Mnangagwa on the Economy: Signs not good.

I have been waiting eagerly to hear Mnangagwa's ideas on the economy.

I was a bit crest-fallen when I heard him repeats the words jobs, jobs, jobs. Yes jobs are need but job creation as a policy has no chance of working in Zimbabwe.

Zimbabwe has only 32% urban population as of 2016 data. That means 68% of Zimbabwe's population are rural and mostly not even looking for jobs.

Zimbabwe's rural people subsist on their own land meaning their entire labour-time is occupied in their own economic endeavours, not on those of employers. Therefore job creation as a core policy is likely to leave the large rural section of the population in poverty.

The number one economic enhancement policy for me is rural infrastructure improvement particularly roads. Number two is a free agricultural market accompanied by prompt payment for agricultural produce by government bodies. Number three is protection of rural farmers from exploitative middlemen.

What the rural population need is sound agricultural policies and access to an unfettered free market, a market free from excessive government interference and protected from corrupt middlemen.

Zimbabwe's Demographic is Mainly Rural So Jobs Alone not enough

Number four is seeking markets. Highly urbanised countries need their people to be fed. Some countries here in Africa are importing food from as far afield as Brazil and the USA. Zimbabwe needs to focus on raising the quality of agricultural produce as well relaxing its own export regulations and working to lower tariff and regulatory barriers to such markets.

Jobs are important to only 32% of Zimbabwe's population. Mnangagwa should not fall into the trap of thumb-sucking policies that work in Western economies and hoping they will work in a largely rural economy. The demographics are simply too different. The West have much higher urbanisation rates as well as bigger populations.

State Expenditure Must Come Down To Be in Line with Revenue

For example the USA is 81% urbanised with a population of more than 300 million. There is a huge market for factories to supply. Therefore there is a huge demand for jobs to man those factories. The United Kingdom is 83% urbanised. Urbanisation in the rest of Europe also hovers above 80%.

Urban people largely do not have access to land thus do not have other means of sustenance except being employed. For rural people employment is a secondary option. In short for 68% of Zimbabwe's population, employment is not a primary economic activity.

The other big problem is government expenditure, especially the propensity for unbudgeted for expenditure. For a long time I have argued that Zimbabwe's economy cannot recover because of an oversized executive. That means there is no room for patronage.

Political Hands Should be Kept Out of State Coffers

Overally what is important for Zimbabwe's economy is sound free market policies and responsible governance. Politicians should never ever be allowed to treat state funds as their petty cash kitty.

When the so called not-a-coup Operation Restore Legacy was launched it turned out that a substantial number of ministers and the remaining vice-president were outside the country. The primary purpose of such foreign trips is to milk state coffers of per diem allowances. Such practices need to end.

Perhaps the biggest draw down of Zimbabwe's economy is the culture of entitlement that pervades Zimbabwean political and management class. People no longer treat management roles as ensuring sustainable management of enterprises. Rather they treat management roles and an entitlement vehicle that gives them access to all kinds of perks and allowances, even if it means running the organisation into the ground.

A number of state enterprises and some private companies have been paying management amounts that are more than their turnover.

Culture of Entitlement Must End

Then there is the practice evading tax and other payments that is quite common in the higher classes. Senior politicians run "businesses" that get by essentially by not paying taxes. Most of these so called businesses are nothing but operations to launder money obtained from the state by hook and by crook.

It does not help that a very strong stench of rumours involving corruption and appropriation of state resources emanates from Mnangagwa's own political past.

I have serious doubts that ED will take serious and meaningful action against corruption. Indeed over the past few weeks people targeted for 'investigation' and arrest have largely been members of the vanquished faction of Zanu-PF. In my books factional victimisation of a few individuals does not amount to a serious fight against corruption.

Lastly the Zimbabwe state needs to make a conscious effort to support local economic activities. Instead of importing finished products the government should be trying to support products with as much local content as possible.

The Elite Must Buy Made in Zimbabwe

Generally there is a mentality among the elite that it is prestigious to import things. That mentality is one of the biggest reasons why there is perpetual cash shortage in Zimbabwe. The moment money gets into the hands of the elite it is exported and they buy trinkets, go on expensive sojourns and holidays not to mention wasteful parties.

My favourite example is motor vehicles. Of late the government has virtually stopped purchasing from local assemblers like Willowvale Motor Industries, Quest Motors, Deven and Dahmer.

I wonder exactly how the government hopes to create jobs when they don't mostly buy products made by local labour. If I had my way cabinet ministers should be wearing clothing made by local tailors. If there are issues with quality point them out to the manufacturers. That is the only way yo can give them a chance to improve and catch up with the rest of the world.

In short, the jury is still out on whether Mnangagwa has got what it takes to turn around the economy. It takes impeccable personal integrity, honesty, firm but very fair application of the law to tackle the concrete blocks weighing down Zimbabwe's economy as it tries to swim in a crocodile infested river. Excuse the unintended pun.

Open Letter to General Chiwenga

Open Letter to General Chiwenga

Sinyoro. Vazungu vakabva Gouveia nengarava. Vanopira midzimu nemvura. My apologies if I got your totem wrong.

I am addressing this to you because I believe you are the man with the power to determine the direction Zimbabwe takes right now. Though it is not official, you are the man in charge.

Firstly I would like to remind you of one slogan that you used to say in those difficult days at pungwes and other dangerous situations as you put your life on the line for Zimbabwe's freedom. The days of the liberation struggle.

One man one vote.

That slogan epitomizes what you fought for. Self determination by the Zimbabwean people. The right of the Zimbabwean people to choose their leaders.

I believe your current actions are correct. Yes the people of Zimbabwe voted for Robert Mugabe, but it is clear he is increasingly incapacitated by old age. Such that his powers were being manipulated by his young wife and other usurping court jesters close to her. I agree with you. Those antics were destabilizing Zimbabwe.

Thanks to your professionalism, vigilance and able leadership of the defence forces, Zimbabwe is not in an unstable state.

As such I do not believe an interim period of stabilization is needed. We can go to elections in 90 days as stipulated by the constitution that you showed us when you announced your intention to stabilize Zimbabwe's politics.

Having a lengthy interim period can only serve patronage purposes. That is to allow some people to enjoy the benefits of power, without facing the generality of Zimbabwe's population. Nobody deserves that because they have not been voted for by the people of Zimbabwe. Only Robert Mugabe won a presidential election. Others need to win their own mandates.

