Tag Archives: Africa

ZIM Wonders: Natural Features

Leave a reply

Although crises in Zimbabwe make it an improbable tourist destination, it is home to many natural and ancient wonders.

The country’s most popular attraction, Victoria Falls, received (at its peak) over 300,000 visitors per year.  It is a UNESCO world attraction, located on the Zambezi River in northwest Zimbabwe.  The border with Zambia also shares Lake Kariba, the largest man-made reservoir in Africa. Also in the north, but near the eastern border with Mozambique, is the famed Mount Inyangani, and its popularly traveled hiking paths.  It is the highest peak in Zimbabwe.

In the south, there are two other UNESCO sites: In the southeast, the ruins of the Great Zimbabwe civilization, for which the country is named. In the southwest, the Matobo Hills with it’s myriad of treasures. (gallery)

 Matobo Hills

Matobo Hills natural granite rock mounds

Click To Tweet

.

Zimbabwe’s Man-Made Food Crisis, 2012

2 Replies

Zimbabwe’s Man-Made Food Crisis | Think Africa Press.

Droughts, poorly implemented policies and a shift by banks to fund tobacco and cotton instead of maize and other grains have all contributed to Zimbabwe’s current situation, but to fully understand how the country reached this state of affairs from once being southern Africa’s breadbasket requires us to look further back to 2000. 

ANDREW MAMBONDIYANI

Occupation: Claim Your African Cake

Leave a reply
Berlin Conference

Berlin Conference

In their scramble for Africa, the dominant European powers of the late 1800’s took claim to the continent for a number of reasons, foremost, out of necessity to compete with their neighbors who were doing the same. This was for resources and trade to existing and new markets borne “from the demand for raw materials unavailable in Europe, especially copper, cotton, rubber, tea, and tin, to which European consumers had grown accustomed and upon which European industry had grown dependent.”[1] Sub-Saharan Africa, in turn, was a new market for surplus European goods, and not participating in the Berlin Conference would have put them at a loss to their competitors. As well, instability in the Suez and the Barbary region necessitated an alternative thru-route into Africa and points east. Part of their effort to solve the Suez and Barbary pirate matters encouraged the plan for powers to protect their trade ability by occupation and control of Egypt, Morocco, and Tunisia (for example).

Although slavery had been essentially outlawed by all the European powers, much of the proposal was billed “The diplomats put on a humanitarian façade by condemning the slave trade, prohibiting the sale of alcoholic beverages and firearms in certain regions, and by expressing concern for missionary activities.” In the worst case, the King Leopold’s land acquisitions—‘trinket’ treaties negotiated by Henry Morton Stanley wherein the signee would have no concept of what they were participating in—were organized into a front-agency “International Congo Society” and proclaimed the “Congo Free State” at the conference under the personal control of Leopold. Very soon, the exploitation and harsh treatment of labor for rubber would soon have the ‘Free’ ‘State’ ignoring its advertised precepts, and original ‘scientific’ beginnings “as an entirely disinterested humanitarian body” which sought to “administer the Congo for the good of all, handing over power to the locals as soon as they were ready for that grave responsibility.”[1]

The terms for keeping the European claims under the conference mandated “effective occupation”—European powers could acquire rights over colonial lands only if they actually possessed them: “if they had treaties with local leaders, if they flew their flag there, and if they established an administration in the territory to govern it with a police force to keep order.” As well, the dispossessed white Voortrekkers (slaveholding), were moving into the interior of southern Africa, establishing independent Boer states, contrary to the aims of the United Kingdom, and were not included as parties to the partitioning. In fact, the Boers were to become detainees in modern history’s first concentration camps for in their attempt to assert their independence.

[1] http://www.martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/april2007/africa_scramble.html

AFRICA: Reactions To Colonialism

Leave a reply
Ashanti War

Ashanti War

Europeans made headway into Africa by making associations with disaffected ethnic groups—who hoped that the newcomers would provide leverage over territorial disputes with other groups.  Some initially welcomed the Europeans, but eventually all would resist European occupation. In the west, the coastal Fante Confederation, weak from raids of the nearby Asante, would side with the British; in the east, the Buganda province would align with against the dominant Bunyoro.[1] European powers capitalized on regional conflict to at first gain footing on the continent, and then secondly, to undermine the native ruling structures of the interior. The Europeans conducted long wars against holdout groups, which fought with both conventional and guerrilla tactics, such as the Islamic empire of Samory Touré, which held a resistance for nearly 20 years against French rule in West Africa at the end of the 19th century.[2]

Defeat for Africans meant a new means of tribute. The European model of taxation for the purpose of capitalizing work projects was introduced to the continent, as a means of self-sufficiency for the European colonies. Hut taxes, Head taxes, and a host of other taxes were introduced upon the Africans who never had to pay such things.[3] Failure to pay taxes, would force conscription into a forced labor gang to build improvements desired by the European nations, which mainly consisted of roads and railways to coastal ports, but nary a road between neighboring groups. Africans were also pressed into mine work, and other dangerous duties by the local chief, who was only crafting the work detail out of a European demand from higher up.

