The following is President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s condolence message following the death of South African independence heroine Mama Winnie Madikizela-Mandela (pictured right) last week.

***

The death this week of Mama Winnie Madikizela-Mandela has been keenly felt by most in our whole Southern African region, and even more so by all of us drawn from the ranks of freedom fighters and liberation movements who regarded her as doughty fighter for freedom and a fearless comrade-in-arms.

A stalwart of the internal dimension of the broad struggle to end racism and apartheid in South African, Cde Winnie suffered long spells of privation as a wife of an incarcerated nationalist, and acute, systematic harassment as a woman in struggle, both at the hands of forces of the obnoxious apartheid system. Yet she never wavered, attesting to her sheer fearlessness and inexhaustible inner will to resist injustice and beat despondency and defeat, defining attributes which made her such a formidable opponent to the vicious racist system which daily stalked and haunted her, and continued to harass her even well after its formal end in 1994.

Today our whole region grieves at the passing on of this unbowed and strident voice of the voiceless whose inspirational message, without doubt, continue to ring loud across generations and beyond borders, all the time consistently making a case for the poor and downtrodden of our region and beyond.

Her rich bequest is thus to all humanity.

As we mourn her passing on, our best tribute to her work is to apply ourselves true and harder, and in unison, for the realisation of her vision for genuinely free, democratic, non-racial and egalitarian Southern African which becomes a just home to all, regardless of race, colour, class, creed or gender.

On behalf of people of Zimbabwe, Zanu-PF, and on my own behalf, I wish to convey my heartfelt condolences to the Madikizela and the Mandela families on this saddest loss which is ours to bear and suffer together. May her family draw some solace from, and be consoled by, her illustrious record as one of foremost mothers of our African struggles, a record which nothing whatsoever can diminish.

Equally, I convey my deepest condolences to my brother and colleague, His Excellency President Ramaphosa, to all the comrades in the African National Congress and to the people of South Africa on this irreparable loss.

As we mourn Mama Winnie, we nevertheless join the ANC in celebrating her iconic life of struggle against apartheid and for the deliverance of our African from the double bondage of settler colonialism and apartheid.

May her dear soul rest in eternal peace.

2,378 total views, 2,186 views today

THIS sermon is about Grace. I mean Grace Mugabe, the former First Lady. She needs a lot of grace. And I repeat for the umpteenth time, Operation Restore Legacy remains an unfinished project. Operation Restore Legacy should have included a session on counselling because clearly, Grace is failing to handle.

The Holy Book warned us of wives like Grace. The book of Proverbs, written by King Solomon contains lots of warnings about such wives. King Solomon knew what he was writing about because he took for himself many ungodly wives who must have inspired many of his proverbs.

Just a few verses will help put things into perspective. Proverbs 21 vs 19 says: “It is better to live in a desert land than with a quarrelsome and fretful woman” while Proverbs 12 vs 4 says: “An excellent wife is the crown of her husband, but she who brings shame is like rottenness in his bones.” Proverbs 14 vs 1 is even more explicit — “The wisest of women builds her house, but folly with her own hands tears it down.”

Dear congregants, kwanzi neBook Dzvene, zvirinani kuti Gushungo vagare mudesert than kugara naGrace. Grace has brought rottenness in Gushungo’s bones and she continues, with her own hands, to tear down her house. These statements may seem a bit harsh, but when you think about what the quarrelsome and cantankerous Grace has done to the legacy of her husband, you say Solomon aiwoneswa muzvokwadi.

Over the last few weeks, Grace has been saying and doing amazing things. She is indeed an amazing Grace. Sekuru vangu Matope (May his soul rest in peace) would say “apa panenge patoita mentari chaiyo.”

Dear congregants, it’s really that bad and it’s likely to get worse. Seeing that things are deteriorating fast, we need to ask our sober selves — should we continue ridiculing Grace? Should we be sympathetic? Should we be sorry? Should we forgive her? Should we continue saying tsvatu waro?

Look dear congregants, Grace is just 53 years old and her husband is 94. She is bound to have lots of insecurities because at the back of her mind, she thinks time is running out.

From 1996 when Grace left her first husband Stanley Goreraza and got married to former President Mugabe, she has not known any other life than being the First Lady. She was pampered like a queen. She was driven around surrounded by many bodyguards. She flew out of Zimbabwe whenever she wanted and she went for those never-ending shopping sprees whenever she felt like it.

It got worse when she made the fatal decision to join politics. She became so powerful that whatever she said became the ZANU-PF resolution. Vanhu vakamhanyiswa naGrace kwete zvekutamba. She got drunk with power and became over ambitious. Grace kwakutoda kutitonga? Ahhh? Kikikikikiki!

I am laughing now, but back then it was not a laughing matter. Some in ZANU-PF, including quite a number who are still in ZANU-PF today, actually believed that Grace could become a Vice-President and eventually become the President of this country.

That is how much power Grace had. But then in politics they call it delegated power and those familiar with real politics will tell you that delegated power rakafanana nekuita pilot wendege yemashanga. Unowa sedamba. Unfortunately, Grace forgot these lessons on delegated power. Kutozvimba musoro wena. Imi vanhu allow me to rewind a bit so that you get my point when I say, Grace akanga azvimba musoro.

“I moved to stop the issue of youths being expelled from the party and demanded that we deal with the head of factionalism. A snake is better dealt with by crushing the head,” ranted a visibly angry Grace before singing Sulumani Chimbetu’s hit song “Batai Munhu.”

She continued: “His head must be crushed. I have said I will personally make sure disciplinary procedures are followed to deal with Mnangagwa even if everyone in the party is scared. I will not be intimidated.”

Those watching on television were stunned. Nhai Mwari mai ava dzarasa here? Why, why, why? But Grace was not finished.

“He (President Mnangagwa) wanted to wrest power from the President in 1980 claiming there was a plot to have him assassinated by Rhodesians just after the elections. He advised the President to leave the country but it was Samora (Machel, late Mozambican leader) who told Mugabe to return home. He hates the President,” Grace claimed. I am very sure that President Mnangagwa was really hurt by these foolish accusations. Grace anozivei nezvaiitika in 1980? Someone had shoved those silly accusations into her shallow mind.

Just when right-thinking Zimbabweans thought they had heard enough, Grace continued the foolish circus.

“I am so good at what I do, I can say it myself. Give me the job and I will do it very well because I am good. I can do a great job.

“There is nothing wrong because we will be following in Mnangagwa’s footsteps. He left a constituency (Chirumanzu-Zibagwe) to his wife. So I have said to the President you can also leave me in charge. You can also give me your position. We will just be copying from Mnangagwa,” Grace said with no shame whatsoever.

Grace kuda kuita nyika mahumbwe. You know dear congregants, there is nothing wrong with hallucinating but the problem starts when one starts believing the hallucinations. And do you know why Grace was now believing her hallucinations?

She was speaking all this nonsense at what some unashamed men of God had decided to call “Super Sunday Rally” at Rufaro Stadium. As she spoke, these supposed men of God and grown up men and women cheered her. Kumera zenze Grace.

In addition, as Grace hallucinated, four Zanu PF executives in Mashonaland Central, Matabeleland South, Bulawayo and Masvingo had endorsed calls for President Mnangagwa and his allies to be booted out of the party on allegations of fanning factionalism and plotting the downfall of the former President. Aitadza nei Grace kumhanya mushini?  And worse, the former President zete zvavo. Kana kutsiura marujata. Iye ndiye karamata, kunoti teshe pamusoro pepfumo. Iwe Gire unobaiwa mhani. Hokoyo navaChiwenga neboyz dzeuniform, of course minus vaChihuri. The rest of what went on to transpire is history.

Now back to my issue — after all this, what do you expect Grace to do? She got drunk with borrowed power and that power was suddenly taken away from her. Suddenly, Grace is discovering that she is nothing. A nobody in the scheme of things. She is bound to get some short circuit upstairs.

What is even worse is that Grace was fooled by Professor Jonathan Moyo who really has nothing to lose. When the going got tough, Prof Moyo just skipped the country, but Grace can’t do that. She has businesses and properties to protect.

Now in a bid to protect her businesses and properties, Grace is resorting to lying in the vain hope of getting some sympathy from the generality of the populace. She is making all sorts of allegations about thieves breaking into her house, having her laptops stolen and so on, but no one is on her side.

Grace is now trying to play victim, but Zimbabweans are saying, “we have been your victims for far too long.”

Zimbabweans are mocking Grace shouting “Unopenga! Unopenga!” imitating the way she used to shout at people during those interface rallies.

In Philippians 4 vs 3; Paul appeals to the believers in Philippi who knew Euodia and Syntyche, saying; “Yes, and I ask you, my true companion, help these women.”

As your Bishop I appeal to you, let’s help Grace. Kupenga kwese is just a simple cry for help.

Bishop is out!

2,468 total views, 2,273 views today

Addressing senior officials of the Communist Party of China in Beijing last week, President Emmerson Mnangagwa said of Zanu-PF: “In my party we say if someone makes a slogan, we give him a post. That must be a thing of the past.”

As is known by all Zimbabweans, the most dominant sloganeering in Zanu-PF, and indeed across major political parties in the country over the past two decades has started with “Pamberi na…” and “Pasi na…”

Essentially, public careers in Zimbabwe have been built and destroyed on the premise of who you suck up to and who you denigrate. This has resulted in critics slamming slogans, as they are often highly personalised political praises or diatribes with no correlation to the socio-economic realities.

Slogans were not always bad.

For us as Zimbabweans, they are a political culture forged in the heat of the liberation struggle, where there were no shades of grey and the world was Manichean: you either stood with the nationalist cause or you advanced the interests of the oppressor.

People understood that there was no middle ground. It was us against them. Plain and simple.

After Independence, we started off with slogans like “forward with hard work, down with laziness”, before arrogance and corruption crept in and corroded a noble political culture, turning a revolution into a detached and static bureaucracy.

Hard work and honesty were replaced by knowing the right people and knowing what slogans pleased them.

Our early disdain of slothfulness and indolence gave way to a thinly veiled glamorising of cutting corners and greasing palms.

Zimbabwe’s politics became a sewer, where the scum rose to the top and people as thick as manure but half as useful were idolised and celebrated.

Like President Mnangagwa said to the CPC officials, individuals rose to the top on the back of empty sloganeering.

And like he also said, that should now be a thing of the past.

Zimbabwean voters are going to the polls in a few months, and the message must be made clear to all aspirants that there is no more room for politicians who are all talk and no action.

Development and improved livelihoods must be at the core of any slogans, and those words must be backed up by robust policies and honest, hard work.

The country has been on the slide for a very long time and it is going to take a lot of serious endeavour to set things right.

Because our Cabinet is largely composed of people who will have been voted into Parliament, it is of paramount importance that the President has the right pool of politicians to choose from.

Of course, in the medium-term — seeing as there is little time left before the 2018 elections — we would advocate for a system where the Constitution is amended to empower the President to pick any capable Zimbabwean, whether or not in Parliament, to sit in Cabinet.

In the few months since his inauguration as President, we have seen the merits in having non-traditional executive appointments in the mould of Ministers Amon Murwira and Winston Chitando.

That said, the reality is right now that the President by and large works with who the voters send to Parliament.

Shoddy candidates create a lukewarm executive that will in turn appoint dodgy characters to head parastatals and State enterprises. This means the onus is on voters to elect capable people who are not given to cheap, non-progressive politicking.

Right from the primaries through to the elections proper, the electorate has a responsibility to put in office people who advance our ambition to be a middle-income economy by 2030, people who appreciate what it means when we speak of Zimbabwe being open for business.

This also applies to local government elections.

Former Harare mayor Mr Muchadeyi Masunda, and the incumbent, Mr Ben Manyenyeni, have never hidden their displeasure with the calibre of councillors they have had to work with.

And it is telling that these are mayors seconded to head the capital city by the opposition MDC-T; heading councils that are dominated by MDC-T. This shows that the all parties, not just the ruling Zanu-PF, have an obligation to forward to the electorate candidates who can do more than sloganeer.

That people derogatively and derisively talk of Harare’s councillors as “garden boys” is anecdotal evidence of the ugly state of affairs in local government.

Our cities, towns and districts will never experience sustainable and meaningful economic transformation if they are overseen by “garden boys”.

The time for meaningless, divisive, hateful slogans is over. It is now the time, and we repeat this, for honest, hard work.

5,928 total views, 5,366 views today

Clare Akamanzi
The CEO of the Rwandan Development Board, Ms Clare Akamanzi, last week came to Zimbabwe leading a delegation to share her country’s journey to becoming one of the most investor-friendly states in Africa. On Friday, she made a presentation to President Emmerson Mnangagwa, Cabinet ministers and senior civil servants in Harare, detailing the role her organisation plays in serving investors in the East African nation. Below is an abridged version of her presentation.

***

Mr President, I want to start by thanking you very much for your invitation to Zimbabwe.

We are very delighted and honoured to be here and experience your warm hospitality since coming here.

I also bring you a warm and brotherly greeting of my President, Paul Kagame, who asked me to convey to you Mr President, and you the leaders, and of course you the people of Zimbabwe, that Rwanda stands very closely with you in all the work you are doing.

And in fact he asked us to come here and share all the experiences we can share and take back all the experiences we can learn from Zimbabwe.

Mr President, I heard you for the time when you were in Davos when you were telling the world that Zimbabwe is now open for business. I sat in that room where you were being interviewed and you shared your vision of Zimbabwe, especially when it comes to doing business.

The next time that I saw you Mr President was in Kigali where you were asking me and my colleagues very specific questions about doing business in Rwanda and our experience.

The next day at 7:30 in the morning, which we think is very early for a Head of State, you were having breakfast with the private sector and telling them that Zimbabwe is open for business.

You also told me and my colleague, Emmanuel, that you would be inviting us to Zimbabwe, which we thought was a very difficult thing to do because we never travel together because we always make sure the other person is running the organisation when the other is travelling.

