SADC Council of NGOs (SADC-CNGO), Southern African Trade Union Coordinating Council (SATUCC) & Fellowship of Christian Councils in Southern Africa (FOCISSA), representing broad membership in all SADC member states, are deeply concerned that the developments in Zimbabwe grossly undermines the regional community’s efforts to achieve regional integration and go against the spirit and objectives of the SADC Treaty.

Presidential run-off elections and their outcome are illegitimate and cannot be the basis for any solution for Zimbabwe. These elections took place under the conditions of politically motivated violence, arrests & detention, brutality and intimidation, which resulted in one party, ZANU-PF, contesting against itself, and subjecting citizens into submissiveness through repression, torture, murder, detention and destruction of property. Our leaders have allowed the Zimbabwean situation to deteriorate to where it is today, despite the fact that President Robert Mugabe and the ruling ZANU-PF party violated, and continue to violate fundamental values and principles of the SADC Founding Treaty, African Union’s Constitutive Act and United Nation’s Charter in that:

ZANU-PF MACHINATIONS
It is common knowledge that the Movement of Democratic Change (MDC) party won the parliamentary and presidential elections earlier this year. Based on its performance, it would therefore be fair to say that the MDC would probably have also won last week’s presidential run-off had it not pulled out at the last moment. Yet, despite these facts, Zanu-PF still remains in power today. Robert Mugabe has once again outmaneuvered his opponents in Zimbabwe and abroad.

No surprises there then, given that the government had set in motion a chain of events that were designed to pre-determine the outcome of the elections in its favour. Indeed, the MDC cited the systematic harassment, torture and murder of its supporters and leadership as the main reason for its withdrawal from the election.

Given this state of affairs and as the Pan-African parliament observer mission reported, the elections could not have been conducted in a free and fair environment. African leaders meeting in Egypt last week called for a government of national unity to be established in Zimbabwe, thereby conferring semi-legitimacy to Mugabe much to the dismay of the MDC and others who were hoping for outright condemnation and ostracisation.

However, the MDC was right to contest the elections in March even though it was faced with insurmountable odds. By participating in a contest they knew would be pre-determined and still registering more votes than the government, the party won a moral victory in the eyes of many Zimbabweans. That moral victory would have been enough to carry the MDC through last week’s presidential run-off election, which was also preceded by the same unfavourable conditions of the March election.

The barbaric acts of violence against foreign African nationals in South Africa over the past month appears to have drawn to a close. However, thousands remain displaced and face the daunting task of putting their lives back together. Government indecisiveness, continuing xenophobic sentiment and the bitter cold of winter remain sizeable stumbling blocks in advancing the process of their reintegration into South African society. Durban suffered mainly reverberations of the mass violence emanating from Gauteng, but reports of harassment, poor living conditions for displaced refugees and growing fear amongst immigrant communities continue to filter in. What are the underlining issues and are they new? More importantly, how do we move forward? Azad Essa speaks to Pierre Matate, Deputy Chairperson of the KZN Refugee Council, to find out more.
===

Q. What is the KZN Refugee council?

A. We try to bring back the dignity of foreigners who have been pushed down by the denial to documentation. The council is there to advocate that a person needs to be treated as a person, with respect and with dignity. We are also trying to stop the brain drain; we need to send people back home with skills so they can go back and rebuild their country. We strive to have programs to promote the dignity and pride in their homes. The South African government has failed, in all ways, to utilize the skills offered by foreigners. They leave them exposed and treat them like cows and sheep standing in a queue.

Q. What is the latest situation in Durban?

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/385/49182mugabe.jpgAfter the African Union issued a statement so tepid that it might as well as have come from a high-school student conference, low expectations have further diminished. The African Union can now be seen in the same light as its predecessor – the OAU, a drum that beats hollow when it most counts for the African citizen.

But nevertheless, Mugabe’s one-man act has irreversibly damaged his reputation. The extent to which Mugabe has misread the continental and international political climate is shocking.African people, who previously saw Zimbabwe as a metaphor of their own countries where the elite exist at the expense of the poor, are abandoning him en mass. Having lost international legitimacy to George Bush and Tony Blair - a remarkable feat considering the extent to which his two adversaries are hated - the African people became his last defense.

But there has always been the African people and their governments. In regards to the African Union statement, Bishop Desmond Tutu dismay by saying that he was "distressed that (AU leaders) have not thought it was important to declare the illegitimacy of the runoff and the illegitimacy of the Robert Mugabe administration.”

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/385/49180xenophobiaSA.jpgWEEK ONE

The sms’s came fast and furious. As furious as the fiery images we were subjected to by our television and our daily newspapers. I dreaded opening a newspaper for days - afraid of being confronted by yet another grisly product of the negrophobic xenophobic violence, which by the end of week three had claimed the lives of about one hundred people and displaced about 100 000, according to some estimates. The mind spins out of its axis, out of the normal.

As the Alexander Township burnt, I was reading text messages from my cappuccino-loving Tito Mboweni-fearing middle class friends. The messages were generally along these lines; “I’m so embarrassed to be South African right now”, or more engaging: “I’m so tired of feeling angry about this and not being able to do something about it…” . Email lists held similar messages of shame; at least Winnie Madikizela-Mandela went to Alexander and told the terrified victims cramped at the police station; “We are sorry, please forgive us. South Africans are not like this”, before hopping back into her nice car and driving back to her life.

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/385/49179SAviolence.jpgSHATTER… MYTHS

On Thursday 22 May, Cape Town changed forever. The xenophobic violence that started 1,200 kilometres away in Gauteng spread to Du Noon township. On Friday the TAC offices began to get reports of violence on trains and Somali shops being looted. The details were scanty, but by Friday evening the consequences became visible even in the affluent city centre. About 150 people sought refuge outside Caledon Square, the city's main police station. Hundreds more gathered at the central train station so they could catch a train to Johannesburg in the morning and then leave the country.

A group of mainly Congolese men at Caledon Square, explained that they had no trust in any South African government institution and demanded to see the UNHCR so they could be repatriated. They said they would not move from Caledon Square until then even if it rained. One of them is a published writer and another lost his computer training school, worth tens of thousands of rands, in the violence. Angry young Burundians screamed at me that they wanted nothing more to do with my country. Malawian youths mournfully described how they felt they had no choice but to return home.

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/385/49178zimwomensum.jpgOn March 29,2008 Zimbabwe went to the polls to elect its next government until 2013. Results for the Presidential elections were announced a month later and people in Zimbabwe maintained peace. From 2 April 2008 the government organised a retribution campaign to target those who allegedly voted for the opposition and since then there has been terror in mostly rural Zimbabwe with youth militia under the command of the army and police confirmed to have gone on to unleash terror in a campaign to teach the rural people how to correctly vote in the forthcoming presidential run off supposed to take place on 23 May according to the law but whose date remains unannounced. As a result of the terror campaign by the military and the youth militia, the most affected are women and children as 80% of Zimbabwean women live in the rural areas.

So far, over 800 homes have been burnt down, over 10 000 people have fled their homes, over 40 people have been shot dead in cold blood, over 7000 teachers have fled their schools as a number have been beaten in the eyes of parents and pupils, Doctors for human Rights report that over 2000 serious cases of physical torture and beatings have passed through their hands and a lot of those they treated have suffered serious fractures to an extent that most are permanently handicapped. The oldest victim of the post election violence is an old woman with 12 grandchildren all of them orphaned and whose son is alleged to have campaigned for the opposition.

