Share this
Mister Wong
Digg
Del.icio.us
Slashdot
Furl
Yahoo
Technorati
Newsvine
Googlize this
Blinklist
Facebook
Wikio
Hear this text
Print
E-mail
Tags
Zuma visit – mediation marvel or damp squib?
On 27 and 28 August 2009, South African President Jacob Zuma paid his first official visit to Zimbabwe since his inauguration on 9 May 2009. President Zuma hoped that his new approach to mediation would find a solution to the enduring impasse in the beleaguered country’s faltering Government of National Unity.
High expectations regarding the potential outcome of the visit were expressed on both the South African and the Zimbabwean side. As the focus shifts to the SADC summit, however, the reality points to mixed results that failed to live up to the harboured hopes.
President Zuma and his team were clear regarding their mission. He would no longer pursue former president Thabo Mbeki’s “quiet diplomacy” that brought few results and merely served to underline the perception that South Africa was supporting Mugabe’s repressive regime.
He would act in his capacity as president of South Africa, a country closely aligned to Zimbabwe and the country most affected by its neighbour’s economic meltdown.
President Zuma would also act in his capacity as chairperson of the Southern African Development Community (SADC).
As outgoing chairperson, he would need to apprise himself of the situation in Zimbabwe in order to present a report to SADC to serve as the basis for further discussions during the next summit to be held in September 2009.
Furthermore, South Africa, SADC and the African Union are the chief guarantors of the Zimbabwean Global Political Agreement (GPA) that led to the creation of the Government of National Unity (GNU), and therefore all these parties carry the responsibility for its success or failure.
President Zuma had resolved to be far more vocal regarding any "deviant" behaviour that fell outside of the precepts of the GNU and would be more "firm" in his insistence regarding improved co-operation between the feuding Zimbabwean parties, but at the same time maintaining that mediation remained the method to do so.
Expectations on the Zimbabwean side were divergent and, as expected, split along party lines.
Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai’s Movement for Democratic Change’s (MDC) spokesperson Nelson Chamisa had high hopes for a positive development and a resolution to the crisis. “We hope that his visit will unlock and unblock the political logjam in our country. We are very optimistic that he (Zuma) will make the best out of his visit”.
Three weeks before President Zuma’s visit, Tsvangirai met with him in South Africa to ask the South African president to intervene in order to resolve the outstanding matters relating to the GPA.
On 26 August 2009, MDC representatives in South Africa handed a memorandum to the ANC regarding the matter. In the view of the MDC, the progress in the unity government had come to a standstill as a result of several issues including:
The continued persecution and harassment of MDC members by Zanu-PF and the armed forces;
The ongoing stalling tactics of ZANU-PF in swearing in provincial governors;
The refusal to appoint a white commercial farmer, Roy Bennett, as deputy minister of Agriculture;
The campaign run by Zanu-PF to use legal means to prosecute MDC parliamentary members in order to reduce the MDC’s influence;
Mugabe’s unilateral reappointment of central bank Governor Gideon Gono and attorney-general Johannes Tomana;
The ongoing dispute over constitutional reform;
The appointment of members of constitutional commissions, particularly the media; and
The mandate of the ministries of Information Communication Technology and Transport.
The MDC had its hopes pinned on President Zuma and called on him to intervene while he was still acting as president of SADC.
Zimbabwean Economic Planning and Development Minister Elton Mangoma, MDC party member, claimed that the unity government also hoped to raise an additional US$50 million in credit from South Africa during President Zuma’s visit.
In contrast, Robert Mugabe’s spokesperson George Charamba downplayed the importance of the South African president’s trip, announcing to the state media that President Zuma was merely addressing the 99th annual Harare Agricultural Show while denying that he would also try to resolve the Zanu-PF-MDC impasse.
Despite Zanu-PF denials, President Zuma did indeed meet with the three Zimbabwean leaders, namely President Robert Mugabe, Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai and his deputy Arthur Mutambara, as a group as well as individually to discuss the progress of the NGU.
Allegedly, Tsvangirai presented President Zuma with a dossier of violations of the GPA by Zanu-PF while Mugabe, in turn, pointed a finger at Tsvangirai and the MDC for not having succeeded in having Western sanctions lifted.
According to an IRIN report, a senior MDC official, who preferred to remain anonymous, claimed that Zuma did extract limited concessions from Mugabe that certain provisions of the coalition deal would be implemented before the SADC summit, which was scheduled to start on 7 September 2009.
Further sources claimed that Jacob Zuma told Mugabe to be more flexible and that Mugabe was surprised by his frank assessment of the problems.
Yet another source stated that Mugabe was told in no uncertain terms that the region could not continue to shield him.
