The PatriotCelebrating being Zimbabwean

ONE cannot fully capture the greatness of pan-Africanist and liberator the late former President Robert Mugabe without celebrating his role in the Land Reform Programme.

His mantra: “Land is the economy and the economy is land,” captured the cause of the First and the Second Chimurenga.

Western narratives tend to be negative with regards to Cde Mugabe because African resistance efforts have never gone well in the minds of the colonialists.

In the face of the “…injustices which left Zimbabwe with a dual land ownership structure skewed along racial lines, the greatest challenge that the country had to face (…) is to redistribute land equitably and overcome various legal constraints in the way,” says Cde Mugabe in his text, The Third Chimurenga: Inside the Third Chimurenga.

Fransis Chitsike’s (2003) Critical Analysis of the Land Reform Programme in Zimbabwe argues the international community condemned the Land Reform Programme as a gross breach of human rights.

However, the Land Reform Programme speaks of the possibility of having successful tangible decolonisation for those who are chattels in the eyes of the white supremacists.

Land reform is a hands-on process.

Dr Felix Muchemwa’s book The Struggle for Land in Zimbabwe (1890-2010) discusses the reasons behind land reform.

To talk about Cde Mugabe is to talk about a hero who managed to move back to top-priority-shelf the cancelled land narratives.

European settler-farmers held 15 500 000 hectares of the land and that translated to 2 474 hectares per individual.

Subversive narratives are treated with scepticism because they are deemed improper, especially when they impinge on the dominant.

In the Zimbabwean post-independent discourse, the life of Cde Mugabe echoes the story of land reform.

In his text The Third Chimurenga: Inside the Third Chimurenga (92), Cde Mugabe explains:

“What this means is that iwe neni tine basa, you and I have a mission to accomplish on behalf of our people who demand full independence, full sovereignty and the full benefits of national resources given to them by the Almighty in his infinite bounteousness.”

Cde Mugabe defines land redistribution as the reason behind the resistance efforts of King Lobengula in 1893, the principal grievance of our heroes of the First Chimurenga, led by Mbuya Nehanda and Sekuru Kaguvi.

He further argues: “The land issue is the fundamental principal definer of the succeeding new nation and state of Zimbabwe. Indeed, we know it to be the core issue and imperative of the Third Chimurenga which you and me are fighting, and for which we continue to make such enormous sacrifices.”

What do you say of a man who states that the colonial occupation cannot and must not last forever?

Imagine freedom of families now on spacious hectares of new, better land redeemed for them through the Fast Track Land Resettlement Programme.

Cde Mugabe taught Zimbabwe that when we make sacrifices, demand and determine the pace of transformative change, we get the results we wish and deserve. 

The Fast Track Land Reform Programme is an economic correlative of the liberation struggle whose legitimacy ought not to be debated or disputed.

The Land Reform Programme was more than party business.

Cde Mugabe conscientised the nation about colonial invasion which can never be a thing of the past as long as land still lies in the hands of the whites.

Imperial occupation brought the darkest phase in our national history.

Against it, the First Chimurenga of 1893 failed to yield results. 

Of course, the Second Chimurenga brought independence.

It is the former President who championed the Third Chimurenga as a realm in which Zimbabweans fought for their inheritance and sovereignty with the understanding that settler-colonialism never meant to make it easy for the Africans.

The inhumane cruelty by the West required sacrifice, in unity, for black entitlement.

His assertion that Zimbabwe is blackman’s country obviously challenges people who were once masters and that’s why it does not go well with them. 

Cde Mugabe touched the raw nerve of the colonialists by conscientising the black Africans.

He paved way for every other resistance effort that is going to take place in Zimbabwe.

No wonder why the unrepentant colonial masters, led by the US and the UK, ganged against this great man and imposed illegal and unjustified sanctions with an intention to make the Zimbabwean economy scream and incite the citizens to turn against their leader. 

Today, the man has died, still on the sanctions list.

Cde Mugabe’s ability to stand up to the white regime must be celebrated.

Indeed, he is a martyr for Zimbabweans and the whole of Africa as acknowledged by various African leaders and politicians. 

Economic Freedom Fighter (EFF) leader Julius Malema, last week, maintained that Cde Mugabe was a martyr for Africa and did not make mistakes in his tenure as President. 

He argues, Cde Mugabe awakened the spirit of all Africans about their rightful place in their country.

As such, the former President should be celebrated by all for his selfless martyrdom. 

In the narratives of Zimbabwe, therefore, Land Reform, which is quoted in 1980 with the signing of the Lancaster House Agreement as an effort to more equitably distribute land between black subsistence farmers and settlers of European ancestry, who enjoyed superior political and economic status, cannot be exhaustively discussed without fully mentioning the late former President Mugabe.

“All the world’s a stage,

And all the men and women merely players;

They have their exits and their entrances;

And one man in his time plays many parts,

His acts being seven ages …” — William Shakespeare (As You Like It).

FORMER President Robert Mugabe’s story was always going to touch the world, to awaken it from its seemingly deep slumber but then be subjected to various twists and turns; all to suit the entrenched interests, especially of those who reviled him both in life and death.

Such was, and still is, the bigoted belief of the anti-Mugabe brigade. They thought they could use his demise to defile his dream, self-belief and determination that he planted in his people.

But on September 6 2019, when he departed for the yonder world they thought they had found the catch they had long waited for.

How wrong they were!

It then came as no surprise that those who loved him carried the day, over those who loathed him.

Yet the tributes have been expectedly and evidently of honour and immense loss from all corners of the world; and that they are all befitting is a narrative that can never be ignored.

It is for a reason.

Cde Mugabe is a man whose contribution to the global political economy can’t be glossed over by a few words.

It would be a dishonour, a disservice to what he did and contributed to the global political and economic world.

It is a story that should be told through documentaries, films and our curriculum.

Here is a story that should be used by our tourism sector to market the country; a story that should never be forgotten and a history whose enduring footprints must never be erased.

As we rummage through the many things that we have been left clutching by this great man, one hopes that there will not be someone from Hollywood who will come and steal that story from us.

It is our story.

It should be told by us.

And Robert Mugabe is our hero.

There is always that uncanny tendency from Zimbabweans to shuffle their history to the periphery, to put it on hold and, with time, completely forget all about it.

We have lost key aspects of our history because of that self-destructive tendency.

But because Cde Mugabe created a vibrant education system and an efficient information management system, that history will never be lost.

That is why this writer is not only taking offence with what has been written about Cde Mugabe but is struggling to canvass for the apt words to describe the great man.

We will nevertheless try to give this story meaning through the following narrative.

Just when one reaches the point where one thinks that everything that needs to be said has been exhausted, something new pops up.

Just when we all wrap our papers, tuck our pens into our pockets and get up to go,  sure that all the words, all the superlatives and nomenclatures have been swallowed and spitted by those who now rely on the ever changing technology to cast them on the expectant lot, somehow new words, new argots emerge.

There they stand, from a distance, lurking with all their might and summoning the vibrancy and urging the writer in one to join the bandwagon and proffer a word or two to the expectant consumer.

And the consumer never tires of the  new, different and sometimes fresh angle.

Cde Mugabe represented just one thing in his life.

He represented his people; an unflinching patriot who never wavered when it came to defending and protecting what was right for the people, his people.

The war against the West, which battle we are still entangled in, is ample testimony of this principled stance.

The continued attempts by the West, through their local proxies, confirm the strength and viability of that unwavering stance against Western imperialism.

He stood for his people, undeterred and unmoved by the manoeuvres from the West and those who tried, but with no success, to stand in the way of what he believed in.

They all lost because he believed in Zimbabwe, and Zimbabwe believed in him as well. That combination could not be broken and it shall never be broken.

Cde Mugabe imbued us with the strong belief that we belonged to Zimbabwe and that Zimbabwe belonged to us.

He was right and in many ways too.

This is our country and in it we find everything that the heart of a human being craves for.

When the West preach democracy, when they attempt to divide us, there is and will always be the towering figure of Cde Mugabe there to give us the light, to shine on us and to cast away the darkness of such vagaries.

We will not shed tears for Cde Mugabe because legends do not die.

We will not weep for him because we are armed with the knowledge that his legacy is there to guide and protect us.

Go well son of the soil!

Fare thee well Father Africa!

Sleep well the towering flame of African emancipation!

Let those with ears listen.

THE DEATH OF FOUNDING PRESIDENT OF ZIMBABWE, CDE ROBERT GABRIEL MUGABE, 6TH SEPTEMBER, 2019 

The death early this morning 1n Singapore of the founder of our Nation, and iconic leader of our struggle for National Liberation, Cde Robert Gabriel Mugabe, leaves a big void in our Nation. 

A veteran nationalist and a doughty Pan-Africanist fighter, Cde Mugabe bequeaths a rich and indelible legacy of tenacious adherence to principle on the collective rights of Africa and Africans in general and, in particular, the . rights of the people of Zimbabwe for whom he gave his all to help free.

In his life and political career met and melded key phases, moods and shifts in the story of our National Struggle and quest for Freedom and Statehood, including the tragedies, pains and rigors which underwrote that epic story. 

