The Herald

By Farirai Machivenyika

14 June 2012

Education, Sport, Arts and Culture Minister, David Coltart, has criticised Zifa’s treatment of Warriors’ stars — Knowledge Musona and Ovidy Karuru — following their alleged meeting with Henrietta Rushwaya in Harare on Tuesday.

Coltart said the negative publicity generated by the way Zifa handled the case was unwarranted. He said this during the House of Assembly question and answer session yesterday. Coltart said the Zifa were failing to manage their employees to act responsibly.

He however, expressed concern in the manner in which charges against Rushwaya were dropped.
“I was concerned about charges being dropped so readily and I have not heard an explanation as the minister,” he said.
He also called on Zifa to expedite its investigations into the Asiagate match fixing scandal is it was affecting the local game.

“They must do so (investigations) with greater haste so that we know where we stand with particular coaches and particular players and that those involved in match-fixing will have no place in our football,” he said.

The poor performances by the national team have been a cause for concern to the nation with many blaming Zifa for failing to create an enabling environment for the national team to succeed.

Coltart also hit out at politicians alleging that they had contributed to the demise of local football standards. He was responding to a question by Mhondoro-Ngezi MP Bright Matonga on what Government was doing to turn around the fortunes of local football that has been in the doldrums for some time now.

The national senior men’s soccer team has also failed to win any of their three matches for the Africa Cup of Nations and World Cup qualifiers. There is far too much politics in Zimbabwe’s football and this has been a problem for many, many years.
“We will not perform in football until we remove politics. All political parties must stay away from Zifa,” Coltart said.

News Day

By Nqobile Bhebhe

12 June 2012

Education minister David Coltart says Zimbabwe is on a knife edge and focus on short term retribution against alleged perpetrators of human rights violations in the post-President Robert Mugabe era could result in coups.

In a recent interview with an American publication during a trip to Washington DC, Coltart, who is also MDC secretary for legal affairs, said Zimbabwe needed a truth commission to deal with human rights issues in a post-Mugabe era.

“It’s a very complicated issue, and the danger of focusing exclusively on the past is that it may prevent any positive future from emerging,” he said.

“We are on a knife’s edge in some respects. If we focus on the short-term on retribution for past evils, we may well drive those responsible for crimes against humanity into having coup and seizing power to protect themselves.”

Asked if he prefers an amnesty Coltart said “No. And, I’m not speaking as government now, but rather as secretary of legal affairs of our party. We believe that the most important elements to address this would be through truth-telling process.
“Specifically, through a truth commission, not a truth, justice, and reconciliation commission,” he said.

“We believe that victims should be given the opportunity to say what happened to them and their loved ones and secondly, they should be able to tell us what should happen regarding justice and reconciliation.”

Coltart said it should not be up to lawyers and politicians to determine what measures were needed to achieve justice.

• Warriors 0-1 down 20 minutes into second half. Come on Zimbabwe, come on!!! We need to go to this World Cup, the road to Brazil. #
• Not a great day for Zimbabwe sport. Stephen Muzhingi unable to defend his Comrades title and the Warriors go 0-1 down in World Cup qualifier #
• Wonderful seeing lovely Kenyan girls sing at the #Queen #039;s Concert – but sad that Zimbabwe remains out the Commonwealth at this joyous time #
• BBC – Radio 3 Blog: Petroc back for Breakfast … http://t.co/RRSVyM7c #
• U.S. Issues El Niño Watch, Which Could Mean Fewer Hurricanes, Colder Winter http://t.co/ttQGs7rh – Worrying for Zimbabwe as we need rain #
• Why Former Mugabe Foes Are Hugging Him Now http://t.co/QjPy8J4V via @HuffPostWorld #
• Congratulations Malawi for taking such a strong and principled stand – "Malawi cancels summit over Bashir http://t.co/msrGS8k6 " #
• I hope the Warriors will overcome all the chaos they have faced this week to beat Mozambique today. The chaos is a national disgrace. #

Newsday

By Richard Muponde

9 June 2012

Civic activist and Masakhaneni Trust director, Dumisani Mpofu yesterday expressed fear that human rights campaigner Paul Chizuze, who disappeared in February, could have been killed for his activism contrary to his family’s belief that he could be in hiding.

