Morgan Tsvangirai's withdrawal from the presidential run-off scheduled for June 27, and his decision to seek the protection of the Dutch embassy in Pretoria, has secured for Zimbabwe's President Robert Mugabe a Pyrrhic victory. Mugabe's triumph comes at a huge cost to democracy and stability in Zimbabwe, as well as in the region. The actions of the Mugabe regime in the run-up to Tsvangirai's decision demand a strong regional response to what is clearly a stolen victory.

After a terror campaign and a sham 'election' last Friday, Robert Mugabe has declared himself President of Zimbabwe. The country is in crisis and its fate depends on talks between Mugabe and the winner of the first round election -- Morgan Tsvangirai.

The EU has not ruled out taking action against Zimbabwean leader Robert Mugabe in the wake of presidential elections marred by extensive violence. In a statement issued following the elections on Friday (27 June), Slovenia, which currently holds the six-month rotating EU presidency warned "The European Union does not exclude the possibility of taking appropriate measures against those responsible for the tragic events of recent months."

Thanks Mary Ndlovu for such a . I would like to add a third false assumption to the two you have stated- the delusion that Tsvangirai’s election will be “finishing the task of liberation” of Zimbabweans.

Truly finishing the task of liberation will be liberating Zimbabwe from the illegitimate Mugabe regime, from the obnoxious interventions (and sanctions) of the West, and from those who operate as agents of western imperialism. It will be when Zimbabweans are finally able to form an independent and legitimate movement/government that is driven and controlled by the people. We may all have opinions as non-Zimbabweans, but our ultimate responsibility is our unconditional solidarity with Zimbabweans. They have the ultimate say and choice.

And that is why no one (especially not Mugabe) should be allowed to deny Zimbabweans the right and the opportunity to make that choice. The terror, burning, rape, systematic violation of basic rights and killings must stop. We must continue to urge our leaders to break their silence and false solidarity with Mugabe. We must continue to expose and resist those who want to take advantage of the crisis and impose their agenda over the wills of Zimbabweans.

And we must continue to support our brothers and sisters who are at the frontline of the struggle for freedom in Zimbabwe. It will be sad if SADC and the AU fail to take advantage of Tsvangirai’s offer for a Transitional Authority. They can if they choose to. They should at least try. But we can no longer tolerate their inaction on Zimbabwe. In solidarity.

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/385/49182mugabe.jpgAfter the African Union issued a statement so tepid that it might as well as have come from a high-school student conference, low expectations have further diminished. The African Union can now be seen in the same light as its predecessor – the OAU, a drum that beats hollow when it most counts for the African citizen.

But nevertheless, Mugabe’s one-man act has irreversibly damaged his reputation. The extent to which Mugabe has misread the continental and international political climate is shocking.African people, who previously saw Zimbabwe as a metaphor of their own countries where the elite exist at the expense of the poor, are abandoning him en mass. Having lost international legitimacy to George Bush and Tony Blair - a remarkable feat considering the extent to which his two adversaries are hated - the African people became his last defense.

But there has always been the African people and their governments. In regards to the African Union statement, Bishop Desmond Tutu dismay by saying that he was "distressed that (AU leaders) have not thought it was important to declare the illegitimacy of the runoff and the illegitimacy of the Robert Mugabe administration.”

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/385/49178zimwomensum.jpgOn March 29,2008 Zimbabwe went to the polls to elect its next government until 2013. Results for the Presidential elections were announced a month later and people in Zimbabwe maintained peace. From 2 April 2008 the government organised a retribution campaign to target those who allegedly voted for the opposition and since then there has been terror in mostly rural Zimbabwe with youth militia under the command of the army and police confirmed to have gone on to unleash terror in a campaign to teach the rural people how to correctly vote in the forthcoming presidential run off supposed to take place on 23 May according to the law but whose date remains unannounced. As a result of the terror campaign by the military and the youth militia, the most affected are women and children as 80% of Zimbabwean women live in the rural areas.

So far, over 800 homes have been burnt down, over 10 000 people have fled their homes, over 40 people have been shot dead in cold blood, over 7000 teachers have fled their schools as a number have been beaten in the eyes of parents and pupils, Doctors for human Rights report that over 2000 serious cases of physical torture and beatings have passed through their hands and a lot of those they treated have suffered serious fractures to an extent that most are permanently handicapped. The oldest victim of the post election violence is an old woman with 12 grandchildren all of them orphaned and whose son is alleged to have campaigned for the opposition.

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/385/49177markofcain.jpgThe farcical run off took place in Zimbabwe, predictably so, in the face of a world opinion dismissing the sham elections and the irrelevant result rightly so already in advance. Mugabe’s legitimacy is one of a dictator, whose power is dependent upon a military junta’s good will. If not for the securocrats and their silent coup after the first round of elections, Zimbabwe would now be governed by political office bearers who would have the legitimacy of a majority of the voters. Even with the state organized terror machinery intimidating the people and forcing them to vote for an unwanted aging despot, his “victory” is nothing but a fallacy and mockery. Shame on SADC, who were willing to witness such a defiance of the people’s will.

Intimidation, repression, physical harm, torture, rape and murder were all part of a so-called election campaign. At the end, the contester - who unlike six years ago in 2002 - could no longer be denied the claim to legitimate political power . Morgan Tsvangirai withdrew for admirably sound ethical and moral reasons. After all, the regime had disclosed its intentions through the systematic use of brute force in ruthless way, To have contested the second round would have been to add further misery, mutilation and death to the long register of human rights violations bordering on crimes against humanity. That would have been an irresponsible symbolic political act.

