tsvangirai is reported to be drawing large crowds at rallies in smaller towns, but Makoni too is being greeted with excitement as he whistle-stops through rural areas.

Will the people speak for Makoni, or will they speak for Tsvangirai, and will Mugabe be able to stifle their voices through manipulation of the process? These are the questions that this election should answer.

To look at the last question first. There is no doubt that there is a loosening of the hold of state security over the people, even in Mugabe strongholds. The fear factor and the patronage factor are still there, but their influence will not be as great this time in securing ZANU PF votes. The rigging factor is impossible to calculate. It will surely play some role, but if people vote in large numbers, as it seems they may do, it will be more difficult, it may have to take place at the very top, and the loyalty of the riggers is in any case in doubt.

But all Zimbabweans need to look around and see that the new political landscape requires new responses. They have, like many voters around the world, voted with their emotions and their hearts, demonstrating their loyalties to the parties with which they have long identified, and to individuals whom they trusted to govern them. That is no longer a viable approach to voting. Zimbabweans must learn to think strategically. What vote is most likely to dislodge Robert Mugabe, to end the corrupt and despotic rule of ZANU PF?

A vote for Tsvangirai assumes that his party can win enough votes from ZANU PF to carry the day. Mutambara’s MDC has already declared for Makoni, and there are signs that much of Matabeleland will heed that call. Can Tsvangirai, with so many of his supporters outside the country, retain the rest of his traditional following, and gain a very large number of former ZANU PF voters? Or is Makoni more likely to draw support as a new, fresh face appealing to both disaffected former MDC and former ZANU PF voters, and representing the idea of co-operation rather than polarisation? A vote for Makoni will assume that Tsvangirai’s time has passed and he would not be able to attract enough of ZANU PF to gain large numbers. Zimbabweans have to consider these possibilities carefully, and vote for the one they think is most likely to oust Mugabe.

If this election is primarily about showing Robert Mugabe the door, the key question for voters is which of the two challengers is likely to succeed in drawing more votes.

But the second task is to choose which of the two is more likely to take us into re-building mode selflessly, with the interests of social justice for the people the main motivation. Again, both have baggage – Tsvangirai is dragged down by the self-interested squabbling within his party which begins to look more and more like ZANU-PF itself; their tendency to insult and denigrate other opposition forces instead of seeing them as allies in a common cause is not promising. Makoni will bring with him some ZANU PF loyalists who could not stand up to criticize their party’s evil doings, and others who have been direct beneficiaries of that evil.

What will be needed will be strong leadership which can give the country a new vision of a united people, while curbing any excesses of their adherents. Zimbabwe needs someone who can reach across party lines and treat the sicknesses of hatred and greed, while ensuring that evil-doers do not escape with impunity. Each voter will have to ask himself, not which candidate gains his sympathy, but which candidate can do both jobs.
Political goals cannot be reached in a single leap. This election will not bring social justice in Zimbabwe. But there are critical achievements that can be made through this election:

- Remove Robert Mugabe from power and end his catastrophic rule.

- Put into power a government that can unite the people to embark on the tasks of restoring rule of law, rebuilding the economy, bringing justice not revenge, healing and dignity to Zimbabweans.

We would dream for the achievement of both, but even if only the first is attained we will have taken at least one step forward.

There is of course the possibility that even the first task will fail. But it is clear that there is a seismic shift in the Zimbabwean political scene which has to produce significant change. If it is prevented from coming through the ballot box, then we surely will face some very dark days in Zimbabwe. Many dangers lurk in the coming weeks, whoever is declared the winner. But progressive Zimbabweans must not give way to despair and assume that the election is already pre-determined against us. If we want change through the vote we must hope and believe and work to reach our goals. In spite of all the odds, if Zimbabweans are prepared to overcome fear, to cast aside emotional loyalties, to think and vote strategically, and to keep their eyes on the goals of peace and social justice, much is possible.

*Mary Ndlovu is a Zimbabwean human rights activist.

**Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

***Also read more of Mary Ndlovu's Zimbabwe analysis.
Blowing Away the Rhetorical Smokescreeens in Zimbabwe
http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/comment/43971

Zimbabwe: Change is coming: the first step in a long journey
http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/features/40499

Media freedom: Lessons from Zimbabwe

Hilary Kundishora

2008-03-13

http://pambazuka.org/en/category/comment/46657

Hillary Kundishora looks at the state of electronic and print media in Zimbabwe and argues that far from the media being the people's watchdog, it is the propaganda arm of the state machinery. With independent media harassed or banned, the promise of democracy has already been undermined

The electronic and print media in other value driven and politically mature societies, has acted as the free marketplace of ideas, and as such there is a direct and general causal link between economic prosperity and media freedom with the exception of China, but nevertheless the success story of China does not mean to undermine the causal link prevalent in much of the third and first word nations. The existence of this unique relationship consequently raises an important thesis about economic development and it elucidates a secret for development, which has been the magic for economic prosperity in first world economies.

The media has formed an important source of a knowledge structure, which has unfortunately in some instances in history been manipulated to favour the interests of a minority and selfish click. And as such the knowledge structure has formed an important power structure most widely sought through hook and crook and in the case of Zimbabwe all tricks including unorthodox means have been elicited in order to control the media for selfish reasons remotely connected to national interests.

Media freedom in much of colonial Africa was designed by architects of the colonial establishment with a sinister agenda which was however meant to advance the cause of racial apartheid and with the advent of independence, Africa sought to open all the secret cardboards stocked with skeletons for the world to see. Zimbabwe like other postcolonial states also opened up to scrutiny thus widely embracing values of accountability as opposed to privacy.

It is interesting to note that with the leaderships increasing variance from the values that underpinned the liberation struggle in Zimbabwe the postcolonial leadership ironically later made use of the same tools box which they despised and had fought hard against, to some extent there were now selling out the cause of the struggle for personal and selfish interests devoid of national interests. The ruling party has used its political muscle to manipulate, barn and restrict access to information it considers informing to the general public, in case the public will be able make other choices for the betterment of their destiny.

