As Zimbabwe's leaders begin to implement the historic power-sharing agreement reached on Monday, international and internal speculation over where Zimbabwe will go from here abounds. Africa Action's statement on the agreement identifies four key factors that will determine whether or not this deal lives up to its potential for Zimbabwe's people. At the top of everyone's mind is how the deal will impact the food security situation in a country where empty shelves and breadlines have become the norm.
"The rains are about to start, so the time to put the seeds in the soil is very close, but we must get the seeds, we must get the fertilizer, we must get the fuel, we must get the implements as a matter of urgency. I am quite certain as a region and a continent we can do that," said South African President Thabo Mbeki, who acted as the main facilitator of the six-week Southern African Development Community (SADC)-driven talks that culminated in this deal. Agriculture was the economy’s backbone since well before independence in 1980, and its export industry rose the country to one of Africa’s most economically successful newly independent countries by the late 1980s.
Today, Zimbabwe has little resemblance to the economic dynamo and
regional breadbasket it once was. For the past seven and a half years,
the country has produced little and
imported a lot. International debt has risen to $5 billion and
inflation, which was once at a slightly uneasy 30 percent in the late
1990s has risen to over 11 million percent by conservative estimates
today. Because bills are worth less than the money used to print them,
food and other necessities have changed hands by mainly barter or fuel
credit.
Agricultural inputs such as seeds, fertilizer, tractors, and especially fuel to run machinery and transport the harvests will be needed in bulk. "We want everybody to be supportive. We have to utilize land that we claimed back," said Zimbabwean Ambassador to Namibia, Chipo Zindoga. Despite the overwhelming support SADC has provided and promised for the future, a path to development will require a change in Zimbabwe's global economic relations. Perhaps the greatest challenge is the massive debt burden, but new aid and trade policies (including the status of targeted Western sanctions) also have roles to play in helping Zimbabweans lift their country out of economic turmoil.
The European Union and the United States have made it clear however that they are not going to either withdraw sanctions or initiate any real support measures (besides continued funding for aid groups already present on the ground) until they see evidence of real change in governance. This message is so far vague, and brings up the important question of whether economic development must first happen for government stability to come about or vise versa. An important opportunity will be missed if there is no immediate aid to help rebuild the agricultural sector. Yet the international community appears leery to provide such resources until the governing trajectory of the complex power-sharing arrangement becomes clearer.
Growing pains in the coalition administration will be inevitable under even the best scenario. The MDC and Zanu-PF have been bitter enemies for over a decade, and hold widely differing views on how a government should be run. The remark by Morgan Tsvangirai that confidence is vital if Zimbabwe is to be rebuilt cuts to the core of the agreement's tenability.
Despite fears of fairness and overthrow, the agricultural situation is critical. Food security in the country is the worst in the world and the rains are coming. Now is not the time for international debate when Zimbabwe has worked so hard to prove itself. The people - not the parties - should now be the focus of Zimbabwe's new government and the international community.
Comments