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/385/49177markofcain.jpgThe farcical run off took place in Zimbabwe, predictably so, in the face of a world opinion dismissing the sham elections and the irrelevant result rightly so already in advance. Mugabe’s legitimacy is one of a dictator, whose power is dependent upon a military junta’s good will. If not for the securocrats and their silent coup after the first round of elections, Zimbabwe would now be governed by political office bearers who would have the legitimacy of a majority of the voters. Even with the state organized terror machinery intimidating the people and forcing them to vote for an unwanted aging despot, his “victory” is nothing but a fallacy and mockery. Shame on SADC, who were willing to witness such a defiance of the people’s will.

Intimidation, repression, physical harm, torture, rape and murder were all part of a so-called election campaign. At the end, the contester - who unlike six years ago in 2002 - could no longer be denied the claim to legitimate political power . Morgan Tsvangirai withdrew for admirably sound ethical and moral reasons. After all, the regime had disclosed its intentions through the systematic use of brute force in ruthless way, To have contested the second round would have been to add further misery, mutilation and death to the long register of human rights violations bordering on crimes against humanity. That would have been an irresponsible symbolic political act.

[email protected] or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org/

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/384/48997zimpolice.jpgOn the 21st May 2008 the Solidarity Peace Trust (SPT) released a report titled Punishing Dissent, Silencing Citizens: The Zimbabwe Elections 2008. The report made it very clear that ZANU PF had embarked on a systematic programme of retributive violence in response to its electoral defeat on March 29th 2008. The report included an evaluation of the violence up until that point based on interviews with 681 people.

In addition to this, Appendix 3 of the SPT report contained information provided by a key informant who relayed their knowledge about the Joint Operational Command's (JOC) election strategy. Those who have been following events in Zimbabwe closely will see that much of what the source described to SPT has since come to fruition. (Appendix 3 of the report is included at the end of this mailing)

Sokwanele received similar information at the time that confirmed and supported the information that was published in the SPT report.

Our source has recently provided us with more information, this time in relation to JOC's preparations and plans for the Presidential run-off poll. Despite the fact that one of the candidates has withdrawn from the poll, the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC) states that the Presidential run-off election on June 27 will proceed. We are concerned that JOC's plans and strategies will continue as well.

We are so worried about the information relayed to us that we have decided to make it public in the hope that some of the obvious dangers can be averted. At this point we cannot verify whether what has been outlined to us will happen, all we can say is that our source has provided credible information before now and that much of what has been relayed to us in the past by our source has happened. There is evidence already that some of the strategies outlined below have already been taking place.

On these grounds we believe that this new information presents very real risks to safety and security of the people of Zimbabwe.

We ask that it is read carefully and that people forward the information to all their local media sources to warn of what could possibly happen.

Sokwanele has supplied various other sources with this information too, beyond this mailing

The information, conveying JOC's preparations and plans for the Presidential run-off poll, is as follows:

Zanu PF youths to be in every constituency, working with war vets, CIO, and the police to make sure Tsvangirai does not hold a successful rally. To do everything needed to frustrate his campaign.

Do everything possible to prevent MDC agents being deployed at polling stations. If necessary eliminate MDC polling agents.

All the voters in a ward should surrender their IDs to the village head, and have their names taken down. On the day of voting, the respective village heads should queue outside the polling agent with each member (voter) with a respective number. As much as possible voters shall profess ignorance of the ability to write on his/her own. Agents in the polling stations will be helping voters to mark X where it is necessary and forth with take down the patterns of voting against each individual.

The indoctrination bases are now fully armed, and most are getting logistical support from the army. Weapons held in the Darwendale armouries are to be distributed to the veterans, including bombs and grenades. Some polling stations to be bombed. MDC youths to be implicated and arrested.

War veterans to kill MDC MPs, working together with the Army and the CIO.

In the event that Tsvangirai still wins, the Nigerian scenario to be implemented. Abiola vs Abacha. MPs to be arrested and the electorate silenced. No results to be announced by ZEC in favour of Tsvangirai. All MPs who speak out shall be charged with treason and jailed.

Polling ballot boxes to be stuffed in remote areas by death squads who will be armed. They have been instructed to abduct and kill whoever gets in their way.

The elections to be ward based and the voting pattern of the 18 – 45 age group changed to make sure this group is disturbed. Results from wards to be scrapped, and the only source of information will be the constituency command centre. Life is to be made difficult for those seeking clarification on their names. Every police officer not to attend to names missing from the roll especially using radios.

Governor Gono to finance all the projects, including the buying of weapons.

All strategic points to be heavily guarded.

A lot of rigging to be done especially on postal ballot boxes. All forms of propaganda to be dismantled including the media. No officer shall watch any radio or TV station outside Zimbabwe state news. Each officer to vote in the presence of an intelligence officer.

Zimbabwe Intelligence Corps (ZIC) to provide logistics on the torturing of MDC legislators. All to be silenced. All retired generals to be recalled to national service.

More terror to be unleashed after elections. More people to be claimed, more displacements in the rural areas. Chiweshe to provide the statistics of voting patterns to assist in determining where terror to be unleashed.

MDC agents to be bribed in the rural areas – substantial amounts to be offered.

Information referred to earlier, taken from the Solidarity Peace Trust report 'Punishing Dissent, Silencing Citizens: The Zimbabwe Elections 2008'

Appendix Three: Interview with key informant on election strategy of JOC (see below)

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/384/48995electionlinezim.jpgSA… and other African countries need to recognise that the fate of Zimbabwe is in their hands. We are not seeking the west to rescue our country, we are calling on our brothers and sisters to help us at our most dire need. The Heads of State in the SADC region now need to stand with the people of Zimbabwe and not its political leaders, writes Janah Ncube.
====

Morgan Tsvangirai dropped a bombshell by his withdrawal as a candidate from the Presidential runoff elections scheduled to be held on June 27, 2008. This certainly cannot have been an easy decision for Mr. Tsvangirai who recently got the majority vote of 48% over President Mugabe’s 43%. The first time he contested as a candidate in 2002, the elections were marked with significant irregularities and he lost. This time, he does know for a fact that the majority of voters wanted him to be the next President but due to a recently introduced Constitutional clause, the next President of Zimbabwe must have 51% of the votes.

His decision has caused much chaos and confusion and a lot of people have been left perplexed and some feel betrayed by this move. Mr. Tsvangirai in his statement states his reasons for withdrawing as being state sponsored violence, his crippled campaign, the decimation of his party’s structures, the partisanship of the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission, MDC media blackout, the threats of war by the ZANU PF candidate and the backing they have received from the leaders of the army and the police and the planned rigging by ZANU PF.

The whole world has been following events in Zimbabwe since March 29 2008 when Zimbabwe held its harmonized elections whose results took over 2 weeks to be released. The situation has continuously deteriorated to become grim, tense and unbearable for Zimbabweans. The escalated levels of violence have seen the continuous brutal murder of ordinary Zimbabweans, their being mutilated, defaced, and having some of their body parts dismembered. There is a lot of blood being spilt in Zimbabwe right now in name of patriotism and change. As said by the [email protected] or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org/

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/384/48994inflationzim.jpgThis is not the first time that America and the West, bankrolled and oversaw a one party dictatorship or military rule for decades only to ditch the regime when it is no longer serving their interests, writes Mphutlane Wa Bofelo. But only after dusting off blood from their hands and clothes, and presenting themselves as the moral voice, urging for war crimes against the very regime that they baby-seated, reared and mentored.
=====

The political and economic meltdown in Zimbabwe is traceable to the hold on the country’s policy alternatives and developmental possibilities by the restraints of the Lancaster House concessions and the constraints of the Structural Adjustment Programmes. Robert Mugabe and his ZANU (PF) implemented these programmes to the letter from 1981 up to 2000. Mugabe and ZANU’s reward was the blindness, silence and tacit collusion of the western powers in the genocidal attack on the people of Matabeleland in what is called the Gukurahundi.

