Zimbabwe Elections

[BruceVC]

Sup All

 

I'm sure some of you are aware that Zimbabwe is going through an election at the moment. The last 3 elections haven't been free and fair and the same political party, Zanu-PF, and the same despotic leader Robert Mugabe has been in power for 33 years (seriously how can you have the same  person in power for 33 years)

 

Anyway this current sham election in Zim highlights one of the biggest issues that face Africa, that issue is where certain countries governments lack the political and democratic electoral credibility to say they are legitimate rulers of a country. So the result of that is a lack of investment and there economies don't grow. And you can understand this as why would a business or government want to make serious investments in a country where there  is political uncertainty and political illegitimacy?

 

So then you have organisations like the African Union trying to rubberstamp elections in Zim, already they are saying "these elections have been free and fair" because they think somehow this will change the reality. Just one example why these elections in Zim cannot be seen as free and fair is that the voters role was only released one day before the election !!!. How can you expect an opposition party to review the voting role in 1 day? Just from the initial assessment of the voting role there have been close to 1 million names on it of people who are dead so who knows the other irregularities that will be uncovered when a proper analysis is done.

 

So what does this mean for South Africa and the neighbours of Zimbabwe, these countries are desperate to extricate themselves out of the economic crisis that the last 12 years has created, they want the Zim economy to recover as many countries in the region have had to absorb the economic and political refugee's from Zim. In South Africa we have 1 million Zimbabweans living here. The Zimbabwean people are very educated and hard working but we have our own issues around unemployment and we can't have thousands of foreigners living on our social services as already our system is taking strain. So unless the Zim opposition party wins, The MDC, the Zim economy won't be recovering and the people of Zimbabwe will have to endure another 4 years of hardships and lack of real investment.

 

It never ceases to amaze why the AU can't see that by endorsing false elections you don't help the situation at all

Edited August 1, 2013 by BruceVC

[Oerwinde]

I heard even some people who were on the voters roll were turned away from being able to vote for not being registered, almost all of them MDC supporters.

[Guard Dog]

Mugabe pays off the right people in the AU from what I've read. But the truth of the matter is, even if he didn't the AU, like every other international organization, is not about solving problems but maintaining the status quo. If they thought the Zanu party would respect a fair election and peaceably leave power they might be more inclined to intercede politically. But they would rather have a dictator than civil war.

Edited August 1, 2013 by Guard Dog

[BruceVC]

I heard even some people who were on the voters roll were turned away from being able to vote for not being registered, almost all of them MDC supporters.

 

That's correct, this is actually "normal" for a Zim election. The Zimbabwean people also have to contend with political intimidation. But this should only effect maybe 5 % of the total vote. But the fraudulent voting role for me is the main reason why this election is a complete joke and as you mentioned this effects primarily MDC voters

[Oerwinde]

 

I heard even some people who were on the voters roll were turned away from being able to vote for not being registered, almost all of them MDC supporters.

 

 

That's correct, this is actually "normal" for a Zim election. The Zimbabwean people also have to contend with political intimidation. But this should only effect maybe 5 % of the total vote. But the fraudulent voting role for me is the main reason why this election is a complete joke and as you mentioned this effects primarily MDC voters

I saw a documentary on Mugabe recently that outlined some of the tactics he used in the last election, at least he isnt employing gangs of teenagers to rape women who dont support him this time... that we know of.

 

Its such a shame, if he had stepped down in the 90s he would have been remembered much differently than a desperate dictator.

[Walsingham]

It is sad. I guess the only punishment he will receive is being remembered as a dingbat. Not much of a ****ing legacy, trashing your own country.

[Gorth]

Wasn't there something about people not finding their names on lists and an unseemly number of dead people who had risen from their graves to vote one last time for Mugabe?

 

Never underestimate the power of election voodoo.

[Walsingham]

I'll always remember the story told me regarding an English officer brought in to audit a list of war widows. One women objected so strongly to being taken off it that she brought in her husband to protest!

[Rostere]

If I'm allowed to branch out a bit without going entirely off topic, what do you all think about Namibia? They seem to be doing rather well.

 

According to Wikipedia, Bloomberg lists Namibia as the top emerging market economy in Africa. They score high on the Press Freedom index, highest in Africa and globally just slightly above Canada and Belgium. Civil liberties and political rights seem to be doing fairly well.

 

In which ways can Zimbabwe, Namibia and Botswana be compared?

[BruceVC]

If I'm allowed to branch out a bit without going entirely off topic, what do you all think about Namibia? They seem to be doing rather well.

 

According to Wikipedia, Bloomberg lists Namibia as the top emerging market economy in Africa. They score high on the Press Freedom index, highest in Africa and globally just slightly above Canada and Belgium. Civil liberties and political rights seem to be doing fairly well.

 

In which ways can Zimbabwe, Namibia and Botswana be compared?

You've raised a good point and worth discussing. Namibia and Botswana are in a different league to Zimbabwe. In fact they are examples of the future of Africa and how it can achieve its full potential both economically and socially. The points you mentioned are important from an African perspective as they encourage foreign investment and this is something that all countries in Africa need.

