Back to Index

Finding facts about Zimbabwe
African National Congress (ANC)
Extracted from the ANC Today newsletter - Volume 4, No. 44, 5-11 November 2004
November 05, 2004

http://www.anc.org.za/ancdocs/anctoday/2004/at44.htm#art4

A COSATU "fact finding mission" arrived in Zimbabwe on Monday 25 October. This was after the Government of Zimbabwe had informed COSATU that, "the mission is not acceptable", and asked that the members of the delegation should be informed "in time that the mission has been called off." Since then, the fate of this mission has received saturation media coverage.

In the light of all this, many members of our movement have sought clarification from the ANC leadership about this whole affair. We have therefore informed the COSATU leadership that this edition of ANC Today will carry an article on this affair to respond to the queries of our members and supporters.

But before we get into the substance of this matter, we must address some misconceptions that have gained some currency arising from COSATU's "fact finding mission" to Zimbabwe.

One of these is that in one way or another, the confrontation between COSATU and the Zimbabwe Government has complicated or would complicate the relations between the ANC and our Government on one hand, and ZANU-PF and the Zimbabwe Government on the other. Whether this is a mere prediction or the expression of a wish, the reality is that COSATU's "fact finding" mission will have no effect whatsoever on these relations.

Here are some of the public comments made in this regard. 'ZimOnline' said "There are fears that the COSATU visit could have hardened the ruling ZANU PF's attitude towards Mbeki's efforts to find a solution to the crisis". Business Day said "that the row could escalate and undermine government's efforts to mediate in the political crisis in Zimbabwe".

The Sunday Times said: "A spat between Cosatu and the Zimbabwean government could be a serious embarrassment for South African President Thabo Mbeki, who has so far espoused a policy of "quiet diplomacy" with his country's northern neighbour." The BBC said "the action will cause embarrassment for the South African government".

Another view that has been peddled around is that this episode reflects divisions within our movement.

Business Day reported that "Senior African National Congress (ANC) officials were locked in a meeting all afternoon yesterday, discussing efforts to control the damage caused by the deportation of a Congress of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu) delegation visiting Zimbabwe on a fact-finding mission. It also wants to preempt a possible fallout among the tripartite alliance partners."

There was no such meeting!

The Voice of America reported that, "the incident has exposed a rift within the ruling party on how the Zimbabwe situation should be handled."

It quoted one Adam Habib of the Human Sciences Research Council as saying: "There is clearly tension within the ANC itself about whether that ('quiet diplomacy') is an appropriate strategy. And there have been discussions and debates within the party itself on that matter. Now I think the ANC is of course not in a position to publicly chart a different route to government, or at least to the presidency and foreign affairs, but COSATU is. It has a relative greater degree of autonomy and it has been very vocal right through the last two or three years about its opposition to Mugabe and what Mugabe's been up to."

We would assume that Mr Habib, described as a "political analyst", would know that as in any other democracy, our Government implements policies decided by the ruling party, the ANC. However, he chose to pretend that the Government decides policy for the ANC. This was to make the suggestion that except for its obligatory loyalty to the Government, which in this instance he reduces to "the presidency and foreign affairs", the ANC would agree with COSATU "about its opposition to Mugabe and what Mugabe's been up to".

Mr Habib overreached himself in his effort to peddle the untruth that obviously serves some people's interests, that our movement is divided about our relations with Zimbabwe. It is clear that in this case, as with others in the past, the wish is father to the thought.

But perhaps we should criticise ourselves that we paid no attention to the predictions about divisions in our movement and so on, made more than a year ago in 2003 by the privately-owned 'The Financial Gazette' of Zimbabwe. In its 26 June 2003 edition, this journal said:

"President Thabo Mbeki's much criticised delicate foreign policy on Zimbabwe goes under a litmus test with the powerful and militant Congress of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu) positioning itself to aggressively push the South African leader to force President Robert Mugabe, currently balancing on a political knife-edge, from power and call for an interim government as a precursor for the ushering in of a new political dispensation.

