Morgan Tsvangirai, the leader of the larger formation of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), who has refused to sign a deal currently on the table, explains in detail why a deadlock remains.

QUESTION: There were a lot of expectations that a deal would be signed by the end of the SADC summit on Sunday. That did not happen and it seems we are back to square one. Why?

ANSWER: Well, we have not made much progress because the expectation was that President Mbeki would use the collective leadership wisdom of SADC to bring the parties to some form of an agreement. Now it would appear that on the other outstanding issues, we are still as far apart as at the beginning. The only fortunate thing is that both parties realise that they cannot walk away from the negotiations.

Q: What are these issues that still hold this dialogue back?

A: The real differences arise out of the roles and powers of the two critical positions in this proposed government, which is the powers of the president and powers of the prime minister, especially in terms of authority, in terms of who is responsible for what.

Q: There is a view that you are overplaying your hand in these negotiations since you did not win an absolute majority in Parliament on March 29 to justify claiming complete executive power. Only one seat separates you from ZANU PF minus the 10 seats that Arthur Mutambara’s faction holds?

A: We are not claiming complete executive power. We are talking about shared executive power. Anyone who claims that we are overplaying our hand doesn’t understand the mandate given to us by the people on 29 March. The thing that is fundamental is that the people of Zimbabwe spoke. Fifty-seven percent of the people who voted said they no longer had any confidence in Mugabe. If you then consider the events of June 27 (the run off election) which was not accepted by anyone, then you can ask where Mugabe derives his legitimacy. It’s ZANU PF which is therefore overplaying its hand. He (Mugabe) can only get legitimacy by saying that he is the caretaker president until another election is held. That’s why there is need for a transition. That’s why Mugabe cannot continue to enjoy the same powers he had before.

Q: We understand that SADC tabled a last minute compromise deal that you and Mugabe rejected. Can you let us in on that?

A: No SADC proposal was given to us. All we were told is that we have to be part of the process in order to influence the process without specifically defining how that process is going to work in real terms. And that is the difficulty we have got.

Q: Who is the stumbling block in this whole process?

A: From what we see and when you analyse the powers of the president and the prime minister, and you see that there is no shared responsibility and authority, you then have to say it’s ZANU PF who is the stumbling block.

Q: But ZANU PF says you are the stumbling block?

A: Let them demonstrate what powers they have ceded to the prime minister or to the other party. Identify those areas and you will easily see who is the stumbling block.

Q: The deal on the table that you refused to sign stipulates that executive power will reside in the president, prime minister and cabinet. It’s an all-encompassing arrangement . . . which ZANU PF says will foster collective responsibility rather than try to make a distinction between president and PM?

A: There is no such thing as collective executive authority. Somebody is responsible. Why are they afraid of pinpointing that you (Mugabe) is responsible as head of state for these functions and you (Tsvangirai) is responsible for government with these functions. Why are they afraid to do that? That demarcation of responsibility is very important for accountability purposes, for authority purposes. You cannot expect the MDC to be tasked with turning around the mess in Zimbabwe without being given authority. Does that make sense?

Q: Your stance is that the prime minister should chair Cabinet, appoint Cabinet ministers, and generally be in charge of running Cabinet. Do you foresee yourself compromising and negotiating that position?

A: That is our fundamental position. It’s very very fundamental and non-negotiable. It would be unprecedented to have a president with a ceremonial prime minister . . . We have said to them we don’t want to have a ceremonial president. But we also don’t want to have a ceremonial prime minister?

Q: If ZANU PF thinks that they have given much power to the position of prime minister, why don’t you tell them to have that position and your party assumes the presidency?

A: We told SADC that. We said let’s swap roles. If they don’t want to concede the facts, we said the other solution is for them to take the prime minister’s role and we take the president’s.

Q: And what did SADC say?

A: I don’t think they said anything on it.

Q: And what about Mugabe?

A: I don’t know what his response is to that?

Q: There is also a view that progress is stalled because the style of President Mbeki’s mediation, deemed by some to be pro-Mugabe, is part of the problem?