Despite the fact that Mugabe and Zanu PF continued with the culture of violent clampdown on political dissidence and repression of media freedom and the freedom of association and assembly, the custodians of democracy remained prepared to portray Mugabe as an astute statesman and scrupulous ruler. For as long as he trod the path of the Washington Consensus and cracked his whip against labour and ensured that there was no room for leftists to raise their heads in Zimbabwe, Mugabe could reign on opposition to his rule by any means at his disposal.

Throughout the 1990’s, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank and the G8 gave a standing ovation to the social policy path and political economy trajectory pursued by Zimbabwe, South Africa, Uganda and Ethiopia. As late as 2001 political science textbooks at tertiary institutions celebrated Mugabe of Zimbabwe, Mandela of South Africa, Museveni of Uganda, and Zenawi of Ethiopia as the crème de la crème of African leaders, and hailed them as former guerillas who had woken up to the realism of running a country.

In 2001 popular disenchantment with the failure to meet liberation expectations and pressure from the war veterans forced the land reform project on the agenda of Mugabe and Zanu PF. Mugabe and Zanu PF then failed dismally to come up with a systematically designed land reform project, with clear targets, performance indicators and monitoring and impact assessment mechanisms. Instead of genuine land reform aimed at sustainable development of communities, they opted for a mixture of anarchist, populist, propagandistic theatrics and bureaucratic centralism, elite’ self-enrichment, and the politics of cronyism and patronage aimed at using the land reform project to prop up the power of the establishment.

Suddenly western governments, with the aid of the media and our ‘fuckademics’ started to shift the focus away from the suffering landless, jobless and poor multitudes of Zimbabwe - who continue to live in utter poverty and squalor - to the fate of white farmers. Both the Western governments and the White farmers in Zimbabwe never raised even a murmur of protest against the rule of Mugabe for as long as their bread remained buttered. All of a sudden, everybody forgot that Mugabe built his repressive machinery under the watchful eyes of the super powers and the so-called multilateral institutions. Nobody cared to remember the role played by the restraints of Lancaster House agreement on a legal-constitutional and peaceful land reform process in Zimbabwe and the ravages of the market forces unleashed by the Structural Adjustment Programmes on the people, economy and environment of Zimbabwe.

Whenever the issue of the war crimes against Mugabe is raised, often the focus is not the crime of the Gukurahundi or the genocidal impoverishment of the people through handing them over to the brutality of the market forces for a decade of subservience to the Washington Consensus. The focus is rather the “crime” of taking land from white farmers. When the Gukurahundi is mentioned no one speaks about the need to also charge Mugabe’s main backers throughout this period - the super powers and the Washington institutions - IMF and World Bank.

This is not the first time that America and the West, bankrolled and oversaw a one party dictatorship or military rule for decades only to ditch the regime when it is no longer serving their interests. But only after dusting off blood from their hands and clothes, and presenting themselves as the moral voice, urging for war crimes against the very regime that they baby-seated, reared and mentored. From Mobuto Seso Seko, Saddam Hussain, Charles Taylor and the Taliban to Uncle Bob—the list of rulers utilized and dumped like used condoms by Uncle Sam and his brethren is endless.

There is no prize if you guess what trajectory Morgan Tsvangirai and his Movement for Democratic Change are most likely to tread if they ascend power. My two year old son, Goitsemodimo, has whispered to me that Zimbabwe will be under the tyranny of the market and remote control by “the empire.”

*Mphutlane Wa Bofelo is a writer, activist, life-skills facilitator and performance poet who has been published in several journals, websites and anthologies and has performed at various events.

*Please send comments to or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org/

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/384/48993hunger.jpgCIDSE, APRODEV and the Ecumenical Zimbabwe Network (EZN) welcome the UN Security Council statement condemning the campaign of violence against Zimbabwe’s opposition party. However, diplomatic efforts are clearly failing to provide adequate protection to the people of Zimbabwe or to guarantee a democratic electoral process. CIDSE, APRODEV, and EZN reiterate their call for the United Nations (UN) to conform with its own Security Council resolution 1674, which confirms the “Responsibility to Protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity” as a fundamental international norm.

With no possibility for a legitimate Presidential election on 27 June, the international community should act immediately to ensure that ballots are not replaced by bullets. “What is needed” said John Stewart, Director of NOVASC, a Zimbabwean human rights NGO “is international intervention. The direct intervention of an international, African led presence to guarantee security and the protection and safety of the people is necessary. Militias have to be disarmed, disbanded, demobilised; the state security agencies must be reined in and kept under scrutiny, to prevent them continuing with their campaign of violence and terror, and to prepare the processes of a return to the rule of law and extensive security sector reform”. Concerted international action is needed to encourage and accompany a determined process to protect and assist the Zimbabwean people, while creating the conditions for legitimate elections in as short a time as possible.

Ahead of the first round of elections in Zimbabwe, CIDSE, APRODEV, EZN and partners in Zimbabwe cautioned that the elections could not be free or fair. “We fear that the government will ruthlessly use fraud and intimidation to steal the elections,” said John Stewart at the time. These fears were unfortunately well founded. .Since 29 March, the world has watched the electoral process unravel, the situation deteriorate, and the people suffer. Across the country instances of political killings, violence and torture have been well documented, with over a hundred deaths reported, thousands tortured and beaten and tens of thousands displaced[1]. The June 21st withdrawal of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) from the second round of the Presidential election must finally end the pretence of a democratic process.

In a country where more than one in four children is orphaned and an estimated four million people are vulnerable and in need of aid, the population is being intimated and lives put at risk by government restrictions on humanitarian aid distribution. Since the government’s decision of 4 June to ban humanitarian organizations from distributing aid international and local aid agencies, including CIDSE, APRODEV and EZN members, have been forced to suspend vital support to the Zimbabwean people. The poorest and most vulnerable communities are being hit hardest.

As a joint statement on May 28th from the Archbishops of Canterbury and Cape Town pointed out the violence has extended to attacks inside Anglican churches. The Zimbabwe Catholic Bishops Conference has called “for an immediate cessation of violence and all provocative statements and actions” and warns that “electoral processes and outcomes are not an excuse for breaching God’s commandments”[2] Churches worldwide joined in a day of prayer for the people of Zimbabwe on 22 June.

*Please send comments to or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org/

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/383/48975deadsorghum.jpgSemi- arid Karamoja region in the remote North Eastern part of Uganda is made up of five districts; Moroto, Nakapiripirit, Kotido, Kaabong and Abim.

The region presents a unique geographic, developmental and humanitarian challenge to Uganda’s stability and development. The region constantly has the nation’s lowest scores in key development and humanitarian indicators. Mortality and malnutrition levels routinely surpass recognized crisis thresholds.

Over 100 people, amongst them children, the elderly, breast-feeding mothers and people living with Aids have so far died of hunger. And about 8,000 people have migrated to the neighboring districts.

The region has not won the urgent attention of enough governmental and non-governmental actors. AWARE-UGANDA, which operates in the Karamoja region would like to bring to your attention the plight of the Karamoja people as their basic right to adequate food is violated.

In addition to death, the famine is causing severe hardship and human suffering and has grave impacts on the women of Karamoja and their families. The efforts by the World Food Program in Karamoja and other parts of Northern Uganda their supply are just a drop in the ocean.

We appeal to you for assistance.

*For more details, please contact Mrs. Loumo Grace Action for Women and Awakening in Rural Environment AWARE-UGANDA at, [email][email protected] or call 256-772-516458.

*Please send comments to [email protected] or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/383/48974oilrig.jpgWe could be on the threshold of a new phase of globalisation, one where there will be a new protectionism, more regional trade and regional economic activism and where governments will be forced to address the problems of the vulnerable middle class and poor, argues John Samuel.
====

Oil is back in the centre of economic and political discourse, at the international, national and local level. What does this mean for the future of the economy and geo-politics?

