kenyaimagine.com

Home

Technology & Science

Africa fiddles while Zimbabwe burns

Written by Al Kags

Thursday, 27 September 2007

In Zimbabwe, Parliament has passed a bill, under the so-called indigenization of the country's resources, that requires foreign owned companies in the already impoverished country to hand over at least 51% of their shareholding to black Zimbabweans.

For Kenyans who are aware, this strikes a new low in the sadness and grief for the people of Zimbabwe.

The indigenization process started out with the driving out of the white minority farmers from their farms, once rich with tobacco and other cash crops - and once the bedrock of the country's economy. This has brought the country to its knees and anyone who has been watching will confirm that that land was not given to the black squatters but to President Robert Mugabe's friends and supporters. Indeed, the squatters are not even squatters in many of those farms now. Certainly, the crops are long dead.

once we were kings

The situation in Zimbabwe is special to Kenya because it is reminiscent of the dark days of 1980s Kenya, when the autocratic governance of former president Moi's government saw the suppression of the people's human rights, wanton disregard for justice and the proactive bullying (an understatement) of the government's critics, who were arrested, tortured, jailed and killed in an effort to quell any resistance to the government.

Zimbabwe's Central Intelligence Organisation is exactly reminiscent of Kenya's Special Branch in those days. It has a huge budget to fund its ruthless operations (even while children lose their hair and skin in the worst - and final - stages of Kwashiorkor), it has unfettered access to the latest technology the world has to offer and it has carte blanche from the president to do whatever it takes to protect the government interests.

People who criticize the government, even in private, are intimidated, arrested, tortured and killed. Their lives, livelihoods, reputations and families are at great risk - and this is why most Zimbabweans choose to stay out of it and remain silent, letting the grumbling of their hungry stomachs voice their discontent. And they are hungry.

The streets of Zimbabwe's capital, Harare are dark at night because there is no electricity but even in the shadows at 3 am you will see hundreds of people walking purposefully. These people represent the one in five people in Harare who still have jobs. There is no fuel for the cars and bus rides are today a distant memory, but they walk to the bus stops and street corners where they wait for pick up trucks and the occasional passing car for a ride to work. It takes five hours to get to work on most days for some people.

petrol queue

At dawn, silent queues form in different places in the city - at petrol stations in the hope that some expensive petrol will be poured into tanks and jerry cans for cars that almost never move, at shopping centres where rumours have it that there may be bread or sugar or rice or some other scarce commodity and at hospitals, where there is the hope that at least a doctor will give some remedy, even if drugs cannot be found - or worse still afforded.

At the shopping centre, even if the bread does come, the people queuing may not get it because the rumours also reached the ears of the also hungry police and ZANU-PF youth wingers, who loot the food as soon as it arrives.

Many Kenyans can remember this sort of thing - even though we were lucky one might say - it did not get to be quite so bad. But this situation touches the raw nerves of many Kenyans. And yet, we are silent. Why has our leadership said nothing against Zimbabwe's president Mugabe? Where are the voices of the likes of Koigi wa Wamwere, Ngugi wa Thiong'o, David Onyango Oloo, James Orengo, Raila Odinga and all those other patriots who felt the brunt of the atrocities of the 1980s in Kenya?

Why is South Africa silent, yet a great number of Zimbabweans flee to South Africa - legally and illegally to seek sustenance for themselves and for the families they leave behind? Politicians and leaders only speak up when it is in theirs' or their countries' interest to take a stance. What do we have to gain from the continued degradation of Zimbabwe's people? Are we waiting to see how comrade Bob does and if he is successful we can emulate him?

Meanwhile, back in Zimbabwe, the new law that now awaits to go to the senate, Zimbabwe's higher house, where it is sure to pass will achieve little. Foreign companies that are already doing little business in light of the high inflation, the people's much diminished buying power and the difficult environment, will have little choice but to close down.

The only upside to that, perhaps, is that that worker can sleep more hours and conserve the energy that his malnourished body will need to find food for his children - if he can.