However, the speaker of parliament Jacob Mudenda can be acting president for 90 days. He is a neutral person in terms of those who have expressed interest in power. I have got absolute confidence in you and your ability to maintain Zimbabwe's stability under that arrangement.

Those who have expressed interest in power, vana ED, vana Joice, vana Morgiza, vana Nkosana Moyo and others, can hit the campaign trail. They need to convince us, the people of Zimbabwe, that they deserve our votes.

Aka kamukadzi aka, if she wants she can campaign too. But hehehe. Regai ndinyarare.

In terms of the Zanu-PF factional fight, give everyone a fair chance. Imposing a specific person on Zanu-PF is no different from Mugabe imposing Grace. Let Zanu-PF go to congress. Adyiwa adyiwa. The winner contests national elections and becomes president.

I recommend the above course of action to you, because it maintains the primacy of the constitution. It is also the one least likely to bring you into conflict with SADC and the African Union. With the likelihood of external intervention attempts, such a conflict will mean much worse instability for Zimbabwe than that which you prevented.

Sinyoro.
Guvheya.
Vazungu.
Vemachira machena.
Vakauya nengarava.
Vene vemagidi.

Ndateterera. Ndinzweiwo mwana wenyu.

So what does the political future hold for Zimbabwe?

So what does the political future hold for Zimbabwe?

My gut feeling is that political parties without liberation credentials, that is the MDC and its various mutations, are the biggest political losers in current developments. Their campaign platform has been little apart from Mugabe must go.

Now he is going and they are not even part of making him go. If I may ask what is their relevance now?

In fact, they spend much of their political lives insulting and denigrating the military who are bringing the change they failed to.

Zimbabweans, especially the rural population, do have an affinity to politicians with liberation credentials.

I am willing to bet all my cows that we have not seen the last of general Chiwenga on the political scene. There will be a lot of relief and gratitude among Zimbabweans that he managed a very, very difficult situation without bloodshed. That is a significant political investment in his benefit.

Is Emmerson Mnangagwa the next main man? It is clear he imagines himself to be but I doubt. Many Zimbabweans are not comfortable with his history as an enforcer for Mugabe. The nickname Ngwena stems from that people for a long time have said he has the cruelty of a crocodile.

I am personally not comfortable with his regionalistic rhetoric. My home district was part of the Midlands and fits into the circle of what he defines as 'his' people but for me that is a myopic view for a national politician to ever espouse.

His definition of Karanga ethnicity is anyway plain wrong. It based on  British drawn provincial boundaries that did not even take into account ethnicity. It has nothing to do with ethnic identity as defined by Shona culture.

I also do not think General Chiwenga would take power and hand it over to someone else. He would probably be keenly aware of what happened in the history of ZANLA. Rex Nhongo supressed a rebellion and handed power to Mugabe. We all know Rex Nhongo's (aka Solomon Mujuru) ending was not good.

What about Joice Mujuru. She has some political capital and if she were to face Mnangagwa in an election I think she would win. However with Chiwenga in the picture the script changes considerably.

Jonathan Moyo is living evidence that intellectualism does not amount to political skill. When you are a good intellectual others can use you but sometimes you cannot use yourself.

My gut feeling is that at some point in the near future we are likely to have a President Chiwenga.

Grace Mugabe has very badly exposed her husband

The man needs Zanu-PF stalwarts

Which ever way I look at what is happening in Zimbabwe, I see Robert Mugabe having moved out of his safe zone. Splintering Zanu-PF is like two brothers starting a fight with huge antagonistic bouncers cracking their knuckles in the wings itching to get their hands on one of them.

Whichever side Mugabe IS NOT on, is likely to receive influential, if not material, help from the powerful and rich West. Those guys' hands are itching to get hold of Mugabe over what he did to their interests, not only through land reform, but through other spiteful policies that resulted in closure of mostly Western owned industries in Zimbabwe.

An example is the Look East policy enacted after Mugabe was banned from travelling to the West. It was spiteful and caused significant damage to Western owned Zimbabwe industries and the country's economy.

Those who blinkeredly created disunity in Zanu-PF have left Mugabe very, very badly exposed. When Zanu-PF splinters the side that gets assistance from outside is likely to come out on top. They will get valuable intelligence to outmanoeuvre the other.

Why is that important? A country like Zimbabwe simply does not have the wherewithal to counter say the CIA's technological sophistry and reach. They can listen phone conversations, track people and vehicles almost at will. Not to mention that buildings are probably crawling with listening devices.

Whatever is discussed it is very very likely the Americans will know much of it and feed intelligence to the side side they prefer.

Neighbouring countries, especially South Africa, facing problems because of the influx of Zimbabwean economic refugees not likely to mount a defence of Mugabe like Thabo Mbeki did.

I haven't made up my mind yet, but the fact that Chiwenga was on a visit to China just before he made his threat to 'step in' means that the G40 faction cannot hope for much support from that quarter.

Even inside the country it is entirely delusional to think that Grace carries the electoral clout to win an election. It is also completely misreading history and the country to think that plain thuggery can keep her in power. Plain thuggery failed to keep Ian Smith in power.

Robert Mugabe was genuinely popular especially in the early days of independence. He was even loved by the West. That support has waned, but he has been lucky to have no meaningful challengers. By people meaningful I mean challengers with a clear people-centric message.

Whoever is on Mugabe's side will be fools if they do not realize they are the ones whose fortunes are very very thinly stretched. Whatever advantage they have inside Zanu-PF, in the long run, will be cancelled out by the very powerful interests likely to support the other side.

So far noone split from Zanu-PF has made significant effort to get outside help. But the temperature of the factionalism now is such that they have no choice.

The people who are being shed now have liberation credentials which means they are far much more likely to get a more sympathetic ear from fellow liberation movements like ANC, FRELIMO, MPLA, SWAPO, etc than the MDC would get.

For the factionalists in Zanu-PF their best hope is to keep everyone on board. Keep Zanu-PF united.

Ngavarege kudziirwa vachikanganwa kunge mbeva dziri mubani risina mwena. They should not gallivant around like mice in a plain without boltholes. When the cat comes there will be nowhere to run.

Nyamhere River: How did Zanu-PF get into Grace's Hands?

Zanu-PF stalwarts have allowed themselves to be found frolicking naked in the pool

As you walk out of the small ravine, up the well beaten scotch-cart track you see the tree. Branches clawing scraggly at the sky, the mutamba (wild locquat) tree stands forlornly and is if in lonely perpetual prayer. It stands in Sekuru Matambo's field, scattered with dry maize stalks from last year's crop.

