Zimbabwe News Update: No Substitute For Dialoge, Says Kabila

Democratic Republic of Congo President Joseph Kabila has won the run-off elections.
Originally uploaded by Pan-African News Wire Photo File

No substitute for dialogue, says Kabila

From Sydney Kawadza in MUTARE
Courtesy of the Zimbabwe Herald

DRC President Joseph Kabila has challenged Africa to follow his country’s example by actively seeking dialogue and pursuing national reconciliation as a means of solving any internal differences.

In his keynote address at the annual Dag Hammarskjold Commemoration Seminar at Africa University here yesterday, President Kabila said victory over foreign forces that threatened to tear DRC apart was partly attributable to political dialogue.

"Political dialogue, entailing compromise and give and take, had to be brought to bear in order to defuse misunderstandings, build confidence, mend the social fabric and induce reconciliation," the DRC leader said.

"Indeed, accepting to share power with adversaries, or granting amnesty to rebels is seldom an easy decision.

"It can be politically painful and even dangerous. It takes vision, wisdom and, above all, courage.

"Looking back, we do not regret having ridden that, at times, bumpy road.

"It led us to where we stand today: strong and tall, as it was meant to be," he said.

President Kabila challenged African countries to draw inspiration from the DRC and its rebirth through resistance, dialogue, reconciliation, democratic rule and hard work.

President Kabila’s presentation was titled "The State of the Congolese Nation Following Negotiations".

The war in the DRC ended in late 2002 and President Kabila subsequently formed a national unity government that roped in six vice presidents, four of them former rebel militia leaders.

President Kabila paid tribute to the Zimbabwe Defence Forces for their leading role in resolving, through Operation Sovereign Legitimacy, the armed conflict that claimed millions of lives in his country.

He said the DRC received "heroic support" from Zimbabwe, Angola and Namibia in those "dark days".

"I wish to seize this opportunity and, once again, pay tribute to these sister countries.

"As a nation, we will never forget the blood shed by their gallant sons and daughters to help us preserve our independence, territorial integrity and national sovereignty," he said.

In September this year at the last Sadc Summit in the DRC, President Kabila said he was grateful for Zimbabwe’s assistance and would soon visit the country to personally convey his people’s gratitude.

The seminar, which ends today, is being held under the theme "The Democratic Republic of Congo: The Road to Conflict Transformation and National Healing".

President Kabila chronicled the DRC’s conflicts, starting with the killing of iconic statesman Dr Patrice Lumumba in 1961 soon after the country’s independence from Belgium the previous year.

This resulted in a drawn-out liberation struggle led by nationalists such as Cdes Pierre Mulele, Antoine Gizenga and the current president’s father, Laurent Desire Kabila.

"Unfortunately, this took place at the peak of the Cold War (between the former USSR and the West) and their efforts got entangled in the East-West rivalry.

"They could not succeed at the outset."

President Kabila said the military coup of 1965 ushered in 32 years of Mobutu Sese Seko’s misrule, which only ended in 1997.

An era of freedom and democracy dawned, but this was almost nipped in the bud by invading armies.

"As if history was repeating itself, no time was given to the new revolutionary regime to organise and put people back to work. Just a year later, the DRC was dragged into a long and protracted war of aggression by her eastern neighbours," he said.

This was after Rwandese and Ugandan troops invaded the country in support of DRC rebel militias who were tacitly backed by Western powers.

The war lasted over five years and claimed millions of lives.

President Kabila said the conflict was the costliest war in terms of human losses after the Second World War.

The popular resistance organised by the late Laurent Kabila rallied friendly countries and saved the nation, though unfortunately it also claimed the liberation fighter’s life.

Meanwhile, President Kabila returned home last night after spending two days in Zimbabwe.

He bade farewell to President Mugabe at State House in the evening with the Zimbabwean leader expressing his desire for the two to continue interacting.

President Mugabe parting shot was: "Thank you for the visit. Let’s keep in touch."

During his visit, President Kabila met the three principals to the Global Political Agreement to get an insight into how the inclusive Government was functioning.


Zanu-PF Congress preps on course

Herald Reporter

Preparations for Zanu-PF’s National People’s Congress in December are progressing as scheduled, party national chairman Cde John Nkomo has said.

