USA Africa Dialogue Series - Re: Zimbabwe: The Revolution Continues

----- Original Message -----
> From: kenneth harrow <harrow@msu.edu>
> To: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com
> Cc:
> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 6:12 PM
> Subject: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Re: Zimbabwe: The Revolution Continues
>
> hi gloria
> i thought in s africa they were called prawns
> ken
>
> On 6/19/13 3:36 PM, Emeagwali, Gloria (History) wrote:
>> 'this is the main point. who got the lands?' harrow
>>
>> Answer: The Martians
>>
>>
>>
>> Professor Gloria Emeagwali
>> africahistory.net
>> vimeo.com/user5946750/videos
>> Documentaries on Africa and the African Diaspora
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com
> [usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of kenneth harrow
> [harrow@msu.edu]
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 3:12 PM
>> To: usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com
>> Subject: Re: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Re: Zimbabwe: The Revolution
> Continues
>>
>> the language of the summary doesn't permit an outsider to this field to
> completely grasp it.
>> these are the issues i see:
>> 1.the expropriation of white owned lands in zimbabwe mostly doesn't
> bother me. i know a little about z's history, the fact that they were
> courting white settlers from britain to come late in the colonial period, at
> least as late as the 1950s, if not later under smith, and expropriating african
> lands. the sympathy for whites who acquired those lands, and who had earlier
> acquired the lands under dubious circumstances makes it seem wrong to sympathize
> with their heirs' claims.
>> 2.i don't know if the ag production subsequently fell after the
> appropriations. if so, they were poorly handled, in contrast to other countries
> like kenya that tried to manage this better.
>> 3.this is the main point. who got the lands? the language below obscures
> that simple question. were they redistributed equitably? did they go just to
> mugabe's supporters? did his politicos get a large chunk? did his soldiers
> get a large chunk. was this his way of buying supporters?
>> if you can't answer that last question really honestly, then there is
> nothing much to talk about. we all can agree on points one and two, but point
> three is the sticking point where autocracy trumps justice, where the current
> misrule perpetuates itself and the resentments that ultimately lead to violence.
>>
>> lastly, i admire gloria's insistence on keeping an open mind: that is
> easy for non-specialists like myself. but we are all observers of this scene,
> albeit amateur observers. we are all interested observers. those who can inform
> us, without all that pro-mugabe regime rhetoric, and simply tell us what has
> happened, should speak up.
>> ken
>>
>> On 6/19/13 2:34 PM, Chambi Chachage wrote:
>> Ajamu, I concur, re:
>>
>> Beyond White Settler Capitalism: Zimbabwe's Agrarian
> Reform<http://zimbabweland.wordpress.com/2013/05/13/beyond-white-settler-capitalism-zimbabwes-agrarian-reform/>
>> An important new book – Land and Agrarian Reform in Zimbabwe: Beyond White
> Settler Capitalism - has just been published by CODESRIA. It is the product of
> the CODESRIA National Working Group on Zimbabwe, and is edited by Sam Moyo and
> Walter Chambati of the African Institute of Agrarian Studies. All 372 pages are
> free to download on the CODESRIA
> site<http://www.codesria.org/spip.php?article1779>.
>> The book is important in a number of respects. First, it sets the story of
> Zimbabwe's recent land reform in a wider context, examining capitalist relations
> in historical and regional perspective. Second, it offers an alternative
> political narrative to the standard analysis focused on neopatrimonial capture
> by political elites. Third, it offers empirical material and analysis from
> researchers who have undertaken detailed fieldwork on a range of themes
> including labour (Chambati), community organisation (Murisa), the media (Chari)
> and mobilisation (Sadomba, Masuko). Finally, as perhaps the leading scholar on
> Zimbabwean land issues, having worked on the issue over several decades, Sam
> Moyo is certainly well-placed to provide an informed, and typically provocative,
> overarching commentary.
>> The book argues that most critics of Zimbabwe's land reform programme
> "continue to underplay the significance of the settler-colonial roots of
> Zimbabwe's land question and its exacerbation under neoliberal rule after
> independence, in fomenting the social and political crisis which provoked the
> popular reclamation of land".