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/385/49176mugabeout.jpgIt may be too early to speak of a positive response to calls for a government of national unity. It would be most encouraging to conclude that both parties are agreed on the essence of a GNU. But this would not be an accurate or even remotely hopeful analysis of the scenario. First, there is the violence in which unarmed citizens have been victims of mayhem. Secondly, there is the unresolved question of who should head this GNU - Tsvangirai or Mugabe. If this were going to turn out to be a defining moment for Zimbabwe, you could argue, with good reason, that both men would lower their own personal expectations in favour of their country’s and their people’s. But would that be realistic? asks Bill Saidi.
====

In essence, what came out of the African Union summit in Egypt, which presumably ventilated the Zimbabwean imbroglio thoroughly, was to leave it to the people to gird their loins for what might turn out to be a bruising or an amicable struggle to rescue the country from the brink of a disaster.

The mildly critical declaration for a call for a government of national unity contained no muscle that one could detect from a distance. Its politeness, as with everything the AU has attempted on Zimbabwe, must have been greeted by huge yawns of boredom by both combatants in the struggle.

It was Zanu PF, rather than the MDC, which appeared to react with a degree of animation to the proposal. Sikanyiso Ndlovu, the Minister of Information, sounded so upbeat it was as if the AU had responded specifically to his government’s call for a government of national unity (GNU). The MDC, almost predictably, introduced the rider that such an arrangement ought to be headed by Morgan Tsvangirai, who beat President Robert Mugabe to the presidency in the 29 March presidential election. Zanu PF would probably engage in a fit of gnashing of teeth before responding to that proposal - just as predictably – with the rejoinder that its leader ought to be the head of such a government.

This will be on the nebulous basis of his so-called victory in the 27 June farce which Zanu PF insists was a free and fair affair in which 85 percent of the voters, presumably, voted freely for Mugabe. There were widespread reports that some voters marked their ballots with “You will rule yourself, not us – we are fed up with you”.

How Zanu PF reached the conclusion that all voters turned up at the polling booths willingly shouldn’t surprise any objective analyst of the Zimbabwean situation. From the beginning, Zanu PF wanted it known throughout the world that it would not accept an arrangement which it had not controlled. The 29 March elections produced results which showed the party being resoundingly trounced by the opposition. But almost all that was overturned: the government took its own sweet time to announce the results. By that time, according to the opposition, “certain things” had been “doctored” and Zanu PF had suddenly performed quite creditably in all the polls.

Yes, it had lost its parliamentary majority in one fell swoop and had performed less than spectacularly in the presidential stakes, but it would live to fight another day – in the run-off of the presidential election.

About 70 people, most of them opposition supporters, were killed in the run-up to the run-off. Mugabe declared publicly that “only God could remove him from office”. It was the kind of contemptuous statement Mugabe has recently made to emphasise his utter disregard for even the elementary requirements for a free and fair election.

Why he would expect the opposition to participate in such a poll is beyond comprehension. Nobody, not even Thabo Mbeki, with his mealy-mouthed stance on Zimbabwe, could speak of the poll as anything other than what others thought of it: a travesty and a sham.

Mbeki would not use those words, but even he must have been frightened at the temerity with which his political idol seemed to regard that charade. Mugabe was swiftly sworn into office and just as speedily flown off to Egypt for the AU summit. Television footage of his reception by his colleagues at Sharm el-Sheikh suggested most of them were a little embarrassed, if not ashamed, at his presence. He may have met some of them privately, but there was notably no TV footage of such tête-à-tête meetings.

What we did see, though, was his media spokesman, George Charamba, almost foaming at the mouth as he shooed off reporters from the president. It was amazing that Charamba found it necessary to tell the West, on camera, “to go hang”. At some time in the future, that portrait of him may return to haunt him time and time again.

Mugabe himself was shown as if he was about to lunge at a reporter who apparently had asked him a question which he evidently found “cheeky”. All in all, it was not at all a worthwhile public relations exercise for Zimbabwe: the president, a man generally regarded as being unfriendly to the media, could only have sent that reputation plunging to the pits of notoriety.

The performance of the AU at the summit was once again as shameful as that of its predecessor, the Organisation of African Unity (OAU), which somehow agreed to hold a summit in Idi Amin’s capital of Kampala, at a time when that odious dictator had displayed the worst traits of a megalomaniac, with a touch of cannibalism thrown in.

Only Raila Odinga seemed courageous enough to speak on camera of a call to expel Mugabe from the AU until free and fair elections are held in Zimbabwe. This is crucial for any future debate on the Zimbabwean situation by the AU or by any other regional or international blocs.

Elections in the country have generally contained an element of farce which most African leaders have refused to acknowledge as such. One good reason for this is that there are only a handful of African countries which could boast of truly free and fair elections since their independence. Many are led by people who achieved power through the barrel of the gun.

Although Mugabe has recently boasted that Zimbabwe’s independence was won solely through the armed struggle, it should not be forgotten that there were protracted negotiations in London – with not an AK47 in sight - at which all the players took part and had to sign an agreement.