Chizuze went missing on the night of February 8 after leaving home at around 8pm and his whereabouts remain unknown, giving rise to suspicion that he could have been abducted and murdered.

His car, a white twin cab Nissan Hardbody (registration ACJ 3446), has also not been found.

“We suspect foul play,” said Mpofu. “While it’s true that his family’s reaction created confusion last time, it was their way of seeing things. We waited as civil society for them to prove that their belief was correct, but we have seen that they are wrong.

“With what is happening in this country and Chizuze’s long history of fighting for human rights, a reasonable person can only suspect foul play. He could have been abducted and murdered, a reasonable person can only suspect that.”

Masakhaneni Trust and nine other civic organisations, which include Zimbabwe Lawyers for Human Rights and Zimrights yesterday flighted advertisements in daily publications requesting for information which may lead to Chizuze’s whereabouts.

“Missing four months — disappeared 8 February.
We are still looking for you. We are still
concerned about you. We are still requesting information that leads to your recovery — dead or alive,” reads the advert.

Concern has been mounting in the country over Chizuze’s fate leading to his friends launching a campaign on social media networks, Facebook and Twitter, as they continue looking for him.

Other organisations led by the Christian Group Churches in Bulawayo and the Solidarity Peace Trust also recently issued an appeal saying they feared Chizuze may have been “murdered”.

Chizuze is a paralegal who worked with civic organisations like the Amani Trust.

He worked closely with the Minister of Education, Sports, Art and Culture David Coltart who on his blog on Twitter said: “I am very distressed about the disappearance of a good friend and colleague.”

Fellow activists have been quoted as stating Chizuze was one of the many volunteers who led efforts to search for Coltart’s election agent, Patrick Nabanyama who disappeared at the height of political violence in 2000, and has never been found.

Nabanyama has since been declared dead.

Nigeria Intel

By James Kimer

8 June 2012

For an ordinary looking man, Zimbabwe’s Senator David Coltart cuts an imposing figure. As one of the few Anglo-African politicians currently serving in the government (as Minister of Education, Sport, Arts, and Culture), Sen. Coltart has gained widespread acclaim for his social achievements within Zimbabwe’s often contentious policy environment. A lawyer by training, Coltart became Sectary of Legal Affairs for the opposition party Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), and has even survived assassination plots for his representation of victims of the Robert Mugabe regime. Now Coltart along with the rest of the MDC find themselves in a power-sharing agreementwith Mugabe that is nearing the end of its five-year term, bringing to head another confrontation between hardliners and reformers for the future of the country. Has the coalition been worth the price? What will happen next? During a recent visit to Washington DC, Nigeria Intel had the opportunity to sit down with Sen. Coltart to examine these questions.

Q: Robert Mugabe is often seen as the definition of an authoritarian African leader. How much autonomy do you have in your Ministerial post, being from the opposition MDC party?

It’s a very important question, as the problem that we have is that although we serve as Ministers, we have a lot of civil servants within the ministries belonging to the ruling ZANU-PF party who can frustrate programs, and in some cases, block them entirely. So we certainly do not have unfettered power. To be quite frank, ZANU-PF Ministers have far more power, so when they decide on a new policy direction, they are able to execute it more quickly.

Over the years I have learned to go the extra mile to get things done. The power-sharing situation has forced me to look at policies that were demonstrably non-partisan – policies that were clearly going to help people and children without being ideological, and then persuading and building up the support for that policy direction.

Q: What are some of the achievements you can point to during your time at the ministry?

We actually just recently passed a sweeping, comprehenisve change to Zimbabwe’s education policy, which is going to have an enormous impact on the daily lives of our country’s children. We have established greater autonomy for teachers, decentralization of decision-making to schools, and passed through agreements new curriculum. We have also implemented mechanisms for more schools to raise funds from student fees, while considerably increasing the number of school days with the help of cooperation with international NGOs and volunteers.

Q: What’s the purpose of your trip to the United States?

