Find us on Google+

Friday, 7 September 2007

A divided region.....

Business Day (Johannesburg, RSA) reports on how President Mugabe attacked President Mwanawasa at the recent SADC summit:

“After Mbeki delivered his report to the summit, Mwanawasa, as the chair of the meeting, said there was an urgent need to discuss Zimbabwe because the situation there had become ‘unacceptable’. Kikwete said there was no need to discuss it because talks were in progress and Mbeki concurred,” a senior diplomat said. “Kikwete then suggested Mugabe should be asked what he thought about Mwanawasa’s proposal. When Mugabe was given the platform to speak he launched an angry tirade, attacking Mwanawasa left, right and centre before walking out in protest.”

The diplomat said Mugabe angrily asked: “Who are you, Mwanawasa? Who are you? Who do you think you are?” “Mugabe also said he was aware of Mwanawasa’s recent meetings with western intelligence agencies on Zimbabwe. He said he would ‘not allow Mwanawasa to sell out Zimbabwe as he has done to Zambia’,” the diplomat said.

10 comments:

  1. He said he would ‘not allow Mwanawasa to sell out Zimbabwe as he has done to Zambia’,” the diplomat said.

    I wonder how that meeting would have gone if Michael Sata had been elected. A lot different, I would think.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I have found it shocking though the level of disrespect that Mugabe would show another President.

    ReplyDelete
  3. That would depend on what Mwanawasa said to him, wouldn't it?

    Maybe he told Mugabe that Zimbabwe would be better run by LonRho. Who knows?

    But I can't disagree with Mugabe. We're not getting the whole conversation, just bits of it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. MrK,

    So you buy into the whole CIA thing?

    ReplyDelete
  5. So you buy into the whole CIA thing?

    I don't know which particular CIA thing you are referring to. :)

    Their fingerprints were all over the Haitian coupt d'etat, which ousted the democratically elected father Bertrand Aristide, and installed the local drug trafficer and the head of the death squads. It had the School of the Americas terror tactics all over them.

    Check out some time the professional biography of the head of the CIA's Angola Task Force, John Stockwell, "In Search Of Enemies - A CIA story". Stockwell is the real deal, and was also described in Orrin Deforest's excellent book on intelligence gathering in Vietnam, "Slow Burn". (I think it is a book that should be read by anyone who has anything to do with intelligence gathering or related policies.)

    I don't know what role the CIA plays in Zimbabwe, but I will tell you one thing. The CIA sponsored neoliberal 'revolutions' all over the place. They are referred to as the 'colored' revolutions. The Rose Revolution (Georgia), the Purple Revolution (Iraq), the Orange Revolution (Ukraine), etc.

    http://www.iran-press-service.com/ips/articles-2005/april-2005/iran_referendum_13405.shtml

    IS IRAN ON THE WAY TO A COLOUR REVOLUTION?

    By Safa Haeri
    Posted Wednesday, April 13, 2005

    PARIS, 13 Apr. (IPS) Is Iran gearing for a new “colour revolution”, similar to the ones in Georgia, Ukraine and most recently in the Central Asian Republic of Kyrgyzstan?

    The question is becoming more pertinent after Mr. Abbas Amir Entezam, a veteran Iranian dissident and probably one of the world’s longest political prisoners, invited his fellow country men not only to boycott the coming presidential elections, but also turn the event into a national referendum on the Iranian regime.


    And from the Financial Times:

    Beijing concerned about ‘colour revolution’
    By Mure Dickie and Richard McGregor
    Published: November 18 2005 00:51 | Last updated: November 18 2005

    Asked why Beijing had halted plans to let foreign newspapers print in China, Shi Zongyuan, the country’s top press regulator, did not mince his words. “When I think of the ‘colour revolutions’, I feel afraid,” he said.


    Cho,

    I don't believe that the CIA is all powerful, or that it is present everywhere. I do know that it is an instrument of US foreign policy, and that this White House is the most corrupt in US history. So no, I wouldn't put anything past them. And I also think that the MDC are unprincipled enough to seek support from any corner.

    I do think the CIA has found an 'method of operations' in these 'colour revolutions'. And I would not be surprised at all if they have given Zimbabwe a go, on top of all these strategically located countries in the former southern Soviet Union.

    Maybe one day ambassador Dell will write his memoirs and we'll all know.

    ReplyDelete
  6. MrK,

    I meant the Mugabe accusation that LPM was meeting "Western Intellegience" agencies. I assume he meant CIA / Mi6.