Angola and Mozambique, which became independent after a 1974 coup in Portugal ended that country’s colonial adventure in Africa and elsewhere, were handed their independence, virtually, on a platter. Incidentally, that did not ensure a smooth transition. Hundreds of lives were still lost in the internecine bloodshed that followed this orderly handover of power.

In Zimbabwe, 20,000 were killed in a virtual civil war after 18 April 1980. After the AU summit, there appeared to have been noises of conciliation emerging from both Zanu PF and the MDC. It may be too early to speak of a positive response to calls for a government of national unity. It would be most encouraging to conclude that both parties are agreed on the essence of a GNU. But this would not be an accurate or even remotely hopeful analysis of the scenario.

First, there is the violence in which unarmed citizens have been victims of mayhem. Secondly, there is the unresolved question of who should head this GNU - Tsvangirai or Mugabe. If this were going to turn out to be a defining moment for Zimbabwe, you could argue, with good reason, that both men would lower their own personal expectations in favour of their country’s and their people’s. But would that be realistic?

The 27 June election was described as a “joke”, which would sound ghoulish if you considered that people were being killed even as the voting got under way or when the president was being sworn for another term of office. Why most people do not dwell on the bloodstained nature of the election campaign is probably an “African thing”. Most election campaigns on the continent feature a certain amount of bloodletting, witness that in Kenya.

Many Zimbabweans, observing from afar the TV footage of the gory situation in Kenya, swore it would not happen in their country. But it did and most were thoroughly disgusted that they had allowed themselves to be duped by Zanu PF into believing that the party had turned over a new leaf and would exit the political arena quietly, having been thoroughly humiliated by the MDC.

Mugabe was in competition with nobody, Tsvangirai having pulled out and being holed up in the Dutch embassy in Harare. Tsvangirai has been criticised for not standing firmly alongside his supporters in their time of greatest need. He has spent time in exile in Botswana and South Africa, apparently fearing for his life.

One point in his favour is that there is no denying that, if an opportunity was presented to his enemies to liquidate him, the chances are that they would grab it with both hands. He has been severely brutalised in the past, by the war veterans and by “men in dark glasses”, officers of the murderous Central Intelligence Office (CIO).

In 1990, one such officer was charged, found guilty and sentenced to a term in prison for his part in the attempted assassination of Patrick Kombayi, then a candidate for the opposition Zimbabwe Unity Movement (ZUM). The two men were pardoned by Mugabe. Officers of this same clandestine unit have reportedly participated actively in the so-called “retribution” campaign launched by the government and Zanu PF after the 29 March elections.

The impunity with which this campaign was carried out convinced many people, previously unable to believe such brutality could be carried out in the name of a government professing to be democratic and a respectable member of the international community, that Zanu PF was in a real bind. Its chances of winning the election had been eroded by an economy so tattered and derelict its likelihood of ever recovering seemed almost non-existent.

It is this tottering economy which the government has said has been the target of Western economic sanctions. The government, in fact, blames the sanctions for all its economic woes. But an influential British commentator has dismissed sanctions as an effective tool against what he calls “brutal rulers” of Mugabe’s ilk.

Simon Jenkins says in an article in The Guardian newspaper this week: “Economic sanctions are a coward’s war. They do not work but are a way in which the rich elites feel they are ‘committed’ to some distant struggle. They enjoy lasting appeal to politicians because they cost them nothing and are rhetorically macho.” Jenkins refers specifically to the decision by the supermarket group Tesco to stop buying produce from Zimbabwe, “while the political crisis exists”. He contrasts this with the stance of the company’s competitor, Waitrose, which has decided not to stop buying from Zimbabwe. “It believes withdrawal would devastate ‘the workers and their extended families.”

There has never been any universal applause for economic sanctions against recalcitrant nations. Jenkins makes the point by referring to sanctions imposed on a number of nations which he claimed had no effect whatsoever. “In almost every case, sanctions make the evil richer and more secure, and the poor poorer.” Jenkins quotes the dictionary meaning of sanctions “as a specific penalty enacted in order to enforce obedience to the law”.

While he suggests that only an invasion would be effective, he refers to the invasion of Iraq as being considered as “a step too far.” “We toss gestures that will not bring about Mugabe’s downfall, only make the poor less able to resist his thugs. And all so that Tesco can feel better for a day.” "Yet there are many who believe that “every little bit helps”. In other words, even the mildest inconvenience to the people of an offending nation is likely to have an effect on their attitude towards the government.

Zimbabwe’s economy is in the proverbial doldrums, some of it totally unrelated to sanctions, but caused by malfeasance and maladministration. For instance, Mugabe himself has railed against his own cabinet ministers over the corruption involving the land reform programme. Some of them have two, three or even four farms, when he has decreed that they should have only one. Moreover, others have not developed these previously white-owned properties to their previous level of productivity, using them for speculative purposes, instead.

In insisting that the sanctions have hurt most ordinary, average-income earners, the government had hoped to persuade voters not to continue with their support for the opposition. The idea has been to paint them with the same brush as the West, which the government alleges launched its anti-Zimbabwe campaign after the land reform programme.

All this has failed to impress most voters, because, for a majority of workers, the luxuries accorded to cabinet ministers and the heads of parastatal companies are so lavish, they cannot imagine the country suffering any real pain from the sanctions – unless there is a political reason for making the workers the main targets and sufferers.