Al Kags
		About the author:
		Al Kags, the founder of the Desturi Trust writes prolifically on Kenyan and global matters. He is the programme officer at the Kenya ICT Board. He publishes a poetry anthology, the Quarterly Colour Series and the Al Kags blog here .

Related Articles:

Articles by this Author:

Re-inventing leadership when the people wake up
Scandal defines me. Not!

View all articles by this author

Set as favorite

Bookmark

Email This

Trackback(0)

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (11)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Show/Hide comments

the devil\'s in the details
written by Stephen Wainaina , September 27, 2007

Al,
Let's try to make this clear. Are we supposed to say something about the political repression in Zimbabwe, or complain because Zimbabweans are getting land and businesses?
What exactly do you want South Africans to do? You do know that SADC have talks on the situation in Zimbabwe, and that Zimbabwe's opposition is working together with its government right?

Let's condemn Robert Mugabe for the political oppression, the suppression of the media and so on. Let's not forget however that he is not the source of Zimbabwe's penury.

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

Really? Who is?
written by Al Kags , September 27, 2007

Stephen,

Allow me to disabuse you of a couple of things:

1. Zimbabweans are not getting land and businesses. Comrade Bob's friends and cronies are getting the land and businesses.

2. As a Kenyan businessman (you are a foreigner in Zim), if you owned an existing business that you have nurtured though out this time - to even survive the thousand fold inflation, would it be fair for comrade Bob to take 51% of your business (depriving you of voice and control in your own business), and giving the same to his buddy?

3. What do you think the businesses will do once this happens? YOu think they will stay open and have the government take the business from under them? What then? How do those children get food, medicare and an education?

4. Did you miss that it takes five hours to get to work? Did you miss that children are dying because even if there were drugs in the hospital they need more money than they have to buy food?

What do I want SA to do? Come one man? Have you heard a condemnation public by that nation of the atrocities of Mugabe's? Have you heard a public condemnation by any other African country?

This is a man playing with human life for his own whims. Do not think that the colour of your skin entitles you to more than anyone else.

It was wrong for whites to discriminate blacks. But the discrimination of their defendants doesn't make things right. It does not even make us feel better.

Wake up.

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

Su*gestions?
written by That Kenyan Loser , September 28, 2007

Al,
I don't know any African person who doesn't sympathize with what the poor people of Zimbabwe are going through.

We have not forgotten; we just have hands tied. Most African countries, Kenya and South Africa included, are dealing with more than their share of internal problems.

The African Union is toothless old dog.

In addition to chronicling and reporting their plight, we need to talk about solutions and how to best implement them.

Unfortunately, from the way things stand, there are only two viable options:

1. Wait for Mugabe to die naturally.
2. Take up arms and drive him out.

In both situations a lot of lives will be lost. It's up to the people of Zimbabwe to decide which one would result in less casualties.

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by Stephen Wanyama , September 28, 2007

Now it has been said severally on these pages, but such is the hegemony of the western media on our minds that we are precluded from seeing the light.

Zimbabwe is a terrible place for a number of reasons. The first is that it is ruled by a government that has under siege become increasingly authoritarian and oppressive. The second is that it exists right in the centre of an AIDS and famine belt that is decimating populations and eating into standards of living from South Africa to Malawi, and from Angola to Mozambique. In addition to these troubles, Zimbabwe was heavily beset by the consequences of its taking up the advise of the World Bank and the IMF, and embarking on the very Structural Adjustment Programmes that caused hell in our part of the world too.

Zimbabwe like every other third world country lacks proper systems of state delivery, which in part explains the intensity of its problems. That out of the way, we can all agree that central to Zimbabwe’s present trauma is the decision by the Robert Mugabe government to expropriate commercial farms that were in the grip of white (and black) Zimbabwean settlers and to give these out to black farmers.

