On Zimbabwe, Western left follows agenda set by capitalist elite

Mugabe's dictatorship is obviously far worse than Mubaraks. The fact that you are continuing to peddle such nonsense only reflects the quite desperate way you try to defend Mugabe against overwhelming evidence of his misrule

Why did the US State Department find no politically motivated killings by the Government or Zanu-Pf in 2006?

Why did Mugabe come 3rd in a poll of Africa's greatest leaders in an African magazine a few years ago?

 http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=84&art_id=qw1093446361762B216
August 25 2004 at 05:36PM
London - Zimbabwe's controversial President Robert Mugabe was voted the third-greatest African of all time, topped only by South Africa's Nelson Mandela and former Ghanaian president Kwame Nkrumah, in a survey for New African magazine announced Wednesday.

Mugabe, widely criticised outside Zimbabwe for stifling dissent and crippling the economy of his once prosperous southern African nation, was an "interesting" choice because "a high-profile campaign in the media has painted him in bad light", the New African wrote.

The London-based magazine said responses flooded in after the survey was launched last December to nominate the top 100 most influential Africans or people of African descent.

Are black governments in southern Africa in league with the 'brutal dictator' Mugabe?

Why do white people and their black followers hate Mugabe and other black people regard him as a hero?

Answers please.

From the Southern African Development Community (of south African states)
 http://www.sadc.int/news/news_details.php?news_id=927
ON THE POLITICAL SITUATION IN ZIMBABWE

The Extra-ordinary Summit noted and appreciated the briefing by H.E. President Robert G. Mugabe on the current political developments in Zimbabwe.

The Extra-Ordinary Summit recalled that free, fair and democratic Presidential elections were held in 2002 in Zimbabwe.

The Extra-Ordinary Summit reaffirmed its solidarity with the Government and people of Zimbabwe.

The Extra-Ordinary Summit mandated H.E President Thabo Mbeki to continue to facilitate dialogue between the opposition and the Government and report back to the Troika on the progress. The Extra-Ordinary Summit also encouraged enhanced diplomatic contacts which will assist with the resolution of the situation in Zimbabwe.

The Extra-Ordinary Summit mandated the SADC Executive Secretary to undertake a study on the economic situation in Zimbabwe and propose measures on how SADC can assist Zimbabwe recover economically.

The Extra-Ordinary Summit reiterated the appeal to Britain to honour its compensation obligations with regard to land reform made at the Lancaster House.

The Extra-Ordinary Summit appealed for the lifting of all forms of sanctions against Zimbabwe.

Thanks KW for proving my point. You serve the privatising MDC puppets. Mugabe and his party are like castro and Cuba. Under attack for their independence.

Addressed to those in denial of Mugabe's cruel, barbarous regime, like yourself Brian:

Evidence of a brutal dictatorship:
Ref:  http://www.cathybuckle.com/thisweek.shtml
To stay safe, stay silent.
Saturday 14th June 2008

Dear Family and Friends,
Every time the man insulted and complained in his ugly, raised voice, I could feel droplets of his spit on my neck. He was standing so close behind me that I felt distinctly uncomfortable. There must have been about twenty of us waiting in the queue at the supermarket but no one commented or said a word about the abusive tirade. The owners of this sort of behaviour are well known to us all and to stay safe we stay quiet. "Hey Manager," he shouted, "someone send for the manager. Why must I wait like this? I don't expect to have to wait." The more the man ranted the quieter it got in the shop. Two security guards standing at the exit doors did not come forward, instead they retreated out of sight and the shower of spit on my neck increased. "Hey, bring more tellers! Come on, I'm tired of waiting. Hey, you, how much is that chocolate? No, not the local one, the imported one. What about the newspaper, the imported one? How much? Hey, hurry up."

The owner of the abusive behaviour was a man of perhaps thirty. His head was shaven and he wore a thick gold chain around his neck. In his hand, on obvious display, he flicked a thick bundle of money. Under his loose, open-necked shirt we could all see the T shirt he wore with the face of Mr Mugabe on it.

This is the face of Zimbabwe a fortnight before elections: one man silences twenty. We see but we stay quiet.

Two men arrived on foot at a farm this week and they were carrying Zanu PF posters. As they began putting up the posters on the walls of outbuildings a worker tried to object - this is private property after all. "You are not allowed to complain," came the response. "Or maybe you are MDC?" The worker did not respond and the posters of Mr Mugabe were plastered on the walls of private property.

