open Democracy News Analysis - what future for zimbabwe? - Comments

michaelcalder on "Zimbabwe: wrong way, right way"

michaelcalder — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 19:56:02 +0000

Zimbabwe is a desperate situation calling for radical solutions.

The current situation is a result of a series of disastrous policies over many decades, starting with the infantilisation of the indigenous population by colonialism, the destruction of traditional societies by various missionary movements, the adoption of foreign ideologies that were ridiculous even in their European birthplaces by successive groups of local elites forming oligarchies on the Western "democratic" pattern by the usual bully-boy routes, and the straightjacket of capitalist economic models imposed on a basically agrarian community (what industry and mining which existed was of course essentially a set of alien protheses run by, supplying, and profiting, only their external genitors).

Add a sprinkling of warlordism, larcenocracy, and now dependence on foreign aid, and it is difficult to see how the situation can be improved without a total cull of the current governing classes and their replacement by a clean,morally pure brigade of magistrates. That is, of course, not going to happen, even if such a group existed.

While I can see what would be desirable ends, I can no more than my betters see routes that lead there; what is however clear is that implementation of modalities which have already been demonstrated to have failed is unlikely to now result in success.

Massive external investment or large volumes of external "aid" will not help; indeed, they would only exacerbate the current problems; a little thought will demonstrate why. (This is not to suggest that there is no place for emergency humanitarian aid to act as a temporary sticking plaster; but the danger must be realised that any significant volume of aid will only prolong the problems it attempts to solve, and provide succour and motivation for the current larcenocracy; any aid must be modest, and strictly limited in duration.) My own preference would be for something not necessarily bound to the strict model of the typical European nation state, but perhaps something more fitted to an African ethos.

While I cannot suggest any practical process, my only suggestion is that potential solutions must be created and implemented by Zimbabweans themselves. Probably the only way the rest of the world can help this is to provide a safe haven for a time for some Zimbabweans to stand back from the current crisis; to give them space and time to think, and return to their country to build it anew; is there any charitable foundation with funds and motivation for anything like this? It might seem fatalistic and a counsel of despair, but quick fixes do not work. A lasting solution will take time to put in place.

Clear skies!

Tawanda Gatawa on "Zimbabwe: wrong way, right way"

Tawanda Gatawa — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 14:50:05 +0000

Makumbe's suggestion seems plausable but in reality it does not work. What is needed in Zimbabwe is the diffusion of tension and polarization. The Government of National Unity (GNU) provides a mechanism that brings together the belligerants and give them the opportunity to mend ways in a conciliatory manner, which the "transitional authority", whatever that really means, will not provide such an opportunity. We are looking for solutions that take Zimbabwe to another level rather than solutions that merely transfer power to individuals.

I have always believed that John Makumbe is a political scientist. Now I have other ideas.

JayJanson on "Zimbabwe: wrong way, right way"

JayJanson — Tue, 03 Feb 2009 05:01:55 +0000

Opendemocracy approves as
E.U. Capitalists Tightens the Screws on Cholera Weakened Zimbabwe

http://www.opednews.com/articles/EU-Capitalist-Neocoloniali-by-Jay-Janson-090131-154.html

DESCRIPTION:
The cruel neo-colonialist image the European Union creates for itself in African eyes seems to be of little concern, as it continues its financial war on Zimbabwe causing extreme suffering. An investment driven E.U., U.K., U.S. conspiracy depends on silence from conglomerate owned international media, its dutiful disinformation and propaganda that Robert Mugabe, is the sole author of the destruction of his own nation’s economy

TEXT:
Amazing how the cruel neo-colonialist image the European Union creates for itself in African eyes seems to be of little concern, as it goes on causing Zimbabweans extreme suffering.

The heartless imperialist machinations of the E.U., U.K., U.S. conspiracy depend on the silence of conglomerate owned cartelized international media and its dutifully insistent disinformation and propaganda that one man, Robert Mugabe, is the sole author of the destruction of his own nation’s economy - inconceivable, even if twice the corruption attributed to him by Western media were true.

