[R-G] Mugabe: Pariah or scapegoat?

[Anthony Fenton]

Pariah or scapegoat?
April 30, 2008
Antony Black
The Hamilton Spectator
(Apr 30, 2008)
http://www.thespec.com/Opinions/article/361955

According to the Western mainstream media, Robert Mugabe is another  
pariah (or "monster," according to a recent column by Gwynne Dyer) of  
the ilk of Slobodan Milosevic.

However, just as in the case of Milosevic, the Western demonization of  
Mugabe is a piece of pure theatre, a transparent, politically  
motivated hatchet job.

But, first, what's all the fuss about?

The problems started at the very outset of independence in 1979. At  
that time, the vast majority of the country's arable land was held by  
a few thousand white farmers, mostly descendants of the original  
British settlers who had taken the land by force a century earlier.

Under pressure, the fledgling independent state agreed to a land  
transfer agreement that was called "willing buyer, willing seller."  
The British government would ante up money to help poor, black  
Zimbabweans (many being veterans of the independence struggle) buy  
back the land from white farmers -- when and if, of course, the latter  
chose to sell.

However, even this agreement was too much "reform" for the likes of  
Britain, which in 1997 reneged on its financial commitments.

The glacial pace of "land reform," then, was a sore that continued to  
fester until Mugabe, under pressure from the veterans, finally passed  
legislation that led to the seizure of nearly 1,500 farms owned by  
white Zimbabweans. At that point all hell broke loose and Mugabe  
became the overnight international pariah we all love to hate.

But, of course, there is much more beneath the surface of this  
political iceberg than just a few confiscated farms. Both Washington  
and London hate Mugabe on a number of counts, including:

* His abandonment in the late '90s of International Monetary Fund- 
mandated "structural adjustment programs" (designed to rob the poor to  
pay rich, foreign investors and such.)

* His refusal to privatize every national institution in sight.

* The fact that he sent troops to support Laurent Kabila's government  
in the Congo (which the United States was attempting to overthrow, and  
to which the Rwandan debacle was related).

* The threat he poses to vested British economic interests and  
companies.

* The fact that his fast-track land reform is a deeply troubling  
symbol to neighbouring countries such as South Africa, which, despite  
the fall of apartheid, has become mired in a devil's pact with old,  
elite interests and has done virtually nothing to redistribute wealth  
or land to its people.

Moreover, the economic disarray of the country is, in large part, a  
direct result of the "international community's" deliberate  
undermining of the economy.

Thus, the IMF, the World Bank and the International Development  
Association have all either frozen loans, blocked Zimbabwe from  
obtaining credit vital to its food and energy security, engaged in  
totally illegitimate economic sanctions, and/or threatened other  
nations with sanctions should they do business with it.

In December 2001, the U.S. government passed its Zimbabwe Democracy  
and Economic Recovery Act, which further tightened the screws on a  
nation already reeling under what amounts, in essence, to a form of  
collective (i.e. immoral and illegal) punishment.

Considering that Zimbabwe imports 100 per cent of its oil, and 40 per  
cent of its electrical equipment and spare parts, these sanctions and  
interferences have, single-handedly, destroyed or substantially  
hobbled the country's industrial and agricultural sectors.

None of this is to say that Mugabe hasn't acted harshly to crack down  
on internal dissent. But one must immediately counter with the fact  
that Zimbabwe is very much the subject of extensive foreign subversion.

Much like the so-called "colour revolutions" in Serbia, Belarus,  
Georgia and Ukraine -- and numerous other attempted "revolutions"  
across the globe -- Zimbabwe's "independent" oppositional groups have  
received extensive funds, equipment and organizational support from  
the likes of the U.S. State Department, USAID and the ubiquitous U.S.- 
funded National Endowment for Democracy (called essentially the  
"civilian" arm of the CIA).

And, of course, the international media can be relied upon to conjure  
their usual bang-up demonization campaign.

Meanwhile, we hear not a media peep about countries right next door.

Such as Tanzania, where even the barest hint of a strike is met with  
state violence and imprisonment.

Or Rwanda, where under the Western-backed Tutsi leadership, thousands  
are routinely "disappeared."

Or Uganda, where there has not been a free election since Yoweri  
Museveni came to power in 1986.

Then again, according to a recent update by the Oxford Research  
Bureau, the United States and Britain (with extensive support from  
Canada through its sub-imperial role in Afghanistan) are now  
responsible for the deaths of 1.3 million people in Iraq since 2003.

"Pariahs" and "monsters," it seems, are very much in the eye of the  
beholder.

Antony Black lives in Hamilton.