Incarcerated for eleven years in settler colonial prisons, he, alongside fellow nationalists who included late Father Zimbabwe, Cde Joshua Mqabuko Nkomo, remained unbowed and resolute, eventually escaping from the then Rhodesia in 1974 in order to lead and guide the resumption and escalation of our war of Liberation at a time of its tragic setbacks and paralysis. 

Before long and under his firm leadership, the struggle regained momentum, expanded and consolidated, transforming the Patriotic Front into a formidable, coordinated national liberation movement and fighting force capable of waging one of the most gruelling and protracted struggles in the Southern African region. Today our country is free – has been srnce 1980, thanks to the sacrifices of a generation of dedicated veteran nationalists and freedom fighters pre-dating the 1960s, who included the late Cde Mugabe. 

A great teacher and mentor, the bitterness of long spells of incarceration, and the anguish of a brutal and bitter war, never extinguished Cde Mugabe’s forgiving inner humanity. That humanity shone undiminished throughout that season of war, and forcefully asserted itself by way of the signature policy of National Reconciliation on which our whole Statehood was founded and built. Through that policy of forgiveness, Southern African politics took a definitive shift towards a just, post-conflict multiracial harmony, which would be replicated elsewhere in our region and beyond. 

He thus wrote a lasting page on Nation-building and statecraft for the world, making him stand out as such a remarkable statesman of our century. Apart from landmark post-Independence transformations in areas of rights, education and social services for the hitherto marginalized black Zimbabweans, the late departed icon will be eternally remembered and honoured for the bold and historic Land Reform Programme which he undertook. 

Through this Programme, indigenous Zimbabweans regained their long-denied land rfghts, to complete their sovereignty. For that he was especially vilified, shunned and punished by those who stood to lose from an end to colonial “rights”, and from· a Just reassertion of African rights. 

With characteristic defiance, he stood firm and undaunted, resolutely pressing on with the Land Reform Programme to completion, all against formidable odds which included punitive sanctions and other reprisals that followed, and which still dog us to this day. Today Zimbabwe’s Land Question, itself a principal grievance of our Struggle, stands fully and irrevocably addressed and resolved. History will remember him for this bold move. 

As we mourn the passing on of our Commander, Liberator, Founder and Leader, we remain determined to carry forward the transformation he so fervently desired, including protecting and defending the gains of the Struggle for which he made huge sacrifices. On the bedrock and solid foundation of the First Republic which he moulded as its leader, we today recover and grow our economy, brick by brick, ,until his lifelong vision of an empowered people is realized.

On behalf of our Nation, that of my family, and on my own behalf, I wish to express my deepest, heartfelt condolences to the Mugabe Family, to Amai Grace Mugabe and the children especially, on this their saddest loss. Amai Mugabe stood by her husband to the very end, thus imparting to our Nation a lasting lesson on devout love and care. For that, we deeply thank her, as we join her in the grief of loss and bereavement, which is also ours to feel and bear. ZANU-PF, the party which the late departed helped found, has met and accorded him National Hero Status which he earned and richly deserves. 

Let me also register the gratitude of Government and our entire Nation to the Government and People of the Republic of Singapore for the unmatched hospitality and medical care they extended to our Leader up to the very end. In particular, we are most grateful to the team of medical experts and support staff which cared for him with such great diligence, dedication and compassion. They did all they could, up to the very end. 

As we await the arrival of the remains of our dear departed icon, we pray that the Good Lord grant him mercies, putting his dear Soul to eternal rest.

We as Zimbabweans, declare days of mourning until our Leader’s burial. 

I thank you.

Emmerson Dambudzo Mnangagwa 

PRESIDENT 

06/09/19

FROM freedom fighter, to Premier and President, Robert Gabriel Mugabe was often referred to as a harsh, paranoid, autocratic, self-serving, arrogant and power-obsessed leader.

But was that a fair and true assessment or judgement? 

Mugabe was born on February 21 1924, in Kutama, Zvimba, educated at Kutama Mission School and qualified as a teacher.  

He attended Fort Hare University in South Africa (here he met some of his contemporaries such as Julius Nyerere, Herbert Chitepo and Kenneth Kaunda). 

After graduating in 1951, he worked as a school teacher at various schools in Southern Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe) and in neighbouring Northern Rhodesia (now Zambia) and then on to Ghana where he met and married Sally Hayfron in 1961. They had a son named Nhamodzenyika.

While in detention, Mugabe obtained further degrees through correspondence courses with various educational establishments, including University of South Africa and London University.  

He obtained degrees in Science, Law, Economics, Bachelor of Administration, Arts and Education.

During his stay in Ghana, Mugabe was inspired and influenced by Kwame Nkrumah, Ghana’s then Prime Minister.

As an African nationalist, Mugabe felt bitter and angered that (Southern) Rhodesia was a British colony governed by a minority settler-elite.  

He embraced Marxism and joined African nationalist protests calling for an independent state with an indigenous-led government.

Mugabe became publicity secretary of the National Democratic Party in 1960 and was appointed acting secretary-general of the Zimbabwe African People’s Union (ZAPU), led byJoshua Nkomo. The following year, after the NDP was banned, it immediately reformed as theZimbabwe African Peoples Union.  

In 1962, Mugabe suffered political detention for his political activism. 

In 1963, Mugabe left ZAPU to join and become secretary-general of the breakaway Zimbabwe African National Union (ZANU), which he came to lead.

In 1964, after critising the government, he was convicted ofsedition and was sentenced again, without trial, to political detention until 1974.   

Late in 1966, while in detention, his three-year-old son Nhamodzenyika, died in Ghana from malaria. Mugabe petitioned the prison governor to leave on parole to attend the funeral in Accra, the Ghanaian capital. 

Ian Smith, the Rhodesian Prime Minister, personally intervened to prevent his release.

Notwithstanding, Mugabe’s political viewpoint was that: “A new progressive society could not be constructed on the foundations of the past…that they would have to destroy most of what had been built up after 1900 before a new society, based on subsistence and peasant values could be constructed.”

On the eve of Zimbabwe’s independence in 1980, after many years of bitter armed conflict between the liberation forces and the colonial state, Mugabe called for forgiveness and reconciliation for past wrongs between former enemies.  

The anxious white Zimbabwean population was told: “If yesterday I fought you as an enemy, today you have become a friend and ally with the same national interest, loyalty, rights and duties as myself. If yesterday you hated me, today you cannot avoid the love that binds you to me and me to you. The wrongs of the past now stand forgiven and forgotten ….” 

In 1974, though still imprisoned, Mugabe was elected leader of ZANU.

He was released from prison in December that year, along with other nationalist leaders following South Africa’s détente initiative.  

From Mozambique, Mugabe led the armed struggle against the minority Rhodesian regime up to the signing of the Ceasefire in 1979, after British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher brokered a deal to end Smith’s 14-year rebellion against the British Crown.

Mugabe emerged as a hero at the end of the war in 1979, and was chosen as newly-Independent Zimbabwe’s Head of Government in 1980; initially as Prime Minister until 1987, then as President of Zimbabwe from 1988, after the merger of ZANU and ZAPU in 1987, which created ZANU PF.

This incorporated the position of Prime Minister, President and Commander of the Armed Forces

Nine universities awarded Mugabe honourary doctorates, while the Queen of England bestowed him an Honorary Knighthood in 1994.

In 2015, he was awarded the Confucius Peace Prize; China’s alternative to the Nobel Peace Prize, “…for his inspired national leadership and service to pan-Africanism.” 

He was labelled as a ruthless tyrant by the West “…who presided over bloodshed and persecution.” In response to critics, former Zambian leader Kenneth Kaunda, in 2007, wrote: “Leaders in the West say Robert Mugabe is a demon, that he has destroyed Zimbabwe and he must be got rid of; but this demonising is made by people who may not understand what Robert Gabriel Mugabe and his fellow freedom fighters went through.”

Certainly, those who clamoured for his downfall did not experience the humiliation of being segregated, spat upon and demeaned at every turn. 

Love him or hate him, you could not ignore Robert Gabriel Mugabe.  

Always dapper, eloquent and forthright; a champion of the previously marginalised interest of the majority indigenous people.  

He fought for Africa and Africans; for women’s emancipation and introduced gender equality.  

He was passionate about children and children’s education. 

He raised the literacy rate to 98 percent in the 1990s, which became one of the highest in the world. In 2010 Zimbabwe’s literacy rate of 92 percent was ranked the best in Africa by the United Nations Development Fund (UNDP) Digest. 

He fought against tribalism and nepotism: “…urge you,” he said on April 17 1980, “….whether you are white or black, to join me in a new pledge to forget our grim past, forgive others and forget, join hands in a new amity and together, as Zimbabweans, trample upon racialism, tribalism and regionalism and work hard to reconstruct and rehabilitate our society ….”

Most recently, in 2000, he led Zimbabwe through the Third Chimurenga.  

The Land Reform and Resettlement Programme, he fully supported, saw many landless Zimbabweans benefitting from the return of their land.

May his soul rest in eternal peace!