 

Another main difference between those countries and Zim is that those countries governments haven't stayed in power by being anti-Western and anti-European. In fact they have generally made the right decisions for there countries not for political expediency but rather what would benefit them in the long term economically. In Africa certain social challengers are ubiquitous, like the redistribution of more land to black Africans. But how African governments handle these issues are very important to how the world perceives those governments. Namibia and Botswana haven't made local Europeans feel unwelcome and have consistently positioned there importance in rebuilding and improving there respective economies.

 

So in summary both Namibia and Botswana are doing really well for themselves and in my opinion are exactly how certain other African countries should be governing themselves

[BruceVC]

So Robert Mugabe was sworn in for another 5 years as the president of Zimbabwe yesterday. Another fraudulent election, another failure of the AU to declare that they wouldn't accept the result. The good news is that the EU and the USA have refused to drop the targeted sanctions so the economic situation won't improve and this is important to show that African countries need to have free and fair elections to achieve credibility in order to ensure foreign investment.

 

What was very controversial and annoying was during Mugabe's inauguration speech he attacked gay people and called Homosexuality a " filthy disease".  And what made these comments worse were the thousands of supporters cheering  when he made these comments. Nice one Zimbabwe in the movement towards equality and clearly showing the world you don't accept bigotry even though you suffered under Colonialism

 

http://www.zimbabwesituation.com/news/mugabe-anti-west-anti-gay-rant-inauguration/

 

 

[HoonDing]

Are there still 1,000,000,000 dollar bills in Zimbabwe?

Edited August 23, 2013 by Drudanae

[HoonDing]

Are there still 100,000,000,000,000 dollar bills in Zimbabwe?

[Walsingham]

As much as I agree with your sentiment I disagree with your analysis. Although it was illuminating by way of contrast.

 

1. Foreign investment opportunities are poor worldwide. Even a credible Zimbabwean government would not receive significant inward investment.

2. Mugabe is not just Mugabe, he is a cabal of family members and corrupt hangers on. These people are content merely to enjoy control. A lack of foreign investment allows them GREATER control of the local economy, because they are the only game in town.

3. The AU has bigger fish to fry, and extremely limited capability to do anything about them. Here I refer to Mali, Sudan, and Somalia.

4. Interventionist First World nations are likewise overwhelmed, and more interested in other areas.

 

It is clearly upsetting for South Africa, which must wish to transition towards a local area of co-development and trade. But to do this it HAS to forget a pan-African Union and concentrate all its efforts on a local union with similar local interests.

[BruceVC]

 

 

 

Are there still 1,000,000,000 dollar bills in Zimbabwe?

 

Probably

 

As much as I agree with your sentiment I disagree with your analysis. Although it was illuminating by way of contrast.

 

1. Foreign investment opportunities are poor worldwide. Even a credible Zimbabwean government would not receive significant inward investment.

2. Mugabe is not just Mugabe, he is a cabal of family members and corrupt hangers on. These people are content merely to enjoy control. A lack of foreign investment allows them GREATER control of the local economy, because they are the only game in town.

3. The AU has bigger fish to fry, and extremely limited capability to do anything about them. Here I refer to Mali, Sudan, and Somalia.

4. Interventionist First World nations are likewise overwhelmed, and more interested in other areas.

 

It is clearly upsetting for South Africa, which must wish to transition towards a local area of co-development and trade. But to do this it HAS to forget a pan-African Union and concentrate all its efforts on a local union with similar local interests.

 

You make some good points and I would agree with you only if the concept of a real AU doesn't make sense or is not applicable

 

But since at the moment the world and the African continent does believe in this group of countries similar to the EU and it is "recognised" as the authoritative political body for Africa  any systemic issues that undermine this union need to be highlighted.

 

So now what does this blatant homophobia mean for the AU? Well the AU claims to believe in the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights. Your sexual orientation is protected in the bill. So how can a member country be in such disregard for one of the basic tenants of what the AU is suppose to stand for?

 

Just the fact that Mugabe can make these statements without condemnation from his neighbours highlights the inconsistency and ineffectiveness of the AU to enforce what it says it believes. This therefore goes towards the credibility of the AU

 

Can you imagine what would happen within the EU if David Cameron went in front of Parliament and said " homosexuality is a filthy disease" . He would be reprimanded on an unprecedented level

 

Africa will never achieve it full potential if  it can't enforce what it says it believes in on a social and political level

Edited August 23, 2013 by BruceVC

[Walsingham]

Well, *cough*, all nations tend to make legal commitments to things long before they mean them. I don't think it's the biggest issue from an administration that uses rape to intimidate its opponents. And until the man in the street feels homophobia is wrong, there's no point trying to use the issue to galvanise opinion against Mugabe.

 

Bear in mind that I don't think the EU makes any bloody sense either. For pretty much identical reasons. It's not geographically, economically or culturally consistent enough to warrant a political or monetary unification. We don't act together on almost anything, since the end of the Cold War. 

