VARIOUS SOLIDARITY MESSAGES!

Life in the <http://www.blogger.com/profile/17824446252611654550> Northwest
said...

Britain should invade Zimbabwe:

Some years ago I met a Ugandan who was driving an illegal taxi in Manchester
(UK). We got chatting about African politics and Uganda as he drove me home,
and he suddenly said something that has stuck with me over the years. He
said that "It was wrong of the whites to leave so early, we weren't ready".

When I asked what he meant, he said that there should have been "a longer
run up to independence in Uganda, with more skilled Africans trained into
the Judiciary, Civil Service, Police and Military". He went on to expand on
this, he was obviously keen to get things off his chest, and said that "The
interim government should have been five years or more, with the first two
elections, supervised whilst still under British overall control, to ensure
the rules were stuck to".

He then added "But most of all, the police should have remained under
British control, and we should have been told we didn't need an army as the
British Army was staying to "protect" Uganda, not that we needed an army, or
protecting from any one except our own army".

I forget which "African strong man" was in charge of Uganda at the time, it
could have been Idi Amin, or Milton Obotoe, or one of the others, but his
charge was that they had all squandered and stolen the resources that had
been there upon independence, and let down the hopes of a nation.

His basic argument was that with no native military, and the police
supervised by the UK, democracy would have stuck from the start, and the
constitution obeyed by all parties. And, that by not wasting money on
unneeded Armies; money would have been spent on education, medicine and
infrastructure.

In reality this wasn't practicable, especially given the "anti-colonial"
sentiments in both Africa and the West at the time. But when you look at the
mess that the vast majority of African nations got into after independence,
maybe he had a point for all of the new states and not just Uganda.

I haven't thought about this conversation for some years, and I am afraid
that like many I have just written the whole continent off as a "basket
case", with Zimbabwe just being the latest example, but I wonder how it
would have all turned out "if only.." Britain and France had come up with a
joint "plan" for correcting inappropriate borders (those that split tribes),
and insisting on acting as military guarantors of the constitution for each
newly independent state?

It's too late now, and asking for any white military force to go in and
correct an abhorrent African regime is just whistling into the wind. There
is still an "Anti colonial" lobby on the left wing of the UK, who would
bring down the New Labour regime if Blair tried to use military force, so
even if he has thought about it, he has not dared risked it.

I am afraid that you are stuck with the 'old boys club' aka the "African
Union" or the "UN", aka the 'Chinese oil exploration authority', for any
hope in Zimbabwe. In reality this means that nothing will happen, and until
and unless South Africa feels threatened, nothing will be allowed to happen.
With the news that Mugabe intends to run for election until he dies, that is
the only hope you have, that he dies of old age.

It will be a very long time, if ever, before Zimbabwe fully recovers from
the damage. All the farm infrastructure has been destroyed, the farmers
dispersed, and capital goods (tractors etc) gone, and livestock diseased or
eaten. Even just repairing the fences will cost millions.

Your country has effectively been destroyed, and will never regain the
chances lost, because even if Mugabe's regime collapses, all the squatters,
veterans, activists etc will still be there, and no one will be able to
control them. It would need a military government just to protect people let
alone enforce the courts orders.

I am sorry to be pessimistic, but I suspect that when Mugabe's party lose
power, they will revert back to guerrilla violence to get it back, and this
brings us back to "if only ...."

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Anonymous said...

The reason Britain, i.e. those people in power in Britain, won't do anything
is because 1)you don't want them meddling in African affairs, (remember?)
2)you can't have your cake and eat it aswell you know, and 3) they don't
much care.
Mugabe is a *unt this is true, but why should I care when in my own country
I have to put up with some Zimbabwean nurse carrying on at me just because I
use the term dark horse? I am not inclined to care either when all I have
heard my whole life is "England did this, England did that" That doesnt stop
me thinking about how much of an arsehole Mugabe is though.

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

Anonymous said...

very interesting reading. i will study more .

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@