• Listen to this segment

GUEST: Emira Woods, Co-Director of Foreign Policy in Focus

Crisis after crisis seems to be striking the southern African nation of Zimbabwe. The rate of state initiated human rights violations has doubled since last year to over 5000 in the first six months of 2007 alone. The violations include torture, assault, detention, intimidation, and even murder. Zimbabwe is experiencing its worst economic crisis in decades with hyperinflation expected to top 1.5 million percent by the end of the year. Over 80% of adults are unemployed and life expectancy has dropped to 36 years. There are serious food shortages – bread, sugar, and corn meal have vanished while meat is practically non-existent. Gasoline is nearly unobtainable and hospital patients are dying due to a lack of medical supplies. All fingers seem to point to Zimbabwe’s “president-for-life,” 83 year old Robert Mugabe. Mugabe has planned to nationalize sectors of the economy to try to revive it. Additionally over 7000 business executives, store managers and traders have been arrested since last month to enforce a government order to slash the prices of goods and services by half. Mugabe also recently signed a controversial wiretapping bill, which he says is modeled on similar US legislation. One of Mugabe’s leading critics, Archbishop Pius Ncube, recently called on Zimbabwe’s former colonial master, Britain, to raid the country and topple Mugabe.

ROUGH TRANSCRIPT

Sonali Kolhatkar: Welcome to Uprising, Emira.

Emira Woods: It’s a pleasure to be with you.

Sonali Kolhatkar: So, Zimbabwe is really in a very, very serious situation, it seems, in all different aspects, whether we are talking about human rights, the issue of democracy, the issue of the economy. Let’s start talking first about the human rights violations. Why, this year, have the human right violations, in your opinion, doubled?

Emira Woods: You have a political crisis that is under way in Zimbabwe. Political crisis, because, essentially, as we move towards a presidential election year, you have a party that is holding power at all cost and is clamping down on opposition, clamping down on human rights activists, clamping down on journalists in ways that are absolutely intolerable and inhumane. So, you have seen steadily increasing incidences of violence, of intimidation, of actual murder, arrest, detention without cause. The list is so long in terms of the attacks against opposition party members, against civil society leaders, against trade union activists, against it seems everyone outside the ZANU-PF party.

Sonali Kolhatkar: Now, we had covered on Uprising in the past the attacks against one of Mugabe’s main opposition leaders, Morgan Tsvangirai. He is currently still speaking out against Mugabe. Is he the best sort of oppositional hope for Zimbabwe at this point?

Emira Woods: Well, I think we should be clear. It is not for those of us outside of Zimbabwe to choose who is the best leader for Zimbabwe. It is for the Zimbabweans themselves to have an open process where they can chose freely their own leaders and then hold those leaders accountable. So, I don’t think I would be in the position to really respond to that at the moment, but I think what is needed, really, is a sense for freedom of the press to reestablish there in Zimbabwe; for freedom of assembly, for people to be able to come together and organize, for people to be able to have meetings. Even church functions are frowned upon now by the Zimbabwean government.

Sonali Kolhatkar: I understand that there was recently an arrest of a group that was basically meeting for mass prayer and they were arrested for simply assembling?

Emira Woods: Without a doubt. We have had incidences in which people gathering in churches, in places of worship, are targeted as perpetrators of crimes against the government, and are targeted for beatings and arrests. And this is absolutely creating a climate not only of intimidation, but of really, you know, fear, where it is really the most courageous that are still, in spite of the circumstances, that are still fanning forward and still organizing and still demanding their rights, their human rights, their rights to dignity and their rights to not only freedom of expression, but also organizing.

Sonali Kolhatkar: Emira, have a lot of Zimbabweans simply left the country?

