International Day of Prayer for Zimbabwe!

We have begun work on this project. Please visit our website at
www.PrayZimbabwe.org and help us get the word out to the world about this
day, and the events taking place in Zimbabwe today. Thank you!

Aaron
aaron@PrayZimbabwe
International Day of Prayer for Zimbabwe: April 18, 2007
www.PrayZimbabwe.org

Mugabe is a "gandanga" requiring other tactics!

>From nyatsimba_mutota@yahoo.com
My problem is with employing "tabloid tactics" to bring down Gandanga fanika
Mugabe. Now all we see are these so called "analytical" stories that carry
too many inconsistencies, misconceptions and even lies. Its a joke to write
about Zimbabwe to a Zimbabwean audience and put it wrong. It destroys the
whole credibility about the article. This is why we have a serious gap
between Africa and the west when it comes to Mugabe/Zimbabwe because such a
story lacking in factual truth can fly abroad but not in Africa and SA. I
mean tabloids tactics just embarass you, but I would like to see how a
gandanga is being embarassed by most of these stories. Maybe Madonna will
give up the baby, but even she goes on with her life.

It seems we seem to forget the basics of who we are and how we live when it
comes to our own country. Perhaps its because we live in foreign countries,
perhaps its because siding with western powers and media is the way to go,
but what really does it do to Mugabe save for the fact that such stories add
more coffers and time to organizations working in Zim?

When people talk of hunger at home, they do not talk of maize from white
farms. Our population is mainly rural with more than 70% living in rural
areas. The other 15-20% in town actually rely on subsistence farming for
food so what really affects these people is drought not land redistribution.
I mean we have had 2 serious droughts before with white farmers in place so
whats new?

"The suggestion that drought was and is the cause of crop failures has been
proved to be a false story put about by Mugabe in order to account for
famine in Zimbabwe. Craig Richardson (Associate Professor of Economics at
Salem College in the United States) in a comprehensive independent report
tabled at the United Nations, proves conclusively that the only 'drought' in
recent times was in 2001-2002."

The problem in Zimbabwe is leadership. We do not have concensus in what we
want and how we want it. How to move and who we are as a people. We want
land reform only in theory not practice. We want democracy in theory and
only if democracy means removing Mugabe.

A lot of you Zim guys in SA even think that white people is the answer
because you have not been exposed to the notion of doing it for yourself.
Most of you attacked Arthur until you beat him into a pulp only for Biti and
company to start having HOTEL rallies with Robertson and Robinson. Only for
Biti and company to start calling for companies like Barclays to pull out!
And we still Mugabe rigs the elections? Who in their right frame of minds
would tolerate such nonsense?

In as much as I think its good to solicit for funding, we need to do so with
firm understanding, belief and strong will of who we are and what we want as
people. Tiri kufarira n'anga neinokwira mai!

An answer to Mr Mbanga's question: "WHY MBEKI?"

