THE campaign pitch of President Robert Mugabe in recent elections has been consistent.Since the electorate shocked him out of deepening complacency in the aftermath of the constitutional referendum held back in February 2000 Mugabe has sought to portray himself as a patriot, while presenting his rival, Morgan Tsvangirai, as nothing more than a groveling puppet of the West.
Mugabe and the former ruling Zanu-PF have paraded themselves as paragons of post-colonial political virtue, while dismissing those who oppose them as shameless sell-outs, permanently at the beck and call of a dispossessed white farming community and a Western world seeking to re-colonise Zimbabwe.
In the world of make-believe painted by Mugabe and his surrogates at Zanu-PF campaign rallies, political correctness entails having nothing or as little as possible to do with white people especially those of Zimbabwean commercial farming stock or with the representatives, even accredited diplomats, of Western nations, particularly the United Kingdom, the United States or Australia.
This essentially racist posturing was evolved and fine-tuned in the period after the 2000 referendum, when it suddenly dawned on the Zanu-PF leadership that they no longer enjoyed the fawning support and unquestioning loyalty of the Zimbabwean electorate.
Evidence abounds, however, that Mugabe’s and Zanu-PF’s racist pretensions are based on a false premise and shrouded in hypocrisy and double-speak. Zanu-PF has thus continued to delude both itself and party loyalists over the years simply because its rivals in the MDC have somehow allowed the party to get away with what essentially amounts to telling two self-serving falsehoods.
Mugabe in the early days of Zimbabwe’s independence basked in the glory of overstated Western adulation, while Zimbabwe benefited from the backing and support of a Western world anxious to support a government they somehow believed would constitute a departure from the African post-independence stereotype of corruption, economic mismanagement, lawlessness and abuse of civic rights. Aid funds poured into Africa’s newest nation while Mugabe was toasted in Western capitals. A knighthood was conferred on him by Queen Elizabeth the Second at Buckingham Palace while members of the Zanu-PF Women’s League ululated in Harare. A number of universities on both sides of the Atlantic recognised him through honorary degrees.
The first lie is that Western nations are natural enemies of Zimbabwe.
The second falsehood, more significantly, is that Zanu-PF hates while people. Nothing could be further from the truth.
In fact, Zanu-PF has built a strategic circle of its own white friends over the years. Not only does Zanu-PF have dealings and cordial relations with its white allies; the people concerned are in most cases capitalist entrepreneurs who have prospered magnificently in Zimbabwe through their association with the ruling elite. Some prosper through exploiting the very people Zanu-PF pretends to protect.
Back in 1980 Mugabe went out of his way to prove to an anxious world that he was more than willing to abide by the non-racist tenets of his party’s first election manifesto.
Zanu-PF’s election manifesto stated categorically: “Zanu wishes to give the fullest assurance to the white community, the Asian and coloured communities that a Zanu government can never in principle or in social or government practice, discriminate against them. Racism, whether practiced by whites or blacks, is anathema to the humanitarian philosophy of Zanu. It is as primitive a dogma as tribalism or regionalism.”
The Zanu-PF of today publicly castigates and demonizes opponents such as the MDC who espouse similar non-racist policies and openly engage with members of the white community, branding them as enemies of the people and as puppets of the West.
Surprisingly, supporters both in and out of the country who hailed Mugabe for his former concern for the welfare of the ordinary man and his policy of national reconciliation, still glorify him long after he abandoned both the concern and the policy and now constantly spouts racist diatribe without the mandate of the majority of his people to do so.
But then to a considerable extent Mugabe and his acolytes depend for their survival on the existence of powerful white supporters who manipulate and strategize behind the scenes.
In the eyes of Zanu-PF and some post-colonial African political opinion the grievous error that the MDC
makes is to parade its Roy Bennetts, David Coltarts, Eddie Crosses, Ian Kays and Trudy Stevensons in public; granting them a manifestly conspicuous frontline role in the fight for democratic change.
The MDC strategists perhaps never read George Orwell’s Animal Farm or took serious note of Squealer’s constant exhortation to “Tactics, comrades.” Squealer was the porcine equivalent of Zimbabwe’s former Minister of Information, Prof Jonathan Moyo. In the Zimbabwean context, Mugabe did not preach reconciliation until he had the keys to the office of the Prime Minister in hand. Yet Tsvangirai practices appeasement and magnanimity from a position of powerlessness. Maybe if he could persuade Bennett to withdraw from the front he would soon have real power to share with him.
Tactics, comrades!
While the MDC’s white supporters love to shout from public platforms, Zanu-PF’s whites are voiceless but powerful backroom strategists. Their rare forays onto newspaper front pages are often prompted merely by the pressing need to defend themselves in the face of allegations of corruption, outright fraud or other impropriety while making money for themselves and Zanu-PF.
Being dedicated capitalists, even when Mugabe was still an avowed socialist, their major preoccupation is to make as much financial hay as possible, while the Zanu-PF sun still shines. Over the past 28 years of Mugabe’s rule leading entrepreneurs such as the gregarious British businessman Roland “Tiny” Rowland, the somewhat eccentric Nicholas van Hoogstraten, also British, John Arnold Bredenkamp, who constantly parries accusations of arms dealing, and Conrad Muller “Billy” Rautenbach who took care of Zanu-PF financial interests in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, have forged strong alliances with the Zanu-PF leadership, Mugabe himself included.
So too have emergent businessmen such as Lt. Col Lionel Dyke (Retired). He quickly rose from the relative obscurity of an officer in the Zimbabwe National Army and was thrust into the limelight by the turn of the century as a political broker.
He was assigned by two men he claimed to be his allies in Zanu-PF, Emmerson Mnangagwa, then Speaker of Parliament and retired defence forces commander Gen Vitalis Zvinavashe to broker a partnership deal between the ruling party and the MDC. Dyke said the MDC was represented by the party’s secretary general, Welshman Ncube and Paul Themba Nyathi, its secretary for information and publicity.
Dyke revealed these details to me in December 2002 when I was editor of the now banned Daily News. He disclosed that he had also been assigned to secure the support of The Daily News, then the country’s largest newspaper, for the ambitious political initiative. The initiative sought to sideline both Mugabe and Tsvangirai, in favour of a new leadership. I turned Dyke’s proposal down, and blew the plot in the newspaper.
Col Dyke, one of Zanu-PF’s most trusted white allies now rakes in millions through landmine recovery operations in Zimbabwe, the Middle East, Kosovo and other trouble-spots of the world. South Africa’s President Thabo Mbeki has since taken over the role of mediator in the Zimbabwean political crisis.
Dyke, who was commander of the Rhodesian African Rifles during Ian Smith’s war against the guerilla armies, was in charge of a regiment of paratroopers in 1983 to 84 during the Gukurahundi massacres in Matabeleland. The Catholic Justice and Peace Commission’s report “Breaking the Silence: Building True Peace” says Dyke expressed support for the deployment by government of Five Brigade against civilians, saying this strategy “brought peace very, very quickly”.
While Zanu-PF publicly berates opposition politicians for associating or having links with whites, behind closed doors Mugabe and his cohorts exploit clandestine relationships with their own white partners, most of them extremely wealthy capitalists.