Your tired feet scuff the earth, battling step by step eating away the the distance, perambulating you past the tree towards the Muketa homestead. Further down is Mudhara Hahuhunanzvi's homestead. His name means "you will not lick the beer" and I am not offering any prizes for guessing his favourite passtime.

You lurch past the Muketa homnestead towards the headman's homestead. Nobody has ever seen him behind the wheel of a motor vehicle but he is popularly known as Driver. He is a wizzened wise old man, Mudhara Hahuhunanzvi's older brother. Driver is Chararamiro village's very own Google search engine for wisdom.

You saunter past the headman's home, past of that of his younger brother popularly known as Ngundu, also another eternal fountain of wisdom. As you stroll out of the village, you stumble into the thicket of mutondo shrubs. In the distance you see the snaking dark vegetation marking its course.

You are coming to Nyamhere River.

Its flow is seasonal, but there are a few deep pools that do not go dry throughout the year. One of them is Chembiti. Its banks are lined by evergreen grass, a couple of rocks jutting into the pool like a jetty.

Chembiti was our favourite spot for swimming and bathing. We would discard our clothes, draping them over the mutondo and acacia shrubs lining the river bank and spend most of the day splashing about in the pool.

It is a pity we knew nothing about the Olympics. There were a couple of swimmers like Fortunate Maputi and my best friend Stanford Chiraramiro who would have made the cut in any Olympic team.

Now let us the depart the realm of fact and delve into imagination. Suppose a madman, happened upon us as we splashed naked in Chembiti pool on Nyamhere river. Unseen by us, he tip-toes among the shrubs collecting our clothes, stuffing them in his dirty bag.

Suddenly we see him!

"Hey!" goes out the collective shout. "What are you doing? Leave our clothes!"

Instead of heeding our calls the madman heads off across the short grass of Muchovhu plain. His legs windmilling faster than an aeroplane propeller, he runs fast away from us. We all take off after him trying to get back our clothes.

Suppose a stranger spies this scene, a bunch of naked people running after a fully clothed man, what is their conclusion likely to be? Who are they going to call mad? Mapenzi ndeapi?

Now imagine a bunch of Zanu-PF stalwarts running after Grace Mugabe for power. Mapenzi ndeapi? Who are the mad people here?

I have a question for the stalwarts. Where were you and what were you doing while your legacy was being taken from you?

Why was Zanu-PF formed? Was the party not formed to serve the interests of the people? How could you allow the party to be personalized in front of your eyes.

The stalwarts have been found naked because their political lives are no longer clothed with the people's interests. All they ever talk about is themselves getting into power. "When I rule. When I rule." that is all we hear from them.

The stalwarts have been frolicking naked in pools of luxury while the people suffer in the wilderness of an economic meltdown.

If you are not clothed with the people's interests you will never walk the road to power the same way I can always walk the road to Chembiti.

These stalwarts are mapenzi evanhu. Hamuna kushonga zvido zvevanhu saka muchitorerwa masimba.

Pamberi nevanhu veZimbabwe yese!!!

Boris Johnson's Blatant Neo-Colonialism and Neo-Imperialism

Recently British foreign secretary, Boris Johnson, joked that British businessmen, not Libyans, would build cities to rival Dubai were it not for dead bodies littering Libyan streets.

The joke was in very bad taste. Let us not forget the leading role the British played in putting Libya in the problems it faces today..

On 19 March 2011 the United Nations Security Council passed a resolution authorizing a no fly-zone over Libya. Ostensibly as part of that enforcement British forces, with participation of their American counterparts, fired one hundred and ten Tomahawk missiles at Libya.

I am not a military expert but I have never understood Tomahawks to be capable of attacking airborne targets.

I will leave it to the experts to explain what ground attack weapons have got to do with enforcing a no-fly zone. At no point had Libya ignored the no-fly zone or fired at coalition aircraft at the time the ground attack began?

What I want to make very clear is that it was British who began the process that ultimately left Libya without effective government, leading to streets littered with dead bodies that Boris is joking about today..

Please, understand that pointing out the above is not in any way amount to praising Gadhafi.

The African Union had made proposals for a negotiated transition which would have prevented the collapse of Libya. The President of South Africa, Jacob Zuma, literally had to beg the powerful Western forces to take those proposals to Gadhafi which, according to him, the later accepted.

The proposals included a ceasefire which would have saved lives and prevented bodies littering streets.

After his demise, Gadhafi's body was carted into the desert where not even one member of his family could let a tear drop on his grave let alone lay a flower. I do not know if those who did it are superstitious. If they are, I am sure they performed rituals to make sure that even his ghost could not find its way home.

Gadhafi's influence in Libya ended with his death. Most of the fighting that littered streets with bodies, took place afterwards is among the militias that were armed and sponsored by Western countries. This means that even Gadhafi's ghost cannot be blamed for the bodies that Boris is joking about.

Now that we understand the role Britain played in putting Libya in the chaotic predicament it faces today, I can not imagine anything more callous than the British foreign secretary bandying about jokes about dead Libyans.

No matter what our leadership situation in the developing world, imagined or real, we do not want it to be compounded by callous and heartless rich people who have nothing better to do with their money and weapons other than make us suffer so that they can find subjects to joke about.

Clearly Boris sees countries whose people do not prioritize making weapons as nothing more than a playgrounds of death. His joke is an exemplification of the racist indifference that his  kind regard us with. A subconscious racism that attaches little value, if any, to human beings who live in poor parts of the world.

His kind probably feel more pity for a dog that gets run over in the street, than for the Yemeni children decapitated, blinded, disfigured and maimed by the weapons his country makes and profits from. He personally takes part in the decision making that sees weapons sold and used in places like Yemen and Libya where they result in the body-littered streets that he now jokes about. It is sad, but the truth.

The toady man’s joke suggests he is more than tone-deaf, maybe brain-deaf. I must say I am strongly tempted to replace the F in deaf with a D.

The dismissive way in which Theresa May finger-waves away the episode as just a minor bad choice of words, shows that she either does not have a clue or does not care. The prime minister of Britain does not think jokes about people dying in a chaotic mess her country helped create are worth her serious attention.

To twist the knife in Libya’s back, Borizozo claims his critics have "no knowledge or understanding of Libya". I wonder whether he has more knowledge than the Libyans, from both sides of the current divide, who also complained? How could he say Libyans have no knowledge or understanding of their own country and its suffering?

My personal judgment is that it is him who has no knowledge or understanding, not just of Libya, but of the disastrous role his country played in putting Libya where it is today.