A: I am in the negotiations as one of the parties and it would be improper to start besmirching the mediation effort.

Q: Another view is that you haven’t adequately reached out to Arthur Mutambara’s faction of the MDC which is now allegedly siding with ZANU PF in the talks to your disadvantage?

A: It’s in the public domain that we announced to the whole world that we have a coalition agreement. So what kind of reaching out is needed, other than to observe the conditions of that coalition agreement. If the Mutambara group have decided to align with ZANU PF, that’s their choice. But they must also know that in terms of that coalition agreement, there is a breach.

Q: Are you speaking as one with Mutambara in the negotiations. At his Press conference last week, he said you ought to put Zimbabwe first, implying that he disagrees with your positions?

A: I thought we were all playing in the same court . . . But it would appear that that is not the case. They (the Mutambara faction) have other views. And I think we need to revisit the coalition agreement and ask them whether we are still together insofar as these negotiations are concerned.

Q: SADC has said Parliament can now be reconvened. What effect will this have on the negotiations in view of the fact that the MOU had said convening of Parliament and appointment of Cabinet ought to be delayed until the negotiations are completed?

A: It will have no effect. As far as we are concerned we don’t see anything wrong with that. Let Parliament be reconvened.

Q: What about Cabinet?

A: Parliament is the expression of the will of the people. Cabinet is another thing. Convening Parliament does not necessarily mean that a Cabinet should be appointed. If Parliament is being reconvened to deal with this dispute, then let it deal with the dispute. But that does not mean Mugabe unilaterally goes to form a government and have Cabinet ministers. If that is the intention, then it will be a breach of the MOU.

Q: So where do things stand now. When are these negotiations resuming and where and for how long?

A: I am not the mediator. That is the responsibility of President Mbeki, the mediator, to manage. We have not heard anything from him as yet.

Q: What happens if this deadlock remains. It looks like Mugabe is not going to budge and you will not budge?

A: Leadership is no just about compromise, it’s also about principle and about the people. It’s not about an elite pact or position sharing. It’s about people’s expectations. The people’s expectations are clear. They want a democratic government to take them out of this crisis caused by mismanagement. Achieving such a government will remain our goal.

Q: ZANU PF keeps on alleging that a deal with you remains difficult because you are reporting and taking instructions from Britain and the United States who have said they will not fund any government in which Mugabe remains powerful?

A: Well I am sure that you know the ZANU PF rhetoric, and line and lies. They always say that the MDC does not think for itself. We are even being accused that the position papers we are presenting are being written by the British and the Americans. It’s very unfortunate. They continue with this paranoia of a conspiracy. But if they were honest, they would go out and try to find out what are the people’s expectations. If they can build confidence in us, we will build confidence in them. That’s the only way to move forward.

Q: What’s next if nothing is resolved in Mbeki’s mediation.

A: This is a conflict of emotions and not principals. The sooner ZANU PF realises that they have no monopoly in determining the future of the country and that they have to accommodate MDC as partner and not as an enemy, the better.

Q: What is your Plan B if the dialogue fails?

A: Ah! We can’t start discussing plan Bs, plan Cs, plan Ds, and plan Es . . .

Q: One of the army commanders is said to have told a meeting of the Joint Operations Command (JOC) that the only way to get the MDC to agree to a deal is to kill you. Are you afraid?

A: Well they have all the guns, and I can’t prevent them from planning to eliminate me. But if they succeed, they would have my blood on their hands

On Thursday The Herald which usually publishes ZANU PF Press statements and positions as news said MDC faction leader Arthur Mutambara had signed a deal. The paper went on to repeat the mantra that Tsvangirai is a western puppet,despite a MOU clause warning against hateful language.

The MDC warned; ‘This report will fundamentally undermine and kill the dialougue. ..these are the actions of a desperate and cornered regime, which we find corrosive. We urge Zanu PF to desist from executing this sly, nicodimus and foolish process but to navigate Zimbabwe out of the current crisis.”

