Zimpapers Logo

Martin Makoni

Midlands State University
To understand why economic sanctions against Zimbabwe should be removed, it is important to recall why they were enacted.

For avoidance of doubt, economic sanctions refer to punitive restrictions imposed by one jurisdiction over another to influence the latter’s policy making.

Sanctions constitute political coercion. Consequently, in the modern era, sanctions are ordinarily administered by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) in accordance with Chapter VII, article 41, of the United Nations Charter.

In the case of Zimbabwe, sanctions originate outside the UN framework. As unilateral sanctions, they are fundamentally antagonistic to international law and conventions. In other words, they have no basis in international law.

Zimbabwe’s supposed crime is apparent. From 1998 the Zimbabwe Government under former President, Robert Mugabe, initiated the Fast-Track Land Reform Programme (FTLRP), which represented a second independence for Zimbabwe’s erstwhile economically disenfranchised black majority.

FTLRP involved compulsory acquisition of land confiscated by colonial settlers from 1890, to 1979, when the UK Government agreed to fund white farmers’ compensation as part of their commitment in formally negotiating Zimbabwe’s independence at the Lancaster House Conference.

The British, in fashion not dissimilar to Brexit talks, eventually proved disinclined to honour their obligations, leaving Zimbabwe’s ruling ZANU-PF with no option but to appropriate land without compensation, fulfilling a revolutionary mandate adopted by the fore-running ZAPU and ZANU in the early 1960s. In retrospect, it is unlikely that the UK genuinely considered land acquisition for blacks a priority.

What ensued can certainly be described as nothing more than a brutal propaganda war waged against Zimbabwe, given the frequency of journalistic amnesia in Western media where the underlying causes of FTLRP, namely a need for broad economic transformation in Zimbabwe, routinely skipped mention.

By 2001, following inevitable and convenient reports of clashes between landless blacks and intransigent white commercial farmers, the narrative of Zimbabwe’s alleged disregard for human and property rights, among many other so-called violations of international laws, found traction, sympathy and sensationalism, especially in the US and across Europe. US President George Bush issued Executive Order 13288, which was followed shortly by an act of US Congress, ZIDERA, ostensibly to check human and property rights violations.

Zimbabwe’s internal socio-economic struggles were opportunistically attributed to the incompetence of Zimbabwe’s Government, grand corruption, and claims from some opposition parties and Western governments of rigged elections.

Consistently overlooked is the impact of US and EU sanctions, the instigators of which frequently declare as targeted and inconsequential to the suffering of Zimbabwe’s citizenry.  This is a self-serving oversimplification of Zimbabwe’s predicament.

Zimbabwe, with its huge public sector, the remnants of an expansive pro-majority, inclusive service-delivery agenda in the aftermath of independence, naturally suffered when several of the state’s key arms of operation were sanctioned. The outcome of the collapse of these Government operations was a nosedive in performance of essential state organs, and corresponding decline of living standards for the generality of Zimbabweans who depend on them. Retrenchments and company closures disrupted production in the majority of local value-chains.

Zimbabwe’s ruling party, ZANU-PF, recently concluded that Zimbabwe lost US$42billion to sanctions-related restrictions, representing 700 percent of Zimbabwe’s 2020 national budget.

This estimate overlooks significant financial and social costs borne by SADC states over the course of ZIDERA. Neither does a mere figure capture the translation of sanctions in terms of hardship endured by Zimbabweans. Sanctions on Zimbabwe crippled the state’s ability to participate in a globalized economy, accumulate and reserve foreign exchange, maintain a stable currency and grow Zimbabwe’s productive capacity.

Few economies could survive two decades with no significant lines of credit. It is nothing short of conscious, resilient patriotism, all-weather friendship and the Almighty’s providence that have maintained Zimbabwe’s buoyancy in the face of a savage backlash orchestrated on the basis of willful distortion of fact for nefarious ends.  It is unacceptable that certain members of the UNSC flout regulations respected by others. Clearly, members of the UNSC cannot be in contempt of the same laws they underwrite. The trend is toward multilateralism, global equality, fairness and co-operation over co-option or coercion.

