We conclude our series on the legacy of Zimbabwe liberator Robert Mugabe by examining what is for some the most contentious period of his premiership – 1980-87 (while he was prime minister to Canaan Banana’s presidency).
The two liberation forces in Zimbabwe, Zimbabwe African National Union (ZANU) and Zimbabwe African People’s Union (ZAPU), with their respective military wings Zimbabwe African National Liberation Army (ZANLA) and Zimbabwe People’s Revolutionary Army (ZIPRA) fought against the white supremacist Rhodesian regime of Ian Smith, attaining independence in 1980. At independence ZANU was headed by Robert Mugabe and ZAPU by Joshua Nkomo. Although fighting against the same enemy they did elicit support from different sources. ZANU was allied to North Koreaa, China and Romania as well as the Pan-Africanist Congress of Azania (PAC), while ZAPU was linked to Russia, Cuba, East Germany and other Pro-Soviet countries, as well as the African National Congress (ANC). (1)
There were attempts by the racist apartheid regime in South Africa to drive a wedge between ZANU and ZAPU through infiltration of the governments Central Intelligence Organisation (CIO). This included campaigns of misinformation, military attacks the training of dissidents such as “Super ZAPU.” (2) Inside the country, Ian Smith undoubtedly added to the climate of intrigue and suspicion by pledging “support” for Nkomo at the first independence elections. (3)
Other reports suggest that the white regime (and its southern kin) sought to destabilise the new government through “tribal conflict” with military assistance “enough to carry on a small war.” Moreover, major arms caches which were discovered in early 1982, and which caused the final rift between ZANU PF and ZAPU were almost certainly engineered by a south African agent Matt Calloway. (4)
The prevailing mistrust led the ZANU-PF government to form a crack force, called the Fifth Brigade in October 1981. The objective of the Fifth Brigade was for all intents and purposes was to root out dissidents. It’s legacy however, is one of pain and recriminations, known historically as the Gukurahundi (“clear the rubbish that has gathered on the dry river beds during the dry season. Hence the first rains are known as Gukurahundi”). (5)
David Gazi, one of the most insightful commentators on Zimbabwean politics, provides a nuanced overview taking into account the diverging complexities of the period, its aftermath and responses to it in his book Zimbabwe: Racism and The Land Question. We quote him at some length:
“The Fifth Brigade was a very serious error of judgement on the part of ZANU-PF. Brigade actions and gratuitous violence were sanctioned by a handful of political and military leaders for personal reasons. Many criminal acts were committed in the name of security. The Fifth Brigade used terror tactics against the civilian population in an attempt to isolate dissidents. Their mission was to cleanse the countryside of all anti-government dissent. They very rarely engaged the armed dissidents whom they were ostensibly after…
However, it is not only pointless but suspicious to point only at the actions of the Fifth Brigade while leaving out all other atrocities committed against the people of Zimbabwe, by Ian Smith and his international white mercenaries, during the war period. The Fifth Brigade should be put beside the Grey Scouts, and the Selous Scouts and the SAS and all these units should be properly investigated and tried. Nothing less will suffice.
The opposition and some Western governments unashamedly want to use the Matebeleland Massacres for their own political ends. They are shedding crocodile tears over the matter. Perhaps they have now turned to the Matebeleland massacres because they have no other recent massacres to report. So they have dug up a very serious issue which they know nothing about and they think they can use the old Roman tactic of divide and rule…
Throughout the actions of the Fifth Brigade the British government and British press had very little to say about what was happening. It was not as if the Fifth Brigade were carrying out clandestine actions. There were road blocks everywhere and stories about what was happening in the countryside were beginning to filter into the cities. Britain-Zimbabwe relations were very good and the British had no intention of rocking the boat.
Prince Charles made a press statement at the time in which he denied there was anything untoward taking place in Zimbabwe.
As the crisis deepened, Nkomo was hunted down and one of his bodyguards was killed when ZANU agents went after Nkomo at his Pelandaba residence in Bulawayo. This direct attempt on Zimbabwe’s founding father did not warrant a mention in much of the Western press. Joshua Nkomo, after more than 30 years at the head of the nationalist movement, was forced to escape during the night and crossed into Botswana on foot.
