Friday 17 July 2015

Itai Dzamara's family breathes fire at President Mugabe

THE family of Itai Dzamara yesterday described President Robert Mugabe's position on the missing activist as "irresponsible and unfortunate."

It said, despite all the statements and theories peddled by the government and Zanu PF against their relative, they consider the State as their "primary suspect".

Mugabe's spokesperson George Charamba was recently quoted saying, the government could not be blamed for the Occupy Africa Unity Square (an anti-Mugabe lobby group) leader's disappearance.

Charamba dismissed calls for Mugabe to "pronounce himself on the matter as pre-eminently political and thus not worthy of his attention".

But Dzamara's brother Patson described Charamba's utterances as irresponsible and unfortunate.
"For the President to make such statements is irresponsible and unfortunate. As a leader he must be concerned. As far as the coverage in the State media is concerned, we are not surprised. Initially, they wanted to ignore this issue, but because the pressure has increased they are doing their best to cover up," Patson said.

"In a way, regardless of the negative tangent they obviously assume, keeping this matter in the conversation goes a long way in establishing the truth. So it's actually a welcome development. We, however, remain adamant that the State is our primary suspect".

State media yesterday dedicated acres of space trying to show that police had done thorough investigations on the matter and trying to link his disappearance to a concocted MDC-T strategy meant to discredit the State and stir up emotions among citizens.

Dzamara disappeared four months ago in Harare with witnesses saying he was bundled into an Isuzu truck by unknown armed assailants.

The MDC-T, the family and civic society organisations suspected the involvement of State agents in his abduction. Efforts to locate his whereabouts have been fruitless in the days and months that followed including a prayer meeting organised last week seeking divine intervention.

MDC-T leader Morgan Tsvangirai, who was at the prayer meeting along with former war veterans' leader Jabulani Sibanda, former Zanu PF Mashonaland West chairman Temba Mliswa and thousands of Zimbabweans called on the State to bring back Dzamara "dead or alive."
#BBID

Sunday 28 June 2015

Mnangagwa leave us alone!!!!

On Friday 26 of June 2015 Mnangagwa is said to have blasted the so called divisive forces who want to divide his beloved country Zimbabwe while he was addressing a constitution advocacy meeting in Masvingo. The Chronicle on Saturday 27 of June carried a story on its second page which had a headline: MNANGAGWA BLASTS DIVISIVE FORCES, where it singled out our Party Mthwakazi Republic Party (MRP) as the chief culprit of secession which is why we have been forced to respond to set the record straight. The story has been repeated on Zbc news and elsewhere in the press.

First and fore most we are not a secessionist Party we have no plans what so ever to divide Zimbabweans, we don't have any  intention to divide the Country on tribal lines in fact we are not tribalists as claimed by our detractors . Mthwakazi is not a tribe but a Nation, Secondly Mthwakazi Republic Party is not led by Mr Paul Siwela a respected Mthwakazian but it is led by Mr Mqondisi Moyo. What is true about us is the fact that we are working towards the restoration of Mthwakazi State, It must be noted and we emphasise we are not secessionists but we want to restore what was there before. It is our constitutional right to belong to our party of choice even the Zimbabwean Constitution allows us to do so, also according to the African charter and the UN Resolution on Human Rights we have a right to belong.

We get worried as party leadership; we get very worried when people like Mnangagwa begin to publicly warn us on the other hand we are happy that the VP of Zimbabwe has actually acknowledged us and our efforts to restore our State Mthwakazi. What we are worried about though is that a turf warning coming from one who is the chief architect of Gukurahundi genocide and is said to be next President of Zimbabwe we are concerned as a party that another version of Gukurahundi maybe on its way to silence us once and for all otherwise where is this unprovoked threat coming from? This is the same Mnangagwa and his party Zanu pf who created the 1979 Grand plan which was meant to destroy Mthwakazian people who when addressing people in Masvingo yesterday said it was normal to sometimes clash and have differences. Is it normal to kill over 30 000 people because they belong to a different tribe? Is it normal to kill people and then go to the press and announce that no one should talk about its now water under the bridge? Is it normal to deny the people the right to mourn their loved ones whom you have killed? Mnangagwa claims that Zimbabwe is a Unitary State nobody disputes that all we want is our own period. The lancaster house constitution was used in Zimbabwe since 1979 against Mthwakazi now they want to continue in that path we say no to that Zimbabwe constitution is not Mthwakazi's constitution hence the denial by the Zimbabwean government to implement the devolution of power concept which stands to benefit the people of Mthwakazi more, hence the continue of looting and plundering of our God given resources.

