Mugabe: The Anti-Mandela
Freedom fighters turned politicians often refuse to relinquish power once attained. Nelson Mandela’s greatest legacy was his ability to leave office when he felt he had done all he could to lead South Africa out of the darkness and when he felt the country was ready for new leadership.
Robert Mugabe, unfortunately, does not subscribe to this way of thinking.
You can call Mugabe a number of things — desperate, cruel, dictator, ruthless, a murderer, an oppressor, to name a few — but don’t call him stupid. Africans who understood the man knew he was never going to give up power, he was never going to sit back peacefully and allow others to govern his beloved Zimbabwe.
And here he is — he is Robert Gabriel Mugabe and he is president of Zimbabwe yet again. The only strange thing is that he won an uncontested election by a 9 to 1 margin… who did the other 10% vote for?
Who is Robert Mugabe and how did he come to hold sway over a country once known as the bread basket of Africa? He was born on February 21, 1924 in Kutama, Salisbury, Southern Rhodesia — or so it was then called. He first rose to prominence in the 1960s as the secretary general of the Zimbabwe African National Union (ZANU). His stated aim was to replace white minority-rule with a one-party Marxist regime. The liberation war ended in 1979, and Mugabe was hailed by most Africans as a hero. He won the general elections of 1980 and then became the first prime minister of Zimbabwe.
His policies have increasingly elicited domestic and international denunciations but none from my country of South Africa, his loyal neighbor. The South African government has remained so tight-lipped on the situation in Zimbabwe that rumors abound that he has information on the ANC that would embarrass the South African government — if it was ever made public. Perhaps this is an urban legend created in the absence of any real facts, but the continued policy of “quiet diplomacy” has baffled everyone for years.
Mugabe’s government, under the guise of “land reform,” expropriated thousands of white-owned farms. As the money, food reserves, and basic supplies began to dry up, the government simply printed hundreds of trillions of Zimbabwean dollars, triggering hyperinflation and food shortages throughout the country. Stories abound about how toilet paper became more expensive per sheet than the money printed and of syndicates buying up trillions of Zim Dollars to incinerate for the silver strip in them that was now worth more than the notes. This in turn triggered a mass exodus across the border into South Africa and has been seen as a major cause behind the outbreak of xenophobic violence that has so plagued South Africa for the past six weeks.
Mugabe, supported by his band of “war veterans” and political supporters, has been accused of harassing and intimidating political opponents, particularly members of the Movement for Democratic Change. Mugabe’s policies have been denounced in the West, by certain African leaders, and at home. He has described his critics as “born again colonialists,” and both he and his supporters claim Zimbabwe’s problems are the legacy of imperialism, aggravated by Western economic meddling and of course his arch enemy Tony Blair.
Mugabe lost the first round of the 2008 election to opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai, 43% to 48%, though neither candidate secured the 50% necessary to avoid a runoff election. Questions abound about how he lost a rigged election and I am certain someone, somewhere was answering some pretty embarrassing questions.
Early signs were that Mugabe might actually concede defeat and allow the country to change leadership. This of course was great cause for celebration down south where Thabo Mbeki’s policy of “Quiet Diplomacy” — so ridiculed the world over — seemed to have borne fruit. But alas, after weeks of flip-flopping and delaying it was announced that the votes had finally been counted and it was too close to call.
It was interesting to listen to Mugabe’s men explaining how the counting was still going on but they already knew a runoff was necessary. Kind of strange, don’t you think? And then, predictably, the violence erupted.
It was all depressingly predictable. There was never going to be a “free and fair” election; the opposition was never going to get the chance to embarrass the government or Mugabe again. Violence, murder intimidation, arrests for treason, harassment, and the prevention of rallies and canvassing began. It culminated with Mugabe’s war veterans preventing an MDC rally from taking place last week. Finally Morgan Tsvangirai, head of the Movement for Democratic Change, took refuge in the Dutch Embassy and declared that he would no longer contest the elections.
As expected, the elections went ahead amidst calls from world leaders that the elections be postponed and a settlement be reached.
Some African leaders even lent their voices to this call, but, once again, South Africa’s Thabo Mbeki, once the most influential leader in the region, remained silent. By the weekend, the results were made known (they sure counted fast this time!) and Robert Gabriel Mugabe was sworn in for a sixth term in office as president of Zimbabwe. The world can condemn him all they like; he simple doesn’t give a hoot.
The people will starve; they will continue to cross the border by the thousands, exasperating the problems we already face in South Africa. And Robert Mugabe and his generals will cling to power, pat themselves on the back, and blame the rest of the world for the problems that befall their country.
Anti-Mandela I wouldn’t call him.
As far as I remember Mandela was leader of the communist and extremely violent ANC.