This is the face of Zimbabwe where election observers have begun arriving but are only allowed to watch from 8 am to 5pm.

A friend was at the hospital when the latest victim of political violence arrived. The victim was in his early sixties and accused of being an MDC supporter. Both his arms and one leg were broken , his skull was fractured and the injuries too severe to be treated at the local hospital.

This is the face of Zimbabwe where only 400 election observers will watch 12 million Zimbabweans on the 27th of June. 400 election observers to watch 9231 polling stations. One observer for every 23 polling stations - it is a mockery, an insult to a tired, broken, hungry and frightened population. Is this really the best Africa can do?
Until next time,
love Cathy
(Catherine Buckle or Cathy Buckle is a writer living in Marondera, Zimbabwe. She and her husband bought "Stow Farm" and spent over ten years turning its rocky grounds into fertile soil, making the farm productive and viable. However, in 2000 she lost her farm, home and livelihood to a group of "war veterans" who claimed rights to her land.

Buckle has written three books for children. Most recently she has written African Tears and Beyond Tears', two books telling about her struggle after she lost her farm and how, when she returned to it two years later, it had been turned into a squatter camp. Despite heavy pressures on writers by the Zimbabwean Government, Buckle writes a weekly e-mail telling of the current situation in Zimbabwe which is sent around the globe).

How can you call someone moronic and quote the bwana's wife as a radical source in the same post?

Oh Brian, you are so dumb.

As African government after African government (from Tanzania to Zambia) begin to gently withdraw their allegiance with Mugabe's government as her people dare to vote for the opposistion in their droves, hopeless apologists like you, Brian, remain in aloof denial, bewitched by anti-imperialist propaganda which give an at-best partial view of events in Zimbabwe, and at, worst, deliberately twist the truth - carelessly neglecting the actaulity of the economic crisis that has been presided upon in that country and the reckless land redistribution process which brought it about. Oh dearie, dear Brian. When will you wake up from your dreamy stupor.

I think Robert Marley would turn in his grave for you quoting his words for your treachorous cause.

btw, I see that you have consistently failed to answer any of the points I have previously raised with you, and so, have conclusively proved that you have lost the argument about what constitutes the actual record of Mugabe, Zanu PF and the state of the country he currently presides over.

So, back to the Bwana's wife - who do you think really moved all those rocks to find the fertile land?

Mark, seeing as you're here - if the Iranians started funding a political party in the UK - how many days do you think those who took the cash would be spending locked up?

;-)

Are you one of them Rhodesians Mark?

Why don't you lay of the personal attacks? They breach the guidelines.

So you're not here to discuss opposition parties that get funded by hostile powers - but you are here to discuss Guyana.

Did their head honcho get a gong after he was accused of massacring members of another tribe as well?

We should be told.

:-)

I am not "here" to discuss non-sensical hypothetical nonsense about political parties in Iran. Neither was I discussing the subject of Guyana, merely drawing your attention to the following article which draws interesting parallels between what has been happening in Zimbabwe and what happened in Guyana (namely, a parliamentary dictatorship which anti imperialism that has been used by many dictators to cover up the repression of their own citizens):
Pan-Africanists: Our Collective Duty to Zimbabwe, by Horace Campbell & Eusi Kwayana
Ref:  http://zeleza.com/blogging/african-affairs/pan-africanists-our-collective-duty-z\
imbabwe-horace-campbell-and-eusi-kwaya

While I can acknowledge the MDC's slight capitulation to the interests of western financial capital 9which I believe is exagerrated), unfortunately, you and your acolytes seem unable to accept Zanu PF's shortcomings. Instead you rely on half-witted lame comments that mascarade your inability to make any attempt at cogent argument, primaraily because you entirely lack one.

Listen buster you present a racist white woman's account of her fear of an assertive black man in a supermarket as evidence that Mugabe is a bad man..... and then you suggest that everyone who doesn't agree with you is unaware of the shortcomings of Mugabe.

But it just ain't that simple - the question that some of us are asking is why is this particular leader being demonised - note the point about when he got his gong - and further more are suggesting that we are being given one hell of a distorted picture of what is going on. Africa (like the rest of the f'ing world) is packed to the brim with corrupt power mongers - but most of them know when to play the West's game - which results in horrific hardship and poverty for millions, and uninterrupted dictatorships for them - and the only one that anyone ever comes to Indymedia to moan about is the one that Bush, Blair and Brown tell us is a bad man.

