Brian Raftopoulos

Mugabe, Mbeki & the politics of anti-imperialism

There can be little doubt that one of the most significant aspects of the current crisis in Zimbabwe, especially the events of the past two or three years, has been its international character. At the heart of President Robert Mugabes offensive against the array of forces opposed to his rule are repeated attempts to place the Zimbabwe problem at the centre of a larger anti-imperialist and Pan-African position. These tactics have been crucial to the process of legitimising the recent actions of ZANU-PF, in power since independence in 1980. The land question in particular has been located within a discourse of legitimate redress for colonial injustice, language which has resonated on the African continent, and within the Third World more generally. Knowing that his authoritarian rule would be confronted with a widespread national and international critique centred on property rights, human rights and the rule of law, Mugabe and his advisors constructed alternative discourses around the need for renewed liberation struggle solidarity, the continuing effects of African marginalisation attendant on the globalisation process, and the presumptions of liberal imperialism. Behind this rhetorical shield, the ZANU-PF government has effectively suspended the rule of law as it attempts to bludgeon its opponents into silence. In doing so, it has enjoyed the support provided by the so-called ‘quiet diplomacy’ and ‘constructive engagement’ of other Southern and Central African governments.

The Zimbabwean Crisis and the Challenges for the Left

The Zimbabwean crisis has generated a great deal of academic and political debate, not the least of which has been conflicting perspectives from the Left. While the politics of land redistribution has been characterised by some as a key marker of anti-imperialist and anti-neoliberal politics, others have been equally concerned about the authoritarian politics that has been the modality for the land interventions of the Mugabe regime. This article undertakes a broad analysis of the theoretical questions underlying the Zimbabwe debate, pointing to particular problems relating to the legacies of political economy, nation and race, and the challenges of developing democratic alternatives in the current global context. The article also situates these problems within a broader, critical historiographical reading of the Zimbabwean crisis. Finally, central to the argument of the article is the concern that issues relating to democratisation and human rights, as well as historical agency, are not peripheralised by the necessary demands for economic reconstruction, which can often lead to an overwhelming economism in political analysis.

Beyond the house of hunger: democratic struggle in Zimbabwe

In 1980, after more than a decade of armed liberation struggle, ZANU‐PF took power in Zimbabwe. The new government under President Mugabe became increasingly repressive, seeking to force opposition either into alliance with ZANU, or into silence. This authoritarian process appeared to be culminating in a formal one‐party presidentialist state, de facto one‐party rule having being achieved in the late 1980s. This article describes the process and analyses growing opposition to it, both from within ZANU and from groupings within civil society — notably students, workers, peasant communities, and the petty bourgeoisie. In this section the role of the petty bourgeoisie is examined, especially its private sector component. Part two, to be published in ROAPE 55 describes and interprets peasant discontent and worker opposition.

Nationalism and labour in Salisbury 1953–1965

The demise of Charles Mzingeli and the Reformed Industrial and Commercial Union (R.I.C.U.) in Salisbury by the mid‐1950s, and the growth of mass nationalism, reflected important demographic and social changes in the city. These changes were the consequence of the changes on the land in the 1950s, resulting in the increasing movement of labour into Salisbury by the mid‐1950s. For the first time, from this period, the numbers of indigenous workers in the city exceeded those from outside Southern Rhodesia. The emergence of the Harare Youth League and later nationalist parties between 1955 and 1965, thus signalled new developments in urban politics. Whereas the R.I.C.U. had confined their varied activities to issues largely relating to the ‘location’ area and the more permanent city dwellers, the broader mobilisation strategy of the nationalist movements included as a central feature, the rural grievances of the urban migrants. This strategy created a broader basis for national mobilisation. However as the ag...

“Kana sora ratswa ngaritswe”: African Nationalists and Black Workers – The 1948 General Strike in Colonial Zimbabwe

For almost two weeks in April 1948 colonial Zimbabwes two major cities, as well as smaller towns, mines and farms were convulsed by mass unrest. Although the causes of the General Strike have long been recognised as having their origins in the urban squalor and rampant inflation of the immediate post-war era, there is little agreement about either its organisation or its significance. Recent interventions in the debate have tended to strengthen existing prejudices. This paper advances four linked propositions which radically reformulate previous positions: that, while the development of secondary industry and the related growth of colonial Zimbabwes urban areas were both relatively large by the modest standards of Sub-Saharan African, the scale was small in absolute terms; that these processes and their social consequences differed considerably between Bulawayo and Salisbury; that that the limited scale of these processes often meant that parochial concerns were more important than national issues; and that while all of this facilitated a greater degree of control over events in Bulawayo, if not in Salisbury, by an elite leadership than some writers have conceded, these events did not amount to a colony-wide General Strike.

Indigenization, the State Bourgeoisie and Neo-authoritarian Politics

When a liberated Zimbabwe came into being in 1980, a political injustice was finally redressed with the establishment of majority rule, but not the economic and social imbalances between the white and the black communities, in particular the glaringly unequal distribution of economic capital. Very little has changed in the twenty years since independence: although the civil service was Africanized within the first five years.2 The state gained control of a significant section of the national economy, both in the financial and productive sectors, but the private sector is still largely owned by the 70 000 white Zimbabweans (out of 12 million citizens) or by international companies such as Lonrho and the Anglo-American Corporation. Indeed, whites are preponderant among the 4000 commercial farmers and largely dominate the manufacturing and mining sectors. However, there are no statistics for the racial composition of local company ownership, and since independence many blacks – including ruling party cadres – were co-opted into business by sections of white capital.3 However, figures from the early 1990s show that 63 per cent of senior management in the corporate sector are still white (Strachan 1993, 41).