[Marxism] Why "Hands Off Zimbabwe" is the main question -- including in Zimbabwe

["Fred Feldman" <ffeldman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Patrick Bond submitted, beginning with a quote from Sayan:
 
Sayan Bhattacharyya wrote:
The question here is self-determination for the Zimbabwean masses.
Whatever the US's attitude is towards Mugabe, is irrelevant to that

vital question. 

 

Especially because the incredible revelations Walter passes along are in
reality common knowledge. Of course US AID and the US Embassy (and
ambassador Dell) are active in Zim to promote US interests. And of course
the progressive forces know this and aren't going to be manipulated. I have
just witnessed a discussion amongst leaders of Crisis in Zimbabwe - probably
the largest civil society network - about why they wouldn't support any
sanctions process that corresponds to Western pressure, or, as the deputy
leader of the Zimbabwe Social Forum - Munya Gwisai (also an ISOZ leader) -
put it in an email today: 

 
Already one of the biggest problems for our struggle
is the overbearing influence and domination of
imperialist and neoliberal forces centred in London
and Washington as well as the international
foundations and NGOs supported by neoliberal global
capitalism. These are pouring huge sums of money into
the movements with the aim of co-opting and
ultimately neutralising them such that at best what we
will see is the removal of Mugabe but continue if not
accelerate the brutal neoliberal policies that the
Zanu PF dictatorship resumed after 2003. This was very
clear from Ambassador Dell's very enthuasitic response
to Gono's last monetary statement as well as the
latest ICG Review of the crisis in Zimbabwe.
 
 
Fred responds:
Basically, what Patrick submits is a cover story for the policy of ignoring
the fact that the US imperialist state has now made the fall of Mugabe an
explicit state interest, publicly.  This in itself is a significant
escalation of the developing political and economic war against Zimbabwe.
Today that is the self-determination issue that is at stake, and more and
more Zimbabweans are going to realize it before or after Mugabe falls.
 
Self-determination of the nation is only one aspect of popular democracy of
course, but it is sheer demagogy to pretend that overthrowing the Zimbabwean
government in direct alliance with US and British imperialism is a "right of
self-determination" which applies above all to the oppression of nations by
other nations or states, not to the choice of government or form of
government within a nation.
 
It is interesting to see that Sayan and Patrick insist that the "right of
self-determination" of the opposition coalition to remove the government
cancels out the violations of the right of self-determination of the
imperialist-oppressed Zimbabwean nation being carried out by imperialism.
Neither of them calls for hands of Zimbabwe as long as the imperialists are
helping those they support.
 
I have always recognized and supported the right of the Kurds to
self-determination. But I don't believe I was duty bound to accept the US
invasion because the Kurdish leading parties thought this would help them
get self-determination.  Frankly, I am not sure that the Kurds are as much
closer to self-determination today as many seem to believe. (There are
political currents within Iraqi Kurdistan that get little publicity but that
seem to have their own doubts.)
 
I can guarantee you that I never supported imperialist aid of any kind to
the Kurds in the cause of subverting the Iraqi government.  What
distinguishes Patrick and to some extent Sayan is their core support of or
indifference to "smart sanctions" and other clever new names for brutal
imperialist intervention.  And that intervention has no fixed "upper limit"
including military action.  Bush may be looking for a place to show his
military stuff that is a little safer - he assumes - than Iraq has been and
Iran may be.  At any rate, we have no reason to assume that anything is off
the table.
 
There is nothing protective of the Zimbabwean people in so-called "smart
sanctions." Under the claim of targeting only the bad individuals, a
deliberate policy of crippling and breaking the entire economy is being
pursued.  It can be escalated infinitely even under the rubric of smart
sanctions.  (Anything that helps so and so is under the ban.) I remember
when Forbes magazine decided that Fidel Castro was one of the five or six
richest men in the world.  They simply assumed literally that since Fidel
was a communist totalitarian monster tyrant, he owned everything in Cuba.  
 
The smart sanctions, I guarantee you, utilize the same scientific
methodology. They are aimed at the people of Zimbabwe, (yes, at undermining
whatever support exists for Mugabe - and the evidence is actually
overwhelming that this thuggish political boss has a significant base of
popular support - but also at breaking the fighting spirit of the entire
Zimbabwean people, ZANU and opposition alike).
 
Frankly, the politician Patrick quotes sounds like he is covering his ass
for foreign and domestic leftists, not fighting the course of relying on the
imperialists as the stronger half of an anti-Mugabe alliance.
 
One issue does demand our international intervention at this time: This is
that the current conflict must be determined by the struggle of - and yes,
among - the Zimbabwean people.  No economic embargos! No threats! No NED
money keeping oppositions afloat! And, Sayan, no South African embargos or
closed borders to bring down the government - something that I am sure
Washington must be pressuring Mbeki to undertake.
 
And let's drop the pretence that what is involved here is the whole
Zimbabwean people against Mugabe and a couple hundred of his goons.  Yes,
that is always the way the imperialists sell their devils of the year:
Noriega, Milosevic, Saddam, Ahmadinejad, and now Mugabe moving up the list.
The unfailingly totalitarian monster-Hitlers who always rule only through
fear.  This has always been an imperialist big lie, and I don't support any
of those governments.
 
There has been absolutely no clear demonstration that the NATION is united
against Mugabe, though I can come up with good reasons why that should be
the case.  There has never been a clear indication that the Shona
countryside is anything like united in opposition to him. Elections, which I
am certain are not completely honest, have never been shown to have gone
against Mugabe.  Despite the brutality, the opposition has considerable
latitude to operate (compared to any genuinely totalitarian setup, such as
Saddam actually had at least in the cities).  The failure to overthrow
Mugabe seems to be about something more complex than pure and simple terror
and rule by fear.
 
Sayan suggests an international movement to demand that South Africa
effectively blockade Zimbabwe, and thus force Mugabe out.  If that can be
done, he suggests, the current escalating imperialist intervention could be
dispensed with.  This suggests that the international campaign against
Mugabe be supplemented by an international campaign against Mbeki, perhaps
with smart sanctions, NED millions, and the whole "smart" operation.
 
Although Mbeki's involvement in campaigning against sanctions on Iran and
Zimbabwe may be straining his relations with US imperialists, I suspect the
hour of the international, "democratic" movement against the monster, the
tyrant, the Hitler Mbeki is not yet --  but I am not sure it doesn't have
future possibilities.  Right now the imperialists have too much to lose in
terms of shaking up the neoliberal course to risk destabilizing Mbeki in
hopes of getting something better.
 
Perhaps that will begin to change if they can get a trusted client in charge
of Zimbabwe.
 
But I have to say something else: The lineup of forces right now indicates
that the Zimbabwean people will be very, very lucky indeed if the successor
government in Zimbabwe is as independent, civilized, and democratic in its
functioning as Mbeki's.  If Bond et al are going to pursue the course of
getting rid of Mugabe by any means necessary, they had better pray for the
blessing of an Mbeki-type government.  Something more like Iraq or
Afghanistan or post-invasion Serbia or Kosovo seems a lot more likely at
present.
 
I repeat: the most important international issue concerning Zimbabwe right
now is that the people of Zimbabwe be permitted to sort this out, fight this
out, and settle this among themselves.  That is the only self-determination
question I see right now, and that battle seems to be being lost, not won,
with the help of the united leadership of the Zimbabwean opposition.  Any of
them who have genuine democratic aspirations will face certain defeat on
this road, perhaps even more so if they "win."
Fred Feldman
 
 
 
 

 

________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism