When a man rules his land for over 20 years, what comes next? He runs short of ideas. This again awakens my continued call for true democracy on the African soil. Already accused of conducting controversial elections, which is usually the case in the majority of African countries, the Zimbabwean leader has employed ancient tactics (as last seen in pre-biblical times) in order to ensure his continued stay in power.
The visible attempt to crush all, who step in his way (an example being opposition leaders Morgan Tsvangirai), as well as the miraculous death of many others such as Leatnmore Jongwe, has re-enacted those agonizing days of Idi Ammin Dada of Uganda, thus leading to an international out-cry against the unintelligent practice of one of Africa’s so called great leaders, Robert Mugabe.
It staggers my logical reasoning how a leader can seize farmlands from farmers and still expect an increase in food supply even when his country already finds itself staring right into the horrible face of malnutrition. Today, roughly 6 million Zimbabweans are without food supply. Millions are facing death from disease, starvation as well as the archaic state sponsored terrorism.
No doubt, the Mugabe regime has contributed immensely to Africa’s greatest humanitarian disaster of the 21st century. Citing the laud cries of foul from concerned individuals, racism was taken as the major reason for the seizure of farmlands in Zimbabwe, as it appeared only the white farmers were affected in Zimbabwe’s redistribution of farmlands. Although the Zimbabwean Government has recalled the white farmers, only a few returned. Economists all over the world have condemned this action saying “evil is goodness turned in the opposite direction”. Initially, Zimbabwe should have tackled the issue by redirecting the evil caused by the Illegal possession of indigenous farmlands within its boundaries. The world is fast becoming multiracial and there is the prediction that in centuries to come it might be difficult to find pure races of human beings on the earth. It must also be remembered that these white farmers are Zimbabweans by birth and hence should have their rights protected by the Mugabe Government.
Hence, the issue should have been resolved with a more strategic solution. Creating more farmlands for black farmers would have been the initial solution. Not seizing lands and later granting back the lands to farmers, some of whom complain of harassment even on their return. Creating more farmlands would have resulted in an increase in food production coupled with a reduction in unemployment as more hands would have been employed in agriculture. Of course, this would not seem well initially for the white farmers. In fact they would have to adjust by reducing their food prices as well as increasing food output in order to obtain the desired income. Zimbabwe would have become one of the greatest exporters of food as other countries would take advantage of the cheap food Zimbabwe has to offer. Zimbabwe would have followed up by constructing hi tech food production plants in order to prevent wastage as well as to ensure food is processed to its final stage. By now Zimbabwe should have been exporting its agricultural produce at its end and final stage. Zimbabwe should have been on the same level as Canada and the United Kingdom to mention a few countries that have embraced diversity.
For years, Zimbabwe has been punished for Mugabe’s actions as investors’ confidence in the region has been threatened. Now, the region is under the mercy of aid. Well, presently, a new political weapon has emerged on the African soil as Mugabe has been accused of using food aid as a political weapon against his opponents.
As harsh disciplinary measures against the Mugabe lead government of Zimbabwe were partially stalled by South Africa’s former president Thabo Mbeki, patience appears to be running out on concerned nations such as Great Britain and Kenya. The later accusing Zimbabwe of being an embarrassment to Africa further making the rest of the world realize that the Kenyan Government has got jokes as their last election exposed the entire continent to ridicule.
Mbeki’s stance can best be understood as Mugabe fought apartheid with aggression, helped inflict sanctions on the white minority government and aided the African National Congress before the lifting of apartheid.However, what Mbeki failed to realize was that South African independence was meant to open the doors to reconciliation, which would have been a great example not only for South Africa but for the entire world. Former South African President Nelson Mandela knew this too well. Mbeki’s success in brokering peace between the Mugabe Regime and the main opposition was frowned at by the western nations, many of whom wanted Mugabe to pay for his tough left stance. This success however may have resulted in the singling out of Mbeki as a scapegoat. Annalists are of the opinion that Mbeki’s “compulsory” resignation may have been as a result of a behind the scene action against the former South African leader. Mugabe had once again sneaked out of the slippery hands of the West. Mbeki paid for it with his career.
Political analysts also accuse the West of being too harsh on the Mugabe regime as other African nations have committed worse atrocities related to fraud elections. An example being Ethiopia’s Meles Zenawi whose last election resulted in the Ethiopian Government committing worse human right crimes than the Mugabe lead government. Equatorial Guinea is just another classical example. Ethiopia’s consent to send its troops into neighbouring Somalia has been cited as the major reason why her flawed election where treated with deaf ears by the United States.
Well Thabo Mbeki may have been right in saying the situation requires patience as Mugabe defied economic sanctions imposed on him but could not cope with the words used on him as majority of his close allies have turned against him. Mugabe has now decided to come to the roundtable for discussions with rival Morgan Tsvangirai. Analysts remain sceptical that this would produce fruitful results citing the fact that numerous African leaders in the past have used this as a tool to divert global attention. A future breakdown of this might raise the next question of the feasibility of a military response to the Zimbabwean crises. This I doubt as the United States and Great Britain, still occupied with unending tension in the Middle East as well as unending threats of nuclear proliferation from countries such as Iran and North Korea, haven’t the excess resources to tackle this new form of terrorism largely employed by Mugabe, “ADMINISTRATIVE TERRORISM”.