Dr Michelina Rudo Andreucci is a Zimbabwean-Italian researcher, industrial design consultant, lecturer and specialist hospitality interior decorator. She is a published author in her field. For comments e-mail: linamanucci@gmail.com

By Golden Guvamatanga and Patience Rusare-Murava

THE elevation to the post of British Prime Minister of the maverick Boris Johnson could further strengthen President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s re-engagement if the new Conservative Party leader’s statements on the country in the past are anything to go by.

Johnson thumped his Conservative rival Jeremy Hunt when he won 66 percent or 92 153 of the votes to his opponent’s 46 656.

But as he assumes power, he will be confronted by a country that has been divided by the so-called Brexit which has claimed the scalps of two Prime Ministers, David Cameron who resigned on June 24 2016 and Theresa May who left office on June 7 2019.

Brexit refers to the UK’s decision to leave the EU following the June 23 2016 referendum.

Johnson has pledged to leave the EU by October 31 2019.

The decision has left Zimbabwe’s former colonial master teetering on the brink of an economic meltdown and scampering for new markets as it seeks to outdo the EU and other countries and blocs on the global market.

And Zimbabwe is one such market due to its vast natural and human capital base.

Added to that is the good climate and prime land, both principal drivers of Britain’s decision to invade Zimbabwe in 1890.

Johnson, has in the past not made his resentment of the British opposition party, the Labour party over its handling of Zimbabwe’s Land Reform and Resettlement Programme of 2000 a secret.

He is widely expected to continue with the re-engagement process with Harare.

Writing in The Daily Telegraph in February 2015, Johnson, then London Mayor, highlighted how Britain played a ‘shameful’ role in Zimbabwe`s current economic woes.

Boris’ interest in Zimbabwe is not only on paper.

He has visited Zimbabwe before.

In a hard-hitting diagnosis of the Zimbabwean and British relations, Johnson noted it was London, in particular the non-conformist Tony Blair, who messed things up.

Johnson’s loaded admission brought to the fore Britain’s reluctance to honour the Lancaster House Agreement led to the curdling of relations with Zimbabwe.

According to Johnson, the Blair government’s decision was ‘that betrayal of Lancaster House that gave Mugabe his pretext to launch his pogroms against the whites’.

“… It is vital to recognise that Zimbabwe was not always like this, and did not have to be like this. This (Robert) Mugabe tyranny is no accident – and Britain played a shameful part in the disaster,” Johnson wrote.

In a flashback, Johnson took readers back to the 1979 Lancaster House Agreement in which the then Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher ‘granted’ independence to Rhodesia.

It was that agreement that also guaranteed compensation for Britain’s settler farmers.

But in 1997 when Blair and the New Labour party came in and in a fit of avowed anti-colonialist fervor, they unilaterally scrapped the arrangement. 

The then British Overseas Development Minister, Clare Short, made it clear in a letter in November 1997 to the then Zimbabwe Minister of Agriculture Kumbirai Kangai that neither she nor Blair had the responsibility of compensating the former colonial farmers.

Short made it clear that Blair’s administration would not accept a special responsibility to meet the costs of land purchase in Zimbabwe.

That marked the beginning of a stand off between Harare and London.

As Clare put it at that time:

“We are a new government from diverse backgrounds, without links to former colonial interests. 

“My own origins are Irish and, as you know, we were colonised not colonisers.”

Johnson said in the article it was that betrayal of Lancaster House that gave Zimbabwe the leeway to launch what he said was a hostile campaign of eliminating the whites from Zimbabwe’s prime land.

“Readers will remember the 1979 Lancaster House Agreement, by which Margaret Thatcher granted independence to Rhodesia,” reads part of Johnson’s article.

“We turned our backs on the very people who were actually indispensable to the economic well-being of Zimbabwe and Labour essentially allowed Mugabe to launch a racist tyranny!”

Many would then ask, what does Johnson’s appointment mean for Zimbabwe and the world?

During his time as British Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Johnson was on record as supporting Zimbabwe’s rejoining the Commonwealth, which the country abandoned in 2003 amid acrimonious relations between Harare and London over the Land Reform and Resettlement Programme.

“The UK would strongly support Zimbabwe’s re-entry and a new Zimbabwe that is committed to political and economic reform that works for all its people,” the Foreign Office said in a statement on April 20 2018.

Johnson chipped in, praising President

Mnangagwa’s reform agenda.

“President Mnangagwa has been in power for 150 days and while Zimbabwe has made impressive progress, there is still much to do,” Johnson said. 

“That’s why Britain, the Commonwealth and the wider international community will do everything it can in supporting Zimbabwe on its path of reform.

“The UK stands ready in friendship to support a Zimbabwe that fully embraces the rule of law, human rights and economic reform.” 

The sentiments have not been one-sided as Zimbabwe also desires to build close ties with the former coloniser.

President Mnangagwa recently congratulated the new Premier on Twitter:

“Congratulations @BorisJohnson on your election as leader of the Conservative Party and on becoming Prime Minister of the UK. 

I wish you good luck for the journey ahead, and look forward to building ever closer ties between our two nations under your leadership,” wrote President Mnangagwa.

In 2018 Foreign Affairs and International Trade Minister Sibusiso Moyo, toured the UK, and met Johnson over Commonwealth.

“I can assure you that the meeting I had with Honourable Boris Johnson and other foreign ministers from the Commonwealth, they actually declared a lot of solidarity, support, encouragement and actually welcomed Zimbabwe into the Commonwealth, but we are saying as the executive, as people who lead the people, we do not want to run as the executive and join the Commonwealth and then leave the people behind. We want to make sure that we are together with the people, we are in it with the people because we are a listening dispensation. What you want is what we will do,” said Minister Moyo.

There is also the likelihood that should Johnson decide a hardline stance against Zimbabwe then it would be back to yet another war of attrition between the two countries.

This is a hostility that lasted almost two decades and another bout between Harare and London will do little to develop the two countries’ economies.

Given Johnson’s track record of stoking controversy each time he opens his mouth; Zimbabweans might find his assumption of that delicate office interesting for many reasons.

The next coming few weeks will be crucial for both countries as Johnson’s administration takes shape.

Only time will tell.

By Saul Gwakuba-Ndlovu

THE revival of Zimbabwe’s economy is the nation’s topmost priority, and must, therefore, be given the public attention it deserves. 

National economic development is not achieved through miracles but by planned production and marketing programmes. 

Zimbabwe follows a free enterprise system whereby market forces determine what investors, industrialists and entrepreneurs produce, for how much the products or services will be sold, when and by whom. 

Distribution of products and services is under the control of private industrial or commercial undertakers, very much unlike in a socialist system where the state owns and controls the means of production as well as the distribution system.

To revive the Zimbabwean economy, we need to prioritise production. 

That should go hand-in-hand, of course, with marketing, that is to say, anticipating market needs and making goods or services accessible to those who want them, also having money and authority to spend it. 

Currently, Zimbabwe imports a large variety of even those consumer goods that can be produced within its own borders. Rumour has it that some extremely irresponsible potential industrialists dismantle some of their factory machinery and sell the bits and pieces as scrap metal. 

Such good-for-nothing people belong to maximum security prison where they should remain under lock and key without hope for any remission or pardon. 

The most realistic way to revive Zimbabwe’s national economy is to start factory production at district level, with every town producing goods whose components are preferably from wards. 

If the product’s raw material is procurable outside the district, a reliable supply source should be established. 

Zimbabwe has more than 50 districts under administrative capitals. 

There are additional urban centres in those districts. 

Our aim should be to have at least a factory in every such urban centre.   

The most economically ideal aim of each of such factories would be to supply the local market. 

That could be the case with construction material such as window frames, door frames, roofing timber, burglar-bars, Venetian blinds, roofing asbestos or iron sheets. 

Towns such as Plumtree, Chinhoyi, Karoi, Victoria Falls, Mutare, Nyanga, Nyamapanda and several others, can be involved in the export market since they are near Zimbabwe’s neighbours such as Zambia, Botswana and Mozambique.

The export market can most certainly help Zimbabwe’s Gross National Production (GNP) by its earnings which means a great deal to the national economy’s growth. 

Economic development at district level can be achieved easily and quickly with the full guidance of the administration, councillors, MPs and traditional leaders.

Zimbabwe can take a leaf from Europe, the US, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the Nordic countries where every urban centre has a factory that specialises in one or another product, or has a service industry or industries. 

In Zimbabwe, a good example of such a town is Kadoma where some building hardware is made manually by highly skilled engineers in Rimuka, a high density suburb. 

It is most likely that similar industrial activities also occur in some of the district towns.

The Confederation of Zimbabwe Industries (CZI) could assist in the marketing of the products by helping the people involved to exhibit their goods at Zambian, Botswana and Mozambican international trade fairs. 

The construction industry is quite active in Zambia, Namibia, Mozambique, Botswana and South Africa. 

Zimbabweans who produce construction materials need to apply for export licences and venture into those markets. 

We have all along been talking about potential markets in the SADC region without saying anything about markets further afield, even overseas, an exciting possibility that can be tried. 

Zimbabwe’s commercial farming is another economic sector with capacity to grow, and with it, the national economy can go a rung or two higher. 