The Botswana government received him warmly and gave him refuge and accommodated him like a visiting dignitary. They then facilitated his onward journey to London. The Western media again remained tight-lipped.
In London Nkomo met with a cool reception. He appealed to his long time “friend” Tiny Rowland the London Rhodesia (Lonrho) Company boss. Tiny Rowland paid for hotel accommodation for a couple of weeks then he asked Nkomo to move on. Rowland did not with to jeopardise his Zimbabwe businesses by getting involved with Nkomo.
The British government did not want to hear because they had much more at stake than even Mr. Rowland. In the end it was left to the Zimbabwe community to look after father Zimbabwe. He spent the rest of temporary London exile in a flat.
Twenty years after the event, everybody suddenly has discovered that there were massacres in Matebeleland. And that goes for the opposition MDC Party. None of the present anti-Mugabe Western governments (except Sweden) raised any outcry over the Matebeland massacres at the time they were taking place..
Opposition party members cannot claim they did not know of Gukurahundi. They were there and it happened right under their noses. They accuse President Mugabe of being 20 years too late over the land question. It has taken 20 years to voice their opposition to the Fifth Brigade. They too are twenty years too late. In fact many former students at the University of Zimbabwe – the intellectual bedrock of the MDC – confess that they approved of the actions of the Fifth Brigade because they accuse ZIPRA of having massacred ZANLA cadres at Entumbane…
Right up to the mid 1990s, President Mugabe had the support of a sizable majority, both in parliament and in the country at large. He achieved his two thirds majority in parliament long after the Matebeleland massacres. That is an interesting fact. President Mugabe did not become unpopular in Mashonaland because of the actions of the Fifth Brigade. If anything, his popularity rose because there were many within the capital city Harare – now the bedrock of the opposition MDC – who cheered the actions of the Fifth Brigade. Now the same people claim to have found common cause with the victims of Gukurahundi.
One has to keep asking why has the opposition brought up the issue of Matebeleland now when throughout the Fifth Brigade operations they supported the government? The leader of the opposition, Morgan Tsvangirai, stated during a British television interview that the president was “alright up to 1995”. In other words, everything that he had done up till then (including the Fifth Brigade into Matebeleland) met with the opposition leader’s approval at the time.
Concerns over Matebeleland are therefore not genuine. Add to this the rising chorus coming from the West that the problems of Zimbabwe are all due to Mugabe, and one is forced to the uncomfortable conclusion that there is a concerted effort to recolonise Zimbabwe. The people of Zimbabwe are being promised that everything will fall into place when Mugabe goes.
During the Fifth Brigade incursions into Matebeleland Western interests were not under threat. The only farms that were confiscated during this period were those belonging to ZAPU cadres – farms that had been bought with the pooled stipends that the ex-combatants received from the UN…
It must be remembered that prior to 1998 price rise demonstrations in Harare, the government had won three democratic elections. At one point it even mustered a two-thirds majority in parliament. This is the magic figure this is required in order to change the constitution. ZANU-PF managed this after the Matebeleland massacres…
In 1989 President Mugabe was honoured by an American organisation for his efforts in making the country self-sufficient in food. He was handed an award of US$ 100,000 at the Commonwealth Institute in London. He was still a rising star in the eyes of the West. 1989 was 2 years after the conclusion of the Fifth Brigade actions in Matebeleland. In 1994, 7 years after the Fifth Brigade actions, Mugabe was made an Honorary Knight Grand Cross of the Most Honourable Order of Bath by the Queen…
Margaret Thatcher made an official visit to Zimbabwe, after the Matebeleland killings, and she was impressed with what she saw. That was the time for Western conscience to voice its displeasure if needed the Matebeleland killings caused it any moral discomfort. That it is doing so now is not only dishonest, it is despicable.
Britain and the rest of the West have demonstrably always been on the side of the white settler population and all their actions have resulted in the enrichment of white settler colonial advantage. As long as the white community was not harassed, the West was not willing to get involved in the internal affairs of a “friendly state”.
