A-list message, Re: [A-List] NEPAD and Zimbabwe?

Professor Patrick Bond and Lorna Davidson,

First of all I apologise for intervening in the conversation between the two of you. But I do so for the reason that I am equally concerned with what happens on the continent of Africa. What happens or has happened on African Continent is a classic case of to what levels the human race can stoop where some species of animals on the same continent will not.

The few centuries of colonial control of Africa was preceded by conquering the territory and enslavement of its people by all nations around and within. These natios include Arabs, Romans, Greeks and all. The story of colonial era and the huge exodus of slaves to colonise the 'New World' where from the original population had almost been erased. Follwoing the same came the era of African independence, during that we find the continent dominated by political liberators black only in the colour of their skins. These leaders were educated to lend them an orientation to despise all that is indegenous and worked to act as the proxy colonialists.

The few major flaws colonialism has wrought in the continet are: first the un-natural political boundaries drwn across the face of the continent with utter abandon to the realities on ground, such as ethnic and geographic facts. If we try to trace all the blood shedding that has gone on during the past half century much can be attributed to these frontiers drawn by the past colonial masters of Africa.

Secondly, the Christianised and western educated political leadership that was left in charge of thee ship when the original masters found it untenable to be at the helm. These leaders tried all types of social and economic systems, except the African and played the role of colonial masters with the single difference of skin colour.

Another one was the division of the continent into anglo- phone, Franco-phone, Potugese and Spanish speaking blocks. The imposition of foreign tongues divided the continent than uniting it. The elite who excel in such tongues continue to drag their fellow Africans under the umbrellas of the past master regions as if the latter did a great favur of giving a group of 'nations' a commn language.

Coming to the any role remaining for the US or other great nations to play in ameliorating the woes of the down trodden masses on other continents, the time should be counted as over. The one good thing the US occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq in a couple of years and her intention of continuing with conquering other countries as well has done is hopefully the US will not have the face to sermon or arm-twist other nations into playing liberalism, democarcy and human rights anymore.

What international law, if any semblance of that still remain lends the G-8 any right to think and work for the benefit of Africans. A Pashtu language saying puts it well, 'I resent your alms, but please hold back your dog'.

If at all any external help can be rendered to Africa or other people it should through the auspices of a re-structured UNO.

Finally, I am sorry to say that the hypocracy human race had been able to muster over the past centuries has been torn and it is again the time and fashion of Chengiz and Attila.

Will the Human Rights Defenders Project of the Lawyers' Committee for Human Rights please look into developing ways that are more genuine and sincere for the oppressed masses of humanity can learn to put their trust in.

Hassan Garhi, Peshawar

----- Original Message -----

From: "Patrick Bond" <pbond@xxxxxxxxxx>

To: "Lorna Davidson" <DavidsonL@xxxxxxxx>

Sent: Saturday, May 24, 2003 3:40 PM

Subject: [A-List] NEPAD and Zimbabwe?

Lorna,

Thanks for the reply. Because I was educated in the United States, I think I understand the problem. It's that deep-seated structural inability of US liberal institutions to connect the dots, and then to dress up that pathological failure--in the process, totally distorting power relationships --using an open-minded-sounding discourse, for opportunistic and feel-good purposes.

It's a shame. I thought LCHR might have transcended that style. Your relegitimation of the Bush regime and NEPAD does enormous damage.

Yours,
Patrick

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lorna Davidson" <DavidsonL@xxxxxxxx>
To: "Patrick Bond" <pbond@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, May 23, 2003 4:29 PM
Subject: RE: Lorna: NEPAD and Zimbabwe?

Dear Patrick,

Thanks for your message and your interest in our work on Zimbabwe. We very much welcome your (and indeed all) comments on our letter to the G8 and are always interested in receiving more information and different perspectives on the best advocacy strategies.

We have, of course, consulted widely with a range of colleagues in southern Africa, including in Zimbabwe and South Africa, on how best to advocate for greater respect for human rights in Zimbabwe at this time. I and a colleague were in Johannesburg, Pretoria, Cape Town and Harare in February and March, to discuss these issues with local activists and academics and to get people's views on NEPAD, the AU and other African institutions that might be utilised to promote greater respect for human rights. We recognise that there are many differing views on the NEPAD plan and the role that is being played by western countries in shaping and implementing it.

Our position is that, while there are flaws in the NEPAD constitutive document and problems about how it was created and how it is being pursued, it remains nonetheless one of a range of mechanisms that can and should be utilised to promote fundamental human rights standards. At the very least, it bears being said that grand plans for home-grown initiatives to promote development cannot be trumpeted unless the countries who are pushing these plans take their own commitments seriously. This is our main point with regard to Zimbabwe. If NEPAD and its peer review mechanism does fail (or has already failed), then we must be clear about why that is and what it means, both now and for the future.

