US sanctions futile, misguided and deceitful

US sanctions futile, misguided and deceitful

• Dr Alex T Magaisa: On sanctions, Mugabe and the economy

• Nobuhle Nyathi: It's Zanu PF not sanctions, stupid!

• Tawanda Hondora: Sanctions undermine economy

• US travel ban will hit ministers' families

• Switzerland bans Zimbabwe officials

• US announces assets freeze on Mugabe's men

• New Zealand bars Mugabe banker

• Belgium in visa snub for Zimbabwe minister

• Gono targeted in EU sanctions review

• Gono escapes as EU travel ban list extended

• Australia tightens Mugabe travel sanctions

• Mugabe invited Prince Charles to Harare!

• Prince Charles in Mugabe handshake row

• Foes reunited at Pope funeral

• Pope would have wanted Mugabe at funeral

• The 'unclean' among the 'clean' at the Vatican

• Mugabe in Vatican for Pope's funeral

• EU renews targeted sanctions against Mugabe

• Full text of EU sanctions renewal agreement

By Khanyisela Moyo

DR ALEX Magaisa and Tawanda Hondora both expressed the opinion that the economic sanctions imposed on Zimbabwe by Western nations were responsible for Zimbabwe’s economic collapse.

Nobuhle Nyathi, writing from Bulawayo and obviously having a first hand experience of the Zimbabwe economic woes stated that the two gentlemen’s views were unsound and misleading. She attributed the problem to the current administration.

My understanding of Dr Magaisa’s contribution is that the sanctions imposed on Zimbabwe are not as “smart” as the Western media and the opposition would like us to believe. Tawanda Hondora also qualified the same assertion. Both writers never denied that the government has contributed to the current problems.

In my view, the two gentlemen speak from an informed position. While Nobuhle Nyathi might seem to be making a powerful intervention, it is clear that her views stem from her limited knowledge of international politics.

I want to correct a common myth perpetuated by Western nations that the government of Zimbabwe has solely inflicted endurable pain on its own people… and that the Western governments and institutions are an untainted, chivalrous lot.

Thus, I define economic sanctions, give their brief history and advance my argument by explaining what sanctions generally entail.

Sanctions are a coercive measure employed by a state/s against a target state to force a change in the latter’s undesirable policy or practice. This is done through the manipulation of the target state’s taxation, imports, foreign aid, access to markets and financial institutions. Their use as a collective security enforcement action is a well established phenomenon in international law and is prescribed by the United Nations Charter. The first experiment in the history of the Security Council economic sanctions, interestingly was Zimbabwe (then Rhodesia) when the Smith regime in 1966 unilaterally declared Zimbabwe as independent from Britain. The sanctions then were not felt as some countries violated the terms and continued to trade with Rhodesia.(In any event Ian Smith’s regime was only interested in the welfare of a small section of the population.)

"In any event, governments, including the Zimbabwean regime are often able to explain away the sanctions as punishment and retribution against the country"

KHANYISELA MOYO

While the impact of sanctions may vary from country to country depending on the circumstances of each case, there are some commonalities. These are; an acute interruption with the distribution of food, pharmaceuticals and sanitation supplies. The quality of food, availability of clean drinking water, basic health and educational systems are interfered with. Some indirect consequences can be the reinforcement of the power of the elite, the emergence of a black market and the enrichment of the privileged elite that take part in it. Iraq offers a good example of how sanctions can negatively affect the livelihood of the civilians. For example prior to the introduction of the sanctions, Iraq, in common with Zimbabwe, was honoured by UNESCO for its educational policies.

The deadly effect of these sanctions were felt in Iraq during the Saddam era. Thereafter, humanitarian agencies, human rights activists and academics appear to agree with the growing body of evidence that the worst affected by sanctions are civilians who have no influence on the policy decisions made by their leaders. This consensus heralded humanitarian exemptions and the future of sanctions is said to now lie in their being made “smart” or targeted. Zimbabwe is once again a testing terrain for this new belief. (Unilaterally by interested partakers, the US, EU and Australia.)

The latest US moves on sanctions are futile, misguided and deceitful. They are deceitful in that they create an impression that what has been imposed are just mere targeted sanctions – a travel ban on the ruling elite and their associates - yet in reality as Tawanda Hondora and Dr Magaisa have demonstrated, in addition to a travel ban on the ruling elite, markets are being (discreetly) indirectly and directly tampered with. (I will not repeat the factual issues).

I agree with Nobuhle Nyathi in that there were economic problems in Zimbabwe before the US introduced the Zimbabwe Democracy and Recovery Act of 2001. I would also agree with her that the Zimbabwean leaders and their cronies cut big slices for themselves from the national cake. I will however put it to her that the economic woes have been exacerbated by the introduction of the (US) Act since this is how any sanction regime is expected to work. That is, the starting point in a sanctions scheme is the devastation of the target state’s economy. This would lead to the suffering of the citizens. The plight of the people would then translate into pressure on a government to reform. It works like an operation; you feel some pain for a brief period so as to have a long time recovery.

There is however, no guarantee that the suffering citizens would direct their pain to the targeted state. A good example would be the case of Cuba, where Fidel Castro has continued to exist despite the US’s more than four decades embargo. In any event, governments, including the Zimbabwean regime are often able to explain away the sanctions as punishment and retribution against the country (essentially tools of the imperialists).

In conclusion , one can still point fingers at Zanu PF stating that it is their actions that triggered sanctions in the first place hence their implication in the economic mess. This is however, not to state that the Westerners who have unilaterally imposed sanctions on Zimbabwe are benevolent, uninvolved partakers.
Khanyisela Moyo is a feminist Zimbabwean lawyer currently studying towards a PhD in Transitional Justice in Northern Ireland. Feedback; humanndignityquest@yahoo.co.uk
JOIN THE DEBATE ON THIS ARTICLE ON THE NEWZIMBABWE.COM FORUMS
newsdesk@newzimbabwe.com