But this inspiration you gave our President to send both of us is consistent with your message that Zimbabwe is open for business.

And, of course, the next time I saw you was in Abidjan at the Africa CEO Forum. Again, there was a very special forum called Doing Business in Zimbabwe.

So, I have been hearing that message that Zimbabwe is open for business but I didn’t know you would act so quickly when you said you would invite us; it only took a matter of weeks and today I am not only saying Zimbabwe is open for business but clearly you mean business Mr President.

For the last few days we have been here, we have been asked to answer how did you do it in Rwanda?

How is it Rwanda is now the second easiest place to do business (in Africa) despite having a very terrible past in the 1994 genocide against the Tutsis?

We have been asked how we have moved from being 158th on the ease of doing business in the world to 41st.

How were you able to do that as a very small country, landlocked, with structural challenges; how was that possible?

How we were able to involve women in our leaders, because today Rwanda is one of the top five countries in the world in terms of promoting gender parity; and we also have the largest number of women in Parliament at 64 percent.

Many times your leaders ask us how did you do this, how is it possible, how did you manage the challenges we know are clearly in Rwanda?

And I want to start by summarising three points that our President said when remembering our genocide in 2014.

He said for Rwanda to reach where we are we did three things mostly: We united our people, because we are coming from a history of division the first priority was to make sure that the Rwanda that was being built was Rwanda that was united; that everyone could see themselves in, the youths the women, the educated, the rural the urban and all those that came from outside the country to be part of the rebuilding.

So unity was very important.

The second thing that the president said was thinking big.

Even though we were coming from the lowest place you can ever imagine, even though we had a divided past even though we had many challenges such as being a landlocked country and having very few skilled people, the point was how can we aim higher? How can we achieve what more fortunate countries achieved?

The third one was accountability.

How do we put in place systems that ensure that what we want to do and the vision we have will remain accountable and our leaders will remain accountable to the citizens.

Today, we want to share with you some of the components that really show these three components. We did share many of them with you as we were exchanging ideas over the last few days.

We did see that apart from the message that we kept hearing that Zimbabwe is open for business and your vision 2030 to become a middle income country.

We also talked to a lot of you and we saw openness and a momentum for reform because you were asking a lot of questions about what you could do and how it worked in Rwanda.

We think that creates a very strong basis to reform. We also saw your infrastructure and your institutions and we thought that there is a strong basis to build on. We believe as we share our experiences you will be able to pick those that can work for you.

Our vision is very simple and also very complex and that is how do we continuously see that Rwanda is measured to become a dynamic global hub for business, investment and innovation.

How do we grow our environment so that we become competitive not just in Rwanda or in East Africa but in the world?

Can we dare to dream as a country and an organisation that we can actually compete with the very best in the world?

It may sound ambitious, but when you think like that you begin moving towards a direction and it stops being something that seems out of reach.

Our vision as a country is for a private sector-led development. So what is really central for us is that private sector.

How do we make sure that the private sector is creating jobs, is solving socio-economic problems of our country?

How do we know we are achieving the goals that we want? We measure it mostly in two ways:

Firstly, we count how many jobs we are making in Rwanda. We still have a big population of our country almost half that is still dependent on subsistence farming.

So how do we create jobs where Rwandans can earn meaningful income and give products and services that are commercialised? That is really our key indicator.

The second one is addressing the trade deficit, we are still importing three times of what we export.

We have to think about financing that deficit and so continuously thinking about finding money to address our deficit issues.

So bringing more industrialisation we can produce what we usually import.

Also how do we increase the amount of exports in the country?

How do you attract investment that can shift from depending on agriculture to services and higher value skills in the country?

The Rwandan Development Board is 10 years old in September; this year we will be celebrating 10 years of existence.

But the functions that RDB takes care of are not 10 years old because government only decided to create an organisation by merging eight separate institutions.

We had an investment authority, an export authority, we had an IT authority, we had a tourism authority. The registration of business was separate from all the other organisations, we had an SMEs support and a privation organisation.

But the government noticed a problem with that. The first was that if an investor wants to start a business they would have interacted with 10 institutions and that was cumbersome for the private sector.

It wasted their time, it made them run around unnecessarily because people are different.

Some would try to have a sense of urgency while others just didn’t care and so the investor would suffer at the end of the day. We thought that contradicts our vision. If we say we want the private sector to create jobs and wealth why should we make it so difficult for them to do that?

So government decided to create one organisation, if the private sector or an investor comes they are going to interact with one organisation.

We also realised that by having so many small organisations which do a little bit of something then your success is the sum of the little bit of what they do.

So the government said we don’t want that little bit of success, we want to try and increase and get big success.But you can only do that when you have a big organisation that is stronger, empowered and can actually answer private sector questions.

The other reason why the RDB was created was to create efficiency for the government.

When the RDB was created we immediately said 30 percent of the Rwandan budget be spent on the few institutions because we were creating more efficiencies and eliminating those that were not necessary.

So after streamlining, synergies were created and duplications removed.

The other one is about harmonising; when you have many institutions dealing with the private sector they had different ideologies and systems and they were not talking to each other.

Some of them were putting in place IT systems but those IT systems were very fragmented; one of things we were told when we were meeting the officials was that Zimbabwe is thinking of integrating quite a lot of institutions and is putting in place IT systems and some of you asked instead of us having our system, is it possible to have one IT system that talks to each other?

That is something we also went through that you might want to think about.

Then, of course, there is the creation of a stronger centralised system that offers one-stop services that investors need.

Again here we did interact with some of the institutions -ZIA – and they reminded us of the challenges we used to have.

They have a one-stop centre, but some of the services are not complete at the one-stop centre.

For example, if you want to get a work permit or visa you have to leave ZIA and the Immigration takes them for processing at the immigration offices. We used to do that as well and we were criticised for creating one more stop instead of creating a one-stop centre.

Because if I still go to Immigration, but I go via ZIA that means you are giving me one extra stop; why not just give me one place I can get everything?

Today the one-stop centre at RDB is fully empowered to give a work permit, tax identification number, social security registration.We are fully empowered to that instead of referring to institutions that were doing that initially.

I want to touch on elements that are guiding principles in establishing this one- stop centre. Even though we created the RDB and a lot services that can be done by the board, we still find that institutional cooperation was important.

For example, we are in charge of negotiating all Government deals.

In the past if you wanted to invest in mining you had to negotiate with the Minister of Mining who would give you a concession, the go Minister of Energy and discuss with the Minister of Environ-                                                                                   ment.

There was no standardised system of ensuring that the government was getting a good deal.

But our institution has the responsibility, for example, before giving a mining concession, there has to be discussion with the Ministry of Mining but the investor doesn’t have to see that.

The second one is efficiency.

Always try to think like an investor. What would the investor want? What would an investor need?

77 total views, 21 views today

Clemence Machadu
Howdy folks!

It is self-evident and beyond reasonable doubt that the situation in our republic has reached another level of progress.

Apart from being safe and sound, the socio-economic security of Mbuya Chenhamo in Chendambuya should be guaranteed by the powers that be.

The only target should really be the dangerous criminals around one ED. Yes, ED mbune!

But before punctuating that discourse, just a point of departure to clarify where we are. You see folks, the country’s growth rates over the past half decade are really not inspiring. They reflect the problems the general populace has been facing.

In 2013, Zimbabwe recorded a GDP growth of 4,5 percent, retreating to 3,9 percent in 2014 and further easing to 1,5 percent in 2015. It was much worse in 2016 when GDP was nearly zero, at 0,6 percent, the lowest growth rate so far in the dollarisation era. While the economy grew by 3,7 percent last year, it is still a far cry from what needs to happen for Mbuya Chenhamo to feel the difference for the better.

Folks, I believe that some of the reasons why the past half-decade was characterised by these low levels of growth are political bickering, poor policy implementation and gross economic mismanagement.

This is a period when factionalism in the ruling party reached fever pitch, with rallies being organised to discuss people, not ideas. We found the party rocked by divisions in its rank and file.  The opposition too was not spared from the demon of division as we saw the main opposition party splitting several times, and weakening its ability to play its role, especially in Parliament.

But thanks to events of November last year, we now have a ruling party that is sensitive to progress and an opposition that is trying to hold Government accountable.

What is now needed is to utilise such a scenario to foster rapid economic development (ED) and ensure that we attain higher levels of GDP growth. Government is targeting growth levels of at least 7 percent per annum, but at the same time projects the country to be a middle income economy by 2030. This noble 2030 agenda requires double-digit annual growth to be achieved. Otherwise at current growth rates, it will take us centuries to reach the upper limits of a middle income economy.

You see, the World Bank classifies middle income economies as lower middle and upper middle. Lower middle income economies have a gross national income (GNI) per capita of between $1 006 and $3 955 while upper middle economies have a GNI per capita of between $3 956 and $12 235.

If we intend to attain the upper limits of upper middle income economy, it is prudent to define a radical and revolutionary growth trajectory that will make all the difference. We certainly cannot hope to make much progress by adopting a tired path of development.

This brings to mind my favourite poem by Robert Frost, titled “The Road Not Taken”, whose first stanza reads;

Two roads diverged in a yellow wood,

And sorry I could not travel both

And be one traveller, long I stood

And looked down one as far as I could

To where it bent in the undergrowth.

This is a defining moment for us and we have to customise an economic system that is inspired by our socio-economic aspirations.

And if we choose well, like in the last stanza of Robert Frost’s poem, one day this we shall say:

I shall be telling this with a sigh

Somewhere ages and ages hence:

Two roads diverged in a wood, and I,

I took the one less travelled by,

And that has made all the difference.

But I don’t want to bore you with philosophy and literature.

Let’s talk about economic development (ED), which is the ED mbune I was referring to earlier. Folks, now that we have defined where we are and where we want to go, the important thing is to chart the shortest possible way and remove all the thorns in that trajectory.

I call these thorns “criminals around ED”.

Folks, Section 8(1) of the national Constitution says the State must formulate and implement “laws and policy decisions that will lead to the establishment, enhancement and promotion of a sustainable, just, free and democratic society in which people enjoy prosperous, happy and fulfilling lives”.

Should we not call those who sabotage this sacrosanct goal, “criminals of ED”? So the path to our promised land should not be lengthened by criminals with nothing but selfish intentions and negative mind-sets about our motherland.

Remember how it took the Israelites 40 years to walk a 400km journey from Egypt to Israel, instead of just 11 days.

You see folks, it can be like that for us; the land of milk and honey might be long in coming if the criminals around ED (economic development) are not targeted and eliminated.

It is important to review some of these criminals, which is what I will attempt to do for the remainder of this article.

Firstly, we need to break the resources curse that has been slapped on us.

In economics, there is a theory called the Paradox of Plenty which postulates that countries with many natural resources tend to record lower economic growth and less democracy than those with less natural resources, like Japan and India.

But what is it that Zimbabwe doesn’t have? Almost nothing! Even the climate is excellent, it brought health to Cecil John Rhodes. And these natural resources are the fundamental factors for ED to do its trick in our country.

We, however, need strong policies to ensure transparency and maximising return from all the riches in the pot-belly of our motherland, while also fostering sustainability. This is indispensable when it comes to breaking this resources curse.

The levels of capital formation in our economy are also not as they should be.

For our country to catalyse its speed of development, there is urgent need to moot innovative capital acquisition strategies from abroad while also mobilising our local folks to increase their savings with a view to lifting our levels of investment.

Our human resources base should also be skilled to be up to speed with the aspirations of ED. The country needs a labour development policy that seeks to foster efficient and skilled labour that is capable of contributing to  ED. This can be achieved by coming up with a curriculum that is informed by the local industry and health promotion programmes. We must ensure that workers are mentally and physically healthy to optimally play their different roles.  Most workers in the country suffer from mental health problems and do not have medical insurance. Zimbabwe also suffered skills flight during the period of economic meltdown and those people are building the economies of other countries that compete us out on the international markets.

Government should have a programme in place to attract these skills home to build their country, as opposed to just promoting them to send money home.

Folks, as alluded earlier, we should aim to realise maximum value from our natural resources in a sustainable manner.

Investments only seeking to accelerate the extraction of our resources and ship them abroad in their raw state should be minimised. Those that can afford to bring capital to extract our natural resources should also afford to set up processing plants locally. Exporting our resources in their raw state is akin to slave trade and borrowing too much from our future generations. It is therefore important to promote value addition programmes, while attention should be also paid on conditions in foreign trade.

While Zimbabwe is seeking to grow exports, which is the key source of foreign currency for the economy right now, it is ironic that we do not have a trade policy in place. Following the expiry of Zimbabwe’s National Trade Policy in 2016, there has not been a successor policy.

Zimbabwe should prioritise to have this policy in place at its earliest convenience in the same manner it is prioritising exports.

And when it comes to the agriculture sector, we should move from mere production to high productivity; and from food security to food surplus and exportation. That entails increasing marketable surplus of agricultural products.

There are huge markets for agricultural products in Gulf countries, Russia and other markets and these should be tapped into. Another notorious criminal I do not want to talk much about is corruption, as I have written about it before.

Suffice to say that it should be urgently targeted for elimination from our systems.

Folks, you will also agree with me that no meaningful economic development will take place without full participation and support of local citizens.

It is the duty of Government to mobilise economic consciousness amongst the different populations of the economy and to promote equality. Otherwise if people do not see how they will benefit from ED, they will certainly not support it.

Folks, only rapid ED will enhance the quality of lives of many people in the country. The growth trajectory we have walked so far has been filled with inconsistencies. Zimbabwe’s GDP averaged 2,85 percent per annum between 1961 and 2016.

We have had moments when growth was as high as 22,57 percent in 1970 and as low as -17,20 in 2013. We need to bring consistence, high growth and draw our swords to target the criminals around ED.

Later folks!

Clemence Machadu is an economist, researcher and consultant. He writes for The Sunday Mail in his personal capacity.