There is no doubt that Tsvangerai and Eddie Cross are puppets who intend to pursue a neo-liberal agenda that will not benefit the average Zimbabwean any more than the fall of Apartheid has benefitted the average black South African.

If I want to be told who the enemy is, I'll read the Daily Mail - but here we should have space to examine stories and find out what the agenda of the media and establishment is.

You're a lost cause and would do better trolling some board where they actually feel sorry for a privileged white woman whose wealth was undoubtably created by the hard work of under paid black workers.

Geddit?

I feel sorry for any victims of discrimination - black or white. The poor majority of the predominantly black population in Zimbabwe are the ones who have predominantly suffered.

News update from WOZA:
Wednesday 18th June

A third 'Women Of Zimbabwe Arise' (WOZA) member released from prison on bail; arrests in Mutare

The third of the WOZA members remaining in Chikurubi Women's Prison was finally released on bail last night. The delay in securing her release was due to the lawyer being unable to meet with the Magistrate to get permission for her release. All 12 members who had been granted bail are now out of custody. Jenni Williams and Magodonga Mahlangu remain in custody - 22 days after their arrest. Their bail had been denied by the High Court. All 14 members will appear in Harare Magistrate's Court on Friday 20th June on remand.

Meanwhile three women were arrested in Mutare on Monday 16th June in connection with a WOZA Zambia (sarong). The original woman had been arrested for trying to cross into Mozambique illegally. When police searched her possessions, they found the WOZA Zambia and immediately demanded to know where she had got it from. Two other women were then arrested after police illegally searched their houses and found WOZA t-shirts. All three women were taken to Mutare Central Police Station and questioned by plain-clothed police officers about WOZA and threatened.

"I feel sorry for any victims of discrimination - black or white.The poor majority of the predominantly black population in Zimbabwe are the ones who have predominantly suffered."

Thats splendid.

So you can understand the need for land redistribution then?

When Clare Short wrote this:

""I should make it clear that 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 to former colonial interests. My own origins are Irish and as you know we were colonised not colonisers.""

do you think that maybe she was being somewhat disingenuous, considering that white ownership of the land took place at gunpoint when the British state was the colonial power?

And do you think that the West is blameless when it comes to the suffering of the predominantly black population - or do you think that Mugabe is responsible for drought and that the sanctions have had no effect?

I hope you're not going to keep changing the subject like you accuse brian of doing.

Socialism's adherents do themselves no favours by continuing to have a blind spot over human rights abuses in countries such as Zimbabwe. The excesses of this brutality now have no bounds under Mugabe. Rather than demonise one man, I hold the party and its henchmen and the military responsible. Mugabe is merely it's mouthpiece.

Lets get one thing clear. Mugabe is a dictator and ZanuPF a dictatorship, it's anti-imperialist stance a justification for their brutality of their downtrodden citizens - who they have taken for granted. The logic - we're going to brutalise you into accepting your economic plight for the sake of the revolution! It has been an misconceived vanguard that, in the absence of Soviet patronage which may have helped them to a limited extent in the 1980s, considered itself entirely independent of the world economy. This may have been possible if the agricultural sector was producing enough food for it's own needs, but it plainly wasn't. Zimbabwe's plight may well have been made far worse because of sanctions, but it primarily came about because of the loss of food security/economic depression, and that depression and drop in food output has come about because of the way Mugabe's government handled the land reform process. He corrupted the land redistribution process in a cynical attempt to retain power in forthcoming general elections in 2000. The rushed land redistribution programme directly led to economic catastrophe, his greatest crime having been to not have mediated this process to retain a level of food production in the country when the UK and other donors were negotiating the recontinuation of the financial assistance package for land reform back in 1998. Mugabe and Zanu PF were irresponsible in holding their own economy and country to hostage to gain short-term political advantage, instead of a more sustainable transition which the UK, UNDP and other donor nations had drawn up with them in the 'Land Reform and Resettlement Conference' of 1998 (which Zimbabwe originally agreed to; under the auspices of the UNDP, the post-1998 land redistribution plan was to be rooted in Zimbabwe's 1992 Land Acquisition Act which ditched the previous "willing seller, willing buyer" clause, allowing them to buy land compulsorily for redistribution, and a "fair" compensation was to be paid for land acquired, instead of the market price compensation requirement of before). The 1998 UK stipulations of transparancy and poverty alleviation in the Land Conference must have been a deal too far for ZanuPF; in particular, the principle of transparancy would see an end to the appropriation of some of the assistance money which ZanuPF members had been benefiting from for a number of years until 1996, and would neccessarily make it difficult to easily deliver land to all members of it's support-base. With pressure coming from Zanu-PF's knife wielding powerbase - the war veterans - who were increasingly getting impatient with Mugabe and Zanu PF to deliver land redistribution, Mugabe then exploited the political capital out of resisting this whole arrangement with the UK just as Zanu PF's own domestic mandate was under threat from the resergent MDC.