The MDC also blasted ZANU PF ’s moves to approach MDC Mps while the talks were going on,
‘… from yesterday to now Zanu PF government ministers and functionaries including CIO agents have approached an extensive number of our members of parliament asking them to submit their CVs and asking them to be part of a Mugabe’s mendacious and dishonest government. ‘

‘An opportunity has been presented through dialogue for a fresh start and restart. Lets us all finish this process honestly and decently’,the MDC said.

It has since emerged that Charamba gave the state paper the highly sensitive talks documents to publish,but some of the contents of the said agreement had been doctored.

Charamba belongs to the Mnagagwa faction and was major player in the ill-fated Ndiyane plot in December 2004 which was meant to catapult Mnagagwa to the vice presidency, Charamba drafted a speech for Mnangagwa for the event and hired a plane for the meeting.

The Mnangagwa faction is reportedly strongly opposed to any meaningful power sharing deal and is in favour of a cosmetic deal through accommodating a willing partner, the Mutambara faction. Already almost all 10 Mutambara faction MPs have been approached by the faction,some using close friends.

Addressing civil leaders in Bulawayo MDC National Chairman Lovemore Moyo,MDC-Matobo South., said the MDC flatly refused at the talks to speak out against a targeted travel ban on Mugabe and 106 senior ZANU PF members.

“The document we signed was clear that we refused responsibility for calling off the sanctions and clearly stated that it was not us who said Zanu PF supporters should beat up and rape people,” Moyo said.

Moyo also revealed that the so called one issue Mugabe and Mutambara agree with is that the Prime Minister should lead a few selected ministries and not have any executive powers.

“The deadlock in the talks arose out of a disagreement on who should have executive powers between the President and the Prime Minister and we could not agree on that as the two parties,” Moyo told the gathering.

“Zanu-PF proposed that Mugabe should have executive powers and should appoint Cabinet and chair Cabinet meetings while the Prime Minister should lead certain ministries and have no executive powers. We felt it would be wrong for the MDC to accept Mugabe as executive President”,said Moyo.

Another senior MDC official official said the issue of radio stations based outside Zimbabwe was out of place in the talks, ‘I was surprised to see the so called pirate radio stations included in the MOU,this is a non issue,ZANU PF must realise that these radio stations came about as a result of their repressive policies,this is more evidence of ZANU PF’s culture of dealing with symptoms instead of the disease …they should free the airwaves first’, he said.

‘Some of these stations are private companies and how do they expect the MDC to approach a private company and tell them to shut down.’, he added.

ZANU PF’s language describing the radio stations and agitation that they should be dismantled sharply resembles the same intolerance exhibited by P. K. van der Byl,Rhodesian’s information minister who once referred to the liberation movements ’s external radio stations as ‘Terrorist propaganda waves’.

During the Chimurenga war, the ‘Voice of Zimbabwe’ radio was beamed from Maputo, Mozambique. Zapu’s People’s Voice radio was broadcasted from Dar es Salaam, Lusaka, Cairo and on Radio Moscow.

The stations provided a different account of events and provided an alternative to the state media which was biased in favour of Ian Smith regime.

There are no independent radio stations in Zimbabwe and an attempt to launch one Capitol radio was immediately squashed by then Minister of Information Jonathan Moyo forcing its founder,former ZBC presenter Gerry Jackson to relaunch it from the United Kingdom as SW Radio Africa.

Contact the writer of this story at bulawayo@metrozimbabwe.com

The same article was published on the same day by its sister newspaper, The Independent of Britain. The newspapers fall under the same stable, the Dublin-based Independent News & Media plc (INM) owned by the Irishman, Sir Tony O’Reilly.

The draft document has since been dismissed as fake by both ZANU PF and the South African government.

What is telling about the so called draft agreement is a paragraph in the story that read: “In a move to appease the potential donors who needed to finance a massive rescue package for the economically crippled country a number of key ministries would be handed over to “independents” – skilled individuals outside of party structures but approved by the cabinet. It is anticipated that the Ministry of Finance and Investment would be one such portfolio that would reside independently of either party chief so as not to deter the expected and needed flow of money into the country during the transition, which will last for something in the region of two years.”

