PDA

View Full Version : Since I ain't got much new to say


Stuart
11-24-2005, 11:32 AM
I'll publish something old. A while back I managed to get myself published a in our city paper. I was pretty proud of myself (being only 21 and all) and so I wrote a few more. They also made it in, and when the person who got me into journalism (well, into writing for publication) went independent online, I followed. I don't agree with her most of the time, or most of the inhabitants of the new site, but I find it enjoyable to make myself heard to thousands of people, for some reason. Perhaps it is because I can see myself possibly, maybe, influencing people's decisions or lives. Maybe it's hubris. Who cares anyway?

Anyway, since I saw EA's thread asking for people to open up, I thought that I didn't have too much current to say. So I thought I might republish one of my old pieces. Hopefully you enjoy.

(By the by, the link to the article itself, which will have working hyperlinks (me being too lazy to actually repeat myself fully) is here (http://margokingston.typepad.com/harry_version_2/2005/07/mugabes_repress.html#more)

Just about everyone has heard of the growing repression that is sweeping Zimbabwe at the behest of its leader, Robert Mugabe. Articles here and here point out the disastrous consequences Zanu-PF’s leadership is having on the country.

Apart from multiple claims of electoral fraud and intimidation, the deliberate and systematic destruction of the opposition and any residual minority rights, Mugabe’s latest step has left hundreds of thousands of people without homes, with the number growing day by day.

Mugabe, in power since 1980, has said he is pleased with the results of the month-old relocation campaign he named Murambatsvina, which means "drive out the rubbish" in the Shona language. So far, about 400,000 people have fled after their homes were bulldozed or burned. The purpose of this exercise is to reverse 4000 years of human history by moving people out of the cities and back onto the land in greater numbers, even if the land is not fertile or the people do not have the agricultural or pastoral skills to survive on the land.

Mugabe has presided over years of economic mismanagement, neglect, oppression and incompetence in Zimbabwe, and he is now adding intent to his actions in attempting to completely destroy what was once a reasonably prosperous nation.

With the systemic intimidation of white farmers with the intent to remove them from their land though oppression and the use of veterans from the bush war with the former Rhodesian government, he has made his intent clear. Mugabe will sacrifice the welfare and even the lives of his own citizens en masse for political gain.

With the socialist system of apportionment of land into uneconomic plots, subsistence farming has become the norm on many of these former productive farms, causing a food shortage in a country once a major exporter of high quality surplus agricultural and pastoral produce.

Add to this the repression of opposition political forces and ethnic/religious minorities, mainly involving the Ndebele people and Christians, and you have a regime that is a world class human rights abuser.

Along with this urban to countryside forced migration has come a change in the law making it harder than ever for independent news and media in Zimbabwe to function and a fair and proper account to be shown to the world of the tragedy happening in Zimbabwe. The passing of the The Criminal Law (Codification and Reform) Bill increases significantly the penalties for the following actions:

* inciting or promoting public disorder or public violence or endangering public safety,

* adversely affecting the defence or economic interests of Zimbabwe,

* undermining public confidence in a law enforcement agency, the Prison Service or the Defence Forces of Zimbabwe,

* interfering with, disrupting or interrupting any essential service, or

* making an abusive, indecent, obscene or false statement about the President, also in his official or personal capacity.

An offence will still have been committed even if the publication or communication does not result in any of the envisaged scenarios. Some of these crimes can carry penalties for up to 20 years in jail. And it is the regime's corrupt and partisan courts and law enforcement officials who decide these cases. Wonderful country, isn’t it? Now this is true repression. All you Woomera gulag prophets eat your hearts out.

By jailing dissidents and causing poverty and dislocation Mugabe can increase his hold upon the Zimbabwean people by making them reliant on handouts and aid, and controlling the distribution of that aid.

On Lateline on Tuesday night, an aid worker said:

'People would be on the run and then they're going to be subjected to chronic poverty, they're going to survive on handouts. He's going to control the distribution channels of food handouts and with this dependency he's only going to be able to strengthen his ability to manipulate humanitarian assistance for political gain.'

A person who would cause the repression, suffering and death of untold hundreds of thousands of his own people in a deliberate campaign to consolidate his own power should be removed.

The director of HABITAT, the UN housing agency, has been sent to Zimbabwe to ‘assess’ the situation. A good start, but limited in and by itself due to the small amount of power exercisable by the UN, both in general and in particular to Zimbabwe. Sanctions would only hurt the crippled nation even more, where rampant inflation due to a lack of exports and the unavailability of essential items already hurts those most vulnerable.

Increased foreign aid only consolidates Mugabe’s power as he oversees and directs its distribution though controlling the mechanisms of the state. Anyone who objects to his rule can have their handouts cut. Rampant electoral fraud and repression have shown that the democratic systems in place are at best a shadow of a true representative government of the people.

