BBC Coverage of Response in Harare to MOU between ZANU-PF and MDC

Brian Hungwe, writing for the BBC Africa, presents views on the street as news of yesterday's Memorandum of Understanding was signed by Mugabe, Tsvangirai, and Mutambara.

Here is Hungwe's description of the signing ceremony:

"There was a handshake and a smile, but no embrace. It appears the rivals did not want to physically commit themselves that far.

The body language failed to provide a clue as to whether the ice had really been broken in the hotel where they held a brief meeting.

Mr Mutambara seemed at ease, Mr Tsvangirai disinterested, and Mr Mugabe was, as usual, self-confident.

The handshake was a temporary triumph for South African President Thabo Mbeki and his much-criticised "quiet diplomacy" policy on Zimbabwe.

At last, the rivals had come face to face.

They signed a commitment to "end polarisation, divisions, conflict and intolerance that have characterised our country's politics."

The talks are due to be completed in two weeks."

Hungwe described the difference responses of people in Harare:

"In the townships, there is some confusion.

"We wait and see, it's difficult to trust Mr Mugabe," says Caleb, 34, from Chitungwiza, a dormitory town just south of Harare.

But Mudiwa, of Highfields said: "We trust all our leaders, we hope whatever they will debate, is good for us all."

"This is not the time to outdo one another, but to think about the suffering of the ordinary people."

Around the streets of Harare, the news came as a shock to many.

It drew laughter from those who thought it was a hoax, but excitement from others.

A security officer at a local hotel said people were looking forward to making sure "people are having enough food and they are having enough medication from the hospitals".

Taxi driver Johannes Phiri said: "I am quite happy, what's has been happening was very bad."

"With the agreement, everything will be all right so that we can survive and lead our normal lives again.""

Perhaps the most telling response was from a rural Zimbabwean who lost three brothers in the political violence during the campaigning for the last election:

"Leslie Madamombe of Mashonaland Central province lost three brothers a week before the country's 27 June presidential run-off.

One was shot point-blank and the others forced to drink a lethal Chinese paraquat herbicide by militias from the ruling Zanu-PF party.

"[The agreement] should have happened long back," he says. "Nothing will ever bring my three dead brothers back."

Leslie's mother and elder brother Hilton still fear for their lives, guarded by armed police at a Harare hospital.

"I'm bitter, but I however look forward with hope," he says."

African response to Zimbabwe's sham elections and political violence shows new spirit of criticism

MICHELLE FAUL of the Associated Press wrote a week ago about the divided response from African politicians this time around following the sham June 27th run-off election.

"A younger generation of African leaders appears willing to break from the clubbiness that has characterized the governing elites on this continent where authoritarian rule has long been the norm.

Among the most outspoken has been Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, the Liberian president who is the continent's only female leader.

On a visit to South Africa this week, she was the first African leader to support proposed U.N. sanctions against Zimbabwe's leaders, saying they send a "strong message" that the world will not tolerate violence to retain power.

"It's important, because it's the first time that we are seeing on the African continent that leadership has transitioned from the old perceptions," said Chris Maroleng, a South African political analyst.

"We're seeing more leaders beginning to embrace their own democratic notion," he added."

In addition to the above mentioned criticisms from Liberia, Faul lists the other outspoken leaders who have chosen to speak out against the abuses of power by ZANU-PF:

"

They include Zambian President Levy Mwanawasa, a lawyer who is his country's third leader since independence in 1964; former army commander Seretse Ian Khama of Botswana, Africa's most enduring democracy; and Nigeria's Umar Yar'Adua, only the third civilian leader since 1966, though he still is fighting a court battle over his fraud-riddled election.

Mugabe's June 27 runoff "was neither free nor fair and therefore the legitimacy of his presidency is in question. He cannot wish that away," Kenya's Foreign Minister Moses Wetangula told The Associated Press."

Mugabe's strongest support have come from his allies in the Congo Wars, Kabila's DRC, Angola, and Namibia.

Faul explains how the lack of criticism from the African Union after the election showed the weakness of the AU to live up to its declared principles state at its 2002 reconstitution, replacing the discredited Organization of African Union:

"The African leaders also retained South African President Thabo Mbeki as mediator for Zimbabwe, ignoring the Zimbabwe opposition's rejection of him and widespread condemnation that his 8-year-long "softly, softly" approach to Mugabe has hastened Zimbabwe's collapse.

Liberia's Sirleaf said the African Union could only maintain its credibility if it pronounced the June 27 runoff unacceptable.

The prevailing African silence over Mugabe marks a landmark failure for the union, set up in 2002 to replace the discredited Organization of African Unity, which had become little more than a dictators' club. The new union was to be the flagship for an African renaissance based on democracy and Africans solving African problems.

At its inaugural summit in 2002, leaders committed themselves to holding fair elections at regular intervals, to allow opposition parties to campaign freely and to set up independent electoral commissions to monitor polls.

Mugabe failed on every point.

While the old organization pledged noninterference in member states, the new union includes a Peace and Security Council, structured on the U.N. Security Council, that has the right to intervene when human rights are grossly violated or crimes against humanity perpetrated.