The fact is also, that the 1998 deal would have meant 50,000km-sq earmarked to be compulsorily purchased out of a total area of 112,000km-sq in the first 5 years (which begs the question that, if the 4500 strong commercial farming community who owned 42.7% of the country - an area of
24 million acres or 97,124km-sq - was less than the 112,000 figure, this might suggest another reason why ZanuPF was against the deal, namely that land belonging to black capitalist farmers associated with ZanuPF was under threat within the very same deal).

Infact, Mugabe was ill-prepared to drag his country further into the war state because he'dd neglected to nurture the domestic economy and domestic food producing capability of his own country; he under-invested in agricultural capacity, and it's infrastructure from before the IMF austerity measures of structural adjustment came into play by 1990 (even then, he didn't consider the priority of it; instead, limited government finances were fritted away on state bureacracy, and payments to cronies .etc).

In these respects, Mugabe and Zanu PF have always taken their population for granted.

While MDC's apparant policy agenda appears to be a capitulation to western financial capital, this claim is largely exaggerated, espcially by the anti-imperialist rhetoric of ZanuPF. Infact, much of the talk of privatisation and shrinking the amount of state employees is really all about reducing the
nepotism and flabby, inefficient bureaucracy familiar to many post-independence socialist African states of which Zimbabwe is one of the last remaining.

The plain truth is that Zanu PF primarily represent an elitist black bourgeois and petite bourgeois and that Mugabe's regime is exposed as being primarily focused upon the protection of patronage networks predominantly within the ruling Zanu PF party, such as the war veterans. As in Guyana, anti imperialism and vanguardism has been used to cover up the repression of it's own citizens.
The political leaders have accumulated wealth in such a conspicuous manner that their consumption of luxury goods stands out in a country where more than 80% of the eligible workers are unemployed. Millions more Zimbabweans have been rendered as economic refugees in Africa and beyond.

Well, now Mark is writing in a completely different style .....

And apparently you can take land at gunpoint and then place conditions on the people you stole it from, by pretending that the state you run is nothing to do with the state that was responsible for taking the land and profiting from it, even though it is fact exactly the same state!.

Thats ever such a colonialist mind set - I'm not surprised that someone like Mugabe would have a probem with it.

So, now the claim is that Mugabe could have had the land but he didn't want black landowners who (allegedly) owned circa 15 000 square km/112 000 square km to be disadvantaged. And in any case it would have left 4500 people still incontrol of at least 20% of the best arable land - purely based on their connection to the colonial state.

You couldn't make it up.......

Oh-dear. You'dd do well to actually read what I have said (if you were indeed capable of doing so). Sorry to have upset your pretence of intellectual authority on the subject of Zimbabwe's land redistribution. Guess you are too proud to admit the basis facts when they stare back at you!

I'll spell out for you that part of the text which dealt with the land redistribution deal which Mugabe and ZanuPF backtracked from for the purposes of short-term political expediancy:
Mugabe and Zanu PF were irresponsible in holding their own economy and country to hostage to gain short-term political advantage, instead of a more sustainable transition which the UK, UNDP and other donor nations had drawn up with them inthe 'Land Reform and Resettlement Conference' of 1998 (which Zimbabwe originally agreed to; under the auspices of the UNDP, the post-1998 land redistribution plan was to be rooted in Zimbabwe's 1992 Land Acquisition Act which ditched the previous "willing seller, willing buyer" clause, allowing them to buy land compulsorily for redistribution, and a "fair" compensation was to be paid for land acquired, instead of the market price compensation requirement of before).

Mugabe blew it (& sacrificed the livelihoods of millions and the lives of hundreds of thousands to maintain his grip on power). get it?

"Mugabe blew it (& sacrificed the livelihoods of millions and the lives of hundreds of thousands to maintain his grip on power). get it?"

Remind us exactly how he 'blew it' - and where Ms. Short's Irish roots fit into it.......

Its bound to be riveting.

You'dd do well to actually read what I actually said in the previous comment.

It is nonsense to suggest that the British State of 1997-1998 and now is the same British State which invaded the country with Cecil Rhodes. This is the very misinformed vanguardism which has allowed a bunch of crooks to sabotage the resulting mass of fervour for it's own political and economic ends, at the expense of this mass of the population whom up-to-now they provided an incomplete land redistribution process without sufficient accompanying investment in education & training, irrigation, rural extension, marketing infrastructure or credit provision.

You said: "now the claim is that Mugabe could have had the land but he didn't want black landowners who (allegedly) owned circa 15 000 square km/112 000 square km to be disadvantaged. And in any case it would have left 4500 people still incontrol of at least 20% of the best arable land - purely based on their connection to the colonial state." I did not say that at-all. Please put your reading-specs on.

In particular, I draw your attention to the following part of the previous comment, so you can be of no doubt what I precisely meant:
Mugabe and Zanu PF were irresponsible in holding their own economy and country to hostage to gain short-term political advantage, instead of a more sustainable transition which the UK, UNDP and other donor nations had drawn up with them in the 'Land Reform and Resettlement Conference' of 1998 (which Zimbabwe originally agreed to; under the auspices of the UNDP, the post-1998 land redistribution plan was to be rooted in Zimbabwe's 1992 Land Acquisition Act which ditched the previous "willing seller, willing buyer" clause, allowing them to buy land compulsorily for redistribution, and a "fair" compensation was to be paid for land acquired, instead of the market price compensation requirement of before). The 1998 UK stipulations of transparancy and poverty alleviation in the Land Conference must have been a deal too far for ZanuPF; in particular, the principle of transparancy would see an end to the appropriation of some of the assistance money which ZanuPF members had been benefiting from for a number of years until 1996, and would neccessarily make it difficult to easily deliver land to all members of it's support-base. With pressure coming from Zanu-PF's knife wielding powerbase - the war veterans - who were increasingly getting impatient with Mugabe and Zanu PF to deliver land redistribution, Mugabe then exploited the political capital out of resisting this whole arrangement with the UK just as Zanu PF's own domestic mandate was under threat from the resergent MDC.


Mugabe blew it. get it?

"It is nonsense to suggest that the British State of 1997-1998 and now is the same British State which invaded the country with Cecil Rhodes. "

Hmmm - the very thought of a Nu Labour British state invading a country for its resources - perish the thought.

We're not getting anywhere - although you have done your utmost to prove the claim in the title of this thread.

I don't think you're really anything even remotely to do with the left though.

To All,(reagarding some of the left, I do not want to generalise).

I couldn't agree more with this article, (well mostly anyway). Hosni Muburak is a brutal dictator, who should be condemed in the strongest terms, (even more so than Mugabe). I've read many reports about beatings and the suppression of democracy, repression of demonstrations, lack of free speech, torture. Some of the left will not give much criticism for such a nasty regime. However, just because Mugabe's regime, (yes I did say regime), is somewhat less bad does not mean we can rationalise the state Zimbabwe is in. Mugabe is stubborn and proud, (excessive pride can be our downfall). Why couldn't of Mugabe groomed someone else in Zanu-pf to take the the presidency? A combination of stubborness, pride, incompetence and inability to 'let go' is the answer! It would seem Mugabe has half the wisdom of a 48 year old, rather than the full wisdom of an 84 year old! Having said that I condem the sanctions and regime change as un-pragamtic, unwanted interference and unhelpful to the people of Zimbabwe.

Jason

To all,

And let's not forget how little criticism is made of the regime in Ethiopia and Kenya. The west subverts democracy on these African countries, yet all the focus is on Zimbabwe!

Jason

With the greatest respect, neither Egypt, Kenya and Ethiopia have a starving population or a inflation rate of 350, 000%. Mugabe and ZanuPF are responsible for that.

You say you are on the left, but you do the left a disservice condoning economic mismanagement. I'm afraid you're hopelessly misinformed; neoliberalism is nothing to do with basic sound economic management like making sure yr country retains food producing capability whilst redistributing the main means of production - which in a predominantly agricultural economy is land. Zimbabwe did the latter at the exclusion of the former and te result is what is now happening in the country.