The main false accusation repeated over and over again is that Mugabe ruined the economy by passing laws taking well producing farms away from their efficient white farmers. Decades of brutal financial sabotage and economic warfare against Zimbabwe, ever since Mugabe refused to go along with IMF demands, and now even the knowledge of the cholera epidemic makes no difference to European political leaders as their national and international banking institutions seek to put additional pressure. Lets review the past week:

"Zimbabwe Summit Begins as E.U. Imposes Fresh Sanctions" by Agence France-Press,
Jan. 26, 2009, New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/27/world/africa/27zimbabwe.html

"Heads of state from the 15-nation Southern African Development Community (SADC) gathered Monday in a renewed bid to end Zimbabwe's political crisis...

EU foreign ministers meeting in Brussels announced 60 more names of people close to Mugabe or their families would be added to a travel-ban list, bringing the number of people on the list to over 200."

The number of companies whose assets in Europe must be frozen were increased to 40 and for the first time European-based firms are included. ...

Monday's talks take place as the European Union slapped fresh sanctions on Mugabe's rule in Zimbabwe, which is battling a cholera epidemic that has killed nearly 2,800 people and infected more than 50,000."

Regional leaders see Zimbabwe's unity deal, which allows Mugabe to remain president while Tsvangirai becomes prime minister, as the best chance to rescue the country from political and economic meltdown"

But EU, UK and US want the man they have funded, and had their media support, to have total power to sell off the country to private interests abroad as the price to release the monetary stranglehold that has successfully crippled the Zimbabwe economy. Future Western capital growth prospects are are being enhanced with long term arrangements for destruction and scarcity in Zimbabwe. (UN Charter prohibitions against the use of sanctions and blocking access to international fiduciary institutions are of no consequent protection for vulnerable nations.)

Their man Tsvangirai won more votes in the first round of a presidential election, but left Zimbabwe and refused to be in the second round run-off, claiming persecution. Since then, all the former colonial powers have demanded Mugabe's head.

However, with the exception of the collaborating Presidents of Kenya and Botswana, African leaders are unwilling to help the Western powers ‘show Mugabe the door’ (a favorite colloquialism employed by the righteous sounding spokespersons of the Western bloc).

In any case, the West continues to pretend to favor parliamentary ‘democracy’, calculating that it can be bent to its investment purposes through control of information by international media cartels and international sabotage of the economy of Zimbabwe as necessary.

The neo-colonialist method of taking financial control of an African nation is much cleaner than the old way - by force of arms and white occupation.

Once in a while, the older method still crops up, as when in 2004, an airplane of the Honourable Sir Mark Thatcher, 2nd Baronet, the son of the Right Honorable Baroness Thatcher, the former British Prime Minister, by marriage a multi-millionaire, was
impounded in Zimbabwe as his co-conspiritor sought to pick up guns on the way to overthrow the government of oil rich Equatorial Guinea. (Thatcher was fined three million rand ($500,000) and received a four-year suspended jail sentence upon an unbelievable plea of innocence, telling the South African judge he was under the impression the project was an air ambulance service to help the impoverished of Africa.)

Tuesday the SADC 15-nation grouping gave its approval of Mugabe going ahead with forming a government with or without Tsvangirai participation - it was SADC’s fifth attempt to secure a deal on forming a unity government - it agreed that opposition MDC leader Morgan Tsvangirai should be sworn in as prime minister by February 11.

Tsvangirai’s MDC answered, "Quite clearly the conclusions reached as reflected in the communiqué fall far short of our expectations". (And those of U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as well, we might assume. She was trying to get South African pressure on Mugabe to accede to Tsvangirai demands.)

However, on Wednesday, Tsvangirai gave in and agreed in principle to the forming of a unity government and now prepares to return to Zimbabwe, from a self-imposed exile.

Now that the 15 nation Southern Africa Development Community has again been supportive of Mugabe, and with the West’s candidate for control of Zimbabwe becoming part of its government, will the West be forced to reluctantly lessen its economic war to make their inside man look good?

Additional background on the Zimbabwe - Western powers confrontation can be read in an earlier OEN article published Dec.10, 2007:

Descendants of Bloody Racist Colonizers of Africa Pretend to Care, Keep Sanctions on Zimbabwe

http://www.opednews.com/articles/opedne_jay_jans_071210_descendents_of_blood.htm

“A Theater of the Absurd, Europeans speak out for democracy in Africa.”

A freaky, preposterous, ridiculously self-righteous pretense of concern for the suffering in Zimbabwe from white prime ministers of European nations that had for centuries killed, enslaved, plundered, and exploited Africans mercilessly and still bilk the continent through their domination of powerful unscrupulous international financial and trade organizations.

