Nothing to celebrate as starvation, price hikes mark Zimbabwe’s independence
[This article was written on Independence Day - 18 April]
Harare: Rangarirai, 42, sits by the fireplace at her Mbare home waiting for porridge in a battered pot to simmer before preparing and serving the first meal of the day to her visibly malnourished eight-year-old child, Violet.
Chipo has been screaming since dawn due to hunger as her last meal last night - corn meal porridge and green vegetables with no cooking oil - was not good enough for her small body frame with a pot belly.
It is about 9.27am on Independence Day and Chipo is among millions of children in Zimbabwe who suffer from malnutrition in a country once considered the breadbasket of Southern Africa.
Within the next hour, security agents will herd her mother and hundreds of other residents in Mbare’s impoverished Matapi Flats and Mpedzanhamo and Magaba marketplaces, to the nearby Rufaro Stadium to ‘celebrate’ Zimbabwe’s independence day.
This has become the norm each year on 18 April, a day when the then militant and respected leader of the Zimbabwe African National Union (Zanu), Robert Mugabe, became the first black Prime Minister of Zimbabwe.
It was on this day when he took an oath promising to serve the people of Zimbabwe diligently.
However, Mbare residents believe that Mugabe who in 1987 became the first executive president after the redrafting of the national constitution to tighten his grip on power and rope in his rival party PF Zapu then led by firebrand politician the late Vice President Joshua Nkomo, was the worst ever thing to happen to Zimbabwe.
“We are starving in a country we liberated in 1980 because of this cruel man who has been the only leader of this Zimbabwe since independence. It is a fallacy to say that we are independent. In fact, we are in a military state as we are forced to attend in large numbers all Zanu PF events so that outsiders may believe that Mugabe is still popular in Zimbabwe,” says Rangarirai before dishing corn meal porridge to her starving child.
Her views are echoed by Pindai of Mbare Flats who adds that independence day has lost its meaning as it has been reduced to a talk show for the ruling elite.
“I think it has lost meaning for me because it is highly politicised by the ruling party,” says Pindai noting that “at the end of the day one does not value its meaning because it is now more of a Zanu PF forum to spit venom against British Prime Minister Tony Blair and United States of America President George Bush.”
“This day has nothing to do with nation building. The ruling elite thinks that it participated in the struggle without the people. The whole idea of independence is to sift who is loyal or not to Zanu PF. It’s like a crime now if one was born before the liberation war,” he says before dashing into his apartment as President Mugabe’s motorcade with heavily armed soldiers snakes into Rufaro Stadium past Magaba Flats.
Fungai and William, both born soon after independence and residents of Mbare’s National Section, also say they will not participate in the independence day celebrations.
“I will not be part of it. It spells terror for people here. We are living in fear as one believes that you will be kidnapped on April 16 and forcibly marched to venues of the celebrations as (Zanu PF) does not have followers anymore. These people are thugs,” says Fungai.
Adds Fungai: “The true sense of independence day has been hijacked by the ruling party. It is for the party’s staunch followers, people forced to attend celebrations at gunpoint and others hunting for a plate of food.”
“To make matters worse, we are now more oppressed under President Mugabe than Rhodesian Prime Minister Ian Smith. Most of the laws passed by Smith are still in force and at the same time Mugabe has enacted others like the Public Order and Security Act to further oppress Zimbabweans. It is a disgrace to have such a leader,” says William.
True to some Mbare residents’ expectations, President Mugabe took center stage at Rufaro Stadium at 12 noon today to launch a vitriolic attack on Blair and Bush saying the two were trying to effect a regime change.
He said the two would never succeed in bringing to power opposition politicians like Morgan Tsvangirai of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC).
“That will never ever happen. No. No. No. Tsvangirai is an invention of Blair and Bush. We are a people-driven government … a government of the people by the people for the people,” he ranted.