Primarily I am here as Minister of Education to raise awareness and support of the education sector, not just with the U.S. government but also with World Bank and UNICEF, among many other organizations. The secondary purpose of my trip is to talk about the current U.S. policy toward Zimbabwe.

The current policy of the State Department has pretty much been to disengage with Zimbabwe, or at best, to restrict their involvement with certain key areas of the country. The attitude has been until ‘Mugabe goes, there will be no change.’ This has negatively impacted many social services in the country, including the education sector, as minimal resources have been available to our country’s children. So what I am trying to do is put the argument that America’s policy toward Zimbabwe, though understandable in some respects, is not working.

By disengaging with Zimbabwe, they actually play into the hands of hardliners who want to derail the process of liberalization and reform. The sanctions serve no useful purpose now, and they would be far better advised to start engaging, especially with moderates, and to support social ministries like health, education, water – because by doing so not only do they help the humanitarian situation, but actually bolsters the transition to democracy as it builds confidence among the public that there are tangible benefits to having closer relations with the United States.

Q: What do you see as the critical areas that need reform in Zimbabwe?

Well, fundamentally we have to address the economy and increase the state’ revenues. We need to encourage investment, as we have insufficient investment capital to re-invigorate existing businesses while we need fresh capital to come for new companies. Our red tape and indigenization policies have been problematic – our focus has been too much on cutting up the existing cake, when we should be focusing on growing the cake and achieving empowerment for Zimbabweans through a growth of our economy.

Secondly, we have to liberalize within the country many of our domestic laws which inhibit existing Zimbabwean companies. We have a problematic tariff structures, endemic internal corruption, and all kinds of rules and regulations that prevent people from forming businesses and contributing to the economy.

Thirdly, in the course of the last 10-12 years, we have lost literally hundreds of thousands of our most talented people. Even if we get the economic policies right, if we don’t have policies that encourage the return of our best and brightest, economic development will be frustrated, or even worse, stillborn.

And lastly, once we have investment rights and revenue flows going, the next critical thing is to get our budgetary priorities sorted out. We need to cut down on the size of government. We need to ensure that social ministries are adequately funded. We have a tax environment and general business environment that encourages growth.

Q: How do you think human rights issues will be handled in a post-Mugabe Zimbabwe?

It’s a very complicated issue, and the danger of focusing exclusively on the past is that it may prevent any positive future from emerging. We are on a knife’s edge in some respects. If we focus in the short term on retribution for past evils, we may well drive those responsible for crimes against humanity into having coup and seizing power to protect themselves.

Q: So you would favor an amnesty of sorts?

No. And, I’m not speaking as government now, but rather as Secretary of Legal Affairs of our party, we believe that the most important elements to address this would be through truth telling process. Specifically through a Truth Commission, not a truth, justice, and reconciliation commission. We believe that victims should be given the opportunity to say what happened to them and their loved ones, and secondly, they should be able to tell us what should happen regarding justice and reconciliation. It shouldn’t be up to lawyers and politicians to determine what measures are needed to achieve justice. Once victims have actually said what they want – and you may be surprised – then we can begin to formulate policies that in the medium to long term to address these issues.

Q: What are the possible scenarios for the near future of Zimbabwe?

I think it is wrong to work any plan of action around the prospect of Mugabe going soon. He is 88 years old, but he is an incredibly fit 88, and generally I think it is wrong to plan around such an outcome.

In terms of scenarios, I think the most likely prospect is that we muddle through as we are at present, and eventually get through the process of constitutional reform and electoral reforms, and have elections some time next year. These elections are not likely to be perfect but they will be better than the last elections. Those elections may not yield a clear cut winner, and we could well have a coalition arrangement between parties.

The other scenario is that the hardliners throw caution to the wind and are so concerned about the future that they decide to abandon this course of action and have an election based on the existing constitution. If that happens, the country is likely to be plunged back into disorder. However I do not think that elections without reform will enjoy the support of the international community or even SADC, and the loss of this support will cause a steep decline in the economy and a loss of confidence among allies. Ultimately those responsible for taking that course of action would be forced to negotiate again, and through these negotiations we may well arrive at yet another arrangement similar to the current one, which will not be good, but at least will keep the country going.