It is in this context that the birth of an over regulated and partisan media industry, and archaic legislations designed to emasculate the media should be viewed as the rise of the devouring demons. Like demons they consume all the good while leaving everything around in a bad state, and Zimbabwe's state media case is in most way similar to a demon afflicted individual. The end of freedom has given birth to a media which militates against the moral value systems on which independence was based upon, the media is now used as a tool to devour the very people it was supposed to develop and assist.

State resources have been poured to the advantage, favouring sectoral interests, partisan and ZANU PF interests in general to the extent that the level of misinformation in Zimbabwe leaves a lot to be desired. Worse still the propaganda continuum is reflective from the lowest ranking officials to the highest office in the land thus the media has been guilty of complicity and not probing issues while acting as a mental inflicting venom which subject people to massive cognitive bias.

It is important that intellectuals and scholars take stock of events in Zimbabwe so that they realise the role the state media has played in undermining the rule of law and natural justice. Instead of acting as a repository and curator of the rule of law and natural justice the press has been used to churn propaganda which if consumed is damaging to the recipients and the very national interests / sovereignty it purports to protect. The Rwandan genocide provides the testimony of how an equally irresponsible media can be so dangerous to the people it is meant to develop, like an weapon the media is a dangerous tool if in the hands of misguided and immoral people who value selfish interests and Rwanda's genocide offers much convincing testimony to this thesis.

If the state media could one day cease to be a tool furthering private interest and pursue a more inclusive approach which is national than sectoral, issues could be debated and scrutinised while it is acting as marketplace for ideas crucial in informing policy formulation and implementation. The state media could then act as a watchdog of national interests-not interests of cronies but interests favouring even vulnerable members of society.  In normal democracies through this way the media acts as a more reliable source of information for scholars, researchers and investors thus exhibiting and playing a causal link to economic development.

As the March 29 elections approach the state media has been conspicuous in churning out hate speech which is more sectoral than uniting in the face of crucial elections which are important in locating the compass which will be used in directing the country to prosperity. It is in this context that the role of the media in misinforming voters must not be left unchallenged, instead of responsibly reporting and offering all aspirants of public office equal chance to attract voters as is happening in America where Obama and Clinton are contesting without vilifying one another, the state media is busy presenting only the ruling party as the only peoples viable choice notwithstanding the damage it has caused to the collective aspirations of a people.

Simba Makoni a new and promising baby in opposition politics has of late been linked to the West and like Tsvangirai his predecessor they both have been branded sell-outs and an agents of imperialism, worse still Makoni has publicly been likened to a bull frog and a prostitute, of which prostitutes in the African context are heavily despised as immoral as they fall outside the mainstream of society. And for the state media it is fascinating that they have never bothered to unpack why Makoni has been a darling of ZANU PF for the past years yet today they accuse him of political promiscuity, only because he has refused to enter the books history for the wrong reasons and as such he has parted ways with the party that nurtured him.

In any other democratic country the ruling party will have been grilled as to what new there are offering to the people after presiding over the death of a once vibrant economy but alas there are the worst but being presented as the best in the general election. This raises the role of the state media in my thesis of a causal link between media freedom and economic prosperity and it indicts the state media for misinforming and diverting people from the real issues that must form the foundation for debate and consequently the election of public office bearers into public office. The diminished media freedom is responsible creating an atmosphere conducive for the proliferation of a kleptocracy, which has run down an economy once prosperous.

Like the annihilation of property rights, the level of media freedom is directly related to the decadence and the thesis further calls upon all loving and spiritual connected citizens to work extra hard to create a media which is free and accessible which consequently act as a source of reliable information and a curator of the peoples rights. The presents of an election offer the masses of Zimbabwe a chance of renewal and to choose the path to prosperity or continue the present path of doom, and for those in dire need of economic revival it is also indispensable that there be a free media in order that we achieve a stable economy. In fact it is crucial that we revert back to valuing the constitution, which is the supreme document that governs and lays out the rule law and freedom of expression as a corner stone for economic prosperity.


*Hillary Kundishora is a scholar of strategic management. You can visit his blog at www.zimchaiyo.blogspot.com

**Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

The SADC facilitation and the Zimbabwe crisis

Brian Raftopoulos

2008-03-24

http://pambazuka.org/en/category/comment/46870

Brian Raftopoulos argues that the SADC mediated talks between ZANU-PF and MDC were undermined by the unwillingness of Zanu PF to allow for a significant opening up of political spaces in the country. He further argues that SADC's endorsement of an outcome that did not take broad democratic principles into account was in effect an endorsement of Mugabe


The 2007 SADC mandate to South Africa to broker an agreement between Zanu PF and the MDC should be seen as an extension of the “quiet diplomacy” that has been the hallmark of the South African and SADC approach to the Zimbabwe crisis since 2000. It took on an added urgency after the brutal public beating, arrest and torture of opposition and civic leaders in March 2007 and the widespread attacks on the MDC structures that followed thereafter. A combination of international pressure and the obligation by SADC to be seen to be taking action on the Zimbabwe question, led to an Extra-Ordinary SADC Heads of State Summit in Tanzania at the end of March 2007 at which South Africa was given the facilitation mandate on Zimbabwe.

There was widespread cynicism in many quarters both within and outside of Zimbabwe about the possibility of success of such an intervention, given the history of SADC’s supine position on Mugabe’s authoritarian regime. However it also presented an opportunity for national, regional and international forces to navigate a common approach out of the Zimbabwean debacle by reaching a political agreement that would be broadly acceptable to all sides.

