Implementing democratic governance key to lifting of sanctions

By Austin Chaodza

I AM often asked by potential investors, students, or would-be entrepreneurs to define the key ingredients of economic success. I always say that there is no magic formula but the main ingredient can be summed up in one word: listen.

This article is designed to explain in clear terms the issues surrounding economic sanctions that were imposed on Zimbabwe by Western governments. It will also attempt to digest the conditions being advocated by the Western governments in order to lift these sanctions.

There are two kinds of economic sanctions that were imposed on Zimbabwe. There are those sanctions imposed on individuals who work for government. The other type relates to those sanctions that affect the national economy in general.

The question is: why are economic sanctions imposed on a country by other governments of the world, especially, Western governments? It is instructive to note that Zimbabwe is not the only country labouring under economic sanctions. Iran, Venezuela, China, Syria, Russia, to mention a few, are all victims of sanctions, imposed largely by Western governments.

There are two reasons as to why economic sanctions are imposed on one country by another or other countries. The first is to force governments under sanctions to introduce, for example, political reforms, economic reforms, and to punish governments violating human rights. The second reason is to avoid war.

• Chamisa under fire over US$120K donation
• Mavhunga puts DeMbare into Chibuku quarterfinals
• Pension funds bet on Cabora Bassa oilfields
• Councils defy govt fire tender directive

Economic sanctions, therefore, become the substitute for war. It is hoped by the countries imposing sanctions that the severity of the embargo would eventually lead towards either a change of government or compliance with the demands being made by the imposers of sanctions.

Zimbabwe has been labouring under economic sanctions since the year 2000. The imposition of sanctions came after the government ordered the seizure of white-run commercial farms ostensibly to redistribute land to landless Zimbabwe citizens. The seizures were sometimes violent and were a political response to the growing threat posed by the newly formed MDC in 1999, then led by Morgan Tsvangirai.

Britain and its European Union allies together with United States were aggrieved by these farm seizures and decided to impose sanctions on Zimbabwe. These Western governments wanted to demonstrate to their kith and kin in Zimbabwe that they could not just stand by and do nothing to protect their interests.

Consequently, travel sanctions were imposed on some Zimbabwean political elites and financial sanctions were imposed on the country’s economy generally. As a result of the latter, the Zimbabwe government is unable to secure lines of credit from international financial institutions.

Britain and other Western governments that imposed sanctions on Zimbabwe seem to have come to terms with the land redistribution programme as long as white commercial farmers, whose farms were seized, are compensated or get back their land in one form or another.

However, economic sanctions are still in place and Western governments that imposed them have set conditions for lifting them. These include Zimbabwe moving towards political and economic reforms, democratic governance, public accountability, respect for human rights and the rule of law.

For example, human rights and democratic governance are closely interrelated. Citizens need to have certain inalienable rights such as being free from want, fear and injustice. Citizens must be free to develop and realise their potential.

Human rights are indivisible. All types of human rights are significant — social, civil, political, economic and cultural. Democratic governance is compatible with all forms of rights — economic, social, political, cultural and civil.

The problems of Zimbabwe are being exacerbated by failure to make fundamental changes in the institutional structures inherited from our colonial masters which were rigid and, therefore, incapable of contributing towards development and economic success.

The Zimbabwe government is playing into the hands of Western governments that imposed economic sanctions on the country for its failure to implement the values of human rights. Consequently, the re-engagement efforts by the President Emmerson Mnangagwa regime and the lifting of sanctions become a far cry.

For the past four decades, Zimbabweans have not known the taste of good governance and benefits thereof. Currently, some opposition politicians are being subjected to arbitrary arrests and detention without trial. Other opposition members of Parliament are being recalled in an effort to weaken the opposition movement.

The Judiciary, the security forces and other arms of the State seem to collude with each other in order to dismember the opposition movement. Against this background, Western countries are adamant that individual freedoms and respect for fundamental human rights should be prerequisites for the lifting of sanctions against Zimbabwe.

They also consider that democratic governance should be implemented and be viewed as the effective management of public affairs through the generation of a government accepted as legitimate for the purpose of promoting and enhancing societal values sought by the citizens.

Civil society, political parties and independent politicians play a crucial role in deepening democracy and democratic governance. In fact, civil society is the pillar of democratic governance in that it can marshal forces for positive social change.

Enhancing civil society participation will enable the country to meet its developmental needs. Therefore, the landscape for civil society contribution to development needs to be levelled. This is possible if Zimbabwe promotes and implements democratic governance.

Mnangagwa himself is on record as having said, he is a “listening President” and that he is committed to constitutionalism. In that case, it must be noted that successful leaders depend above all on quality decision making.

Good decisions in turn depend on a system which encourages ideas and criticism. Good leaders must try to be as receptive as possible to criticism from every corner: the Press, colleagues, critics, political analysts, opposition politicians and civil society.

Turning criticism into positive force can be hard on the emotions and ego, because no one likes to be criticised, yet it is a vital ingredient of democracy. History clearly shows that a proper democratic system which emphasises ideas and the voice of the people brings far more prosperity, equality and freedom than does regimes based on authoritarianism.

Zimbabwe has the potential to be an economic success story if the government can promote good governance. The latter stresses a number of characteristics, principally the predictability of rules and the growth of capacities, particularly in the public sector to formulate and implement policies effectively and efficiently.

Accountability is equally important in buttressing democratic governance particularly in holding public officials responsible for their actions.

Corruption among public officials has become endemic, with the results that Zimbabwe has become politically and morally as well as economically bankrupt. Thus, the call for democratic governance is not just for a political birthright, but for total fundamental transformation and accountability.

In conclusion, it is important when examining the linkage between democratic governance and the lifting of sanctions by Western governments to remember that the onus is on the Zimbabwe government.

The latter is the one trying to re-engage with Western governments in an effort to have sanctions lifted. The imposers of sanctions have indicated that political reform, respect for human rights and the rule of law are necessary conditions for the lifting of sanctions.

In light of the foregoing, why can’t the Zimbabwe government call a bluff on these Western governments by doing as they say? There is nothing wrong in implementing good governance.

When governance is democratic, that is infused with the rule of law, transparency and accountability, among other practices, it goes a long way towards the fulfilment of societal aspirations and human development of all citizens.

Economic success is not sustainable without flexible and responsive governance and accountable public institutions. Let us remember: Democracy is built on a foundation of ideas, debate and listening.