There was Tiny Rowland, that colourful British businessman who was the most conspicuous epitome of western capitalism in Rhodesia, in Zimbabwe and elsewhere on the continent. In Rhodesia he was a friend of Ian Smith and in Zimbabwe he cultivated the friendship of both the late Dr Joshua Nkomo and Mugabe.
Rowland was the founder and chief executive of Lonrho, one of Zimbabwe’s largest multi-national conglomerates. After independence he became one of the most generous benefactors of Zimbabwe’s ruling elite. Rowland’s Metropole Hotel in London became home away from home for the top echelons of those fighting for the liberation of Zimbabwe, with full board on the house. The friendship between the controversial British tycoon and Zimbabwe’s new rulers flourished after independence. The Lonrho end-of-year dinner party became the social event of the year in Harare. Meanwhile, the Lonrho pavilions at the Harare Agricultural Show and the National Trade Fair in Bulawayo were the favourite haunt of cabinet ministers under the patronage of the flamboyant Herbert Munangatire, now late.
So revered was Rowland by Zanu-PF that when he was ousted in a board-room coup, Dr Nathan Shamuyarira, that eminent custodian of the party’s ideological values, lamented that the controversial businessman’s ouster was likely to end the “warm relations between Lonrho and the government of Zimbabwe”.
It is only after the constitutional referendum of 2000 that Zanu-PF has become openly critical of Zimbabwe’s white citizens and representatives of Western governments, especially those who challenge Mugabe’s excesses and point at his failures.