As a Party we are aware that Zanu pf may begin to use violence  to silence us as it always does that's why we are scared but at this stage we are not going back on our demand for Self- determination Mnangagwa must begin to see that we are another generation we don't belong to his generation that means we are different from our fore fathers and our fathers we view the world differently if he(Mnangagwa) can't resolve the Mthwakazi question he must therefore be prepared to leave the burden to Mnangagwa junior because we are here to stay and we mean business we are not going to be intimidated into submission. Like we have always explained we intend to achieve the Restoration of our fore fathers State peacefully and that peace can only be guaranteed by Mnangagwa Himself together with his Party.  

If Mnangagwa is not scared of something that he himself created why is he warning us against exercising our Constitutional rights Mnangagwa must know that since 1893 when Mthwakazi was raided of course with the help of the batsmen from Mashonaland and our King disappeared we have never been given an opportunity to vote for or against being united with Mashonaland in fact we have been Ruled by Conquest since then first by Britain who later transferred the order of council's satanic and barbaric policy to Zimbabwe who have continued and have been worse of in dealing with us their divisiveness to us is worse than that of the British in many ways.....

Saturday 13 June 2015

National Prayer day for activist Itai Dzamara

tomorrow marks 100 days since Occupy Africa Unity Square activist Itai Dzamara was abducted by the dreaded CIO agents and tomorrow a prayer meeting has been organised and speakers will include church leaders, political leaders and civil society leaders at the Zimbabwe Grounds from 9am. Lets continue putting pressure on this evil regime until they release Itai Dzamara, we are the people #BBID

Monday 18 May 2015

Mugabe's Gukurahundi role exposed

PRESIDENT Robert Mugabe, some of his ministers and senior army officials were closely involved in the planning and execution of the Gukurahundi massacres, new research and recently declassified Australian government documents have revealed.

The revelations are likely to embarrass the ruling Zanu PF government at a time the emotive issue has creeped back into the spotlight.

Australian embassy dispatches to Canberra from 1983 reveal how Zanu PF ministers, Vice-President Emmerson Mnangwagwa, Defence minister Sydney Sekeramayi and the late Eddison Zvobgo were aware of the 1980s massacres, with the aim to finish off Zapu and create a one-party state.

The Australian cables reveal that embassy officials had met with former Midlands governor Cephas Msipa, who revealed that Zanu PF ministers had told him that Gukurahundi massacres had been planned by the party’s central committee.

“He (Msipa) had talked earlier with Legal and Parliamentary Affairs minister and later lunched with him,” the embassy dispatch reads.
“Zvobgo told him of the decision of the central committee that there had to be a massacre of the Ndebeles.”

Msipa is said to have reiterated the word “massacre”, revealing that the killings — which Mugabe has only referred to as a “moment of madness” — were carefully planned and executed.

Once the killings started, Zvobgo is said to have told Msipa that Perrence Shiri, then commander of the Fifth Brigade and now boss of the Air Force of Zimbabwe, said “politicians should leave it to us”.

Sekeramayi, who was Defence minister, on the other hand, is said to have told Msipa that he had preferred a political solution to the Matabeleland situation.

The latest revelations sharply contradict what Vice-President Phelekezela Mphoko has said recently that Gukurahundi was a Western conspiracy, but rather point to the fact that the President knew what was happening and approved of it.

“Another member of the High Commission was told by Msipa at the residence (presumably the residence of the High Commission) on 5 March that Sekeramayi had also said that not only was Mugabe fully aware of what was going on — what the Fifth Brigade was doing was under Mugabe’s explicit orders,” the cables read.

The former Midlands governor then said he was having a crisis of conscience, as he remained in government, yet the authorities were responsible for the killings in Matabeleland South, which then were in their nascent stages.

A historian and author, Stuart Doran, points out that Msipa was close to Mugabe because of their shared history and his account to the Australians could be credible.

“Msipa was a credible witness in view of his amicable relationship with Mugabe,” Doran writes.

“He had, for instance, shared a room with Mugabe for two years during their earlier career as teachers.

“Msipa had also welcomed Mugabe into his home when the latter returned from Ghana in 1960 and joined the struggle against white rule.

“Between 1980 and 1982, when tensions were rising between Zapu and Zanu, Msipa had served as a regular go-between and had spoken to Mugabe often.”

In discussions with Western representatives, Sekeramayi also revealed that the killings in Matabeleland and Midlands were not an accident and were planned.

