Zimbabwe appointment shows Africa's 'defiance of the West'
Blogged by: Nina Brenjo
A student reads a book using candlelight in Zimbabwe's capital Harare. Photo by REUTERS\Stringer
It was Africa's turn to appoint the chair of the United Nations' Sustainable Development Commission this month, and its leaders unanimously voted for Zimbabwe to occupy the position. Predictably, Western countries are not happy and have called the selection "a disaster for sustainable development".
Their complaints are nothing but a load of "codswallop", says John Vidal in Britain's Guardian.
Yes, Zimbabwe is in crisis, he says, but when it comes to the issue of climate change, it is one of the few countries that hasn't contributed to "the giant mess" that Britain and other rich countries are responsible for. Worse still, Zimbabwe's critics are likely to undermine the work of the commission in the future, simply because of their "hatred of the president of one of the poorest countries in the world".
There aren't many newspapers around that agree with Vidal's view and Britain's Financial Times is no exception.
It is now widely accepted that Africa will bear the brunt of the devastating effects of climate change, which is largely the responsibility of developed countries, the paper says. But instead of selecting a credible voice for the future debate on sharing the burden of climate change costs, Africa has opted for Zimbabwe with its economy in ruins and a dictator for a president.
The fact is, the only commission Zimbabwe's current leadership would be suitable for is "a commission for sustainable dictatorship", the paper concludes.
Africa's choice of Zimbabwe for the post is nothing but a "defiance of the West", says Scott Baldauf in this analysis piece for Christian Science Monitor.
"The resonance behind what Mugabe says is a result of what Africans see as the duplicity of the Western international institutions (such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund)," the paper quotes Chris Maroleng, a Zimbabwe expert at the Institute for Security Studies in South Africa, as saying. Africans are angry over "the imposition of the conditions on aid", Marlong is quoted by the Monitor as saying.
In order to show their "disinclination to be pushed around by the powerful West", African leaders offer their support to Zimbabwe, the paper cites Peter Kagwanja, senior researcher for Human Sciences Research Council in South Africa's Tshwane.
It is for this reason that South African President Thabo Mbeki - rather than the West - was entrusted with mediating between Zimbabwe's President Robert Mugabe and the opposition, at the Southern African Development Community conference back in March.
As a consequence, this strategy "shifted the battleground from the international arena, which Mugabe loves, to the domestic issues of economic recovery... and the violent nature that Mugabe engages his opponents. And to a degree this strategy may be working," the paper quotes Maroleng as saying.
"So far, Mr. Mbeki hasn't done much more than write a few letters," says the New York Times. The paper advises the South African president to at least consider his country' self-interest, even if he's not moved by the human tragedy in neighbouring Zimbabwe. South Africa may lose its appeal for potential investors with "the growing tide of misery and upheaval just over the border".
And what does the whole affair says about the U.N.?
This entire business only promotes the view that the U.N. is no more than a collection of "costly talking shops", says the Financial Times.
What's the least desirable country to chair a body that has anything to do with economic development? Zimbabwe, says Peter Brookes of the Heritage Foundation, who served at the U.S. Mission to the U.N. in 1992. But "(such) logic carries little weight at the United Nations", which is more concerned with quotas and a country's influence at the world body when it comes to filling leading positions, says Brookes in China Post.
For Dominic Lawson, a columnist with Britain's Independent, the commissions such as the one for sustainable development or human rights are nothing more than "a generous waste of time". Ultimately, the U.N. represents decent as well as corrupt and self-serving countries, so Zimbabwe's nomination in this case is "exactly what (we) should expect".
Britain's Observer doesn't have an axe to grind with the U.N. as an institution, but with those countries that voted to put Zimbabwe at the helm of a U.N. commission. They bring the Commission on Sustainable Development "into disrepute and (compromise) the authority of an institution that should be a vehicle for positive change in Africa", it says.
Reuters AlertNet is not responsible for the content of external websites.
6 responses to “Zimbabwe appointment shows Africa's 'defiance of the West'”
Please note that comments should not be regarded as the views of Reuters.
Leave a Reply
When you submit a comment to us we request your name, e-mail address and optionally a link to a website. Please note where you submit a website address, we may link to it via your name. By sending us a comment, you accept that we have the right to show the comment and your name to users. Although we require your email address, this will not be published on the site, and is only required to enable us to check facts with you, e.g. if you are making a claim we can not confirm easily. Additionally, if you would like your comment removed at anytime, you'll have to use this e-mail address when you contact us. To remove a comment at any time please e-mail us at blogs-(at)-reuters-(dot)-com (address obscured to avoid spam) specifying who you are and what you would like removed. We moderate all comments and will publish everything that advances the post directly or with relevant tangential information. We reserve the right to edit comments in order to maintain the quality of the comments, and may not include links to irrelevant material. We try not to publish comments that we think are offensive or appear to pass you off as another person, and we will be conservative if comments may be considered libelous. Reuters will use your data in accordance with Reuters privacy policy. Reuters Group is primarily responsible for managing your data. As Reuters is a global company your data will be transferred and available internationally, including in countries which do not have privacy laws but Reuters seeks to comply with its privacy policy.