"The move by the South African labour union, a key ally of the ruling African National Congress (ANC) during the liberation of the country, was unanimously agreed on May 28 and 29, at a meeting convened in Johannesburg to actively support calls by the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) and other stakeholders, "for an interim government in Zimbabwe and the drafting of a new constitution on the basis of which fresh elections should be conducted.

"According to confidential information obtained by this paper, Cosatu's leadership resolved at their Johannesburg meeting that they would shortly be sending a fact-finding mission into Zimbabwe comprising of all its affiliates, before cracking its whip on Mbeki to deal with Zimbabwe's crisis and force a re-run of Zimbabwe's presidential election. This follows their meeting with the ZCTU in Johannesburg last month.

"Sources from Johannesburg indicated that Zimbabwe's issue, which had been simmering under within the ANC's ruling block, could boil over, exposing that the alliance has not been singing from the same song sheet over efforts to curtail a long-standing crisis in Zimbabwe.

"President Mbeki has come in for a flak over his silent diplomacy at a time there has been a chorus for a radical push to effect a regime change in Zimbabwe...

"The decision by Cosatu, which was taken by its executive committee, is expected to break the crucial alliance between Mbeki's government and Cosatu. Cosatu's leadership is intent on taking Mbeki hostage over his quiet diplomacy on Zimbabwe, which has been widely criticised as ineffective in dealing with the country's political and economic crisis.

"'Cosatu will lobby the South African government to pressurise President Mugabe..to accede to the demands by the trade union movement for democracy, restoration of rule of law and free political activity,' the Cosatu executive declared in minutes obtained by The Financial Gazette.

"The Cosatu executive said it had a 'historical duty' to help find a solution to Zimbabwe's problems and ensure democracy and free political activity.

"'The resolution that was taken by Cosatu was a result of our meeting with them last month. After the meeting that's when they came with that position and I must say we are very much humbled by their response since we come from the family of both regional and international labour unions', said Wellington Chibhebhe, the secretary general of the ZCTU."

The Financial Gazette published this report 16 months ago. We will now comment on what happened 16 months after the report was published, when COSATU sent the fact finding mission to Zimbabwe predicted by The Financial Gazette.

On 11 October this year, the General Secretary of COSATU wrote to President Mugabe. He said "COSATU in its eighth National Congress held in September 2003, decided to send a fact-finding mission to Zimbabwe". He told President Mugabe that the mission would arrive in Zimbabwe 14 days from the date of his letter, "on the week of the 25-29 October 2004. The delegation will consist of at least one person per each of our 21 affiliated unions plus two officials from the trade union federation - COSATU."

He said the mission would be hosted by the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU). He requested that President Mugabe should "grant an audience to our delegation", during the period it had fixed for its visit. He also said that the delegation also wanted to see Zimbabwe Minister of Labour, Paul Mangwana, and requested that President Mugabe should assist the delegation to meet the Minister.

He informed President Mugabe that the delegation would also meet "the leadership of key political formations and major civil society formations", to gain "a full view of the political and socio economic developments in Zimbabwe".

He went on to say: "We would appreciate a list of organisations that fall into this ('key political and civil society') category that you recommend we should also meet." He wrote that otherwise COSATU was making its own arrangements to meet "other stakeholders".

He requested President Mugabe to "revert back to us about suitable dates and times for a meeting". He went further to advise President Mugabe "to direct all enquiries to our International Relations Secretary, Simon Boshielo in our head office or alternatively at.(mobile)".

Presumably COSATU expected that President Mugabe, a Head of State, would accept that the situation in Zimbabwe justified that a South African trade union federation should send a political fact finding mission, whose fact finding activities he should facilitate, and with which he should then communicate, through its International Relations Secretary, to indicate:

• when he would meet the COSATU delegation;
• what arrangements he had made for the delegation to meet the Minister of Labour; and, which other organisations the delegation should meet.

It is our firm view that under any circumstances, this approach to any Head of State, including President Mugabe, was astounding. The contempt for a Head of State, a sovereign government and state it communicates could not have created a climate conducive to serious discussions. The best that could have been expected as a response to the letter was no response.