Mugabe’s personal friend Nicholas Van Hoogstraten, the British magnate whose status as the largest private owner of fertile Zimbabwean land complements is unchallenged, spoke with understandable warmth and affection when he described Mugabe as “100 percent decent and incorruptible”. Separately he said: “I don’t believe in democracy; I believe in rule by the fittest.”
Among Zanu-PF’s white allies, van Hoogstraten is the most vocal supporter of Mugabe, whom he regards as a personal friend. More significantly he is said to be a financial backer of the President.
Van Hoogstraten holds extensive investments in Zimbabwe. The Rainbow Tourism Group’s shares register shows that van Hoogstraten’s Messina Investments has a stake-hold of 2.17 percent with 35 727 640 shares. He owns 32 percent of Hwange Colliery Company and seven percent of CFI Ltd, one of Zimbabwe’s largest agro-industrial enterprises. He is the single largest shareholder in NMB at 20 percent. The founding owners of the bank were hounded into exile by Reserve Bank Governor, Gideon Gono.
The President’s friend also owns 600 000 acres of prime farmland. Not unexpectedly, van Hoogstraten’s farms have been spared the treatment reserved for the farms of less “patriotic” white commercial farmers.
Van Hoogstraten, who is reported to have relocated from the United Kingdom to Zimbabwe, is said to manage his vast business empire of 200 residential and business properties in Zimbabwe from an office in Harare. In January they hauled him to court. The police had caught him red-handed while receiving rentals from tenants in hard currency.
The phenomenal success of van Hoogstraten is clear testimony that Zanu-PF merely pays lip-service to its anti-white and anti-western mantras.

