by Ian Smith
It was quite clear that there was to be no let-up until they had achieved their objective. In a report dated 15 July 1985, Mugabe warned of a ‘clean-up operation so that we only remain with those whites who want to work with the government. White opponents will have to leave the country.’
Reconciliation meant ‘accepting’ the government and their philosophy — i.e. a Marxist-Leninist dictatorship. To those who objected, if they were whites they had to leave the country, if they were black Matabeles, there were many ways of subjugating them, as we have witnessed over the past few years.
In the latter half of the 1970s Mugabe claimed that his followers were not prepared to negotiate with the Rhodesian government and that it was their intention to take the country through the barrel of the gun. They failed — in fact the war was going so strongly against them in 1979 that they were forced to seek the assistance of John Vorster, their dreaded apartheid enemy, and then Lord Carrington of ‘toothless British Bulldog’ fame to promote the platform for negotiation which culminated in the Lancaster House conference, resulting in the constitution which brought Mugabe and his ZANU(PF) into power. But although they failed in their threat to come into power through the barrel of the gun, ever since the first election in 1980, they have kept themselves in power by that lethal means.
There were two main problems standing in the way of Mugabe’s dream of general consensus for his one-party state: the Matabele and the white man. Masuku, the general of the ZAPU army, had died while in prison, so that was obviously a plus factor. Striking a bargain with Nkomo and ZAPU also turned out to be comparatively simple: the position of a second deputy President was created for Nkomo, half a dozen government ministers (no problem for a government which operated between fifty and sixty ministers) and the ZAPU members in prison released. As they say: ‘Every man has his price.’ I would like to think that there are a few to whom this does not apply.
As for the white man, even if the government had to ride the problem out until 1990, they would have to grin and bear it, but anything which would help to relieve the aggravating thorn in their flesh would be most welcome. Clearly, as the last election had demonstrated, there was no hope that the white community would abjectly surrender to the malignant growth attempting to spread its tentacles throughout the body politic.
The Herald of 12 September 1986 had a headline: ‘SMITH ORDERED OUR OF ASSEMBLY’. A Bill was introduced for its first reading, and the responsible Minister asked if he could proceed immediately with the second reading. This was contrary to the rules of procedure and, in view of the fact that we had not even seen the Bill, the introduction was out of order. I followed the normal practice of objecting to the attempt to rush legislation and thus bring the House into disrepute. The Speaker, Didymus Mutasa, ‘took strong exception’ to my intervention, and ordered me to leave the chamber. However, a number of other members subsequently objected, and accordingly the House resolved that the Bill should be printed before proceeding with the second reading. It had become obvious that there was a renewed attempt at character assassination against me personally, presumably in the belief that if you manage to decapitate the ‘monster’, the rest of the body will wither away. However, their plan backfired. If the public believe that a person is being treated unjustly, there is a natural inclination to sympathise with him, and I received a groundswell of support. A cutting of a letter in the Johannesburg Sunday Times illustrates the point:
Thank you for at least part of your leader on Mr Ian Smith. Patronising though it was in general tone, to your credit you did pay tribute to his courage and humility.
These are rare qualities indeed in the political sphere, especially in Africa.
You might also have mentioned his honesty, his probity, blameless private life and high moral standards, his iron self-discipline and humanity.
All these traits in a politician are rare as rubies and stamp the possessor as one of the great of our time, not as you say, merely as an ‘unsophisticated man from an unsophisticated country’.
Rhodesia is rather more than this. It is a land of courage in the face of overwhelming odds, of enterprise that has built a civilisation second to none in this harsh continent and of standards of behaviour that should be the envy of the world.
These virtues are epitomised in the person of Ian Douglas Smith, a man whom I opposed politically, but grew to admire and respect as I have no other.
What was particularly disturbing was that the continuing sniping at the white community did have a destabilising effect which promoted the exodus of those with expertise, professionalism, experience and capital. At the same time it prejudiced external confidence and investment.