Q: What’s your response to the criticism that the power-sharing agreement of the MDC has only empowered Mugabe and prolonged a dictatorship?

I think it’s difficult to counter that criticism because there is an element of truth to it. There is no doubt that by agreeing to go into this government, we have played a role in the rehabilitation of Mugabe’s reputation by extending him a political lifeline, so that criticism is valid. My response to that is that ‘this may be so,’ but what were the alternatives? And no one has been able to identify a viable alternative.

What is clear is that had we not entered into the coalition, the country would have collapsed totally, degenerating into a Somalia or Liberia-like situation. The military would have still had access to diamond money as they always have, a flow of money to retain their core. Education would have collapsed, thousands of people would have died from the collapse of the health system and the spread of cholera epidemic, and would have caused the destruction of numerous institutions both private and public. And so the question to us became: was that a price worth paying?

Consider how bad things had gotten. When I took over as Minister of Education in 2008, there were only 26 school days. The public examinations of the previous year had not even been marked yet, four months into the new year. We lost 20,000 teachers out of the system in 2007-2008, and that would have continued exponentially. When a system breaks down totally like that, it takes a vast amount of money to repair it, so it was our goal to prevent a total breakdown of every public institution because this is the only path to a more prosperous future.

So to conclude – I recognize the criticism, but in the absence of any rational alternative, what was to be done? Yes, we have rehabilitated Mugabe – but at the same time we have saved lives, we have saved institutions, and we have made the costs of rescuing Zimbabwe much cheaper.

The New Statesman

By Blessing-Miles Tendi 

8 June 2012

They have become a political tool for Zanu-PF, as many African leaders continue to view sanctions as a tool for Western imperialism.

In 2001 America passed the Zimbabwe Democracy and Recovery Act (ZIDERA). ZIDERA instructs America’s executive director to each international financial institution to oppose and vote against any extension by the respective institution of any loan, credit, or guarantee to the Government of Zimbabwe; and any cancellation or reduction of indebtedness owed by the Government of Zimbabwe to the United States or any international financial institution.

America argued that ZIDERA would support Zimbabweans in their struggle to achieve peaceful democratic change and equitable economic growth. The European Union followed suit by applying travel bans on ZANU PF members, an embargo on arms and related material, and the freezing of funds and economic resources of ZANU PF elites.

Zimbabwe’s Education Minister and member of the MDC party David Coltart was in America lobbying government officials to lift targeted sanctions on Zimbabwe recently. In April, Finance Minister and MDC Secretary General Tendai Biti told the Atlantic Council in Washington DC that “your foreign policy as a country, as America, could be better towards Zimbabwe. You do not deal with very difficult, fragile states by disengagement, by isolation. It does not work”.

Southern African states – the guarantors of Zimbabwe’s current power-sharing arrangement between ZANU PF and the MDC – have repeatedly urged the EU and America to remove sanctions. There is also a loudening chorus of calls by leading Zimbabwean civil society actors, academic experts and writers for the lifting of sanctions.

What is remarkable about concerned Zimbabweans’ argument for the removal of sanctions is that only a few years ago many of them were supportive of the Western sanctions regime. What has changed? Why would they now want the West to loosen its grip on the big bad Robert Mugabe?

The answer is that in 10 years sanctions have had no demonstrable effect on Mugabe and ZANU PF. They have become an effective political tool for ZANU PF instead. For instance, when EU sanctions against ZANU PF were introduced in 2002, African leaders’ reaction was typified by the then Tanzanian president Benjamin Mkapa who thundered: “as you have heard about Zimbabwe and the EU’s decision to impose sanctions, it seems they want to divide Africa at Brussels in 2002 just as they did in Berlin (where a conference that regulated colonialism was held) in 1884. Africa must be prepared to say no!”

Many African leaders continue to view sanctions as a tool for Western imperialism in Zimbabwe and this is one of the reasons why some of them never condemned Mugabe. Furthermore the view that sanctions represent Western imperialism anew has undermined the MDC’s standing as an authentic African party because it has been seen as close to the West since its formation in 1999.

