Zimbabwe - A letter from the diaspora

GOING HOME: The year is 2004 and Caleb Dube, the former detective with the Zimbabwe Republic Police has been in exile in the United Kingdom for two years. A letter arrives from his old friend and colleague, Moses Musindo, alerting Dube to the fact that his former teacher and friend, Father Hugh Malloy, is in great danger. Friendship demands no less and Caleb Dube goes home to his native land. With no help from a partisan police force, Dube and Musindo set out to investigate. In the course of their enquiries deep in the rural areas, the two men meet a host of unforgettable characters, including Sami the AIDS orphan and Sami's friend, Tatenda, the hunter. The two boys are an indispensable part of the investigation and the search leads them to an old adversary of Dube's who holds the key to the mystery of the missing priest.
Click here to find out more or buy online

Countdown is a political detective story. It is fiction but the background is accurate and verifiable. Set in 2001/2 and the start of the land invasions, the book shows how the politicisation of the police force has led directly to the breakdown of law and order. In this hostile environment, two honest cops attempt to investigate a murder. Click here to find out more or buy online

31st October 2009

Dear Friends.
Even Zimbabweans' natural optimism must have received a severe setback this week. As each day went by there was further evidence that relations between the signatories to the GNU were collapsing after Morgan Tsvangirai's decision to 'disengage' from all contact with Zanu PF. There were almost daily reports of attacks and abductions of MDC personnel and NGO members in the urban areas and out there in the 'rurals' the Green Bombers and Zanu PF thugs were once again renewing their reign of terror on school teachers and MDC activists. The message was clear: 'You don't disengage from Mugabe and the all-powerful Zanu PF and not expect violence and revenge to follow.'
For those of us who had been pretty cynical from the start that the 'arranged marriage' would ever work, it was clear that the truth could no longer be denied or covered up with sweet-sounding words about how well the parties were getting on; the marriage was heading for the rocks and divorce was looming. On Monday, Robert Mugabe, Morgan Tsvangirai and Arthur Mutambara sat down together while the country held its breath, hoping that common sense might prevail. It was not to be; the talks ended in failure, inevitable one might say. Robert Mugabe had already made it clear that he would not budge an inch. He said as much when he told the government controlled Herald "We won't yield to MDC pressure. We will not give way any part of our authority. They can go to any summit, any part of the world. That will not happen." This from the man whose party lost the election last March but who continues to behave as if he rules by some divine right.
Predictably, the attacks on NGO's and MDC officials increased. Armed police and unidentified men raided homes and even attempted to pick up an MDC Security officer in broad daylight in the middle of Harare. "Help her!" someone in the gathering crowd shouted, "She's an MDC official." and as the crowd advanced on them, the cowardly attackers fled; it was a little victory for people power.

The SADC team was due in the country on Wednesday, perhaps we could hope again, even if it was a forlorn hope given SADC's pathetic record. The SADC troika, Zambia, Mozambique and Swaziland were in the country on a 'fact finding' mission. Was this a chink of light in the increasingly dismal scene? Then, on Wednesday evening we heard the news that the UN Rapporteur on Torture and Inhuman Treatment who had been invited by the 'Government' – in fact it was the Minister of Justice, Patrick Chinamasa – to visit Zimbabwe had been told that it was not convenient for him to enter the country at this time because officials would be busy with the SADC delegation. Fair enough, you might think and Nowak said that he quite understood and would willingly postpone his visit for a few days. Nowak, however, had a personal invitation from the Prime Minister of Zimbabwe and on Wednesday afternoon he flew into Harare airport armed with his letter of invitation from the Head of Government. What happened next is the stuff of spy fiction. At the airport, Nowak was approached by four men, his passport was taken away and he and his delegation were escorted to the departure lounge. What was needed Nowak was told by the Immigration officers was a clearance document from the Foreign Affairs Ministry. Without that, he and his companions would be put on a plane back to Johannesburg. No such document was forthcoming. On Thursday morning the BBC reported that a top UN official had been barred from entering Zimbabwe. In an interview on the BBC World Service Manfred Nowak commented that this action by the Zimbabwean 'government' was totally unacceptable behaviour towards the UN and himself as a UN official. All night long, he told the BBC interviewer, he had been detained at Harare International Airport. Various MDC officials had come out to the airport to see him but they had all been refused permission and were even told Manfred Nowak was not there at the airport! And first thing on Thursday morning, the very day he had been due to meet the Prime Minister, Manfred Novak was put on a plane out of Zimbabwe. "There are serious and credible allegations of torture and inhuman treatment in Zimbabwe" said the UN Rapporteur who bluntly declared that he would not attempt to go into Zimbabwe again after such treatment. Interestingly enough, the Zimbabwean Foreign Minister was actually present at the airport when Novak arrived and watched the whole incident unfold.