This can be read as someone trying to sneak as an ‘independent’. A person politically independent or neutral would be someone who is a professional not known to be a member of a political party nor holding a position in any institution associated with a political party.

For the past few months, Gono has been presenting himself through opinion-editorials in his newspaper, the Financial Gazette, and official statements as a person who is politically neutral and independent. By this he created an impression that he is failing in his job because of what he calls politically inspired sanctions and disagreements.

President Robert Mugabe and Gono have been at the forefront of publicly boasting of the capacity of being able to be bursting the same sanctions they are claiming to be hurting the generality of people. In the process there has been considerable self-enriching activities because there has been high levels of officially sanctioned leakages of foreign currency and externalization during the process of QFAs.

Zimbabwe has 4 forex rates in ascending order – interbank; cash; transfer (payment for forex by a ZW$ bank transfer) and offshore (payment for forex by a ZW$bank transfer and the forex supplier settles a foreign invoice directly).

Manufacturers and retailers have been pricing their goods and services using the transfer rate. The hyper-inflation we have in Zimbabwe has largely been driven by the money supply side for those buying forex on behalf of the RBZ.

Those monitoring the movement of forex rates, they will have realized that the ‘transfer’ rate has not moved since 22 July 2008, pegged at $800 billion (revalued at ZW$80).

The RBZ have a unit that gives highly trusted few people bags of cash to go into the street to buy forex. The same unit also transfers ZW$ money into other few and high trusted people’s bank accounts to buy forex by way of transfers. This is the money pushing exchange rates and since the signing of the July 21, 2008 Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) by the Zimbabwean political players, Gono was unsure where he will be in the new political dispensation.

This explains his subdued Monetary Policy Statement (MPS) which was simply nothing except the looping off of 10 zeros from the local currency. He pushed for the first time presence of President Mugabe for a show of his power and influence among political actors. Curiously this was not named ‘Sunrise III’.

On Friday, August 8, 2008, Gono massively released money to his runners (”vakadirirwa mari mumabag”, so goes the saying) and the transfer rate has just shot up to ZW$250 (ZW$2,5 trillion!) today on August 13, 2008 from ZW$80-85 (ZW$800 - 850 billion) because he is looting like a crazy man in the name of quasi-fiscal activities. He does not know what the future holds for him.

With so much money, the dealers are offering to pay as high as this rate because they are strict to buy, buy and buy. The rate had been constant since the signing of the political settlement on 21 July 2008.

Since manufacturers, traders and service providers price their goods and services at the ‘transfer rate’, consequently life will be worse off.

On January 31, 2007, he said, “the RBZ will, with immediate effect, bring to an end quasi-fiscal interventions and wishes to concentrate on core business activities. To achieve this objective, the RBZ is creating an appropriate structure to shepherd out the interventions by:
(a) Putting a cap and ring-fencing quasi-fiscal outlays and facilities;

(b) Focusing on collecting and administering the outstanding loans on behalf of the RBZ; and

(c) Providing ancillary technical and advisory services to borrowers/beneficiaries as provided for in the various RBZ frameworks establishing such facilities or as otherwise may be expedient.

“The RBZ will incorporate a special purpose vehicle to be called FISCORP (Pvt) Ltd, 100% owned by the Reserve Bank, whose primary object will be to step into the RBZ’s shoes for purposes of collecting and administering the outstanding loans. The RBZ and FISCORP will conclude the necessary instruments/arrangements to enable FISCORP to carry out its aforesaid mandate.

“To ensure effectiveness, financial institutions, development agencies and other

borrowers will be engaged as necessary to facilitate these arrangements. FISCORP will be structured in such a manner as to enable it to focus on the recovery and administration of, and the provision of ancillary services relating to, the Facilities.

“Whilst FISCORP will be a separate legal entity, it will remain an RBZ vehicle to all intents and purposes, and borrowers and beneficiaries, who shall remain legally bound under the Facilities, are expected to co-operate with FISCORP to ensure the smooth implementation of the objectives set out in this statement.

