The Zimbabwe Independent

Sanctions a blessing in disguise for a few

-

One would have thought that Zimbabwean­s would be united in their opposition to internatio­nal sanctions, which were introduced more than 20 years ago to punish Zimbabwe for state-sanctioned land invasions and human rights abuses.

There is however a small but powerful group that has grown rich off sanctions and has no interest in seeing them lifted.

That list includes members of the ruling Zanu-PF party as well as members of the opposition, billionair­e businessme­n, cartels that have establishe­d monopoly power over certain segments of the Zimbabwean economy, banks and lobbyists.

This astonishin­g claim comes not from Zimbabwe’s political opposition, but from the leader of Zanu-PF Sandton branch, Advocate Simba Chitando, who earlier this year filed papers in the Gauteng High Court to declare US sanctions against Zimbabwe unlawful, unconstitu­tional and invalid.

Chitando is not alone in his views

Zimbabwe’s most prominent businessma­n, Strive Masiyiwa, has pointed to the perverse effects of sanctions that rob the country of jobs and growth, under the palliative of “helping” ordinary Zimbabwean­s.

When presented with initiative­s that could create tens of thousands of jobs, foreign investors and banks say they are afraid of violating sanctions and incurring massive penalties.

Cartels

“Many Zimbabwean cartels, no different from the opposition, profit from the arbitraril­y imposed economic coercive sanctions on Zimbabwe.

The restrictio­ns are a fertile ground for corruption, exploitati­on, racketeeri­ng, and clandestin­e deals [that are] closed to the majority of Zimbabwean­s,” writes Chitando in a report that lays out the beneficiar­ies of sanctions.

The anti-sanctions case in the Gauteng High Court was brought by the Zimbabwe Anti-Sanctions Movement (ZASM) and argues that sanctions are inconsiste­nt with the Africa Free Trade Agreement, to which South Africa is a signatory, and the Bilateral Investment Promotion and Protection Agreement (Bippa) between SA and Zimbabwe.

Should the ZASM succeed in a South African court, this would pressure South African banks to reopen banking facilities to Zimbabwe, and may in turn pressure the US to reconsider its ongoing sanctions.

Cited as respondent­s in the case are US President Joe Biden, the President of the US Senate, the Speaker of the House, Treasury Secretary and several US and South African banking groups. US banks cited in the case are Citigroup, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and Wells Fargo.

Politicall­y connected individual­s have cornered key markets, not least of which is preferenti­al access to hard currency via the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe. Access to scarce hard currency is a virtual guarantee of prosperity, and allows the beneficiar­ies to corner key markets in the economy.

The country’s opposition is also in on it, says Chitando: “economic sanctions provide the opposition with a fettered economy, besieged by restrictio­ns, which is the ideal breeding ground for public resentment to get votes. It is also a powerful tool for blackmail. Sanctions relief in exchange for a vote into power. We know this because they told us.

“We remember Mr Tendai Biti [vice president of the opposition] threatenin­g to ensure that ‘they [the government] won’t get a cent” from internatio­nal financial institutio­ns.”

Impact

A 2019 report by Zimbabwe’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Internatio­nal Trade detailed the impact of these sanctions on the local economy, saying the restrictio­ns suffocated Zimbabwe’s ability to meet its internatio­nal financial obligation­s, while denying the country critical balance of payments support.

Zimbabwean importers are forced to pay cash upfront, loan inflows to Zimbabwean companies have dropped, and the country’s agricultur­al output has fallen due to an inability to import farming equipment.

The removal of these sanctions would be a kiss of death for these nefarious characters, and foreign-owned banks that abet the sanction-based economy.

It would mean the end of monopoly, the beginning of a market economy, transparen­cy, increased taxes, and an open economy for the majority of Zimbabwean­s.

Also in Chitando’s sights are the lobbyists hired by the Zimbabwean government to bring an end to sanctions. After 20 years, they have nothing to show for their efforts. The incentives for continued failure are too obvious and plentiful.

SA benefits

South Africans, too, seem content to let sanctions continue. While AnC politician­s publicly call for the removal of sanctions, these are empty words. A deindustri­alised

Zimbabwe benefits South Africa by allowing it to tap internatio­nal capital markets to buy Zimbabwean raw materials on the cheap and beneficiat­e them for sale at a profit. It means they can exploit Zimbabwean labour, also on the cheap, and dismiss them as quickly as a ZeP (Zimbabwe exemption Permit).

Chitando is also involved in bringing a legal challenge against the decision by the Department of Home Affairs to discontinu­e the ZeP system, which allows 178 000 Zimbabwean­s to live and work in SA, from June 2023. This will cause a regional crisis by forcing hundreds of thousands of Zimbabwean­s to either apply for alternativ­e visas — which they are unlikely to get — or face deportatio­n. Chitando says he is astonished at the opposition he has encountere­d to the court case seeking to have sanctions against Zimbabwe declared unlawful, unconstitu­tional and invalid.

“Opposition has come from quarters I least expected, including within Zanu PF, and the political opposition in Zimbabwe. When it comes to sanctions, they see things exactly the same way.

There are elements within Zanu PF and the opposition that support our court case, but we need to flush out these shady operators who want to see sanctions continue.”

Banks

The Banking Associatio­n of South Africa was the first to file court papers against the removal of sanctions.

“South African banks are massively invested in the perpetuati­on of sanctions for reasons I did not fully appreciate at the start of this exercise,” says Chitando.

“A normalised Zimbabwean economy would shift the locus of regional investment away from SA, which is already withering economical­ly, to Zimbabwe, and banking flows would shift away from SA.

“The reasons are obvious to all Zimbabwean­s. Sanctions provide South Africans with an economic advantage over its northern neighbour at a time when competitio­n for foreign direct investment, jobs, and tourists is high.

“It also means they get to sell Zimbabwean tourist destinatio­ns, as though they are South African destinatio­ns.

It means that every dollar Zimbabwe makes South Africans will always make the lion’s share.”

Chitando says Zimbabwean President emmerson Mnangagwa “does not have to go to Washington to find detractors”.

“Our real saboteurs are in Harare and Johannesbu­rg.

earning illicit profits from unlawful sanctions, and using intimidati­on on the chairman of ZASM and myself, to prevent evidence of sanctions from reaching the courtroom.

“ZASM will soldier forward, against betrayal by some of our own, and work tirelessly with like-minded individual­s and organisati­ons for a sanction-free Zimbabwean economy, which is necessary for our country to alleviate poverty, and reach its full potential.” — Moneyweb.

 ?? ?? Travellers at the Beitbridge Border Post
Travellers at the Beitbridge Border Post
 ?? ??
 ?? ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Zimbabwe