Emira Woods: You know, I just came back from South Africa. It is amazing when you see the level of refugees that are in South Africa from Zimbabwe. So, I would say, without a doubt, because of not only the political crisis, but also the economic crisis, you have people really voting with their feet and finding other ways in which they can really make ends meet, put food on the table, feed their children, send their children to school. So, you do have people leaving Zimbabwe steadily, not only to South Africa and other neighboring states, but increasingly to the US, to the UK and other countries in the international community. You have a crisis not only of the political situation, but economically, where you have people well trained as nurses, as doctors, as teachers, really unable to have a meaningful life, and so they are finding other options elsewhere. So it’s on both ends of the socioeconomic ladder that people are actually leaving.

Sonali Kolhatkar: Speaking of South Africa, what role does South Africa play in Zimbabwe’s political situation? I understand that President Thabo Mbeki recently criticized Britain for the crisis in Zimbabwe, while one of the leading dissenters inside Zimbabwe, as I mentioned, Pius Ncube, the Archbishop, has actually, it seems out of desperation, called on Britain to come in and topple Mugabe.

Emira Woods: Well, I think we have to really pull back and remember that, in the apartheid years, Zimbabwe, as one of the Front Line States, was the closest ally to South Africa. It is there that many of those who were underground actually lived and operated and were able to sustain themselves and so the ties that bind are actually really close. So let’s keep that in focus, but at the same time, you know, the situation is so desperate in Zimbabwe. And I think now the pressure on the African Union overall and on South Africa as one of the key leaders within Southern Africa in the African Union on Zimbabwe, South Africa has had tremendous pressure to respond more vehemently, really, to Mugabe, and to help create, really, a situation where the human rights crisis can come to an end and the economic crisis also can be abated. And so, there has been tremendous pressure on South Africa. And I think it is playing itself out in ways – it’s not fast enough, really. I think there are increasing words from Mbeki to Mugabe, but the political pressure that is needed, I think, has not been forthcoming. I think it is absolutely right that Mbeki looks at questions of regime change and pinpoints a finger at the UK, and perhaps even the US, and says no, we don’t want regime change in your way, the way that the US in particular collaborated with the UK in Iraq, but what is needed in Zimbabwe is a change from within. A change from within that is supported by those outside, but that gives the Zimbabweans the control over their own country. It is the Zimbabweans that have to actually be at the forefront in determining the next phase for their country. So I think the attention on the calls from the Archbishop are playing themselves out in different ways. I think there are many who say yes, a change is needed, but also say that the type of militaristic approach from the US and the UK is not what Zimbabwe needs either. So regime change in what way and what cost is part of the conversation as well. So, I think what you are hearing is much more clamoring that says how do we help to stand in solidarity with those trade unionists, with those human rights activists, with those courageous journalists that are really putting forward demands internally and that are creating a space where those like the unions in South Africa are reaching out, linking hands across borders, can stand in solidarity with, but not go to the extent of calling for militaristic action from either the US or the UK. So it’s a bit of a fine line, I think, that’s being walked, but I think one that is needed.

Sonali Kolhatkar: Emira, Human Rights Watch recently put out a report on the crisis in Zimbabwe. They call it a call to action and they are calling in particular on the Southern African Development Community, whose summit has just begun. Do you feel that the SADC, the Southern African Development Community, bears a little bit more responsibility, or at least could in a more responsible fashion than the UK and the US do something to help move Zimbabwe out of the crisis mode?

Emira Woods: I think the regional bodies are critical here. And I think it’s both SADC, which is the Southern African Development Committee, and also the African Union who have the responsibility really to respond. And I think it is calls for their action that need to be pressured and need to be amplified now. I think those calls are coming and it’s bringing some movement forward, but we still don’t have enough of a space within those bodies for civil society to actually continue to push forward its demands, whether it’s for Zimbabwe or any other range of issues. You need to increase the space for mass movements to actually come and present at those organizations their case and have those positions taken forward by the regional organizations. I think you have new institutions within those regional organizations that are beginning to reach out to civil society, but they have not yet created enough of a space where trade unions and others can have a voice within those types of organizations.