18 May 2007 21:31:45 GMT
Just because Zimbabwe was chosen to chair the U.N. Sustainable Developement Commission doesn't mean that they will do a bad job. Mugabe may be a tyrant but I'm sure that there a other politicians in that country that can do the job in the U.N. It was Africa's turn to pick and if they are thumbing ther nose at the West, more power to them. We deserve it after the last few decades.
20 May 2007 09:24:00 GMT
I do agree with John Vidal as quoted in the Guardian, that Zimbabwe has done more to avert climate change. Zimbabwe does not oppose the provision of the Kyoto Protocol as some of Zimbabwe's loudest critics do, Zimbabwe does not burn as much fossil fuel as the developed countries, Developed Countries like the UK do not much wild life on the island because they wiped it out. They come to Zimbabwe in droves to see wild life. Zimbabwe did not participate in the breaking international law by deposing a legitimate government in Iraq, a decision that has causing causing massive loss of human life that does not lead to sustainable development. Just to show the duplicit of the Developed Countries that opposed Zimbabwe's Chairmanship of the CSD 16, the Asia Group selected Iraq to the Chairman the Third Committee which deals with reports that come from the Human Rights COuncil. Nobody raised a finger to say Iraq with what is happening there w! ould not qualify to chair such a an important commitee. Developing countries like Zimbabwe did oppose such a submission because the region had made a decision and nobody has a right to judge that decision. It is in the interest of the developed countries to cooperate with the Bureau of CSD 16 because the issue handled by this Commission are of interest to us all and we need each other to make progress. We have to have to put our politics aside and serve the planet.
22 May 2007 08:23:50 GMT
Well as usual, the west is trying to tell what Africans should do. They are trying to tell Africa to choose whoever pleases the west and it does not matter what ever he does to his country men.
Well guys, this is democracy in its making. Africans will choose whome ever they want to choose. The real issue is not about selecting a better man for the position, it is about selecting the best, some one who can best represent Africa and who will take all the risks political or economical in defending the interests of Africa and Africans. While the UK, its west allies and biased journalists are writing stories sometimes invented in their minds about Zimbabuwe and Mr.Mugabe which makes them no better than the Pro-terorist medias like Aljezirra, they failed to dissiminate the most important and crucial issues that are happening everywhere; be it in darfur or Somalia. Their only worry is only when some white skin briton or African born white man is being treated fairly and equally like others. They want to see a better and unequal treatement which is not fair and which won't happen in Modern day Africa. You can report what is in your mind. But just know that people won't take you seriously as it used to be in the past. Western media is all about business and money and to that end what ever is sellable even if it is a lie is a reportable candidate. It takes a Man and a deep rooted Moral culture to deliver unbiased reporting.22 May 2007 18:59:42 GMT
To all you white Western media outlets that want to demonize Zimbabwe, please listen up: black people world wide support Mugabe for having the courage to take back stolen lands. Whites have dominated blacks on this planet and finally we're having the guts to reclaim our ancestorial lands. South Africa, Namibia and Kenya will have an uprising if land is not returned. Whites stole the land in Africa and want blacks to pay to get it back. Black America supports Zimbabwe land redistribution program.
25 May 2007 10:49:02 GMT
South Africa's silence in this whole situation will do more harm that good for themselves. Thousands of Zimbabwean immigrants jump South African border illigaly in the prospect of a better life. Something must be done and soon.....
27 May 2007 11:25:05 GMT
My gosh - most of you are SO naive.
Mugabe has not taken back "stolen lands" because he is courageous... he's done it to try appease his own cronies - who are the people who benefit from teh land grabs... not the wider poor black population of Zimbabwe. Until you have lived in or visited Zimbabwe - and looked at the suffering of its people without the rose tinted glasses of anti-west sentiments... you have NO clue what you are talking about. As for Mbeki, he's cut from the same machiavellian & self-serving clothe as Mugabe.Any president who think he must buy a $100 NEW jet to whisk himself around the world - while 40% of his population is unemployed & don't have roofs over their heads. Even the Queen of England bought a 2nd hand plane - so WHO does Mbeki think he is. And heaven forbid if South Africans & his ANC party allow him to directly or indirectly hold onto power. That would be a travesty to South Africa & Africa in general.