Back to Index

This article participates on the following special index pages:

Hot Seat interview with negotiator Welshman Ncube
Violet Gonda, SW Radio Africa
November 27, 2009

http://www.swradioafrica.com/pages/hotseat011209.htm

Violet Gonda: My guest on the Hot Seat programme today is Professor Welshman Ncube, the Minister of Industry and Commerce and one of the negotiators from the MDC-M. Welcome on the programme Professor Ncube.

Welshman Ncube: Thank you.

Gonda: Now let me start with the latest developments; you are back discussing issues that you had negotiated on before, why is this happening again?

Ncube: Well it's self-evident, we're back to negotiations because there is a fair amount of unhappiness about either the implementation of the original Agreement itself or the implementation of the decision of the SADC Summit of 26th to 27th January this year which directly gave birth to the inclusive government or because certain maybe unforeseen circumstances have arisen which have affected the capacity of the parties to continue to work together and lastly maybe, just because political parties and their nature - they never stop grandstanding and trying to make political capital out of every situation.

Gonda: So can you tell us what has been agreed on so far?

Ncube: Well regrettably I can't tell you that because there is agreement that we should not begin to negotiate the broader media and one of the resolutions that have been taken by the negotiators is to simply indicate that we are talking, the talks are continuing, we have an agreed agenda which we need to go through without talking to each other or doing reinterpretations which might lead to further complications through the media.

Gonda: But can you tell us which issues the parties are still divided on?

Ncube: Well I wouldn't say the issues where parties are still divided on because we are going through the agenda. What I can tell you is that the same issues that everyone knows have been raised by the parties are the issues which remain on the agenda, issues as I have said, which arise from the SADC Communiqué of 26th to 27th of January this year. And those issues, you'll recall that communiqué asked the parties, or directed the parties to go and agree on a formula for the appointment of provincial governors. Those governors remain unappointed and therefore they're self-evidently an issue. Then again that communiqué requested or directed the inclusive government to deal with the dispute around the appointment of the Reserve Bank governor and the Attorney General. That issue regrettably over the last nine months has either not been dealt with or no agreement on how to deal with it has been arrived at. The communiqué also directed that the inclusive government must be constituted by the swearing in of the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister and the swearing in of all the Ministers and Deputy Ministers by the 13th of February. We all know that one of the Deputy Ministers nominated by MDC-T has not been sworn in and therefore, even though that SADC Summit resolution has been substantially complied with, it has not been completely and fully complied with because one Deputy Minister remains un-sworn in, clearly therefore that is an issue arising out of that communiqué.

And since the formation of the inclusive government different parties are happy, are unhappy about different aspects of implementation of the GPA. And there's unhappiness about implementation around the provisions that we agreed on sanctions, there's unhappiness about the agreement relating to the media in what you might call a two-fold manner - there is the question of the external radio stations such as yours where the provisions relating to encouraging and ensuring that these radio stations should be encouraged to come and broadcast from home rather than externally where it is believed they are influenced by, funded by and also pursuing the agenda of foreign interests.

Then there is the issue of the continued polarisation in the media, in particular that whereas the parties and Zimbabweans have tried to move out of their pre-inclusive government trenches, the media has remained firmly, firmly entrenched in those trenches and sniping away at the political party or parties that are perceived to be the enemies of that section of the media. So all round there's unhappiness about the media, some are unhappy about the public media, the way it has continued to report, some are unhappy about the private media which equally has taken sides and promote as much hate speech regrettably as is promoted by the public media, so that issue has also to be dealt with.

Then there are issues relating to alleged operations of parallel government, indeed by both sides, there are accusations and counter accusations, as you know that this side or that side operate a parallel government not accountable to and not controlled by the inclusive government.

Then you have the issues about continued failure to adhere to the rule of law, selective prosecutions of people on the basis of their political opinions or their belonging to particular political parties. So these are some of the issues which we all know have been in the public arena or public domain for quite some time and in respect of which this or that party is unhappy about and we have therefore to review these issues and find a formula to solve them.

