1
   

5 Million Still Need Food Aid in Zimbabwe

 
 
Thok
 
Reply Sun 27 Jun, 2004 09:45 pm
Quote:
HARARE, Zimbabwe (AP) - Nearly 5 million people will need food aid over the next year despite government claims Zimbabweans won't need such relief, a U.N.-led group said Thursday.

At least 2.3 million rural people won't have enough food either because they don't grow enough or couldn't afford to purchase enough, Zimbabwe Vulnerability Assessment Committee said in a report.

The panel, composed of U.N. agencies and aid groups, said earlier that about 2.5 million urban people will need food aid because of deepening poverty.

Officials of aid and humanitarian groups said the two assessments meant a total of about 5 million of the 12.5 million population will have to be given food help during the next several months.


SOURCE

We shouldn´t look only for Iraq, also to Africa.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,023 • Replies: 14
No top replies

 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Jun, 2004 03:54 am
Mugabe is a tyrant. But because there's no oil in Zimbabwe, they'll have to fend for themselves.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Jun, 2004 09:48 am
Was this a problem when it was called Rhodesia? If we could only figure out what's different now, we might find a solution.
0 Replies
 
patiodog
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Jun, 2004 04:20 pm
What's different now? The farmers have been displaced to Zambia (I think) and Australia, booted out so that Mugabe's cronies can live in their houses. Which is all well and good, except none of them even know how to grow food for themselves, nevermind for the entire country.
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Jun, 2004 02:44 am
patiodog hit the nail right on the head.
0 Replies
 
Rick d Israeli
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Jun, 2004 06:13 am
Point is: the Mugabe regime wanted a black Zimbabwe, with all white farmers leaving the country. He probably didn't want to realize that these white farmers were the backbone of the rural economy. Mugabe probably thinks this is a sacrifice he can make; the people of Zimbabwe surely can not make this sacrifice.
0 Replies
 
patiodog
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Jun, 2004 09:43 am
If, indeed, Mugabe has any concern whatsoever for the people of Zimbabwe.
0 Replies
 
Rick d Israeli
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Jun, 2004 09:48 am
True.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Jun, 2004 09:55 am
I just knew something was different, now.
0 Replies
 
Thok
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Aug, 2004 01:36 am
US seeks 'coalition' to force Zimbabwe regime change


Quote:
The United States has called for the building of a "coalition of the willing" to push for regime change to end the crisis in Zimbabwe. The new American ambassador to South Africa, Jendayi Frazer, said quiet diplomacy pursued by South Africa and other African countries in its dealings with the Zimbabwe president needed a review because there was no evidence it was working. She said her country would be willing to be part of a coalition if invited.

The US could not act on its own, "put the boot on the ground" and give President Robert Mugabe 48 hours to go as requested by beleaguered Zimbaweans but the US would be willing to work in a coalition with other countries to return Zimbabwe to democracy.

Ms Frazer, in a meeting with journalists in Johannesburg yesterday, said: "There is clearly a crisis in Zimbabwe and everyone needs to state that fact. The economy is in a free fall. There is a continuing repressive environment. There needs to be a return to democracy."

She said the US believed that South Africa could play a positive role in returning Zimbabwe to democracy and that it had the means to do so. "It [South Africa] has the most leverage probably of any other country in the sub-region and should therefore take a leadership role," said Ms Frazer, a protege of President George Bush's national security adviser Condoleezza Rice.

Ms Frazer's expression of a more aggressive US line towards the Mugabe regime came the day before the British Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw, arrives in South Africa for series of bilateral meetings with the Mbeki government during which he intends to raise the question of Zimbabwe.

The International Parliamentary Union (IPU) released a report yesterday accusing the regime of doing nothing to stop its violent youth militias from persecuting and torturing parliamentarians of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC).

The report was released after the IPU's three-month mission to Zimbabwe. Mr Mugabe has approved new legislation that will ban foreign non-governmental organisations working in the human rights field in Zimbabwe and the banning of foreign funding to Zimbabwean NGOs. Churches have warned the proposed law would hinder their efforts to feed hungry Zimbabweans.

Ms Frazer said it was particularly important to have Zimbabwe returned to democracy because the New Partnership for Africa Development talked about Africa's responsibility for democratic governance across the continent. "The African Union (AU) and South Africa had already accepted the responsibility to promote democracy and they should do so specifically in the case of Zimbabwe," she said.

She noted that repression in Zimbabwe had worsened and was making it impossible for the opposition to operate ahead of elections next year.

"So we have got to re-look at the approach, that South Africa is taking in terms of quiet diplomacy ... It's not evident that it's working at this point

"We have always talked about building coalitions of the willing and I, for one, believe that the coalitions of the willing are going to be the new force in global affairs ..."

Instead of quiet diplomacy, Ms Frazer suggested an open admission by regional countries that there is a crisis in Zimbabwe. That was an important first step followed by pressure to force Mr Mugabe to return the country to democracy.