It is impossible to justify generalized punishment of Zimbabwe, a violation of our own citizens’ human rights under the UN Charter, as imperative in view of Zimbabwe’s re-engagement efforts. The Global Compensation Deed, a US$3.5billion settlement between the Government of Zimbabwe and displaced former commercial white farmers, reaffirmed Zimbabwe’s respect for property rights. The repeal of AIPPA and POSA laws reaffirmed Zimbabwe’s commitment to reforms and respect for human rights.

The Government of Zimbabwe has made overtures to Western counterparts in light of these positive developments. If Western Governments value the same, they must acknowledge their own failures and seek a more intelligent course of conflict resolution, far different from their dated strong-arm tactics, or risk the complete decimation of public confidence in their motives and vision for the future.

 

Paul Vagere

Great Zimbabwe University

I stared back at the lady behind the enquiries desk who stared back at me, her face expressionless. I shook my head in defeat, wondering which bank I was going to try out next.

I had just visited three banks to try and get help in receiving my scholarship funds which were being wired from the United States of America, but on all accounts I had been told: “Sorry, we do not have a correspondent bank in USA.”

It was only at the fourth bank that I found what I was looking for, and this incident proved to me as fallacy the idea that sanctions only affect those higher up and not ordinary Zimbabweans. Economic sanctions against Zimbabwe need to be removed unconditionally for reasons outlined below.

The imposition of illegal sanctions on Zimbabwe by USA and its allies after the implementation of the historic Land Reform Programme of 2000 has greatly slowed down Zimbabwe’s move towards desired economic development by crippling key sectors of the economy such as agriculture and tourism.

While Zimbabwe has continuously shown resilience in the face of the sanctions, which effected the freezing of assets for local companies and certain individual government officials, they still need to be removed as they continue posing a threat to the achievement of Zimbabwe’s long-term goals.

The negative impacts of economic sanctions on agriculture are a legitimate reason to demand their removal. From being the breadbasket of Africa with the capacity to feed just about half of the whole continent to now facing food insecurity problems, Zimbabwe has apparently felt the ruthlessness of these illegal sanctions.

Agriculture remains the backbone of Zimbabwe’s economy as it contributes about 40% of the total export income and employs millions of Zimbabweans. The sanctions must go because their removal will attract more investments into the industry and open up direct access to lucrative foreign markets.

This will in turn scale up the rate of production and agricultural exports, thus bringing in the much-needed foreign currency. It will also place Zimbabwe in a better position to make meaningful contributions to the achievement of Sustainable Development Goal Number 2, which seeks to achieve Zero Hunger by the year 2030.

The tourism sector will also benefit greatly from the removal of economic sanctions. Zimbabwe has numerous tourist attractions with breathtaking and scenic views, which most foreigners wish to get first hand experiences of. However, due to limitations on flights, negative publicity and other sets of challenges since the sanctions were imposed, the number of tourists to Zimbabwe has plummeted over the years.

As a result there has been loss of employment in the sector and failure to perform at maximum capacity. Removing sanctions will certainly aid Zimbabwe’s National Tourism Recovery and Growth Strategy to work effectively to ensure that the industry reaches the expected USD 5 billion mark by 2025.

Sanctions have contributed greatly to Zimbabweans’ low standards of living. Their removal is a necessary step towards finding a sustainable solution. As a result of economic challenges triggered by sanctions, most Zimbabweans have joined the exodus to the Diaspora in search of greener pastures, where they are often subjected to inhumane treatment, racism and xenophobia.

Zimbabweans make up the largest group of foreigners in South Africa, with their numbers estimated to range between one and five million. This means there has been a lot of brain drain as many skilled Zimbabweans have moved from Zimbabwe, thus depriving the country of vital human capital.

In addition to that, sanctions on Zimbabwe should be removed so as to allow the country to regain eligibility to receive international funding and loans as well as opening up more lines of credit for the country.

International Financial Institutions such as the International Monetary Fund have not granted Zimbabwe financial support in two decades. Removing sanctions will give Zimbabwe an opportunity to get money to foster development and solve the pressing issues being faced by the country. It will also minimize or even eliminate the need for domestic borrowing which often fuels rampant inflation.