Another strategic Zanu-PF ally, wealthy businessman, John Arnold Bredenkamp, has publicly expressed his open support for the Mugabe regime. He told the Zimbabwe Independent that because of his vast business interests and extensive travel experience he had become a friend of politicians and he had no regrets about it. He said he sincerely believed that it was in the “best interests of Zimbabwe for Zanu-PF to win the presidential elections next year”.
Mugabe narrowly missed losing the election in question to Tsvangirai in 2002.
Bredenkamp’s forlorn hope was understandable, given that at the material time he had just won a major tender to supply fuel to the National Oil Company of Zimbabwe. In any case, freedom of speech is enshrined in the constitution of our once great land.
Yet when British premier Tony Blair stood in the House of Commons to pronounce that his Labour government worked hand-in-hand with Tsvangirai’s labour-backed MDC, Information Minister, Jonathan Moyo, went totally ballistic in Harare.
That single statement by Blair and its opportunistic exploitation by Mugabe and Moyo may have made a considerable contribution to the recovery by Zanu-PF in 2005, of a significant number of parliamentary seats that it had lost to the MDC in the 2000 parliamentary election.
Reports in the international media have consistently referred to Bredenkamp, as an “arms broker,” “arms dealer,” “arms merchant,” “weapons dealer,” “weapons broker”.
Challenged by Bredenkamp to substantiate allegations of arms dealing against him, one British publication, Executive Intelligence Review, defended itself haughtily.
“In describing the charmed life of John Arnold Bredenkamp,” the editor wrote, “it is difficult to know where to start. In fact, it is difficult to find a media reference to him that does not mention his business in arms trafficking. From the London Observer, to the Washington Times, to the Guardian of the U.K., to WorldNet Daily, to the UN Association of the United Kingdom, to a broad swath of British-based organizations and NGOs that specialize in opposing arms proliferation, Bredenkamp is repeatedly mentioned in the context of arms trafficking - selling, brokering, and violating sanctions.
Bredenkamp gained his reputation as a shrewd “sanctions buster” while supporting the racist regime of rebel Rhodesian leader Ian Smith.
“Like many of my contemporaries, I have adapted to change,” Bredenkamp says. “I was Rhodesian; I am now a Zimbabwean. I was a tobacco merchant; I am now an investor in many different sectors.”
When the George W. Bush administration imposed sanctions against Zimbabwe and Mugabe in 2001, Bredenkamp was reported to be among Zimbabwe’s businessmen included on the sanctions list. He was charged with violating international sanctions.
On February 18, 2000, The Washington Times published a report that the DRC and Zimbabwe were purchasing arms from Bredenkamp, who was said to be based in Belgium.
After independence Bredenkamp, indeed, left Zimbabwe and moved his base of operations to Belgium.
A report submitted to the United Nations Security Council in October 2002 by a panel of experts investigating the exploitation of raw materials in the DRC cited Bredenkamp’s role as an arms broker:
“John Bredenkamp, who has a history of clandestine military procurement, has an investment in Aviation Consultancy Services Company (ACS). The Panel has confirmed, independently of Mr. Bredenkamp, that this company represents British Aerospace, Dornier of France and Agusta of Italy in Africa. Far from being a passive investor in ACS as Tremalt representatives claimed, Mr. Bredenkamp actively seeks business using high-level political contacts.
“Mr. Bredenkamp’s representatives claimed that his companies observed European Union sanctions on Zimbabwe, but British Aerospace spare parts for ZDF Hawk jets were supplied early in 2002 in breach of those sanctions. Mr. Bredenkamp also controls Raceview Enterprises, which supplies logistics to the Zimbabwe Defence Forces. The Panel has obtained copies of Raceview invoices to ZDF dated 6 July 2001 for deliveries worth $3.5 million of camouflage cloth, batteries, fuels and lubricating oil, boots and rations. It also has copies of invoices for aircraft spares for the Air Force of Zimbabwe worth another $3 million.”