Robert Mugabe, Thabo Mbeki and the ANC
Fri, 19 Jan 2007 00:09:00
http://www.zimdaily.com/news/117/ARTICLE/1238/2007-01-19.html
Ivor Waldeck
In order to understand President Mugabe it is necessary to know something
about the early history of Zimbabwe.
The Shona tribe that Mugabe is a member of, was terrorised by the (black)
settler Ndebele (Matabele) tribe that arrived in Southern Matabeleland from
Kwazulu-Natal in about 1840 - a breakaway branch of the Zulu Kingdom in what
was then Natal.
As late as 1890, Mugabe's grandparents would have experienced the wrath of
the marauding Matabele impis.
The extremely cruel yearly raids on the Shona by the warlike Matabele, only
ceased in 1890 when Rhodes' pioneer column reached that part of the
continent. The new (white) settlers put a stop to the practice.
Historians believe that but for this intervention, the Shona tribe would in
all probability have been wiped out. Because of the past tribal history,
intense hatred still exists between the two ethnic groupings.
During the war of liberation against the Rhodesians that culminated in
independence in 1980, there were two distinct black liberation factions -
ZANU (Shona) and ZIPRA (Matabele). On the battlefield, there were many
deadly clashes between the two factions.
When Zimbabwe gained independence in 1980, the various military factions
including ZANU and ZIPRA, were integrated into the new national army.
Some ZIPRA (Matabele) guerrillas remained in the bush because of mistrust of
ZANU (Shona) and others deserted the new army because they feared that their
Shona commanders were planning their demise.
There followed a period of insurrection, lawlessness and outright warfare
between ZANU and ZIPRA forces. Matabele ZIPRA deserters and their colleagues
remaining in the bush, were labelled 'dissidents' by Mugabe and were killed
wherever they were found - often brutally and in cold blood. Emmerson
Mnangagwa, the then Minister of State Security, announced in parliament in
February 1984 that 459 'bandits' as he labelled them, had been killed. There
is little doubt that many more than that number were eliminated.
Mugabe had meantime called in the communist North Koreans to train the
5-Brigade (1981). He had a sinister motive for doing so.
The 5-Brigade, which was directly answerable to Mugabe, was variously
deployed in Matabeleland over the period 1983 to 1984 - ostensibly to locate
and destroy ZIPRA 'dissidents'. Ultimately, in February 1983, some 16000
square kilometres of Southern Matabeleland and an area of the Midlands
inhabited by mainly Matabele people, was cordoned off. Soon thereafter a
24-hour curfew was imposed.
No food was allowed into the curfew area and as the region was in the grips
of a third drought in a row, thousands of innocent rural people starved to
death.
The 5-Brigade then commenced the systematic and indiscriminate elimination
of innocent Ndebele men, women and children.
What supposedly started off as a war against 'dissidents' ended up as an
attempt to crush the Matabele nation - nothing other than a classic case of
genocide - more politely referred to as 'ethnic cleansing'.
This was punishment and retribution for the attacks suffered by the Shona at
the hands of the Matabele during he 1840-1890 period. Mugabe's 5-Brigade
wiped out entire villages so that there were no survivors to tell tales -
other villagers simply disappeared.
At least 15 000 and possibly as many as 30 000 were killed in the most
brutal fashion - the true number may never be known because of the vast area
involved and the methods used. Ian Smith, the former Rhodesian Prime
Minister in his book 'The Great Betrayal', puts the death toll at 30 000.
The 5-Brigade was led by Colonel Perence Shiri - currently commander of the
Zimbabwe Air Force.
This inhuman thug daubed 'The Beast of Bhalagwe', set up a torture and
killing camp in Southern Matabeleland.
Thousands of men, women and children - regardless of age or health - were
rounded up and conveyed to this and other camps to be re-educated in typical
'old style' communist fashion.
Thousands of innocents were murdered, raped, maimed, beaten or simply
disappeared. Horrendous and sickening methods of torture were employed.
Camp detainees were made to dig graves for their colleagues and when the
killing rate accelerated, bodies were dumped down disused mine shafts.
The feared Central Intelligence Organisation under the control of Emmerson
Mnangagwa (until recently - January 2005 - Mugabe's heir apparent), then
Minister of State Security in Mugabe's office, was at the forefront of the
brutal and sadistic forms of torture and killings.
The ANC had a presence in Zimbabwe at the time these atrocities occurred.
There has never been any condemnation by the ANC of the genocide Mugabe
perpetrated on his own black population after independence in 1980.
The atrocities committed by the 5-Brigade are well documented especially by
the Zimbabwe Catholic Commission of Justice and Peace, in books, articles
and reports by several investigative journalists.
Following an international outcry, Mugabe in September 1983, set up a
commission of inquiry headed by a lawyer Mr Chihambakwe to investigate the
allegations. Although fearful of the repercussions, hundreds of eyewitnesses
to the atrocities turned up to give evidence.
Mugabe undertook to make the report of the commission public, but it was
suppressed. When taken to court (December 1999) in an effort to force the
release of the report he, through his legal representative, claimed that it
was lost! Mugabe is no doubt well aware that the report - wherever it is -
will be used as evidence to prosecute him for crimes against humanity.
The seizure of white owned commercial farms that commenced in 2000 was and
is a desperate attempt to stay in power - his trump and last card in order
to secure victory at the 2002 elections.
These politically inspired land seizures led to the deaths of many, and the
displacement of some four thousand mainly white commercial farmers and an
estimated 1.5 million black farm workers and their families.
Mugabe does not give a jot about the illegality or consequences of his
actions. He has brought economic ruin on his country to save his own skin
and to remain in power - and not for the ideological reasons he claims.
The seizure of white commercial farms resulted in the commencement of
Zimbabwe's economic collapse.
The suggestion that drought was and is the cause of crop failures has been
proved to be a false story put about by Mugabe in order to account for
famine in Zimbabwe. Craig Richardson (Associate Professor of Economics at
Salem College in the United States) in a comprehensive independent report
tabled at the United Nations, proves conclusively that the only 'drought' in
recent times was in 2001-2002.
Rainfall for that season was only 22 percent below the 50-year average, and
in late 2001 dams throughout Zimbabwe were reported full and the stored
water available to agriculture.
The resettled black farmers planted few crops either then or thereafter -
leading to famine, which persists in 2006.
Mbeki's statement to the American press (June 2005) that the famine in
Zimbabwe is due to the drought is a distortion of the truth - yet another
indication of his support for his despotic and tyrannical friend.
According to a World Bank report on Zimbabwe (February 2005) the
redistribution of 80% white commercial farmland to the landless poor, has
resulted in 70% of Zimbabwe's 11.6 million people living below the poverty
line.
The admission (London Daily Telegraph January 2006) by the Mugabe government
that its seizure of white-owned farms has benefited fewer than 10% of black
Zimbabweans promised new futures as commercial landowners, establishes
Mugabe's destruction of agriculture and the resultant famine.
The Zimbabwe Land Ministry report declares that a third of the land given to
these new farmers is lying idle, nothing was happening on another 11% and
30% was classed as 'under-utilised'.
The resettlement scheme has benefited only 4 867 people while 1.5 million
black farm workers and their families were kicked off white owned farms.
Mbeki's glib acceptance of lies propagated by Mugabe concerning the land
grab and his June 2003 prediction that by June 2004 the Zimbabwe crises
would be resolved - sold to the British and Americans as the objective of
his "quiet diplomacy" - are but further examples of the lengths to which
Mbeki is prepared to go to support his tyrannical friend and dictator.
Mbeki should be aware that knowingly repeating lies put about by Mugabe will
ultimately question his credibility.
So why is it that President Mbeki, the ANC and other black African leaders
are tolerant of this despot - described by Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu
as "the archetypal African dictator".
Why is the killing of black people by a black tyrant (the label given to
Mugabe by non other than former President Nelson Mandela), seemingly
acceptable to them and most of black Africa.
It is a historical fact that the ANC and both Zimbabwean liberation
movements were instructed in Marxist/Leninist ideology either in Moscow or
in China. Mbeki, a loyal member of the Communist party when in exile (as was
his father), received instruction at the Lenin School in Moscow. Mugabe has
put into practice what the Red Chinese taught him at the Nanking Military
Academy.
Mugabe even produced his version of the "Thoughts Of Mao" - containing
typical Marxist rhetoric. His 'Youth Militia' - the 'Green Bombers' trained
to kill terrorise and disrupt those who oppose him - are reminiscent of
Mao's youthful 'Red Guard' that terrorised the Chinese population during the
Cultural Revolution.
Mugabe and Mbeki have, according to international political commentators,
both put into practice the Lenin doctrine of 'Democratic Centralism' learnt
from their respective Communist masters - a Marxist/Socialist system whereby
all important policy decisions are taken by an 'inner circle' or 'politburo'
rendering the parliamentary process sterile - the antithesis of any truly
democratic system of government.
In order to carry out his policies, Mbeki surrounds himself with individuals
such as Essop Pahad - an ardent communist - who broadcast Soviet propaganda
from Prague during Moscow's hey day, and described the Soviet Union's August
1968 invasion of Czechoslovakia as " the Fraternal Assistance".
It is no secret that not many years ago the ANC would have encouraged Mugabe
to dispossess and kill white farmers - which was after all one of the
objectives of the ANC in South Africa.
Other of Mugabe's actions would also have received the ANC's enthusiastic
support, and I suspect that many of his actions and utterances still do -
like Foreign Affair's consistent and public support for his land grab
policy, and Mbeki's mischievous blaming (December 2003) of Britain for the
Zimbabwe land crises - in support of lies put about by Mugabe.
Most importantly Mugabe, also not many years ago, actively supported the
ANC's war effort in South Africa. ANC cadres were trained in Zimbabwe and
supplied with ammunition, weapons and explosives, with which to carry out
their work in South Africa.
Mugabe often reminds the ANC of the part he played in their struggle - no
doubt the ANC'S "hour of need" Mbeki so often refers to.
Mbeki's lack of firm action against Mugabe can only be due to the historical
and ideological backgrounds they share - which is a bad omen for South
Africa.
Mbeki could have and still can bring Mugabe to heel by simply threatening to
close the border, and if necessary, restrict trade and the flow of
essentials supplies to Zimbabwe - a successful ploy John Vorster and Henry
Kissinger used to force the Rhodesians to end their war and accept the
principle of majority rule.
And what of the broken agreement Mugabe made with Mbeki and the presidents
of Mozambique (Chisano)and Namibia (Nujoma) at the Victoria Falls in 2000
when he undertook to remove the war veterans from occupied white commercial
farms within a month.
There was no comment from the tripartite when Mugabe, within the same month,
reneged on his undertakings - just a supportive silence.
One wonders just what Mbeki's real agenda is because the world might well
conclude that Mbeki's indifference to Mugabe's human rights violations will
be seen as laying the groundwork for future human rights violations in South
Africa - an observation (December 2003) made by the Anglican Archbishop
Emeritus, Desmond Tutu.
Former South African Nobel Peace Laureate President F W de Klerk warns
(January 2006) on his de Klerk Foundation website, that in the published
Mbeki "second decade of liberation" plan, the ANC intends to take over the
country's assets and violate property rights currently protected under the
constitution.
The ANC has already resolved to dispense with the 'willing buyer, willing
seller' principle relating to the acquisition of white owned farms, and
replacing it with acquisition by expropriation should the government's
valuations be refused.
A Bill currently before the South African parliament (February 2006), seeks
to give the Minister of Justice the final "authority over the administration
and budget of all courts".
The General council of the Bar of SA (January 2006) is concerned that the
executive is taking over the functions of the judiciary. In August 2006 a
judge of the South African High Court warned of a looming constitutional
crises because the ANC has ignored high court orders - a clear sign that the
ANC (like the Mugabe regime) considers itself to be the lawmaker.
Desmond Tutu's observation concerning the possibility of future human rights
violations in South Africa seems ominously prophetic.
Helen Suzman, a former staunch supporter of the ANC and anti-apartheid
activist, concludes (London Weekly Telegraph May 2004) "Mbeki and other
black African leaders support Mugabe's actions in effectively kicking the
white man out of Zimbabwe".
She accuses Mbeki of supporting the Mugabe's anti - white stance "Mugabe has
done that to the whites, and I think that is exactly what Mbeki admires
about him". And further "Do not think for a moment that Mbeki is not
anti-white - he is, most definitely".
Mbeki and other black African leaders, who applaud Mugabe for kicking out
the whites, have clearly not stopped to think that the ultimate victims are
the black citizens of Zimbabwe.
South Africa and the region will, I fear, in the final analysis, pay the
price for protecting a despicable and cruel tyrant who only remains in power
through cheating, lying, killing, torturing, gagging, starving and
intimidating opponents, formulating laws controlling the media which are
regularly tightened, and prohibiting opposition meetings and demonstrations
- the political practises of communist Eastern Europe of the 1960's.
The ANC and most other black African leaders indulgently refer to Mugabe's
uncivilised methods as 'African Style Democracy'. In December 2004 at the
ZANU-PF conference held in Harare, the Secretary General of the ANC Henry
Magothi praised Mugabe and his policies and said that the ANC and people of
South Africa are confident that ZANU-PF "as a party of revolution, will
continue to play a leading role in the political and economic independence
of Zimbabwe".
It is this unqualified praise and acceptance of Mugabe's draconian policies
which concerns the free democratic world and which Archbishop Emeritus,
Desmond Tutu, warns might be regarded by the free world as "laying the
groundwork for future human rights violations in South Africa".
This watering down of genuine democratic principles was again applied to the
2005 Zimbabwean elections which could not be ruled free and fair even by the
South African observer mission which could only described them as
"reflecting the will of the people".
When asked (April 2005) why he chose not to declare the elections 'free and
fair' the delegation head Minister Membathisi Mdladlana retorted - "We see
no reason to follow anybody else's culture".
Mugabe's (June 2005) cruel displacement affecting some 2.4 million urban
black citizens (UN Tibaijufa report para 3.2.3) by destroying shanty homes
and businesses, is according to some observers, designed to drive
disaffected urban voters to the famine-hit countryside - where his political
support base is - for political re-education and to prevent a popular
uprising.
Despite the August 2005 report of the United Nations special envoy Anna
Tibaijufa condemning Mugabe's actions, Mbeki the ANC and the African Union,
maintain their silence as they regard the matter as an 'internal matter for
Zimbabwe'.
Mugabe's statement that trillions of Zimbabwe dollars are to be spent on
re-housing the dispossessed is just another lie, and clearly just a ruse to
placate his critics and satisfy his African supporters.
The civilized world by contrast sees Mugabe as an illegitimate leader of an
illegitimate government, and unlike the ANC, regards the outcome of the
March 2005 parliamentary elections as rigged.
The international community insists on a new round of internationally
supervised elections in Zimbabwe.
United States Secretary of Sate, Colin Powell, is on record as saying
(September 2002) that there must be regime change in Zimbabwe and his
successor Condoleezza Rice, regards Zimbabwe as an "outpost of tyranny"
(January 2005) - an observation which Mbeki, in unqualified support of his
tyrannical friend, objected to.
The American Ambassador to Zimbabwe, Christopher Dell in a speech to the
Africa University of Zimbabwe on the 02 November 2005, had this to say about
America's Zimbabwe policy "... only when Zimbabwe's government restores the
rule of law, conducts free and fair elections, puts military and police
forces under effective civilian control, repeals repressive legislation, and
commits to an equitable, legal, and transparent land reform program will we
support financial support for the government of Zimbabwe".
Mugabe, over a twenty-six year period, has employed terror tactics against
all those he regards as a threat.
He planned, instigated, committed or otherwise aided and abetted a campaign
of violence directed against the civilian population of Zimbabwe. He has to
stay in power because he knows that as soon as he loses the protection of
his office, he and others of his regime will, if justice is to prevail, have
to stand trial at The Hague for genocide and crimes against humanity.
World leaders must surely come to realise that Mbeki's "quiet diplomacy" is
a charade - described by those opposing Mugabe in Zimbabwe as "an act of
blatant deception". Mbeki (London May 2006) is reported as now relying on
the United Nations to unravel the mess in Zimbabwe. The fact that he did not
comment on his government's failed "quiet diplomacy" policy, gives grist to
the perception that it was a charade and designed to deceive.
Zimbabwe sinks further and further into the abyss while the concerned world
looks on, and Mbeki, with measured arrogance born of absolute power, looks
the other way.
By IVOR WALDECK
Email - goodhopepark@worldonline.co.za
I was a judicial officer in Zimbabwe until 1983. After independence inquest
dockets were passed to me in 1982, which revealed that the National Army or
other government forces were murdering ZIPRA 'dissidents'. I was threatened
with detention if I, as was my judicial duty to do, held public inquests
into the deaths. I still have these dockets in my possession.
After 22 years in the Department of Justice, I resigned and left Zimbabwe in
1983 because I could not work for a government that after independence,
engaged in the cold blooded murder of its own citizens.
It is remarkable how few people know the real story about Mugabe and just
how murderous, tyrannical and evil he is. It is mainly the black people of
that country who have suffered because Mugabe has to retain the reigns of
power in order to survive politically.
The whites were pawns in the game and the Matabele killed in their thousands
because of ethnicity and their political opposition to him. Mugabe has
brought shame on the African continent and his country to its economic knees
with an inflation rate in May 2006 of 1000+% (and climbing), and the life
expectancy of the population falling from one of the highest in Africa to
one of the worst in the world - men 37 women 34 (World Health Organisation
report 2006).
The liberators of Sub-Saharan Africa have shown themselves to be incapable
of democratic governance - because democracy would have seen them voted out
of office.
In May 2006 the ANC ousted from power in local government elections in Cape
Town, led a campaign of violence against the newly elected Mayor of Cape
Town. Liberators will not tolerate being voted out of power, and this
seemingly minor episode is a timely warning of things to come.
Liberation governments have turned corrupt and rely on brute force to remain
in power and to retain the spoils. Commentators have expressed surprise at
how quickly corruption has, within ten short years, spread to the upper
echelons of the ANC government "... it is alarming that official corruption,
that constant scourge of post-colonial Africa, has seemingly taken root so
soon after democratic elections, and may have reached into the very highest
levels of government" (Editorial - British Weekly Telegraph - June 2005).
Since June 2005 there has been a marked increase in crime involving the ANC.
High profile figures have been convicted, and the prosecution or intended
prosecution of twenty-three ANC members of parliament for theft and fraud
involving public funds have come before the courts. Crimes involving
violence have escalated alarmingly.
The official crime statistics for the 2005/2006 period catalogues 18 793
murders (50 a day), 20 533 attempted murders, 54 926 rapes - 23 453
involving children (42%), 119 726 robberies involving aggravating
circumstances, 74 723 common robberies, 4 873 robberies of business premises
and 9 391 of residential premises, 12 825 'carjackings' and 385 cash in
transit heists that more often than not involve extreme violence. It is
generally believed that the authorities have manipulated the crime
statistics in order to claim a reduction in crime trends.
A disturbing aspect of crime statistics over the years is the fact that
since the ANC came into power, over 1 500 white farmers have been murdered
on their farms.
Some of these murders were sadistic and cruel in the extreme, and many
believe that they were and are politically motivated - the objective being
to drive white farmers off the land. The policy is succeeding, as the most
dangerous occupation in South Africa is being a white farmer.
The history of Sub-Saharan Africa is replete with examples of liberation
governments that have used chaotic situations involving criminality, to
cower the populace and drive out those who they regard as opponents of the
system. The Marxist socialist Eastern bloc countries of the sixties were
masters of this technique.
Another ominous sign is the firm control the ANC has on the broadcasting
media that it uses for propaganda purposes. It also actively prevents the
opinions of those who oppose the ANC from being aired or screened. These are
actions which can usually be attributed to dictatorships.
In April 2006 the ANC secretary-general Kgalema Motlanthe led a delegation
to Cuba - to be followed by a visit to China - to study the relationship
between party and state.
Both the Cuban and Chinese communist parties are single party systems that
are repressive and undemocratic. It is disturbing that the ANC hierarchy
should want to learn anything from either of the two countries where human
rights abuses are legend. The implications are ominous for South Africa.
The truth about Mugabe, Mbeki and the ANC, is a story that must be told and
spread far and wide, as it would be tragic if Mugabe escapes punishment for
his wrong-doing, and South Africa via the ANC, is permitted to travel the
same route Zimbabwe and every other liberation government in Sub-Saharan
Africa has travelled.
The United Nations must urgently be urged to respond and act.

Tsvangirai launches fierce attack on SADC

By Our Correspondent

www.thezimbabwetimes.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=353

HARARE, January 23, 2007 -Morgan Tsvangirai, the president of the Movement
for Democratic Change (MDC), has launched a scathing attack on African
nationalists and the Southern African Development Community (SADC) for
inaction on the Zimbabwe crisis and for sacrificing ideals of liberation
struggles for the sake of camaraderie

In a hard-hitting speech, Tsvangirai said African nationalists believed they
could not be challenged while SADC as a regional grouping had let down the
people of Zimbabwe.

He was presenting a paper titled Challenges of the Century: A call for
collective leadership on the Zimbabwean question

Tsvangirai said: "Our heritage, our history has tended to be abused by a
certain nationalistic clique that spearheaded and directed our liberation
struggles. To them, the status quo must be protected despite glaring
inadequacies in our societies and a changing world."

"This clique considers itself unchallenged in directing our societies at the
expense of political, social and economic advancement. Our nationalists in a
number of African countries have sacrificed ideals of the liberation
struggle, delayed national integration programmes and distorted the
sovereign expression of millions of Africa."

He, however, said the SADC region had a regional framework recognising
historical unity. "But critical advances have been hampered by misplaced
solidarity among those in our political leadership at the expense of the
generality of the people."

Tsvangirai said millions of Zimbabweans were languishing in exile, putting
pressure on social and economic systems among Zimbabwe neighbours.

"Despite this anomaly, a united SADC voice on the current political and
economic meltdown in Zimbabwe has been, at best fragmented and muffled, and
at worst, lacking in force and substance," he said.

"The solution to the crisis of governance remains elusive. We allow
political morticians to perfume a corpse in an advanced state of
decomposition with the hope that a miracle shall happen. It is fair to say,
SADC has let the people of Zimbabwe down, given the sacrifices the same
people made to the liberation of the sub-continent.

"We ignore the plight of a desperate nation under siege from a rapacious
clique in the name of non-interference in the internal affairs of a
neighbour and under the guise of protecting a liberation icon, a founding
father of the nation, a national symbol or just a friend."

Tsvangirai said a few years ago Mozambicans were displaced and could be
found in almost all the SADC countries. It took outsiders to bring the
warring parties together while the region watched from a distance.

He said Zimbabwe suffered from a system failure, caused by a ruling clique
that had decided to ignore national and international advice, and failed to
accept adaptive change after years of poor governance practices and an open
dictatorship.

Tsvangirai said efforts to effect corrective measures had attracted brutal
responses, leading to the flight of capital, investment and a national
feeling of despondency.

