Dear Reader,

The story of Africa in general, and Zimbabwe in particular, has a recurrent theme. It is a story of old wounds and present realities - a story of empire and enigmas. It is as much a story of the evils of the British Empire as it is a story of a modern-day despot.

Zimbabwe's current crisis cannot be fully understood without an examination of the past. Like all of colonised Africa, many of the country's problems have their roots in slavery and colonialism, and the attendant socio-economic and political dynamics of ethnicity and inequality.

The carving up of Africa, commonly referred to as the "partition" or the "scramble", was much more than the sharing up of the continent among European powers for profit and for power. The indiscriminate butchering of the land cut into and across age-old cultural and linguistic boundaries in a manner that left with it deep and long-lasting consequences on almost every country in Africa, including Zimbabwe.

On November 15, 1884, an international conference was convened in Berlin. Present was every nation of Europe, save Switzerland and the United States of America, 14 in all. The conference was convened by Otto von Bismarck, the German chancellor, ostensibly with two major objectives in mind. The first, to clarify the status of international trade on the Congo and navigation on the Niger, and second, to attempt to define conditions under which future territorial annexation in Africa might be recognised.

That a conference concerned with Africa should be held in Europe, by Europeans, spoke to the intent of the organisers.
Not one single African state was represented. It was clear what the true motives were. With the twin imperative of nationalism and industrialisation, Africa was to be carved up without igniting a war among European powers. What was really at stake was the delicate balance of power among European nations: the projection and protection of their mercantile interests throughout the world, and the nourishment of national pride which had begun to express itself through the acquisition of colonial territories.

The impact of the conference and the diplomatic manoeuvring that followed was dramatic on the African continent. In 1880 about 90 per cent of Africa was ruled by Africans. By 1900, nearly all of Africa had been parcelled out to Europeans - only Ethiopia and Liberia escaped the scramble for Africa.

As the European powers hustled for possessions in Africa, they needed to justify their actions. One such justification was the notion of the "white man's burden", which suggested that it was the duty of whites to assist Africans and other "inferior" peoples of the world by introducing them to the benefits of civilisation. Christianity would play a major role in the subjugation of Africans, as the gunboats followed behind white missionaries as they sought to enlighten and Christianise the "dark" continent.

While the current "chaos" of Africa cannot be fully blamed on colonialism, it is indisputable that the impact of colonialism in Africa, including the country of Zimbabwe, is the single most important event that served permanently to alter Africa's prosperity path and its way of life. Colonialism destroyed the traditional system of administration, justice and conflict resolution, not to mention the economic impact caused by the forced removal of the African labour force to the New World.
In the case of Zimbabwe, it resulted in the apportionment of land and other natural resources to the white minority, and created artificial boundaries that remain today as a source of political and ethnic conflict.

Zimbabwe emerged from the colonial experience with very deep economic and structural inequities. Formerly named Rhodesia after its infamous, so-called founder Cecil Rhodes, described by many as an "imperial merchant", and later under the leadership of Ian Smith's illegally constituted government, the black majority became the victims of an unrelenting policy of land dispossession. From as early as 1889, white settlers were given rights to the land of the indigenous people.

The British South Africa Company was formed to buy concessions from the British crown and this formed the basis of the subsequent wholesale land theft. Profit went into British coffers. Africa's people saw none of it. Over time, as the takeover of land unfolded, white settlers hemmed in the majority black population on what they called Native Reserves (known today as communal areas). This began the division of African people's land. They got small, largely infertile tracts, while expropriated land in the hands of white farmers was the biggest and best. By the time it was over, a mere three per cent of the population controlled 75 per cent of the land.

It was a Zimbabwe shackled by history of injustice and inequality that in l980 ushered in the leadership of its current president Robert Mugabe, in an election that was considered free and fair and reflected the will of the people. Mugabe's policy of reconciliation was generally successful during the country's first two years of independence, but things changed quickly as splits and divisions began to emerge. As the political dynamics changed, however, the issue of white-owned land remained at the centre of Zimbabwe's problems, and Mugabe's government policies.

While some of us understand and appreciate the effects of the past, we agree that Mugabe has lost his way. What we are seeing now are the actions of a despotic leader. Yes, colonialism explains the history and its ramifications, but nothing can justify Mugabe's stranglehold on power and the abuse of the rights and freedoms of his countrymen.
With love,
bab2609@yahoo.com

Trousers in Denim

Cream of the 'Crop'

Cheeky's World