Mugabe: Zanu-PF's Old Ox

Those of us who grew up in rural Zimbabwe know what it is like to have an old ox that you trust and love so much. Everytime you inspan oxen to plough the fields, the old ox would be tathered to lead the team. It's age and creaky bones would be ignored.

It's back would be innured to the constant whiplashes to try and get a faster pace out it. Onlookers would wonder, often very loudly, whether the old ox could take another step without dropping dead. But the family, stranded with no other oxen to turn to, would keep prodding the plodding grand old sire into taking a few more steps, no matter how laboured.

Zanu-PF have got their old ox. Weathered by old age, many believing it can't take another step forward. However Zanu-PF, for lack of choice it seems, have tathered their old ox and brought it to the yoke again. They hope to prod it into plodding a few more years in power for them.

Their old ox, its ears inured to the constant whiplashes of criticism assailing it, has risen to the occasion and promised to plod forward a few more years of rule. That the old ox stumbled badly the last time they yoked it, seems relegated to realm of blissful oblivion. The herd of young steers snorting with impatience in the periphery seems ignored.

That the field ahead is littered with stumps that require more pulling power than old bones can muster seems to be totally absent from the party's future vision. They insist that their old ox is actually an old fox - willy and full of the necessary tricks to keep them ruling.

Us outsiders can only look and but wonder how many more steps the family can get out of the old ox. Sometime we pity the old ox, that no young steers seem ready to take the role of furrow leader (forosi). We can see that the ox is now old and tired, but it is the owners who will choose when to let it rest.

The MDC and Zanu-PF are the same.

My long standing argument has always been that the MDC are no better than Zanu-PF because they exhibit the same signs of intolerance, the same signs crony enrichment, the same signs on heavy handedness and the same cluelessness about the true meaning of freedom.

Both parties are full of people who brazenly use threats and insults to intimidate opponents, whether real or perceived. Both parties are full of people who shy away from intelligent discourse in favour of belligerent pronouncements, threatening accusation and a tar-brush approach to criticism.

Many of them exhibit political maturity below that of medieval warlords and pre-colonial African chiefs. Despite all of them making a lot of noise about the constitution, they seem to think their personal word is the supreme law of the country.

How else do you explain a sitting MP, making brazen threats like “Martin Chinyanga Da William, I have fired you from MDC from onwards you are no longer a member of MDCT have nothing to do with us. You can go and petition anywhere you want…I am an MP. I HAVE FIRED YOU”. This person seems to be totally unaware that there is something called due process, and a disciplinary committee.

Like Zanu-PF the MDC also exhibit an astounding level cluelessness about the technical aspects of running an economy. They seem to suffer from the same belief that authority can impose control on economic factors. The only thing authority can do is carefully study the factors and then adapt their own actions to suit the reality.

The size and expense of Zimbabwe's cabinet under Zanu-PF, made even worse under the GNU (Zanu-PF and MDC together), does not suit the reality that Zimbabwe is a country with a struggling economy.

Maybe I am dull stupid or something. Maybe it is because my mind is so simple, that I fail to understand how we can have more than seventy ministers and their deputies - each with several government bought cars - in a country that cannot provide a basic ambulance service in its capital city.

Is it too much of a request upon the powers that be, to ask them to give up some of their cars so that at least a few ambulances can be bought to take people to hospitals. Is it too much of a burden upon the powers that be, to ask them that give up a few of they foreign trips so that we can put just a few more medicines, even if only pain killers, in the cupboards of our clinics.

Dishonest Leadership is Zimbabwe's Biggest Problem

The major problem we have is that our leaders are not honest. They would impose price controls by day and rush to sell on the black-market by night. A classical case was when a woman was found with her boot full of newly printed money. She tried to contact a very close adviser to the reserve bank governor, who later described her as his 'intimate casual girlfriend' or mistress in simple English.

Officials were brazenly using laws and by-laws to loot legitimate businesses. A law imposing price limits would be passed by evening and the following morning price control teams would fan out and confiscate goods from supermarkets accused of overcharging. The same goods would later find their way onto the blackmarket at much much higher prices, with the same officials pocketing the money.

A classical case was the case where companies and organisations were forced to remit of bank their foreign currency in local banks with the promise that it would be kept as foreign currency. On several occasions such organisations would wake up to find that their money had been converted to Zim dollars at the official rate which was a miniscule of the black-market rate.

The Zimdollars given to the people who worked for the money, couldn't buy anything while those who just took the money would now buy luxury cars including umpteen cylinder Barabuses. Recently one such organisation filed a lawsuit to try and recover their money.

The tactics used by the then Zanu-PF only government to manage the economy were heavy handed, devoid of intelligent analysis, and often based upon spurious unscientifically tested assumptions. I see exactly the same kind of ignorant heavy handedness in the current demands that banks bring back money from 'offshore'. The minister now leading the heavy handed charge, Tendai Biti, now belongs to the MDC.

The pattern of lack of scientific study remains the same. The pattern of leaving their own personal benefits untouched and even growing, remains the same. The pattern of jumping at the mote in another's eye while gingerly stepping around the log in one's own eye remains the same.

My long standing opinion is that the difference between Zanu-PF and the MDC is that between a wolf and a jackal. Neither can be trusted with a flock of sheep. Neither can be trusted to run Zimbabwe properly. Neither can be trusted to eradicate corruption.

Unfortunately the landscape of political analysis is monopolised by analysts who don't see beyond party names. The political landscape is full of people who are blind to all other facts except the name of the party. These analysts some of them acclaimed academics endeavour to reduce all political discourse to an Orwellian chant of "so'n'so good, so'n'so bad"

Animal farm is a story about animals who overthrow the leadership of humans and institute a slogan of 'Four legs good, two legs bad'. As the pigs who took over the running of the farm start to enjoy the comforts left behind by humans and learn to walk on their hind legs, the slogan us changed to 'Four legs good, two legs better!'

Before the GNU the opposition airwaves were full of chants of 'MDC good, Mugabe bad." Since the MDC leaders got into government and started to enjoy the wamth and comforts of power the chants have been slowly migrating towards 'Mugabe good, MDC better'. I would rather chant "MDC and Zanu-PF 'same differnce'".

A write up on Wikipedia about Animal Farm rightly says that the novel "portrays corrupt leadership as the flaw in revolution (and not the act of revolution itself), it also shows how potential ignorance and indifference to problems within a revolution could allow horrors to happen"

In Zimbabwe corruption is the grindstone that has been tied around the country's neck. Ignorance has been the scourge that has riven incompetent leadership of key institutions like the Reserve Bank with disastrous consequences. In difference by top leadership whose pockets are not affected, or are actually fattened, by mismanagement of the economy has allowed horrors to be visited upon the masses.

We need responsible government

"................. is not Government that puts food on the table for civil servants." -- Morgan Tsvangirai

It is the responsibility of government to put food on the tables of civil servants. Government is their employer, and government is not a slave running entity. It is the responsibility of every employer who is not a slave runner to provide living wages for his workers. Any caring employer should try and ensure the welfare of their employees is well looked after.

 What is not government's responsibility, is to put multiple cars in the garages of senior politicians and ensure astronomically paying jobs for the cronies and relatives of political leaders.

Right now, the Zimbabwe government is underpaying civil servants because it is spending too much on an over-bloated executive (70 plus ministerial level posts are simply too much!).

On top of that some government arms such as the PM's office are famous for having a very large 'kitchen cabinets'. That is people with no official role in government but just hanging onto the coat tails of appointed leaders in order to make money.

I think Mangosuthu Buthelezi captured the essense of Zimbabwe's problem (and much of Africa) when he said "Too many, and I dare say the overwhelming majority, are trying to make money on account of holding public office, being in politics or exercising public power."