Elsewhere, he said, regional groupings had put in place monitoring
mechanisms to ensure and extend basic freedoms for their peoples as well as
introducing power to sanction and censure their members in the event of any
infringements.

Such regional block guarded against corruption, political behaviour that
fuelled inflation and economic decay and oppression.

"A regional standard in politics, economics and acceptable behaviour is
necessary to enable our neighbours to sound an early warning system should
the first signs of instability begin to emerge," Tsvangirai said.

"A regional standard offers a single voice, a single position whenever each
one of us faces a serious threat, a natural disaster or a political
miscalculation and misdemeanour."

Tsvangirai said icons of the liberation struggle, the founding fathers of
nations and the national symbols of tradition and heritage, had a coveted
place in the history of the region. They made an invaluable contribution
that no generation could afford to ignore or to forget, he said.

"But, they must let go," he said. "They must give allowances for our
societies to elect governments of their choice; they must give the people
opportunities to take part in their own political and economic activities
and to associate freely among themselves."

"The current effort in SADC shall remain a technical move unless we hit the
nail on the head: politics drives most activity. SADC's vision of attaining
a supra-national union where the respective governments completely
subordinate their sovereignty over policies to a supra-national authority,
and which may ultimately lead to the alignment of the countries involved
into a single community depends on the speed with which we move to protect
our people from incipient backwardness and political retardation.

"You can't live in peace as long as your neighbourhood, rightly or
debatably, is seen to harbour some rough elements. Let us clear our
neighbourhood, more so as we prepare to host the World Cup. International
attention shall be on southern Africa in the next four years. Unless we put
our heads together and sort out the Zimbabwean confusion; we shall be asking
our guests to ignore the dangers of a rough neighbourhood at their own
risk."

Message from www.zimgreats.com !

We are invited to go to www.zimgreats.com to see various latest issues!

I could not give the images sent to me from them.

God bless!

Rev M S Hove....The Radical Mindset!

Cell: 0791463039 RSA.

Message from the "Concerned Zimbabweans Abroad!"

Mugabe is planning another clean -up. This is very unfortunate but I believe
will send a strong messege to the United Nations for its failure to make a
follow up of Anna Tibaijuka's damning report.
Why is nobody doing nothing to stop the madaness that has gripped our
country? On Monday, the chairman of SADC was in Britain and was confronted
by the courageous Free Zim Youths on the plans he had on countries like
Zimbabwe. The reply was wishie washie.He just chewed his words and by the
end of his replying statement, he had actually said nothing.
Who then shall save our nation? Demonstrations are met with live bullets,
beatings and torture. I believe it is time we admit that we have failed to
remove Mugabe democratically. So what now?
We need to stop another tsunami sweeping over our country. In the previous
so called clean-up, children were killed, people got hurt, families broke
up, many were forced into exile and some had to move into the rural areas to
do nothing except retire at tenage stages. As untrained youths, what would
one expect then to do in tyhe rural areas.
We in the diaspora have to act now and thwart any moves by Mugabe to destroy
peple's homes again. I want to believe President Thabo Mbeki could act as
the pivot to thwart the moves by the tyrant to get more people out of the
country.
As CONCERNED ZIMBABWEANS ABROAD, we have already delivered a letter to the
president of S.Africa citing our concerns over the move by the Zimbabwean
governement to destroy more homes and the livelihoods of the poor.
It is very unfortunate that no neighbouring country is prepared to help us
equip ourselves militarily. Not even any other country in Africa. We believe
this is the only option left, if we do not have to wait till he is on the
hearse to the Heroes Acre.
Where many are going wrong is that they think that Mugabe holds all power.
It is a wrong assumption to make. The people hold the power and it is they
who have allowed Mugabe to do what he has done. Many of the people have
actively assisted in destroying the country. For a start, many actively
assisted Mugabe destroy Zimbabwe's food security and supoporting
infrastructure. In this way, they handed their power to Mugabe. Now the
people have to beg Mugabe to provide food to feed their children. It is
inconceiveable to imagine that a nation would not only allow, but its
citizens would actively partake in destroying a country's entire future. We
have brought this upon ourselves. If only we could take the time to look at
ourselves in the mirror and acknowledged this one fact, then maybe we will
finally take full responsibility upon our shoulders and, as individuals, do
something about it. Unfortunately, we are nowhere near the point of
recognising our collective irresponsibility.
There are many things that can be done to speed up change towards a
prosperous and happy Zimbabwe. Of that, we have no doubt. Our future is in
our hands. The problem right now is that we have become totemless and behave
like servants, not citizens.
Jay Jay Sibanda
CONCERNED ZIMBABWEANS ABROAD ( 072 363 0700 )

Zimpolitics opposed to Opposition Unification!

Opposition Unification

The most Zanu like idea and non democratic idea there is!
How do you call yourselves democratic yet embarking on a non democratic
promotional campaign? Anyone who is calling themselves academic or
politician seem to not understand what democracy stands for. What is this
idea about removing choice?
I know and understand what the current administration under Mugabe has not
performed as well as expected and corruption and all that is destructive to
the nation has taken place. We still should not be obsessed by Robert
Mugabe. The focus on the president has taken energy and the ability to be
innovative and creative (which was lacking already). It is not necessarily
the inability for a president to run the country that takes a nation to what
Zimbabwe is and going. It is the millions of Zimbabweans in the diaspora.
Running from their responsibilities. As thinkers and innovators, businessman
and civic organizations should have been creating an environment that is not
conducive to corruption and perpetuation of incompetence.

A coalition is the road to a one party state. Mutambara and Tsvangirai
should remain separate one or two more parties should join the field and
citizens should be educated to vote their conscience and not what someone
else think is the way to go. Mugabe can rule till he dies if Zimbabwean vote
for him. And they should be allowed to vote for him if that is what they
prefer. It is the members of paliament that matter. As long as the president
does not have a majority and the constitution is followed and is for the
people, one should not obsess on Mugabe. If there are crimes committed with
a majority that is not Zanu then Justice should and will take its course.

It however appears to me that until the nation reeds itself of these Zanu
like propensities we are destined to be like Kenya and the rest of the
African States. Change from one dictator to another. As it is we all know
that Tsvangirai and his predecessor from the other group are dictators in
the making.

Businesses need to create jobs, legislators and civic organizations need to
teach job skills and help start small businesses.

Civic organizations in Zimbabwe are little businesses that founders use to
finance their businesses and feed their families rather than do what they
have put themselves to be representing.

As much as mugabe is to blame for the state of the nation, it is time to get
over him already and quit the obsession. We have a judicial system. It may
not be were we want it to be but we have one. Gukura hundi for instance --
We can start prosecuting and filing civil suits and ask the international
courts to start indicting the lowest ranking soldiers that we all know for a
fact that they carried out the atrocities and follow the chain of command
from there. A lot of these will not want to go down on their own so they
will rat on the others and we follow the trail to Mugabe or at least someone
higher up the chain. We can do this with everything - the media, city
council, labor etc.

Lets do something that works and quit the finger pointing and obsessing on
Mugabe. He may die in power and no one will know what to obsess on when he
is gone. Leading to another state of paralysis.
4:16 AM, January 17, 2007
Zimpolitics can be found on www.zimpolitics.blogspot.com .

"GUKURAHUNDI RE-VISITED!"

Compiled by the Catholic Commission for Justice and Peace in Zimbabwe, March
1997
<http://www.newzimbabwe.com/pix/mugabefrail.cut-copy.jpg> REPORT ON
THE 80S ATROCITIES IN MATABELELAND AND THE MIDLANDS
<http://www.newzimbabwe.com/pix/mugabefrail.cut-copy.jpg>

THE DAMNING EVIDENCE THEY DIDN'T WANT YOU TO SEE

Please kindly note the whole Report is now available on
<http://www.gukurahundi.blogspot.com> www.gukurahundi.blogspot.com

All the material has been got from <http://www.newzimbabwe.com>
www.newzimbabwe.com

and is fully ackowledged.

Rev M S Hove....The Radical Soldier.Cell: 0791463039 RSA.

_____

New Yahoo! Mail is the ultimate force in competitive emailing. Find out more
at the Yahoo!
<http://uk.rd.yahoo.com/mail/uk/taglines/default/championships/games/*http:/
/uk.rd.yahoo.com/evt=44106/*http://mail.yahoo.net/uk/> Mail Championships.
Plus: play games and win prizes.

Please click below then go to "Call-back" of Week-end 13 Jan, 2007.

http://www.swradioafrica.com/pages/archives.php

Thanks.

M S Hove...Rev.

Cell: 0791463039 RSA.

Mugabe Hires Security Experts From Pakistan

Ex www.talkzimbabwe.com  

Pakistani security experts hired by Robert Mugabe in response to mass resignations and desertions

Itayi Garande 10.JAN.07

Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe, whose army has been severely weakened by mass resignations and desertions, has imported military experts from Pakistan to try to strengthen his security forces.

The Pakistani experts have been seconded to train the Zimbabwean army as an upsurge in strikes by poorly paid workers threatens civil unrest.

Police Commissioner Augustine Chihuri recently warned Home Affairs Minister Kembo Mohadi in a memo that increased resignations from the police and army would make the country's security "easy to breach".

The Pakistanis will each stay in Zimbabwe for at least two years and will be paid in very scarce US dollars.

The First Secretary at the Pakistani Embassy in Harare, Safdara Hayat, confirmed on Tuesday that Pakistani military experts were already in Zimbabwe to train the army.

He said the experts were brought in under a military co-operation agreement with Zimbabwe signed last week.

The opposition Movement for Democratic Change has strongly condemned the Pakistani deal, saying it proved the "Mugabe regime was in perennial combat with its people".

Spokesperson Nelson Chamisa said Zimbabwe was not at war but Mugabe would rather spend scarce foreign reserves on importing "gunmen" instead of importing fuel and grain for the hungry. This proved his priority was to cling to power at all costs.

It is not clear how many Pakistani officers are coming to Zimbabwe. Hayat said he thought only the four Pakistani experts now training Air Force of Zimbabwe (AFZ) officers would be coming.

But a report on the website of Pakistan's Daily Times, quoting unnamed Pakistani army sources, implied many more would be posted.

The report said Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz had approved the deal, which included extra pay for those deployed in Zimbabwe. Officers would get US$1,500 to US$3,300 plus allowances and privileges such as free accommodation and medical cover. Lower ranks would get from US$615 to US$712 plus extras.

This is much more than Zimbabwean soldiers are paid.

 

---

Copy addresses and emails from any email account to Yahoo! Mail - quick, easy and free. Do it now...

Please listen to SWRADIOAFRICA on Sat evening!

I've been recorded by SWRADIOAFRICA for "CALLBACK" and it will be aired on
Saturday Evening at about 19.10 Zim time.

If you miss it, click on www.swradioafrica.com and go "Archives".

There go to "Sat 14th January, 2007" and click on "Callback."

Their "archives" is kept for 14 days so you can get it even up to the 27th
of Jan.

But, of course, listen to the said Station every evening.

God bless us all!

The Radical Mindset.

A disclaimer:

If I post any views I get from the members of the public, IT DOES NOT MEAN I
AGRRE WITH THEM!

Its only Democracy at work!

Your duty is to contribute to that debate and present your views.

Thank you.

The Radical Mindset.

From the Radical's In-box:

From: CHANDA MATEMAI [mailto:nyamuhumbe@yahoo.com]

Hi,
Its nice that some people out there see things without blindfolds.
Only a man with stature can unsit undoubtedly a true Hero of Zim, Africa and
the world over, Comrade, Commandant (Cubans say), RG Mugabe.Its only that
too many enemies are ganging around him.Tsvangirai stands no chance at all,
all the dead in Zim will turn in their graves.
Mugabe has set the Standard and quality of a leader that ZIM should have and
deserves.Kwete vanaTsvangison, ngavaende vanofudza mombe, or to join
maDiasporan on menial jobs to survive, its better that way, than to be paid
for destroying what some men are building.

nyamuhumbe@yahoo.com

Setting the Zimbabwean Agenda for 2007:

Reflections from the Opposition
5^th January 2007; Harare, Zimbabwe

The National Mandate
Zimbabwe enters 2007 still embroiled in a crisis that has both political and socio-economic manifestations. The economic aspects are inextricably linked to the political matters. We are tired of describing the pain of our people. Our challenge and obsession should be on redemptive action: What should be done in 2007? We need to focus on the nexus between politics and economics in identifying lessons from the past as we chart a path into the future. We have a duty and obligation to confront our plight as a nation, and deliver change. We owe it to posterity.

The Political Agenda
The democratic forces in Zimbabwe must take stock of the effectiveness of their efforts in 2006. There is need for clarity on what works and that which does not. It must be understood within the opposition that there is absolutely no alternative to working together. Self-serving bickering and infighting among the democratic forces must be shunned. All political leaders must put national interest before self interest. The two MDC formations have neither monopoly of political wisdom, nor the immutable right to represent the people of Zimbabwe. In 2007 they must quickly resolve and achieve a framework of effective cooperation. If they do not accomplish this as a matter of urgency, the people of Zimbabwe must reject them completely and develop other alternatives. In 2007, it is shape up or ship out.