In short – reportedly a far tougher visit for President Mugabe, but with little actual proof, as the discussions were held behind closed doors.
According to South African officials, Zuma had managed to obtain consensus and a commitment from all parties that the implementation of the agreement would happen at a more rapid pace.
President Mugabe, reportedly, expressed his willingness to proceed, but with the proviso that Tsvangirai must actively and publicly campaign to have Western sanctions against Mugabe and his party removed.
In a public speech at the agricultural show, President Zuma called on donors to provide Zimbabwe with development aid to revive the country’s economy and said that sanctions and other measures holding back the economic recovery of the country needed to be dispensed with.
He called for solutions to be found so that the GPA could be implemented speedily to ensure that the time needed for Zimbabwe to recover was as brief as possible; as well as serving to build confidence in the fragile unity government.
Zuma refrained from making any direct comment regarding the disastrous Zimbabwean land reform programme, but stated that it was of critical importance that the country guarantees food security and self-reliance, and underlined that agriculture was the backbone of the economy in the SADC region.
Zuma returned with an optimistic report regarding the Zimbabwean unity government, stating that the worst of the country’s problems were behind it. Zuma spoke about “significant progress” that had been made and claimed that the remaining issues were not insurmountable and that mediation would bring about the desired result.
Zuma reported that the Zimbabwean leaders recognised the need to overcome their differences and that they were committed to this process and that all had agreed that the pace needed to be stepped up.
Although at a glance, President Zuma’s public speech refrained from any harsh criticism and played to President Mugabe’s ultimatum regarding sanctions, he did openly recognise that there were problems with the unity government and publicly called on all parties to speed up negotiations to find solutions to the areas in dispute so that the country’s recovery could take place in the shortest possible time.
Zuma further stressed the need for respect of democracy and human rights, which could be interpreted as a criticism of Mugabe. Although low-key and conciliatory, President Zuma did manage to distance himself marginally from former president Thabo Mbeki’s quiet diplomacy by taking a slightly more direct and firm stance.
Zuma also appeared to have won some goodwill and confidence from the different sides, which served to somewhat calm tensions in preparation for the September SADC summit.
In terms of concrete results, however, President Zuma achieved little. Tensions persist and the stalemate remains firmly in place. President Zuma’s more firm tone appears to have escaped Zanu-PF, which hailed him for his strength in resisting the West’s demands to “crack the whip” and get Mugabe in line.
President Zuma, like his SADC counterparts, continues to view Zimbabwe with a degree of optimism. Some small gains in terms of the economy have been seen – hyper-inflation has been curbed and the shelves are once more stocked with products, yet parties are still wrangling with the same issues as before. Zanu-PF’s dedication to the land reform process remains deficient.
At the agricultural show, Mugabe dismissed the outstanding issues as mere “teething problems”.
Mugabe faces increasing pressure from within his party not to make any further compromises that may dilute its hold on power. Zanu-PF has continued to focus its criticism of MDC efforts on the fact that international sanctions have not been lifted, and Mugabe is firm in his refusal to make any further concessions unless Tsvangirai turns this around.
A further Zanu-PF gripe has been private radio stations being critical of Mugabe operating from outside Zimbabwe and the finger has been pointed at the MDC to curb its activities.
Both ultimatums set by Mugabe as a prerequisite for the unity government to move forward are to a large degree outside of the abilities of the MDC to rectify – small wonder that President Zuma has thrown his weight behind the call to have sanctions lifted in an attempt to defuse this insurmountable obstacle.
Zanu-PF is clearly unwilling to make any changes to its deplorable human rights history and new reports have shown a surge in human rights abuses by soldiers loyal to Mugabe as well as renewed violent attacks against civilians by the army.
The balance of power remains firmly in favour of Mugabe, with all senior ministries remaining under Zanu-PF control including the ministries of Defence, Justice, State Security and Foreign Affairs as well as co-chairing Home Affairs.
All rumours of imminent changes designed to move the GPA forward have, similarly, come to nought.
With the Zuma visit at an end, the issue now moves to SADC and its September summit. Both Zimbabwean leaders have plans to submit their case to the 14-nation bloc.
President Mugabe will once again harp on sanctions as being at the heart of the impasse while Morgan Tsvangirai will recall SADC’s responsibilities in ensuring that the political agreement that it had demanded, be implemented to the full.
The fact that President Zuma will hand over the chairmanship of SADC to Joseph Kabila, President of the Democratic Republic of Congo and staunch Mugabe supporter, will not be to Tsvangirai’s advantage.
SADC itself is in a precarious position: it is bound to a six-month review of the implementation of the global political agreement, but all are aware of the large number of outstanding issues and Mugabe’s refusal to budge. A review would expose just how far the unity government has failed and would require action from SADC – a difficult requirement to meet.