Avoidance of taxation and forced labor could lead to imprisonment; another system foreign to the continent.[4] Prior to physical incarceration, punishments were closer to moral judgments and self-reflection. The true leaders of the people were often jailed, for instigating rebellion, or on the fear they might, and it is from this practice that Africa, again, was forced into chains and captivity, and suffered the loss their human capital. Though the slave trade purportedly ceased, a new model of slavery replaced it, one of economic and political servitude. All the while, Africans were being dispossessed of their lands, and forced into meager reservations of poor soil, which would sew “the incipient seeds of future African nationalism.”

Where once the Europeans were welcomed by certain parties, when the demands that were placed upon their enemies were eventually then put upon them, they too, were forced to rebellion in their own self-interest. In what is described as the Secondary Reaction to European colonialism, the ethnic groups that initially welcomed the Europeans would rebel against them, when taxation, forced labor, imprisonment and land alienation began to be imposed on them, in addition to their enemies. The opportunity for alliance was too late, and these rebellions were suppressed, forcing Africa into compliance with the European colonial objectives.

[1] Amii Omara-Otunu, Lecture, University of Connecticut, September 24th, 2013.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Amii Omara-Otunu, Lecture, University of Connecticut, September 26th, 2013.

[4] Ibid.

“Genocide” – Still a Crime w/out a Name

9 Replies

centurys-first-genocide-2

“The aggressor … retaliates by the most frightful cruelties. As his Armies advance, whole districts are being exterminated. Scores of thousands – literally scores of thousands – of executions in cold blood are being perpetrated … there has never been methodical, merciless butchery on such a scale, or approaching such a scale.

And this is but the beginning. Famine and pestilence have yet to follow … We are in the presence of a crime without a name.”

***

On August 24, 1941, Winston Churchill broadcast the atrocities being committed against Jews and Jewish Bolsheviks in Eastern Russia by Nazi forces.  The worst of the Holocaust was still to come, and post-war, name would be invented to describe these crimes. [1] “The crime of … deliberately wiping out whole peoples is not utterly new in the world,” Rafael Lemkin would say in 1945.  “It is so new in the traditions of civilized man that he has no name for it.” Setting out to label these crimes, he formed the word “genocide,” combining words “genes” for race or tribe, and the Latin ending “–cide” for killing.[2]  This simple term and its subsequent use and non-use would eventually be the subject of great debate.  For the interracial courts to prosecute someone for genocide, the charges would have to be clear.  Sometimes, even the most heinous human rights abuses never obtain the label.  Recent situations, such as the crisis in Sudan highlight the frustrations of the word, and how it is used.  In his autobiographical account, “What is the What,” ‘Lost Boy’ Achak Deng witnesses many of the atrocities that the United Nations (UN) considers genocide — yet the crisis still fails to receive the official designation.  The UN and the rest of the world, in its dalliance upon the issue, are cold in their consideration of the separated families, uprooted lives, and merciless, cold blooded death since the beginning of the conflict.

The United Nations would define the term at the “Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.” Adopted by the UN General Assembly on December 9, 1948, the nine articles call genocide “a crime under international law, contrary to the spirit and aims of the United Nations and condemned by the civilized world.”  Article II of the convention names a series of acts that are prosecutable offenses when “committed with intent to destroy … a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, such as:  a) Killing members of the group; b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.”[3]  The events that Deng witnessed amount to ‘acts of genocide’ and seem fit the definition, but lack the term officially. In his time in south Sudan, he recalls experiences similar to the listed Article II items, in much more descriptive and harrowing language.

When the murahaleen entered his hometown of Marial Bai, Deng recalled, first, the “crack of gunfire.” There were easily two hundred, three hundred or more.”  Thinking the men were there only to steal the cattle, soon the “sky broke open with gunfire.”  The invaders would burn down the church, and kill indiscriminately taking slaves when it suited them.  “Those who ran were shot.  Those women and children who stood still were herded onto the soccer field. A grown man made the mistake of joining this herd, and was shot … He was tied by the feet and dragged by a pair of horses” [4]  Indiscriminate killing would seem to be an act of genocide, if “killing members of the group” is literally interpreted. But here it is not.  Situations like this were not mere isolated incidents, they occurred throughout southern Sudan, and the Dinka people were the common victims to Moslem raiding parties of the north.  Wells were poisoned, with the bodies of family members.  Houses, if not burnt initially, would be burnt in the next invasion, causing further depravity and bodily harm.   Those who managed to run a distance were picked off by long range rifle. As prerequisite of Article II, if the case of bodily harm was dismissed, surely the psychological harm should be noticed–these were acts of terror and extermination.

Deng’s time in the desert with the Lost Boys, also fits genocide criteria on paper.  A forced walk in the desert, surviving the ferocity of African wildlife and limited food resources, for weeks on end, could be argued as “deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.”  To expect children to survive such a march is improbable.[5] Another Article II item, the prevention of births, occurred from the start, with the kidnapping of girls and women into slavery.  With the deaths and capture of young men and women, such as Deng’s childhood friend Moses and future potential mothers like his boyhood crush, Amath, a generation or more … perhaps the entire Dinka existence, is left in limbo. With no women left free to reproduce and populate the tribe, the tribe would in essence, cease to exist.