80-year-old President Robert Mugabe, who is seen by millions of Africans as a liberator, continues to be condemned by white EU leaders who continue a choking financial embargo against Zimbabwe. These celebrity politician grandchildren of the masters of Africa’s murderous military occupation are silent about their cruel punishing of Zimbabwe over many years with strict and severe EU and US economic sanctions.

The presidents of Namibia and Angola have urged Western nations to lift the sanctions imposed against Zimbabwe, saying they are "illegal and unfair".

Senegal’s president, Abdoulaye Wade, accused Europe of trying to impose a “straitjacket” on Africa.”

What is rarely mentioned in Western media (naturally unrelentingly Capitalist in slant), is the frustration of the people of Zimbabwe and other former colonies, that white ‘owners’ of most of the best land so many decades after colonial liberation still refuse to negotiate and accept a fairer distribution of the land. Most incredibly not withstanding that the African governments have in large allowed the whites to keep titles to so much land stolen under imperial colonialism – and that Mugabe’s government had for years protected white ownership from squatters and demands of squatters rights, always in the name of continued stable production and benefit for all Zimbabweans, while European investors threatened punitive action if the status quo be changed in any meaningful way.

The tight net of connections and relationships between European financial grip and profits and local whites goes unreported in all this sanctimonious criticism of Mugabe for civil rights abuses and praise for an opportunistic opposition allied with, and supported by big media and money from abroad.
“Africa doesn’t want charity or paternalism,” said Alpha Oumar Konaré, the chairman of the African Union, “We want to play in the global economy but with new rules.”

Its not only Africa, but the whole third world that wants out from under first world control and its program for freedom for foreign investor profits, supported by faked democracy through investor control of a ‘free’ press, not to mention covert support for government undermining violence and currency manipulation.

All this is not malicious in intent, simply the mindless requirement that capital have growth and profit from the work or lack of work of subjected human beings everywhere.”

PRESIDENT ROBERT MUGABE, SPEAKING AT THE 62 ND SESSION OF THE UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY-NY, 26 SEPTEMBER 2007.

"The West still negates our sovereignties by way of control of our resources, in the process making us mere chattels in our own lands, mere minders of its transnational interests. In my own country and other sister states in Southern Africa, the most visible form of this control has been over land despoiled from us at the onset of British colonialism.

That control largely persists , although it stands firmly challenged in Zimbabwe, thereby triggering the current stand-off between us and Britain, supported by her cousin , most notably the United States and Australia.

Mr Bush, Mr Blair and now Mr Brown's sense of human rights precludes our people's right to their God-given resources, which in their view must be controlled by their kith and kin. I am termed dictator because I have rejected this supremacist view and frustrated the neo-colonialists.

Clearly the history of the struggle for our national and people's rights is unknown to the president of the United states of America. He thinks the declaration of Human rights starts with his term in office !

He thinks she can introduce to us , who bore the brunt of fighting for the freedoms of our peoples, the virtues of the Universal Declaration of Human rights. What rank Hypocrisy !

I lost 11 precious years of my life in jail of a white man whose freedom and well-being I have assured from the first day of Zimbabwe's independence. I lost a further 15 years fighting white injustice in my country.

Ian Smith is responsible for the death of well over 50,000 of my people. I bear scars of tyranny which Britain and America condoned. I meet his victims everyday. Yet he walks free. He farms free. He talks freely, associates freely under a black government. We taught him democracy. We gave him back his humanity.

He would have faced a different fate here (in the US) and in Europe if the 50,000 he killed were Europeans. Africa has not called for a Nuremberg trial against the white world which committed heinous crimes against its own humanity. It has not hunted perpetrators of this genocide , many of whom live up to this day , nor has it got reparations from those who offended against it. Instead, it is Africa which is in the dock, facing trial from the same world that persecuted it for centuries.

The colonial sun set a long time ago, in 1980 in the case of Zimbabwe , and hence Zimbabwe will never be a colony again, NEVER !

We do not deserve sanctions. We are Zimbabweans and we know how to deal with our problems. We have done so in the past, well before Bush and Brown were known politically. We have our own regional and continental organizations and communities.

Write, call Obama 202 456 1414. Lift sanctions on poor Zimbabwe!

Not logged in Lawrence Efana on "Zimbabwe: wrong way, right way"

Not logged in Lawrence Efana — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 22:10:56 +0000

Three votes so far and rather low rating as of this hour for the article! We wait to see subsequent responses.