Maybe Boris should borrow a page from Barack Obama's book.  The later at least had the decency to admit that his handling of Libya was the worst mistake of his presidency.

It is unfortunate, but the fault of Boris, that I now have to juxtapose that with the indecency of him joking about Libyan streets being littered with dead bodies.

By they way if you think the rest of his speech was sensible let think of its colonialist connotations. He talked about British business people building and, by my understanding, owning prime real estate on the Libyan coast.

Can Libyan people not build and own those hotels themselves? After all they have money from their own oil. It seems in Boris’ mind only the British can own and develop that land properly in Libya.

We have to wonder, did Britain lead the way in attacking Libya so that British business people could end up owning prime properties on the Libyan?

Donald Trump is Out of His Depth

History is full of some ridiculous moments that are not crowed about today because in hindsight they look, and in fact are, so stupid.

One such moment is the events surrounding the Galveston Giant, John 'Jack' Johnson becoming the first African world heavyweight boxing champion a day after Christmas in 1908.

At the turn of the century boxing like many other sports was segregated and the world heavy weight championship was de facto reserved for white boxers. When a good black boxer Jack Johnson came onto the scene the then world heavyweight champion James Jeffries refused to fight him. Jeffries retired without fighting Johnson.

Eventually a Canadian, Tommy Burns, became world heavyweight champion and agreed to fight Johnson, for a healthy purse of course. Johnson defeated Burns and became the first black world heavyweight boxing Champion.

This triggered resentment and animosity among whites and it was called for James Jeffries, then regarded the best boxer of all time, to come out of retirement and defeat Johnson. He was dubbed "The Great White Hope".

Jeffries agreed to the fight and in his own words, "I am going into this fight for the sole purpose of proving that a white man is better than a negro."

Thus on July 4, 1910, James Jeffries faced Jack Johnson "for the sole purpose of proving that a white man is better than a negro." By the 4th round it was clear Jeffries was not going to win. He spend much of the rest of the fight running and ducking away from Johnson.

By the 13th round it was clear Jeffries wouldn't last the distance. In the fifteenth round Jeffries was knocked down, he got up he and was immediately knocked OUT OF the ring. Punch drunk, he clawed and staggered his way back  into the ring and was immediately knocked down for the third time.

The referee was not stopping the fight so James Jeffries' manager rushed into the ring and got between the two boxers. He was not gonna let his man die trying to prove that "a white man is better than a negro".

That was in boxing over a century ago. Long before the time of Muhammad Ali, Sugar Ray Leonard, Mike Tyson and the Klitschko demolition pair.

The same ridiculous scene seems to be playing itself out, this time in American politics. Whenever Donald Trump is faced with tough questions he brings up Obama's presidency in negative light. When quizzed by a reporter over recent deaths of American soldiers in Niger, without being prompted Trump started casting himself in better light than Obama.

Despite the media reacting in a way that made it clear they were not buying that line of defence, a day later Trump brought up Obama in negative light again. Again the reporter had not asked about Obama.

One does not need to be a rocket scientist to figure out that Trump probably imagines himself the Great White Hope of politics. A man on a mission to prove that a white male president is better than a black president.

His obsession with Obamacare, his tinkering with the Iran deal against the advise of all America's allies except Israel, suggest that he is on a mission to prove that whatever Obama did, it was wrong. Donald Trump, a white man, can do better no matter what the circumstances.

On the contrary, I think he has spectacularly managed to prove that the man called Donald Trump is small minded. I think he is definitely unfit to be president of any country not just America. Not only is he unfit but he is dangerously irrational.

I do not consider Obama to be the best American president ever, but he is way way better than Donald Trump. American congress has to step into the ring and stop Trump from dying trying to prove he is better than Obama,

The Blame Mandela Game: Honest Truth

Recently President Robert Mugabe blamed Mandela for "leaving whites with too much power" in South Africa. He is not the first to sing that refrain. Few may understand his thinking, but an important clue is that his criticism started during the course of the incident involving his wife bashing a young South African lady.

I will explain that later but first let me make it clear that Mandela is not to blame for South Africa's current situation.

If a man leads you across a difficult desert up to the edge of a sea, you should praise him for navigating the desert and not blame him for leaving you without boats.

Those who want total economic emancipation should not blame Mandela for bringing an end to statutory apartheid but not leaving the boats to cross the sea of total economic emancipation. Blaming him for that is like blaming your father-in-law for not delivering your wife already pregnant. He has done his bringing her up. What job do you expect of yourself if you want her already pregnant?

An end to the idiotic but nonetheless statutory apartheid was a necessary first step. That crossing of that desert may not have been sufficient to complete the journey, but it is up to the current leadership to build the boats to go the rest of the way.

Some like in my country Zimbabwe have even set off back in the direction of the desert. Despite all the bravado about liberation, the truth is that the moment you dis-empower your people economically you leave them vulnerable to recolonization. Like a fish to bait, a hungry man will swallow anything that looks like food.

People should also remember that CODESA was not a one man show. Mandela was not sitting alone in front of a platoon of Afrikaners nodding like a jumping jack saying "Yes Baas! Yes Baas!" to everything they said..

A comprehensive delegation on the ANC side attended the negotiations and they consulted, and were closely advised, by the Frontline States. So any Frontline State leader who says Mandela made the wrong concessions should bear in mind that it was probably because they gave him the wrong advice.

The liberation of South Africa was a collective effort by the region and Africa. Therefore it is wrong to blame one man for what is not perfect while wanting to take credit for what is right. The success was collective and any shortcomings are also collective, not just on the South African people but on the Frontline States leaders who made their input as well.

Many of them wanted the wars and destabilization efforts sponsored by the apartheid idiots in their countries to end. The ANC as a collective, who had been hosted by various Frontline states, would have understood the difficulties in the states hosting them particularly Angola and Mozambique and would not have wanted to prolong those situations.

As for President Mugabe, his irritation with "too much white power" probably stemmed from Afriforum's involvement in his wife's saga. In Zimbabwe hordes of supposed veterans from the liberation war would have invaded the farms Afriforum members in retaliation.

He probably perceives it a weakness of the ANC's position, not a strength of South African law, that the same cannot happen in South Africa.

Kenya Supreme Court Made a Wrong Call

I have been following the Kenya elections saga, particularly after the elections were nullified by the Kenyan Supreme Court.

While everyone has been going hoarse singing praises to the court I beg to strongly differ.

From the look of it the court nullified the elections for no reason other than that the opposition was not happy.

The court found that the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission had “committed irregularities and illegalities in the transmission of results” and "other issues" which it did not bother to specify.

It looks like no one including the opposition has any idea what these illegalities, irregularities and other issues were. In other words there are no solid facts behind the judgement.

If the same standard were to be applied to the chad debacle in the United States election where George 'Dubya' Bush faced off with Al Gore in 2000, that election would have been rerun umpteen times.

In that election there were clearly identified issues with voting machines which made chads instead of punching holes in the voting paper. Automatic counting machines then discarded these votes is spoilt ballots.

After the technical problem had been clearly identified, the US authorities fell back to manually counting the votes. Even then there were issue as some of the impressions and chads made by the voting machines left the voter's intentions debatable. Still that did not nullify the election.

No such clearly defined problem with the voting process has been identified in the Kenyan election. Instead it seems the issue has been with the transmission of results.

Mwari wangu why not just order a simple recount! Or simply ask voting stations to phone in their results.

Why put the country through the risk of violence, not to mention wasting billions? After all independent international and local observers found no problem with the integrity of the election. Their independent tallies largely matched the official result.

What is it the Kenyan Supreme Court saw that hundreds of observers did not see?

The answer is probably nothing apart from the judge's political leanings. Being African I know how these things work in Africa. I need a little bit more information before I pass a final judgement, excuse the pun. I want to know the judge's village of origin and how far it is from Odinga's.

Secondly the margin of Uhuru's victory was not by any means a close call. There is a clear nine percent gap between him and the unhappy candidate. Is there any likelihood that those irregularities and illegalities, that the judge did not bother to specify, could have wiped out that margin? I don't think there is such a likelihood.

To those who are busy singing praises, I would like to say a political judgement is bad no matter who it goes for. If you put the contents of a Kibera latrine a bottle labelled 'Honey' it does not turn them into honey.

The fact that this judgement went for the opposition does not change that there is no solid legal facts to nullify the election. There is no proof of the actual voting process being significantly compromised. Nobody has given details of exactly what was done wrong. Therefore it is a bad judgement irrespective of who it went for.

If we are to nullify the elections on the basis of "transmission" that means all elections before the advent of computers and telecommunications were invalid.

My personal opinion is that the Kenyan supreme court made a terribly wrong call. We can go about nullifying elections simply because someone is not happy they have been defeated.

In any election there is always someone who is not happy with the result. Hillary Clinton is still grumbling about the US election of last year as we speak.

The Empress Is Naked

Grace Mugabe had got used to tossing around Zimbabwe government officials despite her not being part of government. A recent example example is when she picked on the permanent secretary for the ministry of information at a rally.

"Iwe George simuka!" (Wena George yima! Hey George stand up!). She then gave him a gale force verbal dry cleaning as he forlornly stood there. Ending it with "Chigara pasi!" (Now go sit down!). Even teachers of kindergarten classes show more respect than that for their pupils.

At past rallies and Zanu-PF Politiburo meetings she has claimed that she has a right to sit next to the president. It is clear in her mind the fact that she sleeps with Robert Mugabe gives her more authority than his official deputies.

She has unashamedly used that self-granted authority to wreak havoc in Zanu-PF and the Zimbabwe government. She effectively haunted one of Mugabe's deputies, Joice Mujuru, out of the party and government, throwing a stream of invective and insults after her.

Zimbabwe officials mostly deferred to her out of respect for her husband. Most of their complaints have been under the table, out of the public eye. However Grace herself brought to light some of what was being said under the table when she thundered at a rally, "Handizi hure raMugabe." (I am not Mugabe's prostitute.)

Everyone knows Mugabe has a hectic travel schedule. I know quite a number of Zimbabweans have been saying that is because of the 'young wife syndrome'. However as age has caught up with him he has looked increasingly frail. He has been unable to keep up the hectic schedule, so Grace has increasingly taken to travelling on her own.

Apparently it has never dawned to her that when she travels on her own she doesn't enjoy the protection of her husband's status. Nor does she carry any status incumbent with being a government official because she is not one.

Previously she was involved in a similar incident when she launched herself catlike, claws, fangs and all, at a reporter in Hong Kong. On that occasion she was in the company in the company of her husband, whose diplomatic immunity was extendable to his accompanying family members.

In South African instance the storm caught her without her umbrella. She was alone on a private visit without her husband.

She needs someone brave enough to tell her 'Empress, you are naked." The authority she granted herself in the Zimbabwe government is like bond notes. It cannot be exported to foreign governments.

I am sure there is a lot of quiet glee in Zimbabwe government circles, what we call in ChiKaranga (Shona) 'laughter that doesn't escape the ribs'. Many are quietly reciting the ChiKaranga saying "Zvaiwana ngwarati kudya ivete" (Finally the sable has been caught eating while lying down).

Her only possible saving grace is that the ANC is strong allies with Zanu-PF and they run the South African government. They might decide to do a Bashir on her. She can be Guptaed out of the country through an airforce base or granted immunity.

However it does not help her case that she is not being contrite and apologetic. Instead those acting for her have variously planted rumours that the victim attacked her. Or that she was a drug supplier for the errant Mugabe children.

In the first case her bodyguards should be fired immediately. How can they allow the First Lady to fight tooth and nail for thirty minutes to defend herself against a slight twenty-year old female while they watch.

In either case she should have shown trust in the South African authorities by reporting the transgressions against her. My advice to them is to stop the evasive nonsense. They should focus on getting a settlement.

Never mind what AfriForum says. Settlements are routinely made in some criminal cases. Bill Clinton settled with Paula Jones over more serious allegations than assault. This is a relatively minor case and the only reason to rule out settlement is to maximize the humiliation of Grace Mugabe.

Obviously that is an outcome the they are interested in. However despite their high horse, their motives seem less than noble. Some people are already crying racism over their involvement in the case.

Nonetheless there is no denying that the empress has just discovered that she is naked. There is no authority in being the wife of a president or even a queen. Prince Philip of Britain regularly gets taken to the cleaners for mere slips of the tongue.

Hellen Zille's Lies

So Helen Zille has been suspended over claims that colonialism brought motorcars, aeroplanes, tarred roads among other technology to Africa. The DA got it right.

Hellen Zille's narrative is wrong on several fronts. It paints all whites with the colonialist brush. Many were simply migrants running away from poverty and disease (such as The Black Death) in Europe.