Little did he know that the majority of Zimbabweans, including Chipo and her mother, living in Mbare high density suburb near the venue of this year’s celebration - Rufaro Stadium - were not happy with his iron-fist rule which has led to massive starvation, daily price hikes and an inflation rate of nearly 2 000 percent, the worst in the world.
July 2nd, 2008 17:22
While we’re all on about the current mess can somebody please ask a few gentlemen some questions: Mr. Chissano (moz), were you not given money in 1997 to topple Mugabe by assisting in the crashing of Zimbabwe’s economy?
Mr. Mandela, did you not fly to Japan ten years ago and personally ask for Japan’s assistance in removing Mugabe for what the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs described in a written fax as “Mugabe has caused considerable financial losses to our South African friends’ interests in the Democratic Republic of Congo?
Mr. Peter Hain, four British agents who rudely pressed a certain Japanese company to join in the coup against Mugabe in November 1997, and who offered that company 32 million dollars to help crash the economy of Zimbabwe (for the sole reason of inflicting extreme suffering on the black population to press that population into overthrowing Mugabe - their words) repeatedly dropped your name. Can you explain?
Mr. Mbeki, your ANC publication ran a story on July 25 1997 in which a certain health minister of an Asian country swore that he would see to it that Zimbabwe was destroyed for refusing to see him in Harare on July 23 1997 when he arrived in the country without prior notice - you were deputy president at the time. Can you say today that that threat was not carried out?
Mr. Obasanjo, can you deny that you were approached in 1997 and 1998 to assist in the plot against Zimbabwe?
And my final question is to Zimbabweans themselves. Can any of you honestly say you do not recall the Herald headline of November 2 1997?
If you don’t recall it said,” SA bank on land and tobacco in Zimbabwe”
By Matthew Takaona
A REPORT sponsored and compiled by an economist of the Standard Bank of South Africa on the future of the tobacco industry in Zimbabwe expresses fear that the “tobacco levy and intentions to expropriate land from farmers” could undermine the future performance of the tobacco sector in this country.
The report, which is in the hands of the Sunday Mail and prepared for Standic Bank Zimbabwe, also casts doubts and aspersions on the ability of the Zimbabwean Government “to leave the industry alone”.
The 26-page report suggests that both external and internal pressures be brought to bear upon the Zimbabwean Government in a bid to force it to change its economic and political policies.
These pressures, the report suggests, could intensify before the current Presidential term ends if the industry was to be salvaged from “serious savaging by Government”.
The report puts down the names of all those interviewed during its preparation within the tobacco industry and upon reading the report The Sunday Mail asked for comment from all those the report had named as sources for material used to compile it.
But Stanbic wrote a threatening letter to The Sunday Mail demanding that the report could have been obtained through theft and therefore should be returned to its offices with an undertaking that no reference would be made by the newspaper in future to its contents.
The Sunday Mail had written to all those who had been interviewed during the compiling of the report and also wrote to the bank seeking a comment on some of the negative comments made by the report against Government.
Part of the letter to Stanbic read: “Some of the statements made by this report are that the Government is corrupt, unpopular, autarkik (despotic) and its policies would soon destroy the tobacco industry in the country. The document calls for both internal and external pressure to force the Government to change its current economic policies.
“The document also says that President Mugabe would save the industry if he quits from power before the end of his current Presidential term”.
The bank’s lawyers wrote in response: “We are instructed that your senior reporter has sent to a number of persons employed in the fraternity of the tobacco merchants in Zimbabwe the attached letter, concerning a confidential economic report made by an economist employed by Standard Bank of South Africa Limited in Johannesburg and London and of the Stanbic Bank of Zimbabwe Limited in Harare.
“In addition, copyright in the document itself vested in its author, employed by Standard Bank of South Africa Limited, has been transfered to that company, which as such is in any event entitled at law to prevent reproduction of any material part of it.”