What was clear was that this was more than just Zanu PF vs MDC; it seemed there were inter-ministerial rivalries being played out as well. Today, another element was added: Zapu had apparently asked Nowak to look into the Gukuruhundi massacres together with all the other recent allegations of Torture and Inhuman treatment that Nowak was due to investigate. With the bland hypocrisy that we are so used to from Zanu PF ministers, today, Friday, Patrick Chinamasa accused the UN Rapporteur of trying to stir up trouble, "He should never have come." said the Minister of Justice - despite the fact that it was he who had invited him in the first place! "He wants to come at the invitation of a Prime Minister who has announced a partial pullout from government. What is he trying to achieve? Cause divisions?" This laughable accusation was echoed by The Herald, who today described Nowak as a 'gatecrasher'. A gatecrasher with an invitation in his pocket!

What is evident is that this whole business was totally unnecessary, a self-inflicted wound you could say. It was a slap in the face of the UN and a deliberate insult to the Prime Minister of Zimbabwe. All it has achieved is to show the world that Robert Mugabe and his party are nothing more than thoroughly untrustworthy partners in the Unity government- the very same reason that the MDC disengaged from them in the first place. So, under the very noses of the SADC troika, Mugabe insults the UN and once again demonstrates his arrogant disregard and disrespect for world opinion. Will SADC find the guts to tell him that this is totally unacceptable behaviour or will they once again turn a blind eye? Zimbabweans have once more to wait and hope that sanity will prevail - but the signs are not good.
Yours in the (continuing) struggle PH.

26th October 2009

Dear Friends.
There are so many things I miss about Zimbabwe but one thing I absolutely don't miss is the ZTV Evening News - or any other of their news bulletins for that matter! Reading Cathy Buckle's account of the way Morgan Tsvangirai's disengagement from the current arrangement with Zanu PF was reported on ZTV News just served to illustrate how vital it is to have a free and independent news media if democracy is to thrive. What strikes one, above all about Cathy's account is the downright racism and vitriol that is permitted, even encouraged, by way of comment. The so-called political analyst interviewed on this particular news bulletin remarked that "The blame is on the Rhodesians. Roy Bennett is a Rhodesian, Morgan Tsvangirai is having trouble pleasing his white masters." If the tables had been turned and it had been a white person commenting on a black Prime Minister's behaviour, the cries of 'Racism' would have been heard around the world. But in Zanu PF thinking as reflected by the ZTV and ZBC propaganda, racism is a strictly one-sided affair and applies only to whites discriminating against black people. "They only did this to please a white man" was the comment from the Zanu PF spokesman when the news broke of Tsvangirai's disengagement from the former ruling party. Logic and reason fly out the window and every issue is reduced to skin colour. The philosophy can be summarised as: All blacks good, all whites bad; in my book that is racism at its most pernicious. It requires no intelligence or clear thinking, no logical analysis; it is simply a knee-jerk reaction based on skin pigmentation and racial origin.