Delegates to the congress — expected to number about 10 000 — will elect the Presidium comprising the President and First Secretary, two Vice Presidents and Second Secretaries and a national chairperson. The First Secretary will, in turn, appoint members of the Politburo.

Speaking after meeting the Congress Co-ordinating Committee on Monday, Cde Nkomo said he had received progress reports but could not reveal the amount of money raised so far.

The party aims to raise US$5 million for the congress.

"I have received progress reports from all the sub-committees that are organising the Congress and they have confirmed that everything is progressing according to our plan. We are quite optimistic that by the time of the congress everything will be in place. As a committee, we have come up with a system where we meet with the sub-committees every Monday to monitor progress of the preparations."

Cde Nkomo dispelled rumours that the party was failing to raise sufficient funds to finance the five-yearly meeting

"Yes, in every endeavour there are challenges and our case cannot be an exception. But challenges are not problems," said Cde Nkomo.

"The challenges that we are facing are ordinary challenges that can be found in any project."

Almost all the 10 provinces have endorsed the current leadership of President Mugabe and Vice President Joice Mujuru ahead of the Congress.

Another Vice President and Second Secretary to fill the void left by founding nationalist Cde Joseph Msika will be elected at the Congress.


US can’t teach us anything

Zimbabwe Herald

THE Western alliance’s reaction to the abortive presidential run-off in Afghanistan should show all who were led to believe that Anglo-Saxon opposition to President Mugabe’s re-election was about the professed platitudes of electoral democracy, that they were sold a dead donkey.

American and British opposition to President Mugabe’s victory was because, in their own words, ‘‘he continues to pose a continuous and extraordinary threat to the foreign policy of the United States (and the British governments)’’.

A foreign policy, that we all know, is about plundering other people and their resources.

A bit of history will suffice here.

Zimbabwe held harmonised presidential, Senate, House of Assembly and local government elections on March 29, 2008 that saw the presidential contest failing to produce an outright winner when none of the four candidates garnered the 50 percent plus 1 votes required for a first round win.

A run-off was, therefore, called for June 27 pitting President Mugabe and MDC-T leader Morgan Tsvangirai. And after gauging the mood of the electorate, and with just days to go before the poll, Tsvangirai announced his ‘‘withdrawal’’ from the run-off, alleging violence against his supporters.

The British and American governments immediately began casting aspersions on the legitimacy of the outcome, saying they would not recognise President Mugabe’s legitimacy.

This was despite the fact that legal experts had described Tsvangirai’s ‘‘withdrawal’’ as a legal nullity since the run-off had already begun with the deployment of election officers and observers countrywide.

Fast forward to August 20, 2009, the day Afghanistan held its presidential election pitting two US-anointed candidates, incumbent Hamid Karzai and his erstwhile foreign minister Abdullah Abdullah. Though Karzai initially claimed outright victory with over 53 percent of the vote in the first round, a UN probe into electoral irregularities unearthed massive fraud involving over 20 percent of the votes credited to Karzai.

The votes were docked necessitating a run-off that had been slated for Saturday, before Abdullah announced his withdrawal saying the run-off was going to be equally fraudulent.

What shocked many was that even before Abdullah’s withdrawal, the Obama administration had enthroned Karzai as Afghan president for another five years, saying ‘‘even if he were forced into a second round of voting he would almost certainly win it’’.

More was to follow after Abdullah’s withdrawal as the US was first off the block in congratulating Karzai even before the Afghan electoral authorities had declared him the winner.

This is not to say we expect the legitimacy of our leadership here to accrue from US blessings, no. All we are doing is exposing the hypocrisy of the self-appointed ‘‘international democrats’’ and ‘‘moral authorities’’ who, ironically, only yesterday opposed our own fight for democracy here.

A bit of history again.

When Ian Smith declared his UDI on November 11, 1965, the progressive world was naturally outraged and the UN Security Council responded by slapping the Smith regime with a raft of sanctions beginning that year till the brief restoration of British rule in December 1979.

Though the terms of the sanctions forbade trade or financial dealings with Rhodesia, the US supported the beleaguered settler regime regardless and covertly channelled assistance through apartheid South Africa.