Lemkin notes “the term does not necessarily signify mass killings although it may mean that. More often it refers to a coordinated plan aimed at destruction of the essential foundations of the life of national groups so that these groups wither and die like plants that have suffered a blight.”[6] Was Deng’s experience not considered coordinated enough to be called genocide?  The definition given by the UN is too vague and problematic to serve these modern unnamed crimes. Is not murder, rape, and enslavement a crime against humanity? Perhaps the term ‘genocide’ has lost its effectiveness, or become a shell of its former meaning.   Could it be that genocide is specific word that only properly defines the events of the Holocaust?  Lemkin concedes that “genocide is too disastrous a phenomenon to be left to fragmentary regulation. There must be an adequate mechanism for international cooperation in the punishment of the offenders.” There needs to be a new way of classifying these atrocities, one that can’t be debated in the midst of crisis and for years afterwards.  “Genocide” still can’t define these “crimes with no name.” A new term, broader in its application and less tangled in bureaucracy, is needed[7]: ‘Genocide’ still doesn’t adequately define these “crimes without a name.”

Works Cited

Eggers, Dave (2006). “What is the What.”  Vintage Books, New York. p. 91-93

Fussell, James T. “A crime without a name.” Prevent Genocide International. http://www.preventgenocide.org/genocide/crimewithoutaname.htm  (accessed April 30, 2009)

Lemkin, Rafael. “Genocide-a modern crime.” Prevent Genocide International. http://www.preventgenocide.org/lemkin/freeworld1945.html  (accessed April 30, 2009)

Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Geneva, Switzerland.  Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.  http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/p_genoci.htm  (accessed April 30, 2009)

[1] Fussell, James T. “A crime without a name.” Prevent Genocide International. http://www.preventgenocide.org/genocide/crimewithoutaname.htm  (accessed April 30, 2009)

[2] Lemkin, Rafael. “Genocide-a modern crime.” Prevent Genocide International. http://www.preventgenocide.org/lemkin/freeworld1945.html  (accessed April 30, 2009)

[3] Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. Geneva, Switzerland.  Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.  http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/p_genoci.htm  (accessed April 30, 2009)

[4] Eggers, Dave (2006). “What is the What.”  Vintage Books, New York. p. 91-93

[5] It is in this author’s opinion, that if the murahaleen had the resources to find and exterminate the Lost Boys, they would have.

[6] Lemkin, Rafael. “Genocide-a modern crime.” Prevent Genocide International. http://www.preventgenocide.org/lemkin/freeworld1945.html  (accessed April 30, 2009)

[7] The author’s suggestion is simply “Human Rights Abuse,” but as with the term ‘genocide,’ even that phrase is tangled in red tape.

Jobs Drive Gender Equality In Africa

Leave a reply

t1larg.ghana_.micro_.wwb_

Investment is the key to equality between the sexes in Africa, according to Richard A. Schroeder, associate professor of geography at Rutgers University.  In his book Shady Practices: Agroforestry and Gender Politics in The Gambia, Schroeder details how women in that country were able to challenge traditional male power structures by small scale, female targeted projects in commercial gardening. With little capital, these women were able to raise their earning capacity and increase their economic power.[1]  Meanwhile, political change in the country of Zimbabwe has seen the creation of a Ministry for Women’s Affairs and the elevation of a woman to Vice President.  More change is needed, contends activist Jenni Williams, the head of Women of Zimbabwe Arise. She feels that an even stronger female presence is needed in government to insure “that gender equality is clearly spelt out in the constitution. However, it must not only be gender equity, but also social justice.”[2]

There is still concern that these progressive laws will do little to change the situation in places such as Kenya, where its many laws to protect the rights of women go ignored in rural areas, superseded by customary law. The Human Rights Watch organization believes that “discriminatory property laws and practices impoverish women and their dependents,” as well as subject them to other impossible living conditions, “relegating them to dependence on men and social inequality.”[3]   Gender balance can be found in international attention and activism, as well as programs meant to empower, such as those in The Gambia and the Women in Development programs of the 1970s and 1980s, “instigated because of a general recognition that many aid programs had not addressed the needs of women or had ignored them entirely.”[4]

Mr. Schroeder recalls how the community of Kerewan, a once impoverished village on the River Gambia, changed over two decades. “The town’s women transformed the surrounding lowlands into one of key sites of a lucrative female-controlled, cash-crop market garden sector.”  In his first visit the area production was small scale, but ten years later, large gardens, managed by women, “had come to dominate the landscape.” He believes that “the arrival of tools and construction materials donated by developers” helped to empower women, by providing a “surge in female incomes.”  This eventually led to “an escalation of gender politics centered on the reworking of…the ‘conjugal contract’.” Men were bitter at first, regarding their wives attention to their garden as that of being a “second husband.” However, a financial crisis “undermined male cash-crop production” and the husbands household monetary contributions, meaning “that gardens were often women’s only means of (household) financial support.”[5]

Eventually, “by virtue of their new incomes,” women were able to enter into “intra-household negotiations,” thereby changing their traditional role in marriage.  Women were now the lenders; men now borrowed money from their wives, who more or less, “purchased…freedom of movement.” Before the gardens, men controlled the cash flow and it was the wives who received pittance.  “The advent of a female cash-crop system reduced (men’s) leverage…because women’s incomes had outstripped their husbands’.” “Men dropped their oppositional rhetoric, became more generally cooperative, and began exploring ways to benefit personally from the garden boom.”  Noticing this change, women worked harder to “sustain production on a more secure basis.” Schroeder believes that “women in The Gambia’s garden districts succeed in producing a striking new social landscape.[6]