The roots of this phase of economic globalisation lie in the economics and politics of the 1970s. The protagonist was oil. There was a food crisis too. This perpetuated the new cycle of debt and highly indebted poor countries. The economic turmoil of the 1970s (due to the oil shock, saturation of the role of the State and consequent inefficient and ineffective public expenditure, food crisis, and consequent new indebtedness of poor and developing countries) paved the way for the new mix of neo-conservatism, neo-liberalism and the third way. The indebtedness and balance of payment crisis in many countries gave unprecedented power to the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank -- and the consequent economic and policy conditionalities they imposed. That is how the story of the new phase of economic globalisation, a mix of neo-conservatism and neo-liberalism – the Reagan-Thatcher prescription -- commenced, sometime in the early-'80s.

While there are similarities between the oil shock, food crisis and economic conditions of the '70s and the one we are beginning to face now, the political and economic context are not the same. The first 25 years after the Second World War saw unprecedented and sustained economic growth in Europe and America. In fact, the demand created by reconstruction activities after the war, the aid system in the '50s, and the capabilities in Europe without the burden of maintaining the colonies, helped to a significant extent to propel this economic growth. In other words, there was a significant demand within western countries and internal market competence to deliver the supplies.

By the '70s, the market got saturated in terms of demand, and the State got saturated in terms of the sustainability of public sector spending and effective social welfare. As a result, there was a real compulsion to find new markets elsewhere and to restructure the tax and public expenditure pattern. The rise of Japan and the competitive edge of Japanese products in Asia, the oil rich Gulf countries and the United States also created a sense of urgency to create new markets. To a certain extent the European Union was a sort of political solution to enable market integration to address the issue of market saturation.

The oil shock, and the consequent debt trap and balance of payment crisis, was a great opportunity for OECD countries to develop a combined strategy of trade, aid and debt and the conditionality approach to open up the markets of developing countries and less developed countries in Latin America, Asia and Africa. The economic and political implosion of the USSR in the late-'80s also created a crisis of the centralised policy planning mode and a non-dollar-based trade framework (there was almost a barter system between the USSR and many other countries). In fact, more than the ideological threat of communism, the West was worried about trade (in oil, arms and other commodities); such a system was a global road block for the western capitalist mode of trade. After the fall of the USSR, it was a free ride for finance capitalism and the neo-liberal mode of policy and trade framework.

The present situation is very different. The growth of the last 15 years is propelled by the growth of Asian economies, of Latin America, and parts of Africa. For the first time, the population of China and India tend to become an economic asset, instead of a liability, in terms of productive capability and domestic market expansion. Such a growth is partly due to new infrastructure development in different parts of Asia (in fact, much bigger in scale than the one in Europe in the '60s), and also due to the competitive edge in terms of cheap labour and skills. The finance capital market too played a key role in propelling new investments in the stock market that, in turn, propelled the economy. Asian countries are beginning to play a competitive game and are also using the finance capital market to acquire market share, productive capacities and big multinational corporations. Many of the takeovers (by Tata, Mittal and others) are of immense symbolic importance.

Due to the flight of jobs and due to the crisis of social development, there is a fast emerging, vulnerable, middle class and poor across Europe and the US. There is the added shade of identity politics (dramatically different from the old communist “threat”). The migrant communities which provided the crucial labour inputs during Europe's growth period have become a political liability now. This means there is more political and economic insecurity among a large number of the working class, vulnerable middle class, and the poor. All European countries are facing a new internal crisis of politics and economics (particularly in the context of the alienation of Muslim communities born and brought up in Europe).

This means there is a shift in the political sociology at the grassroots level in the USA, the EU and other parts of Western Europe. Many European countries such as Italy, Spain and France are facing a serious economic crisis. This also means that there can be a shift in the macro-political economy and geo-politics. Hence, the context is dramatically different from that of the economic crisis of the '70s. Today, there is no crisis of balance of payment (so far) and there is lots of foreign exchange reserves. There are vibrant domestic markets in India and China. In fact, the growth is sustained by the economic growth in Asia.

It seems the ongoing economic troubles, oil price hike, and food crisis, will be the springboard for another key political and economic shift in the world. The price of oil climbed from $10 a barrel in 1999 to $135 in the second week of June 2008. Goldman Sachs says it will hit $200 within the next 24 months! This means that the price of oil has risen by 900% in the last one decade. Oil spending as a share of global economy may cross 7% (more than the peak in 1979). Oil drives the engine of the present global economy. The US consumes 25% of the world output. Though demand in China and India increased, China consumes 9% and India consumes only 3% of the total oil demand.

As the price of oil climbs, commodity prices will go up. This also means that food prices will be relatively higher in the international market. The oil price increase is bringing about new political tension and turmoil. But if the price goes up, at least in some segments there will be a decrease in demand. The SUV market in the US and elsewhere was already in a slump and will face a crisis. This will also have consequences in countries like China and India which sustain the global economic growth (and demand for commodities) to a large extent. It will be difficult to sustain subsidy levels for oil in India and governments will be forced to increase the price (there is no other way). A mix of inflation, increasing oil price and deceleration of the economy (for example in real estate) can create new political tensions and equations in many countries, including India.

The increasing price of oil will make the oil-producing countries very cash rich. So the prominence of Russia, Iran, Venezuela, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf countries will significantly increase. This may also induce a new arms race -- led by Russia. On the one hand it will give rise to a multi-polar world, and on the other hand it can propel a war. It is also interesting to note that most of the oil-producing countries are run by autocratic or authoritarian regimes, many of them in the Arab world.

The role of National Sovereign Funds of Gulf countries will increase dramatically. It is estimated that if the price of oil price climbs, six Gulf countries will have a value of $95 trillion dollars (the American economy is around $13 trillion) -- about twice the size of the public equity market. Already Sovereign Wealth Funds of the Gulf countries are buying up the major and controlling stakes of big western banks and this will create new protectionism. A possible inflation (if it crosses 15%) in Asia can cause serious economic trouble. There will be a devaluation of currencies in these countries -- with potential trouble for the finance capital market. There is a real trend of inflation in most countries in Asia (Vietnam is the highest, Thailand is almost 10%, and India, China and others too face it) and the oil price hike will further accentuate the problem. Persistent inflation and stagnant economic growth may result in stagflation in different parts of Asia, including India.

All this means that (a) this phase of economic globalisation will not be sustainable and it will be a transit to the next phase, (b) there will be a new protectionism (particularly in terms of commodity markets, food etc), and (c) There will be more regional trade and regional economic activism.

So, there will possibly be a tendency to regulate finance flow and there will be more restriction for commodity markets. The elections and politics of Europe and the USA will be forced to address the issue of the vulnerable middle class and the poor. Look at the election promises in the USA – it's about jobs. The health system and social security are also top of the agenda. There will be political pressure to increase the allocation for the social sector and for creating new jobs and a reduction of foreign aid (this is what happened in Japan from 1999 onwards).

The next US President will be forced to initiate new protectionism and new social welfare measures. This will have an impact on global trade. The oil price hike may affect travel as well as trade (due to higher freight charges). All this does not mean a “reversal of globalistion”. It means a new phase of globalisation along with a new protectionism in many countries. There will be scope for a New Deal and a new kind of social democratic politics in Europe and elsewhere.

The world is on the threshold of a new phase. The present economic slowdown is likely to persist for another four years. It will influence the shape of the economy, political dynamics and geo-politics in the years to come.

*John Samuel is a social activist and the International Director of Actionaid.