US allies, among them Portugal (then under Marcello Caetano), Israel, and Iran (then under the US proxy Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi), also assisted and traded with Rhodesia. In an attempt to bypass the UN sanctions, the US passed the Byrd Amendment in 1971 and continued to buy chrome from Rhodesia in violation of the UN sanctions.

As if that was not enough, the US also contributed to the establishment of an armaments industry in Rhodesia that enabled the Rhodesian Front to kill over 50 000 innocent Zimbabweans whose only "crime" was daring to demand majority rule.

The US also provided the technical knowledge and support, again through apartheid South Africa, towards establishing the 700-kilometre Border Minefield Obstacle along Zimbabwe’s borders with Zambia and Mozambique. Mines aimed at stopping aspiring cadres from crossing to training camps and blowing up trained combatants crossing back into Zimbabwe.

Yet today, the US and its allies are trying to re-invent and pass themselves off as champions of democracy in Zimbabwe.

We urge all those who may have been swayed by the Anglo-Saxon rhetoric to acquaint themselves with our history to tell friend from foe.

Such knowledge is also vital to understanding the political dynamics at play in our country today lest we are led down the garden path.

The US can’t teach us anything.


Height of American hypocrisy

By Tendai Hildegarde Manzvanzvike

ZIMBABWE and Afghanistan are thousands and thousands of miles apart. What makes them suitable variables for comparative analysis? Why is the West — the United States and Britain in particular — interested in the two nation states? Why are their recent electoral processes of significance?

After the failure of the illegal regime change project in Zimbabwe, "legitimised" in part by the US sanctions law, the so-called Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act of 2001, the US and its allies continue to refuse to recognise a Zimbabwe Government in which both President Mugabe and Zanu-PF are major players, preferring their handpicked stooges to be in charge.

They have continued to denounce Zimbabwe’s 2008 harmonised elections and the subsequent Presidential run-off on the basis of alleged issues of governance, rule of law, human rights, etc.

However, the culmination of Afghanistan’s presidential poll has revealed the levels of the West’s hypocrisy and double standards, especially the US, when it comes to Zimbabwe.

The Afghan issue shows that every principle of democracy, which the West preaches about and would want to export to every part of the world, has been thrown into the dumpster because their national interests took precedence over the wishes and interests of the Afghan people.

For, on November 2, Afghanistan’s Independent Electoral Commission announced that there was a new president, and he was none other than former president Hamid Karzai.

The Western world, Washington in particular, was quick to embrace and endorse Karzai as the legitimate leader of Afghanistan.

This contrasted with the West’s reaction to Zimbabwe’s run-off that invited a full-blown diplomatic offensive in order to reject not only the electoral results, but also de-legitimise President Mugabe, in favour of the US, Britain and their allies.

Large sums of money were disbursed through civic organisations in order to change the colour of Zimbabwe’s politics, a desperate attempt meant to reverse the gains of independence, especially the land reform programme, and also derail Zimbabwe’s sovereignty.

People’s memories are still fresh with the attempts made by the Bush administration, through his Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Jendayi Frazer, to influence Sadc and the African Union. There were several vain attempts to have Zimbabwe on the UN Security Council agenda.

In fact, last week’s abortive visit by UN’s special rapporteur on torture, Dr Norman Nowak, was a clear demonstration that until a government of the West’s choice is in power in Zimbabwe; they will not relent in their quest for regime change.

It is a goal and objective that they are pursuing with impunity, even if it means funding parallel government structures within the inclusive Government in pursuance of their interests.

However, on September 15, after monitoring the Afghan elections, former US president Jimmy Carter described the Afghan poll as "despicable".

Said Carter: "Hamid Karzai has stolen the election . . . Now the question is whether he gets away with it."

Carter’s comments followed allegations of massive fraud.

Well, on November 2, it became official. Karzai defied the odds, stole the election and got away with it. If observers had expected disgust and dismay, they were actually surprised to learn that the Obama administration was the first to endorse Karzai as the "new president who (was) the same as the old president".

However, the announcement was just a formality meant to make the farcical exercise look credible because on October 31, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was reported as saying that the Afghan poll would be legitimate even if Abdullah Abdullah boycotted.

Said the reports in the media: "Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, has said the Afghan elections would be legitimate even if Abdullah Abdullah boycotted the run-off poll, leaving President Hamid Karzai unopposed."