And since the opposition draws most of its support from the workers, that conclusion is not difficult for them to arrive at. Tsvangirai once said he believed if the South Africans imposed any kind of sanctions on Zimbabwe, they would have such a devastating impact on the economy Mugabe would soon rush to Mbeki on bended knees to beg him to reverse the decision, in return for anything he wanted – including the immediate re-opening of direct talks with the opposition.

Recently, the MDC leader has not been vocal on sanctions, perhaps in the perhaps forlorn hope that Mbeki, under enormous criticism for his lacklustre performance as the main mediator, would at last bend to the wishes of the Zimbabweans and make their geriatric and despotic leader the kind of deal he wouldn’t resist.

* Bill Saidi is the deputy editor of The Standard, an independent newspaper in Harare.

* Please send comments to or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org/

I skipped the AU summit in Egypt and did not feel guilty about it.

In the past 15 years I can count the number of times that I have missed the OAU/AU summits. And in the few times that I have, it was due to unavoidable circumstances.

I have been part of a core of African activists who have remained engaged with our premier diplomatic and political organisation long before it became fashionable as it has become today. Those were bleak times when the OAU was a pejorative term, a symbol of all that was wrong with Africa especially its leaders.

Today everybody talks of engaging, interfacing, collaborating and working with the AU. It is looked upon as an important forum for African leadership, African problems and African consensus on global issues. African and non-African NGOs in particular have in recent years ‘discovered’ that relating to the AU is important for their advocacy and even funding!

Civil society organisations (CSOs) held, from June 22 to 23, the third Citizen’s Continental Conference in Sharm El Sheikh ahead of the Eleventh African Union (AU) Summit. The Continental Conference provided space for African citizens, the Diaspora, CSOs, and other concerned parties to discuss the summit agenda including the AU audit and the peace and security situation in Zimbabwe, Darfur and Somalia, among other issues. The eleventh ordinary session of the Assembly of the AU Heads of State, convening under the theme of water and sanitation, will also consider the merger of the Court of Justice and the African Court on Human Rights of the AU, the current food crisis, the appointment of the members of the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child.

As the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) in Zimbabwe announced its pull out of the run-off election scheduled for June 27, the Pan-African Parliament (PAP) observer mission, one of only two official observer groups in the country, confirmed acts of violence perpetrated by government supporters against opposition members.

Amandla interviewed Morgan Tsvangirai MDC president on the current impasse in Zimbabwe and on the future policies an MDC orientated government would like to see implemented. Tsvangirai sheds light on their current strategy of seeking a negotiated settlement with ZANU PF, their dependence on the SA government, on SADC and the AU to get Mugabe to play ball

As Zimbabwe's political crisis deepens ahead of the presidential run-off election on Friday 27 June, and the status of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) remains uncertain, the situation for HIV-positive Zimbabweans is more precarious than ever. Nicholas Goche, the social welfare minister who regulates NGO activity, announced on 13 June that more than 400 organisations working in the HIV/Aids sector would be exempt from the blanket ban on NGO operations announced the week before.

The United Nations human rights chief today called for justice and accountability in response to the campaign of political violence that has marred Zimbabwe’s electoral process. The Southern African nation has been beset by deadly unrest since the first round of the presidential election on 29 March.

The voting polls have opened and some voters have begun gathering at polling stations as Zimbabwe enters into a second round of Presidential elections, amid international disapproval. The situation in the country's capital, Harare, is reported to be tense. About 5.9 million Zimbabweans are registered to cast their ballots at the 9 000 polling stations over the next 12 hours. The voting process is expected to be overseen by over 400 Southern African Development Community, South African and international observers.

“The next day mother forced me to wear the ZANU-PF T-Shirt and to attend an everyday compulsory ZANU-PF meeting. When we arrived at the meeting place I heard war veterans boasting that they had just acquired new knobkerries to beat those who had absconded from the previous day's meeting. At first I thought it was a joke, but was shocked to see a young man being dragged in front of everyone, and thereafter being severely beaten… We are told that there is a struggle between Zimbabwe and England but it feels like a struggle between the rich and the poor in Zimbabwe” writes Nsingo Fanuel.
====

Excitement gripped me when I was finally able to go back across the border, from South Africa to visit my family in Zimbabwe. Pleased as I was, I tried to ignore all the media reports about the country's disregard of acceptable and proper treatment of human beings. Before going home, I braced myself for whatever the hell was to befall me! Imagine going back home to unpredictable situations, disastrous conditions, or even impending death - and when home is Zimbabwe this is no exaggeration. If you are returning South Africa you are immediately suspected of being MDC. Anyway, going home was the only way to please my mum!

From Johannesburg I boarded a bus directly to Harare, Zimbabwe. I paid 300 Rands for the trip and took at least seven hours to reach the Beitbridge Border Post. The border was highly-congested, with border officials dragging their feet at main checkpoints. My stay there was four hours. We left for Harare at around 5 o'clock in the morning and it took eight hours to get there.

I was shocked by the state of the capital city. There was no transport to ferry me to my small city of birth, Marondera. Familiar with my country's economic woes, I immediately settled on the fuel disaster as the explanation. However, I waited by Fourth Street, just behind Roadport for any transport, and soon thereafter a smoking, dusty, ready-for-scrap Mazda T3500 lorry arrived. I jostled alongside other stranded commuters and climbed to the back. Along the way the driver demanded Z$500 million, as transport fares. He said this was to enable him to buy fuel.