“Sekeramayi was more circumspect in direct discussions with Western representatives, but nevertheless made clear that the massacres were no accident,” Doran writes.

“The ‘army had had to act hard’, he told the British defence attaché, ‘but . . . the situation was now under control’.

“Later, Sekeramayi admitted to the British High Commissioner that ‘there had been atrocities’.”

During the killings, Shiri is said to have consulted extensively with now Zimbabwe Defence Forces Commander General Constantine Chiwenga, then commander of 1 Brigade in Bulawayo.

“Chiwenga’s unit also provided a range of practical assistance, including logistical support for 5 Brigade and a base from which Shiri’s men operated when they made punitive raids on Bulawayo’s townships,” Doran writes.

“Together with other former Zanla cadres, who shared common experiences and common hatreds, the pair was intimately involved in an apparent attempt to obliterate the Ndebele from the face of the earth.

“The first six weeks of 5 Brigade’s pogrom were genocidal in their intensity, but the documentary record shows that an order was given to curtail this phase after news of the massacres began to leak to the outside world.

“However, the killings did not end, but were instead scaled back and conducted in a more covert manner.”

Doran, who is set to publish a book based on new information on Zimbabwe titled Kingdom, Power, Glory: Mugabe, Zanu and the Quest for Supremacy, 1960–87, also questions why Western governments did so little to curtail the killings, but insists blame for the massacre lies solely with Mugabe.

“New documentary material underlines once more that post-independence Zimbabwe’s greatest crimes and deepest wounds lie squarely at the feet of Mugabe and Zanu PF,” he says.

“The killings were a thoroughly internal affair. They were neither provoked nor sustained by outsiders.

“From start to finish, the atrocities were driven from the top by Zanu PF in pursuit of specific political objectives.”

Msipa yesterday refused to comment on the latest revelations or talk about Gukurahundi, saying the matter was too sensitive .

Open discussion of the Gukurahundi massacres in the country remains heresy, with the government recently wheeling out analysts and officials who deny the atrocities.

Mphoko is the most senior member of government to try and absolve Mugabe of any involvement in the massacres, although the latest revelations are likely to leave him and his party with egg on their collective faces.

Mugabe, in the 1980s, set up a commission of inquiry into the killings, ostensibly to assuage Western diplomats who expressed uneasiness at the massacres, but the findings of the commission are yet to be made public, three decades later.

Gukurahundi!!!!!!! we'll never forget

Mugabe's Gukurahundi role exposed

PRESIDENT Robert Mugabe, some of his ministers and senior army officials were closely involved in the planning and execution of the Gukurahundi massacres, new research and recently declassified Australian government documents have revealed.

The revelations are likely to embarrass the ruling Zanu PF government at a time the emotive issue has creeped back into the spotlight.

Australian embassy dispatches to Canberra from 1983 reveal how Zanu PF ministers, Vice-President Emmerson Mnangwagwa, Defence minister Sydney Sekeramayi and the late Eddison Zvobgo were aware of the 1980s massacres, with the aim to finish off Zapu and create a one-party state.

The Australian cables reveal that embassy officials had met with former Midlands governor Cephas Msipa, who revealed that Zanu PF ministers had told him that Gukurahundi massacres had been planned by the party’s central committee.

“He (Msipa) had talked earlier with Legal and Parliamentary Affairs minister and later lunched with him,” the embassy dispatch reads.
“Zvobgo told him of the decision of the central committee that there had to be a massacre of the Ndebeles.”

Msipa is said to have reiterated the word “massacre”, revealing that the killings — which Mugabe has only referred to as a “moment of madness” — were carefully planned and executed.

Once the killings started, Zvobgo is said to have told Msipa that Perrence Shiri, then commander of the Fifth Brigade and now boss of the Air Force of Zimbabwe, said “politicians should leave it to us”.

Sekeramayi, who was Defence minister, on the other hand, is said to have told Msipa that he had preferred a political solution to the Matabeleland situation.

The latest revelations sharply contradict what Vice-President Phelekezela Mphoko has said recently that Gukurahundi was a Western conspiracy, but rather point to the fact that the President knew what was happening and approved of it.

“Another member of the High Commission was told by Msipa at the residence (presumably the residence of the High Commission) on 5 March that Sekeramayi had also said that not only was Mugabe fully aware of what was going on — what the Fifth Brigade was doing was under Mugabe’s explicit orders,” the cables read.