Additional acreage should be granted to tobacco farmers on favourable conditions because they are the geese that lay the golden eggs. 

They generate employment, albeit seasonally. 

These farmers must also be granted favourable terms on bank loans to enable them to purchase chemicals, equipment, procure sufficient labour  and transport expenses, especially in view of the presently high fuel costs. 

Farmers in this agricultural sector owe it to the Zimbabwean nation to perform much better in terms of their earnings than they did last season. 

The mining industry needs to be brought back from the panning jungle to the environment of lawful shafts. 

It is currently unrealistic to consider gold panners as a practical factor in Zimbabwe’s economic development strategy. 

Meanwhile, the legally registered mining companies, including new ones, should be most strongly encouraged to produce more by expanding their operations. 

Employment creation is one way they contribute to Zimbabwe’s economic well-being. 

The other is by earning foreign currency. 

Established mining organisations contribute to the country’s social welfare by the residential and sports infrastructure they build for their workers. 

The more social infrastructure is built, the more economic worth is Zimbabwe, and the more economically productive workers become. 

Foreign investments should be sought by Zimbabwe in all the four corners of the globe. 

Opinion may differ on whether the state should partner some of the investors, and if so, to what extent, and on what conditions. 

Eswatini, formerly Swaziland, is known for phenomenal industrial growth, especially the textile sector on the basis of private public partnership (PPP). 

An absolute monarchy, Eswatini’s economic development strategy is initiated and guided by royalty. 

Like all human-created policies, it has its weaknesses and strengths. 

Zimbabwe, a republic, can borrow from that strategy in spite of its royal origins and objectives. 

We know that industrial towns such as Matsapa have sprouted overnight, and are generating thousands upon thousands of jobs for Swazis, transforming their socio-economic mode of existence from a quasi-traditional twentieth to a modern twenty-first type. 

PPPs give security to the private investors and tangible socio-economic tangibles to the state (the public). 

The Government would be well-advised to streamline its economic policy all round in order to promote PPPs. 

We wind up this article by looking at tourism, a sector that earns national revenue from natural creations, cultural activities and beliefs, social services, scientific knowledge and human architectural achievements. 

Safaris are tourism’s sub-sector and benefits operators at the expense of the generality at large. 

In Zimbabwe’s case, safari operators create employment albeit for a very few. 

It could be of importance to the nation if the safari sector were wholly owned and operated by communities, preferably local municipal councils, and not by private individuals. 

That is because wildlife is owned by the nation as a whole and not by an individual or individuals. 

They are like air and rain. 

However, those who breed wildlife such as ostriches for export either live or meat and other by-products should be encouraged because their earnings add to the national wealth of the whole country, and thus to the economic growth of the nation.

Saul Gwakuba-Ndlovu is a retired, Bulawayo-based journalist. He can be contacted on cell 0734 328 136 or through email, sgwakuba@gmail.com

JUDGING by previous occasions when the new British Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, has given his views on Zimbabwe, it looks like the re-engagement drive with Britain is going to bear fruit.

It should not be surprising to once more see a problematic area between Zimbabwe and Britain being solved by a Conservative Government.

Still fresh in our memories is the deceptive rhetoric by the Labour Party’s Harold Wilson and the pragmatism by Conservative Margaret Thatcher as we battled for our independence.

We have come a long way with our former colonial rulers.

We must also accept that our relations with Britain soured after the then Labour Premier, Tony Blair, reneged on a promise by the British Government.

By the Lancaster House Agreement Britain had pledged to compensate British settler farmers who had lost their land.

And yet it was the settlement of this emotive land question which had averted a collapse of the Lancaster constitutional talks.

All this was happening in the eyes of Johnson.

When he was still Mayor of London, Johnson publicly accused Blair of  ‘messing’ up things in Zimbabwe.  

He even laid the blame for the hostile relations that had developed between Britain and Zimbabwe at the feet of the Labour Party, specifically Tony Blair.

Indeed for all those who care to find out the root cause of the rift with Britain, the reason is very clear.

Blair’s condescending attitude that led him to tear to shreds a sealed agreement is to blame.

The new Conservative leader has since recognised this.

But the adverse effects of the disengagement created by a Labour Government have been double-edged.

Since we had been mutual partners of a flourishing trade, both sides are bound to count the cost of their losses caused by the breaking ties.

Apart from trade, the British, who had taken Zimbabwe as their second home, must be having nostalgic memories of what they are missing.

This includes climate and our natural resources.

The new British PM has promised that Britain will be out of the EU by October 31 2019.

The former colonial giant with once an ‘empire’ that sprawled across the width and breadth of the world would not like to feel lonely after Brexit.

Johnson is bound to seek the strengthening of relations with former Commonwealth allies, Zimbabwe included.

And this has come at a time when Zimbabwe is on a vigorous re-engagement campaign.

Johnson, when pointing out Blair’s blunder, pointed out how Zimbabwe was an indispensable economic partner.

The new British PM is therefore bound to look for markets outside Europe if he is dreaming of making Britain ‘great again’.

We are therefore expecting to see Johnson rebuilding old friendships and high among these should be Zimbabwe.

He has to go no further than the Commonwealth.

Even when he was still the British Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, Johnson was on record supporting Zimbabwe  rejoining the Commonwealth.

Johnson has even acknowledged the political and economic reforms being undertaken by President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s Government, which he says are a prerequisite for mending the broken fences.

When Foreign Affairs and International Trade Minister Sibusiso Moyo met Johnson last year in Britain, he was assured together with other Commonwealth foreign ministers, of the British’s desire to see Zimbabwe back as a member of the Club.

Thus if we look at the imperatives created by Brexit and Johnson’s public pronouncements, the new British PM should not be an obstacle in our re-engagement efforts.

EACH people have their own way of being at peace with themselves and their God, Africans  have their own ethos, Europeans theirs. 

On July 23 2018, the European Union (EU) announced it had set up a 20 million euro facility to fight all forms of gender-based abuse and violence in Zimbabwe.

The then EU Ambassador to Zimbabwe Philippe van Damme claimed this ‘had been necessitated by the country’s deeply-entrenched patriarchal and sexist perception.’ (Newsday)

The EU Ambassador is said to have cited the abuse of the ZEC Chairperson, Justice Chigumba  by the MDC-T as a case in point.

On May 9 2019, the EU reiterated the same.

We are particularly concerned by the EU’s disrespect of us as a people, to come to our country and tell us there is a problem in us being patriarchal and to accuse us of being sexist. We are patriarchal by choice not accident and we have not appointed Europeans to preside over who we are or who we should be.

To castigate us as sexist is to verbally abuse us that we are incapable of relating to the female sex in our society with love and respect. 

This is not who we are, but what Europeans choose to denigrate us as, in the same way they have always insisted Africans are barbaric, hence Europe’s so-called civilising mission using arms and in the process robbing our mineral rich countries.

The question is who taught the Europeans to define women in their own society and how to relate to them?

If the answer is they taught themselves, what makes them think we lack the same capacity?

Each people have their own way of being at peace with themselves and with their God. 

It is not a mistake or a misfortune that we are African, we are an integral and legitimate part of the human family, but distinct as Africans, our destiny is African, we are not a race in transition to being European. 

We have sufficient socio-cultural means to order our lives, evolved over centuries which our ancestors have handed over to us and Europeans are not part of this ancestry. 

Ninety years of bondage to the British was never correct and we sacrificed too much to end it to ever countenance another form of slavery.

Europeans are not the custodians of Zimbabwe’s womenfolk. 

They dare accuse us of being sexist? What they did to Sarah Baartman reveals European sexual barbarism of unfathomable proportions. 

It is not us who need lessons on how to treat women humanely, it is the Europeans and the Americans. 

The Europeans, surrogate fathers to Ian Smith, sponsored him as he tore babies out of our wombs, massacred little girls and young women, defenceless girls and women. 

Were they in a stupor to perpetrate such violence against young girls and women? 

We were not in a stupor when we suffered so excruciatingly at their hands, we still remember and so we are alarmed when Europeans masquerade as saviours of our women. 

We are on our own journey to build the greatest Zimbabwe ever, and Europeans do not know how, because they are not Africans, only Africans know how to build an African edifice, and Zimbabwe is an African edifice.

The Motive of the EU offering millions to ‘combat’ ‘gender based violence in our society’ is suspect. 

Suspect because their own province (Europe and North America) is reeling from gender based violence, it is out of control, so one wonders what they think they can teach us, never mind that we did not invite them.

European and American society is fraught with gender related problems, divorce is so common it is hardly possible to meet anyone who does not come from a divorced family. 

In the European region one  in five (EU) women are victims of domestic violence (WHO). One in 10 women in the European Union report having experienced cyber-harassment since the age of 15 (including having received unwanted, offensive sexually explicit emails or SMS messages, or offensive, inappropriate advances on social networking sites (UN Women) and, Gender Based Violence is so rampant in EU countries that they are ‘required to provide appropriate access to shelters for domestic violence victims and emergency support for victims of sexual violence … also to establish an individual assessment mechanism to determine if special measures are required to protect particularly vulnerable victims during criminal proceedings (European Commission).