The people of Zimbabwe must not brook any nonsense that serves the interest of the dictatorship of Robert Mugabe. They must not accept a dysfunctional opposition that seizes defeat from the jaws of victory. None of the political leaders in the opposition are indispensable. Zimbabwe is not short of capable leaders. In any case, leadership is about creating leaders, not followers. All of the current leaders in the opposition can be replaced, and the struggle will continue unabated. The leadership of the two MDC formations must accept this without equivocation. They must pledge to put national interest before misguided personal ambition. There is need to re-energize the core opposition supporters while inspiring and attracting non-core constituencies.

It must be clearly understood that the cooperation of the two MDC formations is a necessary but not sufficient condition for democratic change in Zimbabwe. Even if reunification of the two MDC formations is achieved, it is not enough, to dislodge ZANU (PF). We have to grow the democratic forces beyond the traditional MDC support base. This should be done by attracting reform minded people from within ZANU (PF), other political parties, and those who are not currently in active party politics. Furthermore there should be enhanced cooperation with Zimbabwe civic society organizations, thus unlocking synergies amongst all democratic forces. Organizations such as NCA, Crisis Coalition, ZCTU, ZINASU, WOZA, MOZA, Women Coalition, and the Churches have shown spectacular courage under vicious attacks.

A results driven, broad based democratization alliance should be established. This should be characterized by inclusiveness, transparency, agenda clarity, effective communication, and sustained collusive efforts and activities. Isolated individual acts of defiance, grand standing, sectarian glory seeking, publicity stunts, pursuit of partisan credit, and legitimacy competition should not be tolerated. The agenda should be the immediate democratization of Zimbabwe through effective, collective and direct action. The experiences from Kenya, Zambia, Malawi, and elsewhere clearly demonstrate that the opposition has to break the ruling party before it can contemplate success in an uneven political playing field such as ours. The opposition has to break and destroy ZANU (PF), both as an institution and a culture, as part of our strategy to victory.

The dissension in ZANU (PF) over Mugabe’s intention to extend his misrule has presented a unique opportunity to build a national consensus for change. As the opposition we cannot even begin to work on this momentous task when we are a bunch of bickering self-destructive democratic forces. Shame on us! In 2007 things have to be drastically different. We have to quickly put the opposition house in order. Only then can we be relevant and effective in the democratization of our country.

While the apparent discontent in ZANU (PF) should be leveraged, the opposition forces should not base their strategy solely on this aspect. Why would the opposition bank on ZANU (PF) authoring its own destruction? We cannot pin our hopes on 10 ZANU (PF) MPs rebelling in Parliament to support the 41 MDC MPs in blocking insecure and incompetent Robert Mugabe’s insatiable lust for power. The fight has to be broader than participating in ZANU (PF) institutions. In 2007 we will take the struggle to the streets, villages, valleys, and jails of Zimbabwe. We must defeat Mugabe and his bootlickers with or without ZANU (PF) dissension. We should never allow the people’s revolution to depend on those ZANU (PF) cowards who are, for all intents and purposes, Mugabe’s wives.

We believe that the ideal framework for our struggle in Zimbabwe is that we should fight for a people driven democratic constitution before any future elections, followed by an internationally supervised national plebiscite. In 2007 we will pursue this objective by any means necessary. We will not respect any unjust and criminal laws. We will not allow the dictatorship to prescribe to us how we should fight it. We will set the agenda and determine the arena and instruments of combat. The opposition must now lead from the front, by setting the agenda, and not merely responding to ZANU (PF) projects. In addition to participating in electoral and institutional processes we will embrace all forms of democratic resistance. We intend to bring this regime to its knees. 2007 is the year of the people’s revolution.

As we pursue the agenda of a new constitution and internationally supervised elections, we should not be naïve and too idealistic. We must have a plan B. Zimbabwean national elections could be held in 2008 or 2010 before a new constitution, and without international supervision. It is hence imperative for us to clearly understand the current flawed and uneven electoral processes. The issue for us is to clearly establish how they are abused and manipulated, and thus develop anti-rigging mechanisms. In addition we need to carry out comprehensive voter education and registration, protect and guarantee secrecy of the vote, train effective polling agents, and establish functioning party structures throughout the country. The challenge should be; how do we make the flawed electoral processes and institutions work for us? How can we use the rules and laws of the dictator against the dictator? If, for example, the voter turnout was more than 70% in every constituency, and the opposition garners more than 80% of that vote while deploying effective polling agents, it will be very difficult for ZANU (PF) to manipulate such results. One of the rigging opportunities for the regime lies in manipulating the unspent vote and the narrow margins of opposition victory in some constituencies. Thus our challenge in this illustration is: How does the opposition ensure that there is 70% voter turnout throughout the country and that 80% of those voters are against the regime? Only a united, all-embracing, but focused and disciplined opposition can even begin to address this challenge. The struggle in Zimbabwe requires inspiring and transforming leadership, innovation, creativity, and thought leadership. It can not be business as usual.

The Economic Agenda
On the economy the opposition must debate and establish clarity and consensus around their economic vision and its corresponding strategy. In the year 2007 as a country we must establish what we want to be known for; our national brand. In order to establish a globally competitive economy the notion of country branding is vital. We must seek to be known for clean and competent government, efficiency and commitment to excellence. This will attract and retain both domestic and foreign investment. Investors should do business with Zimbabwe because they know that the government is clean, competent and transparent. Our laws should be predictable and not selectively applied. There must be demonstrable respect for property rights, the rule of law, and security of tenure. We must be known for meritocracy; i.e., Zimbabwean life chances and business opportunities must be based on talent and ability. Foreign and domestic investors can bid for projects not on the basis of patronage but on merit. For all our citizens, we must guarantee equal opportunity, not necessarily equal outcomes. It takes time to build a country brand. The starting point is that we must have a country, products, and services worth branding. We must be “famous for something” and focus on brand delivery, not advertising slogans. There is need to find the brand-building triggers, and make these happen. Once a country’s brand is damaged and compromised, its global competitiveness is severely undermined. The ZANU (PF) regime has immensely damaged the Zimbabwean brand. In 2007 we have to embark on a Zimbabwean brand development strategy. The stage for country’s branding on a global scale is already well laid out with the large number of successful Zimbabwean professional and business people in significant and strategic locations across the globe. These are the vehicles for marketing a branded global Zimbabwe.

We need to develop and own our economic models. The starting point is learning from those countries that have successfully transformed their economies such as Mauritius, Ghana, Singapore, Malaysia, India and China. We must also consider the traditionally strong economies of the US, Western Europe, and Japan. In these case studies we need to focus on the interplay between politics and economics in identifying lessons for high economic growth. More significantly, we should learn from ourselves (inside out approach); our local business experience, entrepreneurial instincts, work ethic, institutional memory, values, culture, wisdom, and indigenous knowledge systems. We need to understand and leverage our strengths: excellent human capital, strong natural resource base, and robust physical infrastructure. In this way, we can establish our own unique economic signature processes and institutions. Countries adopt industry best practice to stay competitive, but high-performing economies do more. They embrace unique signature processes that reflect their values and strengths. While adoption of global best-practice provides a level playing field, it is necessary but not sufficient. Signature processes, are idiosyncratic, part of national and local institutional culture & heritage; hence very difficult to replicate. A combination of signature processes and global industrial best practice enhances competitiveness and economic performance of a nation.

Innovative and creative strategic thinking must always inform our approach, so that national weaknesses can be turned into opportunities. For example, rather than continuously mourn about the brain drain and how to reverse it, why not think in terms of how we can benefit from the export of human capital and thus build an export industry centered around educational products and services. Under globalization no country can totally reverse the brain drain. We are living in an age of the global citizen and sovereign individual, where geography, national boundaries, and distance are of less significance. The logical conclusion of a completely global economy is a world without national citizens, but global customers. National governments will just be competing service providers. The challenge is how to turn national loss of human capital into an economic opportunity. In 2007 we must think outside the box. In fact, we must think as if there is no box! The thought processes that got us into a crisis cannot constitute the framework of redemption.

For any economic model to work there must be total ownership and buy in by the nation. We cannot borrow economic systems lock, stock and barrel. There has to be customization and adaptation. However, once a national economic model has been designed it cannot be static or stagnant. There must be continuous reinvention, and improvement. It is innovation or death. What makes a nation successful today will not be necessarily effective in the future.

Currently Zimbabwe is completely out of step with the economic vision, value system and frameworks that are being developed regionally and globally. Clearly the dysfunctional Zimbabwe economy cannot be properly integrated into Comesa and SADC, with regional inflation benchmarked at 20% while Zimbabwe experiencing four digit inflation levels. SADC as a grouping will continue to be affected and the success of COMESA is put in jeopardy. Equally significant and important to note is that countries in the region are also experiencing social impacts from mass migration from Zimbabwe into those countries.

It is imperative for SADC and the AU to realize that Zimbabwe’s failure is their demise too. They must understand that when Zimbabwe coughs, SADC catches a cold. Under globalization there is no country that can prosper and stay competitive without effective regional integration. The global survival paradigm is regional economic integration predicated upon regional sovereignty that supersedes national sovereignty. Any economic meltdown in one regional member is catastrophic to the group’s strategic, economic and political interests.

A Clarion Call for Revolution
We remind the generality of the people of Zimbabwe of the saying that “people get a government that they deserve.” Is this ZANU (PF) tyranny, misrule, corruption and economic mismanagement the best leadership this country can offer? Surely Zimbabweans can do far much better than this. The power is within us, to stand up and be counted. We must be masters of our own destiny. This is a clarion call for revolution. Lets all participate in the democratization and economic transformation of our country. History will never absolve us if we abscond. Ask not, how others will change Zimbabwe, but rather what you can do in your own personal way to deliver change. Be a player, not an observer. We must all play a role in the development of political and economic solutions for our country. There is no activity or contribution that is insignificant. 2007 is the year of national action; the year of people driven political and economic change in Zimbabwe. We must restore our sense of duty and national pride; concern ourselves not only with our personal well-being but also the interests of our entire nation. There is strength in unity of purpose and action. That is the only way forward. We all have to be risk takers, and abandon risk aversion. There is nothing as irresponsible as sleeping through a revolution.

The Struggle Continues Unabated.
Defeat is not on the agenda & Victory is certain.
Arthur G.O. Mutambara
MDC President

Our President's Christmas and New Year Message!

 

MORGAN Tsvangirai . . . decision to extend Mugabe's tenure will be resisted HARARE - As we draw a close to what has been for many a very miserable year it gives me great pleasure to predict a glimmer of hope in an otherwise even more?murky prediction for 2007.  I am aware that the year 2006, like the previous seven years, was particularly difficult. But you remained resolute in the struggle to express yourselves out of the national crisis.  We endured long queues for basic commodities; suffered the indignity of shortages of transport, electricity and fuel; sacrificed our entire savings to enable children to attend schools and witnessed the loss of a loved one through HIV/Aids.    We all know that since independence in 1980, and in particular the last seven years, we have been subjected to the most trying circumstances. Many are without food.  We can’t afford to send our children to schools. Hospitals have been turned into avenues of death. An HIV/Aids pandemic is causing havoc, making Zimbabwe a nation with the highest number of orphans in the world.      The challenge facing us today is to devise an effective mechanism to save Zimbabwe from further haemorrhage. Wherever we are, let us commit ourselves in earnest to saving our nation.  What can we do individually and collectively to advance the struggle for change, for a new beginning, and for a new Zimbabwe?    As we approach 2007, let us look back and use our experiences to help the people to help themselves and to determine their own destiny, against the numerous odds imposed by Robert Mugabe and the Zanu PF dictatorship.      Safeguarding our freedom depends on what we are prepared to do, at home and in the Diaspora.   It is quite obvious that we are in for a rough ride into 2007, especially when faced with the consequences of a Zanu PF defend-power project, imposed onto the people after the February 2000 referendum and the June 2000 parliamentary election.      The brutal assault onto the people; declaration of war against the people; the flagrant display of dishonesty, the skewed policies and the propaganda we have been subjected to over the last seven years have hit us hard.         Only the dishonest and those politically connected to Zanu PF are surviving the onslaught.?Southern Africa faces a major challenge in 2010. We are hosting the World Cup.    International attention shall thus be focused on all of us as a region as we receive visitors, international business and attend to the needs of millions of soccer followers.    We cannot afford to be enmeshed in the political emotions associated with elections at a time when the entire focus of humanity shall be on the SADC region through sport.   Fellow Zimbabweans, it is clear that Robert Mugabe and the ruling Zanu PF elite have elevated themselves to the position of super-patriots and decided to extend their rule against the national sentiment    Mugabe and Zanu PF rig elections; usurp state institutions for political expediency; beat up Zimbabweans who disagree with the style of governance and destroy a country full of promise.   The decision to extend Mugabe’s term of office, already contested after the 2002 Presidential election, is major slap in the face for all Zimbabweans.    We are in a serious dilemma as we have experienced and continue to live with an unprecedented economic meltdown and political uncertainty, all authored by Mugabe and his cronies.   We desire a normal society where decisions that affect the entire nation cannot be a preserve of a political party.      All Zimbabweans must discuss and agree on the efficacy of any proposal whose political implications affect the nation at large. Zanu PF has no right to impose its will on all of us.   You are aware that I challenged Mugabe’s legitimacy in 2002 following your mandate. Despite his refusal to open up institutions of state to resolve pertinent concerns arising from the challenge, I wish to thank Zimbabweans for remaining steadfast and committed to the resolution of the national crisis.      What Mugabe and ZANU PF have now done is the final straw that breaks the camel’s back. We cannot continue to watch Mugabe and his cronies play dangerous games with our lives.  The decision to extend Mugabe’s already controversial tenure shall be resisted. Together with our civil society partners and all democratic forces, we pledge to provide the necessary leadership to deal with this tyranny.    We are not going to let this affront on the people’s destiny go unchallenged. We shall consult you and follow your guidance in this crucial matter.     As we enter in one of our bleakest festive seasons and into the New Year, may I assure you of my unwavering commitment to continue the fight for a lasting resolution of the national crisis.  What came out of the Zanu PF conference is a major blow to Zimbabwe’s quest for a new beginning and to an end to uncertainty around Zimbabwe’s future.     Morgan Tsvangirai, PRESIDENT

 

Mugabe term extension madness: Tekere

National Report
http://www.fingaz.co.zw/story.aspx?stid=2163   
       
Kumbirai Mafunda Senior Reporter

FIREBRAND ZANU PF founder member and veteran nationalist Edgar Tekere has described as “madness” ZANU PF’s decision to extend President Robert Mugabe’s term to 2010.