Bredenkamp protested the findings of the UN panel. The report highlighted the existence of an “elite network” comprising Congolese and Zimbabwean government officials and private businessmen. The network was reported to be exploiting the rich mineral resources of the DRC. The report identified the key strategist for the Zimbabwean branch of the network as Mnangagwa, while the former army commander, Zvinavashe was described as his key ally.
It has been alleged that before independence Bredenkamp effectively ran the finances of the Rhodesian armed forces during the later stages of the guerilla war. In this capacity he is said to have brokered export sales of Rhodesian products, mainly tobacco, and used the proceeds to fund the purchase of munitions and military equipment.
It is said that his complex “sanctions busting” deals sustained the UDI regime for far longer than would otherwise have been possible. Could Bredenkamp now be facilitating the survival of Zanu-PF as Mugabe clings to power?
On his return to Zimbabwe in 1984 after he made peace with the country’s new rulers, he remained involved in commodity trading and defence procurement while making himself generally useful to government and Zanu-PF. Using Zimbabwe as his base, Bredenkamp conducted business dealings elsewhere in Africa and in the Middle East. Not only did Bredenkamp become extremely wealthy, he also helped sustain the Zimbabwean economy in a period of some turbulence.
Bredenkamp made strategic inroads into the post-independence political establishment while gaining considerable clout in the economic affairs of Zimbabwe. Mugabe is often accused of having made a single-handed decision to deploy Zimbabwean troops to the DRC. It is alleged, however, that Bredenkamp may have played a significant role in the events surrounding Zimbabwe’s costly and suicidal intervention in the West African nation between 1998 and 2003.
The Zimbabwean army and air force were deployed to shore up the Laurent Kabila government in its fight with rebels backed by Uganda and Rwanda. In return generous mining concessions were granted by the DRC to key figures in the Zimbabwe political and business elite. It is alleged that Bredenkamp and his Zanu-PF allies were major beneficiaries. Mnangagwa has been the key Bredenkamp ally in Zanu-PF since the businessman’s return from Belgium in 1984.
In fact, it is also alleged that Bredenkamp became something of a power behind the scenes in Zanu-PF. Sources say he overplayed his hand, however, when he sought to facilitate the early retirement of Mugabe in 2004 and his replacement by Mnangagwa.
This displeased rival politicians in the party and government and investigations were instituted into the affairs of Bredenkamp’s Breco trading company concerning tax evasion and exchange control violations.
Controversial businessman, Conrad Muller “Billy” Rautenbach, is one of the handful of white businessmen who have prospered under Mugabe. He owned Wheels Africa, which quickly grew to become Zimbabwe’s largest freight company. He also held the Volvo and Hyundai franchises. He is said to own several thousand cattle north of Harare. The herd remained unscathed as neighbouring commercial farms were violently seized during by Zanu-PF sponsored war veterans and other party militants.
Rautenbach was one of South Africa’s best known businessmen but he fell foul of the law. The police wanted him in connection with massive fraud at his Wheels of Africa Group.
The charges against Rautenbach included stealing 1,300 cars from Hyundai, bribing customs officials and fraudulently reducing the tax liability of Wheels of Africa’s subsidiaries. He fled South Africa in 1999 after justice department investigators raided his office and home. Wheels of Africa was liquidated in December1999.
In Zimbabwe Rautenbach has enjoyed the company of equally tough businessmen, including the ubiquitous

