Back to Index

This article participates on the following special index pages:

Election Bulletin
Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition
February 22, 2002

Editorial - African Renaissance … or the last kicks of a dying horse?

Since its surprise defeat in the Constitutional Referendum in February 2000, the government strategy has been to use the nationalist rhetoric of the liberation struggle to defend its unconstitutional actions to grab land, muzzle the media or obstruct the opposition and generally ride roughshod over the Zimbabwean people’s fundamental freedoms. Despite the undemocratic actions of the government, this strategy has gained support from large sections of the population in Africa. Understandably, on the continent, there are large swathes of the population who strongly resent the continued domination of the former colonial masters in the continent, whether this is because of a long history of political interference by Western governments, the exploitative activities of western companies or finally, the indefensible policy prescriptions of the World Bank and IMF, which have laid to waste the social gains of post-independence in defence of the almighty market. Indeed western criticism of the actions of the Mugabe regime are received by Africans with skepticism, perceived as they are as being mainly motivated by the attacks on Zimbabweans of European descent.

The soft line taken by SADC governments in reponse to the actions of the Zimbabwe government can in part be attributed to the skillful ideological framing of the latter’s positions. Despite the negative impact on the region, SADC and African governments seem at a loss for a response to ZANU-PF’s assertion that its fight is one of defending Zimbabwe’s sovereignty and right to self determination. Issues of race and land have been skillfully played to delegitimise any protest that might come from within or outside. To criticize the Zimbabwe government’s stand is to appear to be supporting Western arrogance, racism and indifference to the plight of Africa’s people.

The truth however is that in Zimbabwe, as in the rest of Africa, behind the veneer of various governments’ claims to be defending the high ideals of pan-Africanism lies a story of capitulation to the dictates of the international financial institutions, at the expense of the country’s black majority. This capitulation has been in the face of popular resistance to structural adjustment programmes of the World Bank and IMF. Indeed, during the 15 years of implementing SAPs, government has actively suppressed resistance, including from social movements such as trade unions. Such protests were castigated by the government for chasing away foreign investors and giving a bad external image of the country.

Much as in theory its own ideological positioning fell in line with the working class and peasantry, the government continued to pursue and defend ESAP, not least because to do otherwise would compromise the accumulative tendencies of the ruling class. For ESAP opened the way for increased enrichment for a section of well-connected black elite through corrupt processes of privatization of state assets. And despite the rhetoric in support of indigenisation to create greater racial balance in the share of the formal economy, the government has been conspicuosly lethargic in taking forward widespread demands for indigenisation policies which faciliate the entry of more black Zimbabweans into the formal economy. Rather, indigenisation has amounted to little less than a means to extend patronage of party supporters, while the privileges enjoyed by the business elites and multi-national corporations remained intact. Redistribution is a word that has long been dead in the Zimbabwean discourse, such that the inequalities between the rich and the poor are more gaping than they were at independence.

The agenda for democracy on the one hand - meant to guarantee people’s fundamental rights - and that of fighting what is clearly hostile globalisation and corporate imperialism are not mutually exclusive. Quite the contrary. Governments that genuinely seek to shelter their countries from the latter can only do so if they actively nurture and are sensitive to the expression of popular will. There should be no doubt that Zimbabwean voters are clear that social justice must of necessity include political and civil rights and freedoms and that this is a principle they are going to the polls to defend.

Visit the Crisis in Zimbabwe fact sheet

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