Clinton also said that a boycott of the run-off election which had been scheduled for November 7 by runner-up Abdullah would not de-legitimise the poll. This was after the Abdullah camp had refused to "participate in an election which (was) not transparent and fraud-free".

Long before Abdullah announced his withdrawal, both London and Washington were already anticipating that he would retire "graciously".

Clinton also said that the withdrawal of a candidate would not be "unprecedented" and would not affect the legitimacy of the vote.

"We see that happen in our own country where, for whatever combination of reasons, one of the candidates decides not to go forward. I don’t think it has anything to do with the legitimacy of the election."

So now people know where the withdrawals, boycotts and ‘‘disengagements’’ come from.

Washington was the first to endorse Karzai as Afghanistan’s new legitimate leader, after the Independent Electoral Commission had cancelled the run-off in the wake of Abdullah’s withdrawal.

In his congratulatory message, US President Barack Obama threw his weight behind Karzai and acknowledged that although the election was "messy", his administration was happy that the poll had finally been resolved according to the dictates of Afghan law, and expressed hope that there would be fresh efforts to tackle issues that were part of Karzai’s first term: rampant corruption. He also urged a new chapter in Afghan politics.

Meanwhile, other Nato members were talking about a coalition. The allies appeared to be talking about the same thing in a different way. Maybe it was because the likes of Gordon Brown, who spoke about a coalition, were not happy with the final outcome.

It is evident from this that the American experiment plays itself differently in various parts of the globe depending on whose side one is.

Karzai is a liability to his people, but he is an asset to Nato, and a speedy conclusion of this electoral issue was not necessarily meant for the Afghan people.

The Obama administration has also continued with Bush’s so-called war on terror. Instead of pulling troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq, Obama is actually looking at sending over 40 000 more soldiers to Afghanistan.

It appeared Karzai had to be endorsed fast since time is not on Uncle Sam’s side as winter is starting, and it will be very difficult to move troops in harsh weather conditions. This is despite the fact that the US administration has been advised that the Afghan war is unwinnable.

The Afghan war is also meant to boost Nato’s morale since the capitalist system is celebrating the demise of communism 20 years ago. This is despite the fact that the geo-political sphere is witnessing a resurgence of major political and economic players like China and Russia.


Zim’s sovereignty is irreversible

EDITOR — There is a Zimbabwean element that believes that Zimbabwe’s independence, let alone sovereignty, are irrelevant.

They believe that these aspects of our nationhood are reversible.

Last Saturday, one of these elements, ROHR (Restoration of Human Rights Zimbabwe), described as a radical human rights group, convened in the city centre around 10am with the hope of sending a message to the Sadc Troika "to take up a hard stance on the political parties, especially Zanu-PF and President Mugabe, to own up to their agreements under GPA".

The emblazoned ROHR on the T-shirts made one wonder whether Rhodies had made that daring move of reincarnation.

The irony was the message on the back of their T-shirts: "We will die for our rights." Meanwhile, a gallant son of the soil who had died for the true rights of the people of this country was being interred at the national shrine.

As if ROHR’s actions were not enough, we then learnt that MDC-T leader, Morgan Tsvangirai — who is the Prime Minister — was also playing golf as Cde Makasha was being laid to rest.

Not only was this very unfortunate, but it was also very embarrassing for someone in his position to be doing that. It was unfeeling to say the least. What was there to celebrate?

Although former US ambassador to Zimbabwe James D. McGee, who introduced Tsvangirai to the game, is gone, it is not difficult to hazard guesses of whom he was playing golf with.

There are still so many of them, and since golfing gives opportunities to discuss "serious" issues, the ‘‘disengagement’’ was probably the issue as they teed off.

The 11th hour is notable!

Did Tsvangirai give a thought to that?

To the Anglo-Saxons and not just the Rhodies, the 11th month, 11th day and 11th hour are significant, for this is the day and time when they honour their heroes from the First World War that ended in 1919.

Anglo-Saxons commemorate this day normally called Armistice Day very religiously. However, the renegade Rhodesian leader Ian Smith in 1965 declared a Unilateral Declaration of Independence from Britain on the 11th of the 11th of the 11th of 1965.

It was Smith’s action that made people like Cde Makasha leave home to take up arms and fight for the independence and true rights of this country.