80 total views, 20 views today

Hon Sithembiso Nyoni
The annual United Nations Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) conference was held in New York last month. Zimbabwe sent a delegation led by Women and Youth Affairs Minister Sithembiso Nyoni to join attendees from 192 countries. Our reporter Sharon Munjenjema spoke to the minister on her return from the event that ran under the theme “Challenges and Opportunities in Achieving Gender Equity and the Empowerment of Rural Women and Girls”. We publish Minister Nyoni’s responses in her own words.

As the Zimbabwe delegation to the conference, we had intended to take many rural women with us.

These women applied for visas, but unfortunately they were denied the travel documents by the American embassy.

We don’t know why the visas were rejected, it was their policy, but they (US embassy in Zimbabwe) just said it was a directive from Washington DC.

A lot of countries were affected by this directive, it was not just Zimbabwe.

So I want the Zimbabwean women living in rural areas to know it was not about them, it affected all rural women through-out the world.

Kenya talked of the issue of leaving their rural women behind and so did Uganda, India and so forth.

This conference took place over two weeks. The first week was the official opening and we had readings of ministerial statements, interactive dialogues and side events.

The second week was characterised by negotiations based on the ministerial statements, dialogues and side events of the previous week.

The negotiations were done so that we come up with agreed conclusions.

As Zimbabwe, we were very privileged to have the First Lady Amai Auxillia Mnangagwa as part of our delegation.

The delegation also comprised Minister of State for Manicaland Province Cde Monica Mutsvangwa, the Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly Mabel Chinomona, Hon Paurina Mpariwa and the Zimbabwe Gender Commission chairperson (Margaret Mukahanana-Sangarwe).

We also had civic society representatives who came with us.

The good thing is that we prepared in advance before going to New York.

There were a lot of meetings prior to CSW, so when we got there I was happy, as the leader of the delegation, that we spoke with one voice. We had a side event where we were led by the First Lady. It was well attended by Zimbabweans and members from other countries, both men and women.

It made a great impact on the whole conference because we were the first country to push for and give concrete evidence-based results on the importance of intangible resources for the empowerment of women.

Our intangibles included health, which our First Lady is pioneering, as well as education and training (skills development).

The outcome was that even at the negotiations, the intangible means of production and intangible resources for women empowerment became major sub-themes.

So our side event really made a mark on the whole conference.

To explain the side event there is need to give more detail as to how the conference runs.

There is a main auditorium meeting which is chaired by the chairperson of CSW, where everybody gathers.

But each country or organisation can have side events in smaller halls where they present specific sub-themes or topics of interest related to the main theme.

So in Zimbabwe, our side event was centred on the means of empowering women and the tangible resources we spoke of are land and equipment, etcetera.

But a lot of people leave out the intangible which is education, training and health.

As Zimbabweans we were saying you cannot empower an unhealthy woman.

The empowerment of an uneducated woman is limited because her sphere of comprehending issues is also limited. So the focus was on the intangible means of production.

As Zimbabwe, our impact was felt by the whole conference. We were happy that as a country we were able to lead. It was noted that women and girls need education and health to be empowered and to propel themselves.

Empowerment has to be sustainable and you have to engage the empowered person and she has to be the custodian for empowerment.

If a woman is not educated they will keep on depending on someone else to give them or teach them new concepts and researches.

They won’t be able to research for themselves, they cannot surf the internet, network on cyberspace or understand their horizon. In short, their empowerment will be limited.

Zimbabwe also initiated the change in the narrative. The theme stated “rural women” and we said to them, what is rural is not the woman, but the environment.

So the narrative needed to be changed to say “women living in rural areas”.

When we talk about the condition of rural women, usually people talk about the woman and not the condition and this is why we failed to bring a change because our focus is on the wrong target.

The woman, yes, in terms of the intangible but the tangible is the rural area.

Is there water? Is there transport? Is there communication? Is this woman in possession of land? Does she have access to money?

Those are the things that the world usually look for, but they look for that in the wrong target, the woman, rather than the rural area.

So if we reverse this narrative, we will develop the rural area for women who are educated to live there and earn a living.

We also had a session where we had recognition of women and girls living with disabilities. We also had discussions on widows and how they need to be empowered in order for them to carry on with their lives. Most widows are in desperate situations economically and socially.

So we looked at measures and ways to equip them economically as well as legally so that they claim their rights.

In short, Zimbabwe really made a mark at the event. Zimbabwe’s thinking influenced the narrative of the whole conference at the negotiations. For the first time in history, there was separation between tangible and intangible means of production and means of empowering women.

Agreed resolutions from the conference are not yet out.

We are going to call a big meeting in the country this month for all those who attended the conference to report to the nation. Each sector will give its recommendations that are applicable to the country, that is, Government, Parliament and civil society.

119 total views, 54 views today

Gideon Madenhe
As a young man, Mr Gideon Madenhe felt the difference as Zimbabwe acquired its independence in 1980. His parents relayed to him the news that Rhodesians had finally agreed to grant Zimbabwe its freedom. Our reporter Tanyaradzwa Kutaura spoke to Mr Madenhe on how he reacted to the news and the events that followed. We publish his views in his own words.

My memories take me back to the moment when I first received the news that Zimbabwe was finally going to be free.
During that time I was a teenager and was at our rural homestead in Nyashanu, Buhera.

I remember sitting with my fellow brothers and sisters during the school holidays when I first heard that the then Rhodesia had been defeated and was going to give us back our freedom.

I overheard our parents talking about the issue and you could see that they were very excited about what they were discussing.

To be honest, at first I failed to understand what sort of independence my parents were talking about since I was young and did not understand the whole concept of politics.

But after seeing my parents and other elderly persons in the community expressing eagerness to know if the news was real and gathering in small groups talking in a jovial manner, I enquired what was really going on.

At times my parents used to tell us about the Rhodesian government, how it had conquered our ancestors and the manner in which they ill-treated Zimbabweans.

It was heartbreaking, but we had hope that ana Mukoma who were in the bush fighting for our freedom would one day triumph.

After my parents told me the real meaning of independence and how it was achieved, I was filled with joy and went on to tell some of my friends, thinking I was the only one with such kind of information.

The first thing that sprang into my mind was the possibility of freely going to any school, acquiring education and finding a good job anywhere in the country since freedom was now guaranteed.

We celebrated a lot. I remember our community leaders collecting a certain amount of money agreed by all villagers that was directed to purchasing cows and goats for people to slaughter for the celebrations.

A lot of activities took place as people celebrated independence. Since modern radios were scarce, drums were the order of the day and we enjoyed ourselves that day through our local Dzvanga dance.

Musicians also performed live, but these live shows were for grown-ups.

I recall the preachings of reconciliation and for sure, we forgave the Rhodesians.

It was refreshing to be free. I could see that things indeed had changed and just after celebrating independence, my desire to be educated became a reality as the new Zimbabwean Government offered free education.

This year’s lndependence Day, I look forward to celebrate it in the manner in which we used to do it long back, feasting and lots of entertainment.

2,089 total views, 1,835 views today

Tau Tawengwa
Firstly, Winnie Mandela is an inspiration to all people across, class racial and gender boundaries.

The other day I read a report about how women across the political divide have vowed to stand by former MDC-T deputy president Thokozani Khupe, who has been in a power struggle with her one-time MDC-T comrades.

This act of solidarity occurred when a group of some of the country’s most powerful women came together for a high tea event, during which they pledged their support to Khupe’s cause.

One can imagine this elitist incident, probably comprising of women with designer bags, expensive shoes and hair-dos pledging allegiance to support each other in the boardrooms against the barrage of patriarchal oppression.

Of particular interest to me were the comments made by the outspoken MDC-N legislator, Priscilla Misihairambwi-Mushonga, who stated that battle lines had been drawn when men started “beating” Khupe.

“If this is going to be about who is more powerful then watch this space, there will be a time when we will be holding women’s rallies regardless of which political party you come from to stand together as women,” she said.

“The treatment that we get from men in parties is not right because for half of our lives we have been protecting them.”

Honourable Misihairambwi-Mushonga’s comments got me thinking.

How important is gender balance in African politics? Is leadership determined by gender? Should female leaders be judged and selected by a criteria different from how male leaders are judged?

Interestingly, the Khupe solidarity event took place less than a week after the death of Winnie Mandela, who is without question a political superhero in the eyes both men and women across the racial and political divide all over the world.

I have often wondered why Winnie Mandela did not try to run for the ANC’s top office in her lifetime — after all, she had the wherewithal, charisma and support to challenge any of the leaders who succeeded Nelson Mandela himself.

Yet despite her influence, she did not run for the top ANC office.

In this article I will attempt to see whether any comparisons can be drawn between Winnie Mandela’s leadership and Zimbabwe’s elusive feminist movement, and I will try to determine why Winnie Mandela did not rise to the ANC presid-                                ency.

African feminism is different from Western feminism in that while the former is solely preoccupied with challenging male dominance, the latter resists oppression based on ethnicity, class, tradition, race and gender.

Now, I don’t have anything against the solidarity shown towards Dr Khupe. In fact, I commend such camaraderie and cohesion.

However, when I look at the political history of Winnie Mandela and try to draw comparisons with our prominent Zimbabwean woman politicians, some contradictions emerge.

Firstly, Winnie Mandela is an inspiration to all people across, class racial and gender boundaries.

She inspires women in Deipsloot, Mamelodi and Soweto, just as much as she inspires men in Sandton and Fourways.

Put plainly, she transcended the misconception that leadership is gender, class or race based.

While Nelson Mandela was in prison, she did not relent in her struggle against oppression in the forms of white apartheid or patriarchy in general.

She too could have held solidarity lunches overseas and had high teas about how the apartheid government tried to kill her and separated her from her children.

She too could have held talk-shops about how the ANC was male dominated.

Instead, she was on the streets, on the frontline, hitting back at oppression blow for blow — so much that her radicalism in the 1980s allegedly frightened the likes of OR Tambo and the imprisoned Nelson Mandela, who thought that her radicalism was bringing the anti-apartheid struggle into disrepute.

“Together, hand-in-hand, with our matches and our necklaces, we shall liberate this country,” she said in 1986, at the height of the struggle.

In other words, she was willing to necklace anyone, man or woman, who stood in the way of her liberation objectives.

That’s how radical she was.

Consequently, perhaps when our Zimbabwean feminists and female politicians announce that the “battle lines” were drawn when men chased and allegedly beat Dr Khupe, perhaps they should pause and ask themselves why there were not any women in the lower party structures springing to Dr Khupe’s defence.

Put plainly, unlike Winnie Mandela’s politics, Zimbabwe lacks radical women leaders who inspire both men and women across racial, class and gender lines.

The Winnie Mandela type of female leaders who inspire women and men at all levels of society right down to the lady selling at “musika”.

I’m not trying to propagate assault or “necklacing”, but I am trying to make the point that international respect and acknowledgement as a leader does not come from elitist high teas.

Judging from Winnie Mandela’s experience, international respect and acknowledgement is derived from street action, and taking on the oppressive system blow by blow, irrespective of consequences until your demands are recognised and granted.

That’s what Winnie Mandela was, she inculcated radical politics to such an extent that her male counterparts in the South African struggle fell short of her courage.

At the end of the day she had the respect of both her female comrades and her male counterparts; she had the respect of the masses – both poor and rich.

Perhaps that is the kind of respect our female politicians and Zimbabwean feminists in general should seek. Why Didn’t Winnie run for the ANC presidency?

Winnie Mandela ran for several ANC senior positions including the post of the ANC Women’s League in 1991. In 1997, she was nominated for the position of ANC deputy president from the floor of the ANC’s 50th national conference.

Winnie Mandela withdrew her nomination with the famous words: “Comrade Thabo I think I do understand what is happening. (To) those comrades who nominated my name I apologise for having to decline.”

Her remarks were met with loud cheers and a standing ovation from the ANC audience.

There is a high chance that she could have secured the ANC deputy presidency had she pursued it.

Nevertheless, her alleged involvement in necklacings, kidnappings and murders in the 1980s became her political albatross right up until the time of her death.

The irony is that while Winnie Mandela’s radicalism won her international respect, her radicalism also made her too controversial to serve in the ANC’s presidium.

Before her death, she publicly declared that Nelson Mandela had “sold out” and betrayed the struggle, perhaps because he was not as radical as she was.

She also publicly showed her support for Julius Malema and his vision to nationalise farms and mines in South Africa. All in all, it was not her gender  but her radical political positions that prevented her from acquiring the highest office in the ANC, especially considering that the ANC has preferred a moderate and appeasing approach to the South African economy and foreign capital since 1994.

At the end of the day, Winnie Mandela will be remembered as a global icon and a true African feminist.

2,089 total views, 1,880 views today

NELSON Chamisa is probably the cleverest political infant around. Look, let’s not take anything away from that little boy and let’s give the devil his dues – Chamisa is our modern-day Tickey. Remember that clever little Tickey wema bioscope from the gone era who could do anything to anyone at any time? That Tickey has been resurrected through Chamisa. Very clever little boy.

Well, little Tickey Chamisa has discovered that Karl Duffek was spot on in his article entitled “The Past Does Not Go Away”, when he wrote that: “The past, however, proved to be quite nasty. It did not go away as easily as some of us might have expected.”

Zimbabwe’s past, in this particular case, the liberation struggle has proved to be quite nasty to the opposition political parties. That past has refused to go away as the opposition political parties have been expecting. Operation Restore Legacy is part of that past that in November last year spoke to the future of this country. But this sermon is not about Operation Restore Legacy. This sermon is about little Tickey Chamisa. The cleverest boy around. So what did Chamisa do after discovering that the past is refusing to go away? He decided to steal history and to steal the late Vice-President Joshua Nkomo. Kuita history yekuba kwazvo. UChamisa wantshontsha uMqabuko Nyongolo. Hayi kunzima bakithi!