She claims colonialists brought technology which did not even exist when colonialism happened. If colonialists are to be credited with bringing motor cars and aeroplanes to South Africa then the ANC should be credited with bringing smartphones. It is a fact we all started using smartphones during ANC rule.

Her tweets also reveal that she holds a deeply racist belief that Africans could not have adopted technology had they not been colonized. To me that is as good as telling me that I cannot be a competent engineer today because I am African. If you believe my forefathers were too stupid to learn technology why should you believe that, I a person with their genes, am competent enough to learn to say design a power system or build a motor car?

Below I highlight just three of the lies that Helen Zille seems to treat as gospel truth.

Lie number 1. Colonialism brought whites to Africa.

Despite people's perception Jan Van Reibeck did not come as colonialist. He was simply a migrant riding on a boat, seeking better life and wealth. Just like the thousands trying to cross the Mediterranean Sea today.

Thousands of other Europeans who came to this continent over three entire centuries, between Vasco da Gamas journey to India in the 15th century and the late 19th century, also did not come as colonialists. They were simply migrants seeking wealth.

Things turned nasty when vampires like Cecil John Rhodes, Lothar von Trothar and Leopold II of Belgium started grabbing everything of value and murdering Africans en masse.

Colonialism is not the only means of migration. When did China colonise the USA for there to be so many Chinatowns there.

Besides Robert Moffat in the late 19th century there were many Europeans living 'native'. These were wiped from history books because mentioning them would have proved that segregationist policies and laws were nonsense.

The immorality laws that were passed in Rhodesia and South Africa were aimed at stopping white men from 'going native'. Those laws did not stop white men from breeding an entire Coloured race with black women.

Lie Number 2: Colonialism brought technology to Africa

If I may ask, what model car was Cecil John Rhodes driving? What was his private aeroplane like? There is no answer because those things did not exist at all during his time. When he organised his band of bandits he called the pioneer column, to go and colonise my country, it was not transported by a fleet of superlink trucks, but ox-drawn wagons, most of the oxen stolen from the natives some bought.

Therefore Cecil Rhodes and his fellow colonialists could not have brought cars, airports and tarred roads to Africa because those things did not exist in the whole world.

Yes indeed technology was improved worldwide during the time Africa was colonized. However, through denial of rights to Africans, colonialism actually held Africa back from adopting the emerging technology together with the rest of the world. Africa was not short of people with intellectual capacity. Rather most of them were forced to abandon their chosen professions and fight the system that oppressed them. Nelson Mandela first chose to be a lawyer but he ended up holding a gun fighting for his freedom, and ultimately a prisoner.

Lie Number 3: Africans do not have the capacity to adopt technology

Helen Zille clearly implies that if there was no colonialism, Africans could not have adopted new technology. None of the things she mentions was invented in Russia. Can she tell us, when was Russia colonized for it to become a manufacturer of jets, cars and even nuclear bombs? We could ask the same question of China and Japan.

Adoption of technology was happening in Africa without colonialism. Some clans on the central plateau had acquired gunsmithing and gun powder making skills from the Portuguese. The term gokoro re unga is Shona for the place for making gunpowder. Some families including my great-grandfather owned such locally made muskets.

Africans definitely had mining and metalworking skills as well. We did not import spears from Europe did we. All that mining and metalworking skill, however rudimentary it was, was eradicated not enhanced by colonialism. That not one post-colonial African can identify iron ore and make spears, is an example of how colonialism removed African knowhow and replaced it with nothing.

Yes we do have skilled Africans today, most of us were only allowed to acquire those skills after colonialism ended.

In short Helen Zille's views on colonialism are not only based on false assumptions, but reveal a deeply racist psyche.

Helen Zille Thinks Blacks are Stupid and Can't Run a Country

Helen Zille claims the benefits of colonialism where

Independent judiciary - Does she even know that much of democratic norms evolved after colonialism. For example women were not even allowed to vote. Only in 1918 did Britain allow women who were over 30 and married to vote, meaning my friend Unathi would not have had the right to vote.

Secondly the monarchical system that prevailed in the UK everything depended on the monarch. Most enterprises and companies were enable by royal charter not any fair justice system. Zimbabwe my country was colonized by a private company (British South Africa Company) which had been given a royal charter by Mrs Victoria Wettin, British ruler at the time.

Transport infrastructure, piped water - I would love for Helen Zille to tell us what model car Cecil Rhodes was driving and what his private aeroplane was. She cannot. There were no cars therefore no tarred roads in the whole world. There were no aeroplanes or airports. In short colonialists could not have brought what they did not have at all, to Africa. They did not bring roads, they did not bring airports, they did not bring water engines, they did not bring tractors to farm the land.

Colonialists came here because they were running away from disease (black death, plague, etc) poverty and hunger in Europe. We were rich they were poor. They only became rich and us poor after they took our land, minerals, and in some cases livestock.

Much of the technology we take for granted today, evolved DURING colonialism. It did not exist in Europe before colonialism, therefore colonialists could not have brought it.

The real truth is that because of racist restrictions to the self-determination of Africans, and wholesale theft of their resources, land and minerals, colonialism was a jackboot on the neck that prevented Africa from keeping pace. It was not an enabler of any sort.

How could Africans keep pace when their land was taken and they could not even build homes where they wanted? Africans as squatters (informal settlers) to this day because of that land theft. How could Africans keep pace when their movement, hence corrdination was restricted?

How could Africans keep pace when their organisations and associations like the ANC were banned. How could Africans keep pace when their inteliintisia like Mandela were thrown in jail. If Mandela and thousands of other Africans did not have to spend their lives fighting just for self determination who knows what they could have achieved.

In her twittirade Helen Zille compares Singapore to South Africa for the past 50 years, supposedly to juckstapose the progress of the former to the lack of thereof of the latter. What befuddles my little mind is how could she do that and fail completely to mention the role apartheid had in those years. Is she simply being dishonest or is she trying to erase apartheid from our memories? Pretend as if it didn't exist.

It is clear Helen Zille lays responsibility for the past 50 years at the feet of the current black leadership of the country. Juxtaposing it with Singapore is just her own round about way of saying blacks are stupid and can't run a country.

Take also her assertion that colonialism 'brought' things that clearly were invented or evolved after it happened. It his her way of saying Africa could not have adopted that technology if there were no white present on the continent. That also boils down to the same racist blacks are stupid thinking.

Helen Zille is evidence that someone can be a racist without knowing it. Maybe they know but just want to pretend to be progressive.

