What's going on in Zimbabwe

[Ɔkyeame Kwame]

Zimbabwe officials: Mugabe won in main cities

By ANGUS SHAW, Associated Press Writer 22 minutes ago

HARARE, Zimbabwe - President Robert Mugabe won an overwhelming victory in Zimbabwe's discredited, violence-wracked runoff election, according to official results released Sunday.

AP Photo: Angolan Foreign Minister and election observer Joao Bernardo de Miranda, left, hands documents to Zimbabwean...



Moments after the results were announced on state TV, a marching band opened inauguration ceremonies for Mugabe at his official residence. Reporters already had been called to the ceremony.
The electoral commission said total results showed more than 2 million votes for Mugabe, and 233,000 for opposition candidate Morgan Tsvangirai. Turnout was put at about 42 percent, and 131,000 ballots had been defaced or otherwise spoiled, apparently as an act of protest.
African and other world leaders have condemned the election, in which Mugabe was the only candidate. Human rights groups said opposition supporters were the targets of brutal state-sponsored violence during the campaign, leaving more than 80 dead and forcing some 200,000 to flee their homes.
Tsvangirai withdrew from the race because of the violence, though his name remained on the ballot and his supporters may have spoiled their ballots rather than vote for Mugabe.
Residents said they were forced to vote Friday by threats of violence or arson from Mugabe supporters who searched for anyone without an ink-stained finger — the telltale sign that they had cast a ballot.
In the opposition stronghold of Bulawayo, official results showed Mugabe got 21,127 votes and opposition candidate Morgan Tsvangirai had 13,291, while 9,166 ballots were spoiled.
A high number of spoiled ballots had been noted earlier Sunday by Marwick Khumalo, a member of parliament from Swaziland who led a team of election observers from across the continent under the auspices of the AU-sponsored Pan-African Parliament.
Khumalo said some ballots were defaced with "unpalatable messages." He refused to elaborate, but left the impression the messages expressed hostility toward Mugabe, who has led the country since independence from Britain in 1980.
Tsvangirai won the most votes in the first round of presidential voting in March, but not enough for an outright victory. African mediators have in recent days been pushing for Mugabe and Tsvangirai to negotiate a power-sharing agreement.
Mugabe said on the eve of Friday's vote that he was open to talks but pressed ahead with the election, apparently hoping a victory would give him leverage at the negotiating table.
Khumalo, the observer, urged African and regional leaders to "engage the broader political leadership in Zimbabwe into a negotiated transitional settlement."
With the election discredited and attention turning to the possibility of negotiations, the role of Mugabe in any future government could be a sticking point.
Tsvangirai said in an interview with The Sunday Telegraph of Britain that Mugabe might be allowed to stay on as ceremonial president of a transitional government, with himself as executive prime minister.
"It's being considered within our structures," the paper quoted Tsvangirai as saying.
Mugabe, 84, was once hailed as a post-independence leader committed to development and reconciliation. But in recent years, he has been accused of ruining Zimbabwe's economy and holding onto power through fraud and intimidation.
The official inflation rate was put at 165,000 percent by the government in February, but independent estimates put the real figure closer to 4 million percent.
Since the first round of elections, shortages of basic goods have worsened, public services have come to virtual standstill, and power and water outages have continued daily.

[KaNisa]

What's the REAL deal behind this situation? Does anyone know?

[Ɔkyeame Kwame]

Originally Posted by KaNisa

What's the REAL deal behind this situation? Does anyone know?

A brother of mine, Kwanisai Mafa, says that the opposition MDC has clear and strong imperialist ties and the people are against them and those who support them. He put out some info recently that I will see if I can track down.

Obadele

[KaNisa]

Defiant Mugabe blasts West, tells Britain to 'hang'

• Story Highlights
• NEW: Official says answer to turmoil "is a way defined by the Zimbabwean people"
• Opposition denies reports that power-sharing deal imminent
• State-run newspaper: Robert Mugabe will not tolerate criticism from African leaders
• Ex-world leaders, led by Mandela, want African leaders to say vote is illegitimate