Sonali Kolhatkar: Let’s turn to the issue of the economy. As I mentioned, Zimbabwe is currently experiencing the worst rates of inflation in the world. And as a result, people are experiencing dire food shortages, water and electricity shortages as well. To what do you attribute this? Some say that Zimbabwe is essentially still reeling from the economic effects of the land reform program that Mugabe had imposed years ago, when the government basically took millions of hectares of land from white-owned farmers to redistribute them to the African majority. Do you concur with this analysis?

Emira Woods: I think there are several things at play, and clearly the land reform issue is one of them. It’s a critical issue, not just for Zimbabwe but for many countries within southern Africa, within the African continent. But, beyond that, we have to look at issues of the international financial institutions, the sanctions that were imposed on Zimbabwe. They have also had an effect and I think we have to look critically at those as well, at the impact of those sanctions on the economy. But we cannot really exclude the actions of the government and look at the decisions being made in terms of the government actually promoting its own interests, its own people at all costs, and maintain power at all costs, and making decisions that are absolutely detrimental for the economy.

Sonali Kolhatkar: Would you say that the land reform idea had noble intentions but was carried out in a poor way? Carried out to simply cement Mugabe’s and the ZANO-PF’s power?

Emira Woods: I think land reform is such a tripwire. It’s like the third rail, not just for Zimbabwe but for many countries. And I think it is difficult, no matter how it is implemented. In the case of Mugabe it was implemented in a way that I think increased tensions, increased violence. I think when you look at issues of race and class, and you try to bring questions of equity, in the case of land reform in Zimbabwe, you didn’t get either the equity or the redistribution that was wanted. Instead, you got a very small clique of basically friends and family of Mugabe benefiting from a land reform measure, and so it wasn’t really a fair and just process and it wasn’t implemented in a way that could bring the type of equity needed. So, in essence, land reform is critical, especially in a country emerging out of a race-based, class-based system that Zimbabwe was in up through 1980. And what is needed is still a redistribution of the land so that the majority can gain the assets of that land, can benefit from the resources of their land. But you don’t have that today. You have a very small group of those connected to Mugabe that have benefited, if at all, and it’s been at the detriment of the whole country. Let’s remember, Zimbabwe was the bread basket. Zimbabwe actually exported food to neighboring countries, and not only sustained its own people, but sustained those in surrounding countries. And that potential is still there, in spite of cyclical draughts and all the rest, that potential is very much there. And it is a responsible government that is needed to actually look at these questions of equitable distribution of the land, of productive means in which the land can be used so that you can have food security in a country that has the capacity to maintain it.

Sonali Kolhatkar: What is your opinion, finally, Emira, of the President’s current economic plan to nationalize Zimbabwe’s foreign farms, banks and mining operations as, apparently, an attempt to try to revive the economy? Could it make things worse or could it possibly make it better?

Emira Woods: I think under the current circumstances in Zimbabwe, it is likely to continue down a very dangerous slope until there is a responsible government in place. I think if there is a responsible government in place, the question of nationalizing resources, particularly in a country so rich in natural resources, making sure that those resources benefit the population, I think is critical not only for Zimbabwe, but for many other countries around the continent. We have, for much too long, had corporations that essentially raped the land, take the resources and export the produce, export the benefits without looking at the people. So, whether it is the oil companies in Nigeria or the diamond companies in South Africa, I mean, the list is so long. You know, those companies that are getting the coltan to put in the cell phones and computers out of the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the companies, multinational corporations, are absolutely controlling the resources and not looking at issues of developing the people on the land in which those resources lie. So, what is needed is a government that looks at capturing, whether through taxation or through nationalization or increased ownership, national ownership of those resources, what is needed is a change in the economic system for the long term that looks at the interests and needs of the African people.

Sonali Kolhatkar: Well, on that note, Emira Woods, it’s always a pleasure to have you on. Thank you so much for joining us today.

Emira Woods: Thank you so much for doing this segment.

Special thanks to Claudia Greyeyes for transcribing this interview.