Zimbabwe
sanctions: righteousness or racist repertoire?
By Bernard Bwoni
There has been an intentional and
dishonest repetition that Zimbabwe was under ‘targeted sanctions’ and ‘travel
bans’ which target President Mugabe and his ‘cronies’ and these distortions have
deliberately misled the world to the plight of this nation under siege. The existence
of economic sanctions has been casually brushed off and the architects of the
sanctions have not been sincere or morally upright to the suffering that befell
the general populace in Zimbabwe. The unbearable hardship was blamed solely on
the land reform programme and it seems convenient to justify such ruinous
sanctions and disguise the real intention behind why they were inflicted in the
first place. The economic impact of the sanctions on the Zimbabwe economy must
never be under-estimated as they have been devastating to the most vulnerable
groups in society who have had to bear the full brunt of it as their livelihoods
were reduced to absolute destitution. There have been comparative arguments of
the sanctions placed on Rhodesia and the Zimbabwe economic sanctions and what
emerges is a racist repertoire which is inextricably imbedded and blended with
a long term neoliberal grand master-plan.
Sanctions do not discriminate between
the elite or the general population and they are used as an economic warfare
against target governments. The purpose of economic sanctions is to coerce the
intended victim into submission through a deliberate sabotage of the economy
hence the term economic sanctions. The sanctions against Rhodesia created
social and political integration due to the fact that the Ian Smith regime was
given more than enough time to prepare for the sanctions. On the other hand for
Zimbabwe the sanctions created socio-economic and political upheaval and disintegration
because the country was slapped with instant economic sanctions which saw the
economic meltdown, the strengthening of spurious opposition politics and the
privation and distress caused by the hard-hitting effects of the sanctions.
Unlike Zimbabwe, Rhodesia had a very strong historical and birthright
identification with those who were imposing the sanctions and had ideological
allies who had a vested interest in ensuring that the regime stayed intact and
hence they did not approve the sanctions. Rhodesian sanctions were at most
symbolic sanctions whereas Zimbabwe sanctions were full-blown economic
sanctions imposed indiscriminately and abruptly with resultant immediate
economic collapse that followed.
The nature of the sanctions against Rhodesian
highlights a protective approach to imposing the sanctions in that the Smith
regime was given enough warning of the impending sanctions, ample time to
prepare and harness collective national spirit. Johan Galtung wrote an article
in 1966(On the Effects of International Economic Sanctions: With
Examples from the Case of Rhodesia) hypothesising
the likely impact of the sanctions long before they were imposed. The
Rhodesians were warned and prepped for sanctions well in advance and in and
around the towns and cities Galtung pointed out that there were even jokes like
‘there will be no sanctions against
drinks’ ridiculing sanctions way before they came into effect. Zimbabwe on the
other hand was not threatened with sanctions; they were imposed with very
little if any warning at all. It is disingenuous that the architects of these
hardship-inducing sanctions claim that Mugabe and his ‘cronies’ blame the
sanctions as a way of diverting attention from the country’s politics and
internal mismanagement yet they could so easily lift the sanctions completely and
see if the mismanagement prevails in a sanctions-free economic environment and
uplift the lives of those they falsely claim to be championing for by imposition
of these sanctions.
The sanctions against Rhodesia did not
work because some countries such as South Africa, Portugal, Israel and some
Arab nations propped up the Smith regime. Rhodesia also found ways of circumventing
the sanctions as imports and exports were smuggled through South Africa. The
Zimbabwe sanctions on the other hand were devastating to the economy. Hufbauer and
Schott, 1990(Economic Sanctions Reconsidered: History and Current
Policy) calculate that the annual cost of
economic sanctions to Rhodesia was just $130 million per year. In a study titled
‘Economic Sanctions’ prepared
for the Harvard Centre for International Affairs, Robin Renwick, head of the
Rhodesian department of the British Foreign Office, reported that between 1965
and 1974 Rhodesia's real output increased 6 percent per year; the value of
exports more than doubled between 1968 and 1974 and continued to rise
afterward, although much more slowly. On the other hand the sanctions against
Zimbabwe have cost the country in excess of $42 billion since 2001 which translates
to a staggering $3.5 billion annually to date! The negative publicity Zimbabwe
and its leadership received meant a very negative national image which
attracted high-risk premium on alternative sources of offshore lines of credit
and had a detrimental effect on tourism which is a significant to national GDP
(Taking back the economy: Indigenise,
Empower, Develop and Create Employment). The interruption of trade and
constraints on manufacturing and general activities saw GDP almost halving from
US$7.49 billion in 2000 to US$4 billion in 2010.
The sanctions
against Rhodesia were devised and implemented in a manner to publicly appear to
punish yet privately there was a collective kindredship to preserve and
protect. At most the sanctions were a symbolic gesture to appear to condemn the
racist Ian Smith government to pacify the international community. On the other
hand the sanctions against Zimbabwe were specifically designed to hurt without
due care and attention to the suffering of the ordinary poor people of
Zimbabwe. Rhodesia was placed under sanctions but safeguarded from privation synonymous
with sanctions and Zimbabwe was deliberately exposed to hardship that followed the
imposition of the sanctions. The Zimbabwe government’s incessant cries of the
devastating effects of these merciless sanctions were drowned in the devious
world of media duplicity and the suffering of the people of Zimbabwe was
relegated to the entertainment sections of media sources.
No comments:
Post a Comment