There was, in the next few years, no let-up in the campaign to establish a one-party state. As it was already in existence de facto, I thought it would be madness to attempt to resort to legislation. This would invite the wrath of the free world and there could be serious adverse repercussions on the country. However, Mugabe had suddenly been challenged by Edgar Tekere, one of his oldest and loyalest supporters in the formation of ZANU(PF), who was quoted in a magazine in September 1988 saying: ‘A one-party state was never one of the founding principles of ZANU(PF) and experience in Africa has shown that it brought the evils of nepotism, corruption and inefficiency.’
Needless to say, there was no word of this in the government-controlled national press. As far back as July 1985, Mr Willie Musarurwa, the editor of the Sunday Mail, the most widely read paper in the country, was fired because he was not prepared to withhold information on government corruption that had been exposed. This was followed by the removal of Mr Muradzikwa for an editorial which was critical of certain government action, and then the editor of the Bulawayo Chronicle was removed for disclosing the corruption associated with the Willowvale scandal in 1988.
The pressure was broad-based and continuous. On 24 June 1988 the ZANU(PF) political commissar, Nelson Mawema, stated: ‘All appointments to senior posts in the civil service will in future be based on a candidate’s political background. This is part of the new era of creating a unified party.’ It was simply an open acknowledgement of a system already in operation. It was open talk among members of the civil service that unless you were a card-carrying member of the party, there was no hope of promotion.
As can only be expected, the value of our dollar took a pounding, in keeping with all the talk about a one-party state and implementation of their communist philosophy. A merchant bank quarterly review in April 1989 said, ‘The Zimbabwe dollar has shrunk in value by 65% since 1980. A person earning four times the amount earned in 1980 would not be as well off.’ And on 27 October 1989 a financial report stated: ‘During the nine months up to September 30th this year the Zimbabwe dollar has devalued 15–12%.’ Almost daily there were reports of a crippling shortage of spare parts, plant and equipment threatening industry. There is insufficient foreign exchange to satisfy replacement programmes. In the gold mining industry alone, lack of foreign exchange for spares will deprive the country of $12.5 million this year.’ Perhaps even more important, around the middle of 1988 there was a critical shortage of essential drugs for our health services caused by shortage of foreign exchange, with one report stating that: ‘most outlying clinics and hospitals have bare shelves’.
To be truthful, the cause was the inability of government to get their priorities right. We have more government ministers than any other government in the world, travelling to the four corners of the earth, attending more conferences than any other government in the world, taking larger delegations than any other government in the world. A local medical practitioner estimated that the expenses involved in attending one conference would cover our immediate medical needs.
On 5 July 1989, the Minister of Finance, Dr Chidzero, speaking at the Institute of Bankers’ annual dinner, warned that if the nation’s bankers did not find a means of providing credit to new businesses unable to afford collateral, the government would force them to do so. Bearing in mind t
hat banks have a legal obligation to hold deposits in trust for their customers, this was unbelievably irresponsible. In some communist countries this kind of service was provided by governments for their comrades. Unfortunately our Zimbabwe government was bankrupt, and unable to provide the service. So we were confronted with this blatant attempt to force our reputable banking system to join our government in the gutter of bankruptcy.
At the Masvingo (formerly Fort Victoria) Agricultural Show, Joshua Nkomo, Vice-President, threatened commercial farmers that if more land were not made available to the government for its resettlement schemes, compulsory acquisitions would be effected. This was absolutely evil. It was well known that the government had more land on its hands than it was able to handle and large additional areas were also available from willing sellers. But that was the last thing that would be told to the people, the povo — not when one is thinking of winning votes at an impending election. Provoking racial friction, damaging the morale of commercial farmers who produced the food to feed the nation, and grew cash crops which made the greatest contribution to our foreign exchange earnings, were of little consequence when measured alongside the government’s determination to retain power whatever the cost.