But we were not surprised because Polish historian Andrzej Friszke points to the dual use of history saying: “By its very nature, history, and especially recent history, is a very particular branch of learning. It exists in an uneasy relationship with the memories of those involved in the events concerned. It can play an important role in either legitimising or challenging a contemporary state, its regime and ruling class.”

Kakangwara wena little Tickey Chamisa. Isu takakura tichiziva kuti mbavha dzinoba husiku kwete zuva rakati jekerere. But that’s Tickey for you. By the way, little Tickey has no shame at all. The following is how he tried to steal history and steal the late Father Zimbabwe.

Addressing an MDC-Alliance rally in Bulawayo, made up largely of people from outside Bulawayo, Chamisa falsely claimed that the Nkomo family had told him that he was the first “national leader” to visit the Joshua Nkomo Museum in Matsheumhlophe suburb since Dr Nkomo’s death in 1999. Addressing an MDC-Alliance (alliance ipiko mwana arikungo mhemhaira ega) rally recently in Bulawayo, Chamisa lied through his teeth saying: “I was so touched when I went to Dr Nkomo’s Matsheumhlophe house. I was going there to see the history of this nation. However, the family told me one thing, they said ever since the death of Dr Nkomo I am the first national leader to visit the house, they even offered to give me Dr Nkomo’s traditional sceptre (intonga)”.

Some of us know what the late Vice-President Joshua Nkomo meant, means and shall always mean for this country. Totoziva kuti vaNkomo havasi vemahumbwe. Ikoko kunonyudza, but that’s where Chamisa took all his toys.

The late Vice-President’s son, Mr Sibangilizwe Nkomo, would not have any of Chamisa’s toy games as he explained that no one from the Nkomo family knew about Chamisa’s visit to the museum while dismissing as an abomination claims that they offered little Tickey the late VP’s intonga. The intonga became synonymous with Dr Nkomo as he carried it everywhere he went.

“There is nothing like that. Chamisa went to the Matsheumhlope house, which is now a museum, at the invitation of the chief executive officer of the Joshua Nkomo Foundation, Mr Jabulani Hadebe. None of the family members knew about his visit . . .

“I live in the Pelandaba house and it is a lie that he met any of the family members unless he came here as a ghost. In actual fact, I have never met Chamisa in my life,” said the clearly irritated son.

On claims that the family offered Chamisa Dr Nkomo’s intonga, Mr Nkomo said he was shocked “that a young man like Chamisa can speak such an abomination? It’s not a matter that you can joke about. It’s an abomination that he can talk cheaply about intonga ka baba. That’s no ordinary stick, but it carries so much significance in terms of culture and tradition.

“It’s the property of our ancestors. It represents our family’s ancestry and it is unacceptable for him to joke around with such matters. In our African tradition, we do not offer intonga ka baba to anyone one who is not a member of the family. None of the caretakers at the museum know where that stick is, so we really do not know what he is talking about.”

But then little Tickey was not yet done with his mischief. Instead of just apologising and putting his long tail between the legs, little Tickey said: “. . . the trip to Dr Joshua Nkomo Museum enabled me the opportunity to shake hands with a glorious and revolutionary past.

“I felt tears welling in my eyes when I was told that I was the first national leader to pay homage at the iconic Father Zimbabwe’s memorial monument in Matsheumhlope. For me, the late Dr Joshua Nkomo will always be a source of inspiration, notwithstanding the regime’s perennial attempt to belittle and undermine his national contribution.

“He will always be an undisputed national hero and I immediately ordered the Bulawayo City Council to ensure that the museum is upgraded to a level of a strategic national institution that does not have to pay rates to the local authority. The Joshua Mqabuko Nkomo museum is a strategic national heritage site that honours the life of one of Zimbabwe’s undisputed national heroes. The Nkomo brand is a towering brand that must be accorded veneration by all of us, especially the local authority that we control. Sparing such an institution the obligation to pay rates will be the city’s own humble way of paying tribute to the mammoth and indefatigable national brand that was Joshua Nkomo,” said the unapologetic Chamisa.

Kana hake kutombonyara. Ko ipwereka nhai? He doesn’t even know that he has made the people of Matabeleland angry. He still thinks he can abuse history and abuse the late Vice-President to mobilise voters in Matabeleland. It’s a shame really. Just imagine this is the Chamisa who is crying for a debate on national television with President Mnangagwa? Mupwere ngaatikwanire. He can go debate with Ben 10, Spiderman, Tom and Jerry, Scooby-Doo or Sofia from Disney Junior.

ZANU-PF Secretary for War Veterans, Detainees and Restrictees Cde Victor Matemadanda aptly described Chamisa saying: “We can’t imagine the President taking time of serious bread and butter issues to respond to a goat that is scratching the walls from outside.” Uumm, Mai Rebecca Chisamba putting on that wide smile would say “mashoko makukutu mangoanzwa mega”.

Little Tickey will not stop trying to steal history. The opposition in the country has finally discovered that whether they like it or not, Zimbabwe takes its identity from the liberation struggle. Tsvangirai was fooled into thinking that the liberation struggle was a gone and forgotten era, but zvino aripi? Professor Jonathan Moyo and Savior Kasukuwere fooled themselves thinking the past was past, zvino varipi? Former president Mugabe forgot those who put him into power after Ndabaningi Sithole, zvino varipi Gushungo? That which defines a nation can never be wished away.

Little Tickey has learnt a thing or two. He will continue trying to steal history. Chamisa has always been trying to steal history. Remember his following words?

“When greatness shall be measured, the man in the chair (former president Mugabe) shall be one among a few. I am impressed by his wisdom and deftness in dealing with matters and affairs of the State. I wonder who, among the aspirants, possesses even a quarter of what he possesses. He is a great man. A man of a golden mind – agile and special in many ways. Meetings are different with him. It explains why I have not attacked him for a while. My bone is with Zanu-PF for now.”

As the election temperature goes up, we should not be surprised to see little Tickey at the Blue Roof mansion trying to steal the former president. Desperation can be something else. Just look at the way the G40 cabal is trying to steal and is abusing our history through the former president. Kupererwa chaiko. Now they have formed something they are calling National Patriotic Front, which in reality is Mavambo Part 2. Remember Simba Makoni’s Mavambo that became his magumo? But hey hold on a minute! While Chamisa is trying to wrap himself with the colours of history, does he really know what he is doing to the man he is going to contest against in the forthcoming elections?

By trying to steal history, Chamisa is acknowledging the importance of the heroes from this history. Now, whether Chamisa likes it or not, President Mnangagwa is part of that history. History has its living heroes and President Mnangagwa is part of that history. Will Chamisa also try to steal the President?

Hana yangu yava kurova. Tobirwa President nalittle Tickey Chamisa.

Bishop is out!

2,237 total views, 2,017 views today

In the last edition, Comrade Gomba Midson Mupasu, whose Chimurenga name was Cde Norman Bethune, had no kind words for Nhari and Badza. His comments on ZIPRA touched a raw nerve and we gave former ZIPRA commanders an opportunity to express their reservations. This is what this column is all about – our aim is to democratise and liberate liberation war discourses. And so all voices and views matter.

In this interview, with our team comprising Munyaradzi Huni and Tendai Manzvanzvike, Cde Bethune continues shedding more light on Nhari and Badza. For the first time, Cde Bethune speaks about the meeting that was chaired by Cde Josiah Tongogara about two hours after the assassination of Cde Herbert Chitepo on March 18, 1975. In that meeting, Cde Tongo – the military strategist – was at his best as he and other ZANU leaders prepared to be arrested by the Zambian government. But how did Cde Tongo know that some ZANU leaders were to be arrested and arrested for what crime? Read on . . .

SM: Comrade, let’s continue your fascinating story – you called Badza and Nhari cowards. Can you explain further because your accusations sounded a bit unfair?

Cde Bethune: I was at Nampundwe Farm in Lusaka when they carried out their rebellion, but I knew that Nhari and Badza had issues. I can tell you that our generation, we didn’t want to move around with Badza and Nhari. They were commanders but they had issues. They ended up vava kufamba vari four. You see a commander used to have an assistant. So it was Nhari and his assistant and Badza and his assistant.

SM: Do you remember the names of these assistants?

Cde Bethune: I can’t remember their names, but I felt pity for those assistants.

SM: Looks like you really hated Nhari and Badza?

Cde Bethune: No, not at all. Not at all. It was just their behaviour and character that I didn’t like. I am telling you that comrades from my generation said we can’t operate with Nhari and Badza. Yakanga iri nyaya yemadumwa. Some comrades vakasvika pakuvatiza. Later the two of them knew that many comrades were not comfortable working with them. Actually, later we were told that vakanga vava kutofamba nevakadzi. It’s unfortunate I can’t remember the names of these female comrades.

SM: But when the rebellion took place, some comrades actually supported and sympathised with Nhari and Badza?

Cde Bethune: Ndivanaani ivavo? I am telling you that my generation is the one that worked with Badza and Nhari and we are the ones who discovered kuti vanoshandisa madumwa. Remember during this time, there were few comrades at the war front. We were comrades in arms. Shamwari dzeropa that is why when Nhari and Badza came trying to intimidate us, we stood our ground. Taitaurirana chokwadi. That’s why I told you that I told Nhari kuti ukandirova I will shoot you.

SM: Were you serious?

Cde Bethune: Aikaka! (pause). I was very serious. Kundirovera chii?

SM: Why not fight back using your fists?

Cde Bethune: I didn’t have that time to waste. Kana wandirova you are now the same nemurungu. Hausikuziva cause and I will shoot to kill. These two comrades used madumwa to prove that they were good fighters. Akanga ari madumwa ekusaruka. This meant that tikasangana nevarungu, ivo vana Nhari and Badza vakatanga kuridza pfuti murungu hapana munhu waanowuraya, but if any other comrade akatanga kuridza pfuti paifiwa. But then muhondo is was difficult to know kuti achatanga kuridza pfuti ndiani. We were taught during training kuti atanga kuona murungu ndiye anotanga kuridza. Not kuti commander. Whenever a battle starts, mese munenga matofanana. Motorova pfuti kwete kuti tombomirira commander. During a battle hapana rank. What if the commander runs away, what do you do?

SM: Wotizawo following the commander?

Cde Bethune: Izvozvo that is what we didn’t want. Ukatiza urikupa murungu chance yekunyatsokurova. That’s why the principle was that kana pfuti dzarira, you dash down, change the position and if possible return fire. Depending on the concentration of firepower, iri pauri here or not. If you get to a favourable position, cover for other comrades by firing back at the enemy. Kwete kufunga dumwa pakadai.

So you see I don’t buy this story that Nhari and Badza wanted more ammunition from the rear. That’s a lie. That’s not valid.

SM: We have interviewed Cde Chemist Ncube, who was accused of being part of the Nhari-Badza rebellion and he expressed different views?

Cde Bethune: What views? If he worked with them he is the one who knows how their relationship was like. If he has his own views, that’s him.

SM: We are also told that Badza had been demoted?

Cde Bethune: Like I told you, Badza and Nhari vakanga vava kugara nevakadzi. We got those reports from the comrades in the security department. We also continued to get reports that Badza was beating up other comrades. This contributed to his demotion.

SM: But why keep someone at the war front after demoting him? Wasn’t this a recipe for disaster?

Cde Bethune: These comrades were now hostile and like I told you vakanga vava kufamba vari four. There was a need to come up with a practical plan to neutralise them. But before that plan could be put in motion, the two then became rebellious and started killing other comrades. They came out in the open that they were now rebels. Like I told you by this time I was now at the rear at the farm, but I saw them pavakauya vakasungwa nemahandcuffs. Badza was brought to the farm akaiswa muchitokisi chedu chegomba, chikaribotso. Can you imagine when he saw me he actually said “Bethune iwe you are very lucky. Dai ndakasangana newe I was going to shoot you straight.” Just like that. I then told him kuti ngwarati zvaiwana. I told him straight up.

SM: Comrade, it’s coming out very clearly that you and Badza were enemies?

Cde Bethune: Not exactly. I was one person who never kept a grudge. I was just an open person. Very, very open. Even today I don’t keep grudges but I tell you the truth. I later realised that Badza had catergorised me. He was a Manyika and I am Zezuru. He thought I was in their tribal fights, but I was and up to this day I don’t believe in tribalism. You know after the attainment of independence, some young man came to me and said they had carried out a research which showed that the Nhari-Badza rebellion had been caused by tribalism. I told that young man kuti ummm, vapfana imi makadzidza muri kuita mareseach enyu nani? I told him that was not the cause of that rebellion. Ndakamurambira.

SM: Ok, so Badza was in this Karibotso for how long?

Cde Bethune: He was there for a week. During that week, as I told you I was the overall commander at the farm, so sometimes ndaimuti buda from the Karibotso. Abuda ndaimuseka kuti nhaiwe Badza, shuwa shuwa wakanga uri serious kuda kurwa hondo or all you wanted was power? Simba rezvinhu zvausiri kuda kuita.

SM: What would he say?

Cde Bethune: What could he say as musungwa? He was very radical. He could say all nonsense such that you could become angry and beat him up. He was later taken to Lusaka mutown.

SM: What about Nhari?

Cde Bethune: I don’t know. He was never brought to the farm.

SM: So how did the Nhari-Badza rebellion affect the war?

Cde Bethune: I can’t say it affected the war that much. Those comrades just killed innocent souls. Many comrades were killed as Nhari and Badza looked for commanders like myself that they wanted to eliminate. I know they were also looking for Jimmy Mangwende. They wanted to kill him but they couldn’t find him. I vividly remember that these comrades killed Cde Lovemore Chikadaya in a very gruesome ways. Cde Chikadaya vaifamba negroup remafemale comrades. They instructed Chikadaya to dig his own grave as they were advancing to the rear in Lusaka. As he was digging his grave, vakamufutsira akamira ari mupenyu in that grave. Vakasiya only his head out. So he couldn’t breathe and he died akamira like that. Chikadaya joined the liberation struggle as a Rhodesian spy but he had reformed and so the leaders said asati ayenda kufront, he should carry materiel to Zambezi together with some female comrades. He had reformed.