Still the sanctions regime has its defenders and the foreign policy drive to isolate Mugabe has much traction in the West, as seen in Canada’s withdrawal from the United Nations World Tourism Organisation (UNWTO) over the appointment of Mugabe as a special tourism ambassador in June.

However, the pro-sanctions brigade has buried its head in the sand and refused to earnestly address three critical issues. First is its lack of any evidence that sanctions have or are working. Second is the adverse effect on human rights and democracy promotion of the selective application of sanctions. While ZANU PF has endured sanctions, more undemocratic and human rights violating regimes in Angola and Swaziland, which are Zimbabwe’s regional neighbours, have been ignored. Duplicity undermines the West’s human rights and democracy agenda in Africa because it ends up being perceived as a fig leaf for regime change.

The third critical issue is that Western sanctions policy is overriding the views and demands of Zimbabweans. Zimbabwe does not belong to the West. Nor is the West intellectually better equipped than local actors in terms of knowledge about what will aid the resolution of Zimbabwe’s problems. It is high time the West comes down from its high horse and listens to and does what those who are affected by its bad foreign policies are saying. It is counterproductive to think and behave otherwise.

One India News

8 June 2012

It seems 88-year-old Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe is not in a mood to part with the craving for eternal empowerment. In May, Mugabe had announced his plan to call early elections and discard the country’s power-sharing agreement of 2008. This he did considering his growing age and to put his party, the ZANU-PF, at a favourable position under the current constitution of the country.

However, the President’s proposal was declined by the Southern African Development Community (SADC) at a recent meeting at Luanda. The SADC works towards the socio-economic, political and security cooperation and integration of 15 southern African states. At the Luanda talks, the SADC members, who act as guarantors of the power-sharing pact, told Mugabe that Zimbabwe can go to polls after a new constitution is put in place. The pact, which was signed in September 2008, saw Mugabe’s iron-hold on the nation’s governance loosening to a great extent.

A new constitution, work on the formulation of which is nearly two years behind schedule, is expected to ensure a smooth transfer of power from the ZANU-PF to the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) led by Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangiri. The latter had underwent a split in 2005 over the Senate elections, with the other faction led by Arthur Mutambara. A peaceful power transfer to the MDC could also see Zimbabwe continuing towards a modest economic performance, something it has been doing since the 2008 pact, which succeeded in stopping the political violence to a large extent.

Zimbabwean economy has seen some revival after witnessing a horrendous hyperinflation, which ultimately saw the government rendering its own currency obsolete and replace it with various foreign currencies, including the US dollar. The growth was driven mainly by mining, agriculture and tourism. The human-development indicators of the country, like longevity and child mortality, too have improved. Revenue from tax has also increased owing to rise in economic activity.

However, there is still a long way to go for Zimbabwe. Excessive government expenditure, lopsided ownership norms for foreign businesses, poor allocation of funds for education (David Coltart of the MDC’s Mutambara faction, however, did a commendable work after taking over as the education minister) and of course the evil political hindrance to the nation’s growth.

The obsolete constitution of Zimbabwe would make it difficult to get rid of smooth transfer of power in the days to come and keep people like Mugabe at bay. An effort to reverse the country’s political tradition would be a welcome development for Zimbabweans, not only those at home but also abroad, and that can bring some positive change in the nation’s destiny. The last thorn in the flesh is Mugabe, of course. If the ageing dictator abides by the Luanda talks, his tenure will be shortened undoubtedly. But if he and his outfit refuses to accept the terms, Zimbabwe could revisit its dark days once more.

Zimbabwe Independent

By Wongai Zhangazha and Herbert Moyo

7 June 2012

Comptroller and Auditor-General Mildred Chiri has ordered an investigation into the procurement procedures by the Ministry of Tourism of Liquid Electronic Display (LED) television sets from China which were supposed to be installed at fan parks during the 2010 World Cup but only arrived three months after the tournament.

This comes as Tourism minister Walter Mzembi is under the spotlight for his involvement in the loss-making and controversial Benjani Mwaruwari testimonial match two weeks ago.