Gonda: I would want to talk a bit more about the external radio stations but just to go back to some of these outstanding issues you mentioned, we know where the MDC-T stands on the outstanding issues, for example they want a review of the appointments of the Reserve Bank governor Gideon Gono, the Attorney General Johannes Tomana and governors among other issues and we know that Zanu-PF is saying it wants the sanctions removed and external radio stations shut down but what about the MDC-M, your party, can you spell out your own view about what you believe are the outstanding issues?

Ncube: Well certainly there's no entity called MDC-M, but having said that . . .

Gonda: What do you mean, there's no entity called the MDC-M? MDC-Mutambara, is that not your party?

Ncube: Never. There is no party registered by that name. There might be persistence in the media and elsewhere in calling us by that name, but we are not MDC-M.

Gonda: So what is your name?

Ncube: We are the MDC full stop. We have never, we contested the elections by that name, we have always used that name but that's not the core issue. I say it because if I don't then I will be conceding to being called by a name which we have never fielded.

As I say, that's not a core issue. Your question is about what are our issues - first we have always said the issues which SADC require to be resolved must be resolved and consequently therefore all the issues which arise out of the communiqué as I have indicated them to you, are issues which we say must be resolved and have always said must be resolved because we are parties to the discussions of that communiqué. We are directly affected by those issues, the appointment of provincial governors is a matter of concern to us which is our issue too because if you are to have an inclusive government each of the parties must be represented at all the levels of government and provincial governance is one of those levels. So that is our issue and we have repeatedly said so.

We have equally, equally insisted that the issue of the media as I have summarised to you is an issue which requires to be addressed. In fact on that issue we have been most adversely affected. One of the other parties, two parties, complains about the public media, the other about the private media, we complain about both and we are the only party which do not control, which do not have any media under our captivity, the others have this or that media under their captivity and we clearly therefore do not accept that Zimbabwe deserves a media that is under captivity in one form or the other.

Clearly therefore too, we have an interest in the observance of the rule of law, we have an interest in ensuring that the GPA is implemented as we agreed, that no one party, no one section of society is subjected to the law and others are not. So those are issues which are of interest to us. What you might perceive as a difference is that we have not yet mastered the art of grandstanding and we don't always stand at the roof tops and shout about these issues.

Gonda: You know in terms of the media coverage you complain that your party has been adversely affected and that there's this unfair media coverage but isn't this to some extent because your party is viewed with suspicion and also because you lost dismally in the last elections and that out of the four ministers in government, only one was elected?

Ncube: Well Violet, that's illogical. The question of who this party deploys to government is an exclusive prerogative of this party. It cannot be said because this one was elected, this was unelected - we have an obligation to deploy this or that person. On the contrary we have deployed Moses Mzila Ndlovu, David Coltart, Tapela - all of whom were elected. We have deployed only so-called unelected people who are the senior leaders of the party and even that for good cause. You are not going to go around buying our members of parliament who work with you and expect us to then deploy them into government. And we did that quite deliberately and we were being asked to deploy people who were already working for another political party and we are not imbeciles, we will not do that and we'll never do that. We will deploy people who will stand by, defend the party, die for the party and will not deploy turncoats who can be bought overnight.

So it's quite simple as far as we are concerned and the principle issue is you cannot disagree with Tsvangirai and his party. All of us exist to serve them, if you don't serve them you will be perceived in a negative way, if you jump at the top of the highest mountain and say Tsvangirai is God, you will be worshipped by the media and civil society - that is the bottom line and indeed you should be worried if you are a true democrat. You shall be worried and indeed not just worried, you shall be truly afraid because you have a culture, you have a party, you have a civil society which is a mirror image of Zanu-PF in its behaviour, in its treatment of dissenting voices - because you believe that the positions you have taken are an eternal truth. Who dares challenge an eternal truth?

And did Zanu-PF not believe that its socialist thing, its nationalist thing, its land thing are eternal truths? And therefore who dared challenge them? And its exactly the same thing and this is what is actually frustrating, kuti a people who are supposed to be champions of democracy because they think they're on the right side of history and right side of justice and therefore there can no longer be any right to contest their position and you are constructing Zanu-PF.