>> The final chapter by Sam Moyo and Paris Yeros identifies six aspects that
> they argue make the Zimbabwean experience distinct:
>> (i) the character of the land movement, which has been multi-class,
> decentralised and anti-bureaucratic, but also united by radical nationalism;
>> (ii) its capacity to articulate grievances across the rural-urban divide;
>> (iii) the radicalisation of its petty bourgeois components;
>> (iv) the resulting creation of a tri-modal agrarian structure as a matter
> of state policy;
>> (v) experimentation with state dirigisme, developmentalism and an emerging
> popular cooperativism; and
>> (vi) a new nonalignment policy termed 'Look East'.
>> Not everyone will agree with this summary. Indeed in our own work
> <http://www.zimbabweland.net/Home.html> we have critiqued the singular
> notion of a 'land movement', as well as the role and form of state 'dirigisme'
> in the 2000s and the forms of violent
> nationalism<http://zimbabweland.wordpress.com/2012/10/15/geographies-of-violence/>
> that became associated with state intervention. However, by offering a frame for
> debate, some of the lazy assumptions and analyses in other commentaries can be
> engaged with, with new empirical and theoretical vigour.
>> The book's conclusion argues that much of such current commentary is
> "essentially the reincarnation of a liberal form of settler-colonial political
> compromise". In the opening chapter, Moyo criticises the "dubious intellectual
> positions" reinforced by a "revisionist historiography" peddled by
> "structurally-adjusted" intellectuals that have misinformed the debate. His
> wrath is focused on :
>> "….a peculiar mix of liberalism and Weberianism peddled by American
> political science, especially via the notion of 'neopatrimonialism'; a
> rudderless culturalist theory of 'identity politics', whose post-structuralism
> has managed to replicate with great success the settler-colonial obsession with
> fragmented cultures; and, not least, an escapist 'left' critique, which has
> often sought refuge in pseudo-Gramscian theories of 'hegemony', whereby
> patrimonialism and culturalism substitute for class analysis. Indeed, some
> 'Marxists' succumbed to similar imperialistic and antinationalist impulses, to
> the effect of silencing class analyses which demonstrate the progressive nature
> of the land reform".
>> Nor is he happy about what he dubs our liberal perspective on
> 'livelihoods'. This approach, he argues:
>> " …eschews the interrogation of class formation processes and exploitative
> relations of production (especially in the emerging labour relations) and the
> continued extraction of surplus value (particularly from peasants) through
> exchange relations driven by monopoly-finance capital. The critical role of
> state intervention in the overall outcome is also visibly downplayed by its
> liberal-populist orientation".
>> While elements of this critique may be appropriate, I would argue that we
> have offered, on the basis of our Masvingo work, a detailed analysis of social
> differentiation and class
> positions<http://zimbabweland.wordpress.com/2012/11/19/class-and-differentiation-after-land-reform/>,
> informed by a livelihoods analysis. We argue that the current rural struggle is
> between 'middle farmers' in alliance with the rural poor and a new rural elite,
> supported by the party and state. Indeed in Moyo's chapter on the changing
> structures of rural production he concurs with our analysis from Masvingo,
> showing how the growth of small-scale capitalist producers through a process of
> 'repeasantisation' has widened the prospects for accumulation from below,
> despite the new class struggles observed.
>> Thus I wholeheartedly agree with the book's central argument that a
> perspective informed by historically-informed class analysis can be especially
> revealing. This class analysis, although unevenly applied, is certainly the
> strong feature of the book, making it an important contribution to the debate.
>> In particular, Moyo argues that the petty bourgeoisie broke ranks with
> monopoly capital and became radicalised, and so part of a decentralised,
> organised land movement, led by the peasantry and mobilised by war veterans. The
> 'tri-modal' land pattern that emerged from land reform, including large
> capitalist enterprises, small-medium scale farms and smallholder farms, reflects
> the accommodations of different class interests, the book argues.
>> Moyo however is not without his critique of the current regime, noting
> that: "the nationalist leadership in recent years has come to represent mainly
> un-accommodated bourgeois interests… which are under the illusion that they can
> reform monopoly capitalism so as to sustain a 'patriotic bourgeoisie' into the
> future".
