Together with Presidents Olusegun Obasanjo and Bakili Muluzi of Nigeria and Malawi, I travelled to Zimbabwe recently to discuss with that government and the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) what we might do to contribute to the resolution of the problems facing this country.
Even as this was publicly communicated, there were some in our country who insisted on imposing their own agendas on us. Accordingly, they pretended to know everything about what we would say, raising unjustified expectations.
These detractors are firm in their conviction that we have some divine right to dictate to the people of Zimbabwe. They believe that if we issued some instructions to the political leaders of Zimbabwe, this leadership would obey what the baas across the Limpopo would have told them.
Our experience as a movement tells us that the solution comes from the people of Zimbabwe themselves. We will never treat Zimbabwe as the 10th province of South Africa.
We will encourage Zanu-PF and the MDC to agree on a response to their problems. The Zimbabwe leaders understand the difficult situation imposed on their people by the economic crisis that is gripping their country.
Zimbabwe would be best placed to take the difficult decisions she has to take if her leadership acted together.
The tendency among some of us, on the issue of Zimbabwe, to pose as high priests at the inquisition, hungry for the blood of the accused, as though to condemn, demonise and punish, has taken root. In this situation, as in war, the truth soon becomes a casualty.
From its very beginning as an independent country, Zimbabwe took the position that it had to address the legacy of colonialism in the socio-economic sphere. This virtually quarantined the matter of land redistribution because of agreements reached during the independence negotiations in London. These sought to counterbalance the principle of black liberation with the protection of white property, inserting into the settlement the racist notions of black majority rule and white minority rights.
Beyond this, the new state worked to advance the socio-economic interests of the majority. The government ploughed considerable resources into education with measurable successes. Similarly, significant expenditures went into the area of health.
During the fiscal year 1990/91, the civil service wage bill accounted for 16,5% of the gross domestic product (GDP). This was caused by the expansion of state services to the people and the drive to achieve equal pay for black and white civil servants. Expenditure on the social sectors during that year amounted to about 13% of the GDP.
To meet the needs of the people and alleviate poverty, the state decided to adopt measures that would keep the cost of living relatively low. In essence this was done through a system of subsidies financed through the state, which has been maintained for two decades. During 1990/91 the subsidies to the public enterprises absorbed 3,7% of Zimbabwe’s GDP.
These extraordinary expenditures could only be sustained by running a large budget deficit and through foreign borrowing. This could only mean live now, pay later!
By the end of the first decade of liberation public-sector debt stood at 90% of GDP. In year 1989/90 government interest payments comprised 6,7% of GDP. By 1987 foreign debt service payments had risen to 34% of export earnings. By the end of the first decade of independence it was clear that the growth path chosen by the Zimbabwe government was unsustainable. As early as 1984 the government had to appeal to the International Monetary Fund for assistance, resulting in a counterproductive structural adjustment programme.
Contrary to what some now claim, the economic crisis currently affecting Zimbabwe did not originate from the actions of a reckless political leadership or from corruption.
Persisting ideological blindness to this reality is evident in our own country, where some who call themselves the representatives of the poor have been seeking to oblige us to follow the same policies that led to the crisis in Zimbabwe. We have refused to and will continue to do so.
To come out of this crisis the people of Zimbabwe will have to take a lot of pain. This has been demonstrated by the increases in the price of petroleum as the government reduced the unaffordable fuel subsidy.
The longer the problems of Zim-babwe remain unresolved the more entrenched poverty will become. The longer this persists, the greater will be the degree of social instability. The more protracted this instability, the greater will be the degree of polarisation and social and political conflict.
To respond to this the state will have to emphasise issues of law and order. The more it responds in this manner, the less will it have the possibility to address anything else.
None of this will happen because there are demonic people in Harare. The internal logic of various processes in society compels all of us to be carried along by events to destinations we may not have sought.
In this regard, the people and leaders of Zimbabwe are neither more nor less human than anyone else. As has happened with us at various times, they too will have to break the cycle and the rest of us have an obligation to work with them. As patriots who occupied the same trench of struggle with the people of Zimbabwe when we battled to end white minority rule in our region and continent, we have no choice but to lend a hand to the effort of the people of Zimbabwe.
Our enduring strength derives from our humility, our respect for others … our refusal to abandon what we believe in because of battle fatigue. These we must never lose, simply because some among us tell us to act in an arrogant manner towards another person who lies by the roadside in pain, bleeding.
This is an edited version of Thabo Mbeki’s weekly letter in ANC Today, May 9 to 15