Mzembi was also embroiled in controversy following the Warriors friendly against Brazil in the run-up to the 2010 World Cup finals in South Africa. Allegations were that he had used his position to secure a contract to ferry the Brazilian national team during its visit.

These issues have put Mzembi under scrutiny amid fears he is using his position to pursue personal interests.

In her 2010 audit report, Chiri said an investigation should be carried out to establish why tender procedures were followed or not and why the Ministry of Tourism allowed the delivery of the equipment worth US$2 million 13 weeks after the World Cup.

In April 2010 Mzembi’s ministry made arrangements to purchase 40 LED TV units from a company in China as part of preparations for the World Cup, but the sets were only delivered 13 weeks after the event.

Chiri said: “Since the units were received after the end of the World Cup, it is my opinion that the purpose for which the units were acquired was not met, thereby rendering the expenditure incurred nugatory”.

She added that the absence of documentation for audit examination concerning the fan park equipment loaned to the Zimbabwe Tourism Authority and also the loaning of state equipment was tantamount to misapplication of public assets.

“At the time of audit on May 29  2011, generators powering the fan park equipment were said to be at Manyame Air Force base where they were sent for safe keeping. The balance, comprising 10 generators, was loaned to the Zimbabwe Tourism Authority as complete sets, while one generator was said to be in use at Murombedzi Growth Point, where fan park equipment was installed,” Chiri said.

“An investigation should be carried out to establish why tender procedures were not followed and why the ministry allowed the delivery of the equipment at the end of the World Cup showcase where it was supposed to have been used.”

Without explaining why the TV units were delivered late, Mzembi dismissed Chiri’s report as a “petty issue”, saying the televisions could be accounted for, but have since been “donated” countrywide.

Besides the televisions and Brazilian match controversies, sources close to the Mwaruwari testimonial match fiasco say President Robert Mugabe grilled Mzembi for almost 45 minutes, demanding explanation why the Tourism Ministry got involved in a football match project which should fall under Zifa and the Ministry of Education, Sports and Culture (David Coltart’s jurisdiction).

Sources said senior football administrators, including Ndumiso Gumede, only agreed to be part of the proceedings after a phone call from Zifa President Cuthbert Dube who was in Brussels on Fifa business.

Zifa, which did not want to be part of the event if those implicated in Asiagate like Henrietta Rushwaya were involved, is still fighting Mwaruwari over contract obligations and money. It is feared Mwaruwari’s testimonial match proceeds were looted by shadowy characters who were involved.

Mzembi, however, said his meeting with Mugabe was “cordial” and he had explained to him how the testimonial match had been suggested to him by Mwaruwari and its benefits to tourism through hotel revenue and related expenditure from fans coming from outside Harare and the region.

He also said there was no acrimony between himself, Zifa and the Ministry of Education as demonstrated by Gumede’s presence at the match, which was nothing more than a “glorified social soccer game” that did not have to be under the jurisdiction of Zifa.

Gumede and other senior football officials were not impressed by how politicians and opportunistic characters got involved.

 Research and Advocacy Unit

7 June 2012

“We also worry about the physical security of the teachers. Teachers are held in high regard — especially in the rural areas — where the ZANU-PF has traditionally been relatively strong. Teachers are usually victimized during elections, because people vote in schools and teachers are viewed as sympathetic to the opposition. My worry is that in case of renewed violence, teachers will be targeted and leave again.” [1]

These words from the Honourable Minister of Education, David Coltart, are extremely important, and speak to one of the great problems that face rural Zimbabweans whenever we face elections. Schools, teachers and the pupils face serious risk of being involved in the inevitable political violence and intimidation that accompanies elections. Recent research by the Progressive Teachers Union of Zimbabwe [PTUZ] and the Research and Advocacy Unit [RAU] indicates the scale of the problem. See the results of the research below: [http://www.researchandadvocacyunit.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=187&Itemid=90].