CAIRO, Egypt (CNN) -- Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe's spokesman said Tuesday that talk of Western intervention in the country's politics smacks of colonialism, and that the United Kingdom "can go and hang a thousand times."
Britain, which ruled then-Rhodesia for decades until 1980, is among several Western entities denouncing Mugabe's campaign tactics and declaring his runoff victory illegitimate.
Speaking to a gaggle of reporters at the two-day African Union summit in Egypt, spokesman George Charamba defended the Mugabe regime's resistance to outside influence, saying, "The way out is a way defined by the Zimbabwean people."
"For as long as there are some external interests that are seeking to express themselves within our own politics, then naturally we have that kind of resistance because for us it recalls a certain experience, ugly experience, we have gone through before -- that of colonialism," he said. Watch bodyguards hold back Mugabe at summit »
Asked specifically about Zimbabwe's former colonial ruler, Charamba bristled.
"They can go and hang. They can go and hang a thousand times. They have no basis. They have no claim on Zimbabwean politics at all and that is exactly the issue," Charamba said of Britain.
Mugabe, Zimbabwe's only leader since its independence from Britain in 1980, handily won last week's runoff election against opposition candidate Morgan Tsvangirai. Mugabe was the only candidate after Tsvangirai dropped out of the race, citing widespread violence, intimidation and vote rigging.
Amid an international outcry, Western leaders pressed the African Union to join them in firmly denouncing the elections. A U.N. Official described the summit as "a moment of truth."
Also, the Elders, a council of former world leaders led by former South African President Nelson Mandela, urged the AU to "clearly state" that Zimbabwe's presidential runoff was illegitimate.
"They occurred under the cloud of targeted political violence, precipitating the withdrawal of one of the two candidates," the Elders' statement said. "The African election observers left no doubt: The elections were neither free nor fair."
However, leaders meeting at the Egyptian resort of Sharm el-Sheikh have been slow to criticize Mugabe, and many media outlets are speculating that their reticence stems from a reluctance to throw stones in a glass house.
Zimbabwe's state-run Herald reported in its top story Tuesday that Mugabe would not stand for any condemnation from his African counterparts. Watch a British leader call Mugabe an "embarrassing guest" »
"When he wound up his campaign for the runoff, President Mugabe made it clear he was prepared to face any leader at the summit over the elections because some of them had worse election records," the Herald reported.
Indeed, Mugabe is not the only ruler to be accused of perpetuating violence or rigging elections in Africa. Kenyan President Mwai Kibaki, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, Libyan President Moammar Gadhafi, Equatorial Guinea President Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo and Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir are among current African rulers who have been the target of allegations by the international community in recent years.
In the case of Zimbabwe, international observers had hoped Mugabe and Tsvangirai could sort out their differences and form a unity government, akin to the compromise credited with quelling Kenya's political violence earlier this year.
Mugabe and Tsvangirai have previously said they'd be willing to undertake such an endeavor, but both laid out strict conditions under which they would negotiate such a deal.
Business Day, a South African newspaper, reported Tuesday that President Thabo Mbeki's envoys had secured commitments from Tsvangirai and Mugabe on a power-sharing deal.
Tsvangirai's Movement for Democratic Change promptly denied the report, which claimed Tsvangirai and Mugabe would work to implement a new constitution and other reforms. The newspaper did not name its sources, but Mbeki's spokesman, Mukoni Ratshitanga, told the paper that the envoys' visit to Harare was "a confidential briefing intended only for the president." See photos from Zimbabwe »
An MDC statement refuted the report, saying there were "no talks or discussions" between Tsvangirai and Mugabe.
"And most importantly, there is no agreement in the offing," the statement said. "Nothing can be as malicious and as further from the truth."
While some African leaders, like Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga, have been outspoken in their condemnation of the Zimbabwean election, Mbeki has taken a softer stance.
Mbeki, who was appointed by the Southern African Development Community to mediate the dispute in Zimbabwe, has said a more conciliatory stance will allow for the formation of a coalition government between Mugabe's Zimbabwe African National Union -- Patriotic Front and Tsvangirai's MDC.
Though Tsvangirai did not travel to Sharm el-Sheikh, the MDC sent a five-member delegation, led by MDC Vice President Thokozani Khupe.
"They are reporting very good progress. They have caucused with a lot of people," Tsvangirai said Tuesday.
However, the prospect of a unity government seemed dim. In its statement refuting the South African newspaper's report, the MDC said it tried to mend fences with Mugabe, but to no avail.
"Whilst the MDC pursued dialogue in a bid to establish a Government of National Healing before the 12th [of] June, 2008, the sham ... Election on 27 June 2008 totally and completely exterminated any prospects of a negotiated settlement," the statement said. See how the election unfolded »
Tsvangirai, who sought refuge in the Netherlands Embassy amid the election violence, returned to his home in Harare on Tuesday, Dutch Foreign Ministry spokesman Rob Dekker said.
The Foreign Ministry remains in contact with Tsvangirai and he can return if he deems it necessary, Dekker said.
Tsvangirai arrived at the Netherlands Embassy on June 22, hours after he announced he was withdrawing from the presidential runoff.
As the U.S. And other nations worked to draft a resolution that they hope to present to the U.N. Security Council on Wednesday, a U.N. Official this week said the situation in Zimbabwe imperils the entire region. Watch how the U.N. Could sanction Zimbabwe »
"This is the single greatest challenge to regional stability in southern Africa, not only because of its terrible humanitarian and security consequences but also because of the dangerous political precedent it sets," U.N. Deputy Secretary-General Asha-Rose Migiro said.