The issue of the Fifth Brigade is a very serious issue but it is an African matter which must be investigated and resolved by Africans. Likewise problems in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, in Rwanda/Burundi and anywhere else in Africa, can only ever solved by Africans. So far only the old mischief of divide and rule has been applied to the problem in vain hope of resuscitating colonialism. Efforts to re-colonise Africa (in whatever guise) must not succeed.” (6)
Following the Gukurahundi a unity accord was signed by Robert Mugabe and Joshua Nkomo on December 27th 1987 and their parties were united under the single title ZANU-PF. The accord also gave pardons to dissidents for any crimes committed. (7)
Almost ten years after the unity accord, The Catholic Commission for Justice and Peace in Zimbabwe and The Legal Resources Foundation published a report, Breaking The Silence, Building True Peace: A Report On The Disturbances In Matabeleland And The Midlands, 1980 – 1988. The 200-plus page report “does not seek to apportion blame. It merely seeks to break the silence surrounding this phase in the nation’s history, by allowing over one thousand people who have approached the report compilers in the last several years, a chance to tell the stories they want told.” The report makes a series of recommendations, (8) although the government has yet to make an official response: (9)
“1. National acknowledgement: we need the truth of what happened to be revealed, so that reconciliation can begin. There are large parts of Zimbabwe which have no idea of what happened in the western part of the country, while they were enjoying the early fruits of Independence. We therefore recommend:
• that this report be published and be made available to the public;
• that the Chihambakwe Commission report be made available to the public;
• that the Government appoints a fact-finding committee if they dispute the truth of this report;
• that nation-wide discussion across all ethnic groups be encouraged to promote reconciliation.
2. Human Rights Violators: all those who committed human rights violations, whether security forces or dissidents, are immune from prosecution because of the amnesty of 1988. However, we recommend that:
• known human rights violators should be removed from positions of authority which may enable them to violate human rights again in the future.
3. Legal Amendments: there are currently no legal mechanisms through which those who suffered from damage in the 1980s can claim compensation. The victims of the 1980s are therefore in a different position to those of the 1970s, who can claim through the War Victims Compensation Act. There are also problems surrounding birth and death certificates which arise directly from these years. At the same time, the Government undertook in its report to the United Nations in 1996 that it would pay compensation to families of persons who disappeared during the 1980s, but has yet to do so. We therefore recommend the following:
• that the Government publicise its undertaking to pay victims, as stated to the UN in 1996;
• that the Government should devise mechanisms to process claims by victims;
• that the War Victims Compensation Act should be amended to include those who suffered during the 1980s;
• that there should be an inquiry into the Births and Deaths Act to find a policy making it easier to register births and deaths for those families affected by the disturbances;
• that the Government should amend the Agricultural Finance Corporation Act to cancel debts incurred by farmers during the years of disturbance, where it can be shown that such debts were the result of human rights violations which occurred before 22 December 1987.
4. Human remains: it has been noted that there are many unmarked graves and graves of missing persons in regions affected by the disturbances. Communities need to be consulted to find out what their wishes are in respect to this issue. We therefore recommend that:
• a neutral team of anthropologists and psychologists conduct research to determine the desires of communities affected by such graves and human remains.
• Government undertake to protect such grave sites pending the outcome of this research
• Government should not hinder or prevent qualified teams from helping the process of identifying human remains and reburying them, if this is the wish of communities.
5. Health: it is clear that entire communities have suffered and are still suffering severe psychological trauma. Those who perpetrated crimes may also be suffering psychological pain as a result. Psychological healing is an essential component of reconciliation. We therefore recommend that:
• Government and donors provide the necessary financial and logistic support to enable professional teams of counsellors/psychologists/health practitioners to work in affected areas
• those non-governmental organisations already doing work in the field of psychological rehabilitation, send teams to work in affected communities forthwith The Catholic Commission for Justice and Peace in Zimbabwe & The Legal Resources Foundation
6. Communal Reparation: Reconciliation / Uxolelwano Trust: individual compensation for everyone is now an impossible task, although some could be eligible if certain laws were altered as recommended above. Government cannot afford to compensate all individually. In any case, entire communities were targeted and entire communities could begin healing if Government acknowledged their role in the suffering. Reparation to whole communities could take the form of development in strategic areas. There would need to be a body that was accountable for identifying what communities wanted and overseeing development projects, to prevent abuse of funds. We therefore recommend that:
• a trust be formed called the “Reconciliation / Uxolelwano Trust” to facilitate the process of communal reparation
7. Constitutional safe-guards: Zimbabweans need guarantees that human rights violations on such a massive scale can never take place again. We therefore recommend that:
• citizens of Zimbabwe and the Government begin a debate to consider what safeguards we need to add to the constitution to prevent human rights violations ever occurring again.