“FISCORP will operate within the parameters of the various frameworks and

instruments in place but with a clear mandate and authority to collect and recover the outstanding loans on behalf of the RBZ. FISCORP will be operational and in a position to assume the role envisaged with

effect fro 1st March 2007.”

He has not returned the RBZ to its core functions. Just like Homelink (Pvt) Ltd, the costs and benefits of the company called Fiscorp (Pvt) Ltd are anybody’s guess. He has not done so, instead he entrenched his role as the de facto “Minister of Finance” who could buy and pay for anything for the country, the ruling party, and national institutions (military, policy, judiciary, etc).

Preparing himself for the inevitable and intending to prune the RBZ of his source of manipulating financial power, he repeated this statement in his MPS presentation on July 31, 2008, “…it has become necessary that a more permanent financing vehicle be created to fill up the developmental financing gap arising from market failures. According, therefore, the Reserve Bank is working to transform Fiscorp (Pvt) Ltd into a dedicated financial intermediary” to develop financial packages and solutions to bridge developmental financial gaps created by market failure.

The Ministry of Finance (MoF) is a government ministry administers and regulates financial institutions and structures of the economy of a country. The ministry administers macro-economic policies and the national annual budget. It also handles fiscal policy, economic regulations and government expenditure for the state.

Economic policy is now a responsibility of the Ministry of Economic Planning and Development.

The MoF has considerable control over other ministries as it is the one that sets expenditure limits. The amount of power this gives to an individual minister depends on his personal forcefulness, his status with his party and his relationship with the President.

Institutions that are administratively under the MoF are the

· RBZ,

· ZIMRA (taxes and customs),

· Central Statistical Office (CSO),

· National Economic Conduct Inspectorate (NECI),

· Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG),

· State Procurement Board (STB),

· Consolidated Revenue Fund,

· Registrar of Banks and Other Financial Institutions,

· Registrar of Insurance, Pension and Provident Funds,

· Registrar of Building Societies,

· Consolidated Revenue Fund,

· Central Computing Office (CCO),

· Salary Service Bureau (SSB).

· Securities Commission and the Zimbabwe Stock Exchange

The incumbent is also responsible for being the custodian and final authority of government investments in private and public enterprises.

Gono has the first option to remain the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe (RBZ) Governor until his term expires in December 2008 and make himself available for his term renewal for the next five years. When this happens, he will have to operate within the confines of core business of a central bank and lose so much self-acquired political power and influence through quasi-fiscal activities (QFAs).

Secondly, he can maneuver to be in a political position and the only one available to secure his personal financial interests and continued overseeing of the RBZ is being a Minister of Finance

The third option is the least expected from a power hungry and politically ambitious person. He should take leave now pending his end of his term, humbly admitting that he has failed and there is not much he can do.

With these three options available for Gideon Gono, he has been endearing himself for the second option. Gono must just GO far way from the central bank and political power!

Judge Ephraim Makgoba dismissed with costs an urgent application by Justine Chiota, founder and leader of the Zimbabwe People’s Party, on Tuesday evening.

Chiota sought an order to either allow him to participate in the talks or to stop the talks from continuing, pending the outcome of his Zimbabwe High Court application to quash the results of the presidential elections held in March in that country.

He cited President Thabo Mbeki and President Robert Mugabe as respondents.

In court papers, Chiota claimed he was entitled to take part in the political settlement negotiations following a ruling by a Zimbabwean court earlier this month.

Chiota contended he was wrongly excluded from participating in the Zimbabwean elections after his country’s electoral commission refused to accept his nomination papers on the basis that they were “dirty”.

He said a Zimbabwean court ruled in his favour, and ordered the electoral commission to declare that he had been duly nominated for the elections.

Mbeki opposed the application, saying the Pretoria High Court did not have the jurisdiction to pronounce on a matter outside the territorial jurisdiction of the court.

-news 24

Like a Hollywood new blockbuster release, events were stage managed in a public relations exercise that would leave many PR strategists green with envy. This contribution seeks to demystify the myths and untruths that have been peddled around the so-called historic event.

