Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Monday, 1st December 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sign In
Register

Hopes of end to Zimbabwe's crisis fade as talks stall



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 14 August 2008
By Jane Fields
in Zimbabwe
HOPES for a speedy settlement to Zimbabwe's crisis faded yesterday when South Africa's president Thabo Mbeki left Harare with no sign of a deal between Robert Mugabe and the opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai.
Mr Mbeki said Zimbabwe's rivals needed "space," according to state-controlled ZBC radio.

The South African president had mediated three days of talks between Mr Mugabe, Mr Tsvangirai and Arthur Mutambara, the leader of a faction of the opposi
tion Movement for Democratic Change (MDC).

Mr Mbeki said he remained "confident" that all three parties would find a resolution.

"We have dealt with all the critical elements on which president Mugabe and Mr Mutambara agree, but there's disagreement with one element over which Morgan Tsvangirai has asked for more time to reflect," Mr Mbeki said.

Unconfirmed reports say the talks stalled late on Tuesday after the 84-year-old Mr Mugabe refused to grant Mr Tsvangirai the position of prime minister with executive powers.

The Zimbabwean leader is adamant his controversial victory in a sham 27 June poll must be recognised.

However, Mr Tsvangirai wants his victory in the first round of presidential elections on 29 March to be the starting point for a future government. He pulled out of the June second round, claiming more than 100 of his supporters had been killed.

Mr Mutambara's faction has denied claims by state-run media it signed a deal with Mr Mugabe that sidelined Mr Tsvangirai. However, an official from Mr Mutambara's faction said if the talks collapse, one option "might include a bilateral agreement with either of the other two parties".

A deal involving Mr Mugabe and Mr Mutambara is likely to be viewed as yet another betrayal by the majority of opposition supporters.



The full article contains 296 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 13 August 2008 10:32 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Zimbabwe
 
1

Mikie,

14/08/2008 00:29:34
Did anyone in their right mind really expect anything good to come from these talks? It's like having a bunch of little kids squabbling over whose got the most flies stuck on their lollipops.
2

fife runner,

14/08/2008 07:02:07
I am not surprised. as for Mbeki he has been a failure also.
3

Senga Jean,

14/08/2008 09:09:23
Mugaabe did learn something from the British Empire. DIVIDE AND RULE.
4

Gulliver,

Harare 14/08/2008 10:03:22
People's opinions will obviously differ but I think president Mbeki has been doing his best given the circumstances. I think he understands the PSYCHOLOGY of the revolutionary that Mugabe is, and in fact knows that confrontational tactics do not work very well with someone who has been struggling as a fighter for a significant portion of his life. To confront a person with a background like Mugabe is to simply bring him into his domain, he thrives on confrontation and it is difficult to beat him when he is in his element.

Look at other similar leaders with whom the world has tried confrontational tactics and have failed- M. Gaddafi, F. Casto etc. How many American administrations have come and gone and left these dudes more entrenched in power than before? Go to Libya today and you'll see the same old dude in power. Confrontation and war situation make people feel relevant and it actually thrills them to some extent. It also helps feed their propaganda where they use the negative publicity and actions (e.g., sanctions) to propel their nationalist agendas (which may in fact not be purely nationalist!).

President Mbeki understands all this and to show that the man is serious he has been to Zimbabwe before the March 29 elections and after more times than any other leader or any other AFRICAN leader for that matter. He's practically been here at least twice a month to show the seriousness and urgency with which he wants the situation resolved. He has sent numerous observers under SADC and sent his own observers to investigate the issue of inter-party violence in the rural areas. He sent a team of former SA army generals to get INFORMATION FIRST HAND. And he is the only one who has been able to do that because he knows how to play his diplomatic cards.

If for no other reason I say that President Mbeki has done the right thing because almost everyone else (Bots, Kibaki, US, EU, etc) is trying the other route and he is trying what others haven't tried before.
5

TimW1234,

Ottawa, Canada 14/08/2008 11:14:21
The eventual outcome was a foregone conclusion and is anybody surprised.

With Mugabe as one of three there will NEVER be a solution until he is ousted, dies, or is assassinated.
6

Media 1,

cape town 14/08/2008 11:56:34
Gulliver

I hear what you are saying about Mbeki's approach to Mugabe, but I just cannot bring myself to excuse either of them.

I understand that Mugabe was a freedom fighter and I recognise that both men have much in common in terms of their psychology, but they must still be held accountable for their actions.