For the MDC, weakened by the split in the organization since 2005, there was little alternative to such talks, as other methods of confronting the Mugabe regime had hitherto been handled with characteristic intolerance and repression by Zimbabwe’s ruling party. Mugabe, under strong pressure from SADC to enter the dialogue, had little option but to at least be seen to be willing to talk to the opposition. The South Africans, always keen not to make any interventions on Zimbabwe without regional support, saw this as an opportunity to push their “quiet diplomacy” agenda, and perhaps end up with their longstanding hope for a reasonably free and far election that would result in a Government of National Unity led by a reformed Zanu PF. The EU and the US, long frustrated by Mugabe’s intransigence and the regional and continental solidarity he continued to receive, also had little alternative but to allow the “point man” Mbeki the time to play his hand.

Mbeki started out with the intention that the dialogue between Zanu PF should achieve three objectives. Firstly both parties should endorse the decision to hold parliamentary elections in 2008. Secondly they should agree on the steps that should be taken to ensure that all concerned accept the elections as being truly representative of the “will” of the Zimbabwean people. Thirdly, that there should be agreement by all political parties and “other social forces” on the measures that should be implemented and respected in order to facilitate a legitimate election. The “other social forces” referred to the civil society groups who were cast in a more or less supporting role in the whole play.

Towards the end of 2007 the facilitation had, in the words of the MDC, reached “significant but not full consensus” on a number of areas in a political agreement covering issues of violence, sanctions, land, abuse of traditional leaders and food aid. The talks themselves, begun in an atmosphere of enormous distrust, appeared to have made some progress, with Zanu PF swallowing the bitter pill of negotiating with an opposition party that it had since 1999 labeled a foreign construction.

The dialogue also provided the divided MDC with an opportunity to work together as joint negotiating partners, even as attempts to re-unite the two formations were continuing parallel to the SADC facilitation. Discussions on the various aspects of the SADC dialogue added to the urgency of the need for the two MDC’s to at last work towards an election pact that would allow them to fight the 2008 Presidential and general elections together. Moreover it was clear to the MDC negotiators that if the talks were to break down with Zanu PF it had to be seen to be the fault of Mugabe’s party, and not due to any obstructiveness on the part of the opposition.

As matters transpired it was precisely the intransigence of Zanu PF and the unwillingness of Zanu PF to allow for a significant opening up of political spaces in the country, that lead to an impasse in the negotiations at the end of 2007. Notwithstanding some small changes to the media and public order legislation, the ruling party proved unwilling to make substantive changes on the issues that would affect the transitional political arrangements that would precede the 2008 elections. At the centre of the political deadlock that emerged in December 2007 were three areas: the date of the election; the timeframe for the implementation of the agreed reforms; and the process and modality of the making and enactment of a new constitution. Mugabe’s unilateral proclamation of the election date for 2008, outside of an agreement of these substantive issues, effectively put an end to the SADC facilitation process.

The SADC announcement on the 4th February 2008 that Mbeki’s facilitation had resulted in the political parties reaching an “agreement on all substantive matters relating to the political situation in Zimbabwe” and that the matters outstanding were merely procedural, was the worst kind of political dishonesty. What might have been a principled stand by the outgoing President Mbeki turned into another disgraceful endorsement of the politics of a repressive regime.

The SADC has once again demonstrated its inability to distinguish between Africa’s concern for imperialist interventions, and its commitment to the democratic and human rights of the region’s citizens. It has subordinated the latter to a grubby solidarity with a repressive political regime that has transformed a lofty Pan Africanist discourse into a spurious attempt to legitimize a authoritarian political project. The regional organization had an opportunity to send an unambiguous message to Mugabe that unless he fulfilled the objective of establishing the conditions for a broadly acceptable free and fair election, he could not expect the customary solidarity of SADC. Such a position could have changed the dynamic of Zimbabwean politics decisively and helped to ensure that further intransigence on Mugabe’s part would be met with stronger censure in the region.

That SADC once again took the line of least resistance has demonstrated its lack of commitment to questions of democratic principle, and its priority of protecting libration leaders who have long failed their citizens. However perhaps a Makoni victory in the forthcoming elections will satisfy the need by some SADC members for a reformed Zanu PF solution, for a long time the real objective of “quiet diplomacy.”


*Brian Raftopoulos, Director of Research, Solidarity Peace Trust. This article first appeared in the Mail and Guardian.

** Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

Fighting repression with love

WOZA launch report

Women of Zimbabwe Arise (WOZA)

2008-03-24

http://pambazuka.org/en/category/comment/46868

A Women of Zimbabwe Arise (WOZA) summary of a report that looks at the suppression of women's political voices

Women of Zimbabwe Arise (WOZA) launched a report detailing the political violence experienced by their members in Harare on Wednesday 19 March 2008 at an event attended by diplomats, civic society leaders and members of WOZA and MOZA. The report is entitled "The effects of fighting repression WITH LOVE".

The report is a result of research conducted by WOZA on what violations its members have gone through as women human rights defenders and who the perpetrators of these abuses are. The report was launched to make public the findings and to urgently draw attention to the risks faced by women activists as Zimbabwe braces itself for an election. It is intended that those who read the report will be motivated to take action to remedy the damage done to millions of people's lives by a violent dictatorship.

The meeting was chaired by WOZA's partners, Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights, who vocalised their praise for the detail in the report and for the need for the women human rights defenders to be respected and for there to be justice for the abuses. ZLHR Board member and lawyer, Sarudzai Njerere said, 'the report is an important tool in documenting what Zimbabweans have experienced' and that 'we should all join WOZA in standing up for social justice".

Prominent activist and WOZA trustee, Mary Ndlovu launched the report by giving a brief outline of its contents. She highlighted that it encompasses the police response to peaceful protests by WOZA; that the majority of women interviewed reported multiple human rights violations; that it is apparent that police would like to intimidate and deter women from participation and that the police are in violation of domestic and regional professional codes and are committing criminal law offences all of which call for punishment although none seems to be forthcoming due to a breakdown and partial way the justice system now operates.

She went on to point out that the Zimbabwean government officials who give order to beat or detain the human rights defenders render Zimbabwe in violation of its own constitution and in breach of obligations under international law.

Two WOZA members also gave testimonies of their experiences at the hands of the Uniformed Branch and Law and Order department of the ZRP. One woman in the company of her four-year-old daughter, testified about their arrest and detention in horrid conditions for three days in 2004, well over the 48hour detention period permitted under the Public Order and Security Act (POSA). Her daughter was only three months old at the time and she only had two nappies with her and had to fight to access water to wash them when they became soiled. When members of WOZA tried to send disposable nappies in for her baby, police officers misappropriated them and she never received them. Despite this and further arrests and beatings, she remains an active member of WOZA.

Another woman testified that she had been abducted from her home in Bulawayo with her 18-month-old grandchild at 4am by Law and Order officers. They threatened to kill her by throwing her and the child in a dam. She had also been seriously beaten across the breasts by police and had to undergo extended medical treatment. These testimonies are indicative of the experiences of peaceful activists and reflective of the physical and mental torture they undergo in fighting for their basic freedoms to be realised.

WOZA National Coordinator, Jenni Williams, outlined the recommendations highlighted in the report. She also went on to say that in the light of WOZA's recent experience in Bulawayo on the 8th March 2008, International Women's Day, where over 50 members were brutalised, just weeks before the upcoming 29 March election, a free and fair climate for elections does not exist.

The report calls on the Zimbabwean government to immediately end violence against its citizens and on the Zimbabwe Republic Police to honour their commitment to the Police Act and the SARPCCO Code of Conduct for police officers. It also calls on the Southern African Development Community (SADC) to support human rights defenders rather than oppressive governments that deny people their domestically and internationally guaranteed rights and on the African Union (AU) to isolate representatives of the Zimbabwe government and any other government that fails to abide by its obligations under international law to respect human rights.

The international community was also called on to recognize the contribution of WOZA members as human rights defenders, and assist in the documentation and publicising of violations so that justice may be served in the future.

A further recommendation is for a Transitional Justice programme. The reports reads, "We call on Zimbabweans and non-Zimbabweans alike to assist in putting into place a mechanism which satisfies the wishes of the Zimbabwean people to see not retribution, but justice, truth and reconciliation, so that the guilty can do penance and the victims can feel healed of the many wounds they have suffered at the hands of state agents."

Whilst the report made mention of the trauma experienced by WOZA women as a result of their experiences, it was felt that the findings are significant enough to be released in a separate report due for release soon. What is clear however is that the women have experienced more trauma in an independent Zimbabwe than in pre-Independence period.

*To read the full report, please visit: http://tinyurl.com/353bru


** Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

Prospects from a flawed election

New report on Zimbabwe

International Crisis Group

2008-03-20

http://pambazuka.org/en/category/comment/46810

ICG warns that the international community needs to have contingency plans ready in anticipation of rigged elections in Zimbabwe on 29 March that could precipitate a potentially violent crisis

Zimbabwe: Prospects from a Flawed Election,* the latest report from the International Crisis Group, examines likely scenarios for Zimbabwe’s simultaneous presidential, parliamentary and municipal elections. Even though President Robert Mugabe has two serious challengers, including for the first time one from within his own ruling party, he probably has the means to manipulate the process before, during and after balloting, sufficiently to keep his office, though possibly only after a violent run-off. If that happens, no government will emerge capable of ending the country’s long crisis. “Zimbabweans desperately want change but have little faith these elections will produce it”, says François Grignon, Crisis Group’s Africa Program Director. “Even after the 29 March vote, a negotiated compromise will likely be essential to reverse a deteriorating political and economic situation but only the first step.”

The Southern African Development Community (SADC) mediation by South Africa’s President Thabo Mbeki, which once offered the most realistic chance of resolving Zimbabwe’s eight-year crisis, has failed. Primary responsibility lies with Mugabe, who unilaterally called snap elections and ruled out passage before the polls of the new constitution. His ruling ZANU-PF party has subsequently been using all the extensive means at its disposal to maintain an unfair advantage in the campaign. The bitterly divided opposition must also share blame: it gained relevancy from the mediation but was unable to agree on an electoral strategy at a time of acute national crisis.

If the election leads to further confrontation, the African Union (AU) should be ready to promptly offer mediation for a power-sharing agreement to produce a transitional government with a reformist agenda. A settlement need not necessarily remove Mugabe. He might serve as a non-executive head of state during a transitional period in advance of fresh elections. The important point is for the region to be prepared to act quickly if the elections do not produce a legitimate government that can deal with a national crisis whose consequences are increasingly being felt beyond Zimbabwe’s borders. With South Africa and the SADC having lost some credibility, the AU needs to take the lead.

The wider international community must also be ready to provide concerted backing to AU-led mediation. The EU and U.S. have little appetite to re-engage with a ZANU-PF dominated government, but if that is the result of a genuinely negotiated agreement that aims at reconciliation and renewal, they should not hold back.

“If the region’s leaders were again to recognise an illegitimate government, Zimbabwe’s dramatic economic disintegration would continue, and the inevitable next round of the struggle over Mugabe’s succession could easily provoke bloodshed”, warns Andebrhan Giorgis, Crisis Group Senior Adviser.
Pretoria/Brussels, 20 March 2008

*Read the full Crisis Group report at: http://www.crisisgroup.org The International Crisis Group (Crisis Group) is an independent, non-profit, non-governmental organisation covering some 60 crisis-affected countries and territories across four continents, working through field-based analysis and high-level advocacy to prevent and resolve deadly conflict.

** Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

Zimbabwe: Police, army and prisons chiefs must resign

Dewa Mavhinga

2008-03-17

http://pambazuka.org/en/category/panafrican/46720

Dewa Mavhinga makes a case for the resignation of the Zimbabwean police chief who has vowed to only salute Mugabe

Utterances and statements emerging from Zimbabwe's uniformed forces, starting with Rt Major General Paradzayi Zimondi, Head of Prisons, to the effect that they will not accept or salute either opposition Movement for Democratic Change Presidential candidate Morgan Tsvangirai or Independent and former ruling party minister Simba Makoni (should they win the Presidential election on 29 March) cannot go unchallenged. Police Commissioner-General Augustine Chihuri and Army General Constantine Chiwenga are also on record saying they will not accept Robert Mugabe losing to what they derisively termed 'puppets'. There is no room for such misguided utterances in Zimbabwe; these men of uniform must resign with immediate effect.