A lot of questions remain unanswered around this hullabaloo invented by Pretoria. It is the contention of this contribution that the talks about talks are nothing rather than a red herring to buy time for the illegitimate Mugabe regime. Whilst dialogue is welcome in solving the Zimbabwe crisis, it should be noted that dialogue premised on deception and elite deal making is dithering and fidgeting to nowhere.

History is repeating itself in Zimbabwe as coercion is used as an instrument to deal with dissent and assert political dominion by the ruling ZANU PF. Zimbabwe seems to be heading back to 1979 and 1987, where peace and stability could only be guaranteed by a ZANU PF win.

Item 9 of the MOU states that; “The Parties shall not, during the subsistence of the Dialogue, take any decisions or measures that have a bearing on the agenda of the Dialogue, save by consensus. Such decisions or measures include, but are not limited to the convening of Parliament or the formation of a new government”.

A thorough analysis signals towards a Kenyan style government of national unity (GNU). It should also be taken cognizant that after the March 29th when results pointed to an opposition victory despite the lack of a simple majority as required by the law, the position of the South African government was the formation of a GNU. Furthermore in the preamble of the MOU it is stated that “Acknowledging that we have an obligation of establishing a framework of working together in an inclusive government”. This clearly indicates the pre-emptive nature of these talks about talks, no wonder why there is so much confidence on the part of Pretoria that 2 weeks of intense mediation will achieve what almost 2 years of mediation has failed to achieve.

This shows the prevailing of Pretoria and at the same time a victory for ZANU PF and the stalling of a transition as the Mugabe regime is bought more time in office. The talks thus seek to legitimize and throw a lifeline to a regime that had become out of touch with the electorate. To Mbeki, an MDC government is seen as not desirous and hence his mediation has been more of appeasing Mugabe and blaming Britain unnecessarily for Zimbabwe’s woes just as Mugabe has made it his daily anthem.

More so with Mbeki battling the same elements driving the MDC at home such as the trade union, student and youth movement, the incentives and motivation to him are high to see a stalled MDC transition. The argument is thus the Chiluba scenario that played in Zambia in the 1990s can’t be repeated in Zimbabwe lest the cancer will spread to South Africa.

This partly explains Pretoria’s spirited efforts at the United Nations through its ambassador Dumisani Khumalo to leading a vicious campaign to protect Mugabe by blocking the Security Council from taking action.

It should also be noted that the much hyped signing ceremony comes against a background of South Africa having blocked the adoption of sanctions against the Harare regime at the United Nations. Mugabe having sensed the seriousness of some council members this time around quickly bought into Mbeki’s GNU after playing difficult for a long time and hence his preparation to meet his nemesis Morgan who however did not turn up at the initial event.

Even Mugabe’s state controlled media went on a tirade of criticism against Morgan for failing to pitch up despite the fact that it has always described the MDC as retrogressive running dog of imperialism. The chickens had come to roost, and it was clear to Mugabe and his guardian Mbeki that time is running out before No. 10 Downing Street and 44 Pennsylvania Avenue take action. Therefore as a pre-emptive measure Pretoria crafted the MOU on talks to agree to talk.

This explains the spirited effort to broadcast even live the ceremony of the miracle handshake. Therefore Mbeki can successful argue that any action on Harare outside the talks would hurt and stall the headway that has been made. More so it should be borne in mind that any day further that Mugabe acquires in office is a relief to him. Then why all of a sudden the celebrations and optimism that finally a breakthrough has come? Such amnesia is very baffling given that, the same things this talking to agree to talk sets on its agenda are the same issues that were on the agenda and agreed upon in the preliminary talks that led to constitutional amendment No. 18 and subsequently the 29th of March 2008 harmonized elections.

Also interesting given Mbeki’s continued insistence of talking outside the media circles, is why now all of a sudden his love to have the talks with cameras around.
This unmasks Pretoria’s political chicanery to block action on Mugabe through deception as deadlines get shifted ever since the appointment of Mbeki as mediator. What Pretoria has failed to do is to take stock of why the initial talks and results were not honoured and who was at fault? A snap flashback into history would reveal that Mugabe has never had problems with talks or accommodating his once enemies as long as he is made the leader.