The former Midlands governor then said he was having a crisis of conscience, as he remained in government, yet the authorities were responsible for the killings in Matabeleland South, which then were in their nascent stages.

A historian and author, Stuart Doran, points out that Msipa was close to Mugabe because of their shared history and his account to the Australians could be credible.

“Msipa was a credible witness in view of his amicable relationship with Mugabe,” Doran writes.

“He had, for instance, shared a room with Mugabe for two years during their earlier career as teachers.

“Msipa had also welcomed Mugabe into his home when the latter returned from Ghana in 1960 and joined the struggle against white rule.

“Between 1980 and 1982, when tensions were rising between Zapu and Zanu, Msipa had served as a regular go-between and had spoken to Mugabe often.”

In discussions with Western representatives, Sekeramayi also revealed that the killings in Matabeleland and Midlands were not an accident and were planned.

“Sekeramayi was more circumspect in direct discussions with Western representatives, but nevertheless made clear that the massacres were no accident,” Doran writes.

“The ‘army had had to act hard’, he told the British defence attaché, ‘but . . . the situation was now under control’.

“Later, Sekeramayi admitted to the British High Commissioner that ‘there had been atrocities’.”

During the killings, Shiri is said to have consulted extensively with now Zimbabwe Defence Forces Commander General Constantine Chiwenga, then commander of 1 Brigade in Bulawayo.

“Chiwenga’s unit also provided a range of practical assistance, including logistical support for 5 Brigade and a base from which Shiri’s men operated when they made punitive raids on Bulawayo’s townships,” Doran writes.

“Together with other former Zanla cadres, who shared common experiences and common hatreds, the pair was intimately involved in an apparent attempt to obliterate the Ndebele from the face of the earth.

“The first six weeks of 5 Brigade’s pogrom were genocidal in their intensity, but the documentary record shows that an order was given to curtail this phase after news of the massacres began to leak to the outside world.

“However, the killings did not end, but were instead scaled back and conducted in a more covert manner.”

Doran, who is set to publish a book based on new information on Zimbabwe titled Kingdom, Power, Glory: Mugabe, Zanu and the Quest for Supremacy, 1960–87, also questions why Western governments did so little to curtail the killings, but insists blame for the massacre lies solely with Mugabe.

“New documentary material underlines once more that post-independence Zimbabwe’s greatest crimes and deepest wounds lie squarely at the feet of Mugabe and Zanu PF,” he says.

“The killings were a thoroughly internal affair. They were neither provoked nor sustained by outsiders.

“From start to finish, the atrocities were driven from the top by Zanu PF in pursuit of specific political objectives.”

Msipa yesterday refused to comment on the latest revelations or talk about Gukurahundi, saying the matter was too sensitive .

Open discussion of the Gukurahundi massacres in the country remains heresy, with the government recently wheeling out analysts and officials who deny the atrocities.

Mphoko is the most senior member of government to try and absolve Mugabe of any involvement in the massacres, although the latest revelations are likely to leave him and his party with egg on their collective faces.

Mugabe, in the 1980s, set up a commission of inquiry into the killings, ostensibly to assuage Western diplomats who expressed uneasiness at the massacres, but the findings of the commission are yet to be made public, three decades later.

Gukurahundi!!!!!!! we'll never forget

Mugabe’s complicity in Gukurahundi


THE Ndebele people of western Zimbabwe have a proverb, walutheza olule nkume, which, roughly translated, means “A person picked up firewood in which there was a scorpion, and now the scorpion is out to bite him.” An English equivalent would be: “The chickens have come home to roost.”

BY STUART DORAN

Yet when it comes to justice for Zimbabweans who have suffered under the heel of President Robert Mugabe since 1980, the saying rings hollow. And none yearn for justice more than the Ndebele. From January 1983, a campaign of genocide was waged against them, an outbreak of obscene violence that remains the darkest period in the country’s post-independence history, notwithstanding the bloody notoriety of the last decade-and-a-half.

But the truth, at least, is now coming to light. Thousands of historical documents that expose the perpetrators are now becoming available in a raft of foreign archival collections. The documents are wide-ranging and include, among others, diplomatic correspondence, intelligence assessments and raw intelligence garnered by spies recruited from within the Zimbabwean government.

These papers—augmented by the testimony of Zimbabwean witnesses finding courage in old age—substantiate what survivors and scholars have always suspected but never been able to validate: Mugabe, then Prime Minister, was the prime architect of mass killings that were well-planned and systematically executed.