Basic economic management also means not printing loads and loads of currency in excess of the underlying productive resources of the country. Patrick Bond: "According to Reserve Bank governor Gideon Gono, 67 trillion Zimbabwean dollars (US$33 million at the effective exchange rate in January) were in circulation but could not be traced inside the financial system.The banks had only Z$2 trillion cash on hand. Said Gono, "The rest of the money is with cash barons who have opened mini-central banks at their houses. Unfortunately the people doing that are influential citizens with leadership positions."

Meanwhile, to the guy under the pseudonym "Emancipate" who still doesn't get it (despite continually coming back with trite comments that avoid the substance of argument each time) free yourself of your dogma and you might actually see the wood for the trees...

Emancipate, as I said b4, you rely on half-witted lame comments that mascarade your inability to make any attempt at cogent argument, primarily because you entirely lack one.

Indeed,how can a white zimbawbwean woman be regarded as anything but a fraud when it comes to a black leader! She must be old enough to remember life for black people under the Smith regime. AND she must also be aware that the whites did not buy their land, but took it using violence, from the very people its now being returned to.

if she is experiencing violence by black people,thats called KARMA.

Zimbabwe was and is and will be an independent counrty, noit controlled by racist whites or remote controlled by decayed or decaying empires.

The following excerpts are from a thoughtful article, and they show us that the attacks on Zimbawbe, besides being blatant neocolonialism, and revealing of the intentions of the perpetrators, are also illegal!

REMEMBER: If Zimbabwe were a real dictatorship, the US would be the first to support it:
 http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/US_ThirdWorld/dictators.html
=====================



1. 'America's Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act of 2001 authorised President George W. Bush to fund "opposition media" as well as "democracy and governance programmes" inside Zimbabwe.

In April last year, the US State Department confirmed for the first time that the US had sponsored "events" in Zimbabwe aimed at "discrediting" Mugabe. '

(COMMENT: Besides being an eg of one state interfering in the internal politics of another (illegal IN the US), its revealing that the Empire sponsored 'events' aimed at 'discrediting ' Mugabe. What events would these be? They sound like Covert ops. That they need such underhanded tactics to discredit Mugabe shows us how desperate the empire is and indicates the integrity of Mugabe's character.)

2.'It is reported that the opposition party MDC also received financial backing and political direction from Britain, Germany, Holland, Denmark and the US. A small number of political observers in the West have questioned the wisdom of Western interference in Zimbabwe's internal affairs.'

(Comment: This sort of thing if done in the US by a foreign power would be seen as both illegal and treasonous...you do know then meaning of that word?)

3. 'When America passed its Zimbabwe Act, US Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney asked during a debate in the House of Representatives why US officials were enforcing politically-motivated sanctions against a mostly democratic country:

"Zimbabwe is Africa's second-longest stable democracy. It is multi-party. It had elections last year (in 2000) where the opposition (the MDC) won over 50 seats in Parliament.

"It has an opposition Press which vigorously criticises the government and governing party. It has an independent judiciary which issues decisions contrary to the wishes of the governing party'

(Comment: Now we know MCKinney as one of the few US politicians with any integrity. She correctly informs us that Zimbawbe is a democracy not as dictatorship (additional proof: its not funded by the US), that it has a free press, is multi party and MDC has seats. Did you know any of this?)

4. 'Indeed, one of the ostensible reasons why America passed the Act was to protest against the presence of Zimbabwean troops in the Congo.

Yet, in 2001, both Uganda and Rwanda also had troops in the Congo; and neither Uganda nor Rwanda allowed opposition political parties or a free Press.

Yet both were allies of America, and received considerable economic backing from the US. '

(Comment: SADC asked Zimbawbe to send troops to aid the congo when it was invaded by rwanda and Uganda,. Note, these two countries are not democracies, yet we dont see any media interest in them at all.Why?

You can read the rest of this article here:
 http://cleveland.indymedia.org/news/2008/06/30586.php

Mark

I'm not the least bit interested in your claim that the neo-colonial British state is not in any way connected to the colonial British State - and it is up to each individual who reads the claim to see if they think the disconnect is valid.

You say that if Mugabe had done it the way that the Western powers dictated, then it would be different. Yet when he was cooperating with Britain on land redistibution, 4500 whites continued to maintain a stranglehold on prime arable land (still 70% after 20 years of cooperation).