Interestingly, the writer rightly argues the point that, contrary to older ways of believing things in Africa: that "half-bread" is better than none, has run out of steam!

The paper also tends to hesitate over the saying that it takes two to tango, because the two never existed. It is possible to interpret Zimbabwe political realities in this and many other senses. Quite pitiful and humiliating!

Is there peace to say give it a chance? President Mugabe is old. Surely even if he wanted, it is clearly true that he cannot be for ever!

Many must be wondering what makes South Africa so understanding, patient and diplomatically tactful on Zimbabwe political distress. Is it because giving peace a chance is a thing they still fancy necessary in spite of all the humiliations?

Our world is dotted here and there with experiences and lessons. For the optimist - the less naive], can there still be a reason to see the horizon and build the hope needed for change. NEW TIMES DO BRING NEW THINGS. Forget the past, open your hearts, find and agree on all openings that work the way to peace, a new political start - even if not yet perfect - at least to deal with the economic and social mess. Avoid living in the past to end the consolidation of negative psychology. If the long tunnel is open, the light from one end is surely likely to lead unto the light at the other end. It will need care, understanding and perseverance - what truly appears for some to give credit to the South African government endeavours and sacrifices.

African blacks and whites must now see the reason for them to live side-by-side, sharing to openly rediscover themselves and the importance of doing that in political, economic and socio-cultural senses.

peter.a.kiss on "Zimbabwe’s war of disappearance"

peter.a.kiss — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 14:53:05 +0000

Ian Smith has been proven right several times over.

Lawrence Efana on "Zimbabwe’s war of disappearance"

Lawrence Efana — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 19:39:43 +0000

Nice of you to put-up this paper. You express the view and also feelings of many people, especially those who chanced to believe that things would by now have come to a sensible balance in Zimbabwe.

We agree with you that no matter how comparable the cases of disappearances of people are in recent and past history, the modern world does not need to see such cases anymore.

The sufferings of peace-loving Zimbabwean people have touched the hearts of many. The problem is too big for regional solution. It now needs African Union and the world at large. There must be better ways of doing it without more people dying. It was nice to listen some days ago to Nigerian foreign minister comments on this among others in a BBC interview.

Let us hope the world will react reasonably so note that people like you assembling the courage to draw world attention to problems of this kind are indeed working for humanity.

Not logged in Lawrence Efana on "Zimbabwe: the death of “quiet diplomacy”"

Not logged in Lawrence Efana — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 20:44:10 +0100

On reading the paper, what obviously comes to mind is there are outstanding questions to answer of which the first is: where does manipulation begin and end on the current Zimbabwean political and economic crises?

Even though "case or regional study" knowledge might formally help those participating in discussion of the crises be more informed with contributions, it remains the right of all people cherishing progress and peace to informally - if they want, take part. There is no doubt that most issues are muddled-up, because of the recalcitrant attitude of the Zimbabwean head of state but that is no sufficient reason to shift all the blame and burden on South Africa - a young fragile democracy with own teething problems. Its ousted president is a product of the latter: not too unique under African political conditions.

What we are seeing now is a sense of imbroglio on the front in Zimbabwe. It is unfortunate considering the fine efforts made. At the same time, failures of the kind seen tell of a larger problem, interesting from the view points: 1) African solutions to African problems, and 2) Importance of the "rainbow" civil societies in several Southern Africa countries. It might not be aired out, but isn't it clear to see that the burden of latter is exhausting the regional conflict and peace machinery? Should the state of affair posited cause concern, why not solicit the "wisdom" of: (a) Africa for Africa, and (b) Britain or the Government [Labour] now in power] - alongside other well-wishers. That is, get them to once again team-up, put aside blames and wholeheartedly work to agree on a solution with lasting and sustainable future for Zimbabwe.

Bringing all the hands on deck would indeed be doing South Africa a great service. Beyond that it would be helping to positively dilute the idea of African solutions to African problems in this special situation, and so cement dialogue, opportunities and so on. Global understanding even in its miniature form out of this will still be uplifting Africa and doing good to the idea of partnership - bilateral and multi-lateral. The Labour Government in Britain left too much to diplomacy and forgot its useful colonial links: a prerequisite that ought not to be manipulated, but handled with great understanding. Mugabe has stayed too long in power but many can't stop to open their ears when he cries out "WHY, WHY, WHY".