As things go, the country was unprepared for this transformation in its economy, and even less prepared for the onslaught unleashed upon it by the West. There are sanctions on Zimbabwe, a real credit freeze across the world, not just from the Bretton Woods institutions, but also from Western Banks and from Foreign governments. For an economy only just coming out of the hurt of the ESAPs, these financial sanctions were truly devastating, as was the impossibility of conducting multi-lateral trade with a chorus of condemnations all around you. Coming as it did in the middle of an AIDS epidemic, a famine and the massive jump in global oil prices, it is no surprise that Zimbabwe is where she is today.
I doubt very much that the passionate Al, has solutions to these problems. If he does let’s hear them. Knowledge of this, the true facts about Zimbabwe is what mediates when the SADC countries, and any non-ignorant condemns Mugabe for his very real and numerous short comings.
You can be sure of one thing, even after Mugabe dies, the world will not forgive Zimbabwe unless her people remember their place, cower and die; and that will not happen. Even the MDC has said it will never give back the land. Of course, it would be unwise not to sell, lease land to those who could use it best. But we must not think it is our place to dictate to Zimbabwe.
------

What can Kenya do? We can export some of our farming knowledge and capital. Maragoli, Abagusii and Kimabu folk who have little land to share, can enter into negotiations down there. I am told the enigmatic one is connected in Harare.

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by pmathenge , September 28, 2007

Is Mugabe so rotten as to he cannot commune with the British in Lisbon?

Gordon Brown supported the invasion of Iraq, but now proceeds to hail Darfur as the greatest catastrophe to befall mankind this half-century. He refuses in all earnest to shake Mugabe's bloody hands. There must be few mirrors in 10 Downing Street, or white towels.
The trouble with interventionism, even for someone like me who does not believe in borders, or their sanctity is that it often makes the problems worse than they already are.
China for example has made great strides both economically and with regard to human rights through internal struggles and the promotion of a just society based on Chinese ideals. Similarly, Vietnam has found peace and increasingly prosperity in spite of foreign intervention. We could in fact argue that the American invasion caused Vietnam’s strife, destabilised the entire region, threw her into alliances with unsavoury regimes, and overall was a terrible episode for the ordinary people of that country.

So even as we entertain wet dreams of what would be if we could invade Zimbabwe, or slip ground glass into Mugabe’s oatmeal, let us remember that there are better ways to deal with reforming a nation, and that quite often, the locals alone know what is best.

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

Outstanding
written by Advocatus Diaboli , September 28, 2007

Emmo, you astound me with the erudition displayed above coupled with saintly patience in gently swatting away the matchstick thin propositions constantly trotted out here about Mugabe being Hitler or Polpot or Stalin.

The central issue is self respect and knowledge that one's position in the pecking order is only raised by a supreme act of will and it is rarely pretty.

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by emmo opoti , September 28, 2007

We have discussed this here before, in great detail. I am never quite sure how to react to such questions. Is Zimbabwe in trouble, undoubtedly. Do the people who invaded Iraq have the moral right to talk about Mugabe's very real and heinous crimes? Especially when it is their venegeful financial sanctions that have caused the collapse of Zimbabwe? Well, that's the central question.

I will quote bits here from an article by Dominic Lawson, whose father was a Chancellor of the Iron Lady. He is writing here for the UK's Independent. The Economist has also published an honest middle of the road article about the Zimbabwean president. I will post the link as soon as I can get it. Anyway, to Dominic's article,

Robert Mugabe is a much misunderstood man. I don't mean that he is the virtuous leader of his own imagination, nothing could be further from the truth; but he is equally far removed from the caricature African dictator who eats the testicles of his enemies for breakfast. A friend who had known him for many years once described him to me as "urbane, witty, sophisticated, sensitive, thoughtful and ruthless".
.............
He continues
The affection was mutual: the same friend told me that on the death of Sir Christopher Soames – the British Governor during the transitional period – Mugabe flew to Britain with a Union Jack which he tearfully laid on Soames's coffin. Despite the fact that he had suffered much under the Rhodesian regime – the then Prime Minister, Ian Smith, had refused to let Mugabe out of jail to attend the funeral of his four-year-old only son – Mugabe treated his old adversary with a certain courtesy. He preached the idea of reconciliation between whites and blacks some time before Nelson Mandela became celebrated for espousing the same admirable doctrine.