>> The alignment of the state with capital is examined at various points in
> the book, including reflections on the 'indigenisation' programme (bolstering
> the 'patriotic bourgeoisie'), the Look East policy (non-alignment to realign,
> strategically seeking capital and investment) and focused 'developmental' state
> intervention post 2000, discussed by Moyo and Nyoni, in the context of a highly
> polarised political landscape, and the flight of international capital. Thus,
> Moyo argues "the reconfiguration of domestic agrarian markets and struggles over
> these, in relation to changing forms of state intervention, in the context of a
> gradual reorientation of critical commodity and financial markets to the East,
> have been overlooked".
>> Overall, Moyo argues that in recent scholarship on Zimbabwe, there has been
> "a systematic neglect of the continent's subordinate relations to
> monopoly-finance capital, as well as empirical analyses of class formation,
> political alliances, emergent social movements under the current crisis and the
> implications for state intervention and development".
>> This book attempts to redress this neglect, and fills an important gap in
> the literature. Not everyone will agree with some of the detail, and some of the
> political arguments will no doubt be countered. However, the analysis of the
> class-based nature of Zimbabwe's transformation is most definitely welcome, and
> the book further enriches our understanding of Zimbabwe's complex agrarian
> transformation.
>> This post was written by Ian Scoones<http://ianscoones.net/> and
> originally appeared on Zimbabweland<http://zimbabweland.wordpress.com/>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Ajamu Nangwaya
> <anangwaya@gmail.com><mailto:anangwaya@gmail.com>
>> To:
> usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com<mailto:usaafricadialogue@googlegroups.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 12:50 PM
>> Subject: USA Africa Dialogue Series - Re: Zimbabwe: The Revolution
> Continues
>>
>> Comrades,
>>
>> It is my position that Mugabe opportunistically used the popularity of land
> reform to win support from the people when he realized that the Western- and
> settler-backed MDC could win the next election. He could have done the same
> thing 10 years after the demise of the Lancaster House agreement.
>>
>> It ought to be noted that imperialism didn't provide the money to
> execute the farcical scheme or notion of "willing seller, willing
> buyer" approach to land reform. I do not believe that Afrikans should pay a
> penny to the settlers for our land. It is imperialism that should pay these
> settlers who were doing the job of the empire.
>>
>> I must admit that I instinctively thought that the post-2000 land reform
> programme was one that would benefit the regime's supporters and leaders
> like the earlier attempt. But once I looked at the research results from studies
> on land reform in Zimbabwe, it was clear that it should be commended. The
> success of land reform is admirable in the context of the broad sanctions
> imposed by imperialism against the people of Zimbabwe.
>>
>> Our support should be for the working-class and peasantry in Zimbabwe and
> not the regime of Mugabe or the collaborators in the MDC-T or other variant of
> that political entity. I am an advocate of the self-management of the people and
> that is not the experience of the labouring classes in Zimbabwe or elsewhere.