As we drove past Ruwa, a small town just outside Harare, the fuel black-marketeers waved down the driver. Only in Zimbabwe could fuel run dry, but never for the black-marketeers. Immediately, the driver parked by the roadside, but was told to restart and get fuelled hidden in a small patch of thick bush from the army or police. He complied. I tried to get as close to the black-marketeer and gathered the two were arguing over the exact price of the 'precious liquid.’ It seemed the young man was attempting to refuel the lorry before settling on the actual price.

When I arrived in the newly-crowned city of Marondera (formerly a town, and recently given a city status), I just slept overnight, eager to catch the morning bus to my mother's plot, allocated to her by the ruling Zanu-PF party. The house in Marondera belongs to my grandfather, my mother's stepfather. Currently, the four bed-roomed tiny property is home to my mother's sister, together with her three children. Her first-born is a boy, who has two younger sisters as well. The next morning I took a lift to the Baker Plots, grabbed from a Mr. Baker, a white farmer. Mr. Baker is one of the 4,000 white farmers whose farms were forcibly grabbed by the ruling government in 1997, under pressure from the late former Zimbabwe National Liberation War Veterans' Association leader, Chenjerai Hunzvi.

I paid Z$200 million from Marondera to Baker's. Initially, the driver of the small, out-of-date Datsun Pulsar had asked for Z$300 million, arguing that the exchange rate of the Zim Dollar versus the South African Rand was unpredictable, thus the need to cater for the unexpected devaluation of the dollar. True to his utterances, and as I was to experience for myself during my short stay in Zimbabwe, the Z$ falls on an hourly basis. To stay on the safe side, one has to keep a close and tight guard on the 'now indispensable' Tito Mboweni product.

As I reached the place, I was greeted by a commotion of chants of slogans and shouts by ruling party youths at the local shopping centre. Then there was another shocking horror, the shelves in one of the stores were the emptiest and grubbiest in the whole world! Immediately, I rushed for my mother's plot, and when she saw me, she burst into tears, wondering how on earth God had spared me from the 'Xenophobia Attacks'. We hugged and kissed, and I told her, 'Give thanks to Abahlali baseMjondolo', to which she, who has never lived in a shack, responded curtly, 'Who the hell's that?!' I mumbled in answer to her as I felt my struggle for land and housing as an 'Umhlali’ would shock her.

When we were seated, I began by narrating how good Abahlali had been to me and told her all about the red T-shirts – at the same time pulling out the colours with pride, and showcasing the movement logo, all to her surprise. 'That's politics, my son!’ my mother worried. I continued with the different marches that I had been part of, the camp meetings, the regular fortnightly meetings, office work, drinking and eating from the same plate with the president of Abahlali. I wondered if the same could be done with the ailing and wilting Bob. I wondered at the ease by which I was proud to wear the Abahlali red. I thought about how difficult and burdening it must be to have to wear the old dictator's picture on a shirt. Free at last, ain't I?

The one and only cock was made to suffer the consequences of my return, as is the African custom. It had to be sacrificed for my arrival. How good the meal was, as my sister's authority and expertise over the rural pots proved itself! No spices, just the boiled chicken and a few grains of salt. Of course no cooking oil or any fatty additives whatsoever these days. But the meal was perfect.

The next day mother forced me to wear the ZANU-PF T-Shirt and to attend an everyday compulsory ZANU-PF meeting. She was very worried that I would be under suspicion after having been away. When we arrived at the meeting place I heard war veterans boasting that they had just acquired new knobkerries to beat those who had absconded from the previous day's meeting. At first I thought it was a joke, but was shocked to see a young man being dragged in front of everyone, and thereafter being severely beaten. A certain headman was also being accused of defecting to the opposition MDC. He however managed to save his skin because of his ill-health, otherwise he would have received the canning. But others have been ironed on their backs until they admit to being MDC and promise that they have seen the errors of their ways and that they will be loyal to ZANU-PF.

When I was to return, mother wrote a letter to the President of Abahlali, stating how grateful she was for my good upkeep. She further narrated how difficult it was to survive, mentioning the billions of ZimDollars-for-nothing needed to survive on a daily basis. To this day, I feel pity for her.

When I got to Beitbridge on my way back to South Africa, I overhead some youths openly debating on who the richest man in Zimbabwe was. All the tycoons and bigwigs mentioned in that debate are Zanu-PF loyalists. One talkative youth even went to the extent of boasting about Phillip Chiyangwa, nephew of Robert Mugabe and former MP for Chinhoyi West. The youth was saying Chiyangwa's pair of shoes could cost approximately US$5,000.00. His car could talk, he had a machine to wash his teeth, six wardrobes of shoes – from his Bulawayo-based G & D Shoes Engineering, twenty wardrobes of suits and so on. For your own information, the fallen MP was also booted out of the ruling party for allegedly engaging in espionage, selling all the 'top secrets' to the then Tony Blair-led government in England.

My question is this: if people spend government resources to enrich themselves, to the extent of living luxurious and flamboyant lives, whilst 90% of the population are suffering, even starving, what is the motive behind this? If a pair of shoes is worth a life, how come the leadership is failing to dish out its leftovers or excesses towards the livelihood of the poor? Does ZANU-PF care about ordinary Zimbabweans at all? What other assets are the ruling party cronies hiding throughout the world? We are told that there is a struggle between Zimbabwe and England but it feels like a struggle between the rich and the poor in Zimbabwe.