In the UK, in the year ending March 2018, an estimated 2.0 million adults aged 16 to 59 years experienced domestic abuse in the last year (1,3 million women, 695 000 men). The percentage of convictions secured for domestic abuse-related prosecutions is at its highest level since the year ending March 2010. In the year ending March 2018, 76 percent of prosecutions resulted in a conviction (Crime Survey for England and Wales: Office for National Statistics 2018).

In the US, sexual assault is normalised in early adolescence, intimate partner violence is experienced by nearly a quarter of all women and accounts for about half of women’s homicides (Sameena Mulla:2018). 

Why then should we listen to Europeans pontificating about gender based violence? 

This notwithstanding, your motive is still suspect.

You wish to give us 20 million Euros to combat gender based violence when you turned down our request for funds to acquire land from British farmers in our land. You would not assist although there was every need for you to make amends after you had committed an atrocity, supporting a terrorist regime in its war of attrition to hold on to the land and wealth it had robbed us at gun point. 

You are ‘concerned’ about gender based violence and yet you were prepared to finance and arm a rogue regime and watch it massacre unarmed children, young boys and girls for the purpose of perpetuating a robbery of a land and its wealth which belonged to an African people, Zimbabwe. 

You were at peace to watch children die of starvation and malnutrition while white farmers held on to multiple farms?

By Eunice Masunungure

ONE of the winning elements by the New Dispensation has been its re- engagement of the West in an effort to end Zimbabwe’s isolation from the community of nations and rectify the current economic estrangement facing the country.

However, there are misconceptions around the country’s re-engagement thrust.

Re-engaging the West is not the Government’s attempt to hinge the country’s economic prospects of Zimbabwe on the West.

It is not an implication that ZANU PF is fast-becoming important in the sight of the West nor does it mean Zimbabwe will be a colony of the West again.

The historical comes into play.

Media analyst Hopewell Mauwa argues current efforts to re-engage the West trace back to history in which nations in reality primarily act in their own economic interests, and continuously re-evaluate worthiness of alliances along the process.

“Transfer of white-owned enterprise to indigenous blacks triggered the whole escapade.

“The 2000 Land Reform Programme, which led to transfer of white-owned enterprise to indigenous blacks effected the economic Western policy of isolating Zimbabwe.

“Moreover, China’s influencing the African countries economy affected Western financial system.

“Moreover, MDC Alliance’s failure to win elections in 2013 demotivated their funders who felt they could not continue funding losers.

“Moreover, the British citizens opting to exit European Union triggered the urgency to anticipate for economic risks and British rethinking of global economic ties.

“Lastly, when former President Robert Mugabe resigned, the Westerners who hated him and considered him a threat found it worthwhile to re-engage Zimbabwe.”

Therefore, Zimbabwe’s re-engagement of the West is aimed at mending the fragile relations existing between the State and the West.

Although the economic aspect of the reforms in Zimbabwe seem to be slow, President Mnangagwa’s administration has made considerable progress on political, economic and legislative reforms.

In his congratulatory message to Boris Johnson, who was appointed British Prime Minister on July 24 2019, President Mnangagwa said he was looking forward to working with him and his administration in rebuilding a “once-formidable bilateral relationship.”

Since his investiture, President Mnangagwa has made efforts to normalise the relations with the West particularly countries like Sweden, Australia, the UK, Germany, US and France.

“Reforms were in line with the Transitional Stabilisation Programme (TSP) and Vision 2030.

“A key component of those reforms is re-engagement with all those nations from which we have become somewhat estranged over the past two decades or so.

Rebuilding our relations with the United Kingdom lies at the very core of that re-engagement process and is an objective to which I and my Administration are fully committed.

We are of course, equally committed to an early re-administration to the Commonwealth family of nations, a process which is already underway.”

Emphasis is made on the need to heal the relations between Zimbabwe and the West for the benefit of Zimbabweans.

The purpose of the re-engagement process is to bring normalisation to the country vis-à-vis all lines of communication.

While Zimbabwe has long since shown signs of possible recovery, it needs stakeholders to boost the confidence of potential investors and multi-nationals through having singleness of heart.

The present Government has achieved recognition by the European Union during their time.

It must be remembered that the European Union sent an Election Observer Mission for the July 30 2018 harmonised elections, a first in 16 years.

Moreover, May 2019 Cotonou Partnership Agreement reveals that Zimbabwe and the European Union hold political dialogues.

Re-engagement of the West means bringing everyone on board such that Zimbabwe can easily achieve Vision 2030 and create an upper middle-class economy through full participation of the masses, the Government, the opposition parties and the Diaspora community.

It is beneficial economic repairable efforts by the former coloniser and the ex-colonised.

Re-engaging the West means renewed emphasis on creating ease access, cooperation and a conducive investment environment for thousands of Zimbabweans living abroad.

In re-engaging the West efforts, Diasporas are encouraged “to take advantage of the gaps in sectors like energy sector and make money out of our current economic challenges.”

In challenges lie opportunities to be harnessed.

It also entails accepting the leader of the time and rally around him as the Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, Lt Gen (Rtd) Dr Sibusiso Moyo

said on July 25 at the United Kingdom-based think-tank:

“If an opposition candidate is victorious in the elections, President Mnangagwa is prepared to accept.

“Political contestation must not override national interests.

“People can come and go, but the state is more important.”

He added that Mnangagwa’s government was comfortable working with non-governmental organisations and charities, particularly in the health and education sectors.

“Non-Governmental Organisations and charities, especially in the areas of health and education, are very much welcome.

“We want to rebuild Zimbabwe from all dimensions and our Diaspora and social networks are important to that end,” Moyo said.

Post-colonial researcher Stephen Slemon (2003) says:

“At the level of the local, and at the level of material applications, the modern society must address the material exigencies of colonialism and neo-colonialism.”

The current re-engagement of the West speaks to that attempt to avail quantifiable necessities for Zimbabweans.

For my love of Africa 

By Kathy Hull

Pacprint Limited (2011) 

ISBN 978-0-7974-4589-5

IN the book For My Love of Africa, the author, Kathy Hull, chronicles her life story in Rhodesia and after Zimbabwe gained independence.

The writer who was born and bred in Rhodesia relives her childhood memories, which she describes as the best days of her life.

Hull expresses her gratitude to Ian Smith, the then Rhodesian Prime Minister, for ‘doing the best for Rhodesians’.  

She writes: “Ian Smith was our former white leader and had been a world figure for 14 years from 1965 when he led 

250 000 white Rhodesians in a Unilateral Declaration of Independence from Britain rather than accept majority rule.

He was revered by most of us – a hero.”

Like most Rhodesians, Hull idolises Smith to an extent that she turns a blind eye to the atrocities Smith committed on Zimbabweans.

Under the Smith regime, blacks were treated as nonentities in their own country. 

It was under his rule that blacks were forced off their land and made to stay under squalid conditions.

Blacks were also forced to work in the fields for no or little payment.

But, alas, Hull still views Smith with utmost respect, yet it was under his rule the highest levels of discrimination and exploitation took place.

The writer goes to lengths boring the reader with praises on Smith who has the blood of many blacks on his hands.

“He (Smith) was everything I expected, a true Rhodesia gentleman so likeable and I could not help having utmost respect for him.”

Was it not for the brutal rule of Smith, blacks would not have taken up arms against his Government in protest.

Many sons and daughters of the soil perished in the liberation struggle that led to the downfall of the Smith regime and subsequently gave birth to the independence of Zimbabwe.

Hull, like his kith and kin, does not see all the wrong that Smith did; instead, she praises the man.

When she had the opportunity to meet Smith, she said to him: “You (Smith) did so much for our country and worked tirelessly to do your best for us. 

“I do not know how many people have thanked you.”

Surely a person in his/her right mind ought to be ashamed to be associated with a man who did more harm than good but the writer is happy to be identified with him.

All she remembers about Rhodesia is the good life that came with living on a huge farm with numerous farm labourers who were not only cheap but a target of ridicule.

In Smith, she sees a hero who made sure she had a good life despite the fact that all this was at the expense of blacks, stripped of their dignity and heritage.

Rhodesians even now are keen to reclaim the farms they used to own having no interests of blacks at heart.

All they want is the good life that came with being in Rhodesia.

Hull also agrees that Rhodesians have a hard time fitting anywhere in the world.

It was only in Rhodesia that they had the privilege to exploit the country and loot its resources at the expense of the rightful indigenous owners.

Gone are the days when ‘they (Rhodesians) built paradises in out in the bush’. 

Now they are back in their motherland where they do not enjoy the warm weather and friendly environment.

Hull explains how her son after their farm was repossessed under the Land Reform Programme left the country only to come back frustrated as he could not fit in with the rest of the world.

The writer is bitter over the Land Reform Programme that resulted in Government redistributing land to indigenous Zimbabweans.

Prior to the programme, about 4 000 white farmers owned the country’s prime land.

Today more than 400 000 households have been allocated farms.

Hull, like her kind, shows how selfish she is as she feels she was robbed under the programme and does not look at the positive results of the Land Reform Programme.