As long as that political culture remains, Africa is going nowhere in terms of development. As long as Zimbabwe's politicians are more worried about making money for themselves first and for their family and friends second, the life of ordinary Zimbabweans is going to be hell.

No all of us are connected to a rich relative or friend. The only chance that we have is through a fair system that allows us to enjoy the fruits of our hard work. A system that takes from us the hard-workers and gives to a few who happen to know somebody high up is never going to work.

We need fairness.

Land Dispute In Zimbabwe's Communal Lands

By Marimo Ronald - Ndinokumbirawo kuti ndibatsirwe neruzhinji kuti ndizive masimba a sabhuku zvichienderana nekutongwa kwemabhuku .Ndiri kugara mubhuku raKahari mudunhu ra chief Chikwaka nyaya irikundishungurudza ndeyekuti sabhuku anandakavakidzana naye anonzi Jemera Chirima anoti avakuda kundibvisa panvimbo yandakasiyiwa nevabereki vangu. vabereki vangu vakatanga kugara mubhuku iri 1949 kusvika parinhasi chinondinetsa ndochokuti vabereki vangu vari vapenyu sabhuku uyu haana kumbotaura zvomuganhu .uye vabereki vangu vakagariswa patsva nachigovanyika ,minda yavo ine madundhunduru. madhomini akavagarisa anononzi Mandhava na Magwenzi . Zvitupa zvavo kusvikira panechangu zvakanyorwa kunzi bhuku Kahari .Chirikundinetsa ndeckuti Zvondonzi ndibve Inzvimbo yaNyamasoka ndoenda kupi nemhuri uye ini ndirikuona kunge Sabhuku uyu arikutengesa nzvimbo saka kupera kwaita kwake ndikokwavekukonzera kuti atsvagurudze zvemiganhu. Vanokwanisa kundipawo mazano ngavandibatsirewo ndashaiwa zano nenyaya iyi.

Translation

By Marimo Ronald - I need help to understand the powers of a headman over the village they preside over. I stay in Kahari village in Chief Chikwaka's area. My problem is that my headman Jemera Chirima wants to evict me from the home I inherited from my parents. My parents moved to this village in 1949. My parents were allocated the land by Chigovanyika and the agricultural demonstrators who demarcated the land are Mandhava and Magwenzi.  While my parents were alive the headman never mentioned anything about boundaries. My national identification card and those of my parents state that we come from Kahari village. My problem is that I am now being asked to move away and allow Nyamasoka to move in. Where do I go with my family. I thing the headman has been accepting money to allocate land. Now he has run out of land in his jurisdiction, he wants to evict me. I need your help because I am at my wits' end.

http://www.facebook.com/groups/ziffe/permalink/244965172249007/

Your problem illustrates one of the problems left behind by colonialists and not addressed at all by subsequent land reform programs. In terms of the law neither you nor the Sabhuku owns the land. In the early colonial days communal land was called the Queen's Land. Native reserves were created by colonial state on the Queen's Land. In other words the land legally belonged to the Queen and natives were only allowed to stay there upon the Queen's grace.

As you can see the native residents were not owners of the land and if the Queen (upon the recommendation of the colonial government) decided to use the land for something else, they could not take her to court. This was designed to make it easy to evict the natives if the land was allocated to whites as happened with the Tangwena people of Gairezi.

After Ian Smith's UDI the land became Tribal Trust Lands. The state took over ownership from the Queen (since Ian Smith was unilaterally declaring independence from the Queen ruled Great Britain). However the people living on the land were still not given formal title to the land.

After independence the land was rechristened Communal Lands but was still left in the ownership of the state. The residents of communal lands still do not have formal title to the land.

When white farmers were evicted, most of them took the state to court. That is because they have formal title (registered ownership) of the land (commonly referred to as title deeds or deed of grant). On the other hand people like the Tangwena and Chiadzwa people had no recourse to the law because they had no registered title to the land they called their homes. Unfortunately this lack of registered deed of grant or lease, applies to all people in communal lands (i.e. former native reserves (maruzevha) and communalised resettlements (minda mirefu)).

A deed of grant establishes the fact of who owns what land and the boundaries of the land. If you have no such record, the court has to rely of the word of witnesses and then it becomes your word against the Sabhuku's and any other witnesses either of you might call before the court. Even then the rights that both of you enjoy are less than those of a registered title holder. The colonial system deliberately left natives without adequate rights and protection.

I am not aware of any cases involving a traditional leader and a tenant that have been taken to court, so I do not know if there is a legal precedent to your case. Disputes such as the Tangwena case and the Chiadzwa case have been disputes between the state and occupants of communal lands.

In both cases what happened has depended on the political mood of the moment. As such their fate has been entirely at the whim of politicians. If the politics of the day is in your favour then good for you, but if things go the other way then you are virtually without legal protection.

In today's terms it may boil down to whether you are a Zanu-PF member or an MDC member. Being neutral sometimes doesn't help because each group then accuses you of belonging to the other.

I do not want to lie to you and say that I know the exact solution to your problem. The best option is to maintain good relations with your neighbours such as the sabhuku, if that is possible, so that you avoid giving each other problems.

The second option is to simply stay put and do nothing. The Sabhuku does not have the legal authority to evict you. But remember this won't stop him from using illegal violence against you. You should carefully consider your safety before taking this route.

Another option is to try and use traditional channels. You can take your case to the chief of your area. The chief can then make a determination. Traditionally the chief's authority is above that of the Sabhuku. However it is very likely the Sabhuku will bear a grudge against you for a long time and could find other ways of causing you trouble in future.

Lastly you can explore the idea of obtaining a peace order against the Sabhuku and others disturbing your peace. This affords you protection in terms of state law, provided the law is professionally and impartially enforced. I would also suggest that you approach Ministry of Lands and/or Ministry of Local Government officials in your district and obtain their opinion. They are the groups most likely to have dealt with similar cases in the past.

But let me stress the best way to solve any dispute is to avoid it. Therefore the best option would be to maintain good relations with your neighbours and avoid the dispute in the first place. That would mean negotiating your way out of the predicament by talking to the Sabhuku. For matters to come to this point, there must be something you and him are disagreeing about which you havent't mentioned. Pamwe makamitisirana vana kana kutorerana vakadzi (nyangwe vekubhawa).

You know your own circumstances better than I do so at the end of the day everything depends on your wise judgement. Make your decisions very carefully because this matter can affect you for the rest of your life.

Why we need a small lean government

Right now in Zimbabwe we have a situation were government officials and ministers have several cars bought by the taxpayer. The normal rule with official cars is they should be driven by the person to whom it is allocated or when that person is a passenger.

Therefore an official has no need for more than one car because they cannot ride in more than one car. Zimbabwean officials have multiple cars just for the sake of status, not because they need them.

A bloated, extravagant and expensive top
hierarchy of government is a waste of money.

At the same time ordinary people are suffering from lack of simple infrastructure and services. People have to take each other to hospital in scotch carts and wheelbarrows. Yet the money that is used to buy extra status symbol cars for officials could be used to buy simple ambulances and enough for every district.

A small efficient top hierarchy will free up money
to provide services to the people.

As mentioned earlier each official only NEEDS one car. Any special purpose vehicles should be pool cars.

I do not buy the argument that you need big 4x4s because the roads in most of the constituencies are bad and cannot be accessed with ordinary cars. Fix the roads so that you can go there with ordinary cars. A car for an official is only used by that official, whereas a road is used by thousands of people.

There is something called efficiency. Isn't it more efficient to spend money for the direct benefit of more people than for the benefit of one person.