SM: So sad. So when did you leave Nampundwe Farm and where did you go?

Cde Bethune: I left the farm on 19 March 1975 after Cde Chitepo had been killed in a car bomb at his house.

SM: We understand that during that time, some ZANU leaders were rounded up and arrested by the Zambian government. What happened to you?

Cde Bethune: It’s true some ZANU leaders were arrested. Cde Chitepo had died on March 18 in the morning. He died around 7:45am because we heard the explosion at the farm. The farm and Lusaka town were about 40km apart. That very day, around 10-11am, an emergency meeting was held at Nampundwe Farm. There was the late Tongogara, Mayor Urimbo, Ernest Kadungure, Justin Chauke, Mupunzarima, Cletus Chigohwe, Daulamanzi, myself as the camp commander, Kenny Ridzai, Rex Nhongo, Elias Hondo, Cde Dadirai, Teurai, Tsitsi and Tracy. The people who got into this meeting were members of the High Command and General Staff.

The message that was being conveyed was that vaChitepo vafa in a car bomb. The other message was that as leaders of ZANU we were going to be arrested. It was then planned that Rex Nhongo, Elias Hondo, Dadirai, Teurai and Tracy were supposed to go to Mozambique. The message from Tongo was “you people you are not going to be arrested. You are going to use the new Land-Rover that is outside and by end of day today munofanirwa kunge masvika kuChifombo inside Mozambique. Chitorai mota iri panze iyo muyende. Your role from Chifombo is to re-organise macomrades to launch the war from Mozambique.”

On top of this message, these comrades were given a khakhi envelope which contained information that they were supposed to give to Samora Machel. This letter was confirming to Samora Machel what the leadership had agreed regarding the re-organisation and relaunching of the war from the Mozambican front. The instruction was that in the meantime, these two – Rex Nhongo and Elias Hondo – were to lead the operations. Cde Tongo chaired that meeting. Indeed these comrades did not waste time. They collected a few of their belongings, got into the Land-Rover and left.

The last word from Cde Tongo came to me. He said, “Iwe Bethune, hauna kwaunoenda. Kana uchisungwa sezvatichaitwa, ndiwe uchasungwa pamwechete nemhuri yese iri pano pafarm. The Zambian government knows you are the commander here, so don’t go anywhere.” I did exactly that and continued with my usual routine at the farm. This meeting was on the 18th of March 1975.

At around 4am the next day, a convoy of soldiers from the Zambian army came to the farm. Their commander was driving a Land-Rover. When he came, we had a control gate which was a few metres away. When he got to the control gate, he came with one of my guards who was at the boom gate. He left his convoy outside the gate.

He came and explained that he had been sent by the Zambian government to come and take me. I asked him kuti tiri kuenda kupi and he said munozowona tava ikoko. Takabva tambonetsana ipapo. I told him kuti iwe unotumwa usingazive kwauri kuda kunotiisa why and how? Do you want to take us to Rhodesian kune varungu or what? Why do you want to remove us from here? Takanetsana kusvikira azofona to his bosses telling them that I was resisting because I wanted to know where we were going. I told that Zambian commander kuti iwewe uri mudiki paissue iyi. I told him that I knew what was happening. I told him that I knew more than him about this issue. I told him zvauri kunditaurira that’s a petty issue.

I explained to him that this issue started after the failure of the Victoria Falls Conference. There was a conference that was held in September 1974 in Victoria Falls. Our nationalist leaders who were in prisons were released to attend that conference including puppet nationalists like (Abel) Muzorewa. During the conference the talk was that they were talking about ceasefire. That meeting was to be followed with another meeting on 22 March 1975. That is why Chitepo was assassinated before 22 March 1975.

Chitepo was viewed as the obstacle to the ceasefire during the Victoria Falls conference. Do you get me? So the arrival of delegates to the 22 March 1975 talks was supposed to start on the 10th of March. Each party was supposed to send its delegation. If my memory serves me well, on the 13th of March it was inside Rhodesia when Edson Sithole was abducted at Ambassador Hotel. Up to this day we don’t know where his remains are. After that, former president Mugabe was released from prison that same month together with Edgar Tekere. They later crossed into Mozambique together with Sekuru Rekai Tangwena. While there was still confusion regarding the disappearance of Edson Sithole, the Rhodesians were targeting Tekere or Mugabe. This was the ZANU leadership they were after.

SM: Can you explain this Victoria Falls conference at bit?

Cde Bethune: During that conference, a train wagon was stopped on the Victoria Falls Bridge. Half of the wagon was in Zambia and the other was in Rhodesia. Leaders of each party were released with the intention to talk about ceasefire. The parties were asked to discuss about this ceasefire. ZANU’s Dare reChimurenga and Ndabaningi Sithole, who was our leader then, met at Victoria Falls. When the parties met, ZANU through chairman Chitepo asked who exactly was asking for the ceasefire and why? The other issue is that ZANU asked the Rhodesian government to release all political prisoners. The Rhodesian government discovered that ZANU was not going to be a pushover. After dis- agreements, ZANU then said saka hapana ceasefire. We think this is where the issue about the Unity Accord started. Joshua Nkomo was there and he worked with ZANU.

By this time, ZANLA in terms of war operations had covered the whole of Mashonaland Central, stretching now to Manicaland. So the Rhodesians discovered that they had to talk to the ZANU leadership because we had covered a lot of ground. Following the disagreements, the conference was adjourned. This was in September 1974. The conference was adjourned to March 22, 1975. The 22 March meeting was supposed to be held in Lusaka.

The masterminds of the Victoria Falls conference and the ceasefire plan were Lord Soames, Lord Carrington, Lord Marven and Henry Kissinger. We knew that they were trying to see which political party could serve their interests. Before this Victoria Falls conference in 1972 there was the Pearce Commission which was another attempt to stop the war. They wanted blacks to come together but with power still in the hands of the whites. Blacks voted against the proposed fake unity government.

SM: Comrade, let’s go back to the meeting that was chaired by Cde Tongo a few hours after the assassination of Cde Chitepo. What was the mood like and how did you know the Zambian government was going to arrest some ZANU leaders? And why didn’t you escape?

Cde Bethune: Escaping was a sign of cowardice.

SM: Our question remains – we want to know how you knew that after Chairman Chitepo’s assassination, some ZANU leaders were going to be arrested?

Cde Bethune: There is something called top secret. This top secret in an organisation is received every minute and every day. Kune zvinotaurika koita zvisingataurike. Our top leaders had gotten this top secret about the moves by the Zambian government and that is why they organised this meeting urgently. They knew kuti tiri kusungwa. Maybe within the Zambian government kune vaitidawo who leaked information? Like I have told you, the Zambian government I am talking about from Kaunda himself and Foreign Minister Vernon Mwaanga, they didn’t want to hear anything about ZANU. They could not do anything because the OAU had accepted us. But they didn’t like us. They favoured ZAPU. I saw this with my own eyes. Those two were an obstacle to our struggle.

SM: How was the mood in this meeting?

Cde Bethune:  Hondo kana comrade akafa haufanirwi kutya. It should give you encouragement. We were not afraid of being arrested. Tozotya kusungwa isu tisingatye kufa muhondo? Our leaders told us that the Zambian government was going to arrest us and we waited. They were accusing the ZANU leadership of killing Chairman Chitepo but who was responsible for providing Chitepo with security?

Chitepo had bodyguards, but outside the gate who was supposed to provide his security? They started talking about tribalism, but they never produced evidence to show that. What I know is that Josiah Magamba Tongogara used to preach about unity saying you cannot tell us to unite here in Zambia. He used to say we know that we are the only two strong political parties in Zimbabwe fighting for independence and so when we get home, uniting won’t be a problem at all. So he would say don’t force us to unite now.

More about this explosive meeting next week

2,422 total views, 2,195 views today

In 1998, Zimbabwe deployed its military to the Democratic Republic of Congo to fight rebels backed primarily by Rwanda and Uganda.

Since then, Zimbabwe and Rwanda did their best to ignore each other. Zimbabwe’s brash nationalist posturing could not sit at ease with an African leader, in President Paul Kagame, who appeared to have the backing of a country like the United States.

That hard nationalism, coupled with strong Pan-African sentiment, could not find the diplomatic ground on which to engage Rwanda. Rwanda, perhaps after the experience and encounters with the Zimbabwe Defence Forces in the jungles of the Congo, steered clear of tangling with Harare, even as agitators pushed President Kagame to denounce then president, Mr Robert Mugabe, in the way one Seretse Khama Ian Khama was doing in Sadc.

The result was that Zimbabwe and Rwanda simply ignored each other. Each pretended the other was of no consequence, or maybe did not even exist in its world. For the wider international community, Zimbabwe represented a frustrating case of a country with immense potential; but one held back by toxic internal politics, stultifying corruption, policy inconsistency, weak institutions and an unbearable arrogance when it came to foreign relations.

Zimbabwe was easy to loathe or support. There was no middle ground when it came to Harare: other countries either stood by Harare or did their damned best to end Mr Mugabe’s regime. Rwanda, on the other hand, represented the nuances in national governance that were hard to pigeonhole.

Here was a country in which peace “erupted” just quickly as genocide had in 1994 when hundreds of thousands were killed in one of the worst blood baths of modern times. That Rwanda could unite so quickly after such internal crisis made it a poster child for the global peace and reconciliation agenda.

That Rwanda’s Cabinet and Parliament are dominated by women made it the darling of the global gender equality agenda. That Rwanda’s administration made the country an investment destination of choice made it the preferred partner of capital. But at the same time, this was all largely built to the sound of President Kagame’s cracking whip, which has not gone down well with woolly-headed self-appointed altruists who prefer a leadership style that favours pleading over issuing orders.

There are also those who say dissent is little tolerated in Rwanda, and that President Kagame does not suffer criticism lightly. A few years ago the constitution was tinkered with to extend President Kagame’s right to continue standing for the top job just as his constitutional limit was due. We call him President Kagame today, but not too long ago he was Major-General Paul Kagame.

He is a soldier and soldiers have their way of doing things, achieving results along the way while those who would want to be molly-coddled complain even as they enjoy the fruits of the military man’s approach. President Kagame’s hard, pragmatic and incisive view of the business of running a country makes it difficult for many outside Rwanda to decide whether or not they like the man. He represents the nuances that Lee Kuan Yew also represented during his three-decade quest to make Singapore the modern marvel that it is today.

That said, after the diplomacy of ignoring each other for more than a decade, Zimbabwe and Rwanda have found each other. Last week, the chief executive officer of the Rwanda Development Board, Ms Clare Akamanzi, was in Harare at President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s invitation.

Her purpose here was to share Rwanda’s experiences in turning the country into an investment destination of choice not just in Africa, but across the world.

She said many things while she was here, and we carry some of those key issues elsewhere in this week’s edition of The Sunday Mail.

For a country that President Mnangagwa wants to become a middle-income economy by 2030, by opening up for business, we would all do well to at least dwell on three components that Ms Akamanzi pointed out had done wonders for Rwanda. The three are unity, thinking big and accountability.

Now, this is not just motivational talk but a practical approach to building an economy that works for its citizens.

We may not have experienced the bloodshed that Rwanda saw in 1994, but we are coming from a period of acute polarisation and heated contestation that has distracted attention from the important business of economic productivity.

On thinking big, it must always be borne in mind that we can only advance as far as our horizons. This means investing in innovation; creating the conditions for ideas to not only thrive but to be tested; and opening space for the free flow of those ideas internally and with the international community.

And need we say anything about the importance of accountability and building the institutions and legislation that enhance transparency and rewarding honest, hard work? Learning Rwanda’s experience is a good start. Implementing what is applicable to our situation is a great second step.

It is commendable that we are already seeing the framework for creating an economy that works for its people being erected, as signified by the parastatals and State enterprises reforms announced last week. Presidential Press Secretary Mr George Charamba has written in detail about the grand policy, legal and administrative architecture supporting this economic transformation process (“ED strategy for Zim’s recovery, The Sunday Mail, April 8, 2018).

In closing, we need to stop thinking like politicians who are perpetually running for office and start thinking and acting like businesspeople who have the responsibility of making Zimbabwe Incorporated tick.

8,742 total views, 7,927 views today

Vukani Madoda
Sharp Shooter
The drama unfolding before us in the MDCS and the gradual diminishment and extinction of its support base through the Constitutional Court process pitting Thokozani Khupe and Nelson Chamisa is more pitiable than laughable.

President Emmerson Mnangagwa, like the true leader he is, has promised free and fair elections; but rather than putting up a good fight, the two spoilt brats would rather give us a sideshow that will bruise them badly before the threshold elections.

With Deputy Chief Justice Gwaunza ruling last week that Khupe’s application for MDC presidential powers is urgent and will be argued before a full bench on May 30, 2018, there can be no second guessing that surely those whom the gods would destroy they first make mad.

There will only be one winner in the court case: Zanu-PF.

But I can bet you my bottom dollar, no one in Zanu-PF wants to win the elections because the MDCs will have swallowed themselves.

Zanu-PF is not used to getting victories on a silver platter. It enjoys the battle because that makes the victory sweeter.

And the MDCs’ supporters are not permitted to oppose the ongoing destruction of what is left of their party.

They are expected to blindly support that destruction at the hands of Chamisa’s reckless fanaticism.

The classic warning that madness precedes and causes destruction has never been as true as it has been with the MDCs today.

You can ask the Zimbabwe Nurses Association what the madness of refusing to wait 48 hours to receive their money did to them as they continued to madly engage in immoral collective job action.

They will tell you how madness destroyed them.

It is often the essence of madness that those afflicted by it cannot see it.