    On the CIA read....I currently have Tenet's new book sitting next to Mr Ross's book on negotiation...

    ReplyDelete
  7. I would like to know more about what was actually said during this meeting.

    This article shows a few more details. It sounds that not only was there a confrontation between Mugabe and Mwanawasa, but that Mbeki and Kikwete both tried to prevent Mwanawasa from pushing ahead on the subject. (Maybe diplomacy is not Mwanawasa's strong suit?) From AllAfrica.com:

    But information gleaned from senior SADC diplomats indicates there were not just divisions, but a fierce clash between Mugabe and Mwanawasa that left the regional leaders shocked. They say the trouble started after Mbeki del-ivered his report on talks between the Zimbabwean ruling party Zanu (PF) and the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC).

    Mbeki had earlier given the report to Tanzanian President Jakaya Kikwete, the chairman of the SADC organ on politics, defence and security. Mbeki briefed the summit on Zimbabwe in his capacity as an SADC-appointed mediator .

    Mbeki said in his briefing there was progress in the talks, although parties needed to intensify negotiations.

    "After Mbeki delivered his report to the summit, Mwanawasa, as the chair of the meeting, said there was an urgent need to discuss Zimbabwe because the situation there had become 'unacceptable'. Kikwete said there was no need to discuss it because talks were in progress and Mbeki concurred," a senior diplomat said. "Kikwete then suggested Mugabe should be asked what he thought about Mwanawasa's proposal. When Mugabe was given the platform to speak he launched an angry tirade, attacking Mwanawasa left, right and centre before walking out in protest."

    The diplomat said Mugabe angrily asked: "Who are you, Mwanawasa? Who are you? Who do you think you are?"

    "Mugabe also said he was aware of Mwanawasa's recent meetings with western intelligence agencies on Zimbabwe. He said he would 'not allow Mwanawasa to sell out Zimbabwe as he has done to Zambia'," the diplomat said.

    "During the process Mwana-wasa was shaken and he kept on saying: 'Mr President I didn't mean to say that; you misunderstood me. No, Mr President, that was not my intention' ."

    Sources said Mugabe, after blasting Mwanawasa, walked out and did not return.

    Efforts by colleagues - including Kikwete and Mbeki - to persuade him to return to the meeting failed.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Actually this one has more detail :)

    "I do not like your attitude, Mwanawasa. You are not a true African brother. You are a sell-out. You want to sell Zimbabwe to the Europeans in the way you have sold Zambia. The trouble is, you inherited an independent Zambia, you did not fight the war of its liberation."

    Such insults cut deep in an African country, and Mwanawasa was visibly shaken. But Mugabe wasn't quite finished. Trembling with rage, he stared balefully at the other members of SADC and told them that if any more pressure was put on him to resign he would withdraw Zimbabwe from the regional economic bloc.

    Then he swept out of the room and caught a plane back to Harare eight hours ahead of schedule, leaving a roomful of shaken and silenced Southern Africa leaders.

    ReplyDelete
  9. "I do not like your attitude, Mwanawasa. You are not a true African brother. You are a sell-out. You want to sell Zimbabwe to the Europeans in the way you have sold Zambia. The trouble is, you inherited an independent Zambia, you did not fight the war of its liberation."

    Can anyone disagree with this?

    This is as much a clash of generations, as it is a clash between liberators and neoliberals.

    I think the likes of Mwanawasa truly believe that Africa must be run by the west. He certainly doesn't believe in (or is capable of) government initiatives.

    Contrast that with the Zimbabwean style, that is almost entirely about government directives.

    I think Mugabe may know something, because his (as well as Mwanawasa's) proliferous use of the intelligence services.

    I do think that is about timet that the west started butting out of Africa's business.

    ReplyDelete
  10. I think both of them are patriotic.
    They simply differ on their approach to the solutions. In particular they differ overthe role of Government versus market.

    But these are difference which are found even among economists and political scientists, so I don't think we can use them to call those that favour markets upatriotic.

    Dare I say, I oscillate between the two camps depending on the problem and prior beliefs about the effectiveness of a particular Government's intervention.

    ReplyDelete

All contributors should follow the basic principles of a productive dialogue: communicate their perspective, ask, comment, respond,and share information and knowledge, but do all this with a positive approach.

This is a friendly website. However, if you feel compelled to comment 'anonymously', you are strongly encouraged to state your location / adopt a unique nick name so that other commentators/readers do not confuse your comments with other individuals also commenting anonymously.