Why Zimbabwe Matters

A defining moment for Africa, South Africa and the world

Can rhetoric hold an entire country captive? Will the leaders (both inside Africa and beyond) stand by while evil men do something? In many ways, no news now from Zimbabwe is bad news for Zimbabweans. What happens now though will enlighten outsiders more about the realities and motivations of South Africa’s, Africa’s and the rest of the world’s leaders, than anything new we can learn about the poor beleaguered country itself.

The story of Zimbabwe is the story that anyone outside of Africa, contemplating investing in Africa, worries about most. An incisive article in TIME (A Lion Meets His Winter, by Alex Perry and Ian Evans) summarizes Zimbabwe’s history as being essentially a history of Africa: ‘They wrested their continent back from colonial rule only to plunder it afresh.’

Holland on Mugabe

While those who know and understand Mugabe (such as author Heidi Holland) are not surprised by Mugabe digging in his heels, what is surprising is the South African and international press trumpeting hopefully that ‘Mugabe must go’. Despite virtually no evidence and with Mugabe making no appearances himself subsequent to the polls, the press repeatedly (and hopefully) dismissed Mugabe, describing him as ‘teetering’. Heidi Holland says Mugabe is at his most dangerous once he perceives himself to have been ‘humiliated’. Holland also predicted (speaking to SkyNews) that ‘we haven’t seen the worst from Mugabe.’

Did journalists (local and foreign) suddenly forget about the last decade of history in Zimbabwe?
Despite 20 years of dictatorship, and obviously Mugabe’s old guard remaining comfortably entrenched and safely ensconced in their corridors of power, the media after the election seemed to run away on a series of hubris filled tangents – in a citizen-journalism-Hollywood-reporter-style of third-hand rumor-based reporting. After the US and international media’s complicity in promoting (even if by echoing other media) the invasion of Iraq, this looks similarly shaky.

Lame Duck Leadership from South Africa

The most powerful figure outside of Zimbabwe able to wield influence in Zimbabwe is South Africa’s President Mbeki. True to the ‘lame duck’ label, the President (some contend ‘in name only) described the crisis in Zimbabwe as ‘manageable’. ANC President Zumna went further, but not by much. These wishy washy hands-off approaches by the so-called leaders of Zimbabwe’s powerful neighbour say an awful lot about the new ruling psychology in South Africa.

Meanwhile the MDC (a rival party) could do nothing but announce their ‘victory’, and do so again and again, each subsequent announcement appearing increasingly ineffectual. All the while Mugabe was biding his time, waiting for the hubbub to die down.

Playing Poker

During this period the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (tasked by and answerable to the governing Zanu-PF), found itself in a quandary, having in its hands a vote count that ‘didn’t look good for Zanu-PF’. The ZEC and Zanu-PF’s hesitation upon discovering the election results itself also demonstrates to what extent *they* have been surprised by the popular sentiment of Zimbabweans, and to what extent the government has become disconnected and indoctrinated by their dear leader. The ZEC has since simply kept the voting results close to their chests, while Mugabe ordered a mopping up of those elements that he perceived to be rocking his boat. Journalists that were arrested included New York Times reporter Barry Bearak and Stephen Bevan, writing for The Sunday Telegraph.

CNN Speaks

Meanwhile, Fiona Forde, writing for South Africa’s The Star newspaper, exposed some of the troubling ironies going on, to some extent, behind the scenes. While George Charamba, Minister of Information, banned CNN from reporting on Zimbabwe’s election, a few exceptions were made to allow foreign media ‘accreditation’. The fee for accreditation? $1700. Presumably the handful of licenses were given to only those whom Mr. Charamba considered ‘friends of the state’.

But when news around the world took the sort of slant Charamba didn’t support, who did he call? CNN. Ford writes: “You couldn’t make it up if you tried: the presdient’s man reporting live on a banned TV station that was being carried live in his own country.” And what was Charamba saying? He was dismissing reports that Mugabe was about to step down.

Hesitation

Most of the news the outside world received in the end, Ford contends, was provided by these ‘unaccredited’ reporters roaming around Zimbabwe. The most recent reports describe Zanu-PF’s take on the election as filled with ‘inaccuracies’. Meanwhile even Zimbabwe’s High Court, expected to rule at 10am on Monday, appears hesitant to appear to be in a position to provide jurisdiction on any of the election issues.

Outside of Zimbabwe, Britain has committed to spending $2 billion a year for a Mugabe-free Zimbabwe. South African businesses and leaders, taking their cue from Mbeki, are adopting a wait-and-see attitude. One South African expert has described the Zimbabwe economy as being ‘about the size of Soweto’, a large township on the outskirts of Johannesburg.

While businesses outside Zimbabwe insist that property rights be restored, the war veterans are running amuck in Zimbabwe, spreading rumors and fear amounting to ‘white are coming to take back their farms’.

While one company – IMPLATS (the world’s second largest producer of platinum) – wants to build a power plant in Zimbabwe, South Africa and rest of the world seem to remain of the opinion that the country is to insignificant to warrant any form of real intervention.

With 80% unemployment, an inflation approaching 200 000%, Zimbabweans say “Zuakwana” (enough). Apparently, for Zimbabweans at least, it may take a while longer to reach absolute rock bottom.

Latest News:Zimbabwe election officials arrested
Tsvangirai holds talks in SA
Mugabe stokes poll tensions as Zimbabwe waits on legal bid