Tekere, nicknamed “Twoboy,” said ZANU PF’s resolution at its conference in Goromonzi last weekend to combine the 2008 presidential and the 2010 parliamentary elections was a clear indication of President Mugabe’s insatiable appetite for power.
“Ndokupenga ikoko. Matricks okuda kufira pachigaro. (That’s madness. It’s a trick to stay in power for life.) He has already overstayed and the party and the country has suffered,” said Tekere in a telephone interview from his Mutare home.
Tekere was readmitted into ZANU PF at last weekend’s conference, but was barred from occupying any position in the party for five years.
Tekere, who became the first person within the ZANU PF leadership to publicly oppose President Mugabe’s one party state plan in the late 1980s, said he felt let down by his liberation war colleague. He claims to have struggled in his bid to woo President Mugabe into ZANU PF in the formative years of the party.
In an outburst likely to be seen as a case of sour grapes after being banned from elective office in ZANU PF for the next five years, Tekere said: “I sweated to form that party (ZANU PF) and to persuade him (Mugabe) to join it (ZANU PF) from Nkomo (Joshua).”
The former ZANU PF big-shot also scoffed at claims that the ZANU PF presidency had set strict conditions for him to meet before he could assume any office in the party.
“That party is more of my party than it is for Mugabe. Vamwe vacho ndiwana mafikizolo handimbozivi kuti vakabva nokupi (some of these people are Johnny-come-latelys, I don’t know where they came from),” Tekere said.
Pressed to explain his quest to rejoin ZANU PF considering that the party has not made any reforms since he quit it in 1988 to form his own party, the former Mutare Urban legislator said he will bare his soul on January 11 at the Harare launch of his memoirs, which he has titled A Lifetime of Struggle.
“I would prefer you talk to me on the 11th of January. But you can predict what I am going to say,” Tekere said.
But the political maverick’s dig at President Mugabe will baffle the ruling party’s senior leadership, especially supporters in Manicaland who laboured to back Tekere’s desperate bid to be re-admitted into the ruling party.
Tekere was sacked from ZANU PF in October 1988 because of his strong opposition to President Mugabe’s attempts to establish a one-party state. He formed the Zimbabwe Unity Movement (ZUM), which made an impressive attempt to dislodge ZANU PF during the 1990 general elections.
       

ZIMBABWEAN PETITIONS US PRESIDENT!

Here is the petition link
 
http://www.gopetition.com/online/10585.html

Here is the story that started it.
 
http://www.zimdaily.com/news/126/ARTICLE/1160/2006-12-11.html
 
Since then, I have spoken to two Congressmen who are willing to help us. But that is as far as my little mind has gone. I could use help.

 
Tambu Kahari.

<tapilicious@yahoo.com>

URGENT CALL FOR DIALOGUE!

 Ex www.newzimbabwe.com (FORUMS!)
http://newzim.proboards86.com/index.cgi?board=general
We dont have to agree or come from same political pursuasion!!,...but our fundamental mutual interest can only be solved through dialogue!!! please the petition and put the national agenda on the world stage. Dialogue is the right way to go whether you belong to mdc , zpf, and all the pretenders who run their parties like privated limited companies and form them only when fired by zpf!! meaning they realy zpf in disgruntled politicians skin!!

The west and its intelligencia are advocating for talks with Syria and Iran and have normalised and indeed expanded relations with Libya and enjoy cordial ones with rich Russia who like Zimbabwe have phenomenal natural resources!

IT IS IN OUR FUNDAMENTAL MUTUAL INTEREST FOR DIALOGUE NOT BLACKMAIL SANCTIONS TO TRIUMPH, THE TRIUMPH OF DIPLOMACY LEAVES EVERYBODY HAPPY AND HUMAN!!!

SIGN HERE PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.petitiononline.com/ZIMBOS/petition.html

Posted by Rev M S Hove…The Radical Soldier.
Cell: 0791463039 RSA.

CIO warns of civil war!

http://www.thezimbabwean.co.uk/viewinfo.cfm?linkcategoryid=27&linkid=35&id=2859
HARARE - Middle and junior-ranking officers of the Central Intelligence Organisation (CIO) have recommended that President Robert Mugabe abandon the idea of postponing presidential elections from 2008 to 2010 saying these plans risk igniting civil war.

The details emerged as the feuding opposition MDC factions vowed to close ranks and fight Mugabe as a united front in a double effort to force him to abandon the “politically contentious plan.”

Intelligence officials interviewed this week said the CIO’s top directors who report directly to the President were buffering this message from reaching “Number 1”.

The CIO officers said several of their colleagues working on the “PP (presidential poll) assignment” had emphasised the need to rejuvenate the ruling party but still maintain the presidential election timetable, which must be held by March 2008.

“We are dyed-in-the-wool intelligence operatives and our mandate is to interact with the lowest members of society and provide feedback as frankly and accurately as possible to our principals,” said one junior officer. “Several of our officers have officially confirmed that there is anger out there over these plans to postpone the elections given the deepening hardships. Generally there is a strong feeling from voters that they will not support Zanu (PF) unless Mugabe retires. The President is however being badly advised by those who report to him directly,” he said, adding that this was the general sentiment among middle and junior ranking CIO officers, who constitute the majority of the 3,000-strong spy agency.

The officials said the “foot soldiers” - or junior and middle rank CIO officers deployed to mingle and interact with the ordinary people - had in the past few months conducted an “intelligence ballot” which supported the theory that “there is an urgent need to reconstitute Zanu (PF) through a new leadership” to enhance its electoral fortunes. They said most of the feedback suggested “Mugabe should be persuaded to go into dignified retirement.”

Comprehensive statement issued by the MDC and important for your Historical Records

Sent to the Rev Mufaro Stig Hove (The Radical Soldier) by Bro William Bango (whom I hold in the highest esteem).

M.S.Hove. Cell: 0791463039 RSA. mufarostig@yahoo.co.uk

****************************************************************************

 

The Developing Crisis.

We are a product of unique historical circumstances. Our shared history of injustice and suffering impelled and determined our birth as a force for democracy in Zimbabwe, and our perceived common destiny continues to bind us as we struggle for a deliberately defined and better future.

Throughout the 1990's the current regime simply abdicated the sacred responsibility to govern. It subverted the popular mandate bestowed by the people and became a regime of cronies superintending the welfare and economic well being of a few at the expense of the majority of Zimbabweans.

The political and economic fortunes of the country were rapidly sliding into political decay and economic collapse. Democracy was being slowly strangled and ultimately gave way to a vicious primitive dictatorship. People's voices were virtually excluded from the management of public affairs, their own affairs, and a supposedly benevolent dictatorship was substituted for democratic consultation and democratic processes.

The collapsing economy spewed hundreds of thousands of workers into chronic unemployment and poverty in the urban areas, while in the rural areas millions were driven out of the mainstream economy, with their labour yielding only subsistence existence. Levels of poverty never before experienced in this country were fast becoming a permanent condition of existence. Mortality rates plummeted as the health sector collapsed and hospitals became totally dysfunctional; school dropout rates reached alarming levels as people concentrated on the crisis of daily sustenance and public funding dwindled and general infrastructure collapsed leaving vast swaths of the country virtually inaccessible.

For the people, poverty seemed to defeat all possibilities of relief and redress. Hope was replaced by general gloom and despondency. Then, as now, the only exit route, literally was to wait for eventual certain death from hunger, disease or political violence. The entire population was in a trap.

All these woes were not natural catastrophes. They were a deliberately crafted strategy of rulership by the regime. Poverty was deliberately invented and maintained. The central strategic objective of the regime was to create poverty as an instrument to make the people depended on handouts, thereby render them unquestioningly available to the rapacious caprices of unbridled dictatorial rule. As a captured weapon in the hands of the dictatorship, poverty became a tool to ruthlessly enforce political docility.

The People's Response-- The National Working People's Convention (NWPC).

In the context of this fast developing national crisis, the broad democratic forces in Zimbabwe—labour, women and youth organizations, civic groups, informal sector workers, students, peasants, the churches etc.,---were impelled by the common dire circumstances to come together under the auspices of The National Working People's Convention (NWPC), review the situation and chart a path towards a common liveable future. The NWPC's diagnosis of the crisis yielded a compelling path forward.

The NWPC accurately characterized the manifestations in the socio-economic field, the subversion of the separation of powers, the destruction of democracy and the democratic process, the serial violation of human rights, the general refusal to be accountable and to consult the people on all issues that affected them and a repressive constitution that fails to recognize and guarantee popular sovereignty.

These were correctly identified by the NPWC as simply symptoms of the general malaise. The root cause being a systematic failure of governance. Therefore, only a political solution could lay the basis for resolving the problems confronting the country. The NWPC Agenda for Action was anchored on two fundamental principles: (1) The critical need for a just people's constitution and (2) crafting of policies that met the basic needs of the people. These fundamental principles, in themselves charted and impelled a path towards a sustainable political and economic dispensation for Zimbabwe .

All the democratic forces that assembled under the banner of the NWPC were under no illusion that about the practical import about the adopted resolutions and policies in general and the Agenda for Action in particular. They were both to be, and could only be implemented by a government that issued from a strong, democratic, popularly driven and organized movement of the people. There could be neither substitutes for nor short cuts to the vehicle that was to deliver social liberation. The people had to deliver their own method for liberation and there was a palpable hostility to any strategy that turned the people's resolve and movement into handmaidens that sought to reform and sanitize the current dictatorship or be party to any brokered deals designed to achieve the same diabolical result and neutralize the undiluted thrust of the people's organised interests.

The perceived movement, which was expected to eventually issue a redeeming popular government, was to be a broad people's movement, strongly wedded to recognising and protecting the independent roles and mandates of the various organisations of the working people. Clearly, this was a firm instruction and unequivocal mandate to for the movement to immediately maintain the operational unity created by the NWPC and launch and sustain the democratic struggle as a broad united front until democracy is achieved.

As we gather here today, some among have got tired and went astray. They have defied the operational parameters defined and mandated by the NWPC. Today they are openly and shamelessly sending signals and overtures to the tyrannical regime for an empty compromise whose sole purpose is the achievement of individual political power that is bereft of people's interests. Such is the nature of the tragic betrayal that has befallen the democratic forces in Zimbabwe over the past few months.

But the mainstream democratic movement has remained resolute. The MDC has remained loyal and maintained an unwavering commitment to the values and operational strategies charted by the NWPC. As we move on from this historic National Congress let us be more united and craft and implement policies that ensures that our inevitable liberation will be the product of and owned by all the broad democratic forces in Zimbabwe . The road has been long, perilous and difficult, but we shall prevail.

MDC Inaugural Congress.

The NWPC developed a National Agenda and identified how to carry it forward. That delivery vehicle became the MDC. Consequently, the MDC inaugural congress in February 2000, as with its formation in September 1999, was guided by the spirit, values, policies, resolutions and strategies of the NWPC. The party has remained faithful to the peoples' ideals as expressed in the Agenda for Action by the NPWC. The Inaugural Congress set the stage to launch our blueprint to capture the various interests of the people into a broad programme of action to be implemented by an MDC government.