For some time past there had been an investigation into a racket involving senior ZANU(PF) comrades, including cabinet ministers, acquiring automobiles from the factory and selling them to the public at a profit of around $100,000. Because vehicles were in short supply, due to lack of foreign exchange, this was easy money, but illegal. A number of culprits were brought to book, and paid heavy fines. One cabinet minister, however, Frederick Shava, was caught twisting the truth while under oath. Perjury, because of its effect in undermining the whole system of justice, has always been regarded with the utmost gravity. Accordingly, he was sentenced by the High Court to imprisonment in July 1989, but, Mugabe immediately intervened and granted Shava a presidential pardon, stating clearly that as a comrade and a friend, he would not go to prison.
Obviously, there were serious consequences. The High Court, and indeed the whole system of justice in our country, had received a devastating blow. From then on there were going to be two sets of laws, one for the ZANU(PF) government and their comrades, and one for the rest of us. Moreover, the Attorney General was in a dreadful predicament. There were a number of other comrades in line to come before the High Court because they too had failed to tell the truth under oath. In the end the Attorney General solved the problem by taking unto himself the presidential power of pardon, and he cancelled the prosecution of the guilty parties. By this prompt action, he obviously earned for himself the eternal gratitude of Mugabe and ZANU(PF), and also assured for himself not only the security of his position, but continuous and rapid promotion.
So Shava was a free man, faced with a fine of $150,000 — obviously no problem! But that was not the end of the sad affair. Maurice Nyagumbo, number three in the ZANU(PF) politburo and a government minister, was also implicated. He apparently committed suicide, and amid great ceremony and shedding of tears was buried at Heroes’ Acre, west of Harare. There was clear evidence, however, which pointed in a different direction. It was well known that others were involved and Nyagumbo had made it clear that they too should be exposed, as he had been. The problem was that they were the comrades at the very top. This was obviously an emergency that had to be dealt with rapidly and mercilessly. Who were above him in the party? The two Vice-Presidents, Nkomo and Muzenda, President Mugabe and his wife, Sally, who always worked very closely with him! The idea that Nyagumbo had committed suicide was laughed out of court by all those in the picture. Nyagumbo was a reserved, elderly man, noted for his strength of conviction and his dedication to the party he served. He had openly stated to his friends: ‘Let there be justice for everyone. The truth must be exposed.’ Moreover, we had been presented with the first report of the commission of inquiry, and the chairman had stated that there was to be a follow-up investigation and a second report. This never eventuated, however, and no explanation was ever produced. In a one-party state most people avoid asking provocative questions!
There is a clear lesson to be learned by all Zimbabweans: if you want to live comfortably and, if need be, receive the presidential pardon, simply become a strong, loyal supporter of ZANU(PF).
Friction had been mounting between the government and the university, brought about by ZANU(PF) overreacting to views which did not coincide with their own. Towards the end of June 1989, the Association of University Teachers of Zimbabwe came out in strong criticism of government’s continuing intimidation of both staff and students in an attempt to suppress freedom of thought and speech. In order to substantiate their case they pointed to the deportation of a lecturer who was denied the opportunity to hear the case against him in October 1988. Four other lecturers were also detained and interrogated without any charge being made against them. In January 1989 grants and loans to members of the students’ representative council were withdrawn. In March the university’s application for renewal of a lecturer’s employment permit was refused, and in June a lecturer was arrested and held for seven days before release. The association, therefore, stated that it was ‘deeply concerned about this abuse of power by government … these cases constitute an attack on academic freedom’.
The confrontation continued, and there were protests on the University campus against the government’s dictatorial policies. Opposition views were appearing more frequently in a number of sectors and accordingly government, in keeping with their one-party state philosophy, decided to nip this in the bud. At the beginning of the month of October they summarily closed the university and arrested all members of the students’ representative council. The Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions criticised the action and their Secretary-General, Morgan Tsvangivai, was immediately arrested. At the same time eleven members of Edgar Tekere’s ZUM party — campaigning in a by-election in the north of the country — were also arrested and detained.