8. The Future: this report is a starting point in what should become a serious debate surrounding what happened in Zimbabwe in the 1980s and why. This will require sensitivity and restraint from all parties concerned. We therefore recommend:
• that Government, universities, churches, non-governmental organisations and others do not make inflammatory comments and instead promote sensible dialogue among all Zimbabweans.” (10)
Contemporary critics of Robert Mugabe often point to the Gukurahundi as irrefutable evidence of his tyranny, even though pre-independence atrocities tend to get less focus – perhaps subsumed in the reconciliation posture that immediately followed independence. Yet as outlined above, the European axis (the so-called “international community”) had no issues with the occurrences in Matabeleland at the time and in fact continued to heap praise on the Zimbabwe president. He also consolidated his position within the country at the ballot box following this period with successive electoral victories. However, 1987 the unity accord ostensibly didn’t satisfy everybody and in some quarters the debate continues three decades hence. For some, the current iteration of the debate is a self-serving attempt to undermine legitimate claims for land sovereignty , while for others it is a necessary focus to ensure the nation can fully heal itself. (11)
(1) D. Gazi (20 04) Zimbabwe: Racism and The Land Question. Tiger Publishing. p. 163
(2) The Catholic Commission for Justice and Peace in Zimbabwe & The Legal Resources Foundation (1997a) Breaking The Silence, Building True Peace: A Report On The Disturbances In Matabeleland And The Midlands, 1980 – 1988. CCJPZ and LRF. p. 30
(3) Gazi. p. 159
(4) Melinda Teya (19/03/15) The invisible hand behind Gukurahundi. https://www.thepatriot.co.zw/old_posts/the-invisible-hand-behind-gukurahundi/
(5) Gazi. p. 162
(6) Gazi. p. 165-174
(7) The Catholic Commission for Justice and Peace in Zimbabwe & The Legal Resources Foundation. p. 73
(8) The Catholic Commission for Justice and Peace in Zimbabwe & The Legal Resources Foundation. p. xii
(9) The Catholic Commission for Justice and Peace in Zimbabwe & The Legal Resources Foundation (1997b) Breaking The Silence, Building True Peace: A Report On The Disturbances In Matabeleland And The Midlands, 1980 – 1988 – A Summary. CCJPZ and LRF. p. 1. http://www.hrforumzim.org/publications/reports-on-political-violence/reaking-the-silence/
(10) The Catholic Commission for Justice and Peace in Zimbabwe & The Legal Resources Foundation (1997b). p. 24-5
(11) Mpiwa Mangwiro (09.04.18) How Rwanda continues to heal, 24 years after the genocide. https://city-press.news24.com/Voices/how-rwanda-continues-to-heal-24-years-after-the-genocide-20180409
we ask the question:
MUGABE: What should his legacy be? Part 3
1) What was the effect of the 1987 unity accord?
2) Did the Rhodesians and Boers play a role in the Gukurahundi?
3) Has the government responded to the Breaking The Silence report?
4) Do critics of the Gukurahundi take pre-independence atrocities as seriously?
5) What can be done, if anything, to bring closure to this issue?
6) Are there any parallels elsewhere in the Afrikan world?
Our Special Guest:
Comrade Marshall Gore: is the Chairperson of Zanu Pf Party in the United Kingdom & Europe. Cde Gore is also the current Chairman of the African Forum Scotland Southern African Division and CEO of Team Zimbabwe UK. He is a versatile Businessman with a diverse portfolio of successful businesses. Main area of business focus is The Healthcare Sector (UK) & The Petroleum Industry (Africa). Cde Gore is a well known Zimbabwe Diaspora Community Leader who has relentlessly campaigned for Diaspora inclusion in government policy formulation and development programmes in Zimbabwe. He has a passion in Sports and Philanthropy.