Zimbabweans will not be held to ransom by a bunch of men who should know that it is highly unprofessional for the army, police and prisons to delve in political matters or to attempt to influence the vote by spreading fear, alarm and despondence. Political engagement and discourse is for civilians and civilians alone, it is a fundamental right of the people of Zimbabwe to determine through the ballot who they wish to lead them; the uniformed forces must be reminded that this is none of their business. The uniformed forces belong to the people of Zimbabwe and have an obligation to respect democratic political processes and must swear allegiance to whomsoever Zimbabweans chose as leader.

It must be stated clearly that it is treasonous and shameful for the leadership of uniformed forces to issue such irresponsible statements threatening to return to war if President Mugabe loses elections; it is shameful for government of Zimbabwe to remain silent and not condemn outright such utterances; worst of all, it is shameful and unacceptable that SADC and international community should remain silent in the face of these treasonous statements which are obviously meant to sway and compel voters to vote for a value system that is unmarketable and can only be forced down the throats of the masses. Effectively, Chihuri, Chiwenga and Zimondi have become Zanu PF campaign agents, poor ones at that, as they only know the language of threats. It is very strange that, in the face of all these unconstitutional, frivolous and inflammatory utterances, South African President Thabo Mbeki still has the audacity to express hope that Zimbabwe elections will be free and fair. One wonders what benchmarks Mbeki is applying to elections in Zimbabwe; they are certainly not the SADC guidelines, standards and norms for the conduct of free and fair elections.

How can elections in Zimbabwe be possibly be credible, free and fair when the electorate is threatened with war should they vote out Mugabe? Enough is enough, we cannot accept mortgaging Zimbabwe's future to a few cronies who selfishly cling to the past and are keen to destroy Zimbabwe for selfish personal interests. In a new Zimbabwe there will be no place for unqualified and unprofessional people in our uniformed forces, people will hold office on the basis of merit and merit alone, so let beneficiaries of political patronage beware. This old guard in army, police and prisons must know that it is now time for professional uniformed forces who are not in any way part of political formations and that should either Morgan Tsvangirai or Simba Makoni win in the coming elections, if they do not wish to salute they must simply resign and go home. Already they have outlived their usefulness in these institutions and must be replaced in order to take our uniformed forces back to values of impartiality, patriotism, professionalism and allegiance to Zimbabwe's constitutional values. Chihuri, Chiwenga and Zimondi cannot masquerade as kingmakers and godfathers of Zimbabwean politics, they must confine themselves to their terms of engagement which categorically exclude meddling in political affairs of the country.

The rank and file in the army, police and prisons must also reject these patently partisan and unprofessional utterances and be patriotic enough to resist illegal orders to vote for Mugabe. Soldiers, Police officers and prison officers have a right to vote, their vote must be a secret and a personal choice and not an order from anyone. I am hopeful and positive that the views expressed by these cronies are views of a tiny minority in Zimbabwe and do not reflect the views of masses inside and outside uniformed forces who love peace and democracy and are equally fed up with a diet of starvation and rantings of little men allergic to democracy and good governance. As a patriotic Zimbabwean, it is my sincere hope and trust, and my prayer that sense will prevail over madness.

*Dewa Mavhinga is a Zimbabwean Human Rights Lawyer.

**Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

Preface to a Zimbabwean political roller-coaster

John Mutambirwa

2008-03-19

http://pambazuka.org/en/category/panafrican/46778

John Mutambirwa responds to Grace Kwinjeh and Patrick Bond's commentary on Zimbabwe [http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/features/46561]

AN UNTHINKABLE AND WELCOME GUESS!

Given the kind of social, political and intellectual ferment that characterizes Zim society today, it certainly should not be considered a rude, unjust and unsporting impertinence for one to voice a few cautionary reservations about the gushingly generous laudations usually heaped on the current Zim government's early successes in ushering in a rapid amelioration of education and health. While these approbations are, indubitably, well merited, what cannot be easily comprehended is a hypothetical re-imagining of history which would attempt to gauge what a Sithole, or a Nkomo, or even a Muzorewa, administration would have achieved in the same areas.  That a real-time social re-creation of such a development(s) is impossible, yet imaginable, is one of the tantalizing humours of human history. My immediate and ill-educated guess is that, success in these areas, given any of the cited possibilities, would not have been significantly different.

OF ECONOMY OF CENTS

Good commentary on the economic hiccups concerning the future of Zim. Couldn't agree more.  I am very much in agreement re commentary on plan for economic transformation that is embraced by the opposition. It does not seem to differ much from that which RGM, and desparate (if well fed) company, have practised to date -- i.e neoliberalism -- with the exception that the one in evidence to date seems to be a particularly insiduous strain of fascist capitalism which requires a close relationship between the state and economic elites -- the state elite being mostly composed of top dogs in the ruling party, of course -- some of them being men and women of significant economic substance.

That is one of the reasons I find certain well-measured bellyaches regarding the Zim situation (which cavils, unfortunately, verge towards thoughtful casuistry) by business friendly gadflies alarmingly misleading.  It would appear that they have never asked themselves how an administration, seemingly committed to a more-or-less egalitarian socio-economic ethos, would have so easily (providing, of course, that the recipients of such munificence played political ball) allowed a chosen few facile ownership of a variety of business concerns in Zim, be it in tourism or mining or whatsoever.  This certainly appears to be a weird way for the government to express its egalitarian, socialist ethos!!  I shall not comment on the glaring, obtaining, lopsided wealth and income distribution that currently characterizes the same exemplar of socialist management!!  Bless your soul, John Saul!