Clearly, an air of panic reigned in upper echelons of government. Criticism of and opposition to a government are things unheard of in the corridors of communist dictatorships. Accordingly, they were going to deal with them, suppress them. After all, the politburo existed to tackle all these problems.
The official ‘marriage’ of ZANU (Mugabe) and ZAPU (Nkomo) was consummated under the name ZANU(PF) at a joint congress of the two parties on 22 December 1989. There seemed to be only one contentious matter in the pre-conference discussions and Dumiso Dabengwa, who many think will succeed Nkomo as the Matabele leader, took the initiative by informing the congress that the delegates from Matabeleland were opposed to the inclusion in the new constitution of belief in a Marxist-Leninist one-party state. According to media reports there was obvious concern at the top table and Mugabe in his contribution stated that: ‘the rejection of Marxism-Leninism by certain delegates shows that there is an obvious need for ideological training.’ He went on to argue that he found it ironic that the same people who rejected Marx and Lenin were prepared to embrace another foreigner, Jesus Christ. By the end of the congress there was no change to the party’s pledge to establish a Marxist-Leninist one-party state in Zimbabwe.
I commented in my diary:
The thought is, of course, abhorrent to anyone who believes in democracy with its inherent freedom. Let us hope that the majority of our people will stand firm in their determination to preserve our freedom. This is all the more vital, knowing where we live — every country in Africa to our north is a military, or one-party, dictatorship.
Because of criticism of the government’s control of the mass communications media, the Zimbabwe Mass Media Trust (ZMMT) had been established. In terms of the deed of trust, MPs, the civil service, the security forces and those with active party affiliations were disqualified from its membership. It was obvious from its inception, however, that it was a typical hoax to deceive the public, with the appointees being friends of ZANU(PF). A number of recent appointments had caused queries: Mr
s Kachingwe (Secretary for Information), Mr Zamuchiya (government-appointed senator), Mr Mutambirwia (Postmaster General), Mr Muvuti (ZANU[PF]). However, the chairman of ZMMT, Dr Sadza, ‘angrily refused to discuss the matter’.
As expected, ZANU(PF) won a convincing victory in the general election in early April 1990. The main opposition in the previous Parliament, ZAPU from Matabeleland, had merged with the government, so Edgar Tekere’s Zimbabwe Unity Movement (ZUM) was the only opposition. They did surprisingly well to obtain approximately 20 per cent of the votes, but because of government gerrymandering they ended up with only two of the 120 elected seats in Parliament. Moreover, the whole system had been so effectively rigged in favour of ZANU(PF) that it was amazing that there was any opposition support at all.
There was in existence a Ministry of Political Affairs, created specifically to support the party of the government in power. At provincial and district level the ministry occupied government offices, was staffed by civil servants and was provided with government transport. This was a blatant violation of the country’s constitution and as has been pointed out on a number of occasions there is no Act of Parliament which permits taxpayers’ money to be so used. Under a one-party dictatorship, however, such trivialities are simply pushed aside, and there were many such cases during the run-up to the election. At the Nomination Court, for example, it was pointed out by ZUM officials that Mugabe’s nomination form was out of order as a number of his nominators were not on the voters’ roll. The court was instructed by the government to accept the nomination and was informed that the discrepancies would be rectified later. The chairman of the election supervisory commission, a lawyer, Mr Anthony Eastwood, conceded that the commission had no powers to reverse the decisions of any administrative officer. By contrast, five ZUM nomination papers were rejected because the numbers did not correspond with those on the voters’ roll. Twenty-four nominations from Matabeleland were rejected because their $500 deposits were inadequate — $600 was required. Had they been notified, they would have produced the extra amount. The same applied to four ZUM candidates in Masvingo who had been informed that $500 was the necessary deposit.