Over the past six years, we have formulated policies for our Political, Economic and Social Agenda that capture and express the political economic and social interests of the majority of Zimbabweans and we continue to celebrate our unity in diversity as a democratic movement with rich shared values and hopes.

All our policies and activities have consistently demonstrated an unwavering commitment to replacing the status quo with a popular, legitimate government driven by the people's democratic force and anchored in a popular constitution. We continue to resist and neutralize all diabolical attempts to trap the movement in a groove of compromise with the dictatorship.

Through these relentless efforts, the MDC has now developed to become a central force on the Zimbabwean political terrain. Our performance in all local and national elections has demonstrated nationally, regionally continentally and indeed internationally that we are now the only dominant democratic political party in Zimbabwe today. We have scored major victories over the past six years and Congress has every reason to proudly recount and openly celebrate them. They are no mean achievements in the midst of tyranny.

THE OPERATIONAL POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT.

The valiant political victories that the movement scored were not won on a peaceful democratic political marketplace. Instead, they were snatched from the jaws of tyranny. We accepted, paid and continue to pay a heavy prize for using democratic methods against a political opponent who is totally contemptuous of, and violent to democracy, democratic processes and methods. For that we have no regrets.

Over the past six years, the party has been subjected to such a violent traumatic experience that today we can proudly claim that few political opposition political parties in modern times have survived the same levels repression as those consistently targeted, with the full might, of the state against the MDC. We have passed the test. Now we must prepare to govern with the resilience, fortitude and determination as have seen us survive the darkest and most dangerous times in the post independence history of this country.

The February 2000 Constitutional Referendum and The June 2000 Parliamentary Elections.

From the time of the formation of the party we were engaged in two battles: one organisational; the other defensive. Between the formation of the party in September 1999 and the Inaugural Congress in February 2000 the party concentrated on the establishment of an effective organizational structure on the ground. Wards, branches, district and provincial structures had to be established and stabilised and the party message had to percolate to the remotest villages.

Tragically, this intended programme of intensive mass mobilization had to be combined with a strategy to defend the nascent party structures and supporters against a ferocious onslaught from the ruling party backed by all state organs at its disposal. It was a clash of two political cultures. We sought to introduce a culture of peace, tolerance and democracy where dictatorship once reigned supreme.

With the party still in its infancy, we found ourselves going into a mobilization battle against the regime sponsored Constitution which was intended to render the dictatorship the natural political order in Zimbabwe . While the process of party building was in progress, we had to simultaneously rally the people of Zimbabwe to reject that gigantic confidence trick that the regime sought to bring under the guise of a "new" Constitution. Immediately after the Constitutional Referendum the party had to embark on the June 2000 parliamentary election campaign.

We operated daily under the sound of hostile gunfire with both the party structures and supporters targeted for destruction, the intention being to kill once and for all the idea of democracy, democratic processes and governance in Zimbabwe . Was remained of democratic culture had to be buried.

State-sponsored violence, the magnitude of which has no parallels in the post independence history of this country was unleashed and enveloped the country, creating such conditions of insecurity that for many of the party supporters, life expectancy began to measured in seconds rather than years.

The entire population was brutalized. Murder, rape, kidnappings and general violence became instruments of governance by the regime. Private property was routinely destroyed and there was a general breakdown of law and order. Law enforcement became heavily politicised along partisan lines and a supposedly protective state became a predatory one. The state became a captured instrument in the hands of the dictatorship. Every state organ and agent was turned into combatants against the MDC. Youth militias and rogue elements of the so-called war veterans marauded the country the country as virtual freebooters with specific instructions to destroy the MDC. It was virtually a war against the people. We had no state or legal protection and we had to craft our own survival methods and strategies. We prevailed.

The referendum campaign laid the context in which the violent political practices and pernicious, malicious and repressive legislation, which define the dictatorship today, were established and refined with each subsequent political campaign.

This hostile and dangerous political environment did not deter the MDC from its central objective of mobilizing the people to reject a proposed constitution that sought to entrench dictatorship and enslave them in perpetuity. The party successfully combined the tasks of party building, mass mobilisation and resistance, to defeat for the first time, and cut back the tentacles of tyranny. The people rejected the regime's draft constitution.

It was a glorious victory for the brutalised people of Zimbabwe ; but much more significantly, it was a victory for democracy. It laid the foundation upon which future generations will continue to build an enduring democratic culture in our country. For the first time since independence, the people of Zimbabwe realised that with political power in their hands they can defeat injustice and lay a foundation for a future of their choice.

The referendum result was critical because it demonstrated to the entire world that the people of Zimbabwe were solidly behind the MDC and that the regime's claim to be a people's government was totally false. The crisis of governance in Zimbabwe became a matter of international public opinion because there was now a clear demonstration that the regime had lost the confidence of the people.

For the party as a whole, the message and lesson learnt is loud and clear: The people of Zimbabwe demand to craft their own constitution. Congress must therefore reaffirm its commitment to realising this objective through the methods demanded by the people.

Emboldened by the result of the February Constitutional Referendum the party prepared for the June 2000 parliamentary elections with courage and determination. Our comprehensive Election Manifesto captured and expressed the broad interests of the people of Zimbabwe for long time neglected by the regime. The Agenda for Action of the NWPC constituted the launching pad of our message. We effectively transmitted a message of hope, relief and national revival to the long-suffering people of Zimbabwe .

We promised a peaceful democratic culture under a people's constitution; effective and impartial law enforcement; judiciary independence; land reform; general economic recovery, job creation, poverty eradication and freedom from hunger. All these were promises broken by the regime over a period of 20 years of violent misrule.

With a systematic record of failure, neglect and arrogance the regime had no tangible issue to project, no credibility to deliver believable promises. They had neither fresh policy nor old programmes to repackage and sell to the people. The regime stared at certain electoral defeat and the only electoral policy and strategy available was that of violence, which was officially unleashed without let or hindrance.

The violence that was unleashed during the February Constitutional Referendum was intensified and given a new impetus. The regime abandoned any semblance of democracy and legality. State-sponsored violence became the mode of day-to-day governance. Murder, torture, rape and all kinds of human rights violations against MDC members and supporters became regular electoral campaign events, with the perpetrators enjoying open state support and protection.

Groups of war veterans and ruling party youth militias with open state material and political support roamed the length and breath of the country murdering and terrorising innocent people at will. There was a total breakdown of law and order induced and orchestrated by the state and the civil administration of the country had virtually collapsed and replaced by a power structure resembling martial law. The election was conducted in political conditions that resembled a war zone.

Under the guise of the so-called "land reform," widespread violence sealed off the rural areas from MDC campaigns, and crimes that can only rival fascism and Nazism in scale and wickedness were unleashed against the people. A well planned, systematically implemented and effectively managed infrastructure of violence left virtually no room for free political campaigning.

Our parliamentary candidates and party election workers could not campaign freely and were prime targets of the regime's violence. Some had to abandon their homes and constituencies, while others operated virtually underground. Hundreds of thousands of our party supporters were physically prevented from casting their votes. At many polling centres, the electoral system had been manipulated to "net-in" only those believed to be ruling party supporters.

Electoral violence was complemented by authoritarian electoral management machinery and administrative dictatorial powers both of which ensured that the election was stolen before even the first vote was cast. There was extensive use of the dictatorial presidential powers in support of regime appointed agencies such as the Election Directorate to achieve the desired fraudulent outcome.

Changes to the electoral laws to bend the process in the regime's favour were made only a few days before the poll. Handpicked civil servants in the Election Directorate supported by shadowy security agents ran the poll in place of an Independent Electoral Commission. Poll observation was routinely obstructed by the regime with some election observers denied accreditation. Overall, this combination of violence, presidential dictatorial powers and a ferocious bureaucratic stranglehold on the electoral process was meant to totally obliterate the electoral chances of the MDC.

However, in spite of the hostile and dangerous political environment in which we mounted our electoral campaign, the MDC's poignant message could not be stopped. Through our newly created party structures we were able to disseminate our message to the remotest villages in the country and devise effective strategies to protect members and supporters from the worst excesses the regime's violence.

The atrocities perpetrated by the regime began to attract widespread international attention and condemnation. Consequently we galvanised the region, the continent, the commonwealth and the entire international community to our democratic cause.

From June 2000 until today, the tyrannical regime has remained on the radar of international attention. Democratic forces through the world have rallied behind us to ensure that the regime justly gets the pariah status that it has brought upon itself. Our internal responses to violence and external outreach programme have been quite effective. Zimbabweans and majority opinion and organisations in the international community rejected both the electoral process and outcome.

However, the election results demonstrated the determination of Zimbabweans to reclaim their freedom. Voter determination and turnout were so strong that the regime's violence and rigging mechanism could not alter the result in the 57 constituencies that we won; while in 39 other constituencies, evidence of electoral fraud was so overwhelming that the regime had to manipulate the judiciary system to ensure that MDC election petitions received inordinate delays.

By 2005, not a single election petition had received a fair hearing and concluded at the courts and they had to fall by the way side because of fresh parliamentary elections that were due. If the 2000 parliamentary election had been conducted the most basic or rudimentary conditions of freeness and fairness, the MDC would have easily netted in between 90 and 100 seats. We would have started the process to usher in an MDC administration.

The June 2000 parliamentary election was therefore a major victory for the people and the party. In addition to the regime's defeat at the referendum the parliamentary elections three months later demonstrated once again that the regime had lost the legitimacy to govern and remained in power through the use of force.

The crisis that started with the referendum was exacerbated by the fraudulent elections. From that time until today the regime has sacrificed every facet of national life and the general welfare of the people of Zimbabwe on the altar of sheer political survival. Dictatorial rule became increasingly totalitarian as the regime sought to control every aspect of society.

During the period between the June 2000 and the March 2002 presidential election the regime waged war against the MDC and all democratic forces in Zimbabwe . Our definition as a civilian law-abiding political party was removed and we were publicly pronounced as enemies of state and therefore targets of the most vicious administrative action. Illegal action on ordinary party supporters by the police, army and security agents occurred with frightening regularity with absolutely no means of legal redress.

MDC leaders and political activists were routinely arrested and brutalized on trumped up charges and political violence continued throughout the country. Human rights violations became a critical instrument of control and governance for the regime. Labour and civic organizations continued to be targets of violent state action and illegal arrests and detentions. Independent media journalist were constantly harassed and arrested and newspapers banned. Church leaders were demonised for speaking out against the regime's record of violence and torture and women's organisation were singled out for the most degrading and inhuman treatment. The whole society was held to dictatorial ransom. The objective was to cow down the entire population into submission.

These actions of physical violence and intimidation were complemented by draconian legislation designed to buttress an infrastructure of dictatorship otherwise maintained by brute force. Using its fraudulent majority in the parliament, the regime bulldozed all voices of reason, passed the Public Order and Security Act (POSA) to prescribe and nearly proscribe political activity, close down democratic political discourse, and shrink democratic space. POSA's sister legislation, the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA) targeted and muzzled the press to immunize the regime's corruption and brutalities from public scrutiny. These pernicious pieces of legislation were complemented by the ever-present severe and unwritten methods of tyrannical rule and law enforcement.

The tyrannical political terrain that was created made it virtually impossible for the MDC to function normally as a political party engaged in democratic political activity. It was an attempt to deliberately nudge the MDC into violent precipitous action and thereby provide an excuse for the regime to accuse the party of insurrection, use all the might at its disposal and crush and ban the movement.

We refused to fall into this diabolical trap. In spite of the daily acts of provocation that we endured, we remained committed to peaceful democratic methods of resistance. We launched various acts of peaceful defiance and civil disobedience to confront the regime constantly. The party remained strong and the various democratic mass actions that we engaged in demonstrated to the regime that the people's quest for their freedom remained undefeated.

The March 2002 Presidential Election.

The state-sponsored violence that was unleashed during the June 2000 parliamentary elections was sustained and intensified during the intervening period leading to the presidential election. The entire state machinery operated virtually like a gigantic violent organ of the ruling party targeting the MDC.

Violence against us became a system of government administration and a command structure stretching from the remotest village up to the ruling party headquarters in Harare ensured the installation and maintanance of an extremely efficient infrastructure of violence, which touched every region, and aspect of national life.

The Defence Act, Police Act and the relevant sections of the Constitution were operationally suspended for the purpose of fighting the MDC. The overall army commander openly called for an insurrection should a legitimately elected MDC government come to power and all the other service chiefs openly associated themselves with that statement. The police and the secret service actively participated in campaigning for the ruling party and some committed openly criminal acts with impunity, and units of the army made frequent forays into the high-density suburbs to brutalise innocent civilians. Law enforcement virtually collapsed and any criminal act against the MDC and in support of the ruling party was officially sanctioned.

A number of our supporters were killed for holding their particular political opinions and the systematic violation of human rights reached a new crescendo. Leaders and party supporters were frequently harassed, arrested and detained under trumped up charges and well laid out ambush plans for the assassination of some members of the leadership miraculously failed. What was supposed to be a democratic inter-party political contest assumed the ominous proportions of the state against an unarmed political party. The volatility of the political situation nationally could only be described as one of low intensity conflict.

