Three reasons why the situation in Egypt will not be replicated in Zimbabwe

After recent events in Tunisa and Egypt, where mass public protest has led to profound changes in their governments, many people are asking where it could spread to next.  Many people have asked me of the likelihood of similar events in Zimbabwe, which I believe it is highly unlikely.

There are reasons to think that these protests could spread south, as the situations have their similarities.  Both countries have presidents who have been serving for 30 years, neither have histories of democratic elections, and both are in Africa.  That is where the similarities end.

The Zimbabwean population has proven itself to be a passive one.  As the situation in Zimbabwe deteriorated, mass protests did not appear frequently and when they did they were met with a brutal response from the police.  With an estimated 3 