The presidential elections in Zimbabwe

Its aftermath and the begin of another African tragedy

The farce of the latest election which brought Robert Mugabe his fifth six-years term in succession, should have disillusioned people who, in spite of the experiences of all the »liberating years«, were still believing in the slightest chance of democratic change in Africa.

Robert Mugabe reigns Zimbabwe in a quite dictatorial manner. The despot did, for instance, not have to consult any of his cabinet ministers or the Parliament before he made the controversial decision to deploy no less than a third of Zimbabwe's national army in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Mugabe lead the country that had been the bread basket of Africa and he inherited in 1980 into a mess of unemployment, hunger and rampant inflation. Like any other despot Mugabe denies responsibility for the results of the morass of his last 22 years of misrule. He rather accuses the minuscule white minority to be responsible for the existing chaos. By the way, South African these days are quite used to exactly that kind of argumentation: No matter what, it is always the guilt of apartheid. Especially since the last two years Mugabe is ruling Zimbabwe under an unofficial state of emergency, issuing decrees to over-ride the courts, firing judges and usurping the legislature. Not to mention the violence he uses against his political opposition or the increasing terror by his apologists towards white farmers. Even Nelson Mandela recently called the government in Harare a tyranny.

Shortly after this year's election came to its official end the reports from European Union and Commonwealth envoys there indicated that the presidential election had by no means been free and fair. According to British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw Robert Mugabe had even stolen the election. And that is hard to refute indeed. The Zimbabwean despot resorted to intimidation, violence and vote rigging to hold on power no matter what the price would be. A huge number of both black and white Zimbabwean citizens were excluded from voting. At least one million Zimbabweans living in South Africa and about 400.000 in Britain were simply disenfranchised. Various diplomats were detained by police, while usually no reason for the detentions were given. The opposition did by no means have equal opportunity with the government, voters did not have sufficient access to polling stations. Zimbabwean police, loyal to Mugabe, closed down voting booths and used clubs and even tear gas to disperse prospective voters especially on the chaotic third day of the presidential election. In Bulawayo a local election observer was assaulted at a polling station by a group of militant Mugabe supporters, who tied his hands behind his back and beat him with iron bars. Some female observers were stripped off their official T-shirts and beaten up. In Harare the police attacked voters and fired teargas at polling stations, prompting voters to flee. At the end only about half of the registered voters in Harare could actually vote. Also in Harare white farmers, who are generally regarded as supporters of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change, were charged with corruption for offering food to polling officials. They were released on bail of Z$50.000 each, and ordered to surrender their passports. More whites were arrested for the »illegal possession of communications equipment«, which means radio equipment tuned to police frequencies. 92% of voters at a polling station in Bulawayo South were turned away, even though their names were on the list of registered voters. Ruling party militants intimidated voters as they invaded polling stations in the Karoi area. In the rural town of Banket, 11 farmers were arrested for unknown reasons. They were being denied food or water. Even Amnesty International admitted hundreds of opposition and independent representatives had been detained monitoring the ballot, which was clearly a violation of democratic guidelines.

Not just African extremist regimes, like Nigeria for instance, but also the so-called democratic New South African Government led by Thabo Mbeki seem to be pretty unaware to all these facts. Nigerian Information Minister Jerry Gana stated: »The election can be regarded as the authentic expression of the popular will of the people of Zimbabwe.« The Southern African Development Community (SADC), to which both Zimbabwe and South Africa belong, agreed and declared that the election was a »true reflection of the will of the people of Zimbabwe«. Among various states who sent observers to Zimbabwe to monitor the election there, also South Africa was part of. Under the leadership of Sam Motsuenyane the so-called South African Observer Mission (SAOM) came to a remarkable conclusion that does not differ too significantly from extremist Nigerian views: »Based on our observations, it is the view of the SAOM that the outcome of the 2002 Zimbabwe presidential election should be considered legitimate.« The voting should be regarded as a »democratic process« and the SAOM was »hopeful that now that the people of Zimbabwe have spoken the world will respect their verdict«. Well, apparently the European Union and Commonwealth observers must have been either racist or unreliable. Of course, one could estimate that the SAOM's kind of statement might be not representative for the New South Africa's attitude. In fact it is. In her first statements the government declared the election »have proceeded without any significant conflict«. Shortly after the results of the »election« were published also South African Deputy President Jacob Zuma stated the voting was valid, free and fair and should be respected therefore. Zuma officially congratulated Mugabe on his victory over Movement for Democratic Change leader Morgan Tsvangirai. A few days later President Thabo Mbeki ended his silence and declared, the will of the people of Zimbabwe had prevailed and South Africa's primary objective in this period was to work together with the government of Zimbabwe. Ironically, Mbeki made his adventurous statement just when Mugabe enacted a tough new media law placing curbs on the independent and foreign Press, which forbids journalists from reporting on meetings of the cabinet or other government bodies.

It took only a couple of days after the election when a further white farmer was brutally killed. Remarkably just hours before Mbeki shook his hands with Mugabe at the inauguration ceremony in Harare. Terence Ford was dragged out of his car bound to a tree and shot through the head by government-backed squatters and »war veterans« on his farm 40 km west of Harare. Ford was the tenth white farmer to be killed since 2000 in Mugabe's campaign »to reverse colonial land ownership patterns«. Interesting enough Mugabe's sister Sabina has been eyeing the murder's farm since November 2000.

The verdicts made by the current South African officials contrasted sharply from basically all European Union and Commonwealth observers, who singled out the prevailing »climate of fear« in Zimbabwe. Tells one something about the New South African interpretation of democracy and of the expression of the will of people, doesn't it? On 19 March the ruling ANC told the Parliament Mugabe was a democrat who liberated his country from white rule - probably the reason why ANC member Ezra Sigwela called for solidarity with the Mugabe regime: »They are our comrades in arms.« Also Mbeki frequently mentioned he would never forget the contributions Zimbabwe had delivered in South Africa's »struggle for liberation«, the reason why the New South Africa would never contradict to Zimbabwe. Chief Whip of the ANC, Nosiviwe Mapisa-Nqakula endorsed: »We would be extremely naïve if we were to believe that Zimbabwe's future is not linked to ours.« Well, that is for sure. At least, one can realise now that the ruling coalition of South Africa, the ANC and the Communist Party, openly support despot Robert Mugabe. It is only a question of time when South Africa will finally be transformed into Azania characterised by Zimbabwean norm and standards. European and American investors and tourists, respectively, should keep that in mind.