I noticed on Ceefax last night that a very significant news story leaked out about Zimbabwe. Naturally the serious situation in Burma is now receiving the most attention from the news.
It seems that Zanu have passed a law requiring all businesses to have a controlling 51% shareholding by a black Zimbabwean. In practice, of course this will mean a 51% interest by a Zanu-PF party member or chroney.
The result of this will be that those large agro and mineral companies with holdings still in Zimbabwe will withdraw. And, the main boards of such bodies are unlikely to be willing to sponsor inward investment to the country in the future, where there is a controlling interest in the local operating company which is directed by Zanu. The consequence will be a further decline in the manufacturing and raw material producing base of the Zimbabwean economy. It may very well also lead to the withdrawl of capital from the country.
Last week's TV documentary contained a segment on Zanu grabbing property. It seems that in fact Zanu are going after capital.
Thursday, 27 September 2007
Sunday, 23 September 2007
Its been quite a week
The situation in Zimbabwe has received a great deal of media attention in the last week. Various news reports on TV from ITN and BBC, plus writing press, even a statement from the Archbishop of York.
Let's examine some of the suggestions and proposals:
Gordon Brown has suggested that sanctions against Zimbabwe, and has declined to go to the African Summit if Mugabe is there. I am not persauded that sanctions against an already desperately poor country are the optimal policy, though the international community may well be left with nothing else. Clearly any such moves must be led by other African nations. Refusal to participate in meetings involving Mugabe and to widen the circle of prescribed persons is a good move. It is necessary to get that message communicated into the interior of the country since most Zimbabweans have no idea that other countries are doing this. Support of other African nations is critical.
Possibly South Africa are using Zimbabwe as cover for their own growing crisis. And SA are gaining from the brain drain from Zim into SA. In truth of course the UK are also gaining in the same way (see todays Mail on Sunday). For these reasons, plus solidarity with old ANC and Zanu campaigners there will be little heard from ANC leaders in SA.
It may also be that western money is behind Zimbabwe supporting him covertly while other interests are gaining, possibly in the mining sector or other mineral producers either in Zim or nearby nations. It would be interesting to know more about the situation in DRC and Mozambique to see whether there are any operations hosted out of those countries that are based in Zim.
The Archbishop of York John Sentamu has gone on record about Zimbabwe. I welcome the fact that he has spoken. The fact that he criticised PM Brown for being too moderate seems a little strange. ++John's view seems to be that military intervention may be required. In the end, he may well be right...in order to feed the populace as part of a humanitarian intervention.
But again it would be necessary to obtain the support of other African governments and preferably the UN before tasking the armed forces. The idea of the UK mounting any military operation is fantastic - we do not have the resources (all over committed in Afghanistan and Iraq already) and there is certainly no political will to entertain such action in the UK polity.
Perhaps the worst of all possibilities remains - the situation in Zimbabwe has a long way to run down before it recovers. A colleague this week told me that Mugabe has now claimed the right to name his succcessor. As Brett put it - normally one speaks of "where there is death there is hope" but with this move that doctrine is in question. A successor chosen by Mugabe - incompetent, corrupt, venial, grasping and evil - are words that come easily to mind.
The question is:- what do we do to help and support people in Zimbabwe?
Let's examine some of the suggestions and proposals:
Gordon Brown has suggested that sanctions against Zimbabwe, and has declined to go to the African Summit if Mugabe is there. I am not persauded that sanctions against an already desperately poor country are the optimal policy, though the international community may well be left with nothing else. Clearly any such moves must be led by other African nations. Refusal to participate in meetings involving Mugabe and to widen the circle of prescribed persons is a good move. It is necessary to get that message communicated into the interior of the country since most Zimbabweans have no idea that other countries are doing this. Support of other African nations is critical.
Possibly South Africa are using Zimbabwe as cover for their own growing crisis. And SA are gaining from the brain drain from Zim into SA. In truth of course the UK are also gaining in the same way (see todays Mail on Sunday). For these reasons, plus solidarity with old ANC and Zanu campaigners there will be little heard from ANC leaders in SA.
It may also be that western money is behind Zimbabwe supporting him covertly while other interests are gaining, possibly in the mining sector or other mineral producers either in Zim or nearby nations. It would be interesting to know more about the situation in DRC and Mozambique to see whether there are any operations hosted out of those countries that are based in Zim.
The Archbishop of York John Sentamu has gone on record about Zimbabwe. I welcome the fact that he has spoken. The fact that he criticised PM Brown for being too moderate seems a little strange. ++John's view seems to be that military intervention may be required. In the end, he may well be right...in order to feed the populace as part of a humanitarian intervention.
But again it would be necessary to obtain the support of other African governments and preferably the UN before tasking the armed forces. The idea of the UK mounting any military operation is fantastic - we do not have the resources (all over committed in Afghanistan and Iraq already) and there is certainly no political will to entertain such action in the UK polity.
Perhaps the worst of all possibilities remains - the situation in Zimbabwe has a long way to run down before it recovers. A colleague this week told me that Mugabe has now claimed the right to name his succcessor. As Brett put it - normally one speaks of "where there is death there is hope" but with this move that doctrine is in question. A successor chosen by Mugabe - incompetent, corrupt, venial, grasping and evil - are words that come easily to mind.
The question is:- what do we do to help and support people in Zimbabwe?
Friday, 14 September 2007
BBC Coverage
The coverage of the situation inside by Sue Lloydd-Roberts last night on the News at Ten and Newsnight was outstanding. The situation inside Zim is grim. The leadership of the country is deeply at fault. It appears that the complicity of South Africa in this matter is based on a win/win - as skilled people leave Zim they go to SA. SA is booming and needs their skills.
Kenneth Kowunda long ago said to Robert Mugabe that he had a jewel and he should be sure to keep is that way. Mugabe and his chronies are deeply to blame for what has occurred and is occurring. And, it may not yet be the end of the road. A slow decline over another twenty years is entirely possible. Though it is to be hoped that Mugabe will not last that long.
The key question, for us, is however what are we to do? Should Africa solve Africa's problems? Many inside Zim are now looking outside for help.
Kenneth Kowunda long ago said to Robert Mugabe that he had a jewel and he should be sure to keep is that way. Mugabe and his chronies are deeply to blame for what has occurred and is occurring. And, it may not yet be the end of the road. A slow decline over another twenty years is entirely possible. Though it is to be hoped that Mugabe will not last that long.
The key question, for us, is however what are we to do? Should Africa solve Africa's problems? Many inside Zim are now looking outside for help.
Wednesday, 12 September 2007
Zim Update
It's been a while since my last post, due to being on holiday. On my return I read a piece in the The Times of Tuesday 4th posted by Jan Raath in Harare concerning the deplorable situation. It is worth reading. Here are a few selected highlights:
- A loaf of bread now costs $Z30,000 but it costs $Zim50,000 to produce.
- Current inflation rate is 7600%
- Next year 450,000 tons of wheat are needed to be produced but only 78,000 are produced. Back in 1990 325,000 tons were produced.
- Now 80% of the population in Zimbabwe are living beneath the poverty line.
- An astonishing 3.4m of the population of Zimbabwe have left the country.
The country is in crisis. Two conversations with those who live, or have lived in Zimbabwe in recent years, by friends suggest that now there is a feeling that only external help can result in a change.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)