The Harare Syndrome

Even after a manifestly fraudulent election, he agreed to share power with President Mugabe because he realised that the ageing dictator would never surrender power and would drive the country further into ruin rather than rein in his thugs and respect a democratic vote. Mr Tsvangirai’s decision, after long negotiation, to accept the role of Prime Minister, despite the crippling restrictions, was not easy. He was brutally persecuted by Mr Mugabe. His supporters were murdered. His wife died recently in a car crash. He took a brave step. But has he been outmanoeuvred? Has he been used by Mr Mugabe to deflect the anger of Zimbabweans and the outside world? Has he become a shield behind which the President and his cronies can continue to evade justice and hang on to their wealth and privileges? Has he, in short, fallen victim to the Harare syndrome – identifying with his persecutors and turning a pragmatic blind eye to their appalling crimes?

Mr Tsvangirai’s visit to Britain this week is crucial. Other countries, especially in Europe, will take their cue from Britain’s response. He came seeking help for his recovery programme, asking an estimated one million Zimbabwean exiles to return home with their vital skills. He promised that change was on the way, that the persecution of dissidents would stop, that the BBC would be able to report freely from Zimbabwe and that the reform programme was irreversible.

His pleas have put the British Government in a difficult position. There is a huge desire to see him succeed, to give Zimbabwe the emergency aid and backing to bring it back from the brink. But there is little evidence that the country’s nightmare is ending. Four activists from Mr Tsvangirai’s Movement for Democratic Change were charged with terrorism only last month and are still on trial. The police and militias supporting Mr Mugabe are still intimidating his opponents and white farmers are still being evicted.

Mr Tsvangirai has met considerable scepticism in his contention that reform is under way. He was booed when he spoke in Southwark Cathedral at the weekend by exiles who accuse him of legitimising the Mugabe dictatorship. His contention that inflation, running at more than one million per cent a few months ago, is now down to 3 per cent is barely credible. His call for 5 billion to rebuild the economy is not underpinned by any guarantee that the money will not be squandered on luxuries for the President and his clique.

Gordon Brown was right to grant an immediate 5 million in new aid for food projects and textbooks. But he was also right to insist that more funding would come only if Zimbabwe showed clear progress on reforms. Mr Tsvangirai insisted that his partnership with Mr Mugabe was a workable solution, and compared it with the transitional arrangements when Nelson Mandela took over from F.W. de Klerk. He is not convincing. The apartheid Government was ready to surrender power; Mr Mugabe is not. As long as he remains in office, Zimbabwe will not be free. Until Mr Tsvangirai assumes full control of the army, ends repression and paves the way for the prosecution of the ruling criminal clique, he must be seen as a pawn rather than a premier.