In Zimbabwe, “top-down” changes in male-dominated politics have occurred, beginning with Joyce Mujuru being named Vice President in 2005.  In light of the Zimbabwe’s economic crisis and current political crossroads, the former Minister of Women’s Affairs called “for zero tolerance to violence against women and girls,” adding, “violence has negative socio-economic implications. Violence is unacceptable as it dehumanizes the victim and the offender. It’s a sign of weakness.” She was criticized however for avoiding the subject of “Jestina Mukoko and other women such as Concilia Chinanzvavana, who were…abused in prison by the Mugabe regime.[7] Mukoko, who chronicled state sponsored human rights abuses, was beaten and tortured for three months, and her detainment became “one of the most prominent examples of…Mugabe’s refusal to restore human rights in Zimbabwe.”[8]

There is discontent, still, after the recent power-sharing deal in Zimbabwe.  Jenni Williams believes that “nothing will ever come out of this deal until women are included.” [9] People like Luta Shaba, director of the Women’s Trust, contend that “only through proportional representation can women, together with other previously marginalized groups, rise.”[10]  Rutendo Hadebe, deputy chairperson of The Women’s Coalition, believe that “the coalition will take advantage of the constitutional reform process to lobby for progressive provisions that will empower women and “close a past of inequality.””[11]  There is cynicism, however, that the challenges of tradition could stand in the way.  Gladys Hlatswayo, of Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition, says “We have heard these nice words before but, without political will, they do not mean anything…the power relations are uneven and reflect the power struggles of the general Zimbabwean society.”[12]

Tradition holds sway in the country of Kenya, as well, where women face a variety of discriminatory practices along with poverty and disease.  Many are “excluded from inheriting…stripped of their possessions and forced to engage in risky sexual practices from their husbands.”  Human Rights Watch cites “a complex mix of cultural, legal, and social factors” as responsible for the property rights violations.  Unwritten customary laws that exist beside formal laws, continually override Kenya’s constitutional prohibition of discrimination on the basis of sex.  HRW argues that “the few statutes that could advance women’s property rights defer to religious and customary property laws that privilege men over women.” Women are seen as “untrustworthy, incapable of handling property, and in need of male protection.”

This paternalist attitude is emulated by state, judicial, and traditional leaders who “often ignore women’s property claims and sometimes make the problems worse.” Women generally have “little awareness of their rights” and those who “fight back are often beaten, raped, or ostracized.”  Meanwhile, “the agricultural sector, which contributes a quarter of Kenya’s gross GDP and depends on women’s labor, is stagnant.”  Their assessment is that in order for “Kenya to meet its development aims, it must address the property inequalities that hold women back.”  HRW charges that “unequal property rights and harmful customary practices violate international law,” and that Kenya “must develop a program of…reforms…and initiatives that systematically eliminate obstacles to the fulfillment of women’s property rights” in order to progress.[13]

Investments in women’s programs that are designed to ‘enable’ are necessary for the furtherance of women’s rights and economic growth in Africa.  Schroeder’s documentation of the progress of women’s gardens in The Gambia, show a balancing change in traditional roles between the sexes. The Human Rights Watch’s avocation of more legislative protections in Kenya could help to build upon the gains made by women in Africa. Activism such as that of Jestina Mukoko and other women’s rights organizations can, in turn, build upon that. Continued awareness will address the crisis of inequality by informing the world of these discriminatory practices. Ultimately, calls for equal gender representation, like in Zimbabwe, will one day, have women changing these laws for themselves. The empowerment of women in Africa could one day bring equality to a traditionally male dominated power structure.

WORKS CITED

1  TAKING SIDES : Clashing Views on African Issues, Issue #13

2  Mpofu, Thulani. “Zimbabwe’s Women Feel Left Out of Power Deal.”  The National. http://www.thenational.ae/article/20090312/FOREIGN/394930035/-1/NEWS

3  The Zimbabwean.  “Women Join Hands to Fight Violence.”  http://www.thezimbabwean.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=19927&Itemid=109

4  Celia W. Dugger. “Zimbabwe Activist Released, In Victory For Opposition.” New York Times.  http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/03/world/africa/03zimbabwe.html?_r=1&ref=world

5  Kwidini, Tonderai. “Now To Share Power With Women.” Resource Centre for the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. http://www.galdu.org/web/index.php?odas=3272&giella1=eng

6  Association for Women’s Rights in Development.  “New Cabinet Ignores Quota For Women.”  http://www.awid.org/eng/Women-s-Rights-in-the-News/Women-s-Rights-in-the-News/ZIMBABWE-New-Cabinet-Ignores-Quota-for-Women

[1] TAKING SIDES: Clashing Views on African Issues, Issue #13.  232-239

[2] Mpofu, Thulani. “Zimbabwe’s Women Feel Left Out of Power Deal.”  The National.

[3] TAKING SIDES: Clashing Views on African Issues, Issue #13.  240-243

[4] TAKING SIDES: Clashing Views on African Issues, Issue #13.  233

[5] Ibid. 235-236

[6] Ibid. 238-239

[7] The Zimbabwean.  “Women Join Hands to Fight Violence.”

[8] Celia W. Dugger. “Zimbabwe Activist Released, In Victory For Opposition.” New York Times.

[9] Kwidini, Tonderai. “Now To Share Power with Women.” Resource Centre for the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

[10] Mpofu, Thulani. “Zimbabwe’s Women Feel Left Out of Power Deal.”  The National.

