Posted on 03/25/2002 2:06:08 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
The West would be well-advised to back off pressuring Mbeki to become involved in efforts to sanction Mugabe more harshly. It is too much to ask that the ANC provide aid and comfort to a movement in Zimbabwe that -- if assisted to power -- would then help the ANC's political foes in its own country.
In fact, many South Africans believe conservatives in Washington are predisposed to eroding the influence of the ANC because of its closeness with the South African Communist Party.
In the wake of the recent victory of President Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe elections, African nations -- particularly South Africa -- have come under increasing pressure from the West to condemn his regime harshly.
Yet despite South Africa's move Tuesday to join in the mild sanction of suspending Zimbabwe from a coalition of mostly former British colonies, South African President Thabo Mbeki can be expected to continue his "softly, softly" approach.
However much criticism Mbeki comes under for going too easy on Mugabe, he has his reasons. And punishing long-suffering South Africa would only plunge it into further misery.
Before turning up the heat on South Africa, the United States and the European Union should look at Zimbabwe from a different perspective. In the welter of denunciations of Mugabe, few have acknowledged that during the long struggle to dislodge Zimbabwe's predecessor state -- the white minority regime of Rhodesia -- he was viewed as a plausible alternative to his Soviet-backed competitor, the late Joshua Nkomo. One leading British diplomat of the day said that "Mugabe's victory was the best thing that could have happened" because Nkomo "would have let the Russians in."
Just as the Cold War helps explain why Islamic fundamentalists once were supported by the West in Afghanistan, the same reasoning was used to favor Mugabe. Washington and London may have forgotten this, but South Africa hasn't. Many there wonder why this is now being ignored.
During the Cold War era, Mugabe's party was a stiff and stern critic of the African National Congress, which Mbeki now heads. At the time, Mugabe was aligned with one of the fiercest political opponents of the ANC. And although relations between Mugabe and the ANC during the anti-apartheid struggle of the 1980s were proper, they were certainly far from the picture of boon comrades that is too often portrayed in the West.
One must also bear in mind that South Africa's ANC -- and a number of other ruling parties in the region -- hold no love for Mugabe's opposition, the Movement for Democratic Change, because it has made alliances with opposition forces in South Africa. Despite the West's support of the MDC, it is understandable that South Africa's Mbeki would not favor those allied with his political opponents.
The ANC, like many parties in the region, looks with suspicion at the "Rhodesians" backing the MDC, especially because of their all-too-eerie resemblance to the whites in South Africa's opposition.
The West would be well-advised to back off pressuring Mbeki to become involved in efforts to sanction Mugabe more harshly. It is too much to ask that the ANC provide aid and comfort to a movement in Zimbabwe that -- if assisted to power -- would then help the ANC's political foes in its own country.
In fact, many South Africans believe conservatives in Washington are predisposed to eroding the influence of the ANC because of its closeness with the South African Communist Party.
Instead of pressing South Africa to ostracize Zimbabwe further, the West should bolster the South African leader's approach -- which reportedly includes calling for a government of national unity. Punishing South Africa would be a wrongheaded policy.
Gerald Horne, a professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, is author of "From the Barrel of a Gun: The United States and The War Against Zimbabwe, 1965-1980."
Official sources said yesterday that President Thabo Mbeki's reconciliation and economic recovery plans faced collapse as Mugabe contemplated a "crisis cabinet" to resist growing international pressure and sanctions after his disputed election victory. That would make a coalition impossible with Morgan Tsvangirai's Movement for Democratic Change (MDC).****
Zimbabwe -- Militant tells of Mugabe bribes to raid farmers**** PRESIDENT Mugabe paid his militants handsomely for almost two years of campaigning against Zimbabwe's white farmers and their workers, according to a member of the ruling Zanu-PF youth wing. The 36-year-old, formerly an official of the notorious group, told of the generous sums as the farmer he persecuted for two years packed to leave his farm. It has long been known that the militants were paid. But the member, who was speaking anonymously, suggested that the payments were more consistent than suspected. The "wages" two years ago were double what commercial farm workers earned. The account also indicated that the organisation of the farm seizures was better planned than supposed.****
Zimbabwe -- Why Mbeki caved in over Mugabe ****"Blair made it clear that after the position of Africa on Zimbabwe, other Western leaders would laugh the plan - and him - out of court if he pretended that there was no concern on the handling of Zimbabwe," a Downing Street source said this week. …………..Commonwealth, Zimbabwean, British and SA diplomats who were present on Tuesday said Mbeki insisted there be only a year's suspension of Zimbabwe - to be reviewed within the year - and that this should come with a promise from Western leaders that they would provide food aid to Zimbabwe.
Mbeki also insisted that an agreement on food aid be included in a statement to be issued after the meeting. Howard left the meeting and called Cabinet colleagues in Australia on whether he should agree to such food aid. He agreed to provide $2-million (about R23-million) worth of food aid, and to ensure that other Western countries did the same. ****
Zimbabwe -- Mbeki sends 'words of warning' to Mugabe****'Zimbabwe's future is of direct relevance to the future of South Africa' …………….In a veiled warning, Mbeki said that "an important responsibility rests on the shoulders of the people of Zimbabwe and their political leaders... to create the climate and circumstances that will enable us, our region, the Commonwealth and the rest of the world to help implement this programme of national reconciliation and economic recovery."