The money saved from buying less and cheaper cars for officials can be used to provide sorely needed services. It can also be used to provide better salaries for underpaid civil servants.

Save Zimbabwe: What needs to be done.

I am always talking about what others are NOT doing right in running Zimbabwe. Well that is what we armchair critics do - criticize from the comfort of our armchairs. We see all the wrong things but never really do anything ourselves.

What would I do if I were ever to run Zimbabwe.

1. Reduce the size of the gravy train by
• Reducing the number of executive posts. A maximum of sixteen ministers and no deputies. Upgrade the perm secs so that they can act as deputies if necessary.
• One minister one car policy. This habit of ministers having a spare car to take the poodle to the vet while Zimbabweans take each other to hospital in wheelbarrows and scotchcarts must stop.
• No luxuries at taxpayer's expense. This habit of ministers trying to outspend Bill Gates, Philip Chiyangwa, Carlos Slim, Warren Buffet and all the other billionaires combined, but using taxpayers money must stop. For example the one car above should be a locally assembled reasonable car like a Mazda 3 or Mazda 6 at most, not an umpteen cylinder Barabus. This policy would apply to every public or public linked post including mayors and parastatal managers.
• Have two strong anti-corruption units. One should be independent and directly linked to the judiciary and the other should be supervised by the president. The first should be to prosecute offenders and the second should be to gather intelligence on corrupt activities.
2. Zimbabwe first
• Look inside. The idea of feeding your chickens to mongooses in order to spite eagles means you still loose your chickens. Haupi hukwana kuhovo nekuti wasvotwa negondo. In my books any policy that says look elsewhere is not right. You must look inside Zimbabwe first. If we really have to look elsewhere then our neighbours must have first priority. They are the ones who take much of the strain in times of our troubles. During the liberation war Mozambique, Zambia, Botswana took most of the refugees from the then Rhodesia. They even suffered direct military attacks on their soil but they stood by us. Right now in a time of economic mismanagement largely of our own making, it is South Africa which is even facing threats of civil unrest by its own citizens because of our large numbers there.
• We should not be using taxpayers money to fund expensive lifestyles and foreign education for public officials' children. Taxpayers money should go torwards funding and improving infrastructure in Zimbabwe. Sending the children of officials to get foreign education is not even necessary. They only do it for bragging rights and status symbol power ('Wangu mwana ari kuLondon. Akatomboona Queen vachipfuura' as if seeing the queen passing is anything special). We have the best education ethos in the world. Some of us are 100% Zimbabwean educated and are among the best at what we do. There is no reason why the children of officials should not get a good education in Zimbabwe if they are bright.
3. Pay public workers well
• This is necessary to stop corruption and improve efficiency. I am not saying we should make civil servants millionaires. However every civil servant should be able to pay off a car over six years, pay off a house over 20 years while sending three children to good public schools. Civil servants should not have to supplement their salaries by selling peanuts at work. In the past it was automatic that teachers, nurses and police officers would be well to do. Now vegetable vendors are doing better. That should never be the case.
4. Reduce taxes and educate people on why they need to pay taxes.
• Right now everybody thinks that you pay taxes in order to make ministers rich (which is practically true in the current corrupt environment) or that government money is inexhaustible. Government money comes from taxpayers pockets and every person whose pocket ever runs out of money should know that the same applies to government. If taxpayers don't have money the government won't have money. Taxes are levied to fund common services such as roads, schools, hospitals and justice delivery. They are not levied to enrich ministers.
• Secondly it is better to collect low taxes from more people than to collect very high taxes from those few that you can catch which is what is happening in Zimbabwe now.
5. Close off opportunities for corruption by ensuring efficient service delivery
• People pay bribes because they are faced with inefficient opaque service delivery. If you want a passport and you do not know when it will be delivered chances are that you will even offer the bribe to get it in a reasonable time frame. However if you know that my passport will come after 4 weeks without fail you can wait.
• One of the reasons why service delivery is so inefficient is that supervision ranges from weak to non-existent, or the managers themselves are corrupt.
• The other is plain laziness. Therefore you need practical methods to monitor and evaluate service delivery. You need indicators that can be reliably measured and monitored. In these days of computer technology it is very easy to attach a bar code to a form and monitor its progress in great detail.
6. Educate stakeholders on their rights and duties
• The only way institutions can function correctly is if the people (not just the media who are usually just as corrupt, or more so, as the other institutions) can effectively police them as well as make correctly informed choices when filling up those institutions.
• Zimbabwe needs a subject called Democracy and Development Studies as part of the school curriculum. This will educate and sensitize people from a young age on how to evaluate the development needs of their communities as well as how to select key implementors of the development plans.
• Hopefully this will minimize instances of the electorate being taken for a ride by empty or impractical promises from politicians.

Notice that I haven't mentioned any party names or people's name to exclude or include. I haven't said anything along the lines 'VaNhingirikiri chete chete' or 'Only Nhingirikiri has the brandpower to challenge VaNhingirikiri'. I have laid out a set of ideas that any Zimbabwean should be able to take and use to make Zimbabwe right. The only requirement is the the person should be honest, diligent, hardworking, knowledgeable and tough enough to stick to his principles. He should also genuinely care about all the people in the country not just a particular racial or ethnic group.

Believe me there is going to be a lot of noise from the people who will loose the benefit and opportunity to slavish off the taxpayers. Kana uchidzinga bere pambudzi yako yarabata rinotombokuhon'era chete. If you are chasing a hyena away from your goat it will growl at you.

Notice also that I also haven't mentioned transient issues like land reform and indigenisation. I have concentrated in what I consider core principles that need to be diligently pursued forever. That does not mean I do not consider transient issues important. They are issues that can be tackled in a generation and they need to be tackled this generation. If they are tackled properly, they should soon be forgotten as major political issues. This also need to be tackled in conjunction with other core policies. For example it is plain idiocy to give people agricultural land and in the same sweep ban the free trade of agricultural commodities. If you don't want people to freely market their produce what are you giving them land for in the first place!

Also have some selection criteria that recognizes people with appropriate skills. Give preference to people with agricultural qualifications. I do not believe the absolute bullshit that to be good farmer someone has to be a certain race. Whites had well capitalised agricultural operations because of past racial preferential treatment, but we do know that they started off under-capitalised as well, which is why they had to resort to forced labour (chibharo) to kick-start their agricultural operations. It is to be expected that those being given equal opportunity on the land now will start off undercapitalised, but with time their capitalisation levels will also improve. Giving preference to people with agricultural qualification will speed up the process though it does not necessarily eliminate it altogether.

Indeginisation as well should not be about taking over existing operations but spreading opportunities to previously disadvantaged groups. Rather than take over National Foods it is much better for the government to say it will buy say its rations for soldiers from a company with 51 percent black ownership. Right now our government would rather import rice noodles from China and give them to soldiers who grew up eating sadza, just because it wants to 'Look East'.

In mining rather than pushing in a few black individuals into the ownership structures make sure the community from whose land the minerals are being extracted benefits. If a mine is in Chivi district then give a percentage to Chivi District Council a percentage to Masvingo Province and a percentage to national coffers. Methods of making sure the community benefits have to be studied and fine tuned. You could work the benefits into the taxation model but then you would have to deal with tax evasion and plain cheating by operators. You could demand fixed royalties but then you would also run the risk of demanding too much such that operations become unprofitable or too little to make any difference to the status quo. It is a subject that needs further careful thinking and study.

Ownership of mining concessions should also be tallied with short to medium term investment plans on the concession concerned. The aim is to prevent hoarding of concessions as well as create more investment flow. Mining concessions should also be linked to the building of local processing plants. Companies the build refineries and purifiers locally should be given extra benefits and preference to those who export almost unprocessed rock.