The anti-Western bashing that was carried out by SADC leaders at their summit in Mauritius last week would not help change President Mugabe, she said. The Tanzanian President, Benjamin Mkapa, had lashed out at the West saying it cannot lecture democracy to African countries which it oppressed through a policy of colonialism in the first place.


finally the U.S want to intervent. Sucessfully?
0 Replies
 
Thok
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Aug, 2004 01:27 am
Zimbabwe's opposition to boycott 'unfair' elections

Quote:
Zimbabwe's main opposition party ruled out taking part in elections yesterday unless President Robert Mugabe's regime complies with tough new rules established by regional leaders to ensure free and fair polls.

The decision by the Movement for Democratic Change comes at a time of heightened repression by Mr Mugabe's government, which has introduced legislation banning all foreign charities working in the human rights field and preventing local human rights groups receiving foreign funds.

Analysts described the MDC's decision as the most important step the party has taken since it was formed in 1999. They said the MDC's participation in past elections, which have been marred by violence and ballot-rigging, had served no purpose other than to legitimise his brutal regime.

Even after Mr Mugabe closed polling stations and ordered police and troops to teargas people queueing to vote in the MDC's urban strongholds in the 2002 presidential elections, the party participated in subsequent by-elections and local government polls. But the use of violent youth militias and other state resources to harass voters worked against the MDC, which has lost five by-elections to the ruling Zanu-PF.

Regional leaders in the 14-member Southern African Development Community (SADC) meeting in Mauritius last week agreed on a new protocol on ensuring free and fair elections. The South African President Thabo Mbeki said any member violating the protocol would be expelled from the SADC - although many doubt his sincerity. Mr Mugabe accepted the protocol, albeit grudgingly. For instance the protocol requires member countries to accept election monitors and establish independent commissions to oversee the elections. Mr Mugabe has agreed to establish an "independent" commission subject to one condition - that he will appoint all its members. He has also vowed never to admit European monitors.

"Until there are tangible signs that the Zimbabwe government is prepared to enforce SADC protocols on elections, the MDC national executive has decided to suspend participation in all elections in all forms in Zimbabwe," an MDC spokesman, Paul Nyathi, said.

Two by-elections are planned next month and parliamentary elections are due in March next year. Mr Mugabe has called them "the anti-Blair elections".

Mr Nyathi said the MDC - whose leader, Morgan Tsvangirai, is awaiting the verdict of his trial on charges of treason, which carries the death penalty - would not participate in any elections "until the political space has been opened up and a legal, institutional and administrative framework for elections has been established that harnesses acceptable levels of transparency and fairness in the electoral process".

Mr Mugabe introduced draconian security laws which require the opposition to seek police permission before holding rallies. Dozens of opposition rallies have been banned over the past few months using these laws."A very brilliant move," was how the University of Zimbabwe political science professor John Makumbe described the MDC's decision to quit all polls. Mr Mugabe must now sit with the opposition to agree on acceptable conditions for free and fair elections and his regional peers must hold him accountable if he refuses, Professor Makumbe said.

The MDC said it had also withdrawn from Harare City Council, where it controls all but one of its 40-plus seats. The party has failed to run the city because Mr Mugabe fired its elected executive mayor Elias Mudzuri more than a year ago. Mr Mugabe has also been dismissing elected councillors who disagree with his policies.




Link

I suppose, that this will be have no effect. Mugabe is too wrong-headed.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Aug, 2004 08:27 pm
It wasn't that long ago that Mugabe was a darling of The Left.

To be fair though, compared to his early leadership, it does seem as if he is currently suffering from advanced syphilis.

Should America intervene in Zimbabwe?

Should America intervene in The Sudan?

Should America intervene in Burundi?

Should America intervene in Burma (Myanmar)?

Should America intervene in Cuba?

Should America intervene in North Korea?

Should America intervene in Iran?
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Sep, 2007 05:50 pm
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
It wasn't that long ago that Mugabe was a darling of The Left.

Not that long ago? That must have been close to thirty years ago, when the Zimbabweans had just ousted the racist regime of Ian Smith. I doubt you'll find much anyone, actual communists and the like aside, who treated Mugabe like a "darling" once he'd been in power five or ten years..

The ruthless military suppression of the Ndebele in the early eighties already made sure there was a generous dose of scepticism. To be fair things went relatively well - relatively in comparison with neighbouring states - for the ten years or so after that period. But once the new democratic popular opposition movement emerged in the late nineties and was increasingly brutally clamped down on by the Mugabe regime, he became an outright pariah figure among left just like the right.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Sep, 2007 05:52 pm
The reason I revived this old thread was to post this sad story - illustrating just how desperate the situation has become (or remained):

0 Replies
 
patiodog
 
  1  
Reply Sun 30 Sep, 2007 06:01 pm
Quote:


That wacky UN. What a wicked sense of humor they've got.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » 5 Million Still Need Food Aid in Zimbabwe
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/01/2024 at 05:01:32