The issue of race has dominated the news media in the UK too this week and it is strangely relevant to what is happening in Zimbabwe. All week long the media here has been awash with articles and debate about whether the far right-wing BNP- an offshoot of the National Front - led by one Nick Griffin should be given airtime on the BBC. The British pride themselves on their tradition of Free Speech and tolerance and, since the BNP now has two elected MEPs, they are entitled to a public voice, so went the BBC's argument. All week long the debate has raged about whether the BBC was right to have Nick Griffin on the popular Question Time, a primetime weekly TV programme where the public asks questions of a team of invited politicians from all the major political parties. At issue was the question of whether a minority party such as the BNP with its far-right racist views should be allowed the right, implicit in the doctrine of Free Speech, to air their views. The argument raged back and forth with opponents claiming that the BBC was simply giving the BNP the opportunity to promote their violent, anti immigrant and anti-Islamic viewpoint that would lead to more racist attacks on minority groups. The BBC Television Centre was invaded by hundreds of anti-fascist demonstrators yesterday with police in riot gear attempting to control the angry demonstrators. But the BBC stood firm and Question Time was aired last night before a racially mixed audience who were for the most part overwhelmingly hostile to Nick Griffin and the BNP.

For Zimbabweans in the diaspora it was an enlightening experience. This was democracy at work, wasn't it? Here was a public broadcasting service, in the name of Free Speech, giving airtime to a man whose party denies the holocaust – though as he cunningly pointed out he has never been prosecuted for that – and claims that the only people who have a right to live here are what he calls 'indigenous' British, ie English, Scots or Welsh people. "Where do you want me to go?" demanded one brown-skinned man. "I was born here, this is my home. I was educated here and I love this country." The question sounded very familiar in the Zimbabwean context. Like the white population of Zimbabwe, born and bred in the country with no roots in Europe, who are told by War Vets, Green Bombers and Zanu PF fanatics 'Go back where you came from' the response is the same: Where do you want us to go?' Rather like the BNP, Zanu PF, regards all 'foreigners' as aliens, having no rights; only the 'indigenous' people have a right to live in 'their' Zimbabwe.

As we have seen Robert Mugabe do so often when speaking at international forums, Griffin cleverly toned down his hate speech for the duration of his public appearance but it fooled no one. An evil racist philosophy remains what it is, however sweet the sugar coating.
For Zimbabweans, at home and in the diaspora, what we want to hear is the truth about where we are going as a country. Will there be a place for ethnic minorities regardless of their colour or is Zimbabwe doomed to become an apartheid state where colour is the only determinant of one's cultural and political identity? As Prime Minister Tsvangirai said at his Press Conference on the 16th October, "We can't continue to pretend that everything is well." He was speaking in the context of his disengagement from Zanu PF but his words apply equally to the question of race. It is an issue which has never been openly dealt with in Zimbabwe. In a democratic society where Free Speech is the order of the day, the media would be obliged to debate this question openly, instead of the one-sided racist diatribes we currently hear on ZBC and ZTV.
Yours in the (continuing) struggle PH.

16th October 2009

Dear Friends.
Here in the UK diaspora, I first got the news on Wednesday from a contact at the Human Rights Forum that Roy Bennett was likely to be indicted for trial in the High Court on a charge of terrorism. A magistrate in Mutare was 'deciding' – with more than a little pressure from the politically partisan Attorney General, no doubt - whether the case should be heard before the High Court when it moves to the eastern capital on circuit. With the inevitability of Greek tragedy the magistrate decided that the charge was too serious for her court and Roy Bennettt was immediately sent back to Mutare Remand Prison to await trial which, we are told, cannot be until next year because the High Court calendar is already full. Pending an application for bail, that is where Bennettt will remain until his case is heard before the High Court.

I waited to hear how the BBC would report the matter; after all they are now free to broadcast from inside Zimbabwe but apart from a brief mention on BBC World News and a small item on Channel Four, Bennett's imprisonment was barely touched on. It seems some form of self-censorship is going on, so desperate are the British authorities to show that all is well in Zimbabwe under the Inclusive government. Nothing must be done to upset the boat despite the fact that events on the ground demonstrate very clearly that the boat is already sinking!

Inside the country, however, the comments have come fast and furious; this is not prosecution through properly constituted legal channels, it is downright persecution for political purposes. The disgust and outrage this case has provoked has already been expressed in numerous articles by human rights activists, journalists and foreign diplomats. "Politically motivated abuse" said the EU president and the US State Dept described the jailing of Roy Bennettt as "a blatant example of a lack of the rule of law." The newly appointed British High Commissioner's comment was curiously restrained, "The jailing of Bennett did not look good politically."said Mark Canning. That has to be the understatement of the year! But perhaps his recent experience as British Ambassador to Burma has left him with a healthy fear of military regimes?