[11] Association for Women’s Rights in Development.  “New Cabinet Ignores Quota For Women.”

[12] Kwidini, Tonderai. “Now To Share Power with Women.” Resource Centre for the Rights of
Indigenous Peoples.

[13] TAKING SIDES: Clashing Views on African Issues, Issue #13.  240-243

written: 04/02/09

image via recent Africa & Women’s Micro-finance MSM coverage:
IFC & Goldman Sachs Launch $600 Million Global Fund for Female Entrepreneurs (03/06/14)

Zim Democracy: A Long Way To Go

Leave a reply

People queue to vote in Harare March 16, 2013. Image by: PHILIMON BULAWAYO / REUTERS

In the many attempts to define “democracy,” a simple one, devised by economist Joseph Schumpeter suggested that it be encompass a system where voters first elect their representatives and the representatives themselves would choose what they think the best policy is.  Voters are free to decide on their representatives and they can be demanding. If parties fail to deliver they would lose votes on the next elections.

In the case of Zimbabwe, choice in representation is quite limited, as the ZANU-PF regime uses intimidation and violence to prevent candidates from the electoral process.  For those brave enough to participate, even winning an election does not guarantee your ascendency to office or protection from “War Veterans” whose loyalty to the regime has been secured through many years and promises of gifts, land and political office.

Zimbabwe and its government, gaining majority rule in 1980, styles itself as a parliamentary democracy, when in actuality, it is a one party dictatorship.  Robert Mugabe, head of government since independence (also President since 1987), has controlled policy in the country singlehandedly for almost 30 years under the “Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front” banner or ZANU-PF, There are claims that his ZANU-PF party has rigged elections in his favor using voter intimidation and violence.  Mugabe’s domestic policies, namely his land reform initiatives, which have displaced revenue generating white farmers, are blamed for the food shortages and runaway inflation of the Zim Dollar.  Zimbabwe is effectively a one-party system, and all other parties besides ZANU-PF hold very little popular or political sway.

The Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) led by Morgan Tsvangirai is an opposition party that has faced persecution at the hands of Mugabe’s forces.  Tsvangirai won the 2008 presidential election outright, but a run-off election was called, as the results were not recognized by Mugabe. Intimidation against MDC supporters caused Tsvangirai to back out of the run-off race, but showing in the polls prompted him to return from exile to contest the election and Mugabe would eventually be forced to submit to a coalition government.  Mugabe is accused of stacking minister posts in his favor, retaining key cabinet positions. In some respect, Mugabe is, in a twisted way, displaying Schumpeter’s competitive structure of democracy in the gifting of political appointments, land and other arrangements to loyal supporters (for long term retention of power).
***

A major issue, outside of a fair and safe electoral process, is the number of women in elected positions.  Netsai Mushonga, who coordinates the national Women’s Coalition, described it as “scandalous.” Women, who make up 52 per cent of the population, hold few influential positions in Zimbabwe’s patriarchal society. Currently only seven of the 40 members of the federal cabinet are women. Of the 69 ministers, 12 are women; well under 20 percent representation.  Zimbabwe now has its first female Vice President (and one of the few in Africa) and the government has made small efforts to enhance the status of women by placing them in some key posts in politics and business. However, the power structure in itself appears invalid, due to token adherence a Southern African Development Community (SADC) protocol on gender and development, a joint agreement mandating that women should hold equal positions to men in both public and private sectors by 2015.         Prompting one activist to say: “This government is not a product of the will of the people, but SADC’s.”

Due to the crises that affect the country and the political repression that has occurred in its wake, there is hope and opportunity for more women in political positions in Zimbabwe.  Many strong female leaders have emerged.  Included among them are Jenni Williams and Jestina Mukoko, who have been victims of political imprisonment and torture for challenging Mugabe’s regime.  They are vocal activists of human rights in Zimbabwe, and are widely popular.  The fact that these new leaders are coming forward and being developed (albeit, “trial-by-fire”), bodes well as the country is preparing for new leadership, and possibly, parity between the sexes, post-Mugabe.

“Top-down” changes in male-dominated politics have occurred, beginning with Mujuru being named Vice President in 2005.  In light of the Zimbabwe’s economic crisis and current political crossroads, the former Minister of Women’s Affairs called “for zero tolerance to violence against women and girls,” adding, “violence has negative socio-economic implications. Violence is unacceptable as it dehumanizes the victim and the offender. It’s a sign of weakness.” She was criticized however for avoiding the subject of “Jestina Mukoko and other women such as Concilia Chinanzvavana, who were…abused in prison by the Mugabe regime. Mukoko, who chronicled state sponsored human rights abuses, was beaten and tortured for three months, and her detainment became “one of the most prominent examples of…Mugabe’s refusal to restore human rights in Zimbabwe.” Oftentimes challenged as for being a puppet of the Mugabe/ZANU-PF government (which does include women in its MP positions) Vice President Mujuru is in danger of being ousted due to political infighting.

Having been in office since the new government, elected in 1980 at age 25, Vice President Mujuru claims that “confidence is the reason most women not to seek political office,” fearful of entering a realm long dominated by men. The words ‘she’ and ‘her’ appear nowhere” in the Constitution, which makes no provisions for gender parity in representation; a matter which Jenni Williams hopes to address in constitutional reforms. Luta Shaba, director of the Women’s Trust, “Women want a new constitution that abolishes the first-past-the-post electoral system to enshrine proportional representation…Only through proportional representation can women, together with other previously marginalized groups, rise.”