The only African intervention has been to send troops to back Comoros government soldiers in ousting a coup leader from the remote Indian Ocean island of Anjouan in March — an easy target."

This week, AU Commission Chairman Jean Ping arrived in South Africa to help guarantee negotiations would start, and it appears today, according to the Associated Press, that an agreement has been reached for talks to begin.

AU makes some criticism of Mugabe, but stops short of serious critique

Cris Chinaka, writing for Reuters, gives a good summary of what the African Union did and didn't achieve in terms of recognizing Mugabe's "sham" election as president of Zimbabwe.

The strongest criticism came from Botswana's Vice-President Mompati Merafhe, who issued a statement requesting that Mugabe be excluded from AU and the Southern African Development Community (SADC) meetings:

"'In our considered view ... the representatives of the current government
in Zimbabwe should be excluded from attending SADC (Southern African Development
Community) and African Union meetings,' Botswana Vice-President Mompati Merafhe
said, according to a text of his remarks."

However, as Chinaka reports, Egypt and South Africa do not agree:

"South Africa, the designated mediator in Zimbabwe, has resisted open
condemnation. The AU summit, in the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh, called
for SADC mediation, led by South African President Thabo Mbeki, to continue.
"

South African Government's official word on Zimbabwe crisis begins to change

After agreeing to a UN Security Council Presidential Statement condemning the political violence in Zimbabwe, the South African government has begun to change its tune. The Cape Argus headline story, At last, SA condemns Mugabe, gives the details.

For the past year the British and the Americans have been trying to get the Security Council to take up the issue of Zimbabwe and the violence against the MDC, but South Africa's control of the UN Security Council, which ended last month, has made it impossible (see LA Times article from April 2008 on this). Now, it seems, given the world's attention to the numerous killings, beatings, torture, and displacement of MDC supporters, even the South African government can no longer hide behind its "quiet diplomacy" that has, for the past 8 years, allowed Zimbabweans to suffer greatly.

The actual UN Security Council Presidential Statement reads as follows:

“The Security Council condemns the campaign of violence against the political opposition ahead of the second round of the Presidential elections scheduled for 27 June, which has resulted in the killing of scores of opposition activists and other Zimbabweans and the beating and displacement of thousands of people, including many women and children.
“The Security Council further condemns the actions of the Government of Zimbabwe that have denied its political opponents the right to campaign freely, and calls upon the Government of Zimbabwe to stop the violence, to cease political intimidation, to end the restrictions on the right of assembly and to release the political leaders who have been detained. The Council urges the international monitors and observers to remain in Zimbabwe while the crisis continues.
“The Security Council regrets that the campaign of violence and the restrictions on the political opposition have made it impossible for a free and fair election to take place on 27 June. The Council further considers that, to be legitimate, any government of Zimbabwe must take account of the interests of all its citizens. The Council notes that the results of the 29 March 2008 elections must be respected.
“The Security Council expresses its concern over the impact of the situation in Zimbabwe on the wider region. The Council welcomes the recent international efforts, including those of SADC leaders and particularly President Mbeki. The Security Council calls on the Zimbabwean authorities to cooperate fully with all efforts, including through the UN, aimed at finding a peaceful way forward, through dialogue between the parties, that allows a legitimate government to be formed that reflects the will of the Zimbabwean people.
“The Security Council further expresses its concern at the grave humanitarian situation in Zimbabwe and condemns the suspension by the Government of Zimbabwe of the operations of humanitarian organizations, which has directly affected one and a half million people, including half a million children. The Council calls on the Government of Zimbabwe to immediately allow humanitarian organizations to resume their services.
“The Security Council will continue to monitor closely the situation and requests the Secretary-General to report on ongoing regional and international efforts to resolve the crisis.”

The briefing by Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs B. Lynn Pascoe is also interesting. Apparently, the US and UK wanted the final Presidential letter to state that the results of the March 29th election should be respected, meaning that Tsvangarai should be viewed as the President-elect. But South Africa and China did not accept this wording, leaving the more watered-down line above: "The Council notes that the results of the 29 March 2008 elections must be respected."

For more on the dealings behind the scenes, see William Gumede's "Amid the despair of Zimbabwe, there is still hope" in the Independent, June 25, 2008

Alan Cowell and Celia W. Dugger report in the International Herald Tribune (June 24, 2008), that the ANC reiterated their demand to be in charge of the Zimbabwe situation. Using historical arguments, the ANC warned:

""It has always been and continues to be the view of our movement that the
challenges facing Zimbabwe can only be solved by the Zimbabweans themselves,"
the statement said. "Nothing has happened in the recent months has persuaded us to revise that view."

In what seemed a clear rebuke to the Western-led effort to take an
aggressive stance against the Zimbabwean government, the ANC included a lengthy criticism of the "arbitrary, capricious power" exerted by Africa's former colonial masters and the subsequent struggle by African nations to grant newfound freedoms and rights.

"No colonial power in Africa, least of all Britain in its colony of 'Rhodesia' ever demonstrated any respect for these principles," the ANC said,
referring to Zimbabwe before its independence.""

Apparently, from this logic, historical lack of respect for newfound rights and freedoms means current powers are equally justified in disrespecting them.