In conclusion, it should be noted that the illegal sanctions on Zimbabwe will not be easily removed if some sections of the population still believe that they do not affect them.

Ordinary Zimbabweans need to be educated on the ripple effects of sanctions and the benefits that could come with their removal. Zimbabweans should also unite in denouncing the sanctions especially through social media, which has proved to be an effective agent of change.

A good starting point would be to support and get trending the #zimsanctionsmustgo.

 

Andrew Kudzai Mbazima

University of Zimbabwe

The walls of the hall of fame have been tainted by the blood of the likes of Genghis Khan, Napoléon Bonaparte, Alexander the Great and Adolf Hitler.

These men have a rather scrumptious history of transcending from mere men to god-like beings, and they inextricably left a trail of raw and utter influence on their way to sitting on the throne of world hegemony.

Fast forward the hour glass of time to the 21St Century we see the likes of the United States of America and the European Union presiding over that lavish title of ruling the global village.

These self-proclaimed world governing bodies have bred and adopted a new weapon in their arsenal which is just as crippling as the war tactics used by the before-mentioned men. This new weapon of mass destruction is economic sanctions.

We turn back to the turn of the century, travelling far south in the cradle of mankind we reach a rather small in size but massive in grit and character country we call the Republic of Zimbabwe.

In 2000, Zimbabwe introduced a fair and just land reform programme meant to empower and restore the indigenous Zimbabwean people with their rightful land which the white settlers clandestinely invaded.

Giving back the land to the people was a small step in the road leading to the development of the country under people of African heritage. However, those same imperialists who inflicted such pain and misery on the country seized on that as an opportunity to impose illegal and unjustified sanctions.

Spear-heading these sanctions was the United States of America (USA), and the European union (EU) followed suit. Although some of the sanctions were lifted in the years that followed, the punitive measures that still remain have resulted in devastating effects on the entire economy of Zimbabwe, and this in turn has continually hampered the growth and development of the country.

First and foremost, a detailed analysis shows that the removal of the sanctions will lead to renewed accessibility to lines of credit. This will allow Zimbabwe to receive financial support from International Financial Intuitions such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. Consequently, arrears which Zimbabwe accumulated throughout the years can be cleared thus making the country eligible as a lucrative investment destination.

Furthermore, Zimbabwean companies would have an increased reach of off-shore loans, hence increasing domestic productivity through long-term capital inflows catered for by foreign parties. This would have a ripple effect of increasing the country’s employment levels, improving the standard of living and stabilising its ability to provide basic goods and services to its people.

Re-industrialisation can help halt the emigration of skilled labour. Zimbabwe is renowned for having a high literacy rate and hard-working people with inquisitive minds.

However, in recent years Zimbabwe has suffered the loss of such great minds to neighbouring countries such as South Africa and Botswana. Large- scale industrialisation would hasten the pace of the economic turnaround and serve as coping mechanism in retaining the home-grown skilled workforce.

Moreover, the quintessence of a strong economy is its ability to capitalize on the natural resources it possesses. Zimbabwe was once known as the bread basket of Africa as agriculture was the backbone of the economy.

But the agricultural sector was severely affected by the sanctions. Immediate suspension of these sanctions would indefinitely lift this dark cloud lingering over our fertile lands.

Zimbabwe would be able to maximize on horticulture endeavours as well as exportation of cash crops such as tobacco and cotton without facing unruly trade embargos which hamper forex return. Increased foreign investment can also lead to revamping of the mining and manufacturing sector. The much-needed capital injection can lead to purchase of new machinery, reduce liquidity conditions and inevitability increase the processing and manufacturing of our rich mineral resources.

This in turn will develop the country and make us more self-sufficient and less susceptible to always importing goods we can manufacture ourselves.

In conclusion, economic sanctions on Zimbabwe should be removed because they are immoral. The humane obligation is to remove policies that blight the progress of another country.

The ethical duty is to eradicate these sanctions as they serve to encourage the suffering of a population still licking the wounds of oppression.

Zimbabwe and other African countries should have access to international markets because this surely would pave the way for the glorious Vision 2030.