The legacy of private property whether it be in mining or the industrial sector.'
This is one promise he has faithfully adhered to. What he has not carried out is the land policy for which the militants
Today there are still 700,000 African families cramped into the old Tribal
Lancaster House Charlie VAN GELDEREN When the Zimbabwe African National Union swept to power in 1980, Africa's struggle for freedom took a big step for-
It was rightly hailed as a great victory and the harbinger for the final liquidation of white minority rule in south-
But the victory could only be consolidated if the new regime carried out the programme for which thousands of Zimbabweans had fought and died: in particular, a thoroughgoing agrarian policy which would give the land to the peasants who had formed the main force in the liberation armies, and the raising of the living standards of the urban and rural
If he had wished to effect his socialist rhetoric, Robert Mugabe would have had to break with the Lancaster House
This agreement had the specific intention of binding the new Zimbabwe regime firmly in the coils of im-
The longest section of the agreement, which was signed by Joshua Nkomo as well as Mugabe, expressly forbids the seizure of lands. transferred on a 'willing seller, willing buyer basis (Section 16). barrier is reinforced by the British government, which is committed to paying half the cost of resettlement. Should Mugabe defy this clause and seize the land, British funds would be withheld.
When ZANU came to power in April 1980 with a huge majority, it had a clear choice. It could faithfully carry out the neo-colonialist commitments of the Lancaster House agreement or it could mobilise the people to take the revolution forward on the road to socialism. would entail grave risks. It meant seizing the land of the 4,600 wealthy white farmers who own 38 per cent of the country and produce 90 per cent of the country's agricultural goods, earning 47 per cent of its foreign currency.
If Mugabe had embarked course, this would almost certainly have resulted in a mass exodus of the whites, taking with them their technical know-
There would have been a temporary set-back of the Zimbabwean economy. This is what happened in Mozambique and Angola and, as in these countries, South Africa would have embarked on an immediate policy of destabilisation with both economic and military means.
Mugabe made his intentions clear even before the results of the elections were known. In an interview with the New York Times (5 March 1980), he said:
'We recognise that structure is based on capitalism and that whatever ideas we have we must build on that. We are not going to interfere with Robert Mugabe (right) with Joshua Nkomo (DR)
Trust Lands. The change in nomenclature in no way improves the fertility of the land, or the misery of the families
While the rich white farmers been able to consolidate their positions, the black peasants have had to be content with rhetoric. In the winter of 1981, Mugabe announced that 54,000 families would be resettled in the coming three years. In January 1982, that target was raised to 162,000. In fact, three years after the ZANU victory, only 20,500 families have been re-settled. By contrast, the government has encouraged the development of a middle layer farmers who could act as a buffer between it and the peasantry.
As in agriculture, we find the same contradictions in the urban areas. commerce and industry, 70 per cent of the assets are owned by multinational
The South Africa-based Anglo-American combine, most the entire sugar industry, dominates mining and has interests in four commerbanks, six finance houses, building societies and many other indus-
So powerful is the influence of Anglo-American that it has been able to economic interest and not necessarily in the interest of the people.
Thus it was able to persuade World Bank and the cabinet to finance a new power station which experts maintain is not needed. But Anglo-American now has an outlet for the low grade coal which it mines at Hwang'e and which is almost unsaleable in other parts of the country because of high transport costs.
Bernard Chidzero, the Minister in charge of the National Development Plan, is quite frank about the direction of gov. ernment policies:
•Government recognises the need to sector investment by creating a favourable investment climate and taking necessary fiscal, monetary and other financial measures' (The Guardian 24 March 1983).
To this he could have added that the government would also create a 'favourable' political climate by retaining the oppressive state apparatus which it took over from the Smith regime which restricts free trade unions, bans strikes, and ensures a low-wage labour force.
La pro-ZANU journal, published in Harare, in what may very easily be the last issue in which it is still allowed free expression, gives a very clear picture of the actual
*Both the right and the left have ideological reasons for disagreeing with government. There are people on the right both inside and outside Zimbabwe, who would like to reverse the achieve-
ments of independence, seeing as they do although this has been given greater proa threat from the government of Prime Minister Mugabe. There are also people on the left who are unhappy with the present government's direction because they feel that it does not reflect a clear enough commitment to a socialist transformation - people who are frustrated with the pace and quality of the change.
"There is yet a third group of people who are unhappy with the government for purely sectarian tribal and regional reasons, which they place above the national interests. There would have been such disenchanted people in Zimwhichever party had won the
"There are also economic reasons for dissident activity which are intrinsically mixed with the political lack of meaningful employment opportunities and unchanging relationships to the means of production. The years of hardship during the struggle gave way during the election campaign to high expectations of a new
As the months went by after independence and the guerillas still found themselves in the assembly points, frustration built up.
'Chances of education and achieving skills that they sacrificed during the struggle have not materialised' (MOTO, March
It is very important to distinguish befrom the criticisms and frustration of the combatants, who see the aspirations for which they fought and made sacrifices disappear into some distant future, and counter-revolutionary forces backed by and based in South Af-
Their hostility is directed against the sovereignty of the people of Zimbab-
Revolutionary socialists and the whole labour movement must unconditionally defend Zimbabwe against these elements of counter-revolution.
The frustrations of those who fought• in the battle for liberation is quite an-
These frustrations are by no means confined to the Matabele areas Black soldiers in Rhodesia in 1977 (DR) 14 minence in the press here and because Matabeleland is the political base for Nkomo's Zimbabwe Atrica People's
Union. (Although it should be remembered that Nkomo was still a member of the government when the armed forces were sent into Matabeleland to deal with the dissidents.) But the primary responsibility for the diversion of the discontent among the people into tribal lines belongs to the Mugabe government.
South Africa, of course, is taking full advantage of the situation. Undoubtedly the Pretoria regime has infiltrated • people into Matabeleland to stoke up the fires, especially members of the so-called Matabeleland Brigade, which is trained elements - the genuinely frustrated and the South African agents - is highly
The media in this country has largely concentrated on the Korean-trained Fifth Brigade and its reign of terror in Mata-
But the bulk of the Zimarmy is being trained by 165 British officers, including the notorious Task Force whose activities, though less publicised, have been equally effective subduing the people, both in the Ndebele and the Shona areas.
It was illuminating to hear, on the BBC Panorama programme on 21 March, a British officer defending the activities of the army in Matabeleland as 'necfor the maintenance of law and Lord Carrington, who masterminded the Lancaster House agreement is on public record supporting the move towards a one-party state in Zimbabwe.
The British labour movement has an important role to play in defence of the democratic rights of the people of Zimbabwe. Labour's election manifesto must make it clear that it would not regard the restrictive clauses in the Lancaster especially, withdraw Section 16 and give unconditional financial aid to the Zimgovernment so that it could seize the land of the wealthy white farmers and give it to the people who fought for it.
While it is for the people of Zimbabwe themselves to decide their own destiny, socialists internationally must give every support to those who are striving to establish trade unions free from bureaucratic control or manipulation by any of the political parties (ZANU or ZAPU); it must give aid and the growth of cooperatives in manufacture and agriculture and other forms of self-organisation by the workers and peasants.
After the Republic of South Africa, Zimbabwe is the African country with the most politically sophisticated working class, with a history of militant struggle multinational oligarchies which control the country's economy. The emergence of a workers' party with a socialist programme, and in alliance with the poor peasants is the road forward for Zimbabwe. (Socialist Action Ap. 8, 1983)