>>
>> In solidarity
>>
>>
>> Ajamu Nangwaya
>> Membership Development Coordinator, Network for Pan-Afrikan Solidarity
>>
>> "We must practice revolutionary democracy in every aspect of
> our...[organization's] life. Every responsible member must have the courage
> of his responsibilities, exacting from others a proper respect for his work and 
> properly respecting the work of others. Hide nothing from the masses of our
> people. Tell no lies. Expose lies whenever they are told. Mask no difficulties,
> mistakes, failures. Claim no easy victories ...." - Amilcar Cabral -
> Revolution in Guinea
>>
>> On Tuesday, 18 June 2013 19:45:40 UTC-4, Ajamu Nangwaya wrote:
>>
>>
>> JUNE 05, 2013
>>
> <http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/06/05/zimbabwe-the-revolution-continues/print>
>> SHARE ON
> FACEBOOK<http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/06/05/zimbabwe-the-revolution-continues/#>SHARE
> ON
> TWITTER<http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/06/05/zimbabwe-the-revolution-continues/#>SHARE
> ON
> GOOGLE<http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?v=300&winname=addthis&pub=ra-4f60e2397d05b897&source=tbx-300&lng=en-US&s=google&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.counterpunch.org%2F2013%2F06%2F05%2Fzimbabwe-the-revolution-continues%2F&title=Zimbabwe%3A%20The%20Revolution%20Continues%20%C2%BB%20CounterPunch%3A%20Tells%20the%20Facts%2C%20Names%20the%20Names&ate=AT-ra-4f60e2397d05b897/-/-/51c0f0f9452eb201/2&frommenu=1&uid=51c0f0f9ffd6e217&ct=1&pre=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2F&tt=0&captcha_provider=nucaptcha>MORE
> SHARING
> SERVICES<http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/06/05/zimbabwe-the-revolution-continues/#>29<http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/06/05/zimbabwe-the-revolution-continues/#>
>> >From Servants to Masters
>> Zimbabwe: The Revolution Continues
>> by ERIC DRAITSER
>> http://www.counterpunch.org/ 2013/06/05/zimbabwe-the-
> revolution-continues/<http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/06/05/zimbabwe-the-revolution-continues/>
>> The coming elections in Zimbabwe are no mere referendum on the leadership
> of the coalition government. Instead, the decision before Zimbabweans is a clear
> one: continue on the revolutionary path of Mugabe and ZANU-PF or follow Prime
> Minister Morgan Tsvangirai's MDC-T and their pro-US, neoliberal economic agenda.
>> While much of Africa has been turned into a chaotic, war-ravaged continent
> stuck in the destructive cycles of violence, terrorism, and dependence on
> imperial powers, Zimbabwe has managed to maintain the fierce independence and
> commitment to revolution espoused by President Mugabe stretching all the way
> back to the post-colonial liberation struggle. However, in order to fully
> understand the sustained campaign of destabilization and subversion by the
> Western imperialist ruling class, one must first examine the policies of Mugabe
> and ZANU-PF that have earned them the ire of Washington and London.
>> Mugabe's "Crimes"
>> Robert Mugabe and his ZANU-PF party emerged from the post-independence
> conflict as the dominant political party in Zimbabwe, promising to finally
> address the most pressing issues facing black Zimbabweans who, despite making up
> the vast majority of the population, continued to be mostly landless, while the
> white, landowning class maintained their grip on the most arable land. This
> gross disparity in land ownership, a vestige of the colonial system, became one
> of the primary needs that the new leadership intended to address. However, the
> terms of the negotiated settlement of the war of liberation in 1979, known as
> the Lancaster House
> Agreement<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancaster_House_Agreement>,
> essentially allowed the white farmers to retain their land if they chose to do
> so under the "willing buyer, willing seller" principle.
>> This system continued until 2000 when President Mugabe shifted the policy
> to a "fast track" land program that sought to unseat white privilege and restore
> ethnic balance to land ownership. It was precisely this policy shift that earned
> Mugabe the ire of the imperial powers, particularly the British, which then
> sought to punish Mugabe and the people of Zimbabwe by instituting crippling
> sanctions that destroyed the Zimbabwean economy. However, this only strengthened
> the resolve of ZANU-PF, teaching them a number of important lessons. As Francis
> Chitsike of Midlands State University in Zimbabwe points
> out<http://www.fig.net/pub/morocco/proceedings/TS4/TS4_4_chitsike.pdf>:
>> What the Zimbabwean government learnt from its own experience is that in an
> agriculturally based economy, no development program will succeed if people are
> not given access to land. Equitable access to means of production is vital to
> the success of any development program. There is a direct link between poverty
> reduction and land reform, and issues of poverty reduction cannot be tackled
> without addressing issues of land
> reform.i<http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/06/05/zimbabwe-the-revolution-continues/#sdendnote1sym>
>> After twenty years of playing by the rules set forth by the British, Mugabe
> and ZANU-PF realized that in order to achieve the true goals of the revolution
> (poverty reduction, land redistribution, expanded social services, etc.), they
> would have to reinvent the country, not simply reform it gradually. And so,
> ZANU-PF adopted as its slogan "Land is the economy and the economy is land" in
> order to underscore the government's commitment to true land redistribution. The
> results of the fast track land program are impossible to ignore. In a new book
> entitledZimbabwe Takes Back Its Land, the authors explain how:
>> In the biggest land reform in Africa, 6,000 white farmers have been
> replaced by 245,000 Zimbabwean farmers. These are primarily ordinary poor people
> who have become more productive farmers. The change was inevitably disruptive at
> first, but production is increasing rapidly. Agricultural production is now
> returning to the 1990s level, and resettled farmers already grow 40% of the
> country's tobacco and 49% of its
> maize.ii<http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/06/05/zimbabwe-the-revolution-continues/#sdendnote2sym>
>> This incredible accomplishment of land redistribution has far-reaching
> implications for the people of Zimbabwe. Not only are they finally able to enjoy
> the fruits of their revolution, but they have charted a course of
> self-sufficiency that allows the country and its elected officials to be less
> dependent on foreign powers, giving them a greater degree of autonomy in
> political and economic matters. However, the significance of the land
> redistribution goes much further than simply its impact on the people of
> Zimbabwe. The successful redistribution of land provides a "dangerous" model for
> other African nations still struggling with the legacy of colonial rule.