There is discontent, still, after the recent power-sharing deal in Zimbabwe.  Jenni Williams, the head of Women of Zimbabwe Arise, believes that “nothing will ever come out of this deal until women are included.”  People like Luta Shaba, director of the Women’s Trust, contend that “only through proportional representation can women, together with other previously marginalized groups, rise.”  Rutendo Hadebe, deputy chairperson of The Women’s Coalition, believe that “the coalition will take advantage of the constitutional reform process to lobby for progressive provisions that will empower women and “close a past of inequality.””  There is cynicism, however, that the challenges of tradition could stand in the way.  Gladys Hlatswayo, of Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition, says “We have heard these nice words before but, without political will, they do not mean anything…the power relations are uneven and reflect the power struggles of the general Zimbabwean society.” Williams feels that an even stronger female presence is needed in government to insure “that gender equality is clearly spelt out in the constitution. However, it must not only be gender equity, but also social justice.”

***

Mr. Mugabe blames his country’s crisis on sanctions imposed by the US and the EU, but the global consensus puts the blame on continuance of bad policy. Agriculture has collapsed since the embarked upon “land reforms” involving the expropriation of thousands of white-owned farms, which critics say he has handed over to his associates. Short-term, the economic situation looks grim, and the inflation rate in the hundred-million per cents. Less than two weeks after the power-sharing agreement, ZANU-PF, restarted their requisitioning of white-owned farms with little regard to an SADC ruling which regarded the “seizing white-owned property for redistribution to landless black farmers was discriminatory and illegal.” Barring drastic change, the 400 white owned farms face further troubles, but there is excitement that with new Prime Minister, and farmer Catherine Meridith, whose property has fallen under the target of ZANU-PF “War Veterans,” is optimistic, saying “I’m 100% confident that in five years’ time, I’ll still be living on this farm.”  Mugabe’s land reform and domestic policy have bankrupted a once prosperous nation. Zimbabwe, once the bread basket of half a continent, is facing acute food shortages and currently experiencing a drought, as well as regular cholera outbreaks.

Though having recently celebrated his 88th birthday, Mugabe remains firmly entrenched.  The global aim with the sanctions, media coverage, and international indignation, is that Mugabe will eventually be “shunned” from power.  Douglas Alexander, UK International Development Secretary, called Mugabe’s presence at a UN Food Summit meeting “obscene,” saying “I’m outraged by his attendance.”  He calls labels Mugabe’s “profound misrule” as the key factor responsible for the crisis, adding “I’ll neither shake hands with Robert Mugabe nor meet Robert Mugabe … This is not a man with any credibility or any contribution to a discussion on international food.” Currently, Mugabe is banned from European travel; his status as a respected African “leader” by Western leaders is more than twenty years in the past.  Every day he sits in power, his painfully short-sighted, incredulous policies and irreverent ramblings deprive the country of the real leader it needs. Instead of constructively addressing the issues at hand, (Mugabe) wastes his words placing blame on others, which is parroted through the ZANU-PF hierarchy, mostly with accusations against MDC, saying “Some people are contriving ways and means of making us collapse.”

When “the people who fled the violence have to face their perpetrators to cast their ballot,” you most assuredly do not have a safe and secure electoral process.  The documentary “A Ballot of Thorns” covered the violence and voter intimidation in the 2008 Zimbabwean Presidential election and its aftermath. The film starts with coverage of a MDC rally, which is broken up by armed ZANU-PF youth, characterizing the longstanding lack freedom in political choice.  ZANU-PF gangs beat and killed MDC supporters, and burned crops and homes in what became a “rural war-zone.” Tsvangirai called out the regime, saying that “Mugabe and his wife have been shedding cold tears by visiting MDC victims of political violence when his militia men are, in fact, the authors and perpetrators of the massacres.”  Yet Mugabe has been able to effectively spin that matter with the state media, broadcasting funerals of ZANU-PF members (who were victims of infighting) and purporting their killers to be MDC. Violence intensified as the election neared, with entire MDC families being targeted.  The film covers the impoundment of Tsvangirai’s campaign vehicles, and where he proclaims “It is nothing but harassment…When the leading contender is denied the opportunity to convey!”

The process needs to be fair, and under ZANU-PF state control, that will never occur.  Before the 2000 election, the late Vice-President, Simon Muzenda, told the nation that “if ZANU-PF chose to nominate a baboon as candidate, then the people would have to vote for that baboon.”  The international community and SADC, regarding the 2008 election stated that the Elections “…did not conform to SADC Principles and Guidelines. However, the Election Day was peaceful. Based on the above-mentioned observations, the Mission is of the view that the prevailing environment impinged on the credibility of the electoral process. The elections did not represent the will of the people of Zimbabwe.” The SADC still declared the elections legitimately “free and fair,” forcing Mugabe into a power-sharing agreement, in which ZANU-PF and MDC would be forced into a compromise government, with Tsvangirai as a newly created “Prime Minister.”  However, this compromise was itself compromised by intimidation leading MDC to govern mostly in exile. 