I invited you to explain how Mugabe 'blew it' and you redirected me to a particulrly turgid bit of text which doesn't answer the question.

If you think the fact that I can no longer be bothered to engage with you means that you have won the debate and that neo-colonialism is the answer then so be it.

Emancipate
You wriggle out of dealing with the substance of my response to you by dismissing what I said as a "turgid" bit of text. Now you close yr hands over yr ears and claim you are right and I'm wrong because you have both lost the argument and neither have the guts to admit so.

Mugabe blew it because he played hard and fast with the long-term sustainability of the country's economic position ... and lost. And he did so completely unprepared with no systematic plan to embark upon the land redistribution he embarked upon.

Brian, yet again you reel off facts I already know about, yet seem unable to engage with the points I have already raised which question the quality of Mugabe and ZanuPF's governance of the country.

I do not deny that the west have been pressurising Zimbabwe into a corner to recommence neocolonialist relations; unfortunately, you lump all countries in the North as the "west" without recognising that it is not as black and white as you assume. I take "the western power" to be the US, IMF, World Bank (both controlled by the US), and the EC. The UK tradionally has been part of this "western imperialist alliance", but, looking closely at the facts of what has happened in Zimbabwe instead of restricting analysis to the dogma you steep yrself in, Britain's 1998 agreement with other "western" donors was entirely fair, recognising the 1992 Land Acquisition Act, empowering the government to "buy land compulsorily for redistribution, and a fair compensation to be paid for land acquired" (the act stipulated that landowners were given 30 days to submit written objections, though landowners could challenge in court the price set by the acquiring authority).

Mugabe was his worst enemy because ZanuPF overwrought grip on power meant that the requirement for transparancy was a pill to hard to swallow. Zimbabwe's problem has entirely been due to ZanuPF's overweening grip on power.
Horace Campbell and Eusi Kwayana : "It was only after the massive opposition from the working people in 1997 and after the loss of the referendum of February 2000 that the ZANU leadership opportunistically launched the Fast Track Land reform process. This opportunism has only been surmounted by the fact that the best land went to the political elite who was not real farmers. Opportunism and cronyism exposed the reality that for land reform to be beneficial for the mass of the population, reform must involve the political empowerment of the poor, especially farm workers. The new black landowners did not treat the farm workers any better than the previous settlers. If anything, this experience exposed the reality that the issues of the health and safety of farm workers and their children are just as important as the question of land ownership. Farm workers whether working on farms owned by blacks or whites must be paid a living wage and must have adequate protection from pesticides. They must be accorded full political and economical rights instead of being forced to live in a semi-slavery state. The experiences of land acquisition in Zimbabwe pointed to the reality that land reclamation by itself could not solve the problems of the Zimbabwean society. There had to be transformation of the credit, transportation, agricultural marketing, seed production, distribution of fertilizers, water management and all of the aspects of economic relations associated with agriculture."
Ref:  http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/06/401546.html

I admire any country that takes on the IMF and wins. Zimbabwe have done this. However, zimbabwe's government is corrupt and has mismanaged it's own affairs, and that cannot be countenanced. The intervention in the Congo, was more about allowing certain generals to accrue generous rewards of mining riches.

Subsequent posts about Zimbabwe on the Indymedia newswire, comments hidden from the newswire against Brian (deemed too insulting) and Brian and Emancipapte's inability to respond to the various points I have made about Mugabe and ZanuPF's mismanagement of the Zimbabwean economy, corruption of the land redistribution process, ZanuPF's continuation of working class subjugation and inability to admit to the extent of human rights abuses in the country by ZanuPF and the military all point to the incredible stupidity of this brigade of Mugabe/ZanuPF apologists whose pro-Mugabe propaganda and rational flies in the face of reasoned agrument or common sense.

mark, you wrote this:
'I admire any country that takes on the IMF and wins. Zimbabwe have done this. However, zimbabwe's government is corrupt and has mismanaged it's own affairs, and that cannot be countenanced. The intervention in the Congo, was more about allowing certain generals to accrue generous rewards of mining riches. '

Nice to wring that admission from you, BUT Zimbwabe was asked to send troops to the congo to aid it in its defence agaist attacks by Rwanda and Uganda...