Gonda: What about the issue of Gono and Tomana? Where does your party stand on that?

Ncube: Look, those are communiqué issues. The communiqué of SADC said the inclusive government must resolve them and therefore as I have said all communiqué issues are our issues too. We don't stand with MDC-T, we don't stand with Zanu-PF. Our position is clear, we have nothing personally against Gono, we have nothing personally against Tomana and we are not obsessed about the matter but we believe in principle that once you had a GPA signed on the 15th of September, any senior appointments that had to be made should have been made consistently with the provisions of the GPA, which required the parties to agree and clearly therefore those appointments were made after agreement. We believe that they should be made within the letter of the GPA and should be made within the spirit of the GPA but we have nothing personal against any of those individuals. Ours is a matter of principle, a matter of procedure that an appointment that is required to be made in a particular way was not made in a particular way.

Gonda: So obviously this is a point of departure between you and the other MDC?

Ncube: I've no idea; I don't speak for them so I don't know what their position is.

Gonda: Let me go back to the issue of the media. What really is the issue at hand here when it comes to the radio stations, is it because we are broadcasting externally into Zimbabwe or that we do not come under the influence of the State machinery?

Ncube: My understanding is that in the GPA there is an agreement that those who broadcast into Zimbabwe and are supposedly Zimbabwean media should therefore broadcast from Zimbabwe as a matter of principle. That's what was agreed so that the primary radio stations in Zimbabwe are not an extension of foreign governments or foreign interests, which appears to be in the case in the state of some of the external radio stations.

Gonda: Appears in whose eyes? Appears in whose eyes that they are an extension of foreign interests?

Ncube: Well if you have a radio station which is an arm of a particular foreign government as is the case of at least one of the foreign radio stations which is in fact funded by a foreign government as part of its own national radio station but dedicated to broadcasting into Zimbabwe. Surely you would agree, surely you must agree that everything else being equal, that is undesirable? That is not to suggest that there were no justifications or circumstances which justified getting to the position where you had foreign governments providing a framework or a support to the establishment of radio stations to broadcast into Zimbabwe because you had a closed media environment but..

Gonda: But surely . . .

Ncube: . . .if I may finish . . . you would agree that if you were to correct the internal problems in Zimbabwe, just like any other country it will be desirable to have what is called Zimbabwe media to have stations dedicated to broadcasting about Zimbabwe, broadcasting from Zimbabwe. There's a difference between a station in any other part of the world reporting on Zimbabwe from time to time but from whether a situation where you have a radio station dedicated at, dedicated into broadcasting about and exclusively, almost exclusively on Zimbabwe and everybody's agreed, indeed in the GPA this is not a matter for debate. The parties agreed that this is undesirable and that as a general principle we ought to have Zimbabwean media broadcast from Zimbabwe and we acknowledge in the GPA that there are circumstances, which gave, rise to this.

Gonda: Can you be more specific about this? SW Radio Africa is not pursuing the agenda of any foreign government and is not an extension of foreign interest. And also how can you make the shutting down of external radio stations a priority when you are failing to open up the media environment in Zimbabwe?

Ncube: Firstly I have not alleged that your radio station is an arm of any foreign government. At the worst it is a radio station, which operates externally to Zimbabwe or from Zimbabwe. It is a radio station which will be funded by, I believe, the money which is external to Zimbabwe and I have not suggested and I would think that everyone would acknowledge that your radio station is not a radio station which is an arm of a foreign government.

Then secondly, I have not insisted, as far as I understand myself that anyone should be shut down. I have said in the Global Political Agreement there is an agreement that we will liberalise the media so that those who are operating from outside Zimbabwe will be free to come into Zimbabwe and broadcast without let or hindrance from Zimbabwe. Indeed the relevant clause says - in anticipation of a free media environment the parties thereby agree that the external radio stations should be encouraged to return to Zimbabwe and to broadcast from Zimbabwe . . .