* Please send comments to or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org/

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/383/48972africanleaders.jpgTo: President Kikwete, Chairperson of the African Union
To: President Yar’Adua, Chairperson of the Peace and Security Council, AU
To: President Mwanawasa, Chairperson of the Southern African Development Community
To: Dr Jean Ping, Chairperson of the African Union Commission
To: Members of the UN Security Council

Your Excellencies,

As you know, Zimbabwe is in the throes of a devastating political, economic, and humanitarian crisis. A presidential run-off election was scheduled for June 27th but the widespread political violence inflicted on the population has overshadowed the poll to the point where the opposition feels it cannot participate. Indeed President Mugabe insists he would remain in office regardless of the results, mocking the courage of those voters still willing to go to the polls. Meanwhile men, women and children are daily bludgeoned, medical care is scarce, homesteads burned, food is exhausted and the thousands displaced are on the move. The depth of the crisis has moved the governments of Tanzania, Angola, Nigeria, Rwanda, Kenya, Senegal, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Zambia and Botswana to express their concern and to criticise the government of President Robert Mugabe.

African leadership is desperately needed at this time; we urge you to launch an urgent program of action to accomplish the following goals:

- Cessation of the violence and repression through deployment of a protection force and monitors, and containment of perpetrators;

- Restoration of aid flows and urgent increase of humanitarian assistance;

- Convening of a process to secure a political solution establishing effective governance, restoration of the rule of law, independence of the judiciary, along with necessary steps to allow economic recovery and a rapid return to democratic rule.

- Prevention of any further destabilizing spillover into the wider region.

THE DEPTH OF THE CRISIS

ZANU-PF responded to President Mugabe’s loss in the first round of elections on March 29, 2008, with violent retaliation against the population, characterized by brutal beatings, burning of homes and villages, harassment, arrests, and torture. The violence is largely one-sided, perpetrated by agents of the government and ruling party and the impact has been devastating; indeed, what Zimbabwe is now experiencing is more akin to conflict, than an election. In such conditions, while we salute the determination of the voters to be heard, any election result must lack credibility.

The Zimbabwe Association of Doctors for Human Rights states that it has documented so many cases of systematic violent assault and torture that at times its members have been overwhelmed by the numbers. In May alone ZADHR members saw 1007 patients suffering from extensive injuries sustained during these violent attacks. A hospital in Harare says it has seen almost 2000 victims of violence and torture since the first round poll. The opposition MDC states that at least 70 of its supporters have now been killed and 25,000 forced from their homes as a result of the state’s campaign of violence.

A CONFLICT SITUATION

As observed by President Kagame of Rwanda, there is no reason to hold a vote if you do not intend to abide by the outcome. Yet President Mugabe declared that he would refuse to cede power, regardless of the result. He thereby confirms that an election cannot resolve Zimbabwe’s crisis. President Mugabe even threatened more violence, warning of “war” if the vote goes against him. Continental leaders and regional neighbours can have no clearer indication of the threat to regional peace and security and the impending and increased danger to civilians, a threat that is even greater if the election is not completed. We call on you to find solutions for Zimbabwe that go beyond merely salvaging the election.

NEIGHBOURS AT RISK

Regional governments bear a significant burden as a result of the economic and political crisis. Approximately 25% of the people of Zimbabwe have left. Millions of them are now in neighbouring countries and their needs impose a strain on already stretched domestic social services and intensify tensions between the host population and immigrant communities. This flow of people across borders contributes to active instability and conflict in the region as evidenced by the recent xenophobic attacks against immigrant populations in South Africa. The Southern African Development Community (SADC) has recognized the threat that the situation in Zimbabwe poses to peace and security in its region by mandating President Thabo Mbeki’s efforts to mediate a resolution to the crisis between the ruling party and the opposition. It is time to make resolution of Zimbabwe’s problems a priority for the continent.

AFRICA’S RESPONSIBILITY TO ZIMBABWE’S CITIZENS

Although SADC must be commended for its attempts so far to resolve the crisis in Zimbabwe, its effort has not been repaid. The ruling party is effectively refusing to subject itself to a democratic contest, and waging a violent conflict against its citizens, aggravating a humanitarian crisis. As such it has lost legitimacy, triggering a necessary shift in Africa’s stance. Under the Constitutive Act of the African Union, member states are enjoined to “promote and protect human and peoples’ rights in accordance with the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights” and the African Union has an obligation “to intervene in a Member State pursuant to a decision of the Assembly in respect of grave circumstances, namely war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity.” There is extensive documentation in Zimbabwe today of torture and killing of named individuals by agents of the ruling party and government who have been described and/or identified. African Union engagement, particularly by the Peace and Security Council, is fully mandated by conditions on the ground and is urgently needed.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

To SADC: Convene an emergency summit to:

- Recognize the failure of the Government of Zimbabwe towards its citizens and the need for an urgent regional, continental, and international response;

- Request the AU to assume leadership of a mediation process with support from SADC and the UN;

- Authorize and initiate a discussion with international partners about funding humanitarian needs and a recovery plan for Zimbabwe.

To the AU Peace and Security Council: Convene an emergency session to:

- Establish the responsibility of Zimbabwe’s authorities for the situation, confirm AU responsibility to protect civilians and prevent further destabilization of the region;

- Authorize deployment of a protection force and additional monitors;

- Plan discussions with the United Nations about support, resourcing and deployment of a protection force;

- Send a fact-finding mission to determine the level of responsibility of the different branches of the State in the current human rights violations and humanitarian crisis.

To the AU Commission:

- Include, as an urgent matter, the current situation of Zimbabwe in the agenda of the Sharm El Sheikh Summit and ask the Assembly for a mandate to intervene in the crisis and protect citizens;

- Appoint a Special Envoy on Zimbabwe;

- Authorise him/her to initiate dialogue with key players and the international community with the objective of establishing a mediation process aimed at achieving a political settlement and associated plan of work for achieving long lasting peace and timetable for return to democracy.

The UN Security Council: - Urgently adopt the crisis in Zimbabwe as an official item on the UNSC agenda recognizing the threat it poses to international peace and security and requiring regular political and humanitarian briefings to the Council;

- Issue a clear statement indicating GoZ responsibility for the current violence, deploring the tactics used against the population by the GoZ and demanding the facilitation of adequate humanitarian assistance;

- Provide support for an AU-led mediation effort and protection force.

Respectfully,

1. Action des Chrétiens Activistes des Droits de l'Homme à Shabunda (ACADHOSHA), DRC
2. Aids Law Project, South Africa
3. Botswana Civil Society Solidarity Coalition on Zimbabwe (BOCISCOZ), Botswana
4. Centre for Excellent on Aid Effectiveness, Ghana
5. Centre for Peace and Conflict Management (CAFSO), Nigeria
6. Coalition for Peace In Africa (COPA), Southern Africa
7. Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition, Zimbabwe
8. East African Law Society (EALS), East Africa
9. Economic Justice Network of FOCCISA, Southern Africa
10. Environnement, Ressources Naturelles et Développement (ERND), DRC
11. Foster National Cohesion (FONACON), Kenya
12. Global Zimbabwean Forum, Switzerland
13. Helen Suzman Foundation (HSF), South Africa
14. Human Rights Institute of South Africa (HURISA), South Africa
15. Kenya Human Rights Commission (KHRC), Kenya
16. le Centre de Recherche sur l'Environnement, la Démocratie et les Droits de l'Homme (CREDDHO), DRC

For full list of signatories, please follow this link:

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/382/48924zimviolence.jpgRather than deflect and defeat the likelihood of political violence, the construct of a Government of National Unity would formally integrate it into the lifeblood of the Zimbabwean democratic dispensation. For South Africans, this situation recalls the kind of power sharing arrangements that former South African President F W De Klerk had in mind at the start of the 1990s negotiation process, where the share of actual voter support would not determine power arrangements. This proposal was not acceptable in the new South Africa then, and it is not acceptable in the new Zimbabwe now, writes Grace Kwinjeh examining the upcoming Zimbabwe presidential elections rerun.
===

In March 2008 Zimbabweans voted in the most peaceful election since independence, resulting in an unambiguous victory for the opposition Movement for Democratic Change led by Morgan Tsvangirai. Three months later, the country is hemorrhaging from a massive and rising tide of political violence not seen since the state sponsored terror of the early 1980s. The ruling party and its supporters are responsible for the vast majority of the current attacks [1]. As if to underscore his party’s public embrace of violence, President Mugabe now openly threatens to “wage war” beyond the June 27 Presidential run-off election, if his candidacy should be rejected by the people for a second time. Meanwhile the MDC government-elect, MDC party structures and much of the party’s leadership have been forced into hiding as they seek to convince voters of their right to select – and see installed in place – a president of their choice.