>> Although land remains at the center of the continued revolution, there are
> other key economic issues which Mugabe and ZANU-PF have addressed in ways that
> are antithetical to the exploitative goals of Western corporations and their
> government servants. Perhaps one of the most shocking to financiers and
> capitalists in the West was
> thedecision<http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/17/ozabs-zimbabwe-diamonds-idAFJOE71G02U20110217>
> to nationalize the mining sector, as the government took majority stakes in most
> mining companies operating in the country. Naturally, this was yet another slap
> in the face to corporate interests that saw in Zimbabwe yet another African cash
> cow to be milked dry. The imperialist mentality in Africa views the resources as
> belonging to white Europeans and Americans rather than the people of Africa.
> This fundamental divide is what distinguishes Mugabe and ZANU-PF from many other
> leaders in Africa who, at every turn, grovel at the feet of their former
> oppressors.
>> Perhaps the central principle in Mugabe and ZANU-PF's economic program is
> "indigenisation". This process of reclaiming the economic destiny of the country
> for the people of Zimbabwe has been difficult, even problematic at times, but
> has been successful. Not only has the government moved to nationalize the mining
> sector, it has expanded the program to include banks and other important
> businesses.
>> Although this process has been mocked by so-called "experts" in the West,
> the reality is that the program has been a resounding success, not only
> economically, but also with the people. As Saviour Kasukewere, Minister of Youth
> Development, Indigenisation and Empowerment
> noted<http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/9ca62a74-6775-11e0-9138-00144feab49a.html>in
> 2011:
>> This is an imperative we cannot avoid…they [foreign corporations] have been
> having it too good for too long…if they think by closing a mine they are
> affecting us, tough luck. Closing a mine doesn't change anything…Brazil is
> coming, India is coming…what we have a problem with, is companies with a
> colonial ownership
> structure."iii<http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/06/05/zimbabwe-the-revolution-continues/#sdendnote3sym>
>> Kasukewere here articulates perhaps the most important point of all: that
> the revolution in Zimbabwe is not merely cosmetic, but rather is a decades-long
> process of unwinding the structures of colonial control – the very imperialist
> infrastructure which to this day forms the foundation of white capitalist
> domination of Africa.
>> Unlike nearly every other African country, Zimbabwe does not play host to
> US military bases or any AFRICOM presence. No military "advisors" have
> entrenched themselves in the armed forces as they have throughout the continent.
> There is no US drone base as in Niger, Djibouti and elsewhere. Zimbabwe has
> maintained a steady, if somewhat fragile, peace since independence, choosing to
> maintain support for independent African nations such as Libya while it was free
> under the leadership of Muammar Qaddafi, and Eritrea which, like Zimbabwe, is
> vilified by Western imperialists for its unwillingness to be made part of the
> imperial system. Essentially then, Zimbabwe has in nearly every way asserted its
> independence from the US-UK sphere.
>> Naturally though, the imperial powers do not sit idly by and allow this to
> happen. They have their counter-revolution in Zimbabwe, led and embodied by
> Morgan Tsvangirai and the MDC-T.