Gonda: So why are the . . .

Ncube: So clearly therefore we have not yet got to a state where you can say the legislative framework has allowed that to happen and clearly therefore it is a matter therefore which needs to be addressed.

Gonda: So you see, this is perhaps where the confusion is, why are you then as the negotiators and even as the political parties even talking about the external radio stations right now when there is no free media environment, when the airwaves have not been opened up? Surely, shouldn't that come first? Opening up the airwaves, setting up the media commission and then the journalists or the radio stations that are operating from abroad can then decide whether they want to go back into the country?

Ncube: SADC resolved in Maputo, that the grievances of each and of all the parties must be addressed and resolved concurrently and not sequentially and hence if a party has therefore said we are unhappy with the continued operations of the external radio stations, well none of the parties have the power to veto it because SADC said if you do not put on the table the grievances of all the parties then you would not make progress. Clearly therefore we have to put that issue of external radio stations on the agenda because one of the parties flagged it at SADC as an issue over which it is unhappy. And so consequently it is an issue, which we have to address and find a formula in respect of which everyone will be happy about it. It is not for us to prejudge the issue by saying your issue is invalid and we should not put it on the table because the other party will also say - fine we will say your issues are equally invalid and we'll veto their putting them on the table and we will not get anywhere if that is the attitude.

If you ask me personally and you ask me as the representative of the MDC, I will tell you that there are certain things which would make it easier for us to deal with this issue if they were to happen internally to Zimbabwe but I will not go so far as to say these must therefore be preconditions. If you do then you will have in fact validated Zanu-PF's contention that the issues which were put by them on the agenda originally are all often being said - ah they are issues for implementation last, you must implement all the other issues that we - as the MDC collectively this time - were concerned about: Have a full restoration of the rule of law, have a full media freedom, have full this or that and all those were issues which were placed by us on the agenda and Zanu-PF complains that you want a full realisation and full benefit of your "issues" in quotation marks while you are saying - oh our issues depend on the implementation of your issues so therefore we will get a situation where all your issues are implemented and ours remain unimplemented and there is this or that excuse for their lack of implementation. That is the challenge and that is what they have flagged over the last couple of months and it behoves us to find a formula to ensure that they are satisfied that if the other issues are implemented we will not simply walk away and say - we have got what we want in respect of issues, it's your problem that you haven't got what you wanted.

Gonda: But don't you realise that you can or you may discuss the issue of the external radio stations until you are blue in the face but nothing is going to happen because the creation of some of these radio stations such as ours had nothing to do with politicians and you have no authority to ask for the radio stations to close down. And secondly we all know that this is a Zanu-PF pre-condition - the closing down of these external radio stations - you can't close down things you don't like - isn't that what it all means, isn't this what democracy is about?

Ncube: We all recognise that we have no power to legislate for something which is happening from London or from America and we all realise that we cannot therefore compel anybody to shut down a radio station one way or the other which is why in the GPA we talk of encouraging. We could not and we did not say they must shut down or must be shut down by anyone because we clearly have no such physical or legal power to do it, it's self-evident and in this interview I have repeatedly used the word encourage.

Gonda: Yes but Zanu-PF doesn't use that word. Robert Mugabe has on many times been on record as saying that the radio stations should be shut down, he does not say encourage.

Ncube: Violet, I don't care what people in their parties say, I care about what we agreed and what we agreed is in the GPA and I'm just giving it to you. I'm no spokesperson for Zanu-PF or any other party for that matter therefore I have no mandate nor the will nor the desire to explain what they say.

Gonda: You know it's been suggested that your team from the MDC is sympathetic towards Zanu-PF and is doing the bidding for Zanu-PF and that you are viewed as a spoiler. How do you react to that?