In this national survey, slightly more than half of the teachers interviewed had had a direct experience of violence since 2000, and, shockingly, half of these reported that this violence had taken place during working hours at school. This obviously meant that this was witnessed by the pupils. Most schools in the rural areas of Zimbabwe are primary schools, and this means that very young children are being exposed to violence. The implication of this for the long-term development of our children as citizens requires deep thought: if the model they have for politics is one of violence and intimidation, what kinds of citizens will they develop into?

Worse than this, perhaps, is the demonstration to the children of intolerance to diversity of opinion. A major goal of any education system must be the encouragement of the learner to think and explore, and there can be no greater disincentive to creativity of thought than the crude attack on teachers for holding views that a political party disagrees with. When teachers in Zimbabwe are fearful of encouraging free thinking, when pupils are taught to disrespect teachers for their personal views, then the whole education enterprise is in serious jeopardy.

The basis of all democracies, no matter how they are organized, must be respect for others, tolerance of difference, and freedom to be critical. Without these, democracy fails, as Amrtya Sen has pointed out, and the corollary is that development will also fail. And these values are inculcated in the home, reinforced in school and church, and then implemented in life. So school is such an important part of the process of developing real democrats.

Therefore, the protection of teachers and learners is critical to national development, and we must urgently take steps to provide this protection. The Minister needs not merely to worry about the future, but ensure that all schools are off-limits to political activities: no more rallies, no more youth militia attacking teachers, no more children seeing their teachers beaten or humiliated. This is the priority for education, for what use are books and pens if the teachers are not there to guide the pupils. Our most precious resource is not materials, but people!

[1] Statement made in an interview with Marian Tupy, a policy analyst at the Cato Institute’s Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity in Washington DC recently.

The Huffington Post

By Leo Cendrowicz

7 June 2012

One of the world’s last dictators, Zimbabwe’s Robert Mugabe is seen by the Europe and America as a global pariah. But inside the country, his former foes are now flocking to his side. Education Minister David Coltart, a longtime opponent and human rights activist, tells Leo Cendrowicz that as Mugabe wanes, it no longer makes sense to isolate Zimbabwe.

David Coltart knows what is said about him. He is seen as a collaborator, a dupe, and a sucker. He was turned, bamboozled. He betrayed his principles and his people when he joined the government of Zimbabwe’s eternal dictator, Robert Mugabe. “I’ve been accused of all sorts of things: that I’ve been charmed by Mugabe, that I’ve lost it,” he says.

But as Zimbabwe’s Minister for Education, Sport, Arts and Culture for the past three years, he still believes he is doing the right thing. And he has, after all, a long record of moral integrity and conscientious objection. Coltart, 54, first set up a legal aid clinic in Bulawayo in 1983, and as a lawyer handed human rights cases relating to the Gukurahundi genocide in the 1980s, and the people who the regime had ‘disappeared.’ He was first elected to parliament for the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) party in 2000, and has regularly faced harassment and intimidation. Worth adding that Coltart is white, and given Zimbabwe’s tortured racial history and its recent resettlement programme, his involvement in modern day politics is all the more striking.

Coltart is not alone amongst Mugabe’s foes in joining a power-sharing coalition with the President’s Zanu PF party. Notably, MDC leader Morgan Tsvangirai has been Prime Minister since 2009, despite being arrested and beaten by Mugabe loyalists. Coltart is now going further. Having once led the calls for global sanctions against Mugabe’s regime, he is now travelling the world to seek their rollback. Why?

Coltart takes a deep breath before explaining himself. He knows how perverse it sometimes feels to be sleeping with someone globally seen as odious, as Mugabe is, and he has only slightly tempered his language about his president since joining the government. “Mugabe has done some pretty horrendous things, including to me personally,” he says. “My understanding of his culpability has not changed. But if we are to take the country forward, prevent hundreds of thousands of people leaving or dying, we need to work with him. I understand your skepticism. But there is no viable alternative.”

For more than a decade, the West has issued howls of outrage at Mugabe’s flagrant disregard for basic principles of democracy and human rights. But there is not a snowball’s chance in Harare of any Libyan-style intervention in Zimbabwe. “Mugabe is not just going to hand over power,” Coltart says. What opponents can do, he argues, is plan for the post-Mugabe era. With the old tyrant now aged 88, this could begin soon.