Zimbabwe’s neighbours have been reticent for years to take Zimbabwe to task over its abuses of human rights, especially its larger and richer neighbour, South Africa. Jack Straw recently argued this point, saying it was hard to put diplomatic pressure on Zimbabwe due to those exact reasons.

So what can be done, really? Inspiration came from that paragon of hyperactivity and hyperbole, the Opposition Foreign Relations Spokesperson, Kevin Rudd, in a Lateline interview. Rudd said:

'On the Zimbabwe question, when we have Mr Howard and Mr Downer championing themselves as lines of democracy in the Middle East at the moment, where is there strategy for democracy in Zimbabwe? I've heard complete silence from the Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister on that. We are currently members of the Human Rights Commission in Geneva. I would have thought at a bare minimum, we would have had a resolution quick-smart up to the Human Rights Commission in Geneva calling for fresh elections in Zimbabwe, but silence on that.'

Fair call in one way. The government does need a proper strategy on Zimbabwe that will help the people of that country. I would have liked Rudd to elaborate on a plan past going and complaining to a committee, a UN committee at that, but nothing was forthcoming.

However, in mentioning democracy in the Middle East, Rudd bought fourth an idea. Democracy in the Middle East, and the increasing movements in many countries towards a (better) functioning democracy (Iraq, Lebanon, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and even Syria) was a consequence of the liberation of Iraq, no matter how much the anti war crew go on about historical inevitability or media brought democracy or any other inanity.

What if there was military action taken in Zimbabwe for the specific purpose to remove Mugabe and Zanu-PF, holding true and free elections and using the planned aid money to rebuild the economy shattered by years of mismanagement and deliberate destruction? On human rights grounds alone the removal of Mugabe and Zanu-PF would be justified.

And perhaps democracy, true democracy untainted by corruption of officials and bureaucrats, would take place, the aid given would not be used for monetary or political gain as it is at the moment and Zimbabwe might be able to rise beyond its present tragedy. It would require significant support, but who would say it wasn’t for a good cause?

And it should be done before the situation turns into a full blown humanitarian crisis, not afterwards.

By the by, if you guys don't know, I am from Australia, so some of the things I mention may be unfamiliar.

Woomera is one of the detention centres for illegal/unauthorised refugees in Australia. Some of the human rights people call it a gulag (yeah right) and some conspiracy theorists say that Woomera and the others will be used to hold political dissenters when the fascist jackboots of our current Prime Minister, John Howard, start kicking people.

Kevin Rudd is our Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs. That means his party isn't in government, but it is his job to basically show up his opposition Foreign Affairs Minister in the government, come up with ideas, and cause a shitfight if there are political points in it.

Any other questions, just ask. If anyone replies, that is ;)

Asmodeus
11-24-2005, 01:26 PM
Good read Stu.

Are you referring to a collective "we" in relation that "we" need to help this impoverished country, or one country in particular?

Stuart
11-24-2005, 01:45 PM
Good read Stu.

Are you referring to a collective "we" in relation that "we" need to help this impoverished country, or one country in particular?

The only 'we' mentioned was actually a quote. I am going back to fix it up and make it all clear.

But the only 'we' I would use would be a 'Coalition of the Just' or some such term to name a group of nations with both the militaristic capability, the political will and strength to see it though (unlike this hand wringing over Iraq) and the intent to free the people of Zimbabwe from their dickhead overlords, and give them a chance to choose a new direction.

It should remove ZANU-PF, hold most of the high command in both the political and military structures for war crimes trials or for crimes against humanity (hell, for murder, rape, famine, disease, indeed, there probably are few crimes they haven't committed), rebuild the shattered economy, help those most in need, and start the processes of giving self governance and the reigns of power back to the people.

It would require the US, as well as probably South Africa, Britain, Australia, and any other willing players (but funny how it is those former Commonwealth countries outside the US that would probably be players, eh?) to do so. It's a pipe dream, but one worth dreaming, and the Zimbabwean people are probably more deserving than almost any other. So many have tried to be free, to throw off of the shackles, only to become exiles, or prisoners, or homeless, or dead. We could help, if we wanted to

SimpleSimon
11-24-2005, 03:02 PM
Stuart, I was last in Zimbabwe just before the transition in power and the change in name of the nation from Rhodesia. A beautiful, fruitful land which, even though I am white and had acquired a quasi-afrikaaner accent by then, was full of hopeful, friendly people. What has happened to it is a pitiful shame.

Nevertheless, don't hold your breath on any coalition of commonwealth nations, with or without active US participation (which isn't going to happen) ever stepping up to bat to correct the horrors that have occured and are occuring. The political will simply does not exist.