This violent situation was complemented by the existence of the newly promulgated draconian anti-democratic laws designed to snuff out all those democratic practices and processes that could not be destroyed by violence alone. POSA criminalized legitimate political debate and the freedom of association and assembly while AIPPA crippled the freedom to disseminate democratic ideas through the press. The movement virtually became a besieged party operating under a barrage of physical and paralegal attacks from the state and the ruling party.

At the height of the electoral campaign three MDC leaders including the party president were hauled before the courts on trumped up charges of treason. This was a deliberate, cynical and vicious attempt to decapitate the party and cause chaos, confusion and hopelessness among the membership. The trial dragged on for over a year and the charges were thrown out of court. Resources, which had been reserved for several party programmes had to be deployed for the defence of the leadership. However, in spite of this attempt to strangle the party, both the leadership and the generality of the members struggled on with the campaign heroically.

The electoral playing field was extremely uneven, tilting in favour of the ruling party. The voters' roll was chaotic, with many ghost voters while hundreds of thousands of both old and new voters having been left out of the roll. This shambolic nature of the voters was exacerbated by the arbitrary amendment of the citizenship laws, which deprived hundreds of thousands of Zimbabweans of their citizenship and the right to vote.

There was no independent electoral body. The Election Directorate and the Registrar-General's department stuffed by the regime's nominees and ruling party loyalists, functioned virtually as a rigging mechanism for the government. Military personnel performed key duties in the electoral process and the entire election administration system became militarised and presided over by a civil-military junta. The critical part of the democratic process could neither be expected to be superintended by, nor democracy to issue from such a highly compromised system.

In spite of all the bureaucratic impediments and incessant state-organised violence, Zimbabweans were determined to rid themselves of this tyranny. They turned out in their thousands to cast their vote and the reaction of the state turned the voting process into chaos. In the rural areas some polling stations were closed well ahead of time, while in the urban areas police had to violently intervene using helicopters, teargas and truncheons to stop people from casting their vote.

The result clearly demonstrated the much-anticipated MDC victory. The regime took time to announce the election figures and when they did they issued contradictory figures, which clearly demonstrated serious problems in manipulating an MDC victory into a defeat. Once again, through violence and the abuse of the state apparatus, we were cheated of our victory. Zimbabweans and the bulk of the international community are aware of this victory and the illegitimacy of the present regime.

We took the only route that seemed available to us at the time and petitioned the High Court. The long-drawn out legal battle is still in process and we do not expect any justice from the manipulated judiciary system. However we approached the court because we believed that it would provide us with a platform and opportunity to reveal to Zimbabweans and the international community how the presidential election was stolen.

The Internationalisation of the Zimbabwe Crisis.

Since the February 2000 Constitutional Referendum the focus of the international region and the international community had been trained on the evolving violent political situation in Zimbabwe. Many countries and organisations had been expressing grave concern at the violence deteriorating human rights situation in Zimbabwe. The African Union, Commonwealth, the European Union and the United States of America all made serious attempts to persuade the regime from waging war against defenceless people.

Other organisations such as the International Bar Association and the World Council of Churches added their voices to no avail. The response of the regime was to pour vitriol on any voices of reason, claiming that it had the right of might to treat Zimbabweans any way that pleased it. It banned a selected group of countries, foreign non-governmental organisations and perceived to be critical from entering Zimbabwe and observing the election. The election was to be conducted away from the scrutiny of the international community.

The Commonwealth Conference that took place in Australia shortly before the presidential election failed to persuade the regime to put in place measures to enable the holding of free and fair elections, but ended up setting a troika composed of Nigeria, Australia and South Africa to try to broker a solution to the Zimbabwe crisis. A series of diplomatic engagements by the troika yielded virtually nothing, as the regime spurned any and all political formulae meant to dismantle the dictatorship in order to resolve the crisis of governance.

The persuasive efforts of the European Union and the USA could not derail the regime's efforts to maintain illegitimate political power at any cost. It was the regime's hostility towards all these international overtures that brought about targeted sanctions by the USA, EU Australia and New Zealand against the regime and its key supporters. The intransigence of the regime created for it conditions. We as a movement had absolutely no hand in that development. We did not and do not control political processes and foreign policy in those countries. The actions of the regime internationalised the crisis because the international community no longer regards human rights violations as a domestic matter, contrary to the regime's despicable claims.

The Commonwealth troika took the initiative soon after the elections to diffuse the potentially explosive political situation that gripped the nation after the stolen election and called for dialogue between the MDC and ZANU PF. The mandate of the troika was to promote reconciliation between the two political parties in order to create a political environment conducive to addressing the issues of food shortages, economic recovery, restoration of political stability, the rule of law and the conduct of future elections. South Africa and Nigeria were to foster this engagement. The dialogue started in April 2000.

We were committed as a party to exploring all avenues towards resolving the crisis of governance in the country peacefully and we agreed to engage the regime in dialogue in good faith. We chose a team to carry the party's political position to the talks within the confines of a strict mandate. Our position was that the goal of national dialogue must be based on an unconditional return to legitimacy through a presidential poll that was free and fair under peaceful political conditions. The negotiating team was tasked to demand that before serious dialogue could start the regime had to implement fourteen (14) confidence-building measures that restored a situation of tranquillity conducive to fruitful talks. These included:

1. An immediate stop to the violence that engulfed the nation.

2. An end to all political persecutions and political prosecutions.

3. The immediate disbanding of all ZANU PF militias and immediate cessation of further training.

4. The disarming of all war veterans and guarantees that they will not be rearmed and that they will not be rearmed and that they will not engage in political activities as an armed group operating virtually above the law, but only as ordinary Zimbabwe citizens.

5. An undertaking not to grant amnesty for the perpetrators of murder, rape, torture political violence and other serious crimes.

6. Am immediate stop to on-going human rights violations of all kinds.

7. An end to selective and biased law enforcement. Police should be non-partisan in the execution of their duties.

8. An end to the use of the Central Intelligence Organisation for partisan political activities.

9. A stop to the use of the Zimbabwe Defence Force (ZDF) in civilian policing duties or political activities of any kind.

10. Respect and impartial enforcement of the rule of law.

11. Repeal of the Public Order and Security Act (POSA) and the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (AIPPA).

12. An end to the use of the national broadcaster (ZBC) as a partisan media instrument.

13. A commitment to stop the legislative use of Presidential powers in these areas, undermining the authority of parliament.

14. A commitment to humanitarian ethics of food and relief distribution on grounds of need, without partisan or adverse distinction of ant kind.

It is important that the party is fully aware of the accurate mandate given to the negotiating team. Our position was that before any meaningful talks could be entered into, all these 14 confidence-building measures were to be implemented by the regime in order to create a peaceful political environment conducive to dialogue.

The inter-party dialogue was convened in early April 2002. The opening session was devoted to the reading of opening statements and expressions of political positions, the exchange of position papers and it was agreed to resume a few days later in April 2000 for deliberations on substantive issues. It was anticipated by the facilitators that the talks should be concluded by early May 2002. At the next meeting held on April 10 2002, the inter-party team agreed on the rules of procedure during the deliberations and the agenda for discussions.

The agenda closely mirrored the concerns raised by the MDC in our confidence-building position paper and agreed that there was an urgent need to create conditions for normal political activity. The critical issues agreed to were as follows:

A. Creating conditions for normal political activity.

1. Legitimacy of elections and government.

2. Sovereignty of Zimbabwe.

3. Multipartism in Zimbabwe.

4. Confidence building measures in Zimbabwe.

5. Politically motivated violence in Zimbabwe

6. Constitution and laws of Zimbabwe.

B. Economic development/ recovery plan and mobilisation of resources.

1. Consensus on land reform----Abuja process.

C. Way forward.

1. Adoption of Programme of work.

Both the MDC and ZANU PF had agreed to the above agenda. Our negotiating team went fully prepared to engage in serious discussions. ZANU PF however realised that they had been put in a corner from where there was little hope of escape except to take part in the dialogue seriously and they started looking for flimsy excuses to break away from the talks. Their first salvo was to ask for in an inordinately long and unreasonable adjournment to 13 May 2002 ostensibly because the ministers in their team claimed prior government commitments. Their other reason was that they needed time to prepare for substantive discussions on the agenda items.

ZANU PF maintained a precondition for serious talks to begin. They insisted that the MDC should not take the matter of the rigged election and therefore the illegitimacy of the regime to court. We rejected this condition but indicated that we would consider abandoning the legal route if in our opinion the talks progressed satisfactorily and fruitfully.

There was a court deadline for the submission of our election petition and we continued with our preparations to submit the required court papers. The court deadline for the submission of our election petition fell within the period before the resumption of the talks and our legal team filed the papers on the due date. ZANU PF used the submission of our court papers as an excuse to break the talks and walk away. They argued that the court processes should be exhausted first before dialogue, if need be, could resume. Four years later, the courts have not even begun to hear the main case in our election petition.

It is clear that the regime had no intention from the very beginning to engage in serious political dialogue to resolve the political crisis in the country. They came to the talks under serious internal and external pressure. Internally the rigged election had created high levels of political tension which could have exploded at any time; and externally many countries were piling pressure on the regime to engage the MDC and chart a way forward in resolving the crisis. The regime agreed to the talks to give the appearance talking as a strategy to diffuse both internal and external pressures.

As indicated above, our main election petition has been pending for over four years now and there are no indications that the hearing will take place any time soon. We won the right to examine all election materials pertaining to the presidential poll but the Registrar General engaged in delaying tactics to frustrate us in this exercise and when the materials were finally provided, our examination team realised that the seals on a number of ballot boxes had been tampered with. The election materials could not be of much use to our case. There does not seem to have been any readily available remedy. ZANU PF refused to negotiate, while the state placed bureaucratic obstacles and the courts have since engaged in delaying tactics to hear the case.

Quiet Diplomacy.

The troika's efforts to broker dialogue between the MDC and ZANU PF were scuttled by the open intransigence of the regime but the dispute remained internationalised. The regime became extremely isolated. Nigeria and South Africa intermittently tried to come up with fresh moves, all systematically spurned by the regime. Ultimately, South Africa decided to go it alone and launched its so-called quiet diplomacy, which turned out to be a ploy to gradually reduce international pressure on the regime and assist it to regain recognition and legitimacy by the back door.

Any action on several international fora by any country or countries; group or groups or progressive individuals to resolve the Zimbabwe crisis immediately receives stiff opposition from South Africa. Efforts by the international community to create effective mechanisms to bring the regime to account for its record of misrule have been systematically blunted by South Africa. It has successfully fought more battles on the international fora to protect the regime than the regime itself could have achieved. In our genuine pursuit to leave no stone unturned in the quest for a peaceful resolution of the crisis, we have met with the South Africans on numerous occasions encountered but achieved no positive outcome. We acme to the conclusion that South Africa was only interested in buying time for the regime and regarded the MDC as the junior partner in the political equation which must do ZANU PF's bidding. We reject that without any equivocation or apology.

South Africa has arrogated to itself the right to veto any initiatives on Zimbabwe, which are likely to produce a resolution to the crisis that is inimical to the dictatorial interests of the regime. It has become part of the problem rather than engage in honest brokerage to produce a resolution of the crisis that furthers the interests of the region as a whole.

While we are not sealing off contacts with the South African government, we are now extremely sceptical about their sincerity as honest brokers in the crisis. It is up to the South African government to redeem their bona fides as fair players and honest brokers in the Zimbabwe crisis of governance.

Mobilising the People----The June 2003 Mass Action.

After the collapse of the inter-party dialogue we followed the only logical course available to the party. We went back to the people to explain, to strengthen our party organs and structures and generally mobilise them to engage in peaceful mass action to confront a tyrannical and arrogant regime. State sponsored violence did not stop; instead it was intensified as a measure to keep a restless population subdued. Arbitrary arrests, harassment of civilians by soldiers, impartial law enforcement and human rights violations all continued unabated. The population became besieged by a regime bend on extracting legitimacy from the people violently.

This situation of low intensity conflict was exacerbated by the collapse of the economy. In the urban areas, thousands of workers lost their jobs as companies closed. Food shortages became acute as the effect the chaotic "land reform" programme began to take its toll. Chronic neglect in the rural areas and the politicisation of food aid saw millions starving. The effects of HIV/Aids ran riot, as the bankrupt regime failed to provide for both medical and welfare relief. The population was being assaulted from all angles. The people were constantly beleaguered.

It was in this context, where all democratic avenues were closed and no hope for socio-economic relief that we sought to mobilise the people and demonstrate to the regime that the people are not prepared to endure arbitrary rule indefinitely.

The June 2003 peaceful mass action indicated clearly that the MDC was the legitimate authority in the country with the undoubted popular allegiance of the majority of Zimbabwe. Our goal was never to seek a violent confrontation with the regime as claimed by our detractors; instead, we intended to lay bare to the region and the international community that the regime remained in power only through the use force. It was therefore an illegitimate regime. For five solid days the forces of democracy under the leadership of the MDC, brought the country to a standstill and the regime could only react to our initiatives. We resisted all provocation, which the regime intended to use as an excuse for a formal declaration of a state of emergency in order to destroy the party, and our structures remain intact and resilient. We called off the protest when we were satisfied that our objective had been achieved.