[Ɔkyeame Kwame]

This was posted by Kwanisai, the brother who I spoke about earlier:


Untitled document

Mugabe is ready to lead a Resistance War!

--- North American Committee Against Zionism and Imperialism
(NACAZAI)

The beacon of light and hope for Black Africa must not be
existinguished!

We learn with delight and inspiration that President Robert Gabriel
Mugabe, President of Zimbabwe is preparing the people of Zimbabwe for
a resistance war should the neo-colonialist MDC attempt to take over
via imperialist elections interference.

Its believed that whole sections of Revolutionary War veterans, youth
partisans of Mugabe’s ruling ZANU-PF youth league, and whole segments
of the army and peasantry are committed and prepared to confront the
neo-colonialists and defend the revolution.


Mugabe was quoted as saying “We cannot allow the British to dominate
us here again through their puppets. You saw what they were saying
(after the March elections), celebrating an MDC victory”.

NACAZAI lauds the courage of the great resistance partisan of
Zimbabwe’s War of Liberation, partisan in the fight against
imperialism and neo-colonial enslavement of Africa, President Robert
Mugabe. We vow to stand with him and the ZANU-PF through thick and
thin. We reiterate our support for any measures of state repression
deemed necessary for the stability and security of Zimbabwe.

Long Live President Robert Mugabe and the Zimbabwe African National
Union – Patriotic Front!

Smash the forces which threaten the popular classes and national
independence around the world!

[Ɔkyeame Kwame]

By Reason Wafawarova in SYDNEY, Australia

THE current economic crisis and political instability bedevilling
Zimbabwe continues to be portrayed as a direct sequel of the political
shortcomings of one man, President Robert Mugabe, and we are all meant
to solemnly believe that the mere removal of this one man will mean
that Zimbabweans will live happily forever after.

The political complexity that has been created by Western interests in
the affairs of Zimbabwe will continue to be relegated to obscurity by
those who have chosen to bestow upon themselves the honour of
apostleship to the now hysterical doctrine of regime change.

To many this political interest has been misconstrued as something
emanating from the land reclamation era that started in 2000. In fact,
the land reclamation programme only exacerbated the ruinous effect of
the neo-colonialism resolve to maintain imperial supremacy over former
colonies, in this case over Zimbabwe.

Las Casas, a 16th century Spanish writer, left in his will a telling
statement about the long-term effect of colonial ruin — an effect that
he reckoned would undoubtedly provoke divine powers to anger.

Said Casas: "I believe that because of these impious, criminal and
ignominious deeds perpetrated so unjustly, tyrannically and
barbarously, God will vent upon Spain His wrath and His fury, for
nearly all of Spain has shared in the bloody wealth usurped at the
cost of so much ruin and slaughter."

Casas was obviously condemning the very uncivilised conquest of Latin
America by Spain — a conquest that was a result of six small but
powerful European countries terrorising the rest of the world in the
name of Western civilisation.

Britain decided to bloat its ego by calling themselves Great Britain
despite their tiny geographical territorial space. They called
themselves "great" because they had developed themselves into
champions of expansionism.

Cecil John Rhodes was the British queen’s foot soldier to Southern
Africa and for his legacy he decided to name Zimbabwe after his own
name, calling it Rhodesia. Rhodes and his British South African
Company reduced Africans to a labour resource in their mining and
farming enterprises that Britain saw as a legitimate expansion of its
economy. Africa, just like Latin America and Asia, fought colonialism
from a political front and this is what we have called the "fall of
colonial empires". Colonial empires might have fallen politically but
the reality facing the developing world today is that the West has not
lost much of its usurped colonial wealth and they will do all in their
power to make sure that this does not happen.

For Lancaster in 1979, it was not too much for Zimbabwean nationalists
to ask to have our little region back as long as what they were asking
for was limited to political power.

Now that the political power has been used to venture into the
economic territory of imperial Britain, for better or for worse, we do
see an ominous backlash where Britain is teaming up with her Western
allies against Zimbabwe all in the in the name of an altruistic
international community. The West and altruism have now become a
contradiction in terms.

The weapon used to destroy the threatening political power in Zimbabwe
has been the criminal sanctions against the masses of Zimbabwe, never
mind the spurious argument that these sanctions are "targeted" at
Government officials. This line of argument has just become a
nauseating joke that annoys even the most avowed right-wingers.

It is obviously not enough for Britain and her allies to merely
destroy the political power that has shaken the economic interest of
the West in Zimbabwe. They inevitably need to fill up the gap. What is
needed is to create a replacement political power centre that falls
under the control of the imperial authority.