Later he says: "To be productive, our interventions... can only be as friends who act to support democracy, peace, stability and prosperity...
"It is however also true, as we have indicated, that the future of Zimbabwe is of direct relevance to the future of our own country and our region. We are therefore materially and directly interested in a Zimbabwe that is democratic, peaceful, stable and prosperous." The situation in Zimbabwe held valuable lessons for South Africa, and "as a country we must learn from the experiences of our neighbour, so that we do not repeat mistakes. "At the same time, we have to continue to strive to ensure that the negative consequences of such mistakes do not spill over to any of the countries of our region, including ourselves," Mbeki said.****
As to Mbeki's approach, it is just a collection of excuses for doing nothing.
You and me and millions of others who see it for what it is, co-opting the opposition and shutting it down.
You got it.
Agreed.
He is also a llong standing apologist for Mugabe and a denigrator of the US and Britain as racist.
Like the rest of liberal acedeme, he is incapable of changing his mine or of admitting it when events prove him wrong.
This "Review of From The Barrel of a Gun" a review sympathetic to Horne and his views, is illustrative of his attitude.
Yes, it is true that the opposition party's composition in Zimbabwe mirrors that of the opposition in South Africa, and that it is counterintuitive to think that the ANC should give comfort and aid to it. But the author makes himself look foolish with his great insights like "The ANC, like many parties in the region, looks with suspicion at the "Rhodesians" backing the MDC, especially because of their all-too-eerie resemblance to the whites in South Africa's opposition."
Of course they look similiar; they're white! What's so eerie about whites looking like whites? But with a few exceptions, the whites who have remained in Zimbabwe since 1980 do not identify themselves as Rhodesians, they considered themselves Zimbabweans, with expectations of being considered as such. The initial message was that the country was to include them - those who didn't accept this left soon after the change in government. That is why the actions of Mugabe in the last few years have been such a stab in the back to those whites who remained.
Secondly, ZANU was every bit as marxist (in theory) as ZAPU, Nkomo's party, but was backed by the Chinese rather than by the Soviets, as those two had their own split in the Communist bloc. Both parties sent their cadres for training in all the same countries - North Korea, China, USSR, Czechoslovakia, and East Germany. Why, then, does the author imply otherwise with a statement such as this: "In the welter of denunciations of Mugabe, few have acknowledged that during the long struggle to dislodge Zimbabwe's predecessor state -- the white minority regime of Rhodesia -- he was viewed as a plausible alternative to his Soviet-backed competitor, the late Joshua Nkomo." Hey, they were both Communist backed !
It is true, however, that ZAPU's backers had provided them with something that ZANU's backers had not: a trained army -ZIPRA - rather than lightly armed "guerilla" fighters such as in ZANU. This backing by the Soviets included the implication of assistance by Cubans and East Germans operating in Angola and Namibia at that time. This meant that weapons such as tanks, and missiles were available. In fact a Rhodesian Airliner was shot down by a missle from ZIPRA. Hence the fear that "the Russians" would be let in. Despite this available trained force, the majority of the fighting was done by ZAPU through its guerilla incursions.
However this author seems to imply that there was something innocuous about Mugabe and ZANU when it makes statements like "Just as the Cold War helps explain why Islamic fundamentalists once were supported by the West in Afghanistan, the same reasoning was used to favor Mugabe. Washington and London may have forgotten this, but South Africa hasn't. Many there wonder why this is now being ignored. " If Mugabe was backed by the West, it was because it was believed that, in so doing, it would end the fighting and keep the Soviets and their proxies from gaining a closer foothold to South Africa, not because he was less of a marxist than Nkomo and ZAPU. In fact, despite the Soviet backing, ZAPU was less hard-core marxist than ZANU. If the west didn't know this, it was because they were ill-informed.
Finally, the suggestion that "During the Cold War era, Mugabe's party was a stiff and stern critic of the African National Congress," and "Mugabe was aligned with one of the fiercest political opponents of the ANC" is just silly. The fiercist opponent of the ANC at that time was the Nationalist Party of South Africa ! Is the author implying that Mugabe was aligned with the National Party ? Mugabe was only held in check from offering assistance to the ANC because of the threat of the cut-off of oil and other vital products through the ports of South Africa.
Please excuse my long digression here. There is a small amount of fact, but too many errors of implication in this article for it to stand as it is. I don't know this author at all, but even his book title is in error. There was no Zimbabwe from 1965 through 1980, it was Rhodesia that the war was against.
Mugabe's 'Taliban' torture opponents in terror camps- ***** The opposition, which believes in non-violence to achieve its aims, fears that there will be a mass uprising if Mugabe rigs the election or introduces martial law. Senior MDC officials claim they do not have enough weapons to wage a war against Mugabe, who has reportedly ordered home more than 8,000 soldiers fighting over 'blood' diamonds in the Democratic Republic of Congo. 'We don't know what will happen,' said Sibanda as the sun burned below the African horizon, heralding another night of violence in isolated rural communities. 'If things are fair, we will win. If they are not, who knows? The people blame Mugabe, not whites, for our troubles. We cannot hold the people back forever.' *****
My main purpose in posting this column was so someone would dissect and analyse it. Thank you for doing just that! Very interesting and informative!
We have the law of unintended consequences at play here.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.