The response of the regime was predictable. All the security forces were placed on red alert against a defenceless people embarking on no-violent mass action. A lot of brutalities were committed against unarmed people during the period of the mass action itself. Hundreds of people were arrested, detained and tortured for no preferred or proven charges and released without trial. After the mass action people going about their business peacefully in their neighbourhoods were routinely brutalised by uniformed forces without any recourse to the protection of the law. The regime continued to trample on people's political and civil liberties with impunity.

The Struggle for the Restoration of Genuine Democratic Elections in Zimbabwe----RESTORE!

In spite of the brutalities associated with the suppression of our mass action, we did not succumb to tyranny. Instead the democratic resistance gained momentum throughout 2003 and 2004. Our democratic resistance was organised around five key democratic demands, which constituted the minimum standards for the restoration of genuine democratic elections in Zimbabwe. We applied constant pressure for the regime to:

1. Restore the rule of law.

2. Restore basic freedoms and rights.

3. Establish an Independent Election Commission.

4. Restore public confidence in the electoral process

5. Restore the Secrecy of the ballot

We believed that these principles, based on the SADC Parliamentary Forum Election Norms and Standards, and are common in most SADC countries, were and are a prerequisite to the exercise of our fundamental human rights and we demanded that the regime legislated them into place before the 2005 parliamentary elections. These demands were not new, instead they run through the entire MDC political programme since the formation of the party.

We mobilised a sustained campaign of domestic and international agitation that was quite effective. Our demands were captured by the SADC region and transformed into a programme of action. SADC formerly adopted the SADC Principles and Guidelines Governing Democratic Elections in 2004. The party took a principled position that no democratic value could be added to the nation if we took part in future elections under conditions that were tailor-made to rig the poll in ZANU PF's favour before even the first vote was cast. That step was intended to ensure that the fake legitimacy, which the regime derived from staging a semblance of competitive electoral politics, would be removed.

The regime could no longer violently ignore our demands since the whole regions' attention was then focussed on the electoral conditions in Zimbabwe ahead of the March 2005 parliamentary elections. For the first time since the June 2000 parliamentary elections, it had to concede at least to some of the demands, which it believed did not seriously undermine its tyrannical rule.

In response to local and regional political pressure, the regime used the parliamentary process to introduce superficial electoral innovations. A so-called independent electoral commission, the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC) and the use of translucent ballot boxes were legislated into force. In addition, the electoral laws were tightened to make extremely difficult to approach the courts seeking a nullification of the election results on the basis of ZANU PF violence, intimidation, denial of food and other human rights violations.

We remain opposed to the manner in which ZEC was introduced, its composition and its preponderant political leanings. It is clearly not an independent body. Our proposal was that the two parties should discuss the composition of an independent electoral commission and then pass on the agreed position to parliament to effect the relevant legislation. That way the neutrality and political independence of the electoral body could be guaranteed and become generally acceptable to all Zimbabweans.

Instead, ZANU PF bulldozed the process and used the parliamentary route so that its fraudulent majority could ensure that both the format and composition of ZEC would safeguard the political interests of the ruling party. The chairman of ZEC and the majority of the commissioners are known ZANU PF activists and can in no way be regarded as independent. In addition, ZEC was not a constitutional body, but remained subservient to the Electorate Directorate and the Electoral Supervisory Commission, all of which functioned openly as ZANU PF organs. It arrived on the political scene as a highly compromised and partisan body and no free and fair elections could be expected from its activities.

The simple introduction of translucent ballot boxes without addressing the critical issues of the political environment in which the electoral contest took place did not improve strengthens the democratic process. Translucent ballot boxes on their own did not stop vote rigging, intimidation and all other irregularities. Overall, the electoral "reforms" were simply cosmetic and designed to ward off regional pressure for an even electoral playing field. These reforms were subverted and ultimately did not significantly change the rules of the electoral game, increase room for political fair play or enhance the democratic process.

We remained resolute that no useful purpose could be served by participating in elections under those conditions. However, the leadership listened to wise counsel from the membership, from our supporters, the region, the continent and the international community. The gist of the advice was to take part in the poll, demonstrate the glaring democratic electoral reform deficit, re-establish and re-affirm the yardstick against which the dictatorship could continue to be evaluated. The arrogant insincerity of the regime had to be exposed.

The March 2005 Parliamentary Election.

We decided to take part in the March 2005 parliamentary elections under protest because it was clear to the party that the electoral playing field was tilted heavily in favour of the ruling party. POSA made the campaign conditions extremely difficult. Through POSA, ZANU PF regulated all our campaign activities through the requirement that the police sanction all political meetings---from rallies to confidential political strategy meetings. Using the police and the security agents, the regime was able to eavesdrop on all our sensitive preparatory political meetings, and this cannot be acceptable in a normal functioning democracy.

The voters' registration process was haphazard and the voter's register itself was still grossly inaccurate and thousands of potential voters were still not in the voters register and the newly created ZEC had not started to function. It had neither personnel nor resources. Although the campaign itself witnessed a noticeable reduction in instances of physical violence, the infrastructure of subterranean intimidation and other forms of human rights violations remained quite effective.

In the rural areas, the entire state administrative machinery was transformed from normal functions to serve as a vast ZANU PF intimidation structure. ZANU PF district councillors and chiefs openly intimidated villagers to vote for the ruling party and threatened dire consequences should the opposition win at identified polling stations. In some areas villages suspected of opposition sympathies denied food relief while in other areas the distribution of food relief was withheld pending the outcome of the election and they were threatened with food denial should the MDC win at polling stations in their locality.

Access to food became a critical inimidatory factor in the rural areas. In addition the electoral law ensured that candidates were absolved and immunised from irregularities arising from the activities of their supporters. This meant that unless all the incidences of violence and food denial could be proved to have been perpetrated by the particular ruling party candidate in a given constituency, the opposition party had no form of legal redress.

Party loyalists manned the election process. Known ZANU PF supporters and activists were engaged as returning officers and served in other critical capacities while security agents played a key role in the whole process. This process of swamping the entire election administration machinery with ZANU PF operatives created the context in which vote rigging, including simple ballot stuffing was executed. The counting of the votes was chaotic with contradictory figures being released for some constituencies, while in others the number of votes cast were suspiciously high for a normal election; and the party was not represented at the national vote coordination centre.

There is absolutely no doubt that the vote was rigged given the circumstances in which it was conducted and the heavily biased election administration machinery that conducted the poll. We came back with a reduced representation of 41 seats but in our calculation the party actually won in about 94 constituencies. Consequently the party gathered evidence in about 16 constituencies where rigging was so extensive that an impartial judiciary would have considered them open and shut cases and found for the opposition.

However even the legal route was closed to us. The Electoral Court that the regime set up patently unconstitutional. All our efforts to have the situation rectified were resisted and we felt that we could not subject ourselves to the jurisdiction of an unconstitutional court, which meant that the cases fell by the wayside.

The regime continued with its onslaught on the people. Over the past six years, the regime has been creating poverty rather than wealth and jobs as a means to control and subjugate the people. Now it has come up with a new and more devastating strategy: To eliminate the poor who are the products of its own handiwork. This has been the sole objective of the so-called "Operation Murambatsvina." Millions of people have had their homes and livelihoods destroyed and lived in the open through the bitter cold months of 2005. What kind of a housing programme is it that starts by destroying people's homes and rendering them homeless? Operation Murambatsvina was nothing but an open war against the people. It was a matter of the ruling party using the state apparatus to launch a pre-emptive strike and throw into disarray the victims of its on policies before they could organise and seek a democratic answer to their predicament.

We have the support of the democratic international community and we have the answer. That answer is democratic resistance. Let us mobilise all sections of the nation and launch the final bid for our freedom.

The 12 October 2005 Crisis.

We participated in the March 2005 parliamentary election reluctantly because we knew that the electoral terrain would never produce a free and fair expression of the people's political choice. The electoral process and the result vindicated us. To us the only viable route forward was one of peaceful democratic resistance to compel the regime to yield to the people's demands for democratic reforms to enable the holding of free and fair elections.

Today, the peaceful democratic resistance route offers itself as the only available route to compel the regime to put in place democratic reforms to usher free and fair elections. Continued participation in fake electoral contests would only serve to strengthen the regime's propaganda that such elections signified the presence of a vibrant democracy in the country and therefore the regime was legitimate and democratic.

To fortify this false perception, soon after the March 2005 parliamentary election the regime initiated moves to yet again amend the constitution to introduce a senate. In the regime's propaganda, senate was supposed to signify the "broadening" and "deepening" of democracy through an expansion of parliamentary representation. This was simply a ruse or a cheap trick and the reality was different.

Senate is purely a ZANU PF project, which adds absolutely no value to the resolution of the current crisis of governance facing the nation. It is part and parcel of ZANU PF's succession plan. The idea was to create a political home or parking slot for the ZANU PF dead wood that can never succeed in an electoral context. In that way, having joined the gravy train, feelings of alienation, exclusion and bitterness would be removed from that group and render them willing to accept whatever succession plans are on offer.

The question that confronted the party was whether or not to participate in the senate elections and strengthen, bring to fruition the ZANU PF project? We had consistently opposed constitutional amendments as false start in, in favour of a people driven constitutional process, as the fundamental step in resolving the crisis of governance in the country.

In addition we had demonstrated in June 2000, March 2002, March 2005 and during countless parliamentary elections that free and fair elections are impossible until an electoral framework fashioned along the lines of our RESTORE document are in place. The question was what value would participation in the senate elections add to people's struggle for democracy, good governance, the rule of law, economic recovery etc.?

To us the answer was quite clear and eloquent. Absolutely no value at all. Instead participation would have aborted or set back the democratic struggle by many years.

We objected to our being made handmaidens to plans whose aim was to create a dictatorial structure that enabled tyrannical rule to be inherited. Our position on the crisis of governance in this country is quite clear. We are convinced that it is only through a comprehensive and people driven constitution that democracy and good governance in Zimbabwe can ultimately be guaranteed.

Piecemeal or patchwork constitutional, as has been the experience with the current regime over the past 26 years only resulted in the entrenchment of dictatorship and the immense suffering of the people. This has been a fundamental principle that guided the deliberations of the NWPC and constituted the launching pad of the party. It was and still remains the major reason for the formation of the MDC. To breach that principle would mean that party loses its reason to exist.

We could not simultaneously be fighting dictatorship on one hand and strengthening it on the other. The MDC shall never be used as an instrument for the continued subjugation of the people of Zimbabwe.

It was precisely on the basis of fundamental differences on this sacred principle that the October 2005 split in the party occurred. There were those among us who got tired of the struggle opted for a political course that sought to compromise with the regime in order to create a political context and environment for second "Unity Accord" or better still an "Internal Settlement" This was simply a splinter group. Those of us in the mainstream MDC refused to betray the fundamental values and principles of the people and the party and we remain firm and resolute, committed to bringing about democracy and good governance to the country and put an end to the suffering of the people.

Some in the splinter group mounted what turned out to be a fake parliamentary opposition to the constitutional amendment designed to bring about the senate. The more honest among them including some key individuals among the party leadership in parliament were even absent when the crucial vote was taken. This was a clear indication of support for the senate project.

Those who opted to collaborate with the regime have distorted issues to come up with outrageous justifications for their action. No purpose can ever be served by narrating their position. They have made reference to democracy when in fact by their very actions they sought to link hands with the regime to destroy the democratic struggle and chances of bringing abort democratic governance in this country.

The MDC is a party that was formed on the basis of a shared history of suffering at the hands of the regime. It is a diverse party irrevocably bound by a civic equality as members of the movement. It is the only political party that lays a verified claim to having a nationwide rather that a regional or ethnic appeal. Let us keep it that way. Let us continue to celebrate and jealously guard the richness of our diversity and never allow the forces of tyranny to divide us.

Let us remain focussed on the struggle because there are more ominous developments ahead. We know that the regime is finalising a parliamentary bill to abandon the presidential elections scheduled for 2008, in favour of yet another constitutional amendment to enabled Mugabe's handpicked successor to inherit the dictatorship until 2010. This is part and parcel of a strategy that started with the senate project supported by our erstwhile colleagues who went astray.

As a party let us brace ourselves to resist this sinister agenda with all our numbers and democratic might. We must now stop the dictatorship from continuing to play havoc with the lives and welfare of Zimbabweans. The agenda for action now must be to force the regime to yield to the people's demand for free and fair electoral conditions ahead of the presidential elections of 2008.

The road has been long and hard. We have been through times so hard and traumatic those who continuously deride us cannot even begin to imagine them. Let us not be swayed or deviate. Together, let us walk the last mile to our freedom.

18 March 2006

Harare, Zimbabwe.

 

---

All new Yahoo! Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and ease of use." - PC Magazine