Stuart
11-25-2005, 07:43 AM
Stuart, I was last in Zimbabwe just before the transition in power and the change in name of the nation from Rhodesia. A beautiful, fruitful land which, even though I am white and had acquired a quasi-afrikaaner accent by then, was full of hopeful, friendly people. What has happened to it is a pitiful shame.

Nevertheless, don't hold your breath on any coalition of commonwealth nations, with or without active US participation (which isn't going to happen) ever stepping up to bat to correct the horrors that have occured and are occuring. The political will simply does not exist.

I know that, at the moment, the will doesn't exist to do what I would want it to. Neither Britain, nor Australia, nor the US, nor South Africa, nor anyone else is willing to do jack. Indeed, they are just willing to applaud Bush=Hitler speeches Mugabe makes at the UN and get Zimbabwe on the UN Human Rights Commission. And stand aside while the worst man made famine since the one Stalin made in Ukraine takes place.

Why is it that the world only acts when the people in need of help are either dead, imprisoned or refugees? And even then, cutting and running, or not acting is the norm. Why is it that the nations that are able to help don't? Because sending aid to Zimbabwe is just assisting that scumbag and his party, because he controls it. Do we have to watch these nations collapse before we act?

As a Christian I find it hard to justify assassination, as I see it that heads of state are appointed by God, and will be judged by him in a manner befitting their rule (and Mugabe I think will suffer because of it). But I do have this overpowering urge to speed up the time Mugabe and God meet.

Koliedrus
11-26-2005, 07:38 PM
I can only just fathom the minds producing perceptions as these (http://www.ifilm.com/product/product_discussions.jsp?productId=2683897).

SimpleSimon
11-27-2005, 12:32 AM
I know that, at the moment, the will doesn't exist to do what I would want it to. Neither Britain, nor Australia, nor the US, nor South Africa, nor anyone else is willing to do jack. Indeed, they are just willing to applaud Bush=Hitler speeches Mugabe makes at the UN and get Zimbabwe on the UN Human Rights Commission. And stand aside while the worst man made famine since the one Stalin made in Ukraine takes place.

Why is it that the world only acts when the people in need of help are either dead, imprisoned or refugees? And even then, cutting and running, or not acting is the norm. Why is it that the nations that are able to help don't? Because sending aid to Zimbabwe is just assisting that scumbag and his party, because he controls it. Do we have to watch these nations collapse before we act?

The world acts after those in need are mostly dead because the dead cannot repudiate words/motives ascribed to them in pursuit of our own agendas. Imprisoned people are generally easily silenced or ignored as well. When they flood across our borders, or by their movement significantly affect our interests, then we pay attention. If their movements as refugees do neither, then they are largely ignored, as witness Rwanda/Burundi a few years ago.

Quite a few nations could help, in some small ways. Why should we? What benefit is there for us? Believe it or not, the US is not a "christian nation" - it was not founded as such, and very seldom has acted as such. Frankly, even after they collapse, why should we help? It just gets us shot at, our aid workers raped/tortured/murdered, our soldiers sent to help protect them treated as enemies and killed. Witness Somalia, Lebanon, elsewhere.

I was in SWA and Angola at the end of the 70's. I saw guerilla warfare up close. I witnessed atrocities. Horrifying? Yes. Surprising? Not in the least. Was I impelled to act to intervene? Not at all, for one simple reason. All it would have accomplished would have been my death. It would not have slowed the impetus to slaughter, it would not have changed the actions of the PFLA, or the Cubans, or the CIA contract mercenaries, or the SDF soldiers on their patrols.

As a Christian I find it hard to justify assassination, as I see it that heads of state are appointed by God, and will be judged by him in a manner befitting their rule (and Mugabe I think will suffer because of it). But I do have this overpowering urge to speed up the time Mugabe and God meet.

Assassination is a powerful tool. So powerful, one might ask why it is not more used? It is not moral repugnance, it is not legal constraints, it is not societal concerns. It is a very practical concern - assassination generally makes things worse, not better. Where a program of assassination DOES work might surprise you. It is at the upper middle management levels of the targeted organization.. Kill the managers, the line level grunts aren't much use. Kill the managers, the top-echelon pukes soon find themselves isolated and ineffectual. Don't kill the abusive mis-managers - they are more effective in your cause alive than dead. Kill the competent ones, the mildly charismatic ones who can inspire great efforts from their group.

I am no christian. I have no slightest qualms over making the reccomendations above. I am not involved enough in the issues in Zimbabwe to be interested in acting. Should such be needed here, that might be a different matter entirely.

Stuart
11-27-2005, 10:51 AM
I can only just fathom the minds producing perceptions as these (http://www.ifilm.com/product/product_discussions.jsp?productId=2683897).

Why is that? Incomprehension, awe, disgust, what?