My own reaction to the news of Roy Bennett's re-incarceration can be summed up in one question, "Well, what did you expect? Have you learned nothing after thirty years of Zanu PF misrule?" Duplicity and double-dealing are all you can hope for from the likes of Robert Mugabe and his politically appointed law officers. In the case of Roy Bennettt, it is clear that personal animosity is the one over-riding consideration in his continued persecution. Zanu PF and the Minister of Justice in particular hate Roy Bennettt a) because he is white and a successful farmer and b) because the people love him. If that sounds childish and immature, then that is exactly what it is. Time and again we have seen how the former ruling party react to any white person who is loved by the common people. Remember what they did to David Stephens, to Ian Kay and to so many others whose bloodied bodies were testimony of the racist hatred spewed from the mouths of Mugabe and all the rest of his mentally and emotionally challenged followers. They simply cannot forgive anyone, but especially someone with a white skin, who has earned the love and respect of ordinary black Zimbabweans. Roy Bennettt/Pachedu was elected by an overwhelmingly black electorate in Chimanimani; he is a fluent Shona speaker whose every word demonstrates his love of the people and the land he was born in. That's what Zanu PF cannot abide: the white African who dares to stand up for the cause of justice and democracy, a cause which the government of Zanu PF has comprehensively failed to address for thirty years.

The initial reaction of the MDC to Bennettt's imprisonment was a curious mixture of threats and boycotts: they will not pull out of the GNU but they will suspend all contacts with Zanu PF forums – whatever that means – and they will no longer attend cabinet or Council of Minister meetings. The comparison of the GNU with an arranged marriage is one that has been made by Morgan Tsvangirai himself. So where does the marriage stand now? As one commentator pointed out, it is the GNU of which the MDC is a part that has acted in the case of Roy Bennettt. The MDC are hoist with their own petard; they joined a government of national unity for the good of the country, they said, and now find themselves complicit, by association, in Zanu PF's unjust and illegal behaviour. As Roy Bennettt himself had said earlier this month; the MDC is in government but has no power; this is a marriage in name only.

"Limping along" is how President Khama of Botswana described the coalition government in Zimbabwe. The case of Roy Bennettt may well bring the whole arrangement to a juddering halt. It certainly constitutes a test of the MDC's moral courage; whether they will be prepared to stand by Pachedu and risk losing all the benefits they have personally gained in this ill-considered marriage of convenience is not something I feel able to predict but one thing I am sure of: Robert Mugabe, his Attorney General and his Minister of Justice will not rest until they have got rid of Roy Bennettt – one way or the other.
Postscript: I had finished my Letter and was preparing to press 'send' when I checked the BBC website to see if there was any news of Roy's bail application. No news of that yet but instead a report of Morgan Tsvangirai's Press conference, dated 16.10.09, time 12.27. The MDC has 'disengaged' from, the Unity government. "We will not continue working with Mugabe's party until all outstanding issues of a power sharing deal have been dealt with" announced the MDC President and Prime Minister of Zimbabwe. He added "It (Roy Bennettt's imprisonment) has brought home the reality that we have an unreliable and unrepentant partner in the transitional government"

No doubt all the 'political' analysts will have plenty to say about this over the weekend. This diasporean remains sceptical but it is perhaps a sign that moral courage is not entirely lacking in the MDC. Small comfort for Roy Bennettt as he awaits his bail application in Mutare Remand Prison yet again but a welcome sign that the MDC have finally woken up to the reality of dealing with Robert Mugabe and Zanu PF.
Yours in the (continuing) struggle PH.