As the events further unfolded, some MDC youths arrived at the Beitbridge Rank, not knowing what was about to befall them. Within ten minutes of their arrival, the police began chasing them away, accusing them of serving a puppet leader, and warning them of arrest. The opposition youths could do nothing but listen to Mugabe's bees.

Immediately afterwards, an old, forget-my-past Mazda 323 dragged itself towards the rank and out came the ugliest face I have ever seen, wailing a loudhailer that 'Operation Mirai Zvakanaka' was to start in ten minutes time, therefore every street-trader, and all the ladies by the vegetable market, should 'shut down' and attend an urgent meeting. 'Operation Mirai Zvakanaka' means 'Operation Get Rightly Sorted Out', literally, 'Operation Know Your One and Only ZANU-PF Party.' In Abahlali we come to a meeting with all our different ideas and experiences and discuss things together until we see a way forward together. We are free. In Zimbabwe ZANU-PF tells you want to think. If you don't publicly say what you have been told to think, you will be beaten, sometimes even killed.

After the ten minutes were over, the meeting was held, with youths 'sorting-out' everybody who they had seen walking around without attending to the urgent call. I felt pity for Morgan Tsvangirai and his colleagues. Surely, this wasn't an atmosphere for free and fair elections. Surely, this wasn't an atmosphere for people with their own ideas to be safe. There is no freedom here.

The army is also brutalizing the people, the police have become the opposite of real protectors, and everybody is scared. What will happen to me now that my mother has been Zanufied? How will she fare if the MDC wins the June 27th run-off elections? Will I be made to carry the burden that she put herself in?

On the other hand, the 4,000 white farmers, whose farms were grabbed took their case to the SADC Tribunal. The question is this: If Uncle Bob retains power, and the farmers win the case on the 20th July, is he (Uncle Bob) going to budge, and immediately trigger a war? If he gives in to the tribunal demands, where is my mother going to go at her current old age, together with my brother and three sisters?

Or above all else, shouldn't I start a political party as soon as possible? A political party that is for land and freedom? A political party based on the full involvement of the poor, the street-traders who have been chased away from their stalls, the shack dwellers whose homes have been destroyed, the people who have been beaten and tortured? A political party in which people like my mother will be able to speak freely and will know that they will not be old and without a place where they can live and look after their children?

*Fanuel Nsingo is an Abahlali baseMjondolo activist.

*Please send comments to or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/384/49051brutality2.jpgSince March, Zimbabwe has had no Parliament, no local government councils, no legitimate executive, and ZANU PF has ruled by decree in response to the orders of the JOC – acronym for the military junta which now controls the nation, along with Mr. Mugabe and Reserve Bank Governor Mr. Gono, who is needed to print money, writes Mary Ndlovu. SADC governments allowed the charade to continue, talked to and dealt with the illegitimate government as if nothing was wrong. If SADC fails in its self-assigned disaster management, if the AU is unable or unwilling to step into the breach - hunger, terror, displacement, and death stare Zimbabweans in the face.
====

A collective and audible sigh of relief spread through Zimbabwe on Sunday evening, June 22, as word got around that Morgan Tsvangirai had pulled out of the presidential run-off election. There were, to be sure, also some voices of dismay and anger that we would now be deprived of the opportunity of speaking with our ballots and finishing the task of liberation. Both responses were based on false assumptions – first that the violence could end if there were no contested election and second that voting in a re-run would mean a ZANU PF exit.

Tsvangirai’s reasons for withdrawing were clearly stated and unassailable – under the current circumstances of torture, burning of homes, rape, systematic destruction of MDC structures, killings and arrests, there could be no valid election. What made it possible for him to withdraw at all was the shift in position by the majority of SADC governments.

The MDC and most Zimbabweans believe that Tsvangirai won the first round. He won the contest in spite of it being seriously skewed against him at every stage of the process -from the bias of the Zimbabwe Election Commission, to voter registration, to delimitation of constituencies, to placement of polling stations, to counting and announcement of results. The charade of a run-off has been played out in an increasingly surreal atmosphere, not according to the law, not for democracy or the Zimbabwean people, but for the benefit of reluctant regional leaders who insisted that the MDC accept the deceitful maneuverings of a regime which had lost the support of the people but nevertheless maintained control of the levers of power.

Robert Mugabe and ZANU PF had ceased to enjoy legitimacy to rule Zimbabwe by April 1. The first election was held on March 29, and by the end of March 30 at the latest, all results should have been announced. Instead, the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission, evidently directed by ZANU PF, prevaricated and delayed and began a lengthy tragi-farce, pretending that they were re-counting, validating, and engaged in every other process they could devise to avoid admitting that they had been defeated at the polls, both in parliamentary and in presidential voting. They ignored all relevant provisions of the Electoral Act, and even proceeded to re-write the Act by statutory instrument. This gave them time to delay any run-off of the presidential vote until they could put in place their evil plan to terrorise the population into submission. Mugabe brazenly re-called the cabinet which was dissolved before the election; and without even a façade of legality, they resumed their positions, and continued to receive their salaries and perks of office in spite of the fact that many had themselves been defeated by the electorate.