She writes: “It was hard to lose our farm, the house we had built and extended over the years, our business, our income, our way of life, our community, our friends and our children’s inheritance.”

What surprises the reader is how the writer now wants the audience to feel pity for her yet she ignores the period when blacks were in a similar position.

The question the writer should first ask herself is how she had gotten that farm in the first place.

What had happened to the previous owners of the land before her people came and forcibly removed blacks from their God-given land?

No doubt Hull is simply a bitter Rhodesian who never imagined black people at the helm.

WHEN the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) president Peter Mutasa was waylaid by the discredited ‘Pastor’ Evan Mawarire on Sunday to announce there would be a national ‘shutdown’, those blessed with foresight were immediately seized with the fact that the said programme would be replete with violence.

Indeed, gory scenes of violence that characterised the so-called shutdown not only confirmed those fears, but further buttressed the compelling fact that the ZCTU is an entity pursuing a political agenda.

Cars and vehicles were burnt, those going into the CBD were stopped and harassed by the marauding ZCTU hired goons and MDC youths while shops were looted by the mob.

The untold story was that the ZCTU and the MDC Alliance wanted the ‘shutdown’ to attract international attention, especially as President Emmerson Dambudzo Mnangagwa left for a four-nation tour of Eastern Europe to secure economic deals for the country.

Already, Alrosa, one of the world’s largest diamond mining companies, has announced that it will be starting operations in Zimbabwe next month.

There was a stampede at Western embassies in Harare as the frustrated ZCTU officials and their MDC Alliance counterparts sought to squeeze donor funds for their doomed project.

And as it became clear that the country’s security forces were on top of the situation, MDC Alliance youths set their party headquarters, the Harvest House, on fire, in a futile bid to incite an international community backlash.

Again that failed.

It is apparent what happened this week was anarchy.

The law is clear and it must be used without fear or favour.

When you block roads and burn tyres, stoning any moving object in sight, it simply means that the people have not heeded your call to stay away — you are simply co-opting them.

There is nothing democratic about that.

There is equally nothing peaceful about that.

Democracy is being abused, wantonly.

That has to stop!

We need strong arm tactics when dealing with mavericks behind that anarchy and the moment has come for Government to do just that.

Then you have trade unions and political leaders quietly hiding in the comfort of their homes and hotels pretending that they have nothing to do with what happened on Monday!

It is time to take decisive action against these perpetrators.

They should be arrested and charged with treason, arson or whatever that the law provides insofar as charging these people is concerned.

Let us go back in history and unravel how the MDC uses people to pursue their inane political agenda.

Just before the March 29 2008 plebiscite, the then campaign director for the late opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai, Ian Makone, unashamedly told the media that his party’s campaign would thrive on galvanising the masses to reject any outcome in which the MDC lost the polls.

Said Makone:

“The lesson from (the election of) 2002 is we didn’t plan for after the vote. Everyone stayed at home and said we will go to the courts. 

What happened in Kenya was that they knew there would be fraud and they were ready. We will be out in the streets celebrating when the polls close. 

It can turn into a protest easily. Zimbabweans are angry; they are desperate; they are ready to protest. It’s the tipping point we are planning for.”

Prior to that shocking revelation, on May 14 2007, Australia announced it would spend US$18 million backing critics of ZANU PF with over 90 percent of that money to be spent in the run-up to those elections. 

In a May 20 2008 article, writer Steve Gowans explained how the MDC used violence to coerce people to vote for it.

He speaks:

“The documentation of violence against MDC supporters has been gathered by the US Embassy in Harare, which is hardly neutral and has an interest in discrediting ZANU PF to bring its favoured vehicle, the MDC, to power. Human Rights Watch (HRW), which is dominated by former members of the US foreign policy establishment, has also been involved. But even HRW acknowledges the violence isn’t exclusive to supporters of ZANU PF. Eyewitnesses told Human Rights Watch that…MDC supporters had burned homes of known ZANU PF supporters and officials. 

Louise Arbour, the UN’s top human rights official, who, in previous jobs has invariably sided with the US and Britain, notes that the information she has ‘received suggests an emerging pattern of political violence’ that is not exclusively inflicted by supporters of ZANU PF. 

Kingsley Mamabolo, a senior South African official who led the region’s observer team for the March 29 elections agrees that violence is ‘taking place on both sides…’, as do human rights and doctors groups in Harare, most of which have Western sources of funding. 

Paul Themba Nyathi, a civil rights lawyer and MDC member, says that ‘Tsvangirai’s followers seem to be saying to themselves that they can win elections by beating people and by using the crudest methods of intimidation’.

This has largely escaped the attention of the media, he adds, ‘…because the big prize is still to rid the country of Mugabe’. Police arrested 58 opposition activists on May 9 on suspicion of setting fire to the homes of ZANU PF members. On May 14, they arrested 50 ZANU PF activists.”

We leave it there.

Let those with ears listen.

By Nyasha Chabururuka

THE violence unleashed by terrorists masquerading as protestors, who left a trail of destruction across the country did not come as a surprise.

Sponsors of the violence had been frantically working behind the scenes to cause civil unrest in the country.

But as the dust settles, chilling details of how these so-called ‘protests’ were sponsored by known politicians are beginning to emerge and their actions are going to haunt them in the next few weeks.

Property worth millions of dollars was not spared by the marauding activists, with some of the property belonging to Government while the majority is the sweat of private citizens who have braved the harsh economic environment and managed to save for and acquire those prized assets.

The reason for the terror acts: Forcing Government to the negotiation table in order to create what they call a National Transitional Authority (NTA).

The opposition has been pursuing that route so that they smuggle themselves into governance.

The seemingly sporadic wave of riots, organised on social media, were in actual fact well-co-ordinated attacks by malcontents bent on causing anarchy, and were curiously called for by the notorious Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU), an organisation that gave birth to Zimbabwe’s main opposition political party, the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC).

While the architects of violence have anchored their argument on the premise that the recent fuel hikes were the cause of the insurgency, discerning individuals have dismissed this as pub talk that would only appeal to those with a limited cosmology.

The fuel hike protest was used as a spark in an already well-knit plot that has long been in the offing. 

In August last year, The Patriot intercepted information that the Zimbabwe National Students Union (ZINASU), an organisation that works as an extension of the opposition, had planned to unleash 11 days of terror in Harare’s high density suburbs.

The article revealed that the terror campaign would be co-ordinated on WhatsApp groups, and the strategy involved taking the fight to Harare’s high density suburbs as the central business district (CBD) demos could not guarantee high outcomes anymore.

“The covert operation is to call for ‘peaceful demonstrations’, motivate the crowds to join so that they push a ‘petition’ to have Nelson Chamisa recognised as the one who won the elections.

Once they have the numbers they then divert from the peaceful demonstrations and instead cause mayhem, malicious damage to property and arson.

The ultimate goal is to have Zimbabwe on the international community’s agenda, and have the election results nullified,” reported The Patriot last year.

The story also revealed that Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition (CiCZ) had backed the plan to cause anarchy in the country in the hope that violent disturbances would prop up their relevance for funding.

Drawing from the same template, the latest wave of violent ‘protests’ that were initially called stay aways have since morphed into their real agenda — platforms to effect regime change, proving to be acts of sabotage organised to taint Government at a time when President Emmerson Mnangagwa has embarked on a five-nation tour drumming up support for the country’s ailing economy. 

The youths incited to cause the disturbances were advised to provoke security agents, get beaten and arrested in order to feign abuse of human rights to invite the wrath of the international community. 

This plan to topple the ZANU PF Government is not new, as the past two decades have seen attempts to foment civil strife taking centre stage.

In 2011 for example, Manuel Bagorro, the founder and then artistic director of the Harare International Festival of the Arts (HIFA), accompanied Tafadzwa Simba, Joanna Powell, Nixon Nyikadzino, Talent Chademana and Kerry Appel to study the effective use of social media to effect an Arab Spring-style regime change.

The programme was sponsored by the US Government’s Office for Transitional Initiatives (OTI) through Casals and Associates, one for the agents through which USAID funds regime change projects, under grant number CAZ214 and was funded to the tune of US$40 524.

This was the first recorded step of an organised effort to use social media to undermine the authority of the Government, and this has since intensified. 

The Patriot last week reported that Zimbabwe is still “…besieged by non-governmental organisations (NGO)’s regime change antics despite intercepting their illegal machinations time and again as well as laying bare their sinister plot.”

The article traced how the country’s largest trade union had morphed into a political party, forming the MDC on September 11 1999 and eventually venturing into full-fledged politics, in the process capturing the urban electorate by pretending to represent workers’ interests while pursuing their selfish political agendas. 

“…In 1997, for instance, the ZCTU planned to bring the Government to its knees by spearheading and organising a record 231 national and industrial strikers, most of which were supported by civic organisations.

This perhaps explains the current opposition’s obsession with strikes and boycotts.

As the years have gone by, the ZCTU has openly maintained close relations with the opposition.

However, with the MDC having failed to unseat the ZANU PF Government through the ballot for two decades in succession, regime change proponents have not given up. 