9th October 2009
Dear Friends.
I had already decided what I was going to write about this week when The Zimbabwean popped through my letterbox. The Editorial was commenting on the numerous reports his newspaper is receiving from around the country of continuing violence and the police failure to deal with the culprits. The ongoing violence and theft on the farms is but one example of the total failure by the ZRP to abide by their constitutional duty to uphold the rule of law. Gangs of Zanu PF youths assisted by war veterans and soldiers are roaming the countryside, claims the Editorial, intent on harassing and intimidating the population. Teachers in rural schools are in the frontline of this onslaught and rural communities are being told that the GNU's rule has no mandate outside Harare. I had personal confirmation of this when a friend from Murehwa phoned me this week to tell me that Zanu PF officials in the area were saying just that; Zanu PF is still in control in the rural areas and the GNU is powerless outside Harare; this despite the fact that MDC meetings are now being held openly in the area! What this apparent contradiction tells us is that Zanu PF is in election mode in the rural areas and, as always, their election strategy is to soften up the electorate through violence and intimidation. Morgan Tsvangirai's promise of free and fair elections in 2011 based on a new people driven constitution means very little to the lunatic fringe of Zanu PF fanatics who continue to undermine the GNU in every way possible.

Where will it all end and how will ordinary Zimbabweans recover from the violence and hatred that has characterised their lives for the past three decades of Robert Mugabe's rule? It is surely relevant to examine how other countries have survived after periods of violence and genocide to see what lessons can be learned. Following the arrest in Uganda of another named genocidaire, a question-and-answer piece in the UK Independent by Paul Vallely looked at how Rwanda was coping with the aftermath of the genocide of 1994. In a period of 100 days 800.000 Rwandans were massacred while the world looked on and did little or nothing to prevent the slaughter. I am not suggesting that Zimbabwe has experienced anything on that scale, though the 2030 thousand Ndebele killed in the Gukuruhundi certainly qualifies as a massacre. After the Rwandan genocide some 120.000 people were arrested, they filled the prisons to overflowing. In 2003 President Kagame realised that it would take 100 years to clear the backlog of trials. In place of western-style courts Kagame set up 'gacaca' courts where suspects were taken back to the scene of their crimes to be confronted by their victims. There were no legally qualified judges and no lawyers. Instead, respected village elders were present to ensure that justice was done. One central requirement was that the accused persons were required to ask forgiveness of their victims.
Sadly, fifteen years after the genocide, the Rwandan Minister of Education reports that there are ominous signs that inter-ethnic hatred has bubbled away under the surface with Hutu students harassing their fellows with insults written on walls and various other forms of abuse. In Zimbabwe too, we see that state inspired hatred of people of different political or ethnic origins, disseminated by a state controlled media is not easily erased even by a Unity Government preaching tolerance and forgiveness. Justice must be seen to be done, that is the message of Rwanda. The 'gacaca' system dealt with almost a million cases and is credited by Human Rights Watch with being a reasonably fair way of dealing with a seemingly insuperable problem.

Is there a lesson in all this for Zimbabwe? As Zanu PF inspired violence continues in the country with no sign the police will do anything to stop it until they are instructed by 'someone higher up', there is a post-genocide message from Rwanda that is directly relevant to the rule of Robert Mugabe. President Kagame of Rwanda is an authoritarian ruler; no doubt he has needed to be in a country torn apart by ethnic divisions. His critics accuse him of "suppressing internal opposition and dissent more ruthlessly than Robert Mugabe does in Zimbabwe." But, says Paul Vallely, the difference between the two men is that Kagame with western help has brought economic stability to his country. Rwanda, he claims is one of the safest and most orderly countries in Africa, its GDP has tripled, tourism is booming and foreign investment is being attracted. And for the Rwandan people, that means jobs, There are new schools too and hospitals,clinics and roads are being built.

While Robert Mugabe in Switzerland this week once again rants against independent radio stations and the use of the internet to 'bring about regime change' Rwanda by contrast has, according to Vallely, "an efficient mobile phone and broadband internet service in the cities which is moving rapidly into the countryside."

Perhaps the message of all this is that there is hope for Zimbabweans, even after thirty years of brutal repression, racism and intolerance. There is hope of a new dispensation for Zimbabwe, providing of course, we have a people-driven constitution, a completely new electoral register, minus dead voters, duplicate identities and centenarian voters, followed by free and fair elections. Not so much to ask, is it? If Rwanda can survive the horrors of genocide there must surely be hope for Zimbabwe?
Yours in the (continuing) struggle PH.