Ncube: I'm tempted not to dignify that rubbish with an answer. You have just been saying right now - passionately defending your right of your freedom of expression, freedom of the media to exist and to hold views and to allow people to propagate their views through their media as freely as they want to and you were very passionate just a few minutes ago - and surely you must be equally passionate about our right as a party to hold views which are different from MDC-T and which are different from yours and which are different from civil society and which are different from those of Zanu-PF, and therefore we don't exist for the purpose of agreeing with this or that particular party. And therefore when we disagree with the favourite party of some interest you can label us whatever you wish and we wouldn't care a hoot. We take our position on the basis of our party policies and on the basis of our principles and we hold no brief for Zanu-PF. We disagree in a lot of ways, too many ways with Zanu-PF to be even considered as a party, which bids for Zanu-PF. Just as much as we disagree in terms in particular of the practices of the MDC-T, fundamentally disagree with them in many ways and it's our right to do so. The fact that we do disagree with them does not make us Zanu-PF.

Gonda: Did you deliberately leave the country to avoid the talks?

Ncube: First again that is a nonsensical idiotic allegation. What the heck do I have an interest in avoiding the talks? What is it that I have to gain by avoiding the talks when in fact, when in fact we were the party which was saying before these talks were started and were called that the parties need to sit down and talk? You look at each and every comment, every statement that we made prior to the SADC Ministerial visit, prior to the SADC Troika Summit in Maputo, President Mutambara consistently, consistently called upon MDC-T, called upon Zanu-PF to sit down and talk. We are the ones who called upon Morgan Tsvangirai to come back to the country so that this matter can be resolved by Zimbabweans across the table and if you look at our oral and written submissions to the SADC Ministerial Troika we recommended this dialogue and these talks, it is emphatically calling for the talks. Indeed more than any of the other parties we did that. You will recall the MDC-T were saying there is no reason for any talks, all you need is to implement the GPA without any discussion. So even on the basis of the fact it is nonsensical to say that the party, which called for, which campaigned for, which argued for the dialogue suddenly wants to avoid the dialogue.

Secondly the meetings, which we travelled to attend, were meetings, which were predetermined long before, long before the talks were agreed and before the timeframe was set by SADC. I went to the ATC Council of Ministers in Brussels which was agreed upon six months ago that it will take place on those dates which we committed ourselves that we will attend to ensure that you have appointments of the new Secretary General, you have the budget for next year, you have programmes for next year and that we as a country have an interest in ensuring that all those things take place and that is the meeting I went to attend. Mrs Mushonga went to attend the meeting of the ADB Bank, which we were requested as Chair of COMESA to go and attend that meeting and to make a presentation on behalf of COMESA as the current chairs of COMESA. So if some imbecile somewhere thinks that attending those meetings is avoiding the talks it is not my problem.

Thirdly and finally, the 15 days we are talking about, we as a party were available for the talks. When we returned from Maputo we said we were available for the talks and others were not available. I then travelled to Egypt with President Mugabe to the Africa/China Summit on that weekend immediately, or rather on the Sunday immediately after the Maputo Summit and we came back on the Monday and we offered ourselves for the talks, we said we can talk on Tuesday, we can talk on Wednesday, we can talk on Thursday, we can talk on Friday, we can talk on the Saturday and the Sunday and there were no takers for our offer, others were busy. On the Monday that's when we were then away, on the Monday, and the Tuesday and the Wednesday - three days. We returned on Thursday and offered to be at the negotiating table on the Friday, on the Saturday, on the Sunday, on the Monday and we even offered to say let's get out of Harare and have a retreat so that we will have uninterrupted negotiations with a view to concluding them as expeditiously as possible. Again there were no takers. For instance the Minister of Finance said he was working on his budget, he could not be out of Harare although he was available during those days for talks in Harare. The Zanu-PF team said they were not available during that period and therefore only an idiot can suggest that representatives of a party who were available out of the 15 days that we are talking about, were available except in respect of four of those days, you can then say they avoided the talks.

Gonda: So what is going to happen if you don't meet the SADC mandated deadline? I understand it's the 6th of . . . (interrupted)

Ncube: There is no such thing. That is a creation of those who grandstand and who are masters of deception. There never was a SADC deadline. Those that want to believe there was, it is their problem, not mine. SADC provided a framework and said, and this is a decision of SADC and it has no deadline and I'll summarise it to you.