>> Tsvangirai, the MDC-T, and the Subversion of Zimbabwe
>> The Movement for Democratic Change (MDC-T) led by current Prime Minister
> Morgan Tsvangirai is no mere opposition party. Rather, they are the Zimbabwean
> face of neoliberal capitalism and continued subservience to corporate-imperial
> power. Although Tsvangirai's party shrouds itself in the flag of anti-corruption
> and "sustainable development", the truth is that these are merely the rhetorical
> cover for rolling back the gains made by the people of Zimbabwe under the
> leadership of Mugabe and ZANU-PF.
>> Despite the obvious need, and overwhelming support, for the land
> redistribution programs of the last decade, Tsvangirai and his Western puppet
> party came out against the program and squarely on the side of the entrenched
> white landowners. In 2011, as the land redistribution and indigenization
> programs were beginning to take root, Tsvangirai stated
> publicly<http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/9ca62a74-6775-11e0-9138-00144feab49a.html>
> that, "We don't support grabbing property and seizing companies. We support a
> process of willing seller, willing buyer." This revealing statement illustrates
> clearly the degree to which Tsvangirai and MDC-T represent the interests of the
> British and the imperial-corporate powers who themselves created the "willing
> seller, willing buyer" concept in the Lancaster House Agreement. Essentially
> then, when Tsvangirai speaks it is the voice of London, Washington and Wall St.
>> However, this ideological connection is merely the tip of the iceberg when
> it comes to Tsvangirai and his relations with the West. A 2010 leaked cable,
> published by
> WikiLeaks<http://talkzimbabwe.com/new-wikileaks-tsvangirais-secret-letter-to-obama-exposed/>iv<http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/06/05/zimbabwe-the-revolution-continues/#sdendnote4sym>,
> revealed that Tsvangirai collaborated with President Obama and the US
> establishment against the interests of Zimbabwe and the people. The
> document<http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/insideguardian/2011/jan/13/wikileaks-morgan-tsvangirai-inside-guardian?intcmp=239>v<http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/06/05/zimbabwe-the-revolution-continues/#sdendnote5sym>
> "showed that he [Tsvangirai] had had been privately urging Washington to
> maintain sanctions against Harare, while taking the opposite position in
> public." This revelation, though certainly not a surprise to many in Zimbabwe
> and ZANU-PF, reveals the degree to which Tsvangirai and the MDC-T is, for all
> intents and purposes, a US front group masquerading as political opposition. Of
> course, were this the only example of the relationship, the case against
> Tsvangirai would be incomplete. Rather, one must examine the role of US
> intelligence in shaping the entire agenda of the MDC-T.
>> Earlier this month, the Zimbabwe Herald
> reported<http://allafrica.com/stories/201305130701.html> that:
>> MDC-T has reportedly invited three Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) agents
> to attend its policy conference set for [Friday May 17, 2013] as part of last
> ditch efforts to formulate an appealing election manifesto…the Herald is
> reliably informed that the three CIA agents were also behind MDC-T's security
> policy document titled 'Policy Discussion Papers – Security Sector Cluster: 1.
> Defence and National Security, 2. Home Affairs' [in which] MDC-T announces plans
> to fire all serving security chiefs…and hire what is termed senior police staff
> from Western countries to instill 'professionalism' in the
> force.vi<http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/06/05/zimbabwe-the-revolution-continues/#sdendnote6sym>
>> The intimate relationship between the MDC-T and US intelligence illustrates
> the degree to which Tsvangirai is not merely compromised but, in many ways, an
> outright agent of the United States and the other imperial powers. The MDC-T
> would seek to transform Zimbabwe into little more than another compliant African
> client state where the needs of the poor majority would be trumped by the power
> of the wealthy minority serving the needs of multinational corporations.
