Misihairabwi-Mushonga, Zimbabwe’s minister of regional integration (one of the MDC-M ministers in the Inclusive Government) told an international con- ference in Rwanda in February 2011. And yet the Western donors insist there are no economic sanctions on Zimbabwe.
War of words Te anti-sanctions campaign has already led to a war of words between the EU and
USA on the one hand, and the Zimba- bwean government on the other. In early March, the EU bought two full pages of adverts in some local newspapers in Zim-
study commissioned by the Dutch Min- istry of Foreign Affairs and supported by France, Belgium and the UK, in which the EU admitted that it had “rushed to impose measures against Zimbabwe” be- fore allowing for dialogue as required by Article 8 of the ACP Cotonou Agreement. On its part, America’s response to the anti- sanctions campaign came via its ambassa- dor to Zimbabwe, Charles Ray, who wrote to criticise the state-owned newspaper
Te Herald for publishing adverts on the campaign allegedly placed by Zanu-PF’s Information Department but disguised as “government” adverts and adorned with
being made ineligible for fresh loans, America would be in serious trouble” – Charamba
“ If indebtedness were the basis for
of its members.” And the ambassador was not finished:
“For more than 10 years,” he went on, “Zimbabwe has been ineligible to receive any type of international loan, regardless of US and EU opinions, due to its lead- ers’ failure to make payments on its debts. Zimbabwe’s unpaid debts to the African Development Bank, IMF and World Bank put a stop to lending long before there were sanctions.” And then came the climax: “Fewer than 120 Zimbabweans are named on the legal US sanctions list, almost all of them Zanu-PF leaders who had a hand in political violence against their fellow citizens. Tey may not travel to the US or do business with US companies because Americans do not want them to enjoy the fruits of their corruption on our soil. Tis does not hurt other Zimbabweans.” It was clear that Ambassador Ray was
either merely playing politics or had not read his own country’s punitive law, the ZIDERA. But either way, he was not go- ing to get away with it, not with President Mugabe’s agile press secretary, George Charamba, lying in wait. Charamba hit back hard in his news-
paper column challenging the sanctions- imposing countries to stop lying to the world. “Of course the EU narrative makes no reference to the EU study that clearly admitted the EU was in too much of a British hurry to get to Article 96 before allowing for dialogue as required by the Cotonou Agreement,” he wrote. Turning to the American ambassador,
babwe to match those run by the govern- ment and the ruling Zanu-PF party. Te EU adverts insisted that there were no economic sanctions on Zimbabwe even though it admitted that the sanctions re- gime imposed on the country was broader than the measures taken against individu- als, such as “suspension of government-to- government cooperation”. Te EU, however, disingenuously re-
fused to mention that in April 2007, its own Evaluation Services had published a
the country’s coat of arms. “Zanu-PF is a political party which
does not speak for the government of this great country,” the ambassador, an African-American, intoned. “Publishing such misrepresentation in advertising of- fends the dignity and the intelligence of Te Herald’s readership,” Ambassador Ray continued. “Tis is a political mes- saging campaign pure and simple. It is planned and executed by one political party, Zanu-PF, to the perceived advantage
Charamba said the African-American envoy had made issue with the fact that a Zanu-PF advert run by Te Herald had a national coat of arms embossed on it. “What a point to make Mr American Am- bassador! Can a publisher alter [an advert] without bringing risks upon himself? I thought America is where the science of paid communication achieved excellence,” Charamba said. “More fundamentally, why is [the ambassador] threatened by two logos which are laid out coextensively? How does that pose ‘a continuing unusual and extraordinary threat to the interests of the United States of America’? What has that to do with representing America in Zimbabwe… ‘Tis is a political messaging campaign pure and simple,’ bellows the ambassador. Yes, it is, Mr Ambassador. Where is the problem?” Charamba asked sarcastically. Te US government claims
New African April 2011 | 31
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92