While there are many parts of President Obama's speech before the Ghanaian Parliment that might be lauded there is one remark concerning the current economic crisis in Zimbabwe that is false and misleading:"... the West is not responsible for the destruction of the Zimbabwean economy over the last decade... "Quiet as President Obama would like for it to be kept, the West, including the US, is most responsible for the economic debacle that exists in Zimbabwe today. On December 21, 2001, then President George Bush signed into law a bill entitled the Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act (ZDERA). First introduced in the Congress on March 8, 2001 by Republican Senator William Frist the bill was co-sponsored by the late right-wing Republican Senator Jesse Helms and then Democratic Senators, Russ Feingold, HILLARY CLINTON (now Secretary of State)and JOSEPH BIDEN (now Vice President).As stated by Bush upon signing the bill into law:"Section 4(c) of the Act purports to direct the executive branch to oppose and vote against the extension of loans or the cancellation of debt in international financial institutions unless and until I make a cetification or national interest determination. I am concerned that this provision burdens my consititutional authority in the area of foreign affairs to conduct negotiations and cast votes in international organizations. I will construe the provision as being suject to my exclusive authority to negotiate or vote in international financial institutions."Which international financial institutions was Bush referring to? Well, just take your pick:International Monetary Fund (IMF), International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, International Development Association, International Finance Corporation, Inter-American Development, Asian Development Bank, Inter-American Investment Corporation, African Development Bank, African Development Fund, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, Multilateral Investment Guaranty Agency.The Act makes clear that "Until the president [Bush then, Obama now] makes the certification described in section (d), and except as may be required to meet basic human needs for good governance, the Secretary of the Treasury shall instruct the US Executive Director to each international financial institution to oppose and vote against: (1) any extension by the respective institution of any loan, credit, or guarantee to the Government of Zimbabwe; or (2) any cancellation or reduction of indebtedness owed by the Government of Zimbabwe to the US or any international financial institution."In addition to the fiscally punitive nature of the bill, under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, a sum in the amount of $26m was made available to help fund anti-government activities against President Robert Mugabe. The Act concluded by urging Bush to begin immediate consultation with the governing bodies of the European Union, Canada, and other "appropriate" countries.In August 2001 the bill passed unaninamously in the Senate. In December of that same year the voting went as follows in the House: 396 voted Yes, 11 voted No, there were 26 abstentions. [I am still searching for the voting results of the Congressional Black Caucus.]Most importantly, where Does President Obama stand on the issue today?In early March 2009, President Obama extended sanctions (the Act) for another year. On June 12 while hosting the Prime Minister of Zimbabwe, Morgan Tsvangirai, at the White House, President Obama promised a $73m aid package to be used for education, health, and governance-related assistance.Anyone interested in truly understanding the current situation in Zimbabwe would do well to research the Lancaster House Agreement and its relationship to the land issue in that country.To sum things up consider the words of then Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney in exposing the deceitful nature of the Act:"Mr. Speaker, at the International Relations Committee meeting ..., I asked a question of my colleagues who were vociferously supporting this misdirected piece of legislation: "Can anyone explain how the people in question [Whites] who now have the land in question in Zimbabwe got title to the land?"She goes on to state that "My query was met with a deafening silence. Those who knew did not want to admit the truth and those who didn't know should have known - that the land was stolen from its indigenous peoples through the British South Africa Company and any "titles" to it were illegal and invalid. ... When we get right down to it, this legislation is nothing more than a formal declaration of United States complicity in a programme to maintain white-skin privilege. We can call it an 'incentives' bill, but that does not change its essential 'sanctions' nature. It is racist and against the interests of the masses of Zimbabweans ..." [New African Magazine, August/September 2006]REFERENCEShttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zimbabwe_Democracy_and_Economic_Recovery_Act_of_2001New African Magazine, August/September 2006, pp. 28 - 31http://www.africasia.com/newafrican/index.phphttp://gowans.wordpress.com/2009/07/17/obama%e2%80%99s-africa-speech-lies-hypocrisy-and-a-prescription-for-continued-african-dependence/
https://theblacklist.net/
Comments