For example, let us reflect briefly: for all the meanings and interpretations of the Russian Georgian crisis and war, the understanding is still implacable, underlying why Europe and the US pour funds there, that the situations do not deteriorate to the extent that people would have to suffer. In the case of Zimbabwe, an overarching understanding that could ward-off the burden of psychology was never born in time, leaving the chance to wonder if with current global financial turbulence the donors who are tightening their belts would ever care if it is Morgan who is in command. Even if we might not just now identify the "Old Pa" with political moral, we could woo him with just that and bring about a change of heart by our good examples.

Whether the change called for world-wide would also include this element remains to be seen, but let me say it could be sine-qua-non for the learning processes of many states in Africa.

Lawrence Efana [Finland]

Not logged in Lawrence Efana on "Zimbabwe: the day democracy died "

Not logged in Lawrence Efana — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 19:51:37 +0100

Zimbabwean talks are on. Certainly many are anxious and want negotiations to bear fruits respecting democracy but not fail taking into consideration the African situations. I glossed recently at the book: Ohlson, T., Stedman, J. S., & Davies, R. (1994), titled "The New Is Not Yet Born - Conflict Resolution in Southern Africa". One among others, on the burden and pains of history - the psychology of which must be overcome with respect for democracy. Rather than blame and caricature the efforts, we should instead think deeply and be patient for negotiations' result that will be sustainable during and after the transition periods. Democracy as a 'social contract' theme is hardly aloof history. Drawing a parallel with the Kenyan experience and the option at that time, we should be thanking the former United Nations Secretary General for the foresightedness on behalf of Africa and the world. The "lots" in Zimbabwe might not be any different. Let us carefully and reasonably encourage those individuals and groups leading the negotiations, by appreciating their efforts and hoping for the best of compromise feelings that will help the races and peoples to co-exist fruitfully and peacefully. "Added with the deepest sense of humility and call"!

Lawrence Efana [Finland]

Not logged in on "Zimbabwe: a tale of two leaders "

Not logged in — Fri, 04 Jul 2008 15:39:40 +0100

there should be elections in every five years & all should have right to vote if he/she is of lower casts.no one should rule more than five years like morgan .

Not logged in on "The right and wrong fix: Afghan lessons for Zimbabwe"

Not logged in — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 00:19:03 +0100

The failure of Zimbabwe is an indictment on African leadership. We as African people lack the integrity to create a political system that we can be proud of. Our socio-economic environment makes it absolutely impossible for the pupalace to trust our electoral processes. Our leaders do not have the integrity to deliver on their promise. Instead of owning up to the challenges and roadblocks our economies faces in the world market, they blame the opposition ideas and their proponents. They assasinate the characters of their rivals. During elections years, the real issues of the continent are shoved to the background and personal attacks become the subjects of debate. Mixed these negatives tactics with ethnic inequality, religious difference, illiteracy and you have a perfect recipe for pre and post election conflict.

True democracy is possible in Africa. The first step to achieving this democratic dream for Africa that the citizens across Accra, Kumasi, Abidjan, Deban, Sowato, Timbuktu, Bumjubura, etc, must be made to understand that they are part of the political system. We must find a way to empower the electorate to believe that the power of our democratic system is in their hand.

Not logged in on "The right and wrong fix: Afghan lessons for Zimbabwe"

Not logged in — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:59:02 +0100

Zimbabwe is independent country, people of country chose their own government. If they choose Mugabe, he may trayant, not giving freedom of speach, that is that countriy`s problem.Why whole world crying unjustice unjustice, that Idont understand

If you watch myanar, China,or any other dictators who are rulling in different countries,same story you findout.What about U.S.A?. Is President Bush elected by demoratic way in last election?
Observe all democratic countires are politicans not manipulate their citizens? True democricy is really utopia,.never .you can see in practice.
Live and late give us living chance that is world histroy.So donot futily cry for Zimbabwe`s plight

Not logged in on "Zimbabwe’s election: an African appeal"

Not logged in — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 16:28:42 +0100

Zimbabwe's elections have come and gone. In spite of the efforts a free and fair presidential election failed. The first round, including the parliamentary election was not free and fair either, but the opposition (MDC), we are told gained a narrow parliamentary majority. A major question, I guess many individuals and groups interested in Africa will be asking now is: where and how the country: Zimbabwe, is to move forward from here? This is the concern of those waiting to see President Robert Mugabe let-go the pains of history, the psychology of human frailties, give-in and open his heart to embrace the idea of a broadly defined political, social and economic team-work. Even the stunt nationalist in today's world has to re-evaluate the definition of commitments to members of the civil society, more-so when the travails of dominant rule show that there is indeed no other option.