For SADC, the Zimbabwe conflagration has become the most comprehensive diplomatic failure in the region since the resumption of the Angolan war in the 1990s. But unlike Angola, the Zimbabwe crisis is one for which SADC, President Mbeki and the international community bear a central contributing responsibility. By pushing for secretly brokered power-sharing arrangements leading to a “government of national unity” (GNU), the international intervention in Zimbabwe has relegated hopes for a new democratic dispensation built on the foundations of the expressed popular will of Zimbabweans. By refusing to actively acknowledge the MDC’s electoral victory and insist on its recognition and acceptance by ZANU PF, regional leaders and the international community effectively ignored and silenced the democratic voice of the people. As a consequence, the MDC’s hard-won legitimate authority has been erased, and the way has been opened for ZANU PF to recover by the bullet the authority it had lost at the ballot box.

This violent outcome of a proposed GNU strategy should not have been unexpected. ZANU PF’s violent riposte is reminiscent of the period immediately prior to Independence around the Lancaster House Conference, and even more so of the party’s violent campaign before the 1987 “Unity Accord” with the ZAPU opposition: indeed, it is a tried and tested tactic of ZANU PF to threaten and deploy intense violence as a strategic bargaining tool. Since independence the party has singularly distinguished itself among Zimbabwean political parties by demonstrating a capacity for – and indeed claiming the right to wage – mass violence in defense of its “national” interests. No longer heading the majority party, Robert Mugabe now cynically portrays violence as a means for defending the people from their mistaken choice.

This deeply cynical pathology is echoed more subtly in the GNU concept. Despite a clear rejection of ZANU PF under electoral conditions heavily tilted in that party’s favour, unity talks have been promoted as a means of bringing the former ruling party back into the centre of decision-making. Even though neither voters nor the MDC demanded this arrangement in March, the new government in waiting has come under enormous pressure to fall in line accordingly. Its leaders have repeatedly said that such an arrangement would deny the popular voice and reward anti-democratic, flagrantly illegal and often murderous behaviour – while only deferring, and certainly not solving, the problem of organising the transition to a new political order. It is indeed difficult to understand why those who previously promoted engagement with ZANU PF as a means of strengthening a deeply flawed electoral process, should now effectively reject that improved process and insist on power sharing terms with the author of electoral fraud and intimidation.

In contrast, it is clear that the promotion of a GNU is integral to the facilitation of an elite transfer of power which would vitiate the popular will of the electorate. This is why the idea of a GNU has been explicitly rejected by the leading membership-based civil society organisations in Zimbabwe, from the trade unions to human rights networks. These groups challenge the credibility and viability of a compromise that according to its proponents, would bring about some sort of “normalisation” of the political space without addressing the growing democratic deficit in Zimbabwe. For the Zimbabwean democratic movement, political normalisation requires before all else, recognition and acceptance of the expressed will of dominant social interests – not its circumvention through brokered elite ‘pacting’ carried out under the threat of violence.

In Zimbabwe, there is abiding consternation over why ZANU PF and its militia were given the opportunity by SADC and the international community to ignore the electoral results in the first place. What would have happened if the election results – deemed legitimate by observers – had been recognised and enforced? And what would happen if a similarly free and fair process were enforced in the current second round, by insisting on the disarming of ZANU PF and its militia, and the confinement of the security forces to base? Have those mediating and promoting mediation raised these issues – the clearest and most profound obstacles to democratic practice in Zimbabwe in the current moment?

It is widely acknowledged that demilitarisation is a central precondition needed to advance a democratic outcome and ensure its consolidation in the medium term. Yet, the perpetration of violence has been treated as a negotiable right – not as an act which invalidates claims to the process of a democratic transition. Remarkably, it took 10 weeks of deteriorating conditions for SADC’s official mediator Thabo Mbeki to publicly raise his concerns about the spiralling violence. But even then he avoided commentary on responsibility, despite ample documented evidence heavily implicating ZANU PF and state security forces in commanding the terror. His spokesperson claims he is precluded from doing so by virtue of his position as mediator. However this is a hollow rationale in the face of open and mounting ZANU PF belligerence.

For ZANU PF, with few political repercussions arising from the deployment of its violent supporters, there seems little incentive for abandoning this approach– and perhaps much to be gained from pursuing it. Robert Mugabe’s public declaration earlier this week that his party would go to war in the event of his defeat in the second round of voting was met with paralysing silence by Thabo Mbeki. The deployment of weapons and violence may be logistically difficult to confront: the deployment of words and threats is not.

THE ELECTION FIX: BACK TO THE FUTURE

By focusing on the GNU, rather than the actual election results, the SADC mediation has effectively allowed ZANU PF to return to the brokerage scenario it had anticipated in the post election period. This scenario, broadly shared by ZANU PF reformers, SA, some EU governments and others before the election, was premised on the belief that the MDC-Tsvangirai party’s support would be diminished by support for MDC-Mutambara and for Simba Makoni, the former Finance Minister and ZANU PF reformer who was a candidate for President. A split opposition vote would enable victory in the Presidential election and at least a plurality in Parliament. Moreover, the dispersion of opposition representation across three groupings would present options for developing a ‘Kenyan-style’ negotiation that could lead to a ZANU PF dominated GNU. Makoni – the “modernising” reform face of ZANU PF - could be parachuted in under Mugabe, to soon replace him as the consensus politician. And ZANU PF could argue that, if this kind of arrangement was acceptable for Kenya, why not in Zimbabwe? There was a lot of this kind of talk amongst MDC-M and Makoni supporters in advance of the election.

For ZANU PF this scenario both enabled the departure of Mugabe, a political liability whose presence would continue to block the party’s return to legitimacy and the resumption of desperately needed, stabilizing financial assistance for the world’s fastest-collapsing economy; and the retention and renewed consolidation of power by the ruling party. Confident of a mediated victory and needing a “legitimate” result to back its claims to rehabilitation, ZANU PF significantly loosened control over the electoral process in the first round of voting in March.

As it turned out, the party’s electoral assumptions were wildly naïve. At the election support for the MDC-M collapsed – and notably for its leadership, which was roundly defeated. Makoni was overwhelmingly rejected by voters, gaining perhaps just 10 percent of the vote. At the same time, ZANU PF’s traditional voters deserted the party by voting for the opposition or by boycotting the poll, as they had done in the benchmark defeat of the party in the 2000 Constitutional Referendum. In contrast, the MDC Tsvangirai party surged across the country, including in former rural strongholds of ZANU PF that for the first time ever had been rendered easily accessible to opposition campaigners – and to opposition polling agents and officials. This combination of factors meant there were too few votes to rig with, and that the conditions allowing the playing off of opposition forces within a prospective GNU did not materialize [2].