>> The WikiLeaks cables also reveal how the United States has been actively
> working and preparing for regime change in Zimbabwe. Former US Ambassador to
> Zimbabwe Christopher Dell
> wrote<http://www.thomhartmann.com/forum/2010/11/wikileaks-zimbabwe-tsvangirai-mdc-unfit-lead-says-us-amb-dell>
> that:
>> Our policy is working and it's helping drive changes here. What is required
> is simply the grit, determination and focus to see this through. Then, when the
> changes finally come we must be ready to move quickly to help consolidate the
> new dispensation…He [Mr. Tsvangirai] is the indispensable element for regime
> change, but possibly an albatross around their necks once in
> power.vii<http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/06/05/zimbabwe-the-revolution-continues/#sdendnote7sym>
>> The cables show the intimate working relationship that exists between the
> so-called opposition and their Western backers. Although this is no secret in
> Zimbabwe, it comes as news to many in the West who have been thoroughly
> propagandized to believe that the MDC-T and Tsvangirai represent substantive
> change and a move toward increased democracy. On the contrary, the MDC-T is the
> quintessential counter-revolutionary movement specifically designed to destroy
> the tremendous gains made by ZANU-PF and Mugabe since liberation.
>> What's Next?
>> Zimbabwe's immediate future is going to be shaped by the impending national
> elections. Naturally, ZANU-PF and MDC-T will be vying for the leadership mantle
> in what will be a hotly contested election. That being said, we are seeing the
> usual forces of "soft power" aligning themselves in preparation for a major
> destabilization effort around the elections. As we saw most recently in
> Venezuela, disputing elections is one of the favorite tactics of the imperialist
> ruling class, allowing them and their minions to engage in protracted subversion
> of democratic institutions in order to foment civil unrest and thereby
> delegitimize the elected government.
>> One well known organ of imperialist propaganda is the George Soros-funded
> International Crisis
> Group<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Crisis_Group> which
> recently issued a report entitled "Zimbabwe: Election Scenarios", laying out in
> great detail the various ways in which the United States and its allies and
> clients must intervene in the elections. In particular, the
> report<http://www.crisisgroup.org/en/regions/africa/southern-africa/zimbabwe/202-zimbabwe-election-scenarios.aspx>
> states that:
>> The pervasive fear of violence and actual intimidation contradicts
> rhetorical commitments to peace. A reasonably free vote is still possible, but
> so too are deferred or disputed polls, or even a military intervention. The
> international community seems ready to back the Southern African Development
> Community (SADC), which must work with GPA partners to define and enforce "red
> lines" for a credible vote…That the elections are likely to be tense and see
> some violence and intimidation is clear; what is not yet clear is the nature of
> the violence, its extent, and the response it will
> generate.viii<http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/06/05/zimbabwe-the-revolution-continues/#sdendnote8sym>
>> To the layman, such a description might seem innocuous – a paper outlining
> the possible outcome of the election. However, even a cursory examination of
> recent similar episodes in Venezuela, Iran, and elsewhere shows that "disputed
> elections" are the favorite tool of subversion by the imperial powers which use
> NGOs such as the International Crisis Group as their unofficial mouthpieces.
> When the ICG speaks, it is with the voice of US intelligence and the ruling
> class.
>> If the experience of Venezuela is any indication, we are likely to see
> violence in the streets should MDC-T lose the election, particularly if the
> margin of victory is small. As with Capriles and the US-funded opposition in
> Venezuela, the creation of violence in the streets is merely a trick employed
> for the purposes of destabilizing the government in a time of transition, with
> the goal of creating enough chaos to delegitimize the rule of the victors. And
> so, ZANU-PF and the Zimbabwean people must remain vigilant as the country heads
> into these all-important elections
>> Zimbabwe has come a long way since the official end of the liberation
> struggle. As years have passed, the nation and its people have been transformed
> from servants to masters, dependent children to independent and free human
> beings. In that same time, the former masters have attempted to employ countless
> strategies to continue their exploitation and domination of the resources and
> the people. Because of the leadership of Mugabe and ZANU-PF, as well as the
> determination of the Zimbabwean people, Zimbabwe has metamorphosed into the envy
> of Africa. Of course, there are very real problems in the country, with wealth
> not nearly approaching that of other African states that have remained loyal to
> the imperial system. However, when wealth is concentrated in the hands of a
> kleptocratic ruling elite, is that really wealth? Looking at Zimbabwe, we see a
> true model for Africa: an independent path to progress and equitable
> development. It is for this reason that the imperial powers look to destroy all
> that has been built in Zimbabwe…and for this same reason, we must stand to
> defend her.