When the continent is slowly transforming itself as he is seeing, it does not tell good to remain politically adamant, inflexible and rigid. On this count, let me say that the international system should be grateful to the South African Government and people within the frame of the Southern African Regional Network. I do not see anything wrong with their diplomacy in so far as Zimbabwe is now the center of concern. They know what it takes to ride the storms of democracy.
I commend the attempt by the leaders to manage the Mandela spirit and no less the individual and collective engagements of eminent Africans within and beyond the organizational frames of the African Union. In trying to set what has gone wrong in Zimbabwe right, pressures from different sources have been necessary at the same time as many also call for moderation and more engagement with intensive negotiation efforts, likely to lead to the type of transitional assembly and government in which all the parties join actively in reviving a country that has been run down. Conflict is obviously nothing to feed on. There has to be an alternative way! About this President Mugabe knows for sure that it is not a pleasant thing to ride on the storms for as long as he has done. The time for reconciliation and peace is at his doorway.

I live here in a beautiful region of the world called Scandinavia, made up of the countries: Sweden, Finland, Norway, Denmark and Iceland. Peace and reconciliation is a way of life here. You see that in the modes of government consensus policies and even in the relations between the labor unions and employer associations. It is a pulsating world of negotiations and "reasonable" calm! Riding in the storm as President Mugabe does is not in anyway recommendable. Let me add also that in the small beautiful community and the block of flat in Finland where I live, I have noticed that sparrows [a range of birds] love to fly [ride] when the storm is ragging and the rains are pouring down. I enjoy watching them in my green environment here, but one lesson I learn from them is: they are very flexible. Hardly do they fail to sense and understand the direction of the wind storming. You feel it as they merry and appear to sail easily when in actual fact a storm is ragging. Storms are of different strengths, I understand. You might not win if you unwisely make too much fuss about them. Accepting democracy could also mean that you learn how to sail in the storms not hurting yourself and your civil society.

As we work ourselves towards a changed global world, let me seize the opportunity to say to Open democracy website "Well done". Nigerians are fond of saying "Many greece to your elbow"! I am saying so! Visiting the site is like bringing the "Hyde Park" in London home to people. The Britons are indeed lovable and wonderful, not the least, when the BBC brings home to people themes like "Hard talk" and "World Debate".

Lawrence Efana [Finland]

Not logged in on "The right and wrong fix: Afghan lessons for Zimbabwe"

Not logged in — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 11:40:21 +0100

Human Security is a central issue in all this. For how long should states be left alone under the guise of sovereignty to visit atrocities on the populace because of political differences. In a world that seeks political inclusion as a primary human right, how do we justify the continued existence of the AU if it stands by for an election like took place in Zimbabwe to gain legitimacy? That is a question.

Not logged in on "The right and wrong fix: Afghan lessons for Zimbabwe"

Not logged in — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 10:54:43 +0100

Maybe Mugabe wanted to hold a real election but besides his own ties to family and their dependents, are those who surround and support him. Once you have destroyed the economic base of a society as thoroughly as Mugabe has done there is no way these clients will expose themselves and their dependents to the beggary of those outside the ring. For reasons I am unclear about we make a noisy fuss about Zimbabwe. The same obtains in many other African societies. I'd say that it obtains in all those countries who will not openly criticise him. If the aid industry isn't a part of the solution I have no idea what is to be done. Nor apparently does anyone else.

Martin Rosendaal

johnevans7 on "The right and wrong fix: Afghan lessons for Zimbabwe"

johnevans7 — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 10:18:39 +0100

Zimbabwe resembles Yugoslavia more than Afghanistan. It also resembles Rwanda, which is a terible thought.

UNFOR is a nice idea that 'unfortuantely' doesn't work. Particulary when its soldiers stand by and watch people get massacred.

So instead of wringing our hands and dreaming up a European solution to an African problem, we should be providing the oppressed, with the wherewithal to remove the oppressors, AK47’s.

Then, as has been done in the Balkans, create workable mini states based on ethnicity, and not on something drawn up in a tent by Cecil Rhodes.

Last, but not least, let's get Mugabe's all expenses paid trip to the Hague organised now.