Possibilities in achieving a democratic transition in the country comes from finding a way to hold actual free and fair elections under a neutral and independent electoral administration, according to the group Zimbabwe Democracy Now, which calls for widespread reform from the safety of the internet. They consider that “SADC as architect of the power-sharing agreement is directly responsible for resolving this potentially unstable situation.”  The group cites the numerous electoral failings of 2008 electoral process and offers a host of proposed reforms, suggesting that SADC “immediately take steps to enforce, as guaranteed, Zimbabwe’s transition to good governance and genuine democracy.” A new series of checks and balances and a showing of the “the political will of the African Union, of SADC and of the Republic of South Africa as guarantors” who “recognize that the misrule in Zimbabwe has already impacted negatively on the region, and threatens to cause further disruptions.” It is the SADC’s responsibility to “ultimately bring about the dreamed-of African Renaissance.”

Dictators can’t live forever, and there is hope for Zimbabwe in the passage of time. If not deposed, Mugabe will eventually die, and even if another dictator steps up and takes his place, in the long term, Zimbabwe has the resources and infrastructure (albeit, crumbling) for a successful transition to a functional democracy.  A report from the Harvard University Africa Policy Journal states that “the southern African country is in a perilous state of decline and could face a transition at any time. Waiting until the day after the fall of [president] Robert Mugabe could be too late.” The report predicts that “In political democracies, prolonged economic decline almost always sparks political change, through the ballot box or more radical confrontation on the streets.”

It is hoped that Zimbabwe can eventually make the peaceful transition into a legitimate democracy.  The country can only do so with fair representation in governance, including diaspora, whites and women.  While enticing individuals back to Zimbabwe may be far away, the work of NGOs could assist supporting women’s economic independence. Programs that ‘enable’ are necessary for the furtherance of women’s rights and economic growth in Africa and grow the pool of talented women leaders.  Activism such as that of Jestina Mukoko and other women’s rights organizations can, in turn, build upon that. Continued awareness will address the crisis of inequality by informing the world of these discriminatory practices. Ultimately, calls for equal gender representation, like in Zimbabwe, will one day, have women changing these laws for themselves. The empowerment of women in Africa could one day bring equality, both to a traditionally male dominated power structure & democracy in its governance.

http://www.zimbabwedemocracynow.com/

Video: “A Ballot of Thorns.” Journeyman Pictures, 2009
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ongYOh9nE84

Mpofu, Thulani. “Zimbabwe’s Women Feel Left Out of Power Deal.”  The National. http://www.thenational.ae/article/20090312/FOREIGN/394930035/-1/NEWS

The Zimbabwean.  “Women Join Hands to Fight Violence.”  http://www.thezimbabwean.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=19927&Itemid=109

Celia W. Dugger. “Zimbabwe Activist Released, In Victory For Opposition.” New York Times.  http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/03/world/africa/03zimbabwe.html?_r=1&ref=world

Kwidini, Tonderai. “Now To Share Power With Women.” Resource Centre for the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. http://www.galdu.org/web/index.php?odas=3272&giella1=eng

Graft, T-shirts and the Promise of Land

1 Reply

Land has long been the issue for the disposed average Zimbabwean. During British colonialism, whites controlled the land, converting the finest soils into plantations of cash crop, grown for export. Blacks were left with nothing but the equivalent of ethnic ‘reservations’. The land issue was the impetus for a violent revolution against what was then called Rhodesia, white controlled, and newly independent of Britain. (Schleicher, 2004) Racism from whites was and is currently less, an ingrained feature in sub-Saharan Africa, and that was met with anger and envy by much the landless poor. President Robert Mugabe is a man that promised land to millions of people. His mission for a controlled land redistribution program has fell short in its goals by legal measures, which often get excused for lack of Western “funding.”

In the race prior to the 2013 Elections, the party was the recipient of ‘foreign aid’ from China that consisted of promotional campaign material. President Mugabe described China as “Zimbabwe’s all-weather friend,” making the claim that “we have many friends from the East.” It is curious if by ‘we’ he was speaking of Zimbabwe or himself, as Mugabe is accepting the gift of “over one million T-shirts…and other campaign materials to the ZANU-PF party to aid in their election efforts.  According to news outlet Bulawayo 24, the donation “comes a few days after Mugabe promised party supporters…in Harare that he would get cars and cash from China to bankroll the party’s campaigns.” (“China donates more,” 2013) The Chinese did not supply MDC-T similarly, and, if judged by international standards, Mugabe would be clearly in violation of campaign fundraising ethics or, tangentially, attempted voter intimidation. Mugabe has long been known to outfit his supporters, on this occasion in prominent yellow and green. An in-demand look, the giveaways of the campaign gear was not without violence between supporters (“Zanu pf t-shirts,” 2013), but also, the marker clothing has led to street clashes between supporters, the ZANU-PF affiliated Chipangano youth gang and the opposition MDC-T supporters, politicians, and activists.

