"The success or failure of such a government will depend on credible
and inclusive power-sharing by Robert Mugabe and his ZANU-PF party,"
Robert Wood, acting spokesman for the White House, said on Tuesday.
"The international community must remain engaged and continue to
scrutinise actions by Mr. Mugabe to ensure adherence to the letter and
spirit of this agreement, including respect for human rights and the
rule of law," he said.
"We urge (the Southern Africa Development Community) SADC to fulfil its
obligation to guarantee that Mr. Mugabe proceeds on a new path toward
reconciliation and genuine partnership with the MDC (Tsvangirai’s
party, the Movement for Democratic Change)."
Human rights and Africa activist groups here were somewhat more sceptical.
I think it’s a defective deal in many ways," said Briggs Bomba,
director of Campaigns at Africa Action, a non-profit organisation. "It
short changes people of Zimbabwe on the most basic aspirations that
have defined democracy: human rights and social justice. It appears now
as an opportunity for temporary relief of suffering that people are
"Mugabe’s game-plan is simple: squeeze the maximum gains from the
agreement, put on a show of good behaviour until the sanctions are
lifted and aid flows are resumed, plan for a successor, and then
gradually resume the attacks on the MDC before the next series of
elections," noted Jon Elliot, Africa advocacy director for Human Rights
The formation of the new government is the latest move in the nearly
year-old crisis that was set off last March after the MDC’s victory in
the first round of national elections. Before the scheduled run-off
elections in June ZANU-PF unleashed a wave of violence targeting mostly
MDC supporters. Tsvangirai subsequently withdrew from the race.
Mugabe claimed victory, despite the conclusion of independent monitors
from across southern Africa that the election was neither free nor fair
due to ZANU-PF’s campaign of intimidation and violence.
Over the following six months, SADC, led by South Africa, tried to
negotiate an agreement between MDC and ZANU-PF that would lead to a
coalition government, an effort which eventually culminated in the
signing of a power-sharing agreement in principle on Sep. 15. The deal
provided that Mugabe would retain the presidency, while Tsvangirai
would serve as prime minister in a government in which the MDC would
have majority in parliament.
Over the subsequent four months, however, the two parties failed to
agree on the allotment of specific ministerial portfolios, with Mugabe
insisting on retaining control of the army and security forces.
Meanwhile, conditions in Zimbabwe deteriorated dramatically, amid
record hyper-inflation and a breakdown in the country’s once-model
public health system.
A cholera epidemic, which broke out in August, has spread. So far, it
has killed more than 3,000 people and an additional 65,000 have been
infected, according to the World Health Organisation (WHO).
The U.N. Food Programme estimates that 7 million of the 9 million
people remaining in the country will need food aid this month.
In July 2008, the administration of former President George W. Bush,
along with the EU, strengthened its sanctions against Zimbabwe, though
its efforts to impose sanctions through the U.N. Security Council were
vetoed by China and Russia.
In mid-December, Bush, along with British Prime Minister Gordon Brown
and French President Nicholas Sarkozy, called for Mugabe to remove
"It is time for Robert Mugabe to go," said Bush.
Nonetheless, Mugabe defied the pressure, and last week Tsvangirai
agreed to implement the Sep. 15 deal, bringing the MDC into the
government. Thursday, parliament unanimously approved a constitutional
amendment allowing Tsvangirai to become prime minister.
Many independent analysts here maintain that the deal is a poor one and may soon collapse.
"It’s a question of when, not if, this thing will collapse," Sydney
Masamvu, a senior analyst with the International Crisis Group, told the
New York Times last week.
"This new agreement does not reflect the will of the Zimbabwean people
and is unlikely to produce a viable political solution unless the
behaviour of ZANU-PF changes dramatically," said Jennifer Windsor,
executive director of New York-based Freedom House. For now, most
non-governmental groups believe Obama’s wait-and-see stance is the
"The West need be in no hurry to lift the targeted sanctions or throw
good money at a bad agreement," said HRW’s Elliot. "A full and
comprehensive programme of government reform and audit are also needed
before a single U.S. tax dollar is handed over for reconstruction."
"Zimbabwe’s humanitarian and health crises alone will need a huge
international effort throughout 2009," he added. "That should be their
sole focus for now."
Some groups believe that Bush’s hard line may have been
counter-productive and suggest that the new administration should be
more respectful of the position of other states in the region as the
It is "critical to move away from the counter-productive ‘cowboy
diplomacy’ we saw under Bush, which really pushed to the wall a lot of
critical players within South Africa," Bomba of Africa Action told IPS.
The new administration "must be informed more by a lot of behind the
scenes discussions and consensus building in SADC. So don’t come out
(IPS)Post published in: News