The massacres were closely associated with an effort by Mugabe’s Zanu PF party to eliminate opposition groups in the aftermath of Zimbabwe’s independence. Zapu, a party led by nationalist rival Joshua Nkomo, represented the main obstacle to that objective. Given that Zapu enjoyed overwhelming support among Ndebele, the Ndebele as a whole came to be seen as an impediment. In the words of Mugabe, the people of Matabeleland needed to be “re-educated”.

The little that Mugabe has said since the 1980s on this taboo subject has been a typical mixture of obfuscation and denial. The closest he has come to admitting any form of official responsibility was at the death of Nkomo, when he remarked that the early 1980s was a “moment of madness”—an ambivalent statement that perhaps reflected a fear of ngozi (avenging spirits) more than anything else and one he has not repeated. More recently, he blamed the killings on armed bandits who were allegedly coordinated by Zapu (the original smokescreen) along with occasional indiscipline among soldiers of the army’s North Korean-trained 5 Brigade.

In the documents, his co-conspirators tell a different story. In doing so, they controvert ill-founded theories that Mugabe was poorly informed about the activities of errant subordinates.

By March 1983, when news of the atrocities had leaked, prompting Western ambassadors and others to ask awkward questions, government ministers who were overseeing the operation quickly pointed to Mugabe.

Sydney Sekeramayi, the minister in Mugabe’s office with responsibility for Defence, was one. In a conversation with Cephas Msipa, one of the few remaining Zapu ministers of what had been a government of national unity, Sekeramayi said that “not only was Mugabe fully aware of what was going on—what the 5th Brigade was doing was under Mugabe’s explicit orders”. Msipa later relayed this discussion to the Australian High Commission, which in turn reported it to headquarters in Canberra.

Msipa was a credible witness in view of his amicable relationship with Mugabe. He had, for instance, shared a room with Mugabe for two years during their earlier career as teachers. Msipa had also welcomed Mugabe into his home when the latter returned from Ghana in 1960 and joined the struggle against white rule. Between 1980 and 1982, when tensions were rising between Zapu and Zanu, Msipa had served as a regular go-between and had spoken to Mugabe often.

He continued to do so during the killings. Within Zapu, Msipa, a Shona-speaker, had consistently advocated amalgamation with Zanu, a line that had attracted the ire of Ndebele-speaking colleagues. He was, therefore, considerably more sympathetic to Zanu and its leader than most in Zapu. And yet, after speaking to Sekeramayi and others in Zanu, he was convinced (as he told the Australians) that “the Prime Minister was right behind what had been happening in Matabeleland”. He added that he had never before had such a “crisis of my conscience” about remaining in government.

Sekeramayi was more circumspect in direct discussions with Western representatives, but nevertheless made clear that the massacres were no accident. The “army had had to act ‘hard’”, he told the British defence attaché, “but … the situation was now under control”. Later, Sekeramayi admitted to the British High Commissioner that “there had been atrocities”.

Meanwhile, Msipa talked to other members of Zanu who revealed that the killings were not simply the whim of a small coterie, but the result of a formal and broad-based decision by the leadership of Zanu PF.

Eddison Zvobgo, a member of Zanu’s 20-member policymaking body, spoke of a “decision of the Central Committee that there had to be a ‘massacre’ of Ndebeles”. That statement squared precisely with 5 Brigade’s ethnocentric modus operandi. Mugabe’s heir apparent, the current Vice- President, Emmerson Mnangagwa, was a member of the Central Committee. But so, too, were others who have subsequently developed a reputation for moderation, not least because of their latter-day rivalry with the hated Mnangagwa. Former Vice-President Joice Mujuru heads that list.

The army commanders who directed the killings, many of whom still retain key positions in a security sector that underwrites the regime, are also shown to have been eager accomplices. Zvobgo commented that the first commander of 5 Brigade, Perence Shiri, had said the “politicians should leave it to us” with regard to “settling things in Matabeleland”.

Shiri is now the head of Zimbabwe’s air force.

Other evidence demonstrates that Shiri worked closely with many former members of Mugabe’s guerilla army, Zanla, notwithstanding a myth that 5 Brigade operated separately from the rest of the army. Those who assisted Shiri included the now chief of Zimbabwe’s defence forces, Constantine Chiwenga, who – incredibly – was this month awarded a doctorate in ethics by the University of KwaZulu–Natal. During the killings, Shiri frequently consulted with Chiwenga, who was then using the nom de guerre Dominic Chinenge and was head of 1 Brigade based in Bulawayo. Chiwenga’s unit also provided a range of practical assistance, including logistical support for 5 Brigade and a base from which Shiri’s men operated when they made punitive raids on Bulawayo’s townships.

