Zimbabwe: Recovery Needs Image Change

Source from:  Zimbabwe Independent (Harare) January 26, 2007 01/30/2007

OVER the years, the government has demonstrated its vast array of negative characteristics. Although there are a very few exceptions, almost all of the innumerable ills and problems that perennially afflict Zimbabwe have either been occasioned by those characteristics or have been severely exacerbated by them. And that is particularly so insofar as the abysmal state of Zimbabwe's economy is concerned. Almost all the essential ingredients for a virile, growth economy have existed since Independence and yet, since 1997, the economy has been in a continual, accelerating decline, to levels by now constituting Zimbabwe as the most poverty-stricken country on the continent of Africa. Those ingredients which could and should be the catalysts and foundations for a strong and healthy, expanding economy include, among others: highly fertile land, capable of wholly providing for the food needs of the nation as well as much of those of neighbouring territories, and of generating vast production of commodities in high international demand, including tobacco, cotton, beef, horticultural products, coffee and tea, citrus and much else; an immense, minimally tapped wealth under that potentially fertile land, including gold, diamonds, emeralds, uranium, platinum, nickel, coal, methane gas and many other valuable minerals; although ageing and deteriorating (due to the nationwide economic decimation), an industrial infrastructure which is technologically the second most-advanced and developed in sub-Saharan Africa which, combined with the fact that Zimbabwe is geographically located so as to be the ideal principal supplier to most of southern, eastern and central Africa, having a population of over 320 million potential customers; a unique tourism resource, including the spectacular Victoria Falls, the splendour of the Zambezi Valley, the awe-inspiring Matopos, the mystic Great Zimbabwe and the Khami Ruins, the wonders of Lake Kariba, the immense beauty of Nyanga and Vumba, the finest viewing of wildlife of virtually all species on the continent and much else. All these render Zimbabwe a potential tourism delight of stupendous proportions, with gargantuan concomitant economic benefits; and a wonderful, very able, hard-working and aspiring labour force (with a few, very rare exceptions). Unfortunately, although Zimbabwe has had those outstanding means to stimulate and fuel a vigorous economy, the last 10 years have witnessed naught but the diametric opposite of such an economy. While some (with the government in the forefront) will contend that that has been a consequence of forces beyond their control, the reality is that the near-total demise of the economy is almost wholly due to government policies, and its economic mismanagement. However, it is devoid of the maturity, and of the sense of duty and responsibility, to acknowledge that that is so, and to take appropriate remedial action, other than very occasionally inadequately, ineffectually, and reluctantly. Instead, some of its negative characteristics come to the fore. The first is that of pronounced self-delusion and denial of fact and accountability. The government is so imbued with conviction of its absolute omnipotence and associated infallibility that it is wholly beyond its conception that it could in any manner whatsoever be the cause of the Zimbabwean economic Armageddon. It cannot, and will not, accept that it has destroyed agriculture, negating totally the first of the five most outstanding triggers for Zimbabwean economic wellbeing. Blinded by obsessive, albeit highly justified, hatred for pre-Independence land policies, the government has dogmatically pursued a cataclysmically destructive land acquisition, resettlement and redistribution programme, devoid of justice, equity, respect for bilateral investment protection agreements, and regard for human rights. That has brought the previously dynamic agricultural sector to its knees. Compounding the disaster has been prolonged state mismanagement of procurement and distribution of inputs. Similarly, the government myopically fails to recognise its continuing hindrance of mining sector operations and development, its creation of endless operational constraints for the manufacturing sector, and its destruction of Zimbabwe's image as an investment and tourism destination. Instead, a second very greatly negative characteristic repeatedly evidences itself, being that of extreme paranoia. As the government is unable to admit to itself, or to others, its near-absolute culpability for economic disarray, it has convinced itself that not only are others wholly responsible for that disarray, but also that those others are very deliberately engaged in destroying Zimbabwe's international image, as one of their tools to complete the destruction of the Zimbabwean economy, and thereby, the ousting of the government. Unhesitatingly, vociferously, insultingly, with invariable disregard for realties, the government alleges that Britain in general, its Prime Minister Tony Blair, in particular, the rest of the European Union, the United States of America in general, and its ambassador to Zimbabwe in particular, many Commonwealth countries, and many others, are not only wholly responsible for Zimbabwe's economic misery, but also for deliberate Zimbabwean-image destruction, and replacement of that image with one which enhances the programmes of economic collapse. The mind boggles at how it can be possible for all those alleged enemies of Zimbabwe, or of its government, to have brought about the mid-1980s genocidal activities of the Zimbabwean army, and its 5th Brigade in Matabeleland, or the near-genocidal oppressive brutality of Operation Murambatsvina less than two years ago. How was it Britain's aggressive fault that it provided millions of pounds for Zimbabwe to buy land in the 1980s, which land had not been resettled or redistributed by 2000? In what way did Britain, the EU, the USA and others cause thousands of war veterans and others to murder white farmers, assault hundreds of others, vandalise and steal property and abuse the land? Can it credibly be argued that those countries are to blame when their nationals evidence a reluctance to invest in Zimbabwe, when it is the government of Zimbabwe which overly-regulates the economy, to an extent that opportunities of fair returns on investment capital are horrendously minimised? And are those countries to blame, when their private sectors are reluctant to invest in a country which repeatedly signifies that the only welcome investment is from the East, and from countries with authoritarian rulership, and when that country repeatedly, scathingly accuses foreign investors of denuding Zimbabwe of its resources (but does not acknowledge that those foreign investors send capital and technology to Zimbabwe, generate foreign exchange, create employment, pay taxes, and do much else to the benefit of Zimbabwe). Is it is the fault of Western countries that an overzealous police force, responsible for ensuring compliance with the law, determines people to be guilty before proven innocent, in reversal to the legal maxim of "innocent until proven guilty", and therefore incarcerates people without trial, sometimes for many months, resorts to excessive violence, destroys equipment of arrested miners, and all-too often, demands bribes, while in some proven instances resort to torture? Is it the fault of those alleged international enemies that a provincial governor and resident minister, as recently as two weeks ago, has threatened a repeat of Operation Murambatsvina, instead of proposing substantive government actions to resolve Zimbabwe's housing problems? And is it the fault of those well-wishing countries that they are reluctant to provide Zimbabwe with balance of payments support, loans, and developmental aid, when doing so would be nothing other than pouring the monies into a bottomless pit, due to the manifest mismanagement of the Zimbabwean economy, and the undoubted extent that the world's most pronounced levels of corruption which prevail in Zimbabwe will preclude much of such monies being used for intended purposes? These are but a few of countless instances of Zimbabwe destroying its international image, to the catastrophic prejudice of the economy and, therefore, of the Zimbabwean people, but for which the government blames others. If the economy is ever to recover, the government must be prepared to abandon its negative characteristics, adopt constructive ones, vigorously strive to restore a positive image and, to that end, reconcile with the international community as a whole, instead of fraternising primarily with oppressive dictatorships. If it does not, the economy will never recover. Enditem