Over the last 18 months, Zimbabwe has been in the news for all the wrong reasons following invasions of mostly white-owned farms to redress a land imbalance created during the colonial era.

President Robert Mugabe’s government has targeted about 5,000 farms for acquisition, which represents about two-thirds of the 12m hectares the government says is owned by whites.

Last month Zimbabwe and Britain, at a Commonwealth Foreign Ministers meeting to bridge the rift over land between Harare and its former colonial power, made a breakthrough in talks to resolve the land crisis which had soured relations between the two.

?There has been an agreement,? Foreign Affairs minister Stan Mudunge who led the Zimbabwe delegation said. ?There is an agreement,? at a conference attended by Zimbabwe, Britain, Australia, Canada, South Africa, Nigeria, Kenya, and Jamaica.

Mugabe has remained firm on the issue of land imbalances and that redistribution of the resource is a fundamental and irreversible issue. Government would not pay for the land acquired from the mainly white commercial farmers, only improvements would be compensated for as agreed at the 1979 Lancaster House agreement, leading to Zimbabwe’s independence.

While the majority of Zimbabweans agreed that the land issue had to be addressed, they differed on the implementation. ?Land redistribution does not have to be violent,? said Witness Chinyama, a Harare-based economist.

Mugabe gives the nod

In September, the government accepted an offer by the Commercial Farmers Union, which groups together 3,500 white farmers of nearly one million hectares of land. A total on 8.3m hectares in all are needed for resettlement.

The UK government has said it is prepared to release $50m to help Zimbabwe with its controversial land problem. The money would be deposited into a fund administered by the UN Development Programme to compensate white farmers.

Mugabe said he welcomed the Abuja agreement, which he described as a victory for both the government and the white farmers. ?In the past it has been our concern that Britain has not been willing to discuss our views with us. Britain has now come on board and we can address the issue together,? Mugabe told journalists at State House in Harare.

Nigeria’s Foreign Minister, Sule Lamido, who presented the contents of the Abuja agreement to Mugabe in Harare, said the land issue was acknowledged as a problem at the meeting, with Zimbabwe insisting that land be distributed to benefit the landless black majority while Britain wanted the human rights abuses and the breakdown of the rule of law addressed first.

A committee of Commonwealth Foreign Ministers has been formed to see the Zimbabwe problem come to a conclusion. ?Africa cannot afford another war, not least, a war with racial undertones,? said Lamido. ?The signals coming from the crisis in Zimbabwe should not and cannot be ignored by Africa and friends of Africa all over the world. This is why we are determined to continue concerted efforts with like-minded countries to find an enduring solution to this problem,? said Lamido.

?The need for an early resolution to the land question in Zimbabwe has even become more urgent. and imperative. So many lives and property have been lost as we continue to grapple with this matter without any feasible solution in sight.?

He said the situation on the ground had been deteriorating daily and the feeling of insecurity on the part of the whites was ?palpable? with some of the whites contemplating emigrating.

The Zimbabwe crisis, whose contagion is currently sweeping across the region, has cost South Africa about $1bn in lost investment in the past 18 months. In a report in September, the Johannesburg-based Johnnic’s online news desk said the emergency, which has become an issue of global concern, has severely damaged the South African economy.

?While the Zimbabwe crisis has caused many South African business-people sleepless nights, the extent of its damage to the economy has not been quantified,? it said. However, the group said, Econometrix economist Azar Jammine has estimated the loss to be approximately $1bn.

?It’s very difficult to quantify the loss other than to compare how much investment is down compared with the time before the crisis,? Jammine pointed out.

Heads of State of the Southern African Development Community met in Harare last month to have first hand information on the land issue.

The meeting was chaired by SADC chair Bakili Muluzi of Malawi and was attended by Thabo Mbeki of South Africa, Festus Mogae of Botswana, Joacchim Chissano of Mozambique, Sam Nujoma of Namibia and representatives of Angola and Tanzania.

Commentators said the meeting marked a turning point in relations between Zimbabwe and regional countries. The SADC leaders abandoned their usual posture of revolutionary solidarity with the region’s longest serving leader and forced him to backtrack.

?Mbeki was very firm against Mugabe, Zanu PF and the war veterans,? a source said. ?The authorities did not like that and hence these state media attacks.?

Political analyst Masipula Sithole summed it up well, when he said: ?Mugabe was looking for solidarity messages, but he got a hammering. I think this diplomatic public flogging has dramatised to him how isolated he is now.?

?Mugabe has pretended to the world that his colleagues in the region support his policies, but after this summit, no amount of gloss or spin-doctoring can change the fact that his colleagues are angry with him and embarrassed by his conduct.?

Mbeki is said to have touched a raw nerve when he mobilised regional leaders to confront Mugabe head-on for the first time.

Mugabe compelled

Following up on last month’s watershed Blantyre SADC summit in Malawi, the regional leaders cornered the glum-looking Mugabe and forced him to accept their crisis resolution proposals.

They compelled him to accept the establishment of a committee to monitor the restoration of the rule of law and issued an ultimatum for him to end state-instigated violence and lawlessness.

SADC leaders also ordered the formation of a multi-party parliamentary committee to work on economic recovery.

Mugabe has always refused to work with the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) claiming it represented foreign interests. These measures are designed to push Mugabe to enforce the Abuja agreement signed last month.

The Abuja accord ties the land reform programme and international assistance to the observance of the rule of law, the end of violence, human rights and democracy - the very issues that Mugabe claimed were ?peripheral? or ?extraneous.?


The agreement in full

i) Commitment to the Harare Commonwealth Declaration and the Millbrook Commonwealth Action Programme on the Harare Declaration;

ii) There will be no further occupation of farm lands

iii) To speed up the process by which farms that do not meet set criteria are de-listed;

iv) For farms that are not designated, occupiers would be moved to legally acquired lands;

v) Acceleration of discussions with the UNDP with a view to reaching agreement as quickly as possible;

vi) Commitment to restore the rule of law to the process of land reform programme

vii) Invitation by the foreign minister to the committee to visit Zimbabwe.

The meeting agreed, in the overall context of the statement, that the way forward is for Zimbabwe’s international partners:

a) to engage constructively with the UNDP and the government of Zimbabwe in pursuing an effective and sustainable land reform programme on the basis of the UNDP proposals of December 2000

b) to respond positively to any request from the government of Zimbabwe in support of the electoral process; and

c) to continue to contribute to poverty reduction programmes for the benefit of the people of Zimbabwe and that those partners present (Australia, Canada and United Kingdom) would actively pursue these objectives.

The meeting also welcomed the re-affirmation of the United Kingdom’s commitment to a significant financial contribution to such a land reform programme and its undertaking to encourage other international donors to do the same.

Copyright © IC Publications Limited 2001. All rights reserved. No part of this site may be reproduced or transmitted in any form by any means or used for any business purpose without the written consent of the publisher. Whilst every effort has been made to ensure that the information contained herein is as accurate as possible, the publisher cannot accept responsibility for any consequences arising from its use.

Back to the top
Contents