Land reform is a necessity to be handled carefully
2010 07 08
http://www.thezimbabwemail.com/zimbabwe/5581.html
08 July, 2010 06:42:00
by Tanonoka Joseph Whande
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
A white Commercial farmer confronted by Robert Mugabe’s war veterans
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
OPINION
About ten years ago, the so-called land reform programme in Zimbabwe was initiated. It was, however, unleashed not because of necessity but as a way of punishing some people.
The rank and file had just handed Robert Mugabe an embarrassing defeat during a constitutional referendum.
Mugabe wanted the draft constitution to be adopted because it left his powers basically intact and also skated around the issue of the number of terms a president should be limited to.
But the Zimbabwean people rejected the draft constitution.
This was at a time when the newly formed Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) was making recruitment headway in its infancy.
White farmers, who felt neglected by Mugabe in spite of their annual outputs of crops, beef and tobacco, queued up behind the MDC, cheque books in hand.
This annoyed Mugabe further and he immediately made a u-turn on his declared policy of reconciliation and urged his supporters, led by some elements of war veterans, to invade and seize white-owned farms.
Many farmers lost not only their farms and property, but their lives as well.
Up to this day, illegal farm seizures continue in spite of the establishment of a unity government of which the MDC is part.
There was controversy and the debate still won’t go away.
Some people took a simplistic view and applauded Mugabe for doing what he did.
I am one of those who have always maintained that what Mugabe did was foolish, counterproductive and totally stupid.
First, there is no doubt that centuries-old land imbalances brought upon by successive colonial regimes have to be corrected worldwide.
But Mugabe did nothing about this for more than twenty years after coming to power, only acting after noticing that he was losing support among the rank and file.
He was using land to try to regain back some of his evaporated popularity, while at the same time punishing a particular sector of our citizenry.
Land redistribution, like in all countries in the world, was necessary. It is the way Mugabe went about it that defeats the intended expectations and benefits.
Even today, the land redistribution exercise has not done anything positive as millions are still not resettled as the farms were given to Mugabe’s friends, relatives and cronies.
Secondly, Zimbabwe, like any other country on earth, is bound by the same economic laws and regulations that other nations subscribe to.
That is why there are trade agreements, entered into by governments.
Today, investment protocols entered into between South Africa, Germany and Australia, for example, have been violated by Mugabe and some countries have taken the legal route, which does not give much encouragement to prospective investors.
The illegal and violent farm seizures warned investors to move their investments elsewhere since the land seizures were proof that there were no longer any property rights in Zimbabwe.
Indeed, many companies relocated to neighbouring countries.
Dispossessed farmers, meanwhile, also found themselves on the move to Australia, Brazil, Argentina, Nigeria, Mozambique, Zambia and to other welcoming countries, which badly needed their expertise.
Within a few years after this chaotic land redistribution exercise, Zimbabwe, which used to export food to many countries in the world, found itself unable to feed its own people.
Ten years on, Zimbabwe is still importing more and more food as the once highly productive farms, given to friends without agricultural merit, are left to lie idle.
One of the countries that used to import food heavily is Zambia, which used to import maize and other food items from Zimbabwe.
But this past Thursday, the Zimbabwe government confirmed that it was buying food from Zambia.
What irks me about this business transaction is that Zambia was the biggest beneficiary of Zimbabwe’s displaced farmers.
Zambia welcomed the farmers that Zimbabwe had kicked out, who immediately went to work as their profession demanded.
Now, with the influx of some of Zimbabwe’s best farmers, “Zambia is now producing a surplus maize crop at a time Zimbabwe has recorded a deficit of 500,000 tonnes of the daily food staple this year”.
“Approximately 90 percent of these Zambian crops are coming from ex-Zimbabwean farmers who were forced off their land here,” says Gerry Whitehead, a surviving white farmer based in the Chiredzi area of Zimbabwe.
He called the situation “disgusting”.
Zambia’s High Commissioner to Zimbabwe, Sipula Kabanje, confirmed reports that negotiations with Zimbabwe were going on through Zambia’s maize agent, the Food Reserve Agency (FRA).
“Zimbabwe also wants to import other food items like wheat, beef and dairy products from Zambia,” he said.
So, here I sit, wondering which and what should be more important than the other: giving land to people, even if they do not have agricultural inclination, just to satisfy the expectations of land indigenisation or letting only those who can productively use the land for the benefit of the nation be given the land.
There is absolutely no doubt that indigenous people need land, but is it land to farm or land to settle ?.
If it is land for farming, then only those who can productively occupy the land should be allocated that land. The nation has the right to be fed from its own soil by its own citizens.
Those of our compatriots who chose agriculture as a profession should be given access to those farms and allowed to feed their nation, instead of Mugabe trying to turn every Zimbabwean into a farmer by dishing out farms to people who cannot use them.
If the land is for resettlement, there are plenty of good areas that can be allocated to people, without interfering with those farms that are expected to grow and harvest for national silos.
If Mugabe argues that what he did and how he did it is nationalism, then he has lost his marbles.
What good has it done ?.
Now some black people have fertile land given to them by Mugabe but spend endless hours in queues every month, waiting to be allocated maize and cooking oil from Save the Children, Oxfam and from the United Nations Food Programme.
Since this disorganized land reform programme, the war veterans, who were allocated some of the farms, have been seen jostling for positions of advantage to receive free donated food from outside Zimbabwe.
Land imbalances have to be corrected, not only in Zimbabwe and Africa but worldwide. The disparity seems to be increasing, not diminishing.
However, it can be done in an orderly manner without the murder of compatriots and without racial considerations, lest we become the same as those we criticize for having caused the imbalances in the first place.
I have heard silly rumblings and threats to invade from South Africans and Batswana.
Don’t even think it.
Let those misguided people who think of imitating Mugabe be warned that they will only have themselves to blame if they follow in Mugabe’s footsteps.
There are better ways of dealing with the issue without bringing hardship upon your nations.
We, Zimbabweans, and our plight, are today the best example and proof that Mugabe was wrong.