We also need to bring an end the culture of entitlement that pervades our leadership. Right now most of our leaders feel that they are entitled to luxury at our expense. Yet they do not seem to be aware that it is us the people who are entitled to service delivery from them. We used to complain about whites travelling with their dogs in the comfort of the cabin while workers and people were dumped in the windswept 'pan'.

The new elite won't even allow people near the car. In many cases the car is not even being driven, it just parked in the garage as a status symbol. 'Manje Benz yangu iri kumba uku inomhanya iyoyo. Kungoti gumbo pfaa mbichana, yabva yabata 240km/h one time.' are typical boring boasts we are frequently subjected to.

It is not even legal to drive at 240km/h yet you find people actually boasting about it.

I could write a book about what needs to be done for Zimbabwe. And I can guarantee you that I can write a thousand page book with mentioning a single party or politician as I have done here. Like I always say, it is not the parties or their leaders who matter, it s the principles.

If something has go large horns, no matter what kind of cloth you look for, you can't wrap it up nicely. Get rid of the horns before looking for the cloth. Get the principles right before talking about a leader.

What's in a name

When I moved to SA in 2008 I found accommodation in a 1 bedroom cottage at the back of a larger house in Kempton Park. Towards the end of 2008 tenants in the main house moved out and a white Afrikaner family moved into the main house. It was a couple in their early 30s with two kids, one 5 going on 6 and the other a two year old toddler.

The wife was, according to me, a nut-case and on several occasions I found the henpecked husband with his suitcases packed ready to move out. I often found myself playing the role of elder trying to calm tempers and patch up things. My personal opinion was that the husband would be better off without the nagging wife, but like the good African elder I always advised them to think of their children and stay together. This was even before the events I am about to recount below happened.

Then December came and my children came for the holidays. My daughter was almost 10 and my son who was 6 years old. The children were instant friends. Never mind that my son couldn't speak English yet, and the little white girl not a word of Shona, they just found ways to play together - barrelling around the yard at tireless speeds the entire day. Phew! You can never tell where children get this much energy! Nowadays I cannot even maintain a sedate jog for a minute.

My children of course were not allowed into the main house. So the little girl often came to play in the cottage with my son. On many occasions I would hear her bowling being thrashed by the mother. I didn't want to interfere too much and I didn't ask why though I often advised the mother not to beat a child so young. After a thrashing the little girl would spend maybe half a day without setting foot in my house but a few hours later she would be back.

Then one day she just piped up, "Jupiter, my mother beats saying I should not play with your children. She says black children will give me diseases."

I certainly didn't mind her playing with my children but at the same time I didn't want to use her plight to make a point and get her into more trouble with the mother. It was her who was getting a terrible beating and I didn't want her continue being beaten. At the same time I didn't mind her playing with my children. So there I was just looking at her at a total loss for words on how to express my thoughts.

"But I like Kumbi." My son is named Kumbirai. "Kumbi is very nice."

We looked at each other with my wife.

"You can play with Kumbi, but you should also listen to your mother." was all I could manage to say.

"But Kumbi is my friend. And Fungai is also nice."

"Kumbi will always be your friend, but your mother also likes you so you should listen to her."

"My mother says I should find white friends, but there are no nice ones."

The girl never stopped coming to my cottage and she got many more beatings for it and her plight was one of the reasons I decided to move away from the place. The adults of the white family never said anything bad to me. The husband was genuinely nice, I could tell. The wife was careful to wear the 'nice' mask in front of us. I don't think she ever realised what her daughter had told us. I decided that confronting the family would probably get the girl more beatings and possibly stigmatisation so to save her I had to move away with my children.

Then three months ago my sister had a baby daughter. We jokingly suggested that the now 9 year old Kumbirai find a name for the baby. He spend a day thinking hard then he came up with a name, Ameline. It didn't click in my mind immediately but Ameline was the name of the little white girl. When I eventually realised it and I mentioned it to my wife we all laughed. My mother and my sister were all delighted by the name and how it came to be. The name was immediately adopted so now I have niece called Ameline named after Kumbi's friend, a sweet white girl beaten by her mother for playing with Kumbirai.

Fungai, my daughter also came up with a name for the baby, Anotida. So my niece's names are Anotida Ameline. In Shona they literally mean 'Ameline likes us' or 'She likes us, Ameline'. At the time it didn't strike me but now the more I think about the more I wonder. Is this a coincidence or were my children trying to make a point? They certainly never said anything to suggest they wanted to make a point and Fungai explained that her name suggestion came from Mwari Anotida (God loves us).

The statement they ended up making about their friend who was beaten up by her mother for playing with them is quite powerful and inspiring.

I wonder whether Ameline would be allowed to name a new baby Kumbirai, after her friend a black boy, not just by her mother but by any member of her family. I can only wonder, for I will never know the answer.

Rowan Williams's Approach Was Wrong

The recent visit by head of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, has done nothing to solve the split in the Anglican church and was in fact handled in a manner that is likely to make matters worse.

Dr Williams should have started with an honest appraisal of the history of the conflict. The Anglican church itself started the conflict, displaying bigotry and intolerance towards Kunonga over his political opinion. Kunonga refused to toe the church's chosen political line and criticize President Robert Mugabe in the same way Pius Ncube was doing.

Dr Williams should acknowledge this mistake and take steps to correct it as the foundation to solving the woes of the Anglican church in Zimbabwe. He should not seek to offload that burden onto Robert Mugabe's shoulders now that things have not gone the way he wanted.

I had hoped that Dr Williams would act to heal the rift in the church. However it is clear the he chose a tone that inflamed tensions and sought to shift the blame to politicians. It was preposterous and condescending for the bishop to not even bother to acknowledge rulings by Zimbabwe's courts.

His decision to seek to appeal to 'Mugabe's powers' is a very thinly veiled insult aimed at Zimbabwe's constitution. It is not Mugabe's job to overturn court rulings.

The bearded reverend needs to be reminded that it is his faction that went to court first. Now that the courts have ruled against them, they want to take the matter to politicians. What a joke. If they knew what judgement they wanted why didn't they simply tell the judges to pass it rather than make a ruling.

The comical irony of the matter is that they are seeking the intervention of the very same politician they were attacking when they vilified Kunonga.

Dr Williams should stop trying to turn the Anglican church into another political party in Zimbabwe. He should stop trying to dictate the political opinion his flock should hold. He should have let those who support Mugabe do so in peace and those against him also do so in peace. This attempt at politics has shattered the Anglican church into pieces which he is now trying to have Mugabe pick up for him.

My own personal opinion is that discussions should be held with Kunonga to let him back into the fold and allow him to honourably retire. However being familiar with the racist psyche of those like Dr Williams, he is likely to expend every fibre in his body trying humiliate Kunonga rather seek accommodation with someone he considers inferior.

As it is the reverend's trip was little more than a mission to demonize Zimbabwe and generate bad publicity for the country. He made it to look like the police are persecuting Anglicans when all they are doing is enforcing court judgements.

Is it the holy book that he claims to know well that talks about seeing the mote in another's eye while ignoring the log in one's own eye. Dr Williams should take out the logs that are blinding him to reality.

Anglicans

I do not know why the Anglicans finds Mugabe, a Catholic, relevant to ructions within their organisation caused, not by Mugabe, but by their own mishandling of disputes and disagreements within the Anglican church.

What exactly is Mugabe expected to do in this case? Overturn rulings of Zimbabwe courts which gave Kunonga control of Anglican Church properties?

It is the Anglican church which caused divisions in Zimbabwe by trying to expel Kunonga over his political opinion. It seems they are now trying to use Mugabe's power and influence to get their way over Kunonga.