Together with other former Zanla cadres who shared common experiences and common hatreds, the pair were intimately involved in an apparent attempt to obliterate the Ndebele from the face of the earth.
The first six weeks of 5 Brigade’s pogrom were genocidal in their intensity, but the documentary record shows that an order was given to curtail this phase after news of the massacres began to leak to the outside world. However, the killing did not end, but was instead scaled-back and conducted in a more covert manner.

Estimates of the death toll are frequently put at 20 000, a figure first mooted by Nkomo when the campaign was still underway. But on-the-ground surveys have been piecemeal and vast areas of Matabeleland remain under-researched. Fear and the death of many witnesses provide further challenges.

A forensically-accurate number will never be possible, yet it seems likely that the standard estimate is too conservative. Oral testimony from Zimbabweans who were in key government positions during the 1980s disinters a host of killings that were previously unknown. Cumulatively, this testimony suggests that the breadth of the violence and the extent of official involvement have been significantly underestimated.

Observers have always wondered how much of this was known to Western governments—and what they did about it. It is clear that they knew a great deal, even if some of the detail remained obscure. It is also clear that the polite questions asked by diplomats were—along with courageous representations by churchmen and their allies in Zimbabwe—pivotal to the government’s decision to reduce the violence. Up to that point, there was no indication that the genocidal force of the massacres would be curtailed.

Nevertheless, Western governments did little once the massacres were brought down to a lower, but still savage, intensity. Mugabe was quick to recognise the limits of Western censure, continuing with the campaign in Matabeleland North during the remainder of 1983 and re-deploying 5 Brigade further south in 1984.
It is a fact that the Western response to Mugabe’s genocidal violence toward black countrymen in the 1980s was a pale shadow of the reaction to his attack on white farmers in 2000. Many Ndebele remain bitter about this inconsistency.

While historians debate the dimensions of Zanu’s violence, Western policymakers and the domestic constituencies that are meant to hold them to account would do well to reflect again on the price of inconsistency in the developing world. Aside from the human cost, Western advocacy of democracy and international justice will continue to be viewed with scepticism while such glaring contradictions remain.

At the same time, an inordinate focus on the international dimensions of the Matabeleland massacres is to miss the point.

Mugabe has instinctively sought to racialise and internationalise internal controversies of which he is the principal author or to invoke the spectre of neo-colonialism in the hope of support from fellow African leaders. In a transparent attempt to emulate his master, Zimbabwe’s
Vice-President Phelekezela Mphoko recently made the absurd claim that the massacres were a “conspiracy of the West” and that Mugabe had nothing to do with them.
In Zimbabwe, history is not just written by the victors, it is written by the perpetrators and their acolytes.

Yet the new documentary material underlines once more that post-independence Zimbabwe’s greatest crimes and deepest wounds lie squarely at the feet of Mugabe and Zanu PF.
The killings were a thoroughly internal affair. They were neither provoked nor sustained by outsiders. From start to finish, the atrocities were driven from the top by Zanu PF in pursuit of specific political objectives.

Viewed across a period of several years and hundreds of files, the documents provide overwhelming evidence that—far from being a “moment of madness” in which supporters of rival parties went at each other— the massacres were but one component of a sustained and strategic effort to annihilate all political opposition within five years of independence.

Zanu leaders were determined to secure a “victory” against non-existent opposition in elections scheduled for 1985, after which there would be a “mandate” from the people to impose a one-party state.

This abhorrence of all forms of opposition—and the relentless violence with which Zanu PF pursued supremacy—also provide the key to understanding the disaster that enveloped Zimbabwe at the turn of the century. The fall of communism in the early 1990s may have eviscerated Zanu’s plans for a constitutionally-sanctioned single-party state, but the ideology remained the same.

When Morgan Tsvangirai’s Movement for Democratic Change posed a threat to Zanu’s suzerainty in 2000, Mugabe and his cohorts did not hesitate to wreak violence on the opposition and its support base, even if it meant the destruction of the economy.

It was, after all, a small step for men who had already committed genocide in defence of power.

Dr Stuart Doran is an independent historian and author of a forthcoming book based on the new documentary material—Kingdom, Power, Glory: Mugabe, Zanu and The Quest For Supremacy, 1960–87. This article originally appeared in the Daily Maverick

these murderers must be punished