Mnangagwa. The relationship between the two men goes back to the late 1990s when they oversaw the mining interests of Zanu-PF in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).
As part of a deal struck between Mugabe and then DRC’s President Laurent Kabila - in return for Zimbabwe’s military backing during the five-year civil war - Rautenbach was appointed chief executive of state mining company Gecamines. He was allocated several of its mining concessions, including a share in Mukondo cobalt mine in Katanga Province.
Kabila sacked Rautenbach two years later and seized his assets. Kabila accused the chief executive of under-reporting sales and exports of hundreds of millions of dollars of cobalt for the benefit of his own company, Ridgepointe Overseas Development Company.
Strangely, Kabila then invited Bredenkamp, another Zimbabwean businessman with impeccable Zanu-PF credentials, to take over some of Rautenbach’s seized assets.
Whether this was Kabila’s own decision or these appointments were manipulated from Harare is a matter of conjecture, but Zanu-PF’s interests in the DRC appear to have remained adequately protected.
Miraculously, after Bredenkamp invested in excess of US$15 million to open the Mukondo deposit, said to be the richest cobalt mine in the world, Rautenbach was back on the scene early in 2004. With the assistance of high-ranking Zimbabwean facilitators, he was awarded half of Bredenkamp’s assets in the DRC, with no compensation being paid to Bredenkamp. Rautenbach’s return coincided with the fall-out between Bredenkamp and Zanu-PF in Harare.
It was not clear how Rautenbach compensated those who engineered this windfall in a country from which he had been expelled. But it is likely that Rautenbach’s fortunes were revived following the assassination of Kabila in 2001. His son Joseph took over as president. Rautenbach was subsequently accused of fraud, theft and corruption again and ordered to leave the DRC.
In a report by the UN Panel of Experts on the DRC in July 2006, Rautenbach’s dual role as head of Gecamines and the beneficiary of this transfer of assets was described as a “blatant conflict of interests”. The report also cited Rautenbach as being among DRC “investors whose personal and professional integrity is doubtful”.
This story would be incomplete without reference to the legendary Joshi brothers, Jayant and Manharlal Chunibal, who fled from Zimbabwe within a week of Zanu-PF setting up a committee to investigate allegations of corruption and fraud within their business empire.
After establishing links with them in Mozambique during the war of liberation, Mugabe invited the Joshi brothers to Zimbabwe after independence to manage Zidco Holdings, through which Zanu-PF controls a vast business conglomerate. Mnangagwa, reputed to be one of Zimbabwe’s wealthiest citizens, was chairman of Zidco.
The Joshi’s fled from Zimbabwe in April 2004, a few say after the Zanu-PF politburo established an internal committee to investigate allegations of wide-spread corruption within the Zidco empire.
Mnangagwa, then the powerful Speaker of Parliament and the Joshis had become virtually untouchable. For two decades Mnangagwa served as Zanu-PF’s secretary for finance. In that capacity he was not only chairman of Zidco, he also sat on the board of 14 companies owned by the party. More significantly, Mnangagwa was at the time widely heralded as the man favoured by Mugabe to succeed him.
The Joshi brothers ditched a life-style of consummate luxury in Harare and fled to London, along with fellow Zidco director, Dipak Pandya. Mnangagwa never denied allegations that he personally escorted the fleeing executives to the airport.
While Mnangagwa and the Joshi brothers were repeatedly fingered for alleged corruption, they had become sacred cows, even when well-investigated and documented allegations of corruption were published in the press.
For example, they were linked to a case of corruption well documented by The Daily News which cited them as having allegedly been involved in the corruptly awarded tender for the construction of the Harare International Airport. Through the intervention of Mugabe’s nephew Leo, the contract was awarded to Airport Harbour Technologies (AHT) an international company with its headquarters in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Harare was the company’s first airport construction project.
Hani Ahmad Zaki Yamani, the company’s chief executive, subsequently revealed details of various payments corruptly made to various government officials, including President Mugabe, in the process of the controversial contract.
One of the recommendations made by the Sandura Commission to government in 1989 at the close of the Willowgate Scandal hearings was that the role played by Zidco in the scandal be thoroughly investigated. This never happened.
The Joshis fled from Zimbabwe 15 years later soon after Zanu-PF finally established a high-level investigation into claims of massive corruption within a business empire which the Joshis controlled with Mnangagwa, allegedly with little or no accountability.
There are two major characteristics that distinguish whites who associate with or support Zanu-PF from those aligned with the MDC. Zanu-PF’s whites are immensely wealthy capitalist entrepreneurs. The Bennetts, Coltarts, Crosses, Kayses and Stevensons of the MDC are, by comparison, men and women of much modest means by white Zimbabwean standards.
The major differences between Zanu-PF’s whites and the white men of the MDC camp is that the former are businessmen while the latter tend to be politicians and human rights activists. In fact, while Zanu-PF loves to portray itself as a socialist organisation, the white entrepreneurs associated with the party are the flamboyant embodiment of capitalism.
Where Zanu-PF befriends the aristocracy, as it were, the MDC’s whites are plebeians, figuratively speaking. For instance, Eddie Cross has a chequered history of service to government, both before and after independence. He started off as a land resettlement officer in the Gokwe District before he attained an honors degree in Economics at the then University of Rhodesia. He became the chief economist of the Agricultural Marketing Authority in 1976.
After independence Cross was appointed to head, first, the Dairy Marketing Board and then the Cold Storage Commission, then Africa’s largest meat-marketing organisation. He was then appointed CEO of the Beira Corridor Group, an organisation established to promote the rehabilitation of the Beira Corridor as an export outlet to the sea for land-locked Zimbabwe.
Cross then went into business in his own capacity when he started a group of companies, which he now runs with increasing difficulty. He joined the MDC at inception in 1999 and is currently the policy coordinator of the party and was elected to Parliament in March.
“I regard myself as a white African,” he says, “and am totally committed to the country of my birth and to the future of the continent.”
Zanu-PF is not entirely convinced and regards it as an inherent weakness of the MDC that the party appoints white functionaries such as Cross, Coltart and Bennett to positions of leadership.
Bennett, the MDC’s treasurer, is particularly reviled by Zanu-PF as the man who allegedly canvasses for funds abroad for the MDC.
“I believe that the decision-making process in Tsvangirai and the MDC is now firmly in the hands of the party’s fundraisers, namely Strive Masiyiwa and Roy Bennett,” said Prof Jonathan Moyo in an article published in the aftermath of the controversial June 27 presidential election re-run.
Those who had an idea of the funding-raising situation in Zanu-PF must have chuckled quietly on reading Prof Moyo’s article. President Mbeki and fellow pan-Africanists will certainly not chuckle when it eventually dawns on them what kind of animal they are dealing with in Zanu-PF.