Since March, Zimbabwe has had no Parliament, no local government councils, no legitimate executive, and ZANU PF has ruled by decree in response to the orders of the JOC – acronym for the military junta which now controls the nation, along with Mr. Mugabe and Reserve Bank Governor Mr. Gono, who is needed to print money. SADC governments allowed the charade to continue, talked to and dealt with the illegitimate government as if nothing was wrong. Although it is now painfully clear why the delay was orchestrated, it is not so clear why regional presidents supported it.

Through the past two months, the war, which Mugabe now threatens if he is defeated at the polls, has already been raging. The tactics used to terrorise opposition supporters are those, which were used during the liberation war. Militia bases recreate the guerilla bases of the 1970’s, while all-night meetings called “pungwes” claim to be re-educating the population. Those pungwes were and are meetings where people are forced to attend, sing songs and shout slogans while they watch anyone not openly supporting ZANU PF being beaten, tortured, and killed.

In April and May, ZANU PF militia and war vets were mobilized in the rural constituencies to eliminate known MDC supporters. Houses were burned, many people tortured and killed for the political allegiances not just of themselves, but also of their children, grandchildren, parents and neighbours. In June the terror spread to urban areas, especially Harare, and also to smaller cities, with ZANU PF mobs targeting not only opposition party officials but also anyone not displaying their regalia. The police force too has been targeted. It is not to intervene in “political” situations. Hence none of the perpetrators of this violence have been arrested or charged, while the victims have frequently been locked up and accused of inciting violence.

An election in such circumstances would be preposterous, a mockery of a process in which the will of the people is to be determined. The people’s voices are to be silenced and replaced by refrains echoing the slogans of ZANU PF. They are being informed that they voted “wrongly” and force will be used to ensure that the next vote is correct. But still, until two weeks ago the SADC governments sang a chorus of hope that the election would be free and fair, trying to pretend that something resembling an election would provide a “solution” to the Zimbabwean problem.

It was only after Thabo Mbeki sent his military mission to see what was happening, and early bird SADC election observers began witnessing the devastation and horror, that we began to hear noises from Southern African governments calling on Mugabe to restrain himself. One by one they have spoken out about the violence, calling on Mugabe to stop it, and finally in the past ten days sending a clearer message that if it did not stop they would not recognize the election result. Only then did Tsvangirai take the step of withdrawing from what most Zimbabweans had seen as an unnecessary punishment inflicted on them by regional governments. He could only afford to pull out when it was clear that those who had insisted that the charade be played out had understood the true nature of the ZANU PF regime, and its determination not to be removed from office by any electoral process.

Why has Zimbabwe been forced through this hell? Why couldn’t SADC do what should have been done in April – insist that ZANU PF adhere to the electoral law, produce results at the appropriate time, and accept their defeat? Were they too blind to see the truth? Or was it too painful and difficult for them to speak the truth, too complicated to devise a strategy for Mugabe’s removal? Only they can tell us, but the consequences of their blindness, hypocrisy or cowardice are clear for all to see. They gave ZANU PF three months’ leeway to bring Zimbabwe to its terrible fate of thousands more lives destroyed, trillions more worthless banknotes undermining an already dying economy, institutions in ruins, and the fallout strewn through the region.

But those three months have only made the problem more intractable – how to remove Mugabe. SADC governments have expressed the view that the violence must stop and that a Mugabe government after June 27 will not be legitimate. But they still have the task of devising both a solution and the means to achieve it – the same task they faced in April.

What next? In spite of Tsvangirai’s withdrawal, ZANU PF appears intent on proceeding with elections, forcing as many people as possible to vote, and declaring Mugabe the winner. What will the response be? What we have gained so far from the international community, both regional and global, is an agreement that the outcome of Friday’s re-vote will not produce a legitimate government. But beyond that we have nothing.

On Wednesday the Defence and Politics organ of SADC urged Mugabe to postpone the election until a conducive environment can be established. They did not state what should occur between now and the undecided date of such election. They did not indicate any action they might take to deal with Zimbabwe after Friday. On Saturday morning, Sunday and Monday, he will still be in State House, with every probability that his militia will still be terrorizing the population. And then what?

Tsvangirai has called for a transitional authority run by the African Union, and supported by peace-keepers. The most SADC seems to be able to do is to call for further negotiations between ZANU PF and the MDC – talks which have been on-going for over a year and have achieved very little. If Mugabe’s government is illegitimate after Friday, will he still be called “President” by his counterparts, and treated as such? Who will rule Zimbabwe while the “talks” are continuing? The illegitimate non-president and his non-ministers? Will SADC, the AU and the international community in general isolate their former comrade? Will they quickly find a mechanism, a means to remove his illegitimate government and install a transitional authority that can return the country to legitimacy? Can they rise to the occasion and act strongly and urgently enough to avert further catastrophe? The AU heads of state are meeting this weekend. Can they take over where SADC has so far failed? This is the challenge, this is what Zimbabweans wait for, but with more skepticism than hope. By withdrawing, Tsvangirai has effectively handed our fate to others to decide – others who have failed to act up to now.

If SADC fails in its self-assigned disaster management, if the AU is unable or unwilling to step into the breach - hunger, terror, displacement, and death stare Zimbabweans in the face. The economy has long since failed to sustain us; the rule of law was long ago abandoned; control by the military is presently established, but the prospect of total collapse into anarchy, warlord and mob rule looms ever closer. Only four short days later, even the echo of Sunday’s sigh of relief has faded, and Zimbabweans face the future with anxiety and fear.