However, the Government of Zimbabwe humbled itself to respond to the letter of the General Secretary of COSATU. Quite appropriately in the circumstances we will describe, the respondent was the Permanent Secretary (Director General) for Public Service, Labour and Social Welfare.

The first point the Permanent Secretary made in his letter is that the ZCTU, COSATU's counterpart and host, only communicated to the Zimbabwe Minister of Labour about the then projected COSATU visit, and the programme of the mission, in a letter dated 19 October 2004. Evidently, the ZCTU indicated that the COSATU mission would be in Zimbabwe from 24 October, 5 days after the date of the letter of the ZCTU to its own Minister of Labour.

The Permanent Secretary concluded his letter as follows: "In view of the foregoing, the mission is not acceptable and COSATU is advised to liaise with Hon. Mdladlana (the South African Minister of Labour) with a view to revisiting the original agenda. In order to avoid inconveniencing your members who are supposed to travel to Harare on Sunday the 24th October 2004, you are kindly advised to inform them in time that the mission has been called off. By a copy of this letter the ZCTU Secretary-General is advised of the position."

Much has been made of this advice in the aftermath of the termination of the stay of the COSATU mission and its transportation out of Zimbabwe back to South Africa. The central allegation that is made is that this advice, and what then happened to the COSATU delegation, demonstrated the anti-democratic and "brutally repressive" nature of the Zimbabwe Government.

Accordingly, all and sundry, from the South African Communist Party to the Democratic Alliance of Tony Leon, and others in between, have hailed COSATU and the COSATU fact finding mission as outstanding combatants for the liberation of the people of Zimbabwe from tyranny.

However, to entrench the culture of truthfulness in the conduct of public affairs, it is necessary that we indicate some of the contents of the October 21 letter written by the Zimbabwe Permanent Secretary to the General Secretary of COSATU. He said:

"Let me start by pointing out that.the solidarity arrangement(s) between ZCTU and COSATU are not in dispute. I wish to draw your attention to the processes agreed upon by the Social Partners of both Zimbabwe and South Africa in June 2003 in Geneva, Switzerland, with a view to dealing with the political dimension of Labour in Zimbabwe.

"Mr E. Patel of your organisation's International Relations is fully aware of what was agreed upon in June 2003. Social Partners in South Africa being coordinated by Hon M.M.S. Mdladlana, Minister of Labour, agreed to engage their Zimbabwe counterparts in order to discuss the political element of Labour in Zimbabwe.

"In line with what was agreed, Hon Mdladlana, in November 2003 invited his Zimbabwe counterpart together with representatives of ZCTU and EMCOZ to a two-day meeting in South Africa. Both COSATU and Business South Africa were involved in the organisation of the planned meeting. The Government of Zimbabwe was to meet the expenses. However ZCTU refused to proceed to South Africa. As a result the meeting was called off, notwithstanding getting the invitation directly from COSATU.

"Accordingly, any proposal by COSATU to visit Zimbabwe on a mission to engage Zimbabwean stakeholders outside the realm of Employment and Labour should be in the context of an agreed framework.

"The proposed meeting(s) with ZANU PF and MDC officials (and other organisations "involved in the political discourse of Zimbabwe") demonstrate the political nature of the mission to the extent that it has to be within an agreed framework of dealing with the political dimension of Labour within the two countries. In view of the foregoing, the mission is not acceptable and COSATU is advised to liaise with Hon Mdladlana with a view to revisiting the original agenda."

COSATU decided to ignore this letter. It insisted on its right to visit Zimbabwe regardless of the wishes of the Government of that country, and the right of that Government, like any other, to decide which foreigners to admit into the country.