This is the kind of intellectual malaise I find afflicting even indigenous critics of the status quo, who mindlessly refer to RGM's regime as socialist.  Pity that the same chorus is then repeated by respected, if equally indolent and irrelevant, international commentators.  A government that is neoliberal to the core is then presented as a bunch of wooly-headed impractical idealists of the socialist school.

A SLIGHT AND SLEIGHT DIGRESSION

Perhaps a modest digression on this socialist theme is here necessary.  I confess that I am tempted to discuss this theme with passionate garrulity, but will have to - given the beckoning and sobering realization that I might be both unwisely worrying the reader's finite patience and also that I am loath to display my spotty comprehension of such a comprehensive theme to a glowering public - limit my comments to a few timidly expressed points.

The continued reference - as socialist - (in the name of unreflective mutilation of meaning!) to the sort of economic management, on display in both contemporary Zim and China, is so mindboggling as to drive one to a madhouse.  In the abidingly erratic view of this author, what would seem to be the obtaining administrative pattern in the economic realm of the latter is a robustly authoritarian dirigisme (which is hardly in comportment with the socialist trends - equally despotic - of its immediate past), and in the former (as in most economically battered developing countries), a markedly diffident version (fearfully and sporadically manifested) of the same dirigisme - a not-too-surprising scheme of things, in light of the apprehensive and furtive glances over their shoulders that the policy makers, of such a country as Zim, steal at the headmasterly ferrule of Mr Bretton Woods.

The immediately preceding comment might provoke a pained and censorious brouhaha from those who would be quick to counter that recent events, indicative of counterproductive administrative meddlesomeness (price controls being one of them), are unambiguous pointers to Zim's embrace of the dirigisme of the robust variety.  I cannot accede to this criticism, for current manifestations of official meddlesomeness are little more than desperate actions resorted to to ameliorate an irremediably wretched situation. A very instructive instance of the emotively deflating observation, "too little too late". The telling damage was done long ago during the heady days of maddening flirtation with the enticing magic of the Washington Consensus,  whose sudden termination left Zim officialdom with a broken heart and a diminished will to live. Besides, one might as well mention in passing the schizophrenic policy clashes, within the administration, that occasionally manifest themselves in contradictory approaches to formulation and implentation of policy between Prime Minister Gono's office and the Presidency.

One wonders when the next batch of extremely worn out Zim dollars will be dispatched to the punctilious Bretton Woods debtors!  Which again makes me wonder what the MDC's thoughts on the debt overhang are. Will the MDC threaten a well planned delinquency - a la Argentina - or will it let fall a loud diplomatic blare re debt cancellation?  My person has run out of tea leaves (perhaps, a reflection of the prevalent, obtaining, dire economic straits!) to consult with regard this particular.

The same errant train of thought effectively afflicts the same social critics in their approach to such headline-grabbing themes as "Nationalization" and "Indigenization" and the intellectually lazy tendency (so liberally exibited by the same critical horde) towards treating them as semantically and practically interchangeable.  The former (given that democratic discourse and practice are its defining hallmarks) can be properly referred to as a move towards effecting a more equalitarian social dispensation at best, or, in somewhat more diluted form, a move towards smoothing the jagged edges of a remotely socially sympathetic capitalism - both outcomes being discretionarily engineered by the government then ruling.  The latter has, all too often, exhibited itself as none other than the much discredited classical nationalism informed by the philosophy of displacing a colonial with an indigenous elite.

AND MORGAN THE PILATE

" And what is truth?", asked the jesting and intellectually ovewhelmed ruler of Judea. One gets the far from easy sentiment that Morgan Tsvangirai is in like intellectual and spiritual torment when one considers his answers to questions on the economy when he was recently interviewed by SWradioAfrica on this particular.

To begin with, it is rather difficult to get a good read on Morgan's comments regarding developmental assistance (be it gratis or in the form of manageable loans).  Depending on the language in which such assistance is robed, it can be, and has probatively been so in many instances, developmentally malign.  It is rather difficult to imagine that a prostrate economy, such as Zim's, still has a sufficient reservoir of bargaining energy (usually a confident companion of an advanced degree of economic autonomy) to emerge as mutual winner in negotiative gives-and-takes regarding this particular.  Nor is it easy to imagine that, in the interests of prudent self preservation and careful navigation of all possible priorities, Morgan and company have cast a thoughtfully tentative glance at Latin America. My uninformed guess is that little cerebration has been expended in this direction. It can only be fitfully guessed how much Latin American Chavistas would like to establish a beachead for their brand of social governance in Africa and also what the warmth of receptivity of oppositional policy wonks to such a diplomatic overture would be.

The same commanding uncertainty accompanies Morgan's view on subsidies. Morgan emphatically pointed out that no such discretionary assistance would be forthcoming to local companies and individuals who can afford it.  These are brave fighting words in the teeth of the global opening up of the economy and the ubiquitous presence of South African influence in many facets of the Zim economy.  It also seems to pay scant regard to the companion deindustrialization of the opening up of the economy experienced in the immediate past -- not locally beneficial arrangements these, in terms of wealth creation and concomitant increase of employment oppsrtunities. Nor does it consider how to counter South African competition in both local and regional (perhaps, effectively lost and and now irretrievable) markets without arranging for some form of enabling subsidies to local producers.. And, by the way, these problems will manifest their enduring qualities even in a Zim minus RGM or ZANU!

It would appear that a robust discretionary meddling with the economy will have to be a fact of life (especially for an economy so wretchedly stooped and bent as Zim's) for a very long time to come. It would also appear, as Patrick Bond has so persuasively pointed out elsewhere, that some oppositional policy wonks have never learnt anything from the discretionary economic management of the Smith regime in Rhodesia and the apartheid one in South Africa, both of which manifested a goodly amount of prudence and foresight in establishing a nationally comforting measure of economic autonomy, and in creating very effective speed bumps to reign in footloose, speed demons of the international fast lane.

By the way, it might be necessary to mention reassuringly on this head, that discretionary policy, in so far as it is carefully thought out and also informed by a profoundly democratic impulse (in contradistinction to the blunderbuss approach that Zimmers have become all too familiar with) cannot but work for the greater social weal.