*Mary Ndlovu is a Zimbabwean human rights activist.

*Also read more of Mary Ndlovu's Zimbabwe analysis by clicking on the following: ; .

*Please send comments to [email protected] or comment online at www.pambazuka.org

While the authors’ is spot-on with regards Mugabe, I think it falls short on the danger posed by the current opposition and the hypocrisy of the West. I personally don’t believe that an African leader should be condemned, punished or abandoned for standing up to the West. It is a quality Africa desperately needs in its leaders.

However, I think there are many other legitimate reasons why Mugabe SHOULD and MUST go. I have insisted that as Pan-Africanists and progressives, our responsibility is- an unconditional solidarity with the people of Zimbabwe. Not with Mugabe, the dubious imperialists and certainly not with an opposition that is willing to be a tool of western imperialism.

I believe Zimbabweans are not only victims of the Mugabe regime paranoia, but are also direct victims of the inhumane sanctions by the West, as well as victims of the hypocrisy of the opposition that has prevented them from forming a independent and legitimate movement that is driven and controlled by the people.

Power to the people of Zimbabwe!

"The June 27 Presidential election is not an election, but a declaration of war against the people of Zimbabwe by the ruling party." (SA Congress of Trade Unions statement 24/6/2008). This is an important call to all Zimbabweans from civil society - you must boycott the forthcoming election.

[email protected] or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org/

It is so sad that a leader who came as a new Nkrumah is going down as a Mobutu, writes Tajudeen Abdul Raheem about Mugabe. It is a grave understatement to continue to describe him as an embarrassment to Africa. He is a dangerous autocrat who does not care anymore if the whole nation crashes with him. He needs to be stopped and stopped now.
====

It is extremely sad to watch, hear or read about the tragic events happening in Zimbabwe. Not even the proverbial ostrich, notorious for burying its head in the sand no matter what is happening around, it can claim not to notice.

This week's withdrawal of the ppposition presidential candidate, Morgan Tsvangirai, is not surprising at all. In conditions such as those orchestrated by the ZANU-PF regime and its ageing revolutionary turned autocrat, holding a credible election is impossible. Mugabe has made it clear, and his security goons and freelance political enforcers have repeated it in words and brutal actions, that on no condition would he hand over power to the MDC and Morgan. So why bother to hold an election at all? Mugabe is willing to accept only one outcome: his continuation in office.

In conditions like these, an election is not an indication of democracy but a conspiracy against the masses. The issues facing Zimbabweans are no longer about electoral disputes but a one-sided civil / political war situation where the state and its agents are persecuting their political opponents and those they believe to be their supporters.

It is not only the coercive instruments and institutions of the state that are extremely and openly partisan. They also allow their supporters to operate with impunity. The army, the police, security and intelligence services, state and government officials, and party officials all operate as outlaws, while militias operate as regular officers. It is a post liberation state gone full circle. The people's state has become the enemy of the people.

The problem is political. Therefore the solution is also political. Our first responsibility is to discourage President Mugabe from his destructive self-succession in going ahead and contesting against himself on the 27th of June. If he insists, as it is likely, the immediate response should be a withdrawal of official observer teams that may have been sent there, recall of ambassadors, travel advice to nationals not to go to the country and possible evacuation of citizens. All these will signal to Mugabe that Africa is serious.

If he goes ahead with the farce, African countries must publicly state that they do not recognise his election. That should invite immediate break in diplomatic relations to demonstrate to President Mugabe that we mean business.

If western pressure alone could have done it, Mugabe could have gone many years before now. He has survived western diplomatic isolation because African states and leaders, even those opposed to him, have refused to accept Western dictates on the matter. He has exploited this to his advantage without giving back any significant concessions even to his closest allies and defenders, like Thabo Mbeki.

Mugabe has become a collective embarrassment to Africa and we need to be rid of him. It is no longer enough to say he is not alone. The fact that there are other thieves is not a plea against prosecution by those caught in the act. Those who continue to focus on Western hypocrisy and multiple standards on the matter are guilty of being accessories to the continuing suffering of the people of Zimbabwe.

As African leaders arrive this weekend in Sham El Sheik for the AU summit, we must campaign in our various countries, lobby foreign ministers, African ambassadors in our countries and our heads of state to take firm stand against Mugabe to ensure a credible political negotiation for a transitional government in which both ZANU-PF and MD and other stakeholders share power for a limited period, with an eye toward a level playing field for democratic elections. This is not possible with Mugabe therefore he needs to be eased out.

Africa has been an experimental laboratory for all kinds of transitions. Zimbabwe itself has historical memory of different transitions that were initially thought to be impossible. Ian Smith died of old age in a free Zimbabwe in spite of his atrocities against Black Zimbabweans. A negotiated settlement may indemnify Mugabe too while the cause of justice and democracy is enhanced by him seeing other people (including those he called traitors) govern the country. The handwriting is on the wall but Mugabe cannot read it; therefore African leaders should spell them out in BOLD letters to him.

It is so sad that a leader who came as a new Nkrumah is going down as a Mobutu. It is a grave understatement to continue to describe him as an embarrassment to Africa. He is a dangerous autocrat who does not care anymore if the whole nation crashes with him. He needs to be stopped and stopped NOW.

*Tajudeen Abdul-Raheem writes this column as a Pan Africanist.

*Please send comments to or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org/