This explains why he unleashed a horrific orgy of violence and terror that made sure that he would win the election through hook and crook and then call for talks where he can bribe the opposition to buy himself legitimacy. Just as he managed to prevail over ZAPU in 1987, Mugabe and Mbeki expect the same episode to replay itself again with the MDC. The major question is can the MDC ride the tiger and not end up in the womb given that they do not have an honest mediator in Mbeki? It’s highly unlikely for the MDC to prevail over ZANU PF in these talks and yield transformative result.

The best they can do is to scrap an elite deal that will accommodate them, through appeasement with a few cabinet posts and some cosmetic power concession. This is the most sought scenario by ZANU PF and Mbeki as it will give them time regalvanise and at the same time hoping the MDC will grow weary. At the same time such an arrangement would buy ZANU PF the legitimacy it has been seeking particularly from the western world. Another scenario would be an agreement towards a transitional government that will lead to an election.

This might have many positive possibilities for change to take place but the major challenge might be the duration of the transition. Mugabe might argue for a longer time so as to buy himself and ZANU PF more time to rebuild their dilapidated empire. Such a move would also give ammunition to Mugabe’s fellow Africanists to block any western action on Harare, since a process to normalize the situation will be underway.

Therefore these talks about talks have been premised around the throwing a lifeline to a fledgling dictatorship rather than giving the people of Zimbabwe a voice. Mugabe after the March elections made it clear that they could not just surrender a country that they got through the barrel of gun by a mere pen and X.

The same pen that they could not listen to on the 29th of March 2008 is the same pen that has cast another X on the 21st of July 2008. Why would they be compelled to listen to it when the tide goes against them as it has done in the past? Won’t we have other talks about talks for talks? ZANU PF and Mbeki are dithering and fidgeting and shifting goalposts always. Therefore the hullabaloo about the miracle handshake is just a fool’s paradise.

In an interview with ZBC’s Newsnet,Charamba said Zvayi is a fearless writer who defended the interests of his country and is welcome back home to do what he knows best.

Ceasar Zvayi had an employment contract with the University of Botswana which was supposed to take him up to 2010 he was deported last week.

Writing in the The Financial Times Bredenkamp rejected any association with Emmerson Mnangagwa.

“I have not met Mr Mugabe for over 23 years and I am not a close associate of Mr Mnangagwa. The fact that I was jailed in Harare for five days in October 2006 for passport offences (on which I was subsequently acquitted in court) is clear evidence that there is no such alliance or close association.”

“More importantly, I deplore political violence of any kind and have tried on several occasions to suggest ways of building bridges between the ruling party and the Movement for Democratic Change.”,wrote Bredenkamp.

“Mugabe used to be my hero, but now I consider him as a political criminal to the Zimbabweans who were denied the result of their choice in the recent elections,” Alfonso Dhlakama, head of the Renamo party, told reporters.

The 84-year-old Zimbabwean president, viewed as a liberation hero following a guerrilla war that led to his country’s independence in 1980, was re-elected in a June 27 run-off poll widely condemned as a sham.

Opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai boycotted the run-off despite finishing ahead of Mugabe in the March first round, citing rising violence against his supporters.

Power-sharing talks aimed at resolving the crisis, mediated by South African President Thabo Mbeki, began last month.

“The negotiations to solve the Zimbabwean political crisis were done in bad faith and it is a bad example to Africa and the whole world,” Dhlakama said.

“It encourages African leaders who lose elections to resort to robbing elections and rely on the solutions of their friends to continue to cling to power.”

Mozambique, which borders Zimbabwe, has been a traditional ally of Mugabe.

The MDC officials said an aide to Chief Chiduku recently ordered headmen in the district to collect fines of Z$50 (US$1) from MDC members with a payment deadline of August 15. Those who have not paid the fine by then are threatened with expulsion from Makoni district.

MDC officials at the national level said members across the country are facing similar problems when they try to return to their homes having fled political violence in the April-July period.

They say some opposition members are being beaten while others are forced to pay fines in cash and livestock before they are allowed to settle back into their homes.