Criminality in South Africa: An Eco-System Fed By South African Officialdom

The President of South Africa, Jacob Zuma, is right when he says people are fed with crime. He just does not understand the extend of his own involvement in creating the perception that foreigners are deeply involved with criminal intent in South Africa.

Let us be honest. Criminality in South Africa is not the exclusive preserve of black African migrants of low social status, who are the only victims of xenophobic attacks.

Radovan Krejcir is not a black African. Nor was Mark Thatcher who was convicted of organizing coups from South Africa. The Guptas have not been convicted of anything but the stories swirling murkily around them are not nice.

Secondly where criminality occurs it is often in collusion with South Africans including officials in some cases. Krejcir literally had a hit squad of police officers on his pay. Former police commissioner, Jackie Selebi, served time in jail for receiving bribes from a criminal who was not a black African migrant. That is like the FBI director taking bribes from say Osama bin Laden.

Even in cases where African immigrants are involved in criminality, you will find that somewhere there is the connivance of officialdom. Take for example issue that seems to have triggered the most recent upheaval, brothels full of human-trafficked women. The police know exactly where those brothels are. In the suburb I live, the street that runs right in front of the police station is full of such brothels. They are left undisturbed because the pimps 'eat' together with the officers.

In that same street there is an illegal shebeen within a couple hundred metres of the police station's main door. Other shebeens that spring up further away are quickly shut down. The rumour is the shebeen owner is related to one of the police officers.

One of my relatives was once arrested for public drinking and urination in that street. When I went to pay a fine for him, I personally witnessed about 10 girls being released from the police cells directly into the custody of a man who seemed Nigerian. Apparently the man had 'forgotten' to 'take care' of the police officers which is why 'his' girls had been rounded up the previous night.

A few years back when I was reporting as the condition of my work permit the male home affairs official serving me complained that virtually every female officer he worked with was living with a Nigerian. He said for that reason whenever a law enforcement operation was planned, the criminals would be told in advance and disappear only to come back after the operation.

Last year a journalist did an investigative report on how a police officer involved with a drug dealer was helping him by arresting his rivals.

The real problem that needs to be tackled is corruption and inefficient service.

The people who do not have proper documentation are usually not involved in hard high value criminality. Most of the time they are working without papers.

Often that is because home affairs has not responded to their applications for permits or asylum on time. And uncle of mine with a degree from Europe and working as an Oracle expert for NHS spend two years waiting for a permit. His old permit expired and for the second of those two years he was technically illegal. He eventually got the permit.

The hard criminals often have 'valid' documentation. They have the money to pay hefty bribes to officials, and buy whatever documents they need.

I am not calling the Guptas criminals but they are an example of high value migrants who carefully cultivate connections with senior government officials. I believe I do not need to mention names or the level of government they are connected to.

The Guptas have not been convicted of anything but money laundering to Dubai, attempting to plant functionaries in the country's cabinet, and trying to smuggle suitcases of diamonds out of the country are among the accusations that been publicly made against them.

Very often high value migrants, among them criminals, also afford to pay for 'marriage' to South African women. A former workmate of mine once told me that her cousin was getting paid about R1000 every month for 'marriage' by a Nigerian.

She wanted to know if I could enter into the same arrangement with her.

The bottom line is that for every criminal migrant, there is several South Africans working with them. This does not just apply to migrants and South Africans of low social status. It goes way, way up the social strata. People who make a lot of noise about migrants are often themselves eating from the hands of migrants.

But many are hypocrites like Edward Zuma who once complained about foreigners without batting an eyelid about his father's close friends.

I told you Donald

No sooner had I mentioned that Donald Trump was ignorant to ban people from some countries for fear of terrorism, than the story broke confirming my fears.

Diplomatic officials from a country not on his list, Venezuela, and clearly not meeting his criteria of potential terrorist source, had a racket going selling fake national documents to people some from countries on Donald's list. Iraq and Syria were mentioned.

It is nothing new, that corrupt officials take backhanders. Hollywood has created the impression that it is only the mafia that pays bribes and the police who take them. In the real world it is anyone with cash can pay bribes. Big corporations, intelligence agencies and, yes, terrorists often pay huge bribes.

In many developing countries, officials often openly extort small bribes from ordinary citizens for basic services. Such officials usually consider those approaching them with offers of large amounts of cash as a 'score'. What in Zimbabwean parlance we would call 'kubata mhene'. That roughly means catching a golden goose with your bare hands.

When people pay bribes, they do not announce their ultimate motive to those they are bribing. Nobody is going to approach an embassy or a national registry and announce, "Hey, I am a terrorist. Give me a fake document so that I can go bomb America". They will approach officials with very innocent sounding stories like "My uncle has found me a job in America, I need to go there quickly"

I am just giving these scenarios as an example. In the majority corrupt officials do not care a raindrop's chance in hell what the bribe payer is going to do with the documents. In fact, they may not see the ultimate recipient of the documents, but deal with pushers and middlemen.

The pushers may be runners tasked by the officials to find clients, or maybe cashing in on 'knowing the right people'. These middlemen mostly do not allow their 'clients' to be in contact with the officials they deal with. Knowing 'the right people' is high value intellectual property, so to speak.

Do not imagine that the officials taking bribes are just low ranking officials. It can be anyone up the command chain. In South Africa, Jackie Selebi was convicted of taking bribes when he was national police commissioner (the equivalent of FBI director). The CNN story suggests that people as high as a minister may be getting a cut from the sale of fake Venezuelan documents.

Also in South Africa the minister of defense was accused of smuggling a person illegally into South Africa on an official plane. Not to mention that the man now president has a friend who was convicted of paying bribes to him. Oh, what about the foreign wedding cortege that landed at the country's most secure airforce base.

Mind you when people take bribes, the official policy of they governments counts for nothing. All they want is the money. Sometimes they are socially engineered. Recent media stories mentioned how Nigerians often start affairs with civil officials so that they get close to an inside person.

In most developing countries, officials will take bribes faster than Donald Duck can say 'Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeez' in a cartoon. Excuse the pun. Countries that are economically stressed like Venezuela, are especially susceptible.

Donald Trump's immigration ban was drowning in naivete, even before it was floated.

Dear Donald

Dear Donald

I never thought you would want to become a duck, but it seems you are working very hard to make yourself a sitting one.

Whoever told you that people can be terrorists on the basis of their religion forgot to tell you that Christians have been terrorists since the times of crusaders. We are in a modern enlightened world but your actions and so called convictions are no different from those who burned Joan of Arc at the pyre for being a heretic. I demand that you remove my African brothers and Muslims from your pyre of hate.