 

And absolutely nothing I've heard or read gives me any indication that the AU is seen as anything more than a means of excusing action through consensus.

 

~

 

I'm now trying to work out why I'm applying seemingly different rules to that whole thing about Putin earlier.

Edited August 23, 2013 by Walsingham

[Nepenthe]

Mugabe pays off the right people in the AU from what I've read. But the truth of the matter is, even if he didn't the AU, like every other international organization, is not about solving problems but maintaining the status quo. If they thought the Zanu party would respect a fair election and peaceably leave power they might be more inclined to intercede politically. But they would rather have a dictator than civil war.

Well, there's the EU which isn't about maintaining the status quo, it's about ****ing **** up.

[BruceVC]

Well, *cough*, all nations tend to make legal commitments to things long before they mean them. I don't think it's the biggest issue from an administration that uses rape to intimidate its opponents. And until the man in the street feels homophobia is wrong, there's no point trying to use the issue to galvanise opinion against Mugabe.

 

Bear in mind that I don't think the EU makes any bloody sense either. For pretty much identical reasons. It's not geographically, economically or culturally consistent enough to warrant a political or monetary unification. We don't act together on almost anything, since the end of the Cold War. 

 

And absolutely nothing I've heard or read gives me any indication that the AU is seen as anything more than a means of excusing action through consensus.

 

~

 

I'm now trying to work out why I'm applying seemingly different rules to that whole thing about Putin earlier.

 

But Walsie I think you missing the point

 

If 80 % of the people in the UK don't like the thought or believe in paying Tax that is irrelevant. Taxes need to be gathered from citizens as its part of the legal framework of the country and is required to ensure a country can be governed and successfully financially managed

 

Certain African leaders claim that the  world doesn't take them seriously or don't respect there autonomy. But the world doesn't take Africa as seriously as it could as there are far to many inconsistencies and contradictions to how Africa implements its own policies. Its got nothing to do with the fact that 60 % of Zimbabweans are hypothetically homophobic, this is about a charter that African countries agree to follow and then fail to enforce.

 

Why would you invest in a country that considers your sexual orientation a "vile disease".

 

What Mugabe is doing is just harming the economic recovery of Zimbabwe

[Walsingham]

I think that you and I both know a dozen examples of much more serious legislative issues which cause international investors to baulk at investing in Africa.

 

It's things like a 'heath inspector' turning up, citing some made up regulation about windows in your factory and demanding a fine of £300,000 to resolve the issues via the fast track, or no-one will be allowed to return to work.

 

It's things like supplies of material being held at the docks for inspection, unless and until you finagle the under-minister or harbour master.

 

When people denigrate duty and discipline, or patriotism, this is the kind of crap I think of.

[BruceVC]

I think that you and I both know a dozen examples of much more serious legislative issues which cause international investors to baulk at investing in Africa.

 

It's things like a 'heath inspector' turning up, citing some made up regulation about windows in your factory and demanding a fine of £300,000 to resolve the issues via the fast track, or no-one will be allowed to return to work.

 

It's things like supplies of material being held at the docks for inspection, unless and until you finagle the under-minister or harbour master.

 

When people denigrate duty and discipline, or patriotism, this is the kind of crap I think of.

 

There are other factors that are more important from an investment perspective. But don't underestimate the harm that a governments policies can make in Africa to economic growth. I accept that bribery is almost a way of life in certain industries but I don't have to accept  the public and unnecessary statements by African leaders that undermine the overall view of the continent as a viable investment opportunity. Remember its not just Mugabe's bigotry, he also wants to implement what he calls "Indigenisation". Basically every foreign owned business will be forced to sell 51% of the company to the Zimbabwean government. These steps are only going to slow the economic growth down.

http://zimbabweelection.com/2013/08/07/ffze-economists-warn-mugabe-indigenisation-will-scare-off-foreign-investors/

 

 

 

[Walsingham]

Giving a controlling stake of a company to the Zimbabwean government strikes me as a quite literally insane plan.

 

Are there any companies who have played ball under those circumstances?

[BruceVC]

Yes, the mining industry has already been forced to sell. This new step will now apply to any company and yes its further economic suicide for a country that needs foreign investment

[Walsingham]

Yes, the mining industry has already been forced to sell. This new step will now apply to any company and yes its further economic suicide for a country that needs foreign investment

 

As I said, the country might need economic investment, but the regime just needs to retain control. Impoverishment positively aids that, unless and until some external factor intervenes.

 

EDIT: To clarify a little, I don't believe this is what Mugabe et al. sit around telling themselves. I expect they see themselves as the true believers, resisting foreign domination. their absolute control equates to Zimbabwean freedom, national freedom trumps the prosperity of people they never meet. 

 

I point this out by way of observing that any rule can be taken too far. Our own masters in the UK are so keen on economic prosperity that they will sacrifice just about any independence we've accrued.

Edited August 25, 2013 by Walsingham