To me that is still the wrong approach. They should be trying reconcile the church factions rather than than trying to use a politician who belongs to another church to suppress one of the factions.

Dr Rowan Williams should be coming to Zimbabwe to meet Bishop Kunonga not Mugabe. If his objective is to heal the rifts in the Anglican church then that is the only logical thing to do. Meeting Mugabe suggests that his objective is to further humiliate Kunonga, and widen the rifts, by getting Mugabe to 'switch sides'.

If that is the case then the preposterousness and condescending nature of Dr William towards Mugabe is astounding. How can he expect Mugabe to turn his back upon someone ostracised for supporting him in the first place.

I also feel greatly insulted by Dr Williams' insinuation that court rulings in Zimbabwe are irrelevant, all that's relevant are the politicians with power. What does he take our constitution and governance system for?

It is the courts which said Kunonga is in charge. If Dr Williams understands the whole concept of independence of the judiciary, I fail to see where he thinks Mugabe can come in. This is not a criminal case where Mugabe has the prerogative to pardon criminals after conviction. This is a civil case.

Debate on Which Present Day African Tribe Built Great Zimbabwe is a Pointless and ill Informed Exercise

http://www.newzimbabwe.com/news-6095-No+pure+truth+on+Great+Zim+historian/news.aspx

Clearly Professor Sabelo Gatsheni-Ndlovu is ignorant about the subject he is talking about. How can he talk about Karanga vs Rozvi or Venda vs Kalanga as if these are separate and clearly defined entities. Talking about Karanga vs Rozvi is like talking about Coloureds in terms of Black vs White. Can the Professor tell us  who are the true ancestors of Coloureds, Whites or Blacks?

Today's Karanga have among them the descendants of the Rozvi. It is also clear that the Venda have strong and clear ethnic links to the people now called Shona. There is no doubt that they have among them large numbers of descendants of the VaRozvi. The same applies to the Kalanga and definitely to the Ndebele as well given the prevalence of the surname Moyo among the Ndebele.

About four years ago in Naboom I was served by a bank teller with the surname Chikanya. She was a Venda and had never been to Zimbabwe. While doing a project for Tansnet in Pretoria my contact person was named Tendamudzimu Matshatshi (or is it Machachi). She was a Venda.

The Professor is guilty of the assumption that the Shona have a very narrow and easily identifiable ethnic source much like the Ndebele. The truth is that the Shona are a conglomeration of many different ethnicities with a history going back a millennia not a mere century.

During that millennia some people have moved into the region and been assimilated into the Shona culture such as the vaNjanja who are descendants of Portuguese traders. Others have moved out of the region and became assimilated into other cultures. In Malawi I met a man with the surname Shumba whose clan had been in Northern Malawi for so many generations that they didn't recall exactly where they came from but he claimed they had links to Zimbabwe.

Such movement happened frequently in Bantu history and a recent example is the Mfecane which resulted in the scattering of various Nguni clans. The Ngoni are now in Malawi and have become Chewa speakers. The Shangaani are now in Mozambique and Zimbabwe and the Ndebele are now in South Africa and Zimbabwe very far away from Zulu territory.

The Mfecane happened at the same time as the infiltration of Africa by European settlers who had writing and record keeping skills which is why it is relatively well recorded. Other movements have not been so well recorded. Though versions have survived through folklore, these are not accurate and detailed.

Therefore the truth is that some of the descendants of the builders of Great Zimbabwe are to be found among the people called Shona today while some have moved and are to be found among surrounding cultures. The VaRozvi go by the totem Moyondizvo. These people largely went by the isbongo Moyo when they were assimilated into Ndebele culture.

It is therefore quite possible that Jonathan Moyo today called a Ndebele may have the same ancestors as my great-grand-uncles the Mupfururirwas of Chivhu who are Moyondizvo and are today called Shonas, or even the Mushores found in Hurungwe who are also Moyondizvo.

The questions then becomes whether Jonathan Moyo should claim that the Ndebele built Great Zimbabwe because he is now a Ndebele or the Mupfururirwas should now claim that only the Shona built Great Zimbabwe since they are now called Shonas.

On the other hand my own clan, the vaBarwe are also now called Shonas like the Mupfururirwas, but Barwe folklore clearly states that we originated from around Sena in Mozambique and does not lay claim to construction of Great Zimbabwe. My village or origin Punungwe village at Wazvaremhaka in Chivhu now lies next to the Mupfururirwa village, while Jonathan Moyo's village of origin in Tsholotsho is a journey of many days away from Mupfururirwa village. He does not even natively speak the same language as the Mupfururirwa's anymore.

It is wrong to deny either the Mupfururirwa's their heritage and credit it to the Khumalos because they are now considered closer to Jonathan Moyo, or to deny Jonathan Moyo his heritage and credit it to us Punungwes because we now live next door to the Mupfururirwas.

Therefore the notion of 'contestation' of 'ownership' of the Great Zimbabwe monument among the various ethnicities now found in the region is entirely pointless and those who are partaking in it will keep going around in circles, and have as much chance of success as a dog has of catching its tail.

That notion is propagated by mentally colonised people who seek to write history in exclusionist terms the same way colonialists did for reasons of racism and discrimination. Colonial historians sought to exclude blacks from the Great Zimbabwe heritage for reasons of their own bigotry and racism. I therefore fail to understand why blacks would partake in the same exercise.

It is like trying to find out who are the true Romans, the Italians or the Spanish. Italians have among them people who were not Romans and Spanish have among them people who were Romans.

The descendants of the people who built Great Zimbabwe are to be found among the Shona, the Ndebele, the Venda, the Kalanga the Nambya and the many other ethnicities in the region. At the same time among those ethnicities are to be found millions of people whose ancestors had nothing to do with the construction of the monument.

Yes it is true the people who live around the monument are today called Shona and indeed the name Zimbabwe itself comes from the Shona language. That means the monument is always going to be identified with the Shona more than anyone else. Let us not forget that even the name Shona itself is a very recent creation.

Classical Shona tradition readily recognises the ethnic diversity of the people. If one mentions the name Ncube at a Shona gathering several voices will quickly say 'ndiSoko Murehwa ivavo' clearly implying and accepting that the Ncubes who are Ndebeles are closely related to Murehwa people.

When I introduced a friend and business colleague, Steve Mpofu, to my mother a muHera of the Mhofu totem she quickly told me 'ndiSekuru vako ivavo'. (He is your uncle.) This is in line with the Shona practice of identifying close relations by totem even across tribal lines, rather than by ethnic name as most people tend to do. This is a clearly acknowledgement that blood relations, people with common ancestors to oneself, may be found in other tribes and not only among the people of the same tribe as oneself.

In short people who say the Shona claim the Great Zimbabwe monument for themselves do not understand this aspect of Shona culture which clearly is inclusionist. The Shona acknowledge that vaRozvi built great Zimbabwe and at the same time will readily call Jonathan Moyo a muRozvi because of his totem although ethnically he is now called a Ndebele. At the same time Shona people like myself who are not vaRozvi will never claim to be such, or claim association with the builders of Great Zimbabwe.

People like Professor Sabelo Gatsheni-Ndlovu have exclusionist outlook, that seeks to exclude certain groups first from among themselves and then from some aspects of Bantu heritage. They may also be suffering from tribal malaise which does not like to see anything good credited to the Shona.

In short the Great Zimbabwe monument belongs to all of us in the region. After all we are all Bantu people, and the evidence is clear that the ruins were built by the Bantu. Whether those Bantu are now Ndebele, Shona, Venda, Kalanga or whatever you like to call them they are still Bantu.