The shock of the election result and the resulting conundrum for the ruling party were quite literally written on its face. The headline of The Sunday Mail, the most slavishly loyal of the state-controlled newspapers, screamed the day after the election, “Anxiety Grips Zim.” Many other state media, including the country’s only radio and television broadcaster, ZBC, effectively fell silent, bewildered. No party leader of note addressed the nation for several days.

It was apparent that ZANU PF was reassessing its game plan. Over the next month it developed and then rolled this plan out, as SADC first patiently accommodated repeated inexplicable delays in the processing and announcement of results by ZEC, and then sat motionless as ZESN, the key civic election monitoring network, and MDC itself were raided by state officials in search of independently collected polling data that could be used to disprove manipulated official figures. Even after the long delay, only limited details of the presidential poll were eventually released [3].

Meanwhile, reports surfaced of remobilised war veterans and youth militias, and of the first violent penetrations by state security forces of “turncoat” former ruling party strongholds. ZANU PF aimed to create conditions that would make the run-off so difficult and dreaded that prospects of averting violence through some form of GNU and power sharing arrangement would be welcomed: a replay of the ZANU-ZAPU Unity Pact of 1987. ZANU PF’s transparently obvious “spin” on the violence –which has often been taken up by SADC leaders, and swallowed whole by much of the regional media as well – has been doubly damaging for Zimbabwean democrats. One the one hand, substantial evidence that the violence is disproportionately organised against the MDC has drawn muted criticism from SA, SADC and the GNU advocates like Makoni; on the other, the small amount of retaliatory violence attributed to the MDC is deemed to suggest a “crisis” and raise possibilities of “civil war” – reinforcing the need to avoid a run-off and the urgency for a negotiated solution [4].

African leaders have thus far studiously avoided apportioning responsibility for violence, in most instances couching reactions in terms of cautioning both sides and invoking dialogue. Widespread violations of SADC’s election ‘norms and standards’ have failed to elicit coherent responses from them. Neither has SADC cautioned or castigated the ZANU PF government for failing to ensure its constitutional responsibility for safety and security, despite overwhelming empirical evidence that the primary perpetrator is ZANU PF and its proxies.

Rather than address the issue of destabilizing violence and impose political censure for its deployment in this period of uncertainty, the SA government, SADC, some EU diplomats and the Makoni grouping actively talked up the need for a GNU – ostensibly as way to avert the threat of violence coming from ZANU PF. Indeed, independent and MDC reports demonstrated that increasing numbers from the MDC’s ranks were being beaten, tortured, abducted and murdered, the rationale for a GNU – and a political counter-attack to the wave of violence – was publicly reinforced by SA and SADC.

While mediation does not preclude processes of accountability, this approach appears to have been absent from the Mbeki initiative. As a result the SADC intervention has directly facilitated ZANU PF’s unfolding strategy for manipulating the conditions and issues that would have to be negotiated. SADC’s tentative response to the March vote allowed space and time for ZANU PF to regroup and ramp up the violence and threats of more of the same – both fuelling a defensive “demand for GNU”, and reasserting ZANU PF’s leading place in the setting of terms for any negotiations. The latter now focus on ending violence and averting civil war, rather than implementing the results of the peaceful election or ensuring that the next round of elections are conducted in a free and fair atmosphere – something that it appears can no longer be ensured.

THE GNU PROBLEM

If the GNU is primarily being proposed as a means to avoid a violent tragedy, rather than as a basis for a establishing a new inclusive democratic politics, skeptics are right to question the idea’s aims, objectives and predictable outcomes. Just as importantly, we need to pose a question for those advocating a non-democratic negotiated resolution to Zimbabwe’s election crisis: by what principle can the rights of the popular democratic will as expressed by voters be equated with, or rendered secondary to, the rights of discredited elites and perpetrators of violence? For this is precisely what the idea of a GNU proposes, in the name of an elusive, highly unstable and temporary peace.

Even if the MDC were able to extract considerable concessions from ZANU PF, it is highly unlikely that Robert Mugabe’s party would cede its effective control over its levers in the bureaucracy and particularly, in the security forces. Why would it: these are the instruments of war and obstruction that have enabled ZANU PF to climb out of the hole of electoral defeat on more than one occasion, to protect its networks of power. To suggest that these determinants of power would be given up willingly is to accept the notion that ZANU PF would be willing to abdicate. The last two months have exposed this view as profoundly delusional. Those who have put stock in the GNU have failed to assess their model of peace-making in light of ZANU PF’s strategic understanding that violence is a political asset and an effective substitute for popular legitimacy, which will not be negotiated away.

Rather than deflect and defeat the likelihood of political violence, the construct of a GNU would formally integrate it into the lifeblood of the Zimbabwean democratic dispensation. This is a remarkable solution to put before a political party that has just won an election based on its abiding commitment to non-violent democratic participation – and to the voting majority who supported it. For South Africans, this situation recalls the kind of power sharing arrangements that former South African President F W De Klerk had in mind at the start of the 1990s negotiation process, where the share of actual voter support would not determine power arrangements [5]. This proposal was not acceptable in the new South Africa then, and it is not acceptable in the new Zimbabwe now.
to the March election has facilitated a strong and violent response by ZANU PF.

For the time being, it seems increasingly likely that the GNU route will be not followed. This is not due to any lack of effort by the likes of Mbeki and many in SADC, or the distasteful posturing of the rejected Makoni, who cites rising violence as the need for inclusive negotiations without naming and condemning those – his erstwhile colleagues – who have created the unstable terrain on which he hopes to re-launch his ambitions. Rather, both the MDC and its supporters are wary of legitimizing the political role of those holding the gun to their heads and the torch to their homes. War is not something to be prevented: it is here already. And the only non-violent way to confront and defeat it is the ballot box, even if that option too is flawed.

If the current pressures for a GNU do indeed fail, all is not lost for ZANU PF: Makoni or another ZANU PF senior reformer could return to the forefront if Mugabe were to win the run-off, further destabilize the MDC and civil society, and then retire on his own terms – handing over power to a reformer to negotiate a new GNU from a position of regained legitimacy and strength. But this first requires another successfully manipulated election result, and a frontal assault on MDC and civil society resistance. The arrest on treason charges this past week of MDC Secretary General Tendai Biti does not bode well; neither does the relative weakness of the SADC response to this latest development. And is there any reason to think that additional ZANU PF manipulations during and after the second round of voting will not take place, given the success of such interventions in the first?

ACCEPTING RESPONSIBILITY, ACTING RESPONSIBLY

The options chosen by SADC and the international community for dealing with the March 2008 election have directly contributed to the options chosen by ZANU PF. It was a choice not to recognise the MDC victory and to allow the illegal charade over the recount to occur [6]. It is enough here to point out that the MDC won the Parliamentary elections, that Morgan Tsvangirai won the Presidential election, that nearly 3 million Zimbabweans did not vote, and consequently it is very clear that Robert Mugabe and ZANU PF do not enjoy the support of the vast majority of the population.

This set of circumstances allowed for an alternative political response; a recognition of and call for an MDC government to be accepted by ZANU PF. However, the failure to support this option has contributed directly to the current confusion between promoting conditions for a free and fair re-run and negotiations for a GNU. Despite a widespread acceptance that conditions cannot be free and fair for the June 27 poll, and calls for a GNU, the MDC is sticking to the electoral path and holding out prospects for an inclusive government of national healing in which it would play a lead role after the elections. This position, openly supported by SADC, will promote an elitist management of transitional arrangements under the auspices of a power sharing arrangement that will effectively insulate and protect those responsible for perpetrating violence and gross human rights abuses –as happened with previous election amnesties for party violence, and most seriously with the Unity Accord in 1987.