With regard to the role of the G8 and the Bush administration in particular, we do believe that the US remains an important player in the international community and can have a positive influence on human rights around the world. While many of the actions that have recently been taken (and continue to be taken) by the US government have done severe damage, both with regard to respect for human rights domestically and internationally, this does not mean that there is no room left at all for the US to be a positive force on human rights in many respects. If you wish to look at the copious material produced by the Lawyers Committee on recent developments in the US with regard to the precarious balancing of rights and considerations of national security, as well as on a range of other issues, you can find this on our website (www.lchr.org).

Similarly, with regard to the role of South Africa in Zimbabwe, I agree with you that President Mbeki has done very little to inspire confidence. Many of my colleagues in Zimbabwe have told me of the betrayal felt in the country with regard to the role being played by South Africa. However, the reality remains that the South African government is an important player in the developing situation, at a political level, and is likely to remain so. We therefore believe that positive engagement with South Africa remains an important part of our advocacy strategy, both directly (we regularly communicate directly with the South African government) and indirectly through US, or other international channels.

In short, our work on Zimbabwe is multi-faceted, and our letter to the G8 is just one part of a broader advocacy strategy. We continue to work closely with Zimbabwean human rights activists and always take their advice on the kinds of approach they feel can be most effective, given our own limitations and strengths as a US-based organisation.

I have done a fair amount of research on NEPAD and am certainly very interested to receive more material on it. So, I would very much welcome copies of the manuscripts that you mention.

Thanks again for your interest in our work.

Sincerely,

Lorna Davidson
Senior Associate

Human Rights Defenders Project
Lawyers Committee for Human Rights
333 Seventh Ave, 13th floor
New York, NY 10001, USA

Tel: (+1) 212 845 5251
Fax: (+1) 212 845 5299

E-mail: Davidsonl@xxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick Bond [mailto:pbond@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2003 4:00 PM
To: Lorna Davidson
Subject: Lorna: NEPAD and Zimbabwe?

Dear Lorna (if I can be informal),

This concerns the controversial letter (below) that you have sent out to colleagues on email, signed by Mr Posner. No doubt the intentions are democratic, but will the results be acceptable -- if G8 leaders do as is requested, namely codify NEPAD and put pressure on African governments, in precisely the way that the repressive ZANU-PF regime warns against? Is your group not playing into the hands of some very dubious actors? Won't men like Mugabe and Jonathan Moyo point to such a letter with glee?

I know it's hard from New York to keep an eye out for all the fine details of politics in Southern Africa. However, it shouldn't be a surprise to you that the New Partnership for Africa's Development is widely derided as 'sub-imperialist' by progressive civil society groups (e.g., those most closely associated with the World Social Forum) in this region.

In fact, based upon the appalling record of nurturing the dictatorship since 2000, as well as the SA government's strategic interests -- economic,
geopolitical and domestic (in relation to future opposition party challenges from the labour movement) -- there are very very few serious observers of the Zimbabwe situation who believe that there is ANY positive role for the Mbeki regime. In particular, NEPAD's peer review mechanism is widely considered 'a joke' (even by the secretariat, which in our main business newspaper last month admitted that NEPAD is no longer taken seriously because of Zimbabwe).

Even more disturbing is that you believe the Bush administration can and should make interventions on behalf of Zimbabweans, in the wake of his delegitimation thanks to the US occupation of Iraq, not to mention the racially-biased Florida election.

There are a great many resources that can be sent to you from southern Africa to clarify these issues. For example, the Zimbabwe Coalition on Debt and Development is producing a booklet on how NEPAD has failed. A book I edited a year ago -- Fanon's Warning -- provides ample evidence that the major civil society and intellectual forces in Africa view NEPAD as having only one merit: as a point of unity against which all progressive forces are uniting in opposition. Another book I co-authored -- Zimbabwe's Plunge -- provides detailed documentation of why Mbeki and Obasanjo cannot be trusted to support democracy in Zimbabwe (as if the recent Nigerian election was not enough proof). Also, three weeks ago, I presented a long power-point at Columbia University and the African American Institute on NEPAD. Please let me know if you'd like any of these manuscripts emailed (both the books were co-published by a New Jersey press, Africa World Press).

There are SO many ways an excellent organisation like LCHR can promote democracy and development in Zimbabwe and across Africa, but I must insist that your group's strategy of working through the Bush and Mbeki regimes will certainly rebound negatively on LCHR's good name.

Yours,

Patrick Bond
(Professor, University of the Witwatersrand)
-----------

"Lorna Davidson" <DavidsonL@xxxxxxxx>
16/05/2003

Please find attached a letter sent today to each of
the G8 heads of state, in advance of their upcoming Summit at Evian. The letter calls on the G8 states to fully implement their Africa Action Plan, by working closely with African states that demonstrate committment to the NEPAD principles both in their domestic policies and their regional relations. In particular, the G8 should demonstrate their commitment to ending ongoing human rights violations in Zimbabwe, by working closely with regional governments and civil society groups to resolve the current crisis.