The Indian envoy should be expelled

The Indian envoy should be expelled, fulstop. His ignorance of Shona culture and traditions does not amount to the absence of such traditions.

I also wonder exactly on what facts he bases his assessment that the Shona people are quiescent and undemanding. Who fought the first Chimurenga. Which war against colonialism was fiercer than the second Chimurenga.

The envoy's regurgitating of Rhodesian misrepresentations is an insult to us the people of Zimbabwe.

Did the envoy ever bother to listen to Zimbabwean programs like ChiKristu neTsika or Madzinza eZimbabwe which was presented by the fomer minister of education Mr Chigwedere and the late Boniface Gabarinocheka Dzvova.

If the Indian envoy is so convinced that the Shona have no history and culture then can he explain to us what the Munhumutapa Empire, Rozvi Empire, Great Zimbabwe civilisation, Torwa Empire and Barwe Empires were all about?

If the envoy is ignorant of Shona culture and history he should keep quiet rather than try to pass off insults and misrepresentations as facts. Especially if these are misrepresentations by our oppressors the Rhodesians who spent generations trying to prove that a white race built Great Zimbabwe and threw away crucial archaeological evidence calling it 'the filth of Bantu habitation' when in fact it was the proof of Bantu construction of the monument.

In fact Shona is the most widely spoken native Bantu language and the seventh most widely spoken native language in Africa. Such demographics certainly are not evidence of a lack of culture.

The ambassador's confusion may be stemming from the fact that he is trying to attribute the Shona to a single ethnic source. Let him be informed that Shona culture is a very large collection of cultures united by a common history and close geography but not by a single ethnic source.

This fact is recognised by the Shona themselves who identify themselves by clans such as vaHera (giving their name to Buhera), vaNjanja, maUngwe, vaRozvi, vaBarwe, vaTsunga, vaRemba and so on. Karanga, Zezuru, Korekore, Manyika and Ndau are language dialects and not definers of ethnicity, another common misunderstanding about Shona ethnicity.

Indeed that the Shona have a diverse background is commonly acknowledged. The Shona are not the descendants of a single tribe but a collection of tribes and peoples who moved into the region over a millenia. For example vaNjanja (vazungu vemachira machena) are commonly acknowledged to be descendants of Portuguese traders and this evidenced by their clan praise name Sinyoro which is a derivative of Senor.

Other Shona clans such as vaHera are thought to be descendants of Arab and Indian traders who plied the Indian Ocean coast with their dows long before Vasco da Gama was guided to India by an Arab or Indian guide. Other clans such as the vaTsunga have folklore which openly acknowledges that they came from north of the Zambezi. Vakarova mvura netsvimbo ikazaruka.

My own clan the vaBarwe are often referred to as maSena because we are said to have come from around Sena is Mozambique. Clans such as my clan, the vaNjanja and vaHera who are relatively recent arrivals in the region have no hand and have never claimed to have any hand in the construction of Great Zimbabwe.

Other clans such as vaRozvi have a much longer history in the region and I have no reason to doubt that they had a hand in the construction of Great Zimbabwe.

What there is absolutely no doubt about is that some of the descendants of those who built Great Zimbabwe are to be found among the people called the Shona today. Due to migration and assimilation, some are certainly found in neighbouring cultures. Nobody has ever claimed, certainly not us the Shona, that all the people now called Shona are descendants of the builders of great Zimbabwe, or that those known by other names never had a hand in it.

That misconception is often carried by people who underestimate misunderstand the size of the monolith called Shona culture. We are a very large group who even differ in physical characteristics ranging from tall dark people like the vaRozvi (mostly Karanga speakers), light skinned people like vaHera, short people like vaManyika, slight people like maKorekore. Most of us Shona can easily tell another Shona's clan or origin from their appearance and the moment they speak the first few Shona words.

We are also known by surrounding African tribes for stubbornly sticking to our traditions. Indeed some say we have a reputation of being very difficult to deal with in marriages and other traditional ceremonies, if things are not done as per our clan traditions.

Certainly we are not docile. We simply do not jump to agendas set by others.

When we do choose to put up a fight you can guaranteed that it will be ferocious and accompanied by cunning and deviousness. Cecil John Rhodes is said to have referred to the Shona as 'peace-loving but cunning' people. That is about the only thing he was right about.

US Diplomacy in the wake of Wikileaks?

Ambassador Ray Charles recently remarked that he had a writing quota of 1000 words a day. It seems US diplomats have an addiction to pens (err keyboards) and will write anything to fulfil their quotas.

They will write reports about anything and everything. The unpleasant side effect of this excessive report writing is that people who thought they were in informal meetings with US officials, have been surprised to find their names popping up in the formal US reports released by Wikileaks.

A Thai diplomat complained that an informal lunch meeting with a US official several years ago meant that his name appeared in a formal US report.

One wonders whether US diplomats should now be treated like lepers. Avoid them in case your name ends popping up where you don't want it to pop up.

Secondly I don't understand the logic of meeting people informally when they are not prepared to meet some of them formally. Take for example Zimbabwe's case. Over the years US diplomats have been meeting Zanu-PF officials informally and ended up being told a range of opinions and predictions none of which had anything to do with Zanu-PF's official positions.

Instead of ending up with valuable insider intelligence it looks like the US ended up mostly with dud information. As a result US policy in Zimbabwe can hardly be said to have been a success. They ended up backing a lame Prime Minister while Zanu-PF 'hard-liners' continued to exercise the real power.

Could this have been avoided if they had taken official positions more seriously? Could it be that the US diplomats were being deliberately misled, by the informal contacts they sought? I don't know the answers, and I doubt that anyone in the US diplomatic corps does either.

People who know Zimbabweans society inside out would have told you that the influence of the highly respected liberation war cadre was not about to wane and could definitely now be switched off overnight. Back when I was still writing blogs for the now defunct The Zimbabwe Times, I was among the first to predict that the MDC could not rule without the backing of the military.

Look at the size of Mujuru's funeral. That alone tells you that there are millions of ordinary people out there who care about what General Mujuru did for the country. That is helping get rid of the yoke of cruel racist colonialism.

Then the MDC almost totally ignored the existence of the military. Now they are trying to fashion a relationship of sorts with the military but I believe it is now too late for it to make much of a difference. If fact rather than build alliances and mutual respect, they are calling for 'security sector reform' which suggests they still don't have meaningful influence on or from the military.

The MDC strategy in Zimbabwe was not well thought out from the beginning. It was and largely still is a hodge-podge collection of opportunistic interests only united by their common abhorrence of Mugabe.

Justice and Gadhafi's demise

Gadhafi was one of the worst dictators the world has ever seen there is absolutely no doubt about that. But there also absolutely no doubt that today the lives of Libyans are much less secure, much less comfortable much more expendable than they were under Gadhafi. Evaluations that I have seen in news media are estimating that it will take at least 10 years to restore the civil infrastructure just to the level it is today. What is irreplaceable forever is the lives of loved ones that have been lost. Brothers, sisters, mothers and father have been wrenched away from their loved ones. Holes in the heart cannot be patched up like holes in concrete.

What leaves a numb ache in the hearts of those who care, is that this could have been avoided. A negotiated transition was possible and was only prevented by NATO sponsorship of the violence. Much of the carnage and mayhem, in Libya today could have been avoided through a negotiated transition rather than a fought transition. Gadhafi had already agreed to a transition, but apparently those backing the rebels did no want a transition that would leave Libya standing.

Much more worrying is the unspoken insinuation that third world lives are cheap and expendable, and much less valuable than first world lives. To me this is a form of discrimination equal to, if not worse, than racism.

