×
NewsDay

AMH is an independent media house free from political ties or outside influence. We have four newspapers: The Zimbabwe Independent, a business weekly published every Friday, The Standard, a weekly published every Sunday, and Southern and NewsDay, our daily newspapers. Each has an online edition.

Mnangagwa claimed Zim was open for business. What’s gone wrong?

Opinion & Analysis
guest column:Henning Melber/ Roger Southall In November 2017 Zimbabwe’s military replaced the late former President Robert Mugabe as head of State with his long-time confidante Emmerson Mnangagwa. President Mnangagwa declared Zimbabwe was “open for business”, linking foreign relations with economic policy. We look forward to playing a positive and constructive role as a free, democratic, […]

guest column:Henning Melber/ Roger Southall

In November 2017 Zimbabwe’s military replaced the late former President Robert Mugabe as head of State with his long-time confidante Emmerson Mnangagwa. President Mnangagwa declared Zimbabwe was “open for business”, linking foreign relations with economic policy.

We look forward to playing a positive and constructive role as a free, democratic, transparent and responsible member of the family of nations.

International expectations (more so than those among local people) looked forward to translating these promises into policy. This was despite the fact that Mugabe’s departure had been anything but democratic.

But there have been few, if any, changes in Zimbabwe’s political trajectory. A deepening economic crisis combined with a brutal crackdown on the government’s domestic opponents has resulted in disappointments.

On the foreign policy front Mnangagwa has fared no better. In a recently published analysis we examine the status of Zimbabwe’s foreign policy. We identify what’s gone wrong in its efforts at rapprochement with Western countries in a bid to get sanctions lifted, and why its efforts at cosying up to China haven’t gone according to plan either.

We conclude that Mnangagwa’s hopes of reorienting Zimbabwe’s foreign policy have been confounded by his government’s own actions. Its repressive response to mounting economic and political crises increased rather than diminished its isolation. The more the Mnangagwa government fails to engage democratically with its own citizens, the more it will negate any prospect of re-engagement.

Relations with its neighbours

Since the Mugabe era the African Union and Southern African Development Community (Sadc) have been tolerant of the Zanu-PF regime’s politics.

Sadc’s annual summit in 2019 demanded an end to Western sanctions. But the continued repressive nature of Mnangagwa’s regime is not making this loyalty easy.

Tensions have begun to show. In August 2020, South Africa dispatched official envoys to Harare to press for restraint on the Mnangagwa government in its actions against opposition figures.

The envoys weren’t greeted warmly. Instead they were subjected to a presidential harangue and denied the opportunity to meet the opposition.

A subsequent mission by South Africa’s governing party the African National Congress (ANC), acting as a fellow liberation movement, was as shoddily treated.

South Africa’s patience may be wearing thin. But, for its part, the Southern African Development Community has preferred to officially ignore developments by remaining silent. While “business as usual” translates to continued political loyalty, it does not translate to increased economic collaboration.

The West

Two decades ago the US and European Union imposed sanctions on those linked to the government in response to human rights abuses. Mugabe’s regime reacted by blaming its economic woes on the West. Mnangagwa decried sanctions as Western attempts to bring about “regime change”.

Unimpressed by the rhetoric, the US extended restrictive measures against targeted individuals and companies in August 2018. In March 2019, US sanctions were renewed.

In contrast, the EU demonstrated more willingness to re-engage with Harare. In October 2019 the EU announced an aid package, bringing support during the year to €67,5 million. Aid to Zimbabwe since 2014 stood at €287 million in 2020. This made the EU Zimbabwe’s biggest donor. To ease the woes of the COVID-19 pandemic, it added another €14,2 million humanitarian assistance in 2020.

Mnangagwa, however, continued to blame the West for sanctions he equated to cancer. Responding to criticism the EU declared

Zimbabwe is not where it is because of the so-called sanctions, but years of mismanagement of the economy and corruption.

Similarly, the US ambassador dismissed “any responsibility for the catastrophic state of the economy and the government’s abuse of its own citizens”.

US Senate Foreign Relations Committee chair Jim Risch called upon the Southern African Development Community’s 16 members States to focus their energies on supporting democracy, not kleptocratic regimes.

Looking East

The deterioration of Zimbabwe’s relations with the West coincided with growing Chinese interest in access to African resources for its own rapidly expanding industries. Zimbabwe’s growing isolation offered a convenient entry point.

But, China’s greater involvement was spurred less by solidarity than by self-interest.

And it’s singular importance in throwing a lifeline to the Zimbabwean regime in need gave it enormous influence in directing the collaboration.

Failure to mend relations with the West and other global institutions leaves Zimbabwe with no other partners for development and co-operation, thus vulnerable to manipulation by China.