As if to demonstrate that, for at least the first 15 years of his rule, Mugabe did his best to protect the 5,000 white farmers who controlled 75 per cent of the country's farmland – despite the fact that most of them showed absolutely no inclination to train up their indigenous workforce.

and then

Under the Lancaster House agreement with the government of Margaret Thatcher we had pledged to finance the compensation to white farmers as their farmland was gradually handed over to black Zimbabweans – who in practice were always going to be Mugabe's mates. On 5 November 1997, however, Claire Short, then the Secretary of State for International Development,
wrote an astonishingly ill judged letter to the Zimbabwean Minister of Agriculture and Land, Kumbirai Kangai. It brusquely cast aside all previous undertakings: "We do not accept that Britain has a special responsibility to meet the costs of land purchase in Zimbabwe. We are a new Government from diverse backgrounds without links in former colonial interests. My own origins are Irish and as you know we were colonised not colonisers."

It would have been hard to construct a letter more skilfully designed to enrage Mugabe – or even a man with a much thicker skin than the Zimbabwean leader. Short's amazing assertion – that because her family was of Irish stock there was no need to honour a commitment to Zimbabwe entered into by a previous British government – was an inimitable mixture of shamelessness and sanctimony. That friend of mine who knows Mugabe says that Short's letter sent him into a rage against Britain which has scarcely abated for the succeeding decade.

We can pretend all we want, but right there is the reason for Zimbabwe's present pariah status. So while Gordon Brown and George Bush schmooze with the Saudis, and with Museveni we 'Africans' are supposed to be 'outraged about Mugabe' and accept their admonitions to 'do something'.
For every single charge you can level at Mugabe, there's examples of them in most third world countries. Press repression, political assasinations, repression of minorities, and so on.
When we blame Mugabe for the economic downfall of Zimbabwe, are we suggesting that it is in his government's interest that the Zimbabwean economy collapses? The SADC folk- across the board are in a similar situation, burgeoning poverty-stricken populations, debilitated by the burden of AIDS while minorities live like Kings on the finest of their lands. That is why for example Botswana has an almost entirely foreign civil service, and it is why Nelson Mandela is such a global darling/ saint like Mugabe once was.

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by emmo opoti , September 28, 2007

Have you heard of Craig Murray? He was the British Ambassador to Uzbekistan, where people are boiled alive in oil, and the President's birthday is a national holiday. His conscience protested and he was then persecuted by his own employers. Here is his wikipedia page, I would have given you his website, but it was pulled you see.

Let's campaign for Human Rights and good governance everywhere, not just where our eyes are compelled to look.

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

...
written by aeichener , September 28, 2007

To the title: I do not think that "Africa" has such Neronic grandeur (shades of Peter Ustinov in his best role ever) as the headline insinuates.

Rather, it is Gado who had so aptly covered the essence of African liidaahs' behaviour towards their evil tyrant cousin:

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

join the Rand zone
written by Timothy Wainaina , September 28, 2007

That Craig Murray is a legend for Arsenal fans, It was from him that we were warned about the ugly Usmanov ( no relation of Ustinov's mind). We don't want a thieving Abramovic at Arsenal.

And by this winding road do I make my point. Both Roman Abramovic and his chum ( ex-chum) Boris Berezovsky are Russian hyper-crims living the large life in the UK. Don't forget Margaret Thatcher calling Pinochet a 'great defender of Democracy', or Tony Blair and Gordon Brown doing their utmost to be chummy with the House of Saud. So pardon me for not crying for the ouster of Mugabe.

That said, I do empathise with the people of Southern Africa, and especially the Zimbabwean ones. Some of these scenes look like straight up movies. I would like to volunteer my services to Rserve Bank boss Gono. Maybe my ideas will be a little more intelligent tham yours.

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

Mugabe is wrong
written by Njamba , October 06, 2007

For those of us who have been dealing with the land question in Zimbambe for a longtime since the early 1980 Mugambe actions against his people is not defendable and he is violating civilians basic human rights so let us address Al Kags issue not the sideshows about Land. Watch the Video here.

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +0

Show/Hide comment form