Yes Mbeki has spent a lot of time in Zimbabwe, but here is the thing. In all the visits he has taken to Zimbabwe, people in SA are being slaughtered in the most violent criminal attacks on the planet. Our electricity supply is critical, our ministers are out of control and incapable of performing their duties, our roads are the worst they have ever been, road rage as a result of mini bus taxi carnage is horrendous, rape is rife, aids is killing millions whilst Mbeki's friend Health minister Manto urges the infected millions to eat garlic and beetroot and it gets a lot worse. He has failed here and he will fail with Zimbabwe.
I know that the hard line approach is not always the right way to go, but in this instance because of the torment of the dictator, Mbeki should have pushed for international intervention and an overthrow of the Zimbabwean government. Harsh yes, but in such circumstances it is necessary. You cannot offer a dictator respect, they need to be treated with disdain or it will lead to more torment for the people.

I respect your views though! You make good points, I just cannot agree with all of them.
7

Gulliver,

Harare 14/08/2008 12:17:18
# 5,

I agree with you that the outcome was indeed a foregone conclusion but for different reasons. How well do you know Zimbabwean politics?

You might not know this but in

1980: Mugabe initiated a policy of national reconciliation. Extending a hand of friendship to erstwhile former enemies who murdered thousands in cold blood. If he was an uncompromising fellow that would not have been achieved.

1987: Mugabe together with the late Joshua Nkomo united the two main rival parties in the country under the Unity Accord.

Let's look a Morgan Tsvangirai,

2005: Managed to split MDC into 2 formations over the issue of participating in Senatorial elections.


2008: Negotiations when underway to unite the 2 MDCs because it was clear that with a fragmented opposition Mugabe would win. He had been offered the option of running as the sole presidential candidate for the 2 MDCs which would have almost certainly given him the edge he needed to win without the need for a run-off but what did he do? He refused and this left Mutambara with the option of campaigning for Dr. S. Makoni, an independent candidate instead!!!

Given that brief background I would say it is clear who has greater difficulty in negotiating. And I wonder why? Is it because someone in the EU is giving him confidence by repeating the same old rhetoric that they'll only recognise a Zimbabwean administration led by Tsvangirai??

And even if Mugabe was undemocratically elected who says anyone other than Zimbabweans have VETO power over the matter??? Zimbabweans are their own liberators, if they allow themselves to be ruled by dictators tough-luck for them!!
8

Gere,

Scotland 14/08/2008 15:08:42
Democracy was the product of a tolerant, Pagan European mind that had been nurtured in a vastly different social environment to that of Africa.

In fact the gentleman's name was Pericles of Athens and he lived circa 400 BC. Democracy does not necessarily lend itself to export, it does not travel well!

Remember Europe did not await the arrival of colonisers to bring education to them! They set about inventing it for themselves then became the colonists that brought education to black Africa.

European colonists brought black Africa the concept of hospitals, schools, government, law, the monetary system, and in short everything that Africa has today except the African innovation of necklessing!

Black Africa is simply not ready yet for embracing the understanding of the concept of Democracy.

Evolution simply has not yet had enough time to catch up to catch up with events on the ground!
9

Media 1,

cape town 14/08/2008 15:28:37
Gere #8

You are not wrong, but you are not exactly correct.

They may not be ready for running nations the way they should be run. But then how do you explain Mugabe and Mbeki? Both educated in Europe and both equipped with the tools necessary to run a country. Yet as usual, both are miserable failures!!
So, is it evolution? Or is it some inherent pre disposition to fail?
10

Gulliver,

Harare 14/08/2008 15:54:42
I have ceased to burn up in anger and just laugh when I read some of these comments!!!

Don't get me wrong Gere, there is some merit in your argument when you say perhaps the pace at which we expect Africans to fully grasp the concept of democracy as espoused by Europeans. There are indeed many factors at play that make me agree with you such as cultural background, religious beliefs, socio-economic influences, etc. However, some of the points you raise just need a bit of clarification.

Europeans brought democracy to Africans? We need to be careful and say at what stage was this democracy brought to Africans and in what form.

Previously Africans governed themselves under monarchs which might not have been the best of systems of governance but it was acceptable to Africans. When they disagreed they fought wars and deposed leaders they did not want or simply moved away to form new kingdoms.

One has to be careful in analysing the present day scenario because whilst the system I've just crudely described above might not have been "fair" one wonders to what extent the systems brought by Europeans during colonialism where in fact better than the African systems? People where enslaved and basically there were no human rights to talk about for Africans. They were definately not allowed to vote for leaders of their choice. It is important in presenting our arguments so that it does not appear as if were saying that democracy need not have applied during slavery and more recently colonialism (knowing that non of us are racists)?

SA is only in its tender teenage years after colonialism of over a century. I agree Gere, it'll take time to fully embrace some of the concepts but with time Africa will improve. Let Africans themselves choose for themselves which systems they think are best for their situation.

Democracy is a process not a destination. Even some European and American governments are still exploring the concept and refining it further.
11

,

15/08/2008 01:58:04
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
12

The Former Mr. Angry,

Perth 15/08/2008 10:03:51
Quelle surprise! Obviously from the same school of propaganda as Putin/Medvedev and Brownski.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.