Posted on 21-8-2002
Old
Style Left-Right Fight In Zimbabwe
By Alan Marston
Mugabe is a veteran old-style socialist from the cold war days
and it
shows. On the other hand, the right hand, there are many old-style
attitudes from those formally in charge of economics and politics
in
colonial Africa. Zimbabwe is witness to the consequences of
rock heads
meeting hard money.
Hard Money
The future of privately-owned commercial farming in Zimbabwe
faced further
uncertainty on Monday as about 100 estate owners went to court
to fight for
the right to remain on their land instead of leaving to make
way for a wave
of new farmers to be settled. On 9 August 2,800 farmers were
meant to leave
their land under the terms of controversial land reform laws
which aim to
transfer land ownership from white farmers to underprivileged
black
settlers. It also became a crime for commercial farmers to continue
tending
their crops or feeding their cattle.
Jenni Williams, spokeswoman for pressure group Justice for Agriculture
(JAG) told IRIN that about 100 farmers appeared in courts around
the
country on Monday to challenge the order that they stop farming.
The
outcome ranged from farmers being fined and allowed to return
to farming,
to farmers being told they must leave. The farmers are using
a range of
technicalities including that farms still being paid off may
not come under
the acquisition programme without informing the bond-holding
bank - a
condition that has not always been met.
Zimbabwe's land reform programme is being pursued against the
backdrop of a
food crisis affecting six million Zimbabweans - half the population.
According to JAG's website, cereal production had dropped 57
percent
compared to last year - with doubt cast over the fate of the
US $330
million crop still in grading sheds - and maize production had
fallen by 67
percent. Economist John Robertson told IRIN that current uncertainly
surrounding the future of farming placed the country's billion
dollar tea,
coffee, sugar, flower and vegetable export markets at risk.
He said that
almost 95 percent of the country's commercial farmland was affected
by the
land reform programme and added that even the remaining five
percent may
eventually come under the spotlight. Robertson said the full
extent of the
impact on farming and the economy would only be known in a few
months' time
as it became clearer which farmers would be leaving their land.
With the
land reform law forcing "Section 8" farmers to down tools, crops
like tea
and tobacco which need ongoing post-harvest processing, could
be ruined,
losing farmers millions in income.
Banks also faced an uncertain future with the risk of farmers
not making
bond repayments and this would adversely affect the country's
international
credit rating. He said the government had so far not provided
promised
agricultural inputs for the incoming farmers, and they could
be too great a
credit risk for the already wary banks to lend them the cash
they need to
get started. "The banks are currently badly exposed to debt
from the
commercial farmers and the new owners (the government) won't
pay. The banks
will have to write this off as bad debt which is dangerous for
their long
term survival. "The economy is very involved and intricate and
it will all
fall in a heap if anything goes wrong," he said.
Rock Heads
The current crisis is one of drought, yet the international
press vilifies
the government for intentionally starving Zimbabwean citizens.
The
government says the natural disaster is being used to focus
attention on a
regime the West would rather see gone.
The aging President Mugabe recently rejected food aid from the
United
States, so Western observers criticized him for irrationally
subjecting his
people to further suffering. Astute journalists have linked
this rejection
of food aid to a thread of thought that is often invoked when
discussing
globalization: national sovereignty.
International criticism of Mugabe was focused during the Zimbabwean
Parliamentary elections of 2000. The government promised that
war veterans
would get land after Independence in 1980. The vets finally
started
reclaiming white farms on their own prior to the parliamentary
elections.
The Zimbabwean government quickly implemented a fast track land
reform
program to reclaim land and grant it to those who apply for
agricultural land.
The white landowners vehemently oppose the reclamation, with
violence
occurring on both sides. Their appeals to the international
community
emphasize the brutality of the Mugabe regime and inexperience
of black
farmers. The Zimbabwean government has publicly declared white
farm owners
can retain their farms if they go through the land application
process like
everyone else. Additionally the government has legislated a
process for
making sure that the commercial farms remain productive.
The Caught In The Middle
Divisive politics hurts everybody, but it is particularly destructive
for
the great majority who are not rock heads or hard money. Land
resettlement
has grabbed international attention, but does that mean the
`international
attention', including a sustained attack from Helen Clark here
in NZ, is
alright? I don't think so, which does not mean taking the side
of Mugabe.
The rhetoric of the controversy surrounds democracy and economic
stability,
but the reality of the situation is the livelihood of displaced,
diseased,
starved and super-exploited Africans. Who speaks for them?
|