With this little bit of historical context, the nation should ask what Tsvangirai’s actions meant, and what an independent Zimbabwe means to him and his party?

Nomagugu M’simang.
Harare.


We’re tired of MDC-T antics

EDITOR — Ever since MDC-T "disengaged" from the inclusive Government more than 10 days ago it’s still not clear even to the top leadership as to what they want to achieve with this move which President Mugabe attributed to the party’s reliance on "little emotional" rather than rational thoughts.

I came to this conclusion after Nelson Chamisa, the MDC-T spokesperson, was at pains to explain what MDC-T’s "disengagement" from Government means.

Chamisa, who had an interview with a local journalist, was incoherent and equally confused as he was quoted as saying: "We are not disengaging from the Government. There is no pullout from Government because we are Government ourselves. It is impossible for one to pull out of ourselves."

Then can the party please explain to the layman on the street in plain Shona, as we cannot talk of English what to "disengage" means? The party is not attending Cabinet meetings and the Council of Ministers where I am sure Government business is discussed and direction as to the operations of the ministries is given. On the other hand, Chamisa was quoted as saying: "Our ministers are going to their offices and executing their duties diligently as ministers of excellence." Can MDC-T please stop insulting the intelligence of the masses, more so their supporters who indicated that the party should stay in the inclusive Government during their consultative meetings.

Which takes us back to the question of whose interest are those in MDC-T serving as reports are that a day before making the decision to ‘‘disengage’’ Morgan Tsvangirai, the MDC-T leader, met with officials from the US, Britain, Canada, Sweden, Denmark, France, Norway, Switzerland, Holland and Australia, who overwhelmingly pressured him to announce a "collapse of the inclusive Government".

People are tired of MDC-T antics, which for a long time are exposing their naivete and gullibility, which borders on the ridiculous. There seems to be no exceptional strategic advisers to this embattled party as time and again they have found themselves in the deep end when they can’t even swim.

MDC-T leaders should be told in no uncertain terms that these childish antics will not move Zanu-PF, a party of seasoned politicians, to give in to the regime change agenda.

Susan Chipanga.
Avondale,
Harare.


Boost for Malawi-Zim trade

Herald Reporter

Government has called for the expeditious implementation of measures that promote trade between Zimbabwe and Malawi.

Officially opening the eighth session of the Zimbabwe-Malawi Joint Commission in Harare yesterday, Foreign Affairs Minister Simbarashe Mumbengegwi, said the two countries should work to clear obstacles affecting trade between them.

"In this regard, we need to remove all impediments to trade, such as non-tariff barriers, bottlenecks at border posts and unnecessary bureaucratic procedures that are hindering trade relations between the two countries," he said.

"We should also bring the private sector including SMEs on board to ensure that our engagements as governments are relevant and meaningful to our entrepreneurs."

Minister Mumbengegwi underscored the need to create an enabling business environment saying that would benefit both countries’ economies.

He said Zimbabwe and Malawi had strong business ties hence the need to undertake measures that ensured less taxation of the entrepreneurs.

"We, therefore, welcome the proposal to sign the Agreement on the Avoidance of Double Taxation as a measure to stimulate further investment between our countries."

He commended the government of Malawi and the Sadc region at large for rallying behind Zimbabwe in the face of Western illegal sanctions. Although the Zimbabwe-Malawi Joint Commission last met in 2002, Minister Mumbengegwi expressed gratitude on the progress it had made since.

"Although it has been a long time since the last session of the Joint Commission, we have witnessed the signing and implementation of the Revised Bilateral Trade Agreement, the MoU on Agriculture and the MoU on the Promotion of Small and Medium Enterprises," he said.

Minister Mumbengegwi took a swipe at Western governments for maintaining illegal sanctions on Zimbabwe in spite of their condemnation by Sadc, Comesa, the Non-Aligned Movement and the African Union.

Malawi Foreign Affairs Minister Professor Etah Banda said her country was committed to upholding the mutual relationship between the two countries. She said Malawi would do everything on its part to strengthen trading relations between Zimbabwe and Malawi.

"We will do our best to ensure that we achieve our goal of enhancing trading relations between our two countries," she said.

Prof Banda said in the face of modern global challenges, it was imperative that the two countries explored new areas of co-operation to deal with emerging global challenges such as climate change.