The divine, ruling or dominant powers that have made them mad, that have turned them against their own vital interests, against themselves, to bring about their own destruction can prevent them from being aware of their madness and the doom it portends.

As the spectacle unfolds, the MDCs are campaigning for Zanu-PF by showing the electorate why it would be folly to vote for the higgledy-piggledy opposition political parties.

Under the circumstances, Zanu-PF should prepare itself to form another Government from 2018 to 2023 and the few remaining opposition supporters must resign themselves to another enervating defeat and continued stay in the political wilderness.

Yes, Chamisa may put up a brave face and try and exude a semblance of stability.

He may speak confidently and eloquently even as he mouths hot air.

But he cannot escape the political insanity unfolding around him as a result of his own actions and thoughtlessness.

Yes, the gods have caused madness in the opposition camp because they soon want to destroy them.

Dubula’zitha!

153 total views, 106 views today

Richard
Runyararo Mahomva
Mama Winnie Nomzamo Madikizela-Mandela – an epitome of African nationalist motherhood and certainly a deity in the nationalist discursive framing – is worth celebrating.

In his farewell to her, Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) leader Julius Malema threw a supplication for signs/signals for Azania to confront the dilemmas and hypocrisies of incongruent and intermingling realisms of national belonging in South Africa.

Malema recollected Mama Winnie’s rejection and how those who sold her out to the apartheid regime where present at her funeral, mourning louder than the genuinely bereaved.

Likewise, when Zimbabwe celebrated her 38th Independence Day, even those whose role has been to invite agony through sanctions were present at the National Sports Stadium.

As Nelson Chamisa entered, he got his fair share of applause.

Of course, it was nothing compared to the jubilation that greeted Vice-President Constantino Chiwenga’s entry into the stadium, not to mention double-fold harmonic ovation which escorted President Emmerson Mnangagwa to the podium where he performed the rites of this great day.

Through selective social media reportage from timelines known as being mini-broadcasts of polarity, Nelson Chamisa was awarded ownership of a crowd he did not invite.

This evidently points to the depth of pettiness – if not subluminal narcissism – in the psyche of partisan appropriation of opportunities and platforms to unite Zimbabweans beyond the chasms of difference we have nurtured over the years.

The fact that Chamisa’s presence at the national Independence Day celebrations is hyped with falsehoods of his gigantic applause than any other leader betrays the opposition-inclined activists’ fallacy that past national events were a monopoly of the ruling zanu-pf.

However, it is even further revealing that accusations of partisan patronage linked to zanu-pf in the convening of national events were a reality to those who assumed the propensity of the absurd.

To those amused by misdirected populism, events such as the Independence Day – particularly this year’s celebrations – were characterised by pluralism which has been mistakenly captured as a cavalcade platform to demonstrate “who has got more fame than the other?”.

Of course, the agenda is to falsely propagate insinuations that an aspiring opposition presidential aspirant has a bigger following than the incumbent.

However, the 2018 question will not be resolved by such petty play at the nose of a party in power.

In its defined and mature approach, zanu-pf won’t give attention to such.

Tipabate ipapo!

While it is crucial to engage in dialogue, anti-zanu-pf cyber marshals must avoid preoccupation with magnifying the trivial.

I deliberately raised this matter to expose our divided claims to national belonging every time we permit our split patriotic consciousness to supersede the common national good.

It is these different interests and deferred commitments to the national project which partially motivate Professor Sabelo Ndlovu-Gatsheni’s enquiry “Do Zimbabweans Exist?”.

Wednesday’s celebrations made it clear to me that Zimbabweans do exist and that our nationalism is far-reaching and permanent.

This is against a milieu of dichotomous and contrasting realities to national belonging which accelerated an expedite revamp of our politics. As a result, Zimbabwe is heading towards an open sphere of political association.

This change has not been exclusively embraced – in fact, opposition activists are completely sabotaging this unfolding political trajectory as it is paving way for tolerance, inclusion and enhanced civil participation.

This antagonism to national good is at the behest of this superficial left’s comforts underpinned in Zimbabwe’s erstwhile highly polarised and conflict-charged politics.

The hostility of our political environment justified NGOs’ continued donor income.

Therefore, a systematic dormancy of the State in its iron-fisted habits of the old era means that there is no need for the old time funded advocacy.

That past is gone and of course the broad plan of externally assisted regime change dramatically failed in the past years.

Such changes in the domestic policy imply less need for Western democracy funding as was the case in the past.

Government’s commitment towards democratisation irks the civil society’s profit-making interest that was sustained through massive misrepresentation of Zimbabwe as a crisis-laden State.

Now the election is upon us and its outcome will shape the fortunes of the country’s future.

As our political parties enter into their respective campaign modes, their messaging must not be characterised by pettiness – as is the case; particularly from politicians who exaggerate their popularity before the elections endorse the credentials they claim to have.

Key focus should be on bringing more citizens to any winning side by any positive means necessary.

This is why State media have been giving fair coverage to activities of all political parties.

However, Government’s effort to liberate the airwaves has suffered the opposition’s goodwill to reciprocate the courtesy.

The disparaging of zanu-pf in some social media platforms reflects the extent to which the envisaged culture of pluralism is under sabotage.

Only recently, there were irrational cyber rants about the imported fleet designated for zanu-pf’s election campaign.

This on-going debate is widely characterised by criminalisation of zanu-pf’s decency to assert its footing in the coming election.

zanu-pf’s right to consolidate its power is being demonised on many online platforms.

These critics definitely miss the fact that it is not a zanu-pf problem that other political parties are not in any capacity to have equal competitive campaign machinery.

Therefore, zanu-pf must not be deterred from acquiring more campaign missiles, fearing the usual blackmail on the need for the party to fund Government business.

zanu-pf cannot stop financing its programmes simply because this and that hospital has no medication.

zanu-pf is an independent political party which is in Government.

Therefore, Government business must be stomached by its various ministries, departments and parastatals.

If zanu-pf membership subscriptions and well-wishers can afford the party an extravagant campaign, is that a problem?

No other party is barred from doing the same and those parties and leaders who claim to be genuinely concerned about welfare and interests of the public are allowed to divert their campaign funds to mitigate Government’s financial gaps.

I am sure such handouts from the opposition to Government will be most welcome. If that is not possible, then zanu-pf must be given room to campaign like any other party than to be unnecessarily held at ransom.

All political parties must exceptionally flourish in the uniqueness of their dissent; at the same time their participation in national business must be founded on sincerity to their respective values.

Consequently, our political parties must not be fundamentally preoccupied with seeking short-lasting fame and unnecessary demonisation of one another.

A civil approach to confronting difference may enrich the anticipated sobriety of our current political environment.

Iwe neni tinebasa.

66 total views, 20 views today

Pitched primarily on economic transformation, President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s maiden Independence Day address last week struck the right chords.

His declaration that “Zimbabwe will rise again” speaks volumes about his agenda.

As the President noted, 38 years of Independence had not been without challenges, and mistakes were made while opportunities were missed.

But this year’s celebrations, he said, were pregnant with hope for better days.

Positivity had become a scarce commodity among Zimbabweans. Past failures had made many among us nabobs of negativity who had put the handbrake on the vehicle of hope.

This national malady manifested in many ways, not least emotional damage coupling economic woes.

The result was that we became blind to the plethora of opportunities around us and the great potential Zimbabwe possesses.

President Mnangagwa thus said: “As we commemorate and celebrate the birth of our nation, let us believe that our tomorrow is greater. Let us boldly and proudly sing our national anthem, and fly our flag high in renewed hope and unity.

“Let us think big of our country, for the Bible says, ‘As a man thinks in his heart, so he is’.

“Let us also speak and confess well and the very best over our country, for the Bible again says, ‘Death and life are in the power of the tongue, and they that love it, shall eat the fruit thereof’. Nothing is impossible. Zimbabwe shall rise again.”

He seemed to echo Kwame Nkrumah at Ghana’s independence celebrations in 1957.

Nkrumah said, “From now on, today, we must change our attitudes and our minds. We have awakened, we will not sleep anymore.”

Zimbabwe is experiencing regeneration and a renewed sense of optimism.

As noted by the President: “Five months ago, the people of Zimbabwe took to the streets in a peaceful revolution. They called for freedom, progress and a new way of doing things. Like the heroes before them, they called for a new Zimbabwe. We heard their voices, we shared their vision and we are committed to delivering it.”

It was also significant that President Mnangagwa’s speech was all-inclusive.

“Together, we are embarking on a new journey of nation-building, irrespective of creed, language, age, religion, or political persuasion,” he assured.

“In unity, peace, and harmony, guided by the love of our country, and informed by a desire to build a better tomorrow, we are rekindling the pride in being Zimbabwean.

“We have raised our national flag high. Our national anthem reverberates in every corner of our great country, a constant reminder of our identity, and a prayer to God Almighty to abundantly, ‘Bless our native land!’

“I call on all Zimbabweans, at home and abroad, to proudly celebrate the past, and boldly stride forward, arm-in-arm, towards a brighter future.”

Commenting to journalists after the speech, MDC-T leader Mr Nelson Chamisa commended President Mnangagwa.

“National days should be unifying and not partisan. They are supposed to be days of togetherness because no individual or political party is bigger than these national days, which is why we applaud President Mnangagwa’s speech.

“President Mnangagwa’s speech was to a large extent inclusive because it reckoned the diversity of political parties.”

As Zimbabweans reflect on Operation Restore Legacy, we must take heed of the President’s message that “once again, we are free to dream, hope, and to believe”.

48 total views, 21 views today

Cleophas Pedzisa
After being asked by a diplomat what her hopes for this year were, the UK’s Mother spoke neither about her own well being nor that of her family. She did not even reference the impending royal wedding.

Instead she spoke of her wish that “Zimbabwe will one day return to the Commonwealth”.

So reported the Daily Mail.

President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s work ethic and transformation drive fits well into the Commonwealth’s general principles of good governance, economic growth and respect for human rights.

Zimbabwe was asked to attend last week’s summit in London and that is a most welcome development.

All pointers are that we will once again be a full member soon and this would be a plus to world politics.

The indisputable fact is that President Mnangagwa is a game changer.

The Commonwealth is an association of friends – an NGO, mainly at inter-governmental level – brought together by a common history of being former colonies of Great Britain.

On its own this sounds bad. But when one thinks of the realities of post-colonial geo-politics and how the previous regime badly responded to these realities, one realises that much good can come out of being in the Commonwealth.

Britain’s Ambassador to Zimbabwe Ms Catriona Laing has given positive signals to the re-engagement and Zimbabwe’s foreign policy establishment has been clear about its intentions.

There is much hope for out relations with the West.

Zimbabwe has been in isolation for such a long time that it was easy to start thinking that it was normal to be fighting the world.

But two things are more than apparent.

Firstly, no nation exists in isolation. Secondly, international relations play a significant role in the development of any country.

That Zimbabwe and the Commonwealth had a stormy relationship culminating in a sensational and acrimonious divorce in 2003 is well-documented.

The dramatic statement “This is unacceptable. This is it – it’s quits, and quits it will be” captured the high emotions of the time.

The history of Zimbabwe and the Commonwealth is long and storied.

In World War II, a great number of the then Southern Rhodesians served under the United Kingdom against Hitler and his allies.

In total, 10 107 service personnel, including 7 730 pilots were also trained in this country.

Zimbabwe had the opportunity to host the 12th meeting of the Heads of Government of the Commonwealth of Nations at Elephant Hills Resort from 16 to 19 October in 1991.

The meeting concluded with the Harare Declaration setting out the core principles, values and membership criteria, among others.

In the Harare Declaration, heads of government committed themselves to affirmation of commitment to equal rights; equal opportunities for all races, regardless of colour, creed or political belief; and equality for women.

The imperatives of Zimbabwe’s return to the Commonwealth are overwhelming.

The chorus of rejoining is growing louder by the day.

Apart from the high-powered meetings, there are activities of the aptly named “unofficial Commonwealth”, a multitude of organisations that foster ties under different disciplines and professions, sport, literature, arts, culture and many others.

There is the Commonwealth Youth Programme which looks specifically at “jobs for the youth”.

There is the Commonwealth Foundation, which shapes the livelihoods of millions of disadvantaged people.

There are the Commonwealth scholarships and fellowships from which our bright students can benefit.

There is even the Commonwealth for Kids, whose mantra is “we are all different, but we work together”.

Zimbabwe will be able to fully participate in the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, which promotes, develops and supports legislators and parliamentary staff to identify benchmarks of good governance and to nurture democracy.

Harare and London should be able to differ in pragmatic fashion, knowing that there is no need for sanctions and isolation.

Looking forward, the Commonwealth Games Federation has selected Birmingham, England as the host city for the XXII Commonwealth Games in 2022.

We are four-and-a-half years from these games, but all preparations and all arrangements are set.

Who does not want to be associated with such enduring sportsmanship?

51 total views, 21 views today

Tau Tawengwa
I have just finished reading the memoir of the late national hero Cde Cephas G Msipa entitled “In Pursuit of Freedom and Justice – a Memoir”.

While Cde Msipa might evade the memory of many because he wasn’t an attention-seeking politician, he is certainly one of the most influential people in Zimbabwe’s history.

He caught my attention around 2016 when he called on Mr Robert Mugabe to resolve the succession issue in zanu-pf and perchance, even to step down as President of party and State.

“This idea of selfish politics will not help at all. I have travelled and wherever I go, I am asked, is this the Zimbabwe you fought for? It’s not,” Cde Msipa said in 2016.

“We never fought for violent protests, we never fought for selfish leadership, but we fought for selfless leadership that puts Zimbabwe ahead of personal interests.

“Mugabe must put the country first. At the moment, Zimbabweans do not know what tomorrow holds and are literally groping in the dark . . . I cannot force Mugabe to step-down, but given his age, I think it’s important for him to find a solution now.”

As a born-free Zimbabwean, I didn’t fully comprehend Cde Msipa’s contribution to pre-and post-Independent Zimbabwe until I read his memoir. Nevertheless, I respected his courage and willingness to warn Mr Mugabe of his impending fall.