If Africa wants to continue on in this sort of suicidal way, then why do the rest of the world seem determined to send money and aid. It doesn’t seem to be reaching the people that require it most, and in fact, seems to be a major factor in propping up their many repellent regimes. Perhaps we should leave them alone until such time as they are able to create stable, economically viable, self-sufficient and humane countries. Most, if not all, developed countries have had to do this on their own, why should Africa be any different?
The ANC was never a communist organisation, it certainly had links with the SACP (South African Communist Party) but that was probably borne out of “The enemy of my enemy is my friend” more than anything else.
On release from prison Nelson Mandela was instrumental in ensuring South Africa became a peaceful and capitalistic democracy…
Having lived through the 60s 70s and 80s let me assure you that although militant the ANC was anything but ‘extremely violent’ given the circumstances they were operating in.
Yet another shining example of a fallen British colony sinking into the mire from where the influence of a civilized, yes CIVILIZED society is removed.
I’ve read articles from news sources across the globe about this tyrants hold on power. It’s simply despicable. Most of the articles context went as such. “Can’t Mugabe be brought up on ‘crimes against humanity?”.
Since Zimbabwe reclaimed it’s “identity” from the good old Rhodesia back in the mid 60′s, it’s been a steady slide down.
The current leaders in Africa don’t want to admit they would do what Mugabe is doing if they can get away with it.
Absence of protest is endorsement of the event, and the same kind of kleptocracy Mugabe runs.
If you go to Zimbabwe today, you will find that the people is indeed still very much civilized. The way ordinary Zimbabweans cope with their terrible situation is incredibly impressing. You will see them stand in line on the supermarket to buy a loaf of bread (if the shelves are not all empty) accompanied by trolleys of money. This peaceful, well educated and beautiful people deserve so much better than the current leadership.
Because it is correct, of course, that Mugabe and his peers are not the least bit civilized. Let us hope the AU refuse to accept the elections, in spite of South African lobbyism. This will perhaps give Tsvangirai some more strenght in the negotiations with Mugabe. Zimbabwe has learned us one thing, though: Never be optimistic.
Dear Coffee Addict
- I don’t know your definition of communism, but I would normally call an organization that allies with communist parties and describes itself as located “on the left” communist.
- You don’t consider necklacing extremely violent?
On release from prison Nelson Mandela was instrumental in ensuring South Africa became a peaceful and capitalistic democracy…
Bit of a failure there then. South Africa is one of the most violent place on the planet. Highest amount of rapes per capita I believe. Then there is the recent killings of immigrants from other parts of Africa. Then there is the problem of one party rule.
Mandela was not a terrorist but ANC’s “military arm” led by his then wife certainly was a terrorist organisation.
At a publicized Cspan before Congress, a SA Chrisitan ministry testified of the atrocities the ANC were committing; they were told they were going to church and then given guns to fight the oppositon. If they refused necklacing was one of the alternatives. She also testified that the guns and weapons offered them were made in Russia.
Also most of the precious minerals that were used for the US space program were mined in SA. Did Russia want and use the ANC to try to contol this industy?
For instance Bill Cosby jumped on this band wagon and said he knew the ANC was backed by the communist and he didn’t care; he later apologized. Go figure a man like Mandela gets a hero welcome in this country. But then Putin get man of the year, Carter and the late Arafat gets a Nobel Prize, to name a few… Louis Farrakhun (terrorist connections) gets praised and whorshipped in (so-called) black Christian churches…etc………
It’s great to hear from people that have taken the time to get the information they need to see who is behind these protest.. this goes back to the same disgruntled groups and poor people in society. That’s how Lenin/Stalin came into power, and infiltration in the US unions such as UNMW, Auto Union.., they are using the blacks to stir up the old slavery and prejudice issues, an agent with the late KGB was the ones who stired up that AIDS was used as an experiment by the CIA and other agencies. Casto trained guerilla fighters in third world countries in Central America, South Afica, South Amercia; when do you think he got that kind of money. In the Arab/Israeli wars the big guns were made in Russia; Russia may not want a Mutual Assured Destruction why should they, when they can walk in our front door with words and KoolAid. Call me a McCarthyite but I am closer to the truth than some people who dismiss it entirely.
Why give the originally reported results any credit? The 48-to-43 lack of an outright majority already reflected a corrupt process. It’s most likely that Mugabe lost outright.
Mandela had power, exercised it constitutionally, then walked away when his term was finished. He is not perfect, but he could have kept hold of power or turned South Africa into a one-party state. He did not.
Americans need to realize how lucky we are that our first president was George Washington. He had power, exercised it constitutionally, then walked away.
Coffee Addict – please, old sport, don’t let the facts get in the way of your hero worship of Mandiba!
Where the hell has Nelson been these last 10 years – watching Comrade Bob take care of business.
Mandela is and always has been a terrorist and a Marxist, and he gave the orders for the Church Street bombing that killed (and targeted) civilians.