Gonda: Before you summarise it to us, Morgan Tsvangirai, after the SADC Summit in Mozambique, he came out and told journalists that Robert Mugabe had been given a 30 day deadline, so are you saying he lied?

Ncube: I'm not the spokesperson for MDC-T or for Morgan Tsvangirai, you are free to go and ask him. . .

Gonda: But you are saying there was no deadline.

Ncube: There was no deadline and I don't know whether he said that or he didn't say that, I'm hearing it from you and as far as I'm concerned there wasn't. My understanding and my party's understanding of the SADC resolutions was that the parties must meet immediately and after 15 days, the facilitator will review the progress they have made and render such assistance as might be necessary to render. And after a further 15 days the facilitator shall report to the SADC chair on progress or lack of it and then the SADC might then consider what further assistance or what further action, if any, is required and in my vocabulary, those are not deadlines, that is a framework.

Gonda: The MDC-T has issued several statements and in most of the statements they've talked about a SADC deadline and I was actually going to ask you who pushed for the 15 to 30 day timeline?

Ncube: First as I say I'm not a spokesperson of anybody except the party that I represent. As I understand it there was no deadline pushed for or the timeframe, which was pushed for by anyone. The Ministerial Report, the Foreign Ministerial Troika Report contained the provision relating to the 30 day period or 30 day framework, that was already in the Report to say that the parties must talk and SADC must then review within 30 days the progress thereof. What was then added on the floor of the Summit was the 15 day period and that 15 day period was proposed by President Zuma and accepted by everybody else who was present at the meeting.

Gonda: Right, and so President Zuma has actually appointed a new team tasked with evaluating the negotiation process, so in your view how significant is the shift in persons?

Ncube: Previously the dialogue was facilitated by the South African President who was at that time President Mbeki and there's a new President in South Africa and he's facilitating the dialogue. In fact if there's a team to evaluate, they never was a team before to evaluate. That's a new development. Previously there was a facilitation team and this was not an evaluation team. This was a team, which basically chaired the dialogue among and between the parties. You had Reverend Chikane, you had then Minister Mufamadi you had Advocate Mojangu - these were the facilitation team, they sat with the negotiators, chaired the meeting when they were required to be chaired and then when we requested that we wanted to talk on our own without them being present we will tell them so. That is what used to happen and they were not an evaluation team. I have no idea what the terms of reference of the new team is.

Gonda: Finally Professor Ncube why are the talks being held in total secrecy because many people are saying obviously you cannot give all details but surely there has to be some kind of a brief, or the occasional press conference so that at least Zimbabweans know what is being discussed about their future?

Ncube: Well I think Zimbabweans know what is being discussed. The contentious issues, the unresolved issues and the outstanding issues are known. What we have said we will not do is give a briefing of 'we have an agreement on this, we are still negotiating on this' because first there can be no agreement on one issue without an agreement on the others because all the parties have said while they may make a concession on item "A", that concession is valid only on the assumption that they will be able to get concessions on items "C" or "D". Therefore without going through the entire agenda there is in fact no agreement on anything. So it is pointless to say you are announcing that we have an agreement on how to take the issue of sanctions when you have no agreement on how to take the issue of the rule of law because whatever concessions people are making on one issue might be conditional on the other issues being resolved, so it is pointless.

Secondly by its very nature, if you start to brief the media and to issue statements on the substance there will always be different points of emphasis which will only create contradictions and we might then end up negotiating what we have said in the media - is this correct, is this the best way of saying it - and it doesn't help in our respectful view.

Gonda: I'm afraid we've run out of time and we have to end here but thank you very much for talking on the programme Hot Seat. That was Professor Welshman Ncube one of the negotiators from the MDC and the Minister of Industry and Commerce, thank you very much.

Ncube: Thank you.

Please credit www.kubatana.net if you make use of material from this website. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License unless stated otherwise.

TOP