Share this
Twitter
Digg
Del.icio.us
Yahoo
Technorati
Googlize this
Facebook
Hear this text
Print
E-mail
Tags
Winds of change may be gathering Thanks to President Robert Mugabe’s ill-fated actions, its neighbour Malawi is in trouble. The country is facing a serious fuel shortage following a scarcity of foreign exchange. According to media reports, the lack of foreign exchange is partly the result of a decision by the Malawian government to lend Zimbabwe US$100 million, which is due to be repaid by 31 December this year.
Extraordinarily, the money was intended to enable Zimbabwe – until recently a major exporter of food – to buy maize in Malawi. It has been suggested by some newspapers in Malawi that the loan was guaranteed by the Malawian government on the basis of a “personal understanding between President [Bingu wa] Mutharika and his close political pal, President Robert Mugabe.”
In an attempt to alleviate the fuel problem, the Malawian authorities have asked the Mozambican government if they could borrow some fuel, but also blamed Mozambique for its fuel woes, claiming that fuel has been held up because of congestion in the ports of Nacala and Beira. This claim was strongly denied by the managers of both ports.
So, Malawi is in trouble as a result of Mugabe’s misrule in Zimbabwe. This raises the question yet again: how does Mugabe succeed in seemingly manipulating and dictating to its neigbours?
Even the most cynical must admit that President Mugabe is guilty of gross misconduct. He lost an election despite blatant attempts to manipulate the process and intimidate and harass the opposition. Even so, he contemptuously ignored the will of the people of Zimbabwe and it took a herculean effort and intense international pressure, sadly not from his neigbours, to coerce him into a unity government with the real victor of the election.
Not daunted in any way, Mugabe continues to manipulate, intimidate and cheat with apparent ease and without fear of retribution. Â
How Mugabe gets away with all his transgressions is incomprehensible. His mismanagement is not limited to Zimbabwe, and the effects are felt throughout the southern African region.
The apparent inability and reluctance of the South African Development Community (SADC) to act decisively and call to order one of its members – which is clearly out of line – is glaring and an indictment of the SADC’s commitment to good governance and transparency.
Quite rightly, the SADC maintains that the situation in Zimbabwe is complicated and highly emotional. Fact remains, the SADC allowed the situation to develop into the problem it has become by not acting firmly in good time, and through its reluctance to call Mugabe to order. Â
By treating him with velvet gloves, the SADC has signalled to President Mugabe and his Zanu-PF followers that the leadership of the SADC is at ease with their undisguised intransigence despite the dire consequences it has for some SADC member states.
Hundreds of thousands of Zimbabweans have fled to neighbouring countries, placing a heavy burden on limited resources. In South Africa, the resentment caused by large numbers of Zimbabweans contributed to the unfortunate outbreak of xenophobia attacks.
Although the authorities decided to remain silent, there is evidence that a fair percentage of the crime committed in South Africa is carried out by foreigners, including Zimbabweans.
In Botswana, the influx of refugees from Zimbabwe and the tension it creates has forced the government of that country to step up border patrols.
Zambia has begun to repatriate Zimbabweans, fearing the consequences should they be allowed to stay.
Malawi is facing a fuel and foreign exchange shortage. The average Malawian must be wondering how he/she will benefit.
Thus far, President Mugabe has not spared his allies in his quest to dig in and wait for the inevitable.
In Malawi, President Mutharika must now face the wrath of his own people and it is highly unlikely that President Mugabe will render a helping hand.
The legacy of former president Thabo Mbeki as conflict mediator was seriously, if not permanently, dented by Mugabe’s manipulation and empty promises. The disastrous “silent diplomacy” approach will haunt Mbeki for ever.
The complete failure of this ill-fated attempt involuntarily calls up images of Neville Chamberlain’s “peace in our time” promise after the British prime minister returned from talks with Adolf Hitter while everyone else could see the inevitability of war.
Admittedly, the consequences of the failure of Mbeki – and by implication also the failure of SADC, as it endorsed Mbeki – is not nearly as devastating; although millions of suffering Zimbabweans may beg to differ.
How does he get away with it?
There is no logical or obvious explanation, but a fascinating illumination is presented by Musa Hlophe, who argues that part of the answer lies in the attitude of the leaders of the SADC member states.
Most, if not all, of them do not take kindly to a strong opposition, and the opposition is tolerated as long as it does not pose any threat. The MDC represents the kind of opposition that is resented, and to take a stance in support of the MDC may just create an unwelcome precedent.
But, it is said that the main reason for Mugabe’s grip on his SADC allies is his clever exploitation of the esteem they have for him as the 'doyen' of the liberation struggle in southern Africa. Not only did he lead his country to independence in a bloody liberation war, but he also gave support to the fight for freedom in Namibia, South Africa and the Democratic Republic of the Congo to topple the Mobutu Sésé Seko dictatorship.
Mugabe’s stature and standing in southern Africa was eclipsed by Nelson Mandela when the latter walked out of prison, and Mugabe did not take kindly to being relegated. The 'injustice' was rectified when President Mandela retired and Mugabe could reclaim the status as the region’s oldest serving liberator.
He is the 'elder' freedom fighter still in office, and the spirit of liberation solidarity still prevalent in southern Africa precludes any condemnation of abuse of power by a hero of the liberation.
To call to order a liberation icon such as Mugabe would be a renouncement of the liberation struggle and that is unacceptable, even if the freedom of the people of Zimbabwe is once again under threat.
President Mugabe knows quite well the psychological impact of his liberation struggle credentials and he uses it to good effect in his battle for survival.     Â
However, cracks are appearing in the solidarity barrier. At present, he seems to be a lone voice, but President of Botswana Ian Khama, fresh from a landslide victory in his country’s elections, expressed in public his disquiet with the situation in Zimbabwe and the ineffective role of the SADC in resolving the crisis.
In a clear indication that he does not approve of the SADC’s current attempts, President Khama did not bother to attend the last two SADC Heads of State meetings on Zimbabwe.
President Khama does not pull punches and he makes no bones of the fact that he blames President Mugabe and his supporters for the ongoing crisis in Zimbabwe and that, in his opinion, new elections under purposeful and committed supervision are the only workable solution.Â
To date, President Mugabe has not, in public at least, expressed his usual disgust and contempt with the opposing views held by President Khama. It is possible that Mugabe believes the support of the rest of the SADC brotherhood still allows him sufficient latitude to ignore the president of Botswana.
But it may also be that President Mugabe recognises the fact that President Khama belongs to a new generation of leadership in southern Africa which does not hold him in the same awe; and that the winds of change – albeit still only a breeze – may have begun to blow for him.
Musa Hlophe, Zimbabweans betrayed, http://www.times.co.sz/index.php?news=11915