Lorna Davidson

Human Rights Defenders Project
Lawyers Committee for Human Rights
333 Seventh Ave, 13th floor
New York, NY 10001 USA

Tel: (+1) 212 845 5251
Fax: (+1) 212 845 5299

E-mail: Davidsonl@xxxxxxxx
(See attached file: G8 letter Bush.doc)

President George W. Bush
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
Fax: 1 202 456 2461

May 16, 2003

Dear President Bush,

We write to urge that the current crisis in Zimbabwe
receives sufficient attention at the upcoming meeting
of G8 countries in Evian, France. The commitment of
the G8 to ending serious human rights abuses in
Zimbabwe by working alongside African states and
institutions is crucial. The resolution of the
Zimbabwean crisis is not only a legal and moral
imperative, but it also fundamental to the successful implementation of the G8's Africa Action Plan and the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD).

We are pleased to note that monitoring the implementation of the G8 Africa Action Plan, which was adopted at the end of the June 2002 summit held in Kananaskis, Canada, is one of the items on the agenda of your upcoming meeting at Evian. We are also encouraged by President Chirac's proposal to focus on several major themes during the meeting, including the promotion of democracy through dialogue with civil society and other states. The crisis in Zimbabwe is a litmus test for the efficacy of your discussions. The situation in Zimbabwe starkly contradicts the principles contained in NEPAD and supported by the Africa Action Plan. Moreover, Zimbabwean civil society groups are routinely being persecuted, which hampers their efforts to promote respect for human rights and the rule of law.

In the Africa Action Plan, the G8 states pledged their commitment to the principles and objectives contained in NEPAD. Among these are the attainment of sustainable development through good governance, democracy and respect for human rights. The G8 Africa Action Plan describes NEPAD as "a bold and clear-sighted vision of Africa's development" and seeks to encourage "the imaginative effort that underlies [it]." The Plan also refers to NEPAD's peer-review process as an "innovative and potentially decisive element in the attainment of the objectives of the NEPAD." The Plan does not, however, lay out any guidelines for how the G8 states will seek to support the peer-review process and ensure that it indeed fulfils its role as a "decisive element" in ensuring good governance and respect for human rights.

We see the need for an effective peer review process in the implementation of NEPAD that includes independent civil society groups within Africa and rigorously examines states' implementation of internationally recognized human rights standards. (See Lawyers Committee letter to African heads of state, November 13, 2002, attached.) The peer review process should include an examination not only of a state's internal practices and implementation of human rights, but also should assess their policies towards other African states and the consistency of such policies with international human rights obligations.

We commend the commitment of the G8 states, contained in the Africa Action Plan, to establish enhanced partnerships with African countries whose performance reflects the principles and undertakings contained in NEPAD. In order for this commitment to be fully realized, such enhanced partnerships should be established with countries whose actions both at home and in their relations with other countries in the region are reflective of the principles of good governance, democracy and human rights. NEPAD is itself a regional initiative and requires regional vision and implementation, not only domestic policies and practices that conform with its aims.

Many crises of poverty, disease, armed conflict, and denial of democracy and human rights continue to plague Africa and fundamentally undermine efforts to achieve sustainable development. Combating such crises requires effective, co-ordinated strategies among African states and supported by the international community. The current situation in Zimbabwe is one such crisis, the details of which are well-documented by local and international organizations (see Lawyers Committee Briefing Paper for the G8, June 2002). Since your June 2002 meeting, the situation in Zimbabwe has further deteriorated, and it is largely the black population that is targeted for abuse. Serious human rights violations committed by the government and its agents continue to receive insufficient attention both within the region and internationally. Efforts to end the crisis must
involve the combined efforts of governments and civil society groups in Africa which are encouraged by the G8. Fundamental human rights issues must be addressed, including bringing an end to political violence, arbitrary detention and torture, restoring full freedom of _expression_ and association, ensuring the independence of the judiciary, and combating impunity for human rights abuses.

The very fundamental challenges to NEPAD presented by the Zimbabwe crisis and the response to it, and the creation of viable regional mechanisms to enhance respect for human rights in Africa must be prioritized at the G8 meeting. We would greatly appreciate your action in this regard and any information that you can provide to us in response to our concerns.

Sincerely,

Michael Posner
Executive Director

Cc:

President Jaques Chirac
Prime Minister Tony Blair
Prime Minister Jean Chrétien
President Vladimir Putin
Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder
Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi
Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi

Mr. Colin Powell, Secretary of State
Mr. Jack Straw, Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs

Mr. Joschka Fischer, Federal Minister for Foreign Affairs
Mr. Igor Ivanov, Minister for Foreign Affairs
Mr. Dominique de Villepin, Minister for Foreign Affairs
Mr. Franco Frattini, Minister for Foreign Affairs
Mr. Yoriko Kawaguchi, Minister for Foreign Affairs