It is all good and well to steadfastly support what you believe in Tapiwa and I respect that. I also respect and acknowledge that we are also entitled to our very own opinions and beliefs.

But, what you clearly do not do in turn is to respect and acknowledge other people's opinions and beliefs. At a very simple level you should acknowledge that the MDC has a strong following in Zimbabwe. On a broader more philisophical level you should be able to reason why they have such a support and accept the MDC. It is this lack of understanding at a basic level where the divisions in Zimbabwe start. From a personal level I can understand why Mugabe and Zanu have a good following in Zimbabwe: he liberated the people and has addressed the land issue amongst other things which is seen as a great thing in the eyes of many. Conversely I also understand why people support the MDC. But that is a whole different debate.

And then you wonder why such people as you yourself (Tapiwa) and others like Reason and Zvayi attract such huge criticism. It is because of your tunnel vision to the bigger picture. But on a basic level, politics always becomes personal and when you wrtie slanderous material it will attract criticism, and you need to accept this or not write at all and the same goes for Reason. Let me provide an example Tapiwa and I will quote from one of your previous articles:

"these (white settler) people are the true terrorists, there are few good white people out there, but there are many more who support Dubious Parties (MDC), they themselves are dubious and should be sieved from Africa as a whole and Zimbabwe in particular.
This party of mostly Dubious Cowards should heed the voice of Zimbabweans and respect Our Choice"

So in one paragraph you have managed to call people terrorists, bad people, dubious, cowards and disrespectful. Do you see how this may be offensive to your normal objective reader? Do you see how you may then attract some level of criticism on a personal level because some of your writings are incredibly offensive?

You ask for your choice to be respected but then you must in turn respect the choice of others because for any developments to take place on this "understanding" there has to be respect and understanding of all.

As is common in any conjectural piece, factual errors abound.

"In Roman times when the King fell off the Quadriga the enemy would have won"

Lesson number 1 - never invoke historical references you know nothing about. Are you talking about pre-Republic Kings? Or Republican Counsels? Or Roman Emperors? A thousand years of history crammed into one poorly expressed sentence reveal a lack of knowledge. And a lack of knowledge, reveals conjecture.

"Few will know today how heavily dependant on western decisions MDC-T is"

Lesson number 2 - Tapiwa Mutemachani is one of the few who knows exactly how "heavily depdendant on western decisions MDC is". This suggest that he is either in the MDC, or the western organizations that decide MDC policy. Alternatively, he has access to Zanu PF intelligence or is part of the Zanu PF set up. The objectivity of this author is not in doubt. We can ascertain for a fact that objectivity, on the part of the author, does not exist, and hence cannot be doubted.

"Had it not been objectivity and clear understanding of Politics and Imperialist agendas by China and Russia, not in the least our Brothers in South Africa"

Lesson Number 3 - Propaganda is correct. Always. The anti-Imperialist Russians recently attacked a sovereign country called Georgia. The anti-imperialist Chinese continue a forced colonization of Tibet. South Africa is driven by anti-imperialist ideals, not by the real consequences of having even more hungry Zimbabweans stream across the border. There was no clear understanding on the part of China and Russia - they protected their client. Have a look at your military inventory if you want to know what I am talking about. And the South Africans? They re getting kind of fed up with having to feed your people - they just want to keep them out of their own country - and if supporting Mugabe does that, so be it. That statement of yours is pure conjecture.

" demonic movement"

Lesson Number 3 - Do unto others whatver you feel like - Zanu PF and Reason will protect you.

Reason, if you are going to post bullshit like this that includes pointless namecalling, then how can you expect us from desisting. Alternatively, perhaps you or Tapiwa will furnish us with proof that there are, in fact, demons involved in the MDC movement.