Nor have they listened to the nostalgic worries of the majority of ordinary Russians today, who could poignantly tell them that (were the wheel of history capable of opportune reversal) they most certainly would welcome a vigorous glasnost -- always needed for an invigorating blast of democratic fresh air -  but would be extremely and peevishly wary of a perestroika whose draught plans were laid out by crafty Bretton Woods architects.(1) (see comment at the end in regard this theme)

I find the comments on the diaspora interesting.  I have always wondered why, even in elections past, with such a significat portion of the electorate having moved further afield, the numerical total of voters on the voters roll has remained constant.  The MDC, however, still soldiers on with masochistic fortitude even given these seemingly insoluble brain teasers. Verily, a veritable cornucopia of masochistic valour is needed to conduct oppositional politics in Zim today!  Resoundingly persuasive reasons for participation in such elections will always be conjured up. Such is the nature of being always put in a politically reactive mode!  I do, however, know that had RGM found himself in a like position, he would have been the first one to combat it with extra-parliamentary vigorousness. What!  With all the copious wisdom of the degrees of wisdom under his belt to draw from!

As much as my bilious temperament has been so unsurprisingly provoked that I should like to comment without cease for a few years more, there appears to be still a scintilla of embattled patience, which has not been been crowded out by the riot of emotions in my house of personality, in a remote nook of my mind sagely prompting me to cease and desist here.  If you cannot read anything further than the next fullstop, it might have just succeeded in doing that.

But, hang on, there is still that insistent footnote to deal with below!

(1) In the same reflectively compassionate vein as that of the Russians, many a plaintive observer would probably point out that:

(ii) In regard to the hallowed gospel of the inerrantly functional market society, contemporary highest wisdom would claim that: while it indicated unquestionably meritorious patriotic stewardship, on the part of the US government, to intervene in the market to keep abreast of, and even emulate, sub-systemic patterns of Soviet administration that were responsible  for military, and near military, excellence (the MIGS, the AK 47s and the sputniks, among others), it would have been unforgivable folly (of purgatorial authorship!) to emulate subsystems that were responsible for keeping the general Russian populace well housed, well educated and sanitarily provided.

It can be profitably, if secretively, conjectured that the former variety of emulation, besides being patriotically noble (a sentiment in which the broad population is emotively elevated) is also incidentally and mundanely lucrative to those in the aerospace and military industry -- a species of payoff not so broadly generous to, or even remotely experienced by, the underlying population.

(iii)  The current bailing out (to the tune of half a trillion dollars US) of a few financial houses in the US also springs to mind.  Though it must be pointed out that the current malaise -- malignly repercussing globally and also the cause of a recession in the U.S. -- extends beyond the oft-mentioned mortgage chicanery and includes the agile accounting footwork manifested by many swagger companies that keeps a lot of extra-budgetary transactions off their official ledgers. Great tribute to the free market is this!!

(iii) Perhaps it would be overkill, on my censorious part, to make passing mention of the infinite amount of riders in international agreements which allow the US and European administrations to subsidize unilaterally and liberally their industries at the very same time that "developing" countries experience severely incapacitating deindustrializing throes.  Not quite surprising, since these riders happen to be the brainchildren of lawyerly verbal flair and Daedalian logic with which both the US and Europe are more than adequately blest. Mentally uncomplicated, starry-eyed yokels, such as this author, cannot but help reciting (in regard to the immediately preceding) Oliver Goldsmiths lines on disarmingly impressionable rustics:

"While words of learned length and thundering sound Amazed the gazing rustics rang'd round;"

*John Mutambirwa is has worked with a local chapter of the National Urban League in New Jersey, was an Economics Justice editor for AfricaFiles and is involved in internet advocacy.

** Please send comments to editor@pambazuka.org or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

On truth commissions and prosecutions

Agnes M.F. Kamara-Umunna

2008-03-24

http://pambazuka.org/en/category/letters/46871

In response to Truth commissions and prosecutions: Two sides of the same coin? [http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/features/46719]. I just finished reading "A Human Being Died That Night: Forgiving Apartheid's Chief Killer" by Pumla Gobodo-Madikizela. I had a meeting with Elazar Barkan about my work in Liberia on collecting stories from Victim and Perpetrators in Liberia making them talk on the radio about what had happen to them during the war and what (perpetrators) did during the war in Liberia. How both Victims and Perpetrators felt when it was happening to them as a Victim and the how Perpetrators how felt when they were hurting people.

I worked with the Liberia TRC trying to talk to the Perpetrators to be part of the TRC processs in Liberia. Since they have beening coming on my radio program to talk about what they did during the war, they also needed to go to the TRC. The TRC has been charged with the responsibility of investigating the root causes of the conflict in Liberia, amplifying historical truths. If this is the work of the Liberia TRC then the Perpetrators have to be part of the Liberia TRC.

You ask: Are TRC's designed to generate more truth, more justice, reparations, and genuine institutional reform? Or are they designed to undermine the State’s and society’s legal, ethical and political obligations to their people? I have asked myself this question alot.

Again you say "Truth commissions have been multiplying rapidly around the world and gaining increasing attention in recent years. They are proposed for different reasons and driven by diverse motives. They can be used firstly, for the purpose of national reconciliation and in the interests of the society; secondly, sometimes they can be used to avoid accountability or prosecution and merely to shield an offender from justice." If we are going to have TRC in Africa after conflicts - are we going to have the same type of South Africa TRC?

In Sierra Leone there was a TRC. How did was it at the end? Did the people of Sierra Leone get Justice? After theTRC finished its work and gave its recommendations, did the Sierra Leone Government adopt them? How can the Liberia TRC learn from these two TRCs? What will Happen to the Kenya TRC?

We have to see what will work for us in Africa after our conflicts. There are so many tensions between Truth Commissions and Prosecution in Liberia. Prince Yormie (or Yeomi) Johnson is a Liberian political and former military figure. He was elected to serve as a senator in the Liberian congress in the historic 2005 election. Johnson was born in Nimba County, in the east-central interior of the country.