The chaos and legal setbacks that immediately succeeded your dictatorial order suggest that you are ignorant of the laws of the country you lead. On a whim, you have thrown people who have diligently followed the laws of your country to the dogs, literally leaving some of them stranded in the air.

I would expect such behaviour from small minded dictators like Kim Jong-un. It seems the two of you share more than hairstyles. You both think your personal word and beliefs constitute the law of the land. Please do not take America back to the dark ages. The world needs an enlightened America not the fascist fiefdom you are trying to make it.

Your behaviour would have seen Benito and Adolf puffing up their chests with pride in you. If anyone can muster a smile inside The Inferno they are probably chuckling now.

Your executive order does not improve security in slightest. Determined terrorists can easily arrange fake passports from numerous countries not on your list. The fact that you can even imagine that such a measure will work suggests that you are clueless about how international travel and national registries work worldwide.

Your pompous ignorance is what is a real danger to American security. You are like a man who is busy showing the village how good he is at dancing to fireworks, by setting his house is on fire - divorced from reality.

Whatever you criteria for selecting countries whose citizens to ban was, it has precious little to do with terrorism. Otherwise you would not have left out a country whose nationals organised the biggest terrorist attack on American soil, the World Trade Centre plane attack. A nation who citizens are said to be among the chief sponsors of the terrorist organisation you claim to be fighting, ISIS.

In case you haven't noticed, your rhetoric is already inspiring terrorism. A terrorist who has professed admiration of you has just killed six people in Canada. Given that you inspire terrorists, perhaps it is time you signed an executive order barring yourself from the USA.

I am glad you are discovering that it takes more than tweety fingers to run a country. Especially one as big and critically important in the world as the United States.

Please stop making America unsafe. It also makes the rest of the world unsafe,

Zimbabwe: There is absolutely nothing to blame SADC for

Those who insist on blaming SADC for Mugabe's continued rule in Zimbabwe are completely wrong. Recently SADC has been negatively contrasted with ECOWAS after the recent events in The Gambia. Some people also cite ECOWAS' role in the Ivory Coast.

These people are comparing snort apples (matobwe) and bananas. ECOWAS had solid grounds to support both Quattara and Barrow. SADC never had similar grounds.

In The Gambia Barrow was declared the winner and the Colonel General Professor Doctor Jammeh (profound apologies for leaving out the rest of the half-page paragraph of his titles) even conceded defeat. ECOWAS had solid grounds to support the official outcome of an election.

In the Ivory Coast, like Zimbabwe, there was a first round of elections in which there was no winner. A second round was held and Quattara won 54%. Gbagbo then CANCELLED the results of seven districts that supported Quattara resulting in himself becoming the winner.

The United Nations and ECOWAS decided to uphold the official results announced by the IEC. They had solid grounds for supporting an official election outcome.

In the case of Zimbabwe there was a first round is which THERE WAS NO OFFICIAL WINNER. A second round was held. Tsvangirai then WITHDREW from the second round GIFTING Mugabe a clear victory. I had actually wanted to say 'the coward Tsvangirai' but I will hold that back.

Tell me what should SADC have done? Force Tsvangirai back into the election?

In any case Mugabe had offered to negotiate with Tsvangirai BEFORE the runoff. The latter rebuffed the offer.

After Mugabe's UNCHALLENGED victory, what SADC then facilitated was a coalition given the opposition's official strong showing. That was a very pragmatic approach and Tsvangirai should thank SADC for helping him get into government after he had officially lost the election, and failed to negotiate for himself despite Mugabe's willingness.

To those who claim rigging let me point out that not once have Zimbabwe elections or outcomes ever been challenged in court. The one time that Tsvangirai did make noises about a court challenge, in2013, he later withdrew it. Himself, cited the lack of rigging evidence for the withdrawal.

There is nothing to blame SADC for.

Pragmatism: Why The Gambia Type Scenario Won't Work in Zimbabwe

I want to be sauntering lackadaisically in the lush green plains of Manyene listening to the side splitting jokes of my elders like mudhara Hahuhunazvi (nickname meaning "you won't lick this beer").

I want to be able to go to Chambara or Nyamhere clinic and get painkillers if I have a headache. I long for the days as I child when I would dread a visit to the clinics because it was guaranteed I would get a 'jekiseni' (antibiotic injection).

Those days are no more. Our country is in a terrible state. Ruled by people who would rather spend millions of US dollars going kusikero (post-natal baby inspection and weighing) in a foreign country than spend a few hundred thousands dollars making sure every clinic is well stoked with medicines.

I want to be building my homestead (kuvaka musha) rather than toiling in a foreign land trying to raise some cash to send my relatives back home. I want the economic gangrene that has infected Zimbabwe to be amputated and thrown onto the rubbish heap of history.

I want my country to stop being the shebeen example (and every sundry drinking place) of bad management. A country that any drunkard so sloshed that they have got only a few brain cells left in working order, if you ask them "Which is the worst managed country in the world?" they will slur out "Zimbabwe" in that half passed-out state.

I want my skills and expertise to benefit my people without risking starving myself. I want a country that simply works.

No matter how desperately I want proper leadership in Zimbabwe, I will not be fooled into thinking that a Gambia scenario will work in my country. The Gambia is a country that is barely 20km across and maybe an odd 150km long. The length of the country would fit in the distance from my home town of Chivhu to Harare. The width of the country would leave out places like Mhondoro Mubayira and Manyene if Simon Mazorodze road were a line running down the centre of the country. Chitungwiza would be a border town.

It is entirely surrounded by Senegal except for a thin sliver of beautiful beaches on the Atlantic. Its army is made up of a mighty 2500 soldiers. It has never fought in any wars. The army's most strenuous experience has been harassing Jammeh's opponents. Relative to Zimbabwe it is a toy army.

Zimbabwe has more than 80'000 militarily trained personnel (army, air force and police) in active service. The armed forced have fought in several engagements in the past few decades, from Mozambique to the DRC. The Gambia's most strenuous engagements have been sending 200 soldiers on UN peace keeping missions.

There is no regional army that can take out Zimbabwe's army in a few hours of marching like was done in the Gambia. You can be assured that any war will be brutal, lengthy and have no guaranteed outcome.

Having foreigners occupy the fiercely proud people of Zimbabwe will also be a problem. You can be guaranteed that triggering violence will lead to lengthy internecine violence like Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya.

We need to solve the Zimbabwe situation, but let us not imagine that a The Gambia scenario is one of the solutions.