Zimbabwe: A bonfire of Mugabe's vanity

In 2000, Slate magazine’s David Plotz, while describing Zimbabwean tyrant Robert Mugabe, observed: “He does not wreak havoc out of evil, caprice or lunacy. He does it out of cynicism. Mugabe, who liberated his nation from colonial oppression 20 years ago, is the father of his country. He is what would have happened if George Washington had turned out to be Richard Nixon.”

Born in 1924, in the Matibiri village in what was then known as Southern Rhodesia, Mugabe was raised as a Roman Catholic. He would later become a Marxist guerrilla in the war against Ian Smith’s Rhodesian Front. In 1979, pursuant to the Lancaster House agreement, he assumed power in Zimbabwe.

“I wish to assure you that there can never be any return to the state of armed conflict which existed before our commitment to peace and the democratic process of election under the Lancaster House agreement.” — Robert Mugabe

This role as liberator was to provide him with seemingly unlimited political capital as he endured, effortlessly at first, and endured and endured.

In 1987, the office of prime minister was abolished and Mugabe assumed the role of executive president of Zimbabwe. Judging by his conduct and preparedness to sacrifice everything of value in that country on the bonfire of his vanity, he has decided that this is an office for life.

Whereas at first it was his popularity that cemented his position, he was later required to manipulate elections in order to stay in power. In this regard he has in the past, inter alia:

handed farms to “war veterans”;

refused international observers at elections;

ensured that rural voters had free access to voting while voters in urban areas, where he was weak, struggled;

banned media coverage except those he believed would not interfere with him;

launched Operation Murambatsvina — retribution for the urban poor voting against him; and

employed intimidation, corruption and brutal violence against his opponents.

(The above being part of the tactics used by “the liberator” against the people of Zimbabwe and certainly not an exhaustive analysis of his conduct.)

It does not bode well for the upcoming election.

Of course this approach has seen the destruction of the agricultural sector, a drastic reduction in the life expectancy of Zimbabweans (now below 40) and the exile of upwards of four million of its people.

We must not, however, be too critical of uncle Bob. He has, after all, shattered inflation records with the 100 000% mark reached just a few short weeks ago.

Incredibly, Bob’s your tyrant is 84, lives like a king and does not seem to know the meaning of starvation — perhaps a short trip down the road to meet his people would change this.

His oft-quoted words “So, Blair keep your England, and let me keep my Zimbabwe” sum up the situation — Bob believes that it is his Zimbabwe to do with as he deems fit.

His feelings towards the people are best summed up with this remark he made a while back about foreign aid: “We are not hungry … Why foist this food upon us? We don’t want to be choked. We have enough.” Enough for Mugabe is enough for all, it seems.

Of course the fact that Mugabe introduced legislation that makes it legal to phone-tap and bug his opponents (and friends) speaks volumes about his current views on his own popularity and a goodly amount about his paranoia at the cracks appearing in his regime. He knows, as he has for some time now, that he could never win a free and fair election nor rule his people without terror.

His two major defences appear to be that anyone who wants something better for Zimbabweans is a racist and any concern expressed about the plight of the people is an attempt at colonial-type interference. Apparently it would seem that all citizens should be prepared to starve to death and see their homes destroyed and their country decimated in order to prop up this tyrant — or be considered traitors.

His latest endeavour is to make Zimbabweans the majority equity holders in Zimbabwean companies. If he is allowed to continue with this move, which is highly unpopular among investors, the business sector will soon be in the same disastrous state as the agricultural sector.

Of course Mugabe’s record on human rights is right up there with Idi Amin of Uganda and Colonel Mengistu Haile Mariam of Ethiopia — everything from brutalising opponents, starving his people and confiscating or destroying their homes to his favourite, a total onslaught on the gay community.

What a piece of work is Bob.

“Our votes must go together with our guns. After all, any vote we shall have shall have been the product of the gun. The gun which produces the vote should remain its security officer — its guarantor. The people’s votes and the people’s guns are always inseparable twins.” — Robert Mugabe

They had come to “despise the very people who put them in power” and “think it is their privilege to be there for eternity”. Some of these leaders wanted to keep power for life to avoid retribution for their crimes in office: “We have to be ruthless in denouncing such leaders.” — Nelson Mandela on leaders in Africa who have made enormous wealth and once commanded liberation armies, in 2000 during a speech in Johannesburg for Unicef

ANC treasurer general Mathews Phosa confirmed to the Afrikaanse Handelsinstituut that “quiet diplomacy” has simply not worked, and that Zimbabwe (Mugabe) has abused us.

Accordingly, South Africa — as the closest thing to a neutral observer that this election will have — has to ensure that Mugabe does not rig this election, manipulate the results or fail to accept the outcome if it ends Zanu-PF rule.

Zimbabwe has destabilised this region for long enough. It’s time to send this tyrant packing and prepare the exiles for the journey home.

Anything less is treachery against the wonderful people of that great country.