2nd October 2009

Dear Friends.
After attending the UN General Assembly, you would think that Robert Mugabe would rush back to his beleaguered country but instead he went on to Venezuela where he attended a South America/Africa Summit hosted by his friend Hugo Chavez. The purpose of this Summit was, to quote Luis da Silva the Brazilian president, "to construct a new alliance, discover opportunities and help ourselves mutually," In reality, this Summit was another opportunity for the anti-western and anti-imperialist rhetoric that we have become familiar with over the years from the likes of Robert Mugabe, Hugo Chavez, Luis da Silva and the mercurial Libyan leader, Gadaffi. While it's not difficult to understand why former colonised countries feel resentment at the west's world domination, it is not so easy to see what real benefit there is to their people on the ground from all this hot air issuing from the leaders' mouths. Hugo Chavez, with his country's massive oil revenues, claimed, "Africa and South America are rich lands, yet the people are poor because they have been exploited. Let's not allow them to keep exploiting and ransacking our lands." For the outsider who may know little of South American politics, it is difficult to judge the accuracy of this statement. By 'them' and 'they' we assume that Chavez is referring to global oil companies who have moved in - presumably at his invitation - to exploit his oil wealth.

Zimbabweans are better able to judge when we hear Robert Mugabe speak. "In Africa," he said, "greater industrial development has been difficult because of a reliance on the very powers that industrialised us. They do not want us to see us industrialised." What evidence does Mugabe have for such a claim? How does it serve the west's interests to have Africa permanently poor? As with his ludicrous claims at the UN General Assembly that western sanctions are ruining his country, Mugabe offers no hard evidence for such irrational statements. It is merely populist rhetoric designed to earn him more kudos with his anti-western audience whose attitude was summed up by Gadaffi when he described the western powers as "a small club of major powers still trying to run the world on their terms." It was Mugabe's remarks about his country's natural resources that told us the real reasons for being there in Venezuela; "Zimbabwe could offer minerals and agricultural products for oil and technology," he said. Zimbabweans must have reacted with hollow laughter when they heard that their country had agricultural products to offer! In a week when figures revealed that his Gushungo Company owns as many as a dozen farms, many of them seized from their former white owners, and the agricultural sector is daily under attack by Mugabe's own cronies, it's difficult to understand what agricultural products he could be referring to. Grace Mugabe's dairy farms too have been in the spotlight all week for profiting from milk sales illegally purchased by the Swiss owned Nestles Company. What Zimbabweans know only too well is that offers of agricultural products in exchange for oil and technology are more likely to benefit Gushungo and his cronies than the masses of Zimbabwean people.

While Mugabe was enjoying his time in the limelight with like-minded populist leaders in Venezuala, back home in Zimbabwe there was the usual mixture of good, bad and not-so-bad news. In an astonishing development, Jestina Mukoko was released from the threat of any further prosecution on 'Banditry' charges. She no longer has that threat hanging over her and that is good news but it needs to be remembered that the judgement by the Supreme Court refers only to Jestina Mukoko and not to her co-accused. The Supreme Court's judgement appears on the surface to be an assurance that an individuals constitutional rights are protected by law but on the ground there is little evidence that this is the case. The police continue to ignore court orders as top army officers seize farms and prevent the legal owners from entering their properties despite court orders to the contrary. And with the appointment of the new Media Board there is worrying evidence of military involvement at every level of media management. All the new Media board are Zanu PF loyalists and unbelievably, it is the hapless and hopeless Tafataona Mahosa who now heads the Broadcasting authority of Zimbabwe in charge of issuing licences. There is little hope that the media in Zimbabwe will be free any time soon from political interference. It remains firmly in Zanu PF hands and the military are present in force to ensure that Mugabe's Zimbabwe remains his own personal fiefdom. With no real power, as the MDC's designate Deputy Minister of Agriculture admitted this week, it is hard to see where real change will come from.
Yours in the (continuing) struggle PH.