The Fletcher School

Is Zimbabwe a conflict or a crisis? Human rights advocates and practitioners of international conflict resolution gathered at The Fletcher School’s Center for Human Rights and Conflict Resolution (CHRCR) on Friday November 19, 2004 to discuss joint strategies for mediating the current crisis in Zimbabwe. The facts documenting Zimbabwe’s downward spiral are staggering: 70% unemployment, a 600 % rise in inflation between November 2003 and February 2004, a sharp fall in agricultural production, thousands of displaced workers, food shortages, widespread HIV-AIDS and gross violations of human rights. If Zimbabwe is declining into a “failed state,” as Pauline Baker, President of the Fund for Peace described Friday, how does the international community intervene to help Zimbabweans help themselves?

Though present for decades, human rights abuses have increased dramatically since the political climate worsened in 2000, and Robert Mugabe and the ZANU (PF) government instituted fast-track land reform. This, according to Blair Rutherford, Anthropologist at Carleton University in Canada, sparked the violent expropriation and redistribution of land. Human rights abuses have certainly risen since fast-track land reform, but existed, everyone agreed, well before then.

Professor Hurst Hannum, academic co-director of CHRCR convened the human rights panel that included Andrea Lari from Refugees International, Archana Pyati, representing Human Rights First and Zimbabwean journalist Geoffrey Nyarota, who currently resides in the United States and is a Fellow at The Carr Center for Human Rights, at Harvard University. Nyarota confirms that human rights violations in Zimbabwe have been long in the making. Since 1983, he’s been fired three times for continuing to be an out-spoken defender of human rights and free expression, though his dismissal was always couched as necessary on the grounds of “administrative” reasons. Nyarota spoke passionately about the severity of his country’s problems; in particular, about the government’s efforts to repress information within and to limit communication beyond the borders of Zimbabwe. “No conflict resolution can exist without a favorable media environment,” said Nyarota.

The conflict resolution panel followed the lively human rights-focused discussion, highlighting what an intervention could possibly look like, and, more importantly, who currently would hold credibility to negotiate or intervene in Zimbabwe’s crisis. Joining Professor Eileen Babbitt, academic co-director of CHRCR, were Pauline Baker, President of the Fund for Peace, Anthropologist Blair Rutherford of Carleton University and Colonel Robert Helvey, (ret) President of The Albert Einstein Institute. In light of deteriorating political, economic and social conditions, panelists agreed that both trade unions and churches could, perhaps, be looked to as influential stakeholders on the local, national and regional level. Zimbabwe’s crisis, it was discussed, demanded a participation that would require internal as well as external pressure and interests. South African President Thabo Mbeki and Nigeria’s Olusegun Obasanjo, were two African leaders cited as holding potential for regional diplomatic action.

With elections in Zimbabwe slated for March 2005, a sense of urgency is apparent to all. The MDC, the opposition party, has boycotted the elections though there is both internal and external pressure to reconsider. As Nyarota and others stated, ‘Mugabe is good at manipulating; good at preying on the culture of fear that he has created through complete control of the Green Bombers, Central Intelligence Office, police, and military. He has all of these military arms at his disposal and is not afraid to use them. As a result, very few citizens or leaders raise their voices. The only one who does is the MDC; it is the only group that can articulate arguments against ZANU (PF). Therefore, MDC must remain in the forefront in the short-term.’

At the end of the day, questions remained. Panelists and audience members agreed that there were far more questions to offer to the debate, than easily found solutions to end the crisis. Yet, bringing human rights and conflict resolution practitioners together to focus on Zimbabwe was, indeed, a very necessary exercise. One enlightening, it seemed, to all. For a video of the conference, please see http://www.chrcr.org.

Article by Deborah Jones, MALD '06