The legitimacy of this kind of political power centre cannot be seen
to be founded in economic principles, just like liberation movements
were largely pushed to be founded in ideologies that were free of
economic influence.

Most of the liberation movements entered independence agreements that
merely brokered an assurance that the new political leadership would
not only co-exist with capitalist business owners but would actually
ensure an employee-employer relationship between indigenous peoples
and their former colonisers.

Many countries, Zimbabwe included; were applauded for "employment
creation" initiatives that were in essence an abuse of cheap labour
for maximised profiteering by Western multinational companies.

To make sure that the political leadership followed this route the
West employed the tactic of foreign aid — ostensibly meant for
"development enhancement" programmes. To this end, it was made to look
perfectly normal for developing countries to rely on aid for rural
development while they continued to top the global export indexes for
their minerals and other raw resources.

Secondly, African politicians were tactically rewarded for compliance
to this subtle campaign for economic supremacy. Such rewards would and
still do come through such awards as Nobel Peace prize, honourary
degrees, knighthood awards or foundation scholarships.

Those who have not lived up to the imperial expectations of the
awarding authorities have in the past been demonised frantically and
we have now seen a new trend of the "revoking" of these awards.

Those who have enjoyed the dishonour of being shining lights in
looking after imperial wealth do not only continue to have more awards
thrust upon them but also continue to receive wide-ranging media
coverage as beacons of "democracy and human rights".

We have just seen a list of African personalities appearing on a list
of signatures to a document that purports to be calling for "free and
fair" electoral process ahead of the Zimbabwe June 27 election.
Desmond Tutu of South Africa will never miss duty on such an
assignment and at the rate John Sentamu of Uganda is going, he stands
a fantastic chance of landing the Noble Peace prize right in the
footsteps of the clearly obnoxious little bishop from down south.

The opposition MDC is meant to be a political replacement to Zanu-PF
and not to be an alternative government for the people of Zimbabwe. An
MDC-led government is meant to excel in proving to the world that
African political power can only work in partnership with Western
economic power.

The MDC wants to form the next government whose mandate would be to
impress what they keep calling "the international community" — a
euphemism for Western powers.

George W. Bush has just publicly said to Gordon Brown "We will help
you get a free and fair election in Zimbabwe." Why does Brown need a
free and fair election in Zimbabwe, or more precisely why does he need
an election of whatever form in Zimbabwe? He is not even elected
himself.

Britain, Australia and the US have all vowed to take Zimbabwe to the
UN Security Council "should Mugabe emerge the winner" in the coming
election. Effectively it now stands as a fact that a Morgan Tsvangirai
loss is, by definition a result of an unfair and unfree election.

To the West this is a one-way election whose result is now cast in
stone. Sadc and all observers are meant to descend on Zimbabwe and
monitor a Morgan Tsvangirai win or they risk being labelled biased and
less robust in the fight for democracy.

It is by design that the West staunchly supports the MDC’s purported
fight for democracy and human rights. That is the credo and platform
upon which client regimes are founded these days. There is no client
regime that preaches economic empowerment for indigenous people. They
all preach freedom of speech, jobs, food and a whole spectrum of shiny
packages of limitless freedoms and liberties.

To make the crusade for freedom legitimate Zimbabwe is unreservedly
portrayed as a lawless country where the Government is killing its own
people. MDC political activists can be as provocative as they wish
because any arrest will, by assumption, be viewed as a violation of
basic human rights. All that is happening in Zimbabwe right now is
just a cycle of colonial ruin and what the MDC is seeking is not a
"new Zimbabwe" but a restoration of Rhodesia.

Rhodesia was founded on Britain’s impious, criminal and ignominious
murders of 1890 and the MDC’s "new Zimbabwe" is to be founded on the
ruinous, profane and despicable sanctions that have been unleashed on
the generality of Zimbabweans.

We were subjected to servitude by the power of gunpowder in 1890 and
we are being forced into subordination by the ruthless power of
economic sanctions in 2008.

Some among us collaborated with the enemy in 1890 and some among us
are collaborating with the enemy today. The British interests over
Zimbabwe have not changed. Zimbabwe must help make the small island of
Britain stand as "Great Britain" by allowing British imperial
authority to preside over the economic affairs of Zimbabwe.

What has changed is the warfare. Gone are the days of military
conquest. Gone are the days of crude power politics. Now is the time
for economic strangulation. Now is the time for stage-managed crusades
for "democracy and human rights".

Britain wants its citizenry to continue to share the bloody wealth of
Zimbabwe usurped at the cost of so much ruin and slaughter as we saw
through the many lives that were massacred during the First and Second
Chimurenga and the many more lives that have been claimed by the
ruinous effect of the illegal sanctions currently imposed on Zimbabwe
by Western allies. This cycle of colonial ruin cannot be allowed to
continue. The econom