Revolution against western allies
Revolution against western allies
By Reason Wafawarova
THE just-ended EU-Africa summit has left a clear message that the era of aid cemented relations between Africa and its former colonisers have come to an end. The refusal by African leaders to endorse the newly proposed Economic Partnership Agreements and the emphasis on a new era of a partnership of equals was indeed the right direction for African leaders to take.
For Europe the summit was about out competing China for the resources of Africa and the tradition of dangling aid to manipulate a good Samaritan-hapless man relationship between Africa and Europe did not work this time around. In fact Africa left the European imperial womb ovulating and totally refused to fertilise the imperial egg at the expense of African resources. For Britain, particularly for its unelected Prime Minister, Gordon Brown (who must really thank President Mugabe for bringing his name into the international lime light) — the summit is one forgettable piece of history that has made a mockery of Britain’s claim to the EU-super power mettle.
Brown vainly tried to use his assumed supremacy in the EU to unite Europe, divide Africa and isolate Zimbabwe and as Caesar Zvayi pointed out in one of his pieces, only the opposite was achieved. Gordon Brown, by declaring that only two summits could materialise — one with him present or another with President Mugabe present, managed to humiliate himself irretrievably as both Europe and Africa clearly preferred a summit with President Mugabe in attendance and there was no sign that anyone missed the unelected Brown in Lisbon.Gordon, by trying to replay the archaic colonial master tactic, only managed to unite Africa, divide Europe and hopelessly isolate himself — even to the dustbins of war torn Basra, Iraq, where he duly enjoyed the company of his inherited poodle Nouri Al-Malik.
The face-saving after thought gimmick by some European countries who are now claiming that Angela Merkel of German — who tried to convey the London message on Zimbabwe; was speaking on behalf of Europe falls hollow in that Europe clearly failed to speak on behalf of London all the time Brown was trying to rope everyone into his ban-Mugabe campaign. Africa had its way on the Mugabe issue and Britain did not.
Through Africa Zimbabwe had its way to Lisbon and through Europe Britain was handed its defeat in the diplomatic war with Zimbabwe. If Merkel spoke against Zimbabwe at the summit, so did President Mugabe against Brown’s "gang of four" and so did Abdoulaye Wade against Merkel’s assertions. That is how international gatherings proceed and it is plainly vainglorious for Brown or anyone else to claim any victory over Merkel’s pronouncements. The Lisbon diplomatic score by Zimbabwe can only be viewed as one more battle won in a revolutionary war whose ultimate victory is still coming. It is a victory that has rekindled hope into some hearts that were failing at the ruthless suffering induced by the sanctions so systematically mobilised by Tony Blair against the people of Zimbabwe. It is a victory that can only fuel the Zimbabwean agrarian revolution to greater heights. Now that the Lisbon victory was closely followed by Zanu-PF’s extraordinary session of Congress at which President Mugabe was unanimously endorsed as the party’s presidential candidate in March 2008, one has to look at the agrarian revolution from the
proceedings at the congress.
The much-predicted fireworks against President Mugabe were not seen at the congress. What was seen was the solidarity from SWAPO of Namibia, ANC of South Africa, Chama Cha Mapinduzi of Tanzania, UNIP of Zambia, and the MPLA of Angola among other revolutionary people of Southern Africa. Such solidarity gives hope to Zimbabweans- hope that victory is certain.However, the revolution can only succeed if that hope is strengthened by a strong sense of discipline as well as a commitment to innovation and imagination. There is no room for the kind of corruption that was chronicled by Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe governor, Dr.Gono in a people’s revolution — simply there is just no room for that. The revolution simply has to take a choice to keep its hope for survival alive. There is hope for the economy of Zimbabwe and it is highly dangerous when people are driven to assume that there is no more hope. As the American renowned linguist and academic, Noam Chomsky says, "If you assume that there is no hope, you guarantee that there will be no hope. If you assume that there is an instinct for freedom; that there are opportunities to change things, then there is a possibility that you can contribute to making a better world. That’s your choice."
The land reform programme was based on a conviction that economic freedom could only be achieved through repossession of Zimbabwe’s stolen lands. Monopoly capitalism or imperialism was and is still dictating that Africans have no capacity to control the means of production — asserting the position that only Western innovation can sustain modern economies. It is Western innovation that created the wealth in many of the Western countries — all out of the resources of colonised territories and at a cost of so much ruin and slaughter. Africa, like all other ex-colonies must realise here and now that the impious, criminal and ignominious deeds perpetrated so unjustly, tyrannically and barbarically by European settlers cannot pass for a blessing. John Sentamu, the yoked Anglican Bishop of York must also get this message clear and must stop acting like a perfect idiot.