The party has long unofficially supported the Chipangano group, which functions as a youth cadre and violent, street-level support apparatus. The group/gang funds itself by extorting the commuter bus drivers in the capital of Harare, charging a fee to depart the bus stations. “In a day, the militia is said to be raking over $30 000,” and the bus Operators Association are attempting to bring their grievance to the government in early 2012. ZANU-PF Secretary Didymus Mutasa “told them that the former ruling party was not running the extortion ring, and told them the party (referring to ZANU-PF) made its money from selling membership cards not from bus termini.” However, the Chipangano ARE extorting and fund themselves from bus termini, whether it’s a top down directive or otherwise, and for the most part they continue to get away with it, while claiming their effort is at the behest of the party and support of Mugabe’s reforms. Receiving little support for their case from politicians, the Operators approached the police, to bring in the Jimmy Kunaka, the chief organizer of the Chipangano, and certain drivers alleged to be part of the ring. Kunaka and his associates called the charges “fabricated” and claimed that he had “protected the minibuses” and that “they should be thanking me,” adding that the group “deserved to be paid for loading the minibuses, but denied that he was the recipient of the cash.” Kunaka claims that he’s a provincial chairman within the party, as if it would absolve him of any criticism. And requisitely, he deflects, telling the Daily News that “these allegations are being made by agents of the MDC who are trying to tarnish my image. I will not lose focus.” (“Zanu pf terror,” 2012)

Being a culture of corruption, the party has resorted to making offers of appeasement to the opposition. Reportedly, from the state controlled newspaper ZimEye, “Thousands of dollars have been received by MDC-T officials behind closed doors.” The news was likely an attempt to damage the reputation of their political opponents, this time spinning a claim that is usually leveled against ZANU-PF.  The report suggests that Solomon Madzore, his wife, and his elder brother Paul received farm lands from the Indigenisation Office via a former ZANU-PF minister. It has been denied as “rubbish” by the MDC-T Youth leader that the claims were brought against. The Anonymous author which presented the charge states that “other unnamed MDC-T officials were rumoured to have received more money although the finer details could not be fully established at the time of writing” and that “the state media has compiled another list of MDC officials reported to have approached government for lands.” (“Tsvangirai-officials receive farms,” 2013) Whether the claim is factual or turns out to be fraudulent, the purchasing of political submission and the promise of a plot of land has long been an example of how ZANU-PF consolidates its support.

While there are beneficiaries of the Mugabe/ZANU-PF regime, outsiders, political opposition, and the apolitical Zimbabwean at-large suffer physically under their management. There has been incidences of beatings and rape by groups, who purport themselves to be acting on behalf of ZANU-PF. Once incident describes how three unidentified gunmen burst into a family home demanding ZANU-PF membership cards. When their young daughter couldn’t present one, the gunmen left with her, in order to “check some issues” because “she doesn’t have a ZANU-PF card.” She was taken to the bushland 10 miles away, chained to a tree, and raped repeatedly over the course of days before escaping and crossing the border into South Africa.  The incident happened in 2003 when the MDC-T first began challenging the Mugabe government, and the victim, now in the UK, is bringing her case to broader international attention. (Bulawayo 24, 2013) Another series of incidents, representative of almost every election in Zimbabwe since Independence, occurred in 2013 when youths near Chigovanyika went “door to door writing names of all MDC-T activists and threatening to ‘deal’ with them.”  They did this driving around in the ZANU-PF candidate’s car, in ZANU-PF regalia, attacking anyone representing another political party or dissident opinion. Activists received no sympathies from the local police inspector who is a ZANU-PF sympathizer. Also common is forcibly ordering people to vote for Mugabe. (Karimakwenda, 2012) While the President may not personally be one the “vicious animals” who perpetrated these offenses, they were carried out in support of him and the party—not the people—he leads. (“Zanu pf youths,” 2013)

According to Mugabe, the issue of land reform was the “last colonial question.” He has also stated his intention to “to settle it once and for all.” Thus far, it has been by violent confrontation and confiscation of white-owned farms by former “war veterans,” ZANU-PF party members, or other Mugabe loyalists.  “Possession of a ZANU-PF card (means) that one will access socioeconomic resources easier, and most importantly, one would not be persecuted by state and non-state actors.” This members-only club of Zimbabwe’s governance has only served to foster a culture of intimidation and corruption.

 

Works Referenced

Schleicher, A. (2004, April 12). Zimbabwe’s land program. PBS Online NewsHour. Retrieved from http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/africa/land/gp_zimbabwe.html

Zanu pf youths victimise mdc t supporters. (2013, August 16).Votewatch 263. Retrieved from http://votewatch263.org/reports/view/1028

Woman ‘gang-raped’ for not being a zanu-pf card holder. (2013, October 12). Bulawayo24 News. Retrieved from http://bulawayo24.com/index-id-news-sc-international-byo-37315.html

Zanu pf terror gang cornered. (2012, September 1).Nehanda Radio. Retrieved from http://nehandaradio.com/2012/09/01/zanu-pf-terror-gang-cornered/

Karimakwenda, T. (2012, April 13). Violent chipangano gang campaigning for zanu pf. SW Africa Radio. Retrieved from http://www.swradioafrica.com/2012/04/13/violent-chipangano-gang-campaigning-for-zanu-pf/

China donates more than a million t-shirts to zanu-pf. (2013, July 8). Bulawayo24 News. Retrieved from http://bulawayo24.com/index-id-news-sc-national-byo-32797.html

Tsvangirai-officials receive farms & cash from zanu pf. (2013, October 16). Zim Eye. Retrieved from http://www.zimeye.org/?p=91843

Zanu pf t-shirts scramble victim named. (2013, July 17).New Zimbabwe. Retrieved from http://www.newzimbabwe.com/news-11739-Zanu PF t-shirts scramble victim named/news.aspx