In 1990, Johnson was allied with Charles Taylor as part of the National Patriotic Front of Liberia (NPFL), which crossed the border from Côte d'Ivoire and began operations in Liberia on Christmas Eve, 1989. However, an internal power struggle resulted in Prince Johnson leading a faction of fighters which he named the Independent National Patriotic Front of Liberia (INPFL).

In spite of ECOMOG opposition, INPFL forces captured most of the capital, Monrovia, late in the summer of 1990, and Johnson's supporters abducted President Samuel Doe at ECOMOG headquarters, the Free Port of Liberia. Although Johnson has recently denied killing Doe, there is no question that Doe was brutally executed in Johnson's custody on September 9, 1990, as the spectacle was videotaped and seen on news reports around the world. The video shows Johnson sipping a Budweiser as Doe's ear is dismembered. Ahmadou Kourouma also accused Prince Johnson of war crimes (abduction and torture of several Firestone's executives) in his book "Allah is not obliged". Shortly after Doe's death, Johnson allied with UN-supported ECOMOG peacekeepers in capturing the Liberian capital.

Subsequently, Johnson briefly claimed the presidency of Liberia in the fall of 1990. His claims ended following the consolidation of rebel power by his rival Charles Taylor of the NPFL. In an attempt by the weak national government to reconstruct Liberian politics, the INPFL was recognized at a conference held in Guinea, where Amos Sawyer was elected president. However, Johnson was forced to flee to Nigeria in fear of rebel forces supporting Taylor. He returned to Liberia in March 2004, stating his intention to return to politics by running for a senate seat in Nimba County; however, he left Liberia again on 7 April, apparently due to death threats he had received from the country's dominant rebel group, the Liberians United for Reconciliation and Democracy (LURD). In the October 11, 2005 elections, Johnson contested and won a Senate seat representing Nimba County, in spite of having a reputation for wartime brutality and having committed gross human rights abuses. He is the chair of the Senate's defense committee. Can we have him prosecuted in Liberia? How long will it take and how much money will the government spend on him? After all, he is a Senator in the same Liberia where he commited Human Rights abuses.

On Obama at the crossroads of a revolution

The Dag Hammarskjöld Foundation

Henning Melber

2008-03-25

http://pambazuka.org/en/category/letters/46918

Thank you very much for posting the three thought-provoking, sensible and reflective essays with differing perspectives on the impact of Obama [http://www.pambazuka.org/en/issue/current]. They offer in complementing ways to outsiders like me additional understanding of how to read some of the substantive contentious issues. With this posting, Pambazuka News shows once again its relevance in information sharing.

Horace Campbell - whom do you write for?

J E Burke

2008-03-25

http://pambazuka.org/en/category/letters/46919

I've finished reading Prof. Campbell's comments [http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/features/46809], and I can see that he is enthusiastic, encouraged, and hopeful regarding the candidacy of Barack Obama. But I had to wade through way too many words to find his actual points, and many of those words were confusing. I long to read clearly expressed incisive thought, and this just doesn't qualify. Perhaps there is an in-crowd who shares a common understanding of some of the terms that are opaque to me, and I'm not part of that group.

I'm left wondering, what are "new self-organizing tools for self-emancipation" (is this a reference to robotics?), and "self-similar processes being developed in spaces of peace, spaces of hope and non-racialized spaces"? Not only what, but where, are such spaces found?

And this statement: "Decent Christians are now seeking the gospel of peace and love instead of hate and religious fundamentalism." Is that "decent Christians" as opposed to "indecent" Christians? I've met some Christians, as well as non-Christians, who've been seeking the gospel of peace and love for a long time now. If this is a change, is Prof. Campbell suggesting that it's been brought about by Barack Obama?

What is "this methodical organizing like the repetition of self-similarity"? What is the "scaling pattern of Obama"?

"This leap has been reinforced by the nested loops of new social networks wired through the spaces of the information revolution". Perhaps I'm to understand this as poetry.

"Safe and clean neighborhoods, children who are reared to respect all human beings and a society that support (sic) repair of the planet earth awaits these new self-organizing forces." Exactly which forces are those? In my view, these requirements wait for no politician or political force, but are the direct responsibility of individual citizens. No parent can put off teaching respect for all humanity until the right politician appears on the scene. If our neighborhoods are unclean and/or unsafe, it's our fault, not the fault of "politics". In my view, each individual is responsible for the space s/he occupies.

My message: reading this piece was largely a frustrating experience.

Women advocates: Long way to go

L D Alabi

2008-03-25

http://pambazuka.org/en/category/letters/46920

Good article by Roselyn Musa [http://www.pambazuka.org/en/category/panafrican/46518] but I think African advocates of women's rights have a really long way to go and must work more using a results based approach rather than the 'satisfy the donor' approach. While the former will help us sincerely adress our problems with a preparedness to make appropriate sacrifices capable of recording change, the latter tends to tie us down with the atittude of struggling to merely carry out an activity and reporting back to donor that the activity has been implemented. In this latter situation, we tend to 'sleep again until some other donor advances more money for another activity'. So we just keep going round and round in the real sense of it!

To what extent are African women's rights activists prepared to endure pains and stresses that necessarily come up in the sincere struggle for the realization of women's human rights? To what extent are members of the women's human rights community willing to lay aside differences and struggles for personal recognition & power which we so often exhibit at the expense of the overall interest of women's cause?

We need to address all of these issues to be able to move faster along the already tight rope to the realisation of women's rights. Experiences from being a part organizer of a just concluded 'Kaduna State Women's 2008 Peaceful Walk', in demand of respect for women's human rights organized in Kaduna State of northern Nigeria, convinced me that women need to go back to the drawing board in their vision, strategy and purpose in actvisism.

Look out for a detailed report of this activity which happened on 11th March 2008: A lot to learn indeed!

Fahamu