So South African president Jacob Zuma came to Harare, saw with his own eyes the mess that the dithering of SADC has wrought upon the political and economic fabric of Zimbabwe and was overcome by the scheming of ZANU-PF leader Robert Mugabe and his cohorts.
With subdued fanfare and little to show for his half-hearted efforts, Zuma left the country with yet another promise of more talks and new deadlines for the resolution of the so-called outstanding issues of the so-called inclusive government. He met separately with Reserve bank governor Gideon Gono and attorney general Johannes Tomana.
If it is true that Zuma did not ask these two Mugabe henchmen to step aside for the good of the country. then this was a truly a lost opportunity. We can surmise though, that Zuma could have offered each of these men a golden handshake of sorts in South African rand in order to tempt them to do what even they must know to be the right thing: leave their posts and hope that given their relatively young ages, they might have a real chance to participate in rebuilding the country in the future. After all, what use is South African wealth if some of it is not brought to bear on situations such as this?
The departure of Gono and Tomana will likely result in a domino effect because once these two are out of the way, who knows on whom the axe will fall next? I find it difficult to believe that ZANU-PF will begin the process of dismantling its terrorist apparatus. Fear of the slippery slope complex will mean that we are likely to be talking about this case until at least after the World Cup.
I believe that there will be some face-saving movement within the government in the wake of Zuma's visit. Governors will be appointed from the MDC side but perhaps not to the full extent envisaged under earlier agreements. ZANU-PF needs to slow down the transition process in Zimbabwe because there is a very real probability that an accelerated pace of change could flush the party down the drain of political oblivion.
Saturday, March 20, 2010
Friday, March 5, 2010
The case against the Brits
In his book Diamonds, Gold, and War: The British, the Boers, and the making of South Africa (read Southern Africa) Simon and Schuster, 2007, Martin Meredith gives a dispassionate account of the history of Southern Africa, with special attention to the colonization of Zimbabwe and the struggle for control of South Africa betwen the Brits and the the descendants the Dutch settlers who were the first white people to settle in that country, also known as the Boers.
Spearheaded by Cecil John Rhodes, the British presence in southern Africa appears to have been spurred by the efforts of treasure hunters lured by the prospect of striking it rich in the proven gold and diamond fields of South Africa and an imaginary eldorado in Mashonaland in what is present day Zimbabwe.
The brutal efficiency and cunning of Rhodes' s methods and the nod and wink approach of successive British governments are explored in depth. At times, the British government comes off as unwilling and unwitting victims of the machinations of Rhodes but most of the time, they never seem to take a firm stand against the actions of their citizens in southern Africa.
If that sort of behavior rings a bell, its because it is starkly similar to the attitude of British governments of the second half of the 20th century who seemed paralysed to do anything about the denial of basic human rights to Africans in Rhodesia and South Africa while publicly making loud noises to the contrary.The murderous deception that resulted in the conquest of Zimbabwe is described in sympathetic detail by the author.
Meredith's account of the uprising against the settlers by the indegenous peoples of Zimbabwe towards the end of the 19th century is illustrative of scheming and thuggery of the the most despicable kind, including the planned and deliberate provocation of the Matebele in order to get them into a fight which they would lose for the simple reason that they were heavily outgunned.
Someone should make a movie of the battle of Shangani, the last stand of the Matebele against Rhodes where they incurred heavy losses while killing every single member of Alan Wilson's patrol. King Lobengula of Matebeleland is portrayed as at once naive and thoughtful in his dealings with the settlers, whom he tried to avoid fighting despite the urging of his own generals. Believing that all the whites wanted was gold, Lobengula allowed them to prospect for gold in the territories under his control, including Mashonaland.
Much to the disappointment of the settlers, there was not much gold to be found in Zimbabwe and soon the settlers made it clear that their focus was more on seizing land than on finding King solomon's mines.In the end, there was nothing that Lobengula could do to stop British ambitions especially once the British government had joined in the plunder at the urging of Rhodes.
On a personal note, I have mixed feelings about Meredith's account of how the settlers may have saved my own people, Chief Bere's people who lived near Fort Victoria, now Masvingo. Sensing an opportunity, the settlers decided to take sides in the quarrel in order to provoke Lobengula into a fight which they knew they would win.
Am I then expected to be grateful to the settlers for saving my clan? Presumably, I would not have been born if my ancestors had been exterminated but this assumes that I was somehow predestined to show up on earth some time. This view goes against my basic instincts of who I am. Besides, what about all the millions of native peoples who have suffered colonially driven genocide over the centuries?
I recommend this book for anyone who wants to have a deeper understanding and appreciation of the colonial mindset of the British kind.
Spearheaded by Cecil John Rhodes, the British presence in southern Africa appears to have been spurred by the efforts of treasure hunters lured by the prospect of striking it rich in the proven gold and diamond fields of South Africa and an imaginary eldorado in Mashonaland in what is present day Zimbabwe.
The brutal efficiency and cunning of Rhodes' s methods and the nod and wink approach of successive British governments are explored in depth. At times, the British government comes off as unwilling and unwitting victims of the machinations of Rhodes but most of the time, they never seem to take a firm stand against the actions of their citizens in southern Africa.
If that sort of behavior rings a bell, its because it is starkly similar to the attitude of British governments of the second half of the 20th century who seemed paralysed to do anything about the denial of basic human rights to Africans in Rhodesia and South Africa while publicly making loud noises to the contrary.The murderous deception that resulted in the conquest of Zimbabwe is described in sympathetic detail by the author.
Meredith's account of the uprising against the settlers by the indegenous peoples of Zimbabwe towards the end of the 19th century is illustrative of scheming and thuggery of the the most despicable kind, including the planned and deliberate provocation of the Matebele in order to get them into a fight which they would lose for the simple reason that they were heavily outgunned.
Someone should make a movie of the battle of Shangani, the last stand of the Matebele against Rhodes where they incurred heavy losses while killing every single member of Alan Wilson's patrol. King Lobengula of Matebeleland is portrayed as at once naive and thoughtful in his dealings with the settlers, whom he tried to avoid fighting despite the urging of his own generals. Believing that all the whites wanted was gold, Lobengula allowed them to prospect for gold in the territories under his control, including Mashonaland.
Much to the disappointment of the settlers, there was not much gold to be found in Zimbabwe and soon the settlers made it clear that their focus was more on seizing land than on finding King solomon's mines.In the end, there was nothing that Lobengula could do to stop British ambitions especially once the British government had joined in the plunder at the urging of Rhodes.
On a personal note, I have mixed feelings about Meredith's account of how the settlers may have saved my own people, Chief Bere's people who lived near Fort Victoria, now Masvingo. Sensing an opportunity, the settlers decided to take sides in the quarrel in order to provoke Lobengula into a fight which they knew they would win.
Am I then expected to be grateful to the settlers for saving my clan? Presumably, I would not have been born if my ancestors had been exterminated but this assumes that I was somehow predestined to show up on earth some time. This view goes against my basic instincts of who I am. Besides, what about all the millions of native peoples who have suffered colonially driven genocide over the centuries?
I recommend this book for anyone who wants to have a deeper understanding and appreciation of the colonial mindset of the British kind.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)