What all this amounts to is the following:

• During the annual 2003 International Labour Conference in Geneva, the South African and Zimbabwe social partners - government, employers and labour - agreed to work together in a Joint Tripartite Commission.
• Among other things, this Commission would address "the political dimension of labour in Zimbabwe".
• In this context, the Zimbabwe Government reaffirmed its respect for the right of COSATU to act in solidarity with the ZCTU.
• The first post-Geneva meeting of the Commission convened by the South African social partners, and scheduled to take place in South Africa in November last year, failed to take place because ZCTU refused to attend.
• When the Zimbabwe Government received the letter from the General Secretary of COSATU, it said that because of the obviously political nature of COSATU's fact-finding mission, it would be proper that, as visualised in the Geneva understanding, the mission should be organised through the Joint Tripartite Commission.
• It therefore advised COSATU to contact the South African coordinator of the South African social partners, Minister Mdladlana, to use the mechanism provided by the Joint Commission to arrange COSATU's visit to Zimbabwe.
• In response, COSATU flatly refused to use this agreed mechanism and afterwards said it was "absolutely right to insist that (it) did not require government permission to conduct the mission".
• In the circumstance that COSATU refused to use the agreed process to enable it to engage the political situation in Zimbabwe, thus dismissing any interaction with the Government of Zimbabwe on this process matter, a confrontation between COSATU and the Zimbabwe Government became inevitable.

Consistent with what was reported by the "The (Zimbabwe) Financial Gazette" in June 2003, COSATU has now said that it will "campaign for the restoration of democracy and for free and fair elections (in Zimbabwe)."

It said it "believes that despite its early forced departure, the mission achieved its goal". It "congratulate(d) its members in the fact-finding mission to Zimbabwe for their heroism and commitment." It "thank(ed) all those, in South Africa and around the world, who have supported the mission and shown their solidarity."

Among those who showed this solidarity were the SACP, the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) and the DA.

The SACP said "the South African Communist Party (SACP) is outraged and angered by the rounding off and expulsion of a COSATU delegation by the Zimbabwean government from Harare. With this act, it is time now that South Africa's workers intensify their solidarity with the workers and poor of Zimbabwe and support for the struggle for the democratisation of Zimbabwe."

The ICFTU said "the ICFTU-AFRO condemns in the strongest possible terms the expulsion of the COSATU mission. This strong-arm tactic must be viewed in the light of the deteriorating political situation on the eve of the parliamentary elections early next year. ICFTU-AFRO is concerned that violence and intimidation against opposition and the trade union movement is likely to rear its ugly head bringing into question the fairness of the electoral process."

For the DA, its parliamentary Chief Whip, Douglas Gibson, said, "For once COSATU is setting a good example. If only President Mbeki and the ANC would take a leaf out of COSATU's book and adopt a more robust approach, we might soon see a resolution of the Zimbabwean problem."

In this regard, the Deputy General Secretary of COSATU, Bheki Ntshalintshali, said: "The ANC and the government have their own ideas on how the Zimbabwean crisis should be dealt with. However, we do not agree with them."

In another statement, COSATU said, "We accept that the ANC government shares with COSATU the common goal of restoring democracy in Zimbabwe, but that it is pursuing a different route from COSATU towards achieving this goal." For these reasons, COSATU has said it saw no reason and was not obliged to consult either the ANC or Government about its Zimbabwe project.

Expressing its "own ideas", the ANC and our Government will continue to engage ZANU PF, the MDC, the Government of Zimbabwe and other representative organisations of the people of Zimbabwe, as they have done for some years already.

With no hidden agenda in this regard, we will continue to interact with the Zimbabwe leadership, our own people and others throughout the world, convinced that the solution to the problems of Zimbabwe lies in the hands of the people of Zimbabwe.

Our task is to work honestly and inclusively with all the leaders of Zimbabwe to support them as they strive to solve these problems, avoiding any action that might suggest an arrogant superiority on our part, over the people of Zimbabwe.

We will continue to support the Joint Tripartite Commission formed by the South African and Zimbabwe social partners in 2003 with the involvement of all three of our country's trade union federations, and urge the social partners to use this institution to assist the people of Zimbabwe to overcome their challenges.

We will also continue to work with all representative organisations of our own people, together to contribute whatever we can to a bright future for Zimbabwe, consistent with the wishes of the people of Zimbabwe.

We fully support the statement made by our Ministry of Foreign Affairs that "The South African government accepts that Zimbabwe is an independent, sovereign state that has an inalienable right to determine and to apply its immigration legislation as it may deem appropriate and in its own interest."

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