'According to Ambassador Mubako, “the intervention of Zimbabwe troops in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)” is “one of the two main reasons for current Western hostility to Zimbabwe”.
“In 1998”, he told the Schiller Institute, “the DRC was invaded by Uganda and Rwanda, with the tacit support of the United States of America and Britain. The declared aim was to overthrow the young government of President Laurent Kabila.
“The DRC appealed to SADC [Southern Africa Development Community] for help; SADC agreed to send troops from Zimbabwe, Namibia and Angola. The invading forces were checkmated, and the plan to overthrow the government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, was foiled.
“The invading forces are still occupying, and exploiting the diamond and other mineral resources of the DRC, on behalf of the West.
Western silence over the Congo
“Two and one half million people have died in the process, in the occupied territories,
Zimbabwe’s support for the Congo and Laurent Kabila did not please imperialism
10
as a result of war, starvation, and diseases. There has been no outcry in the West about the occupation, exploitation, and atrocities committed by the occupying forces, and the deaths of so many millions of people. The West singles out Zimbabwe for vilification, because of their own failure to plant a puppet regime in [DRC capital] Kinshasa.
“Zimbabwe’s presence in the Democratic Republic of the Congo was a SADC decision, aimed at saving the people of the DRC from imminent danger and genocide; and this was part of the wider SADC goal, to assist the African people everywhere.
“Zimbabwe is proud of its role in the DRC, and we know that the Congolese people are happy and grateful for the assistance they receive from the government and people of Zimbabwe.”'
etc'
 http://www.cpa.org.au/booklets/zimbabwe.pdf

Brian, Zimbabwe may have been asked to intervene in the Congo, but their army chiefs certainly made it worth their while going there (the intervention was more an opportunity rather than the herioc anti-imperialist mobilsation you suggest). Don't be fooled into thinking that the intervention in the Congo allows the government to be allowed to be free from criticism in almost every other aspect of their careless governance of their own country. A couple of rights (this and their stance with the IMF) don't make up for the multiplicity of wrongs ZanuPF have enacted upon their own people, primarily through how they corrupted the land redistribution process through politicisation and subsequent mismanagement of the economy then and thereafter.

Brian, you are unable to address these points I raise about Mugabe's failures, Mugabe's rushed land redistribution push in 2000 was carelessly executed and IT IS THIS WHICH DISCREDITS HIM. Thomas Munjomo: "In Zimbabwe, agriculture may be regraded as the engine of the economy, providing the impetus for growth. Land redistribution must, therefore, be implemented cautiously in order to limit any adverse effects on present levels of productivity. Wide pre-reform changes may be necessary and these may include restructuring supporting services such as agricultural credit, marketing, research and extension, input supply and processing and storage. This could help to ensure increases in productivity without which redistribution alone achieves modest and/or temporary benefits. land reform, therefore, must be regarded as a process and not an end in itself. It is neither easy, nor costless; nor is it necessarily a complete panacea." (taken from "This Land of Africa", by Munjomo, 2000).

If you read the American act from 2001
you read that the IMF began removing the plugs from the Zimbabwean economy in 1999 and the IMF and IDA had pulled all the plugs by 2000, the same year the EU, UK and the US state department set up the 'Opposition" - The people of Zimbabwe are being punished for their support of Mugabe, Clair Short's nonsense was her excuse for the UK reneging on the Lancaster House agreement. It was all sorted at Lancaster House the old Colonial power were supposed to pay the compensation, the decent thing to do, but Short probably under orders from the IMF pulled a fast one.

I've seen very little evidence to support the demonisation of ZANU-pf all I hear from the BBC for example is rabid propaganda. If you want to get ZANU-pf's side of this you find their web-site is blocked. Yet you find copious anti Mugabe sites telling tales of demonisation with precious little evidence to support these 'stories'. MDC are also guilty of violence and both sides called for a stop to violence before the run off election.

Elsewhere you can find "stories' of demonisation that are demonstrably falsified.

The Global Corpratists want their clutches on Zimbabwe the MDC are their puppet opposition whether they realise it or not. They are factionalised e.g there's a minority faction led by someone who had control of all the mining clean ups, a single UK company got the deal that company's run by ex- SAS.

The guy from the state department that runs the MDC also runs courses in 'opposition' in Belarus and any where else the "have nots have too much" you know redistributive economies, Socialists and Liberals - These countries are targets of the neo-liberal myth spinning "free marketeers" who's policies ensure the rich get richer.

Zimbabwe has a constitution and elections - You can argue about freeness and fairness 'till the cows come home, but the USA is no paragon for electoral rectitude is it.