In all likelihood, SADC will also focus on the question of sanctions as the main bugbear and will ask South Africa, as the only member of SADC in the G20, to intervene to have sanctions lifted.
An exaggerated focus on the issue of sanctions may serve to deflect the attention from the real issues and the odds are once again stacked against Morgan Tsvangirai.
As further illustration of Zanu-PF’s lack of commitment to real change, it was reported on 2 September 2009 that Zimbabwe had pulled out of the SADC Tribunal, claiming that the regional court has not been constituted properly and that it would no longer take part in, or respect, any Tribunal decisions.
Zimbabwe's decision was obviously motivated by the fear of having its land programme affected.
The withdrawal of Zimbabwe from the SADC jurisdiction came as a serious blow to 79 white commercial farmers who had won their cases in the regional court blocking the Zimbabwean government from acquiring their farms.
The Zimbabwean government now says any decisions taken by the tribunal are null and void. It withdrew on the grounds that two-thirds of SADC’s members have not ratified the establishment of the court, but it is generally accepted that it was the result of its dissatisfaction with the decision.
Zimbabwe had, in fact, previously demonstrated its support for the Tribunal by seconding a Zimbabwean judge, Justice Guvava, to be one of the judges representing Zimbabwe within the SADC Tribunal, making a mockery of the grounds it is now using to dismiss its legitimacy. The SADC treaty itself provides for a tribunal so it would be difficult to explain how Zimbabwe could withdraw from the Tribunal but not the grouping itself.
Developments at the SADC summit should bring more clarity regarding whether SADC members are willing to face up to this recent Zimbabwean defiance or whether they will continue to ignore realities and join President Mugabe in using sanctions as a smokescreen for what is really ailing the unity government.
As a positive development, on 28 August 2009, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) announced a loan of US$400m to Zimbabwe, with an additional US$110m scheduled for release to aid the country in combating the effects of the global recession and to boost the country’s economic revival programme.
The IMF decision is expected to galvanise other multilateral institutions to provide Zimbabwe with other lines of credit, which could go a long way towards defusing the sanctions issue.
The IMF released the funds to the Zimbabwean Central Bank reportedly upon the condition that it be used to top up the country’s foreign currency reserves.
The funds could, however, be diverted in the usual style of Reserve Bank Governor Gideon Gono, to the benefit of the Mugabe regime. Once again the MDC is dealt a poor hand with MDC Finance minister Tendai Biti having the task of ensuring that the money is used as intended by the IMF.
The grant is also unlikely to motivate Mugabe and Zanu-PF to let the sanctions matter slide, as the limitations on Mugabe and 150 of his closest collaborators remain in place and are unlikely to be removed unless the Zimbabwean government shows more commitment to human rights and political change.
The European Union has also confirmed that more negotiations would have to take place before it would be willing to lift its sanctions, with the exception of humanitarian aid.
For its part, South Africa has thrown its weight behind an economic recovery in Zimbabwe – understandably so as the country has borne the brunt of the Zimbabwean meltdown. On 27 August 2009, the South African Minister of Labour Membathisi Mdladlana and Zimbabwe’s Minister of Labour and Social Welfare Paurina Mpariwa signed a four-year agreement regulating labour migration.
Visas remain scrapped to allow Zimbabweans to freely enter South Africa and the two countries have signed an Agricultural Memorandum of Understanding.
South Africa clearly plays a vital role in manipulating events in Zimbabwe. Admittedly, President Zuma’s influence on President Mugabe remains limited. His efforts at mediation could be dismissed as being ineffectual yet within the constraints of the situation, little more could have been done which would not have serious ramifications in terms of renewed violence or hardship for the Zimbabwean population.
Under the circumstances, President Zuma, most probably, achieved as much as he could have and his conciliatory and inclusive style certainly had a positive impact on defusing the very tense situation.
The next hurdle is the SADC summit of 7 and 8 September 2009 which, while serving as compass point for the embattled Zimbabwe, is unlikely to bring about any radical change to this complex situation.
President Zuma was accompanied by International Relations Minister Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, Performance Monitoring Minister in the Presidency, Collins Chabane, Presidential Advisor Charles Nqakula and Ambassador Lindiwe Zulu.
Southern African Development Community.
The Global Political Agreement (GPA) signed on 15 September 2008 was designed to ease political tensions in Zimbabwe. This culminated in a 2009 presidential election run-off between the ruling Zanu-PF’s Robert Mugabe and the Movement for Democratic change (MDC) leader, Morgan Tsvangirai. The election took place amid widespread violence and widespread reports of electoral irregularities.