It seems there are a few cards up their sleeve which they are yet to play.”  

In order to hoodwink the international media and locals that these terrorist activities were politically motivated, the organisers ordered their ‘protestors’ to avoid wearing their party regalia and to not chant any slogans so that they would plead plausible deniability.

There are a number of questions that organisers of the mayhem witnessed in the country over the past few days need to answer.

If the ‘protestors’ did not belong to a particular political party, then why ask them to not identify themselves?

Why is it, though, that when the rioters lit tyres at barricades they had set up countrywide, they all seemed to exclaim: ‘Tozozvidira jecha manje, izvezvi zvadhakwa’?  

Is it not Nelson Chamisa who promised the electorate that if he did not come out tops in the July 31 2018 elections, who would ‘dira jecha keke renyu’?

The bellicose opposition leader also claimed that no development would happen in the country without his involvement.

“Haivhiyiwi,” exclaimed Chamisa.

Do you think that by engaging in violence, whatever grievances you have will be solved? 

Since when has violence ever been a solution? 

Who do you think is going to pay for the trail of destruction you have orchestrated?

You say you are protesting against the rise of the price of petrol, so why are you burning private cars belonging to innocent citizens who are equally affected by the same policy?

The majority of Zimbabweans will never condone such acts and it is high time that Government took stern action against the saboteurs.  

By Akbhad Makumbe

THE spate of violent demonstrations that rocked the streets of Harare, Bulawayo, Gweru, Chinhoyi, Chitungwiza and Kadoma, among other cities’ high density suburbs across the country, were a well-organised plan to cause anarchy and consternation in Zimbabwe.

In shocking acts of terror, protesters indiscriminately burnt fuel stations, police stations, tollgates, police vehicles, commuter omnibuses, buses and private vehicles.

The hooligans barricaded roads, looted and vandalised supermarkets, clinics, city council offices and stormed schools where they beat up teachers.

They beat up and killed one of the police officers who were trying to enforce law and order.

The violent protests called for by the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Union (ZCTU) were well co-ordinated on social media platforms such as WhatsApp, Facebook and Twitter.

Planning the terror on WhatsApp groups such as Shutdown Zimbabwe Group 1 to 10, 13-14 HRE SHUTDOWN, Shutdown Chitungwiza, Shutdown Zim Embassy Canada, Shutdown Zim Embassy UK and Shutdown Zim Embassy SA, among others, the group administrators called on all citizens to stay away, cause disturbances, malicious damage to property and to commit arson.

The motive, they said, was to make Zimbabwe burn, ungovernable, remove the democratically elected President Emmerson Mnangagwa and replace him with MDC Alliance leader Nelson Chamisa. 

Interestingly, many groups were created by foreign cellphone numbers such as +27644275516, +267969781450, +27622320243 on January 13 2019 between 10am and 2pm.

The group administrators hoped by using foreign numbers, local authorities would fail to trace the identities of the owners of the numbers.

Most Shutdown Embassy groups were created by an individual using the number +27622320243, who eventually created other groups before exiting as soon as the groups had the desired number of participants.

One of the groups, Shutdown Zimbabwe Grup 6, was created by a number +263717845768 reflecting the name John Mangwiro whose WhatsApp profile picture is that of the late MDC-T leader Morgan Tsvangirai.

The violent demonstrations were well-co-ordinated, and the strategy to take their fight to the country’s high density suburbs as the central business district (CBD) demos could not guarantee high outcomes anymore, was well-calculated.

Information at hand indicates that Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition (CiZC) was co-ordinating the violent demonstrations to effect regime change in Zimbabwe.

Prior to the violence, a series of meetings were held by CiZC first at MDC-T headquarters Harvest House, Southern African Political Economy Series (SAPES) offices, Wild Geese Lodge and lastly at CiZC offices in Belvedere.

The strategy that the meetings agreed on is well-known; violent demonstrations and media manipulation. 

The organisation has discovered a new ‘crisis’ following the July 30 2018 elections that saw their ally the MDC Alliance lose.

It is now a ‘crisis of legitimacy’ according to them. 

Terrorism: a managed change 

formula

It is necessary to put into context that the CiZC-organised violence is part of a well-co-ordinated series of events to take the glow from President Mnangagwa’s current four-nation visit to eastern Europe and the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, later this month.

As part of the managed change formula, there is an online petition on change.org that is asking the international community to ban the Zimbabwean President from attending the World Economic Forum meetings.

The petition was created by a Progress Mukanya and sent out to Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, United Nations, European Union, Swiss Government, US Congress, Red Cross, BBC and CNN with a target of 50 000 signatures.

“The president of Zimbabwe, Emmerson Mnangagwa, has lost legitimacy…the international community must stop propping up a dictator,” reads the petition.

The managed change formula was formulated by the International Crisis Group (ICG).

It was then co-ordinated by Western Governments through a report titled, Zimbabwe: An end to the Stalement.

The terrorism acts are intended to push for the creation of a Government of National Unity (GNU2) between President Mnangagwa and MDC Alliance’s leader Nelson Chamisa.

The other route that the sponsors of the violence are also angling for is a National Transitional Authority (NTA), a plan that the likes of SAPES director Ibbo Mandaza have unwittingly revealed.

CiZC co-ordinator Rashid Mahiya is reported to have highlighted that time was now ripe for a national shutdown to take place.

The latest meeting held on January 11 2019, two days before the violent demonstrations under the auspices of Zimbabwe Civil Society Convergence at Number 10 Longden Road in Belvedere, Harare, was the final nail into the strategy.

The Patriot was told by impeccable sources that 27 regime change quislings attended the nine-hour-long meeting.

The agenda was to call for a national shutdown with pressure groups such as #Tajamuka, #Occupy Africa Unity Square, #This flag, ZCTU, General Consensus, Citizen Manifesto and Concerned Citizen Agenda handpicked to drive the project.

The organisations handpicked have a proven track record of violence and viewed as creme de la creme in the regime change circles.

Tajamuka led by Promise Mkwananzi and Evan Mawarire’s #This Flag made the headlines in July 2016 when they called for violent demonstrations and stay aways.

They have a proven record of mobilising through force and threatening the masses to stay away and demonstrate by burning tyres, looting shops and stoning law enforcement agents.

Citizen Manifesto fronted by Briggs Bomba and Brian Kagoro made the head-

lines when it handpicked disgruntled groups in July 2017 to actively participate in the fresh regime change onslaught which however came unstuck.

The so called ‘disgruntled groups’ chosen to push this agenda included students from tertiary institutions, trade unions, the informal sector such as vendors, public transport operators, resident associations and churches.

To CiZC, Citizen Manifesto has the ideal people to push the terror acts.

It gets interesting.

For instance, while Concerned Citizen Agenda led by Tinaye Munetsi has direct access to MDC Alliance, he is an MDC Alliance official in Chitungwiza.

Occupy Africa Unity Square is led by Dirk Frey.

Frey has a proven record as a regime change activists.

He is part of the Amalgamated Rural Teachers Union of Zimbabwe (ARTUZ) leadership.

Last week’s edition of The Patriot exposed ARTUZ which is fronted by Obert Masaraure as a regime change outfit highlighting that quislings such as Frey have no place at the union.

Frey has no background in teaching and one wonders how he ended up at ARTUZ if the organisation represents what it purports to represent.

Frey was also deputy Chairman of the National Youth Action Alliance, an entity which at some point was vocal in calling for the former President Robert Mugabe to step down.

Frey wrote a letter to SADC and African Union seeking help to have former President Mugabe removed.

Crisis of Legitimacy dream

Last month, CiZC at a week-long workshop at a private lodge in Harare from December 3 to 7 came up with strategies to incite Zimbabweans to revolt against President Mnangagwa and the ZANU PF Government to force a unity Government with opposition political parties or to set up a transitional authority.

CiZC chairperson Rashid Mahiya and a committee member, Pride Mukono, reportedly coordinated the meeting held under the theme: “The Crisis of Legitimacy in Zimbabwe.”

Said CiZC: 

“The fact that the polls were presided over by a compromised electoral commission and were characterised by a number of irregularities and that the opposition disputed the outcome of the elections resulted in a legitimacy crisis on the part of President Emmerson Mnangagwa and his Zanu PF party. 

In as much as the ruling party has often declared that they were overwhelmingly voted into power, the legitimacy crisis is a reality that has also come with negative implications on economic development as well as democracy.”

More than 80 people representing 40 NGOs affiliated to CiZC attended the workshop.

Foreigners who attended the meeting include Nora Rafaeil, an American, Gerald Ordway (Spain) and Martina Zapf (Switzerland).

It is no coincidence that the demonstrations came at a time ARTUZ was being a public nuisance, threatening a difficult year for the ZANU PF Government.

In a statement released last week, CiZC called for another multi-stakeholder dialogue ‘to solve the economic and political crisis’ in Zimbabwe since the July 30 2018 harmonised elections.

CiZC and Citizens’ Manifesto, in statements slammed the Government for seeking to bar demonstrations through alleged repressive means.

“Government, instead of addressing the concerns of its workers, has turned brutal against suffering civil servants and the ordinary citizens. Such a militant approach can only serve to worsen the situation in the country,” the statement read in part.