>> *Author's Note: This article is the first in a series of articles examining
> the political and economic landscape of Zimbabwe as elections approach. Look for
> the next installment of the series in the July issue of CounterPunch.
>> ihttp://www.fig.net/pub/ morocco/proceedings/TS4/TS4_4_
> chitsike.pdf<http://www.fig.net/pub/morocco/proceedings/TS4/TS4_4_chitsike.pdf>
>> ii http://africanarguments. org/2013/03/21/zimbabwe-takes-
> back-its-land-%E2%80%93-a-
> review-by-martin-plaut/<http://africanarguments.org/2013/03/21/zimbabwe-takes-back-its-land-%E2%80%93-a-review-by-martin-plaut/>
>> iii http://www.ft.com/intl/ cms/s/0/9ca62a74-6775-11e0-
> 9138-00144feab49a.html#
> axzz2UmpnDZ1U<http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/9ca62a74-6775-11e0-9138-00144feab49a.html>
>> iv http://talkzimbabwe.com/ new-wikileaks-tsvangirais-
> secret-letter-to-obama-
> exposed/<http://talkzimbabwe.com/new-wikileaks-tsvangirais-secret-letter-to-obama-exposed/>
>> vhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/ help/insideguardian/2011/jan/
> 13/wikileaks-morgan- tsvangirai-inside-guardian?
> intcmp=239<http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/insideguardian/2011/jan/13/wikileaks-morgan-tsvangirai-inside-guardian?intcmp=239>
>> vi http://allafrica.com/
> stories/201305130701.html<http://allafrica.com/stories/201305130701.html>
>> vii http://www.thomhartmann. com/forum/2010/11/wikileaks-
> zimbabwe-tsvangirai-mdc-unfit-
> lead-says-us-amb-dell<http://www.thomhartmann.com/forum/2010/11/wikileaks-zimbabwe-tsvangirai-mdc-unfit-lead-says-us-amb-dell>
>> viii http://www.crisisgroup. org/en/regions/africa/
> southern-africa/zimbabwe/202- zimbabwe-election-scenarios.
> aspx<http://www.crisisgroup.org/en/regions/africa/southern-africa/zimbabwe/202-zimbabwe-election-scenarios.aspx>
>> Eric Draitser is the founder of
> StopImperialism.com<http://www.stopimperialism.com/>. He is an independent
> geopolitical analyst based in New York City. You can reach him at
> ericdraitser@gmail.com<mailto:ericdraitser@gmail.com>.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the
> "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of
> Texas at Austin.
>> For current archives, visit
> http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
>> For previous archives, visit
> http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
>> To post to this group, send an email to
> USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com<mailto:USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com>
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
>> unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<mailto:unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
>> ---
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to
> usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<mailto:usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the
> "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of
> Texas at Austin.
>> For current archives, visit
> http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
>> For previous archives, visit
> http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
>> To post to this group, send an email to
> USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com<mailto:USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com>
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
>> unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<mailto:unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
>> ---
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to
> usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<mailto:usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> kenneth w. harrow
>> faculty excellence advocate
>> distinguished professor of english
>> michigan state university
>> department of english
>> 619 red cedar road
>> room C-614 wells hall
>> east lansing, mi 48824
>> ph. 517 803 8839
>> harrow@msu.edu<mailto:harrow@msu.edu>
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the
> "USA-Africa Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of
> Texas at Austin.
>> For current archives, visit
> http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
>> For previous archives, visit
> http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
>> To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-
>> unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
>> ---
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> kenneth w. harrow
> faculty excellence advocate
> distinguished professor of english
> michigan state university
> department of english
> 619 red cedar road
> room C-614 wells hall
> east lansing, mi 48824
> ph. 517 803 8839
> harrow@msu.edu
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the "USA-Africa
> Dialogue Series" moderated by Toyin Falola, University of Texas at Austin.
>   For current archives, visit http://groups.google.com/group/USAAfricaDialogue
>   For previous archives, visit 
> http://www.utexas.edu/conferences/africa/ads/index.html
>   To post to this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue@googlegroups.com
>   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to USAAfricaDialogue-   
>   unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "USA Africa Dialogue Series" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
> to usaafricadialogue+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>