Coltart draws in historical comparisons to show why it might prove worthwhile to hold his nose and shake the hands of his former nemesis. An obvious example is South Africa, where Nelson Mandela and the ANC negotiated with the National Party, eventually securing a full and peaceful transfer of power. “It was a painstaking process that lasted four years, but it succeeded,” he says. And he looks further back to the Second World War, to show another unlikely alliance forged for the greater good. “The bottom line is that Churchill and Roosevelt had to negotiate with Stalin to bring a war to an end,” he says. Even today, a similar delicate dance is being conducted with the unpalatable Burmese regime: Washington has re-established ties in step with the generals as they open up the country to limited democracy.

While sanctions once shamed the country, they are now counterproductive, Coltart says. “Sanctions have got beyond their sell by date,” he says. “They have always been more symbolic. The reality is that Zimbabwe had already been suspended from the World Bank because of their arrears. Even if these sanctions are lifted, it won’t change the arrears.” The travel bans on Mugabe and his cronies have also been circumvented; as Coltart notes, Mugabe often comes to New York. “And so much notice was given on the asset freezes that they had time to move them out,” he adds.

The point of the sanctions, Coltart says, was to stigmatize those involved in gross human rights abuses. “It was why I supported them, as they were acting with impunity,” he says. “And if they are lifted, the stigma will not go away. So the sanctions have achieved their purpose.”

Ironically, Coltart says, the sanctions are now serving the hardliners around Mugabe, who use them as an excuse to explain why their policies have created turmoil. “If you remove the sanctions, you remove the excuses,” he says. “It won’t change much on the ground. And it will move the process ahead.”

There is also real change in Zimbabwe, Coltart says, which deserves support. “The international community forgets how bad we were in 2008,” he says. Back then, Zimbabwe was on the brink of implosion with hyperinflation, mass emigration, and a cholera epidemic. Now inflation is down to 4%, the country has reopened hospitals and clinics, beaten the cholera, and brought clean water to people in cities. When Coltart took over as Education Minister, the schooling system was facing total collapse, with just 26 teaching days in 2008, but he has re-established the teaching year.

“The country would have become a failed state like Liberia and Somalia,” he says. “We know there is not going to be a deep rooted change while he is there. But that assumes there has not been any improvement on the ground. By every objective indicator, thing have improved since 2008.”

Even if he does not get a change in policy on sanctions, Coltart hopes he will at least get a change in engagement and support of education. He notes that Germany has put $18 million into Zimbabwe’s education transition fund, Finland $10 million, the UK £38 million, but only $1 million from the US.

Coltart says that it is misleading to see Mugabe as a tinpot tyrant in same vein as Sacha Baron Cohen’s recent movie The Dictator. “It is wrong to compare him to Hilter and Pol Pot,” he says, drawing a psychological picture of the man who led Zimbabwe’s independence movement in the 1970s against the white supremacist rule of its predecessor, Rhodesia. “Although he has been responsible for crimes against humanity, he has not killed millions. He is a very complex character, but wrong to paint him as a doddering old sadist. He is a calculating ideologue, rooted in the battle to defeat Ian Smith and Rhodesia.”

The country is still in a precarious position, and thugs are still in authority, Coltart warns. “I’m not naïve person who thinks leopards can change their spots,” he says. For example, he does not expect the next parliamentary and presidential elections, due next year, to be peaceful, free, and fair. He also notes that earlier this year, one of his closest friends, human rights activist Paul Chizuze, disappeared without trace. More recently, the nuts on Coltart’s car wheels were loosened, and the wheel came off. “It could well have been sabotage,” he says. “I come into this debate with the clear understanding that there are still dark forces utterly determined to subvert the process, and use the same tactics they have used for 30 years. But by disengaging, it only benefits the hardliners.”

As for Mugabe, “He is 88 years old, he is old and tiring.” But, Coltart notes, whether we like him or not, he is still revered by about a third of Zimbabweans. “In Africa, he remains a symbol of overthrowing white rule. We have to grasp the harsh practical reality. We have to accept we need him,” he says.