As regards the re-run, although it is no longer possible to create the conditions for a free and fair poll, with less than 10 days before the poll, there could and should be certain steps taken to remedy the most egregious violations and potential for destabilisation. This should include: deploying adequate numbers of election monitors, especially in areas where violence and intimidation has been reported, and playing a more active role in monitoring the activities and decision-making processes of the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission; promoting an agenda of disarming ZANU PF and its militia/war veteran proxies hands; censuring the role of the security forces, censuring hate speech and talk of war by any political parties; commenting on access of candidates to state media; question and establishing a strategy with rewards and penalties for compliance/non-compliance with SADC election guidelines.

Thabo Mbeki did state ahead of the 2005 elections that there would be consequences if the SADC Principles and Guidelines were seriously violated, but this was said against the background of woefully inadequate provisions for monitoring on the ground [7]. Meanwhile, in June 2008, the corpses of MDC officials and suspected opposition supporters are accumulating, thousands have been displaced by the political violence, likely thousands more beaten and brutalised, hate speech fills the airwaves, and a discredited President threatens the majority with war – and still, there is no sign of serious electoral censure in the air.

It is time for fresh thinking and fresh action. In advance of the second round of presidential voting, problems need to be anticipated and prevented before they arise. Several critical questions emerge:

What would have happened if SA, SADC and the international community rejected the delays by ZEC and ZANU PF, demanded the transparent compilation and immediate release of results - and ensured that all parties abided by them?

What would have happened if all civil society organisations and democratic parties and politicians had stood firmly behind the MDC government-elect, rather than soliciting for all-inclusive extra-electoral GNU? If more support for the winning party MDC had been expressed, what options then would have remained for elite transitions?

Who, then, really enabled ZANU PF’s violent election strategy sending the defeated party, its leaders and violent supporters inside and outside the state all of the wrong signals in the immediate post-election period?

And consequently, whose responsibility is it now to end the violence by terminating discussions about an all-inclusive GNU, and insisting on a government of transition and renewal headed unambiguously by the party elected by the people: the MDC Tsvangirai.

* Grace Kwinjeh is an NEC member of the MDC and the Chairperson of the Global Zimbabwe Forum.

* Please send comments to or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org/

* For further notes, see below

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/382/48923zimfree.jpgProminent African leaders from across civil society have issued a public call for an end to violence and intimidation in Zimbabwe ahead of the presidential run-off elections at the end of the month. In an open letter signed by former heads of state, business leaders, academics and leading campaigners, the group calls for appropriate conditions to be met so that the second round of the presidential election is conducted in a peaceful and transparent manner that allows the citizens of Zimbabwe to express freely their political will.
====

It is crucial for the interests of both Zimbabwe and Africa that the upcoming elections are free and fair.

Zimbabweans fought for liberation in order to be able to determine their own future. Great sacrifices were made during the liberation struggle. To live up to the aspirations of those who sacrificed, it is vital that nothing is done to deny the legitimate expression of the will of the people of Zimbabwe.

As Africans we consider the forthcoming elections to be critical. We are aware of the attention of the world. More significantly we are conscious of the huge number of Africans who want to see a stable, democratic and peaceful Zimbabwe.

Consequently, we are deeply troubled by the current reports of intimidation, harassment and violence. It is vital that the appropriate conditions are created so that the Presidential run-off is conducted in a peaceful, free and fair manner. Only then can the political parties conduct their election campaigning in a way that enables the citizens to express freely their political will.

In this context, we call for an end to the violence and intimidation, and the restoration of full access for humanitarian and aid agencies.

To this end it will be necessary to have an adequate number of independent electoral observers, both during the election process and to verify the results.

Whatever the outcome of the election, it will be vital for all Zimbabweans to come together in a spirit of reconciliation to secure Zimbabwe's future.

We further call upon African leaders at all levels - pan-African, regional and national - and their institutions to ensure the achievement of these objectives.

* Civil society groups and individual citizens are invited to counter-sign the letter by clicking

*Please send comments to [email protected] or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org

*For the full list of signatories, please follow this link:

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/382/48880zimfeminists.jpgThe Feminist Political Education Project (FePEP) calls upon all political leaders to stop the 27th of June 2008 Presidential election run-off.

We refer to our position as Zimbabwean feminists, articulated through our previous statements that elections will not solve the crisis that faces Zimbabwe today. We have learnt from other countries that have experienced conflict that elections, alone, do not solve political governance crises. What Zimbabwe needs, is a negotiated settlement.

We are alarmed by the escalated levels of political violence, destabilisation, displacement of people and the continued deterioration of socio-economic conditions that the Zimbabwean people, especially women are subjected to.

It is clear, that the prevailing environment in Zimbabwe completely discredits any electoral process.

We therefore call for the cessation of the Presidential elections runoff and the immediate resumption of dialogue involving all political players.

We call upon both presidential candidates to step up to their responsibilities, take up humane political leadership and commit to dialogue that leads to long lasting solutions for Zimbabwe.

All Zimbabweans have an obligation to work towards the development of lasting solutions for our country. We thus urge all leaders to support this call.

We appeal to SADC, AU leaders and the international community, to use their influence to support political dialogue that resolves the Zimbabwean conflict.

Our position as FePEP reflects and amplifies the voices of many women from across the political divide and from all parts of the country.

The Presidential elections runoff must be called off!

*Please send comments to or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org

http://www.pambazuka.org/images/articles/383/48864market.jpgEric Holt-Gimenez looks at the FAO Food Security Summit in contrast to the parallel “Terra Preta” meeting organized by social movements, Indigenous Peoples’ organizations and civil society organizations to discuss issues of food sovereignty.
====

The FAO’s recent Food Security Summit held in Rome 1-4 June called for more free trade, more Green Revolutions, more direct food aid and more investment in agriculture to stem the growing global food crisis. The issue of agrofuels—the original reason for holding the conference in the first place—was effectively taken off the agenda by the United States. did world leaders address the root causes of the food crisis.

In a parallel meeting called “Terra Preta” organized by social movements, Indigenous Peoples’ organizations and civil society organizations, and supported by the International Planning Committee for Food Sovereignty, a “People’s State of Emergency” was called for. In a statement on the World Food Emergency called “No More Failures-as-Usual!” activists demanded governments accept responsibility in creating the food crisis:

“Historic, systemic failures of governments and international institutions are responsible. National governments that will meet at the FAO Food Crisis Summit in Rome must begin by accepting their responsibility for today’s food emergency… The emergency today has its roots in the food crisis of the 1970s when some opportunistic OECD governments, pursuing neoliberal policies, dismantled the international institutional architecture for food and agriculture. This food crisis is the result of the long standing refusal of governments and intergovernmental organizations to respect, protect and fulfill the right to food, and of the total impunity for the systematic violations of this right among others. They adopted short-term political strategies that engineered the neglect of food and agriculture and set the stage for the current food emergency.”

THE AGRA MEMORANDUM

The Terra Preta statement identifies the Green Revolution as one of the causes of the current crisis, and condemns the call for a “new” Green Revolution in Africa:

“We reject the Green Revolution models. Technocratic techno-fixes are no answer to sustainable food production and rural development. Industrialised agriculture and fisheries are not sustainable.”

Drawing from the here

These statements fly in the face of the “Memorandum of Understanding” signed by UN agencies and AGRA that claim the new Green Revolution will “significantly boost food production in Africa’s “breadbasket regions.” The strategy of the new AGRA-UN memorandum is to increase yields in Africa’s most productive regions to offset low yields in other areas. While this may appear on the surface as a new idea, it is actually quite old (like most of the ideas floated at the Food Summit). In fact, the original Green Revolution’s strategy was to seek impressive gains in production by concentrating their efforts on regions that were already high-producing, like India’s Punjab. This not only led to a displacement of poor farmers by rich farmers, it caused severe environmental problems.

Today, the Punjab has the world’s highest [email protected] or comment online at http://www.pambazuka.org