Last but not least the world needs to take stock and evaluate what started as a mission to 'protect civilians' ended up being an openly one sided participation in a civil war. The kind od insincerity, lying, cheating and dishonourable behaviour exhibited by NATO clearly has an effect of the ability of the world to intervene in other parts of the world.

Clearly the international community is now hobbled on Syria. Nobody can trust that whatever action is authorised will not be twisted and abused by some Western powers. It is a sad day when not authorising anything is seen as being better than authorising limited action because you cannot trust the implementers to twist the authorisation for their own ends. It is a sad day when the policemen are worse than the robbers. It is a sad day when 'humanitarian intervention' result in more carnage and abuse than the original situation.

The problem is made worse by international institutions that have sacrificed their independence. The UN secretary general has reduced himself to a mere foreign minister of some of the G7 countries. Around the world the UN is increasing being seen as a vassal and appendage of only some of the world powers.

I don't know if the ICC is even worth mentioning. That organisation has been so biased that there is little hope of its actions being seen as justice delivery at all. It has reduced itself a mere witch-hunter and kangaroo court. The world does need a true centre of justice delivery but the ICC is simply not up to the task. Right now the situation in Libya needs a proper and professional investigation into possible crimes by all sides including NATO commanders who can legitimately be accused of indiscriminate bombing in some instances. But the ICC has reduced itself to a tool for merely harassing Gadhafi, not justice delivery in Libya.

The ICC is to Western powers what some Zimbabwean judges are to Robert Mugabe. In fact it is insulting to Zimbabwean judges to make such a comparison. They are much more professional under much more difficult circumstances.

Clearly Gadhafi is the bigger abuser in Libya. But, in a proper justice system, you do not let the petty thieves go because you have caught the murderer. The ICC should not let rebel and NATO commanders go scot-free because Gadhafi is there. Justice is not just about catching the big criminal only, it is more about a thorough and credible process being undertaken to deliver justice at all levels.

Personality Politics Ruining Zimbabwe

There is no doubt that Zimbabwe's opposition politicians are hungry for success. They are trying their best to do something that will make them hugely successful and hugely popular in the eyes of the public.

Probably the biggest political success of the last few generations was the liberation struggle to shake off the shackles of white minority oppression. That was a struggle to end a clearly defined system of repression, racial discrimination and exploitation.

It was struggle that shaped the psyche and culture of the country immernsely. The concept of national hero was born out of it. Songs some recorded, some never recorded mushroomed heaping all sorts of accolades on those who fought in the liberation war. Zimbabwean culture being typically African, everything revolves around song and dance. Moments of sorrow are marked by song, moments of joy are marked by song, times of hard work pass easily through song.

It is patently obvious that the liberation struggle is the yardstick opposition politicians are measuring themselves by. Their rhetoric, their demeanour and even their commemorations are all steeped in language reminiscent of the liberation struggle. Talk of fallen heroes, talk of the struggle has sought to elevate what is a mere ruckus over leadership change, and the excessive stay of one man in power, into liberation struggle of sorts.

The first clue that talk of liberation is misplaced is that the antagonist and protagonist revolve around persons not systems, much like a cheap action movie. True liberation struggles like the American Civil Rights movement, have systems as the antagonist. True liberation struggles do not have one person as an irreplaceable hero.

Our own liberation struggle has heroes like Jason Ziyapapa Moyo, Hepert Chitepo, Leopold Takawira, Ndabaningi Sithole and others who did their part but their removal was never considered a threat to the very struggle itself. The American Civil Rights movement had heroes ranging from Medgar Evers to Martin Luther King Jr. The deaths or removal of these individuals changed nothing. It did not alter the system or the need to dismantle the system.

Contrast that with Zimbabwe's politics today. Everything is revolving around two people, Mugabe and Tsvangirai. The departure of Mugabe would pull the rug from under much off the opposition rhetoric and strategy. At the same time Tsvangirai is handled like a rare egg because there is no other person with the brand-power to take his position in Zimbabwe politics. What kind cause is it, that merely revolves around a person's brand-power.

I always lament that this kind of personality politics has served nothing but to draw energy, time and resources away from substantive issues. There is no more proper assessment of the development needs of communities. This has been substituted by assessments of who they support.

Youths are mobilised to bludgeon opponents and not to partake in community projects. Youths are plied with intoxicating substances not career enhancing skills and knowledge. These are hallmarks of opportunistic tactics not visionary strategy.

Libya Ceasefire and Negotiations

NATO bombing of Libya has been going on for almost half the year now. To say that the outcome is any more certain than it was in March is a lie. If anything it is now much, much less certain.

Today there was a story on BBC about rural buildings that were bombed by NATO. The BBC interviewed a schoolgirl who had been injured in the bombing. Gadhafi's government claims that 85 civilians died. I believe they are exaggerating.

NATO claims they are sure it was a military target. I am sure they are lying through their teeth. The truth is they don't know what they bombed. They don't have men on the ground and apparently they rely on the rebels for much of their target selection intelligence.

The rebels are mostly untrained civilians. It is certain that their intelligence will be unreliable, based on wrong or incompetent analysis and sometimes plain malice. For example getting NATO to bomb their house could be a very cool way of getting back at the family of that girl who embarrassed me by rejecting my hand in marriage. This is conjecture on my part but there is no denying that family and tribal alliances play a very significant role in which side one supports or opposes in African conflicts, and perceived social slights play a large part in forging those enmities and alliances.

I have also seen an article suggesting that occupation by another Arab country could be the face saving way out of this quagmire for NATO. Why do we have this conflict anyway? The people of Libya supposedly want a democracy with free and fair elections. Since when did foreign occupation and democracy become bosom buddies?

NATO seem to be keeping on bombing Libya because they don't know what else to do. Since they have the bombs, the aircraft and the missiles, they will just keep lobbing them until they can think of another way to end this.

The truth is that if NATO wanted to spare the people of Libya the uncertainty, tribulation and fear of living in a war situation, they don't even have to think. All they have to do is take one of the options already on the table, a ceasefire followed by elections within a time limit.

Can Gadhafi be trusted? Of course not. But taking a chance with negotiated solution is much much better than bombing the Libyan people and their infrastructure - not Gadhafi - until Gadhafi gives in to what has evolved to be a mere battle of wills. And all this because of Sarkozy's inexperience and naivete as an international political leader.

The bottom line is that the ongoing NATO bombing and destruction of Libya is nothing but gratuitous. It may, hopefully, eventually get Gadhafi to depart but to any thinking person a negotiated exit, which Gadhafi has already agreed to, is a much more certain and much less destructive way of getting the same result that NATO are claiming can only be gotten through raining fire and brimstone upon Libya's harpless people.

If the negotiations had started in March or even April we could be talking about an election in Libya by the end of the year. Right now we are talking about maybe a foreign occupation without a timeline for an election. If you call that progress then I will call what comes out of a horse's behind chocolate.

The best way to put an end to the suffering of the Libyan people right now is an immediate ceasefire and commencement of negotiations. Did I hear someone say the rebels won't agree to that? Rebels my foot. Without NATO bombs there would be no rebels. Those guys cannot organise a shooting contest in an armoury. They have been held up by NATO policies, definitely not their own competence. They will do what they are told to do by NATO.

Ceasefire and Negotiations for Libya!

Regionalism in Zimbabwe: A mere red herring.

The issue if regionalism keeps getting raised by narrow-minded people who are refusing to see the forest for the woods.

Firstly local development issues are the purview of district councils. If the people running those are incompetent, then they should also be taken to the cleaners not just national leaders.

Secondly with so many people with names like Diniwe Mutambudzi, Thabani Magaya, Tichaona Mkandla and even my own brother Bekezela Edmore Punungwe (Facebook page), it is pointless and impractical to try and allocate most Zimbabweans to a particular region.