In his book,” Long Walk to Freedom”, Mandela says that he “signed off” with this act of terrorism. People should take a look at what Mandela “signed off” with while he was in prison – convicted for other acts of terrorism!
President P.W. Botha told Mandela way back in 1985, that he could be a free man as long as he did one thing: Publicly renounce violence. Mandela refused. That is why Mandela remained in prison until the appeaser F.W. de Klerk freed him unconditionally.
The bottom line is that Nelson Mandela never publicly renounced violence – and we should never forget that.
Nelson Mandela, South Africa’s first Black president, who is widely admired across the political spectrum more for his performance in office than for his beliefs, is now retired and thus free to express his long standing Marxist and often bizarre beliefs freely. He continually attacks U.S. “imperialism” and “arrogance” while voicing support for the likes of Libya, Iraq, and Cuba. This is not surprising. Mandela did support violence in the past – a fact that is largely forgotten or trivialized. Indeed, in 1961 he was the founder of Umkhonto we Siswe (“Spear of the People”), ANC’s terrorist arm, and never during his long years in prison did he condemn that organization’s acts of indiscriminate terrorism. Moreover, throughout his career Mandela has remained close to regimes actively supporting terrorism – the former Soviet Union, Libya and Cuba.
There were good reasons for such fears, not the least being the decades old cohabitation of Mandela’s African National Congress (ANC) with, and its penetration by, the Communist Party of South Africa (SACP), one of the world’s most committed Stalinist parties. There were also the ANC’s close links with the militantly leftist (and SACP dominated) trade union federation, COSATU. Importantly, despite the rhetoric about Black economic oppression under apartheid, the fact remains that a Black middle and indeed upper class had developed in South Africa, the interests of which had little to do with the traditional socialism advocated by the ANC throughout its history.
Mandela implemented an aggressive affirmative action policy once he took office – which slowed down the economy. His government established a criminal law code on the European model – abolition of the death penalty, excessive rights for accused criminals, etc., with destructive results. South Africa today competes with civil war-torn Colombia for the dubious distinction of being the world’s most crime-ridden country. Interpol’s International Crime Statistics say it all: in 1999 South Africa had 121 murders and 119 rapes per 100,000 inhabitants, compared with Colombia’s 69 and 6 respectively (and the United States’ 5 and 32). The trends are no more encouraging considering that in 1994 the world’s average murder rate was 5.5 per 100,000, compared to South Africa’s 45. In such circumstances, and with a slow justice system, which only produces a 10 percent conviction rate, South Africa has seen the rise of vigilante groups filling the void left by an incompetent (affirmative action, again – one third of policemen are functionally illiterate) and violent police – who between 1997 and 2000 killed 1,550 people, compared with 2,700 killed by the apartheid regime in 30 years.
The high crime rates, and a decline in educational standards, led to a massive emigration of White professionals to the United States, UK, Canada, and Australia. A 1998 poll of 11,000 skilled professionals suggested that 74 percent wanted to emigrate – with then-president Mandela responding with “Good riddance” to them. The problem is that not just professionals leave South Africa – major corporations also moved out, including mining giant Anglo American Co. and South African Breweries, both of which are now headquartered in London.
When it comes to African opinions at the UN, Pretoria prefers to side with the worst. Libya for chairmanship of the UN Human Rights Commission? Yes, said Pretoria, and so did the rest of the African bloc. Support Mugabe’s “right” to be invited to Lisbon for the EU-African Summit? Yes again, at the cost of billions of dollars in aid to Africa. Mandela’s ideological legacy seems to be alive in Pretoria’s international behavior. None of this should come as a surprise. The once dominant South African National Defense Force (SANDF) is now only a shadow of its past self, largely as a result of budget cuts and affirmative action, which put former ANC terrorist thugs and gang members in charge and led to a massive exodus of White and Coloured officers.
President Mbeki has a problem with his own ANC party, specifically with Nelson Mandela’s former wife, Winnie. Mrs. Mandela is the loose cannon of the ANC. A convicted torturer and felon and thoroughly corrupt, she remains a very popular figure with Black South African youths and was repeatedly elected to the ANC leadership. The disturbing thing here is not so much Winnie’s criminality, awful as it is, as the general decline of South Africa’s judiciary, which is becoming increasingly more “African” and less and less Western.
- Michael Radu, Front Page Magazine, February 6, 2003
Earth to Coffee Addict; Mandela was as a much a tyrant as Mugabe.
The only negative feeling any African leader has about Mugabe is envy.
Need I mention the disgusting Durban Racism conferences are held in SA for a reason – to bash Israel and the Jews.
Mandela? Feh!
Roark, that is BS. Mandela is no tyrant. While SA has gone downhill, it certainly is light years ahead of Zim.
Javelin, it took Mandela until last week to publicly speak out against Mugabe. That says a lot to me….