The Zimbabwean revolution is not about Britain and her allies against Zanu-PF or President Mugabe. It is about Western imperialistic subversive and destabilising forces against a national-popular project. The bourgeoisie democracies in the West are stiff scared of the power of the poor masses and Zimbabwe’s land reform programme is no exception. The land reform programme is a revolution that must draw its lessons from other revolutions. Zimbabwe is not the first encounter with a national-popular revolution for Washington and its Western alliance. For Zimbabwe to survive, the revolution must be driven by hope, discipline and innovation. If corrupt officials pretend to be leaders, a revolution cannot succeed. If inept minds pretend to implement policy a revolution cannot succeed. If leaders shield themselves from accountability a revolution cannot succeed. If structures thrive to manipulate people’s votes through deception a revolution’s victory can only be delayed. If political aspirants believe in buying votes a revolution cannot succeed.
It must be remembered that Jacob Arbenz’s revolution in Guatemala lasted only three years (1951-54) before Washington overthrew Arbenz’s government; the Salvador Allende government lasted two and half years (1970-73) before suffering the same fate; Nicaragua’s Sandinista revolution resisted for six years (1984-90); the Bolivian revolution held out for twelve years (1952-64) while the Cuban revolution has triumphed for the past 48 years (1959 to date).The Zimbabwean leadership, like that of Nicaragua, Bolivia and Cuba is in control of both the Government and state while Arbenz and Allende only controlled governments. The Zimbabwean revolution can draw lessons from the thwarted revolutions as well as from the Cuban revolution. There is hope in the revolution of Zimbabwe — a hope manifested by the Million Men and Women March of November 30. It is hope rooted in the hearts of Zimbabwe’s peasant population as well as many of its poor people — a people determined to suffer in the shaping of a better future for the coming generations. It is this hope that will bring an election victory for the ruling party in March 2008. The MDC, united or divided cannot win an election, even one supervised by angels. This is squarely because a divided minority forms two smaller minorities and the reuniting of the splinters can only produce another minority, not a majority.
This, the bitter professor from Tsholotsho ought to know. The MDC is a minority opposition party and its splitting and reuniting cannot transform it into a majority party — only alternative policies can; and unfortunately the MDC does not believe in alternative policy. It must be remembered that the winning of an election is not necessarily the success of a revolution; otherwise Allende and Arbenz could have triumphed to the end. The Zimbabwean leadership needs to learn fast that discipline is key to the success of a revolution and that lessons can be learnt well from Cuba and China.
A revolution that harbours thieves, robbers and traitors will decay from the core. This is why the Reserve Bank Governor, Dr. Gideon Gono must be courageous enough to name the corrupt leaders in his knowledge. Of course the Governor needs protection from the revolution and this writer believes that the vanguards of the revolution can provide such protection once required to do so.Equally, the revolution needs policy implementers with a vision and a sense of imagination. Some of the inept ministers must just be rested to allow more innovative minds to spearhead the revolution. Commandant Fidel Castro is a firm believer in the power of an innovative mind and this is one of the reasons the Cuban revolution has succeeded to this day. Yes, the Zimbabwean revolution has withstood the subversive and destabilising efforts of the US-led Western alliance for eight years but it is time such resilience is matched by the sacrifice that is needed to rid the revolution of the scourge of corruption and lack of innovation.
The Chinese arrest and even execute the thieves in their revolution and now China is growing from strength to strength. There are no passengers on a picnic in a revolution and the economy of Zimbabwe cannot be turned around by seed-eaters.the time for people who resell farming fuel allocations for quick profit, hoard cash for speculative purposes, abuse Government resources or engage in fraudulent conduct is up if the revolution is to survive after March 2008.
The impending victory for Zanu-PF in March 2008 will come with new pressure from Washington, London and other outposts of imperial tyranny. The talks between Zanu-PF and the MDC are in the context of the conflict that was created by the MDC’s ‘‘defiance’’ campaign and they have nothing to do with the election result for 2008. The MDC has used the time between the last election and the 2008 election to confuse and scare away its supporters through the October 2005 split as well as its endless violent squabbles and fighting over access to Western donated resources. The disgruntled MDC supporters are unlikely to come back simply on the basis of a new constitution or the presence of Westerners at election time. At any rate opposition parties cannot change constitutions until they first win elections and become governments and that is the trend the world over. The MDC must come up with a way of winning elections under the current constitution and they should forget about running government institutions outside government.
Instead of trying to appoint officers in commissions and public offices the MDC must be behaving like an alternative government, telling people what they will do if elected and not just concentrating on what President Mugabe should not be doing. Anyway, the current MDC cannot win an election in Zimbabwe and the major reason for that is that they do not know how to win an election. It is this apparent weakness of the MDC that is driving Washington crazy and the Zimbabwean revolution should therefore brace for new subversive tactics after 2008. This is why the revolution must rid itself of passengers on picnic because these have been used by Washington against revolutions elsewhere.
Washington will call the corrupt people in Zanu-PF reformists or democrats or whatever they can coin, if only they can lay their hands on them for purposes of using them to destroy the revolution. We did hear before of plans for demonstrations against corrupt officials by war veterans and one would think that the move might now be overdue if the figures given over cash hoarding are anything to go by. Together we shall overcome. It is homeland or death for the children of the revolution in Zimbabwe.