If you take the extreme view like the Mtwakhazi Liberation Front where does that leave my brother Bekezela born in Harare to a mother from Filabusi and a father from Chivhumudhara. Does he qualify as a Mtwakhazian? If maybe he qualifies because of his Ndebele name, what about my other brothers Muchineripi Punungwe and Tawanda Punungwe? Same father and same mother as this guy named Bekezela. What about my friend Steve Mpofu born in Nkayi but who has since made a life for himself in Harare. Does he have to abandon his mansion in Chisipite?

What about our neighbours in Chivhu, the Mpundumani family, the Ndlukula family, the Molai family. Do they have to abandon the homes that they have occupied for generations (and their youngsters don't speak even a word of Ndebele).

It is my sincere belief that any Zimbabwean who has and espouses a national outlook can lead Zimbabwe. It would be naive to expect those who constantly blurb along regional lines to get the votes of the people they are constantly criticising along ethnic lines.

It is also a fact that once issues are stripped down to regional issues then so called Shona (none of us calls ourselves Shona by the way. I am a muBarwe and my mother is a muHera) enjoy a significant advantage in numbers. There is no need for any of us to try and explain or be apologetic about it, because none of us is Cecil John Rhodes, Leander Starr Jameson, Frank Johnson or Frederick Selous the people most responsible for where the county's borders are now.

Zimbabwe's Diamond Torture Camps : Fact or Fiction?

The sudden discovery of torture camps in one's country is a chilling, spine freezing experience for anyone who loves their country as much as I do. I was concerned.

I rushed to the BBC website and read the BBC online article, and another by The Guardian. There are no substantive facts presented in either article. All they do is rehash long running gossip, rumours and urban legends about Marange and try and present that as if it were some earth shattering discovery.

At one time a major Western newspaper, The Chicago Tribune, published an internet urban legend as fact claiming that an Air Zimbabwe pilot locked himself out of the cockpit and had to hack down the door with an axe. http://www.snopes.com/travel/airline/fireaxe.asp. This is the same kind of hatchet job journalism we are witnessing here.

The truth of the matter is that ever since the discovery of Marange diamonds a lot of colourful rumours and gossip have been swirling around relating to them.

I am surprised the BBC program did not mention the stories of diamond poachers (colloquial known as magweja) skinning each other alive, to extract stones from those who may have swallowed them. Nor the ones about a villager from the area feeding his cattle exclusively on cabbages trucked in everyday. There are other urban legends about villagers installing expensive TV's in their chicken runs so that the feathered ones could watch.

The BBC has selected only some of these rumours and colourful claims that are negative for the government and tried to present them as fact. If you ask me that is gutter journalism, bad enough to make News of the World journalists seem like saintly friars.

For example the claim that detainees where whipped 120 times a day simply doesn't hold water, unless of course they were being whipped by one year old toddlers. If that was true there would be hundreds of people with scars to bear the testimony and probably numerous deaths as well. Being given 10 lashes by a strong man let alone 120 is not easy for the human body to endure.

My major concern is that this kind of negativism about Zimbabwe rubs off on the rest of us, not just those attacked.

It is ordinary Zimbabweans who eventually face xenophobic attacks from hosts who have negative perceptions about them. It is ordinary Zimbabweans who face deportations and other difficulties because of negative perceptions about their country. It is ordinary Zimbabweans who face all kinds of discrimination wherever they go because of negative perceptions.

Zimbabwe Politics

The pathetic thing about Zimbabwe politicians of the past 2 decades, is that they cannot seem to identify substantive issues to formulate policies around, yet there are so many things which need to be done in the country.

Consequently opposition politics has been reduced to mere Mugabe and Zanu-PF trashing, leaving the erena almost devoid of substantive issues except those raised by Zanu-PF itself.

For example the only substantive issues that are talked about in any depth are land reform and indigenisation. These were brought into the debate by Zanu-PF policies.

If opposition parties do not want to follow behind Zanu-PF on policy, there are numerous other national development issues they could formulate policies around. For example infrastructure development is one such issue. Rural infrastructure is deplorable and needs to be upgraded.

Rural were at first neglected by past colonial governments as part of their racist policies. Unfortunately the black population has been mentally colonised and have come to consider it normal that rural areas are backward. Rural dwellers most living in titleless communal lands need secure legal tenure to foster their development.

Zimbabwe is famed for its educated people. However the truth is that Zimbabweans are educated because of the work ethic of the students. In terms of basic education infrastructure such as classroom teaching aids, Zimbabwe is horrendously backward. Most schools are not computerised or even electrified. Universities are horribly under-equipped and understaffed.

Yet Zimbabwe's politicians are focused on taking the little resources the country has and sending their often dull children to expensive schools and universities outside the country. Bona is in Hong Kong and the Tsvangirai brood are all over the world.

Sending politicians children overseas is not only expensive in terms of the fees but also expensive in terms of their upkeep. The political brats are often spoilt into leading pointlessly expensive lifestyles.

These are issues which any sensible opposition could formulate national policies around. Yet what do we get endless harping about Mugabe this, Zanu-PF that. Exchange of insults has suplanted the exchange of ideas.

Organising youths into violent groups rather than organising them into productive self-help groups has become a favourite pass-time of all political parties. It is sad that buying youths scuds is considered a legitimate campaign strategy by all these politicians.

I cry for Zimbabwe.

Wither Libya?

Nato's Libya operation has panned out to be a virtually aimless pogrom of gratuitous violence. It continues to this day because the traditionally racist Europeans leading the operation do not care about the African Libyan lives being lost.

They know the operation is not leading anywhere but because it Africans dying they do not care to bring the conflict to the most sensible end - through a ceasefire and negotiations not a military victory by any of the sides.

The only side capable of military victory is the Gadhafi side but the Europeans have prevented that from happening prolonging the conflict. Despite my attempts to filter through the Nato propaganda, I still fail to see where a prolonged conflict, rather a negotiated solution, is in the best interests of Libya.

In fact, common sense tells me that prolonged conflict is in the interests of those bend on weakening Libya and removing her as a significant force in African politics. Libya has been the backbone of the AU which was slowly gaining assertiveness in international politics. Despite his off-the handle loose nut behaviour, the crazy colonel's money has been one of the nuts holding the AU's handle firmly in place. Removing the colonel is an obvious way of setting the AU back by several years if not decades.

Indeed the way the AU was treated in the whole saga suggests a deliberate ploy to humiliate the organisation.

An assertive and confident African continent is a threat to European countries whose economies are still dependent on colonial resources. It does not surprise me that the countries that led the onslaught on Libya had recently had problems which politicians in former colonies who refused to toe the line. France with Laurent Gbagbo and Britain with Robert Mugabe.

Dictatorship is no good and Gadhafi's dictatorship was among the worst, but the situation that Libyans are in now, is worse than Gadhafi's dictatorship. Not even Nato despite their bluster and bravado know what the future holds for Libya.

With the killing of a rebel general by rebels, everything is increasingly pointing towards sectarian strife. It would also have send a message to other defectors and planned defectors that they don't have a safe place to go. Defecting was probably not the wisest of decisions on their part. Defecting former Gadhafi allies should not expect to find a comfort zone among the long-standing opponents of Gadhafi. Life is not a Madagascar movie where a Zebra and a Lion can become the best of friends. If you have been opponents for life you do not become trusted buddies in the span of the moment it takes to say 'I am defecting'.

The TNF is a hodge-podge of long time Gadhafi opponents and defectors. As General Younnes death shows, the defectors were probably better off sticking with Gadhafi.