Judging from his relationship with the former President as outlined in his book, I can say with certainty that those warnings were not malicious, they were in fact sincere.

Yet, interestingly, his memoir illuminates pivotal aspects of our political history that depict how we arrived where we are today, while concurrently showing us how we can extricate ourselves from our situation and take the correct trajectory.

It is in the context of Cde Msipa’s memoir that I’m convinced that President Mnangagwa is the right person to lead the country at this juncture and in this article I will discuss why I believe he deserves to be voted into office. Msipa was in Zapu and worked closely with heroes like Willie Musarurwa and Joshua Nkomo. He became a member of zanu-pf after the 1987 Unity Accord.

What particularly interests me about his story is his allusions to the fact that Zimbabwe’s economy and the livelihoods of our people have often been sacrificed by self-serving politically radical policies and manoeuvres.

He points to how moderate politicians like Joshua Nkomo were victimised and hounded out of the country, and yet were still willing to unite for the purposes of the greater national interest.

He also mentions how other moderate liberation leaders like Josiah Tongogara never arrived in Zimbabwe in 1980.

“PF-Zapu was (as) shocked as zanu-pf about Tongogara’s death. We considered him to be a moderate in his party and much more pragmatic than many of his colleagues . . . Nkomo was profoundly shocked by the death of Josiah Tongogara,” he writes in his memoir.

The description of the late Tongogara as a political moderate supports the view that had Zimbabwe taken a moderate policy and political-economy approach from 1980, we would have walked a different path.

President Mnangagwa’s new dispensation has taken the moderate approach to the economy.

He has watered down indigenisation regulations and pledged to compensate white former farmers for developments on our land.

He has also made commitments to repay the country’s outstanding debts and travelled to many countries reiterating and emphasising that Zimbabwe is open for business.

This is the kind of moderate approach that has been long overdue in our policy and national politics.

In contrast, the previous administration had become notorious for its radicalism.

We can safely say that President Mnangagwa’s moderate and investor-friendly approach is a welcome development. In this light, President Mnangwagwa deserves the opportunity to finish his economic revival mission. He deserves a full term in office.

On that note, I also urge the President and the new dispensation to remember the youth.

If Cde Msipa’s story is anything to go by, there is an urgent need to appoint youthful leaders into strategic Government and policy positions for the purposes of gaining experience and learning the reigns.

As it stands today, President Mnangagwa is the most senior member of zanu-pf and he should be given the opportunity to accomplish institutional democratisation at party and State level.

In this context his calls for the removal of the “one-centre-of-power” principle are notable and his assurances to hold free and fair national elections in 2018 are commendable.

Ultimately, he is the right person for the top job and Zimbabweans should give him the opportunity to fulfil his democratisation agenda.

153 total views, 117 views today

Innocent Chirisa
Zimbabwe is in a new dispensation.

The old dispensation seemed to have a cacophony of ideas that did not add up to a defining development ideology.

Every Zimbabwean wants the new order to deliver the desired development, and it appears we are on the right path.

Let’s consider a few issues as we march forward.

When colonial settlers took over the land between the Zambezi and Limpopo in 1890, they immediately set out to establish rules, ordinances and laws to define their imperialistic appetite.

The British South Africa Company’s rule (1890-1922) saw the establishment of an effective transport system.

Within 10 years, a well-networked spatial system of settlements had been set up.

African agriculture was relegated to a subsistence economy.

The 1930 Land Apportionment Act ensured the imperialists amassed as much land as possibly required, reserving some of it for their unborn children.

The colonial government also institutionalised the Maize Control Act (1934) to stifle the efforts of peasants, whose production competed favourably with that of whites. This meant that in the maize market, the black African farmers now could not compete with the white farmers.

Blacks always received lower grading of their produce relative to that of their white counterparts.

As far back as 1894, the first reserves had been created – Gwaai and Shangaan – in Matabeleland.

The First Chimurenga precipitated creation of more reserves.

Whites “owned” commercial farms, estates and mines while blacks were second-class citizens in their own country.

Towns and cities always received blacks as temporary citizens whose presence in the urban space was defined by their ability to prove to the authorities that they were gainfully employed.

Black women and children had no space in the city. If one visited an industrial area, say, Willowvale in Harare today, he or she would notice that there are no sanitary facilities for women there.

Mines and farms were designed to serve as enclaves in which workers could bring their families.

Primary school facilities would be provided on the farm. This design and provision of facilities was informed by the philosophy of white supremacy.

Husband, wife and children could sell their labour to the farm and the system would go on for generations like that.

Those children would be made to aspire to be good farm workers and be retained on the farm after “completing” primary schooling. Those who did very well could end up as farm foremen or managers or live in “better houses”, far from the madding crowd in the farm or mine compounds. Abundance of farm or mine work ensured workers had limited touch with the outside world. This is some form of local embeddedness.

When one is locally embedded, they are destined to be born, grow up, school, work, marry and have children, grow old, die and be buried in one place.

They are holed up in that place and their mindset is programmed never to see any life outside their current frame of exposure. It could be assumed that under such an arrangement, one can be very close to the city, but never get an opportunity to set their feet therein.

The mind is so boxed that thinking outside the box is considered rebellion.

Colonial planning created no-go areas for the black population, all in the spirit of separatist development.

We are told that black people were not allowed in First Street Mall of Salisbury (now Harare). We are told a “city centre” for blacks was created for them – “Magaba”.

The city was racially divided such that the so-called locations were planned as black African townships, the oldest being Harari (now Mbare), followed by places like Highfield, Mufakose and Kambuzuma. Successful blacks could afford to be accommodated in places like Marimba where a varied tenure system of the properties was designed for them.

There were places reserved for the coloured community – Sunningdale, Arcadia, Ardbennie and St Martins – and others like Belvedere were for the Asian community. With massive industrialisation in mind, particularly during the years of the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland (1953-1963), three-to-four storey hostels were constructed.

They were designed to accommodate the migrant worker, a bachelor.

It didn’t matter whether you were married or not, once you came for work and had left your family at your rural home, you were a bachelor.

You were discouraged from bringing that family to town because the available facilities, including the kitchen, one bedroom and ablution were just meant for one male adult employed in a shop, factory or other similar workplaces.

From time to time, city authorities would unleash inspectors to see how residents were living and keeping the hostels and council-provided accommodation.

It made sense to have a Department of Housing and Community Services just to ensure the habitability of accommodation facilities and also to ensure illegal residents were chucked or kept out.

Having a work pass or identity card (chitupa/situpa) was a major requirement. Inspections (masipakisheni) were the order of the day. The places were highly-policed and controlled and that meant orderliness in the African residences.

The Department of Housing and Community Services also ensured community amenities, including community parks, grounds and similar facilities were well-managed. Grass had to be cut short during the rainy reason.

In 1951, the Land Husbandry Act was enacted.

It was meant to give the migrant worker in town or on a farm or mine confidence without having to have a schizophrenic worry about his assets, including land left in communal areas in trust of the wife and children. It had already been acknowledged that rural communal lands were suffering from gross environmental degradation such as overgrazing, deforestation, soil erosion and siltation of water bodies.

Revision of the 1933 and 1945 Town Planning Acts was suggested so that these issues could be embraced.

The 1976 Regional, Town and Country Planning Act was born out of this realisation. The Land Husbandry Act provided for some stringent measures to deal with environmental challenges experienced in the rural areas apportioned to black Africans. For instance, households were supposed to reduce their livestock to ensure adequacy of pasture lands.

They were also expected to prepare their arable land. To mitigate against uncontrolled overland flow and subsequent soil erosion, contours were dug in fields (makandiwa).

And to allow for easy tax collection, communal land dwellers were commanded to get into the linear settlement system, usually along a river or a defined path/road. The re-arrangement of dwelling units resulted in what came to be known as maraini (the lines).

The same pattern was also to be seen with respect to the locations (African townships) in urban areas.

Police would be seen patrolling the streets. By the late 1970s, the Smith regime was determined to see advancement of its separatist policy.

The success of the Chitungwiza dormitory town system where blacks could live about 40km away from the city, but sell their labour to whites in the city, was ripe for replication countrywide.

For every major city, a growth point town for blacks was suggested. For example, for Mutare it was Zimunya.

Their idea was to have blacks have their own sense of success and “independence” while underhand forces could keep them as suppliers of cheap labour to white cities.

One could go on and on, but the bottom line is that colonial planning was never guesswork.

We may not like its objectives, but it had a clear ideology and guiding philosophy.

The idea was to present whites as a force of dominance while putting the black person in underdog position.

This served the purpose of the colonialists to the greatest and its legacy and imprint we have even up to today.

We must ask: what is the guiding philosophy of the planning practice in independent Zimbabwe? Has this philosophy been spelt out? If spelt out, by who and to advance whose interests?

If it has not been defined, then, as a nation, we have to act on this for us to move forward.

This explains why our rural townships and growth points resemble nothing but a midhadhadha of buildings along a “highway” without any innovation in design.

Once you are at Murambinda, you get the Mupandawana experience, and this extends to Juru and Murehwa Centre. This explains why a typical house in a high-density suburb is nothing but a mere semblance of a matchbox structure.

It partly explains why the rural kitchen hut has never been remodelled to embrace the modern needs of habitable accommodation.

However, the mind of the planner and architect sometimes can only go as far as ideology and philosophy define the aspirations and direction of a nation.

Good is the enemy of best.

As long as we still think what we have is good enough for us, we will never tap into progressive and innovative thinking.

I am still wondering who schooled the Chinese.

I wonder who gave them the idea to design the more than 600km Great Wall north of Beijing.

I wonder who gave the Central Chinese Emperors the idea to craft their Terracotta warriors in Xi’an.

The seed that defines society – ideology and philosophy – in its practical way, seems to be the missing link between what we do and where we aspire to be.

Professor Innocent Chirisa is the University of Zimbabwe Department of Rural and Urban Planning Chairperson. He wrote this article for The Sunday Mail.

2,321 total views, 2,143 views today

LAST week, Comrade Gomba Midson Mupasu whose Chimurenga name was Cde Norman Bethune spoke about the meeting the ZANU leadership held about two hours after the death of chairman Chitepo in Lusaka, Zambia in 1975. It was a fascinating narration.

However, in the interview last week, Cde Bethune mixed up the dates when the Malta Conference was held and he also mixed up the dates when Cde Edison Sithole was abducted by the Smith regime. In his narration last week, Cde Bethune made it appear as if the Malta Conference on Rhodesia was held in 1975, yet the conference was held at the beginning of 1978. Also he made it appear as if Cde Sithole was abducted early 1975, yet official records show that Cde Edison Sithole was abducted from Ambassador Hotel on October 15, 1975. We sincerely apologise for failing to rectify this mix up before publication last week.

In this week’s interview, Cde Bethune tells our team comprising Munyaradzi Huni and Tendai Manzvanzvike how Zambian soldiers gunned down some ZANU cadres at Mboroma. He narrates how after this shooting incident, ZANU moved its rear operations to Mozambique.

Read on. . .

SM: Last week you had narrated your story until the time when the Zambian government had sent one of their commanders to come to Nampundwe farm in Lusaka after the death of chairman Chitepo. What went on to happen?

Cde Bethune: Like I told you, Tongogara had told me not to leave the farm as the overall commander. His instruction was that if I was to be arrested, just like other ZANU leaders, I was supposed to be arrested together with all the comrades who were at the farm. So when this Zambian commander came, I asked him to tell me where he wanted to take me and my comrades. He said his instruction was just to take me away and I told him that without knowing where I was going, I was not going to leave the farm. I told him handiende kwandisingazive.

I told this commander that my commanders had briefed me about what was likely to happen after the death of Chitepo. We argued for some time as I insisted that he should tell me kuti tiri kuenda kupi. I told him that we already knew that the Zambian government was supporting ZAPU and that they were accusing ZANU of refusing to unite with ZAPU. We exchanged harsh words.

SM: The Zambian government was accusing ZANU of refusing to unite with ZAPU. . .

Cde Bethune: Yes, that is what the Zambian government was saying and we were saying the Zambian government had no right to speak about ZAPU and ZANU unity. That was none of their business. Why was the Zambian government so interested in the politics of Zimbabwe?

SM: You were living in Zambia. Zambia was hosting you.

Cde Bethune: So what? It was not yet the time for unity and you cannot force me to do what I don’t want. Zambia was our host and their role ended there.

SM: So what did you finally agree to do with this Zambian commander?

Cde Bethune: He later consulted his bosses and he was told to tell me the truth. That is when he told me that they were taking us to an area called Mboroma. I then asked him for what reason? What is the logic because wherever they wanted to take us, we were still on Zambian soil? He told me he just had instruction to take us to Mboroma.

I then agreed to leave. He then gave me permission to carry whatever I wanted. I was with Cde Kenny Ridzai, Cde Tsuro and many others. We carried all our food stuffs nemabhero embatya and our medicine. We left two tractors, nemagejo maviri, a planter, roam disk nechibage chatakanga tarima pa45 hectares chakanga chava pastage yekufurura. I am told that chibage ichi chazoibva chakadyiwa nemacomrades eZAPU because ndivo vakazoenda kunogara paNampundwe farm. That pained me a lot because my comrades had worked hard at the farm and we were removed just like that.

You know as I was speaking to this Zambian commander, Nikita Mangena from ZAPU was there together with other comrades from his party. They were also accusing us of refusing to unite. But our point was how can we talk of unity when the leadership of ZANU was being arrested? These comrades had been misinformed by the Zambian government to think we were stooges. Of course we later proved to them that we knew what we were doing. You know even ordinary army officers in the Zambian army told us that we were refusing to unite with ZAPU. We told them that while ZAPU was training its comrades, we were already in Rhodesia fighting the Smith regime. What happened after the death of chairman Chitepo pains me up to this day.