 “Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition (CiZC) stands in solidarity with civil servants who have embarked on job action following government’s continued failure to improve their welfare and working conditions.

“The demands by the civil servants who include teachers, doctors, nurses and other health personnel are legitimate and we implore the government to desist from commandist approaches in addressing strikes by civil servants.”

This does not come as a surprise as CiZC is well known to be a quasi-political group that has spearheading regime change agenda in Zimbabwe since its ill-fated formation in 2001.

CiZC is an umbrella organisation which directs and controls the operations of over 350 NGOs involved in the regime change agenda project and is supervised by US institutions including the United States Institute for Peace (USIP) which boasts that the formation of the coalition in 2001 was a huge success in that it controlled the issuance of uncoordinated statements by the NGO sector involved in the regime change agenda.

This came after Nicholas Ndebele, who took over ZimRights from Reginald Matchaba-Hove, angered the organisation US handlers after he issued statements that were supportive of the Government of Zimbabwe’s Land Reform and Resettlement Programme.

This led to the formation of CiZC, a pinnacle of control of most civic organisations in Zimbabwe.

USIP report stated: 

“Conflicts over strategies, relationships with government and the MDC, and struggles for power within existing organisations have also created a demand for new forms of civil society activism and cooperation.

“The Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition established in 2001 is a broad coalition of more than 300 NGOs and 15 national coalitions presently working on various fronts to facilitate the development of proactive and broad based agenda and process for change.”

And since then the CiZC has lived up to its mission following laid down strategies of destabilising Harare and ultimately effecting regime change.

In July 2017 another meeting was convened by another quasi-political group masquerading as an NGO, SAPES in the capital and deliberated on the need to create chaos.

“As International Crisis Group, we follow bloody crises around the world and Zimbabwe is not a crisis concern,” said Piers Pigou, International Crisis Group’s senior consultant for Southern Africa.

In tow was Mandaza who laid bare the purpose of the gathering.

“How can we get back Zimbabwe on to the international agenda as a country in crisis as was the case prior to the 2013 elections,” asked founder Mandaza.

Before the formal launch of the regime change agenda, a US seminar to discuss the strategy for dealing with the ‘Zimbabwe Crisis’ was held at the US State Department in Washington DC on March 23 1999.

The seminar, according to Stephen Gowan, a Canadian based writer, came up with the following strategies for removing ZANU PF from power

Civil society and the opposition to be strengthened to foment discontent and dissent

The opposition to be brought together under a single banner to enhance its chances of success at the polls

Funding to be funneled to the opposition through western backed NGOs

Dissident groups to be strengthened and encouraged to take to the streets.

Investigations show that the US Department of State has been making huge deposits into quasi-political groups such as CiZC masquerading NGOs.

CiZC is a major recipient of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) funding.

In 2005 it received a NED grant “to hold monthly meetings on issues of food insecurity, the security forces and the upcoming elections,” and to “organise a media campaign that will seek to provide alternatives to state sponsored media.”

In 2006, the CiZC received US$50 000 from NED to “among other things reduce citizen apathy in Zimbabwe by providing opportunities for public protest and debate”.

On April 30 2009, Casals and Associates signed by Mike Staresinic under grant number CAS033 availed communication equipment worth US$20 110 to CiZC to ‘foster freedom of speech and assembly’.

The equipment included a public address system, three tents, four laptops, one desktop, a laser printer dublex and Microsoft office package.

The US State Department made two separate deposits into a Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition local account on January 23, 2013 (US$264 684) and June 24 2013 (US$187 978,04) to finance the so-called Feya Feya campaign which was designed to lure voters to the MDC-T under the guise of a campaign for peaceful, free and fair elections.

The British Embassy also joined the fray and availed US$156 000 on January 30, 2013 and US$161 000 on February 13, 2013 to Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition for the MDC-T campaign.

Leading up to the July 30 harmonised elections, civil society organisations sounded vibrant enough to convince their donors that regime change was on the horizon in Zimbabwe.

However after ZANU PF election victory they had to manufacture a crisis and have ZANU PF’s victory question.

Last month Linda Masarira and Reverend Anglistone Sibanda revealed that Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition was working hand in arms with the MDC Alliance, through a series of meetings at Harvest House.

“Civil society has been captured by MDC Alliance, they go to Harvest House for meetings to strategise,” said Rev Sibanda.

“More-so just before elections civil society leaders were channeling resources from USAID to fund their colleagues in the MDC.

“It’s not something that is new, it has always been happening just that the rest of Zimbabweans did not know about it”.

Unlike in the past, when civil organisations would act behind scenes, this time around they are in the front lead.

Government must be warned.

Have they become too desperate or they have finally changed tactic?

By Sheldon Hakata

AS thousands left Barbourfields Stadium last Saturday, the aftermath of the much-publicized CAF Champions’ League Group B match pitting Zimbabwean champions FC Platinum and South African ABSA Premiership giants Orlando Pirates  was, unsurprisingly, centred on the chaos that had characterised entry points at the match venue.

While the stadium was filled to the brim, it is the manner in which organisers of the match went about business that put an embarrassing blight on the country’s football.

Matters were not helped by overzealous security which was not only all over the place, by harassed people who had come to enjoy the game of football.

Thousands of soccer loving supporters were left a disappointed lot as they failed to gain access into the stadium.

Such was the ineptitude that even former Warriors skipper Benjani Mwaruwari struggled to gain entrance.

Across the world, football legends are a revered lot and they normally receive privilege cards for matches of that magnitude.

Surely what happened last Saturday is unacceptable.

Organisers should have had prior knowledge that Orlando Pirates has a huge following in Zimbabwe and that such a match would naturally attract a bigger crowd hence common sense should have prevailed.

Away from the madness there was little surprise that the huge crowd that filled the venue was strongly behind the visitors Orlando Pirates.

They won the hearts of mainly Highlanders supporters who housed and filled two bays to the bream.

These Bosso fans fully associated with the visiting team right from the beginning.

Orlando Pirates coach Milutin ‘’Micho’ Sredojevic was a very delighted man with the strong support the Buccaneers got from their legion of supporters mostly Highlanders supporters.

‘’We played a very competitive side and needed to get every detail like a game of chess, they came up with a setup we did not expect,’’ said Pirates gaffer.

 Micho acknowledged that FC Platinum is a very good side with talented and hardworking players.  

FC Platinum fans were complemented by Dynamos and CAPS United supporters who could be visibly seen with their flags flying high in their midst of the crowd occupying the swimming pool end at Barbourfields Stadium. 

In Zimbabwe, no team is yet to win the continental trophy with Dynamos coming very close by reaching the final which they lost to Ivory Coast giants ASEC Mimosas in 1998.

Zimbabwe has made commendable strides in recent years judging by the quality of players in international leagues who are doing exceptionally well.

 FC Platinum gave a count account of themselves by holding the South African giants and will be looking to build on that good start when they lock horns with Tunisian powerhouse Esperance Tunis.

Esperance are the reigning African champions.

‘’I can’t complain, it was a massive performance from the boys, we now need to focus on our next match in Tunisia,’’ FC Platinum coach Norman Mapeza said after the match.

There was no difference in experience as the Platinum boys went pound for pound with the Sea Robbers.

FC Platinum though being in a tough group that includes AC Horoya of Guinea the result on Saturday means the group might be evenly balanced.

The Zimbabwean miners refused to be intimidated by their more fancied opponents and had some genuine chances to break the deadlock but the Pirates goalkeeper was there to make some breathtaking saves following FC Platinum’s marauding attacks.

On the other end FC Platinum goalminder Petros Mhari produced a brilliant shift between the goal posts preventing the Soweto giants from causing damage.

On a number of occasions Mhari had to be summoned for relief.

He stood tall to deny some of the opposition’s dangerous moves.

Zimbabwe international and Orlando Pirates deadly striker Kudakwashe Mahachi was restricted from taking shots though he could take on defenders at will.

Long serving FC Platinum defender Gift Bello summoned his load of experience on numerous occasions in this exciting encounter at Barbourfields Stadium.

FC Platinum duo of Farari Madhananga and Devon Chafa also had a very good afternoon in the central midfield.

Their display could have charmed some South African scouts present on the day.

Orlando Pirates are home to Zimbabwe’s national team players Kudakwashe Mahachi and Marshal Munetsi.

‘’We came here needing to tighten the back so that we do not concede and secondly to go forward and get that all important goal,’’ Pirates coach said.

FC Platinum showed a thick skin in this encounter with superb exchange of passes and being very comfortable on the ball.

The Zimbabwean champions had a penalty waved away by match officials midway through the first half.

FC Platinum midfield maestro Kelvin Madzongwe had his effort pushed out for a corner by Pirates goalkeeper Jacksn Mabokgwane from close range.

FC Platinum coach, Norman Mapeza was a rather contented man after the draw.

‘’It was a good game of football, the guys really worked very hard and for me as a coach this is a positive result. I am more than happy with a point,’’ Mapeza said.

FC Platinum still have five games to go in the group stages and they just need to enjoy the ride.