"Xenophobia, in itself a truly un-African word quite foreign to the values and the African way of life"

Lesson Number 4 - English and Christianity are actually African.

You are quite right. It is a Greek word. And the language you are writing in is also most unAfrican. It is English. And the religion you follow is also most unAfrican. But I digress. And the deportation of Caesar Zvayi had very little to do with xenophobia. The man can be called a xenophobe himself given his racist attack on James McGee- complete with references to slavery and plantations. Nations have a right to kick morons out. And it has nothing to do with Xenophobia- but a lot to do with moron-phobia, particularly when said moron is out advocating violence in his editorials.

"Brotherly neighbourliness."

Lesson Number 5- Thou shalt tolerate your neighbor even if he insults you in your own house.

"What these brothers write has been termed ‘Conjecture’ by western apologists"

Lesson Number 6 - Learn English before you use it. Does Tapiwa know what the term 'conjecture' even means? I bet he does not.

"Botswana needs SADC (and Zimbabwe) more than SADC needs Botswana"

Lesson Number 7 - People in glass houses should not throw stones at others.

Zimbabwe needs the rest of the world more than the rest of the world needs ZImbabwe. Other countries will do just fine without Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe, on the ohter hand, sees 30% of its population fed by the International World Food Progam. Another ocuple of million are being fed in South Africa by South Africans. Botswana may need SADC, but at least it can feed its own people. Zimbabwe cannot. Why not? Because of the sanctions? Okay, if we take the sanctions away what will happen? You will get investment. From? The rest of the world. Dont pullt hese stupid stunts. Zimbabwe is as meaningless a country as a Botswana. If they need the SADC and Zimbabwe, you need the rest of the world to feed your own people.

"relieving us of a heritage that was hard fought for,'

Lesson Number 8 - Avoid Conjecture.

Which heritage would that be? The heritage of pre-colonial Africa, or the civilized version passed onto you by your Christian masters and colonizers, who destroyed all those aspects of your heriage that were incompatible with Christianity. The Chriistian heritage your colonizers left behind is not dissimilar to theirs. All you fought for was the right to put your own dictator in place of theirs - hardly a heritage.

Dont worry, Zimbabwe will never be a colony again. The age of colonialism has passed. besides, ZImbabwe has precious little to offer - it is cheaper to acquire eveyrthing Zimbabwe has from the open market than it is to occupy, rule and feed the Zimbabwean people. On this account you are right, - it is not conjecture.

Oh and my usage of the term conjecture was deliberately tongue in cheek, in case you hadnt noticed. Which I doubt you did - it requires a certain intellectual capacity.

It's a one-sided, partial diatribe that uses personal invective as a substitute for reasoned political discourse and offers no solutions other than the continuation of domestic policy that the people of Zimbabwe do not want. It's thirty years out of date, it doesn't reflect the reality of the situation in southern Africa and does nothing to recognise that the biggest problem faced by Zimbabweans is the brutality, violence and incompetence of their own government.

A few points:

Firstly, to have Wafawarova in the same list as Mugabe and Nehanda is an affront to the heroes of the Chimerunga, who actually took up arms and made sacrifices. When the inflation got bad, Wafawarova ran away like a little girl to the shopping malls of Sydney. He doesn't belong in that list.

Secondly, there's no evidence that the MDC is a 'puppet organisation', so Mtemachani is also spreading lies.

Thirdly, the people of Zimbabwe do not endorse Mugabe, nor ZANU PF. They only voted for him when they were threatened and beaten in an election with one candidate. This article serves a status quo which does not benefit the people of Zimbabwe but a tiny elite of corrupt people who are becoming rich on the sweat of those Zimbabweans lucky enough to have jobs.

Invoking the heroes of Zimbabwean liberation to prevent the change that Zimbabwe needs to prosper again is a disgrace to the things those people suffered so much for.

Mutemachani is writing from a declared position and he does support his position to the best of his ability. I urge contributers to critique his position and his arguments and not to go after the man or to resort to slander. That is not the idea for hosting this forum.