Kaunda was playing double standards. We suffered. The Zambian government was being used by the British government because they never fought for their country. It’s a shame. The Zambian government without any proof just arrested ZANU leaders. You know they took us to a place that was a jungle. Musango without any sanitation. That was Mboroma. Right in the middle of nowhere.

What even pains me more is that the white man who killed chairman Chitepo was staying in Zambia. He was staying with a certain white farmer. Why couldn’t their intelligence pick that up? Why didn’t they protect Chitepo and JZ Moyo? There was information to the effect that these two were being followed, what measures did the Zambian government take?

SM: How did you know that this white man is the one who killed chairman Chitepo?

Cde Bethune: We later got to know about this when this white man wrote some paper confessing. But all along we knew it was the Rhodesians. I can’t remember the exact name of this white man but he later wrote a book about it.

SM: Let’s go back to Mboroma. How was the situation?

Cde Bethune: Like I told you this was right in the middle of the bush. There were tents of different sizes. There were Zambian and ZIPRA comrades staying close to Mboroma. The demarcation between us and these Zambian and ZIPRA comrades was a fence. The Zambians knew that we had issues with the ZIPRA comrades and so they erected this fence so that we would not mix with the ZIPRA comrades.

SM: At Mboroma you were still the overall ZANU commander?

Cde Bethune: Yes, I was still the commander until we were repatriated in September 1975 to Mozambique.

SM: So you were not arrested as what happened to the other ZANU leaders?

Cde Bethune: This was an arrest of some sort. Why did they take us from Nampundwe farm to Mboroma which was in the middle of the bush? This was some house arrest. At Mboroma we continued with our physical fitness exercises which included a road run. Because of the tension that was between ZAPU and ZANU, some of my comrades vakanga vatogadzira some spears as they anticipated a clash with the ZAPU comrades. I want to tell you that during this time, takanga tisingawonani nanasahwira vedu ava veZIPRA. The situation between us was very, very tense.

SM: How long were you at Mboroma?

Cde Bethune: From March up to September 1975.

SM: We heard that while at Mboroma, there were clashes that left some ZANU comrades dead. Tell us more about this.

Cde Bethune: Like I have been saying, the Zambian government kept on accusing us of refusing to unite with ZAPU. We told them kuti you talk about unity nevana vemunhu maparents acho ari mujeri. Does that make sense? Now what triggered the clashes you are talking about was that my comrades got irritated by these continuous allegations by the Zambian government. They told the Zambian soldiers at Mboroma that if they continued talking about unity, tinokurovai. So many vulgar words were exchanged. Macomrades angu because takanga takawanda, nehasha they pushed the demarcation fence ikawira pasi. When the fence fell, the Zambian soldiers shot in the air as warning shots. I was standing at the far right side ordering my comrades to stop advancing towards the Zambian soldiers. They kept on advancing and the Zambian soldiers opened fire, killed five of my comrades – three male and two female comrades. After this shooting, my comrades vakabva vaita wild, kupenga chaiko. I later calmed them down. We later moved about 2km from Mboroma and found another place to stay.

We had gotten information that some ZAPU comrades who were with the Zambian soldiers at Mboroma wanted to poison our food. Like I told you there was Nikita Mangena and Mazinyane, I can’t remember his Chimurenga name. I remember during this incident, this Mazinyane akanga akuda kubata one of my comrades anonzi Marble. She is still alive this Marbel. Ndiye aiwacha mbatya dzangu naNyemwererai. They even captured one of our female comrades who spoke Ndebele. We demanded that this female comrade should be brought back to us but all our efforts were in vain.

SM: As overall commander, don’t you think you failed to lead your comrades, leading to the shootings?

Cde Bethune: I don’t think I failed. I tried my best but the provocation was just too much and my comrades had had enough. If I had a gun that day, I would have shot the Zambian soldiers.

SM: When they started shooting at your comrades, what did you do?

Cde Bethune: Ndaigoita sei? I actually took cover. We all didn’t have guns.

SM: Do you know the names of the comrades who were killed?

Cde Bethune: There was Farai, Pedzesai, Tsitsi. I can’t remember the names of the other two male comrades. Pedzesai was one of the senior female comrades. She was in the same generation with Cde Dadirai.

SM: So what did you do to these five dead comrades?

Cde Bethune: We had an ambulance, a VW that was being driven by Cde Gwauya. So these bodies were taken to Kabwe mortuary. I think it was about 100km from where we were. They were later buried at Kabwe cemetery. Before this, Ndabaningi Sithole was told about these shootings and we were told by those who were there that he refused to see the dead comrades, saying he was rushing to America where one of his daughters was not well. As comrades zvakatibata zvikuru. I briefed my comrades about this and vakarwadziwa about the decision that Sithole had taken.

You know it started as a joke kuti “pasi naSithole” and it later became a reality. This got to Mgagao where the Mgagao declaration disowning Sithole was written.

SM: As overall commander, were you not the one who planted this anti-Sithole sentiment into the people?

Cde Bethune: Look, five comrades had died and he decided to go see his daughter. What kind of a leader was he?

SM: But Cde Bethune, he had already bought a ticket?

Cde Bethune: Surely, he could change his bookings. He couldn’t even come to see me at Mboroma.

SM: After this shooting incident, did you try to engage the Zambian soldiers?

Cde Bethune: No, not even. Hatina kuzomboita hukama. Then later William Ndangana and Richard Hove came to Mboroma but we told them kuti dzokerai kuLusaka. Through these two comrades we established a link with the Lusaka office where Cde Muzenda was now in charge.

When we moved about 2km away, they didn’t follow. The OAU later got wind of what had happened and they came to investigate. The Zambian government killed innocent people and they should be answerable.

You know if as ZANU we were not strong, what happened in Angola could have happened in Zimbabwe. You know in Angola, UNITA under Savimbi is the one that had done all the donkey work but some people were bribed at the last minute and MPLA got into power. That is why Savimbi did what he did after the independence of Angola.

I am very glad that in Zimbabwe we later had the Unity Accord. Very glad because it brought peace. But some people should not think we don’t see what’s happening.

SM: From Mboroma where did you go?

Cde Bethune: We were taken to the Zambian International Airport from where we were flown to Chingodzi which was in Tete province in Mozambique. The OAU organised our repatriation.

SM: Why were you moving to Mozambique?

Cde Bethune: Hukama hwakanga husisiri right. The Front Line States decided that we should move to Mozambique. In Mozambique, Samora Machel welcomed us and ZANU felt at home. Samora Machel told his people through the radio that “hondo yeZimbabwe ihondo yedu. We are dying together.”

Cde Rex Nhongo and Cde Elias Hondo had already laid the ground for us to settle well in Mozambique. They had already sent word to comrades at the war front that they were no longer supposed to go to Zambia but were supposed to go to our base called Chitima in Mozambique. From Chitima there was another base called Shangara. These were the two bases kwaisvikira macomrades during the first years in Mozambique.

In Mozambique I was assigned to be the commander at Battaliao Base in Tete province. By this time, thousands of recruits were joining the liberation struggle and most of them passed through this base. Some of the comrades who were injured at the war front received treatment at Battaliao.

Cde Bethune’s exploits in Mozambique are well documented. He was the commander at Chimoio Camp when Rhodesian forces massacred thousands of people. Last year we published his exploits in Mozambique and his heart-rending story was well received. This is the last instalment from his interview which lasted about 17 hours.

2,527 total views, 2,355 views today

As Zanu-PF prepares to launch its 2018 election manifesto, Zimbabwe stands on the edge of an era-defining moment.

The manifesto will not only articulate the ruling party’s programme of action for the next five years, but outline the development agenda that Zanu-PF seeks to pursue under President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s leadership.

For long, the revolutionary party has been riding on its tried and tested ideologies grounded on the liberation struggle, land reform, indigenisation and empowerment; and this year presents an opportunity for the party to advance its discourse to the realm of economic nationalism.

The revolutionary party’s manifesto will seek to answer many questions posed by prospective voters, whose inevitable demand is “what is in it for me?”

A look at the 2013 manifesto shows that Zanu-PF needs to radically advance on how it won the elections last time around.

The 2013 manifesto revolved around accelerating the indigenisation and empowerment policy to complete the effective takeover of “an estimated 1 138 foreign firms operating in the country”, with the ambitious dream that “this would unlock US$1,8 trillion into the coffers of locals and drive gross domestic product”.

The 2013 blueprint, which revolved around “Indigenise, Empower Develop and Create Employment” will certainly not be longer the lynchpin of the message for this year, as President Mnangagwa’s administration has relegated the indigenisation discourse to a lesser role in line with the Zimbabwe is Open for Business drive.

This shift is seismic and feeds high expectations that the 2018 manifesto will herald a new business culture that places Zimbabwe on the path to becoming a middle-income economy by 2013 in line with President Mnangagwa’s vision.

While indigenisation was a noble idea, it was not properly thought out and was horribly implemented, killing an economy that it claimed to be building.

As such, this year’s manifesto will depart from impracticable promises and speak to a refreshing set of attainable economic targets.

As a point of reference, this year’s manifesto can read into the bold 1980 poll statement.

Part of the 1980 manifesto instructed that “the achievement of political power by the people will remain hallow in terms of their material development unless it can translate itself by way of economic power in social form”.

The economic interests of the people should be uppermost.

Economic transformation is long overdue and the 2018 manifesto is the watershed. In short, this manifesto must keep its eyes on the money.

The new gospel is economic stabilisation (which is already happening), and then economic growth as the natural successor.

The sloganeering of years gone by is dead.

And in all this, Zanu-PF will be mindful that – as Zimbabwe Electoral Commission Chair Justice Priscilla Chigumba has noted – that “according to … preliminary statistics after the (biometric voter) registration blitz, about 60 percent of our registered voters are aged 18 to 40”.

This calls for a manifesto that speaks to the youth inasmuch as it speaks to a future of economic transformation, growth and development.

The future beckons. This is a new dawn not just for Zanu-PF, but indeed for the whole of Zimbabwe.

2,706 total views, 2,543 views today

This week we were reminded of Gore Vidal, the American essayist who died back in 2012 and was referred to by some as the Oscar Wilde of his generation.

In a public career spanning decades, which included an unachieved ambition to be United States President, Vidal had plenty of occasion to unleash his acerbic tongue on the political classes with a turn of phrase many in political commentary can only aspire to.

It is Vidal who has been credited with the following witticism: “‘Politics’ is made up of two words, ‘poli’, which is Greek for ‘many’, and ‘tics’, which are blood-sucking insects.”

Politicians are easy to take pot shots at. By entering the public arena, they are offering themselves up to a life of power and criticism. Politicians themselves say nasty things about politicians.

Consider Ronald Reagan’s quip: “It’s been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I have learned that it bears a striking resemblance to the first.”

We all know Reagan was not the sharpest tool in the shed, and one wonders if he came up with that one all on his own. Either way, it was an incisive commentary on the state of politics not just in the United States, but indeed across much of the world.

The reality is that we should not expect sainthood from politicians. That is what the church was created for.

But that said, sometimes the level of bloodsucking cannot go unchallenged and unpunished. A little bit of background.

Last week, central Government, the Health Services Board and the Zimbabwe Nurses Association were engaged in discussions over working conditions.

Nurses said they had been promised so much for so long, without anything ever materialising, that they could not continue working under the circumstances. Government pointed out that the grievances being raised were a legacy issue, dating back to the previous regime and that the new administration should surely not be cursed unto the fourth generation because of the sins of the father.

Regardless, Government said it inherited the grievances and would deal with them. It promptly released more than $17 million to be paid to striking nurses, and said they must return to work because people were dying.

Most of the nurses did not return to work. Government made a decision: it fired all non-compliant nurses and directed the Health Services Board to fill the posts with the thousands of trained nurses who have for years been searching for jobs. The mass dismissal was in terms of Section 58(i)(c)(ii) of Health Services Regulations (Statutory Instrument 117 of 2006). Further, a Labour Notice gazetted as Statutory Instrument 137 /2003 categorises nurses as “essential service providers” who cannot suddenly stop working – simply because people will die.

So we have to ask ourselves: why did the Zimbabwe Nurses Association direct its members to allow people to die?

Surely, if the association was genuine in its engagement, it would have directed the membership to return to work when the $17 million was availed.

Assuredly, if the Zimbabwe Nurses Association was truly representative of the profession and its members, it would not have embarked on such a ruinous route. And most certainly, if the association was really interested in progress, it would have since tried to re-engage Government and set about making things right.

Instead, the leadership of the Zimbabwe Nurses Association is agitating for war, even as its members tell them that they simply want their jobs back, treat people and access their share of the $17 million-plus. So what is the problem? Politics. Politicians have hijacked labour as they are wont to do and they will abuse and suck the blood out of professional nurses so that they further their self-centred agendas.

They will seek to build their political careers on the corpses of patients who could not access healthcare because the Zimbabwe Nurses Association allowed itself to be used by bloodsuckers.

What is one Doug Coltart going out of his way to convince nurses not to return to work? What is one Joice Mujuru’s objective when she goes and stands in solidarity with nurses who were fired because they heeded a political directive from their union leadership to abandon ill patients?

How come none of these politicians is standing in solidarity with dying patients? Because they hope to create a wave of labour unrest similar to that witnessed towards the end of the last millennium. They want to ride the crest of that anticipated wave well into elections.

Let’s face it: the opposition is in disarray and the only way they can envisage a favourable electoral outcome this year is by stoking public anger against President Emmerson Mnangagwa’s Government.

They cannot come up with a strategy to make voters like them; so instead they think they have come up with a strategy to make voters dislike Zanu-PF.

And all this at the expense of ill patients and ordinary nurses who – like all other Zimbabweans – genuinely want an improvement in their living conditions.

This is a brand of politics founded on blood and the bodies of innocent Zimbabweans.

It cannot be allowed to flourish with impunity.

2,753 total views, 2,587 views today