|
When truth goes on holiday and
dishonesty rules the world, it behoves people with moral conscience to stand up
and be counted.
Perhaps I have to declare my hand early. I used to vote Labour. I voted for Tony Blair on 7 May 1997 when he became Prime Minister. But I refused to vote at all in the last elections in June 2001 because I couldn�t insult my conscience and vote for Blair and Labour again. Because of their odious foreign policy, especially in Africa, and particularly in Zimbabwe, Labour and Blair have lost my vote forever. Because of the interest of just 4 500 white farmers (who happen to be British descended), Tony Blair�s Britain and its allies are punishing 13 million black people in Zimbabwe by imposing unannounced economic and other sanctions on the country, leading to severe hardships. I was in Zimbabwe between 10-22 December and I saw people queuing for bread in parts of Harare, something I didn�t see last April. Its all about one of Zimbabwe�s international credit lines which have been cut by Britain�s lies about Zimbabwe and its allies, making it impossible for the Government to source foreign exchange to buy enough maize for a country hit by drought induced famine. The lone credit line still open is so because of a "friendly bank manager". And yet Britain and its allies have the audacity to pretend that they are the ones who love black Zimbabweans so much that they want them to have "human rights" and "security", and as such, the English cricket team should boycott Zimbabwe. What hypocrisy! Lets fast rewind to the days of apartheid and the English cricket tours of South Africa. Did the British stop them? In October 2001, President Bush signed into law the Zimbabwe Democracy Act under which Washington has blocked all international credit lines to Zimbabwe, ostensibly because America wants black Zimbabweans to have more democracy, human rights and all that. America (sometimes joined by Britain and France) consistently voted at the UN for the continuation of apartheid. In fact, in 1995, at the height of the apartheid atrocities, America supplied nuclear technology to the apartheid government, and for the next 10 years until 1975, supplied about 100 kilograms of weapons grade uranium fuel to South Africa. Washington knew that the apartheid government would not use the nuclear weapons on the elephants in the Kruger National Park. It was going to use them to kill the blacks in and outside South Africa, including Zimbabwe. Today, the same Washington professes to love black Africans so much that it has passed a Zimbabwe Democracy Act under which it is denying 13 million Zimbabweans access to international credit. And they say it is President Mugabe who is rather "starving eight million people to death". What about the president of the other six Southern African countries also hit by drought-induced famine? Are they also "starving" their people to death? For those who don�t know, I must explain myself here: in Southern Africa (unlike anywhere else I know of), the people live on only one crop � maize (or sadza). So a shortage of maize means famine, even though there may be other foodstuffs available � rice, potatoes, millet, cassava, sorghum, etc (as is the current case in Zimbabwe and Zambia). But the people don�t like these foodstuffs or eat them with reservations. Strangely maize is not even indigenous to this region, it is an import from South America. At the moment, the UN World Food Programme and many other NGOs (local and foreign), are distributing maize in Zimbabwe. President Mugabe doesn�t control these agencies or their operations, so how is he "starving eight million people"? Remember: Britain, America and their allies did the same to Nkrumah in Ghana when they wanted him out. They manipulated the world cocoa price (knowing that Ghana depended heavily on cocoa sales, about 70 percent of exports at the time) until it fell from �748 per tonne in 1960 to �60 per tonne in 1965, making it impossible for Nkrumah to run the economy. In between, they mounted a shameless propaganda campaign to demonise Nkrumah in order to speed up his overthrow, which eventually came on 24 February 1966. On 8 January 1999, the Times of London, which prides itself as "the paper of record", made an extraordinary admission: "Kwame Nkrumah�s Ghana was brought low by the collapse of the cocoa market," it reported. We are seeing a replay of the same machinations in Zimbabwe. In fact, Zimbabwe is being punished to teach the South Africans and the Namibians (who have similar land ownership problems) a lesson and frighten them into inaction. "You do a Zimbabwe, and this is what you get." May our ancestors help the Zimbabweans to be strong and continue to resist the attempts to destroy their efforts to take their destiny into their own hands? We lost out in Ghana because we listened to the deceitful words of those who pretended to love us more than Nkrumah. Zimbabwe cannot, should not, and must not repeat the mistake! It is going to be difficult in the first few years, but they shall overcome. To me, my greatest worry is that the British government and media have reached a point where they cannot even tell proper lies. We had an interview with David Hasluck, a former Director of the white Commercial Farmers Union in Zimbabwe, who is accusing the Labour government of causing the mess in the beautiful country. "A Conservative government would never have done that", Hasluck told me without batting an eyelid. He recounted a similar event in the British � Zimbabwean saga that has escaped everybody. President Mugabe himself, Hasluck said, came to see Tony Blair (then just six months in office) in October 1997, to talk about the land issue. "Mugabe was not well received". He left London "dismayed and angry." Blair�s attitude shocked Mugabe because John Major, his immediate predecessor, had sent a mission to Zimbabwe only in late 1996 and the mission had been reported, recommending further British assistance to the land reform programme. Major had left the files for Blair when he was defeated in the May 1997 elections. And what did Blair do: stick two fingers up the nose of the Zimbabweans! Two weeks later, Clare Short, Blair�s minister for international development, sent an incendiary letter to the wounded Zimbabweans, telling them: "I should make it clear that we do not accept that Britain has a special responsibility to meet the costs of land purchase in Zimbabwe. We are a new government from diverse backgrounds without links to former colonial interests. "My own origins are Irish and as you know, we were colonised not colonisers." Claire Short confirms that President Mugabe did come to see Blair in October 1997, and also makes another telling admission: "I am told Britain provided a package of assistance for resettlement in the period immediately following independence," she writes. "This was, I gather, carefully planned and implemented, and met most of its targets." Until the interview with David Hasluck on 20 December 2002, I had overlooked the import of this paragraph even though I had read the letter many times. Tony Blair�s government and the British media have claimed since 1999 that Britain stopped funding Zimbabwe�s land reform because "Mugabe gave the land to his cronies". But here is Clare Short testifying that (please let me repeat the paragraph): "I am told that Britain provided a package of assistance for resettlement in the period immediately following independence. This was, I gather, carefully planned and implemented, and met most of its targets". I am not English, but I do understand their language, thank God. Clare Short is saying here, "Britain is happy that the package we provided was used for the purpose it was given. The land resettlement programme was carefully planned and implemented and met most of its targets!" So where did the "cronies" come in? Is it any wonder that John Major and Mrs Thatcher who worked with President Mugabe for years on the land issue, have been pointedly silent since Zimbabwe exploded in the face of Blair? Strangely, and instead of owning up to their mistakes and making amends, Blair and Short and their government have gone on to finance the formation of the opposition MDC party, and mounted an ugly campaign to demonise not only President Mugabe but Zimbabwe as a whole, driving away businesses, while pretending that nobody sees their hands at work! Well, not all the people are so naive. David Hasluck, the white farmer, says in our interview: "you will think that the diplomatic failure to pre-empt this, I mean internationally sanctioned now, our leaders are internationally sanctioned largely � you know, the elections are one thing � they are sanctioned largely because of the approach on land which started all the other things." But it is crystal clear that the current "approach on land" was the only alternative left to President Mugabe by Tony Blair and Clare Short. And they are the ones who claim to love the Zimbabwean more! � New African. The Mulindwas
communication group
"With Yoweri Museveni, Uganda is in anarchy" |