The Sunday Mail replied to the letter through their lawyers Honey and Blanckenberg. Part of the letter read: “We wish you communicate to Messrs Atherstone and Cook our objection to the threats and blackmail undertones contained in their communication to us. We will not return to them as they demand, the document in our possession. It is an authentic document whose existence Atherstone and Cook accept.”
The Sunday Mail said the document had not been stolen as alleged by the bank but it was left at the desk of the editor, appanrently by an anonymous person. The paper went on to prove the veracity of the document by way of drawing the attenion of those who were allegedly interviewed.
“The document and some of its stipulations and observations hinge on the very heart of the Zimbabwean economy. It is therefore as far as we are concerned a document of major public interest.
“We believe that in a democratic society where there is talk to no end about the freedom of the Press and the need for investigative reporting, we are entitled to publish stories of interest such as this one,” said the letter.
After this letter, the bank wrote to give a comment on the report.The bank said the report was an evaluation of threats and opportunities facing the tobacco industry and the comments in the report were the the (sic) opinion of the economist who compiled it.
“For your information the Economics Division of Standard Bank of South Africa comprises 30 highly qualified economists, who for obvious reasons have complete editorial independence. As such the report does not reflect the official views of either Stanbic Bank Zimbabwe or Standard Bank of South Africa, or any other person or organisation whatsoever. The report is simply an aid to assist a handful of selected senior executives of the bank in their analysis of the bank’s credit exposure to a particular sector of the economy” said the letter.
The bank said there was no evdence of the allegations being made against the bank.
The report on the Zimbabwean tobacco sector was undertaken in August 1997. It is allegedly based upon desk research carried out in Johannesburg and a programme of interviews carried out with representatives of the Zimbabwean tobacco growers and market, in and around Harare. Considerable help was provided by the Corporate Banking Division of Stanbic Zimbabwe, said the report.
The report said that there were two key risks to the tobacco sector of Zimbabwe. These were cited as “cyclical risks from the perennial vagaries of the crop and the global tobacco market and the economic and political environment of the country”.
The bank said the main factors within the political and environmental risks were the expropriation of land for resettlement, the tobacco levy, the indigenisation policy that could see farmers being forced to sell their tobacco through Boka Tobacco Auction Floors and generally bad governance.
The report suggested that the bank could sucessfully check its interests if the above factors were closely monitored.
Said the report: “Assessment of the risks of the group thus come down to two main elements - assessment of the progress ofthe global balance of supply and demand for quality tobacco and assessment of the rate at which pressure builds on President Mugabe from internal and external sources to change policies and improve performance, or even to force him to quit his post before the current Presidential term runs out in 2002.
“Thus the essense of the situation is this; the industry is more likely to grow and prosper if Government leaves it alone
… For that situation to prevail Government has to adopt and adhere to very good economic policies and stop its current autarkik pretences.
“Can Zanu Government under President Mugabe do that? The Zimbabwean Government is not regarded as a model in the application of good governance. The President apparently makes most decisions himself. Is he likely to be responsive to the industry’s concerns?
“The Government is, meanwhile, becoming increasingly unpopular. Mugabe’s Presidency has 41/2 years to run. Much could happen in that time. Already there have been serious demonstrations from the retired bush war veterans and a number of quite serious strikes. But if the Government and President cling on to their current unsuccessful approaches till the (year) 2002 Presidential elections come around, the tobacco sector could have suffered serious savaging by Government then.”
Some analysts have said reports of this nature tend to give credit to suspicions and perceptions that vested interests by finacial institutions at home and abroad could be bent on destabilising economies of Third World countries like Zimbabwe to ensure wealth remains in the hands of the minority.
They said this could be evidence of the fact that due to the participation or involvement of indigenous forces in the industry established players in the tobacco sector could be advised by their financiers to abandon the industry with a view to destabilise it.
However, almost all the interviewees cited in the report distanced themselves from the political and economic comments made by the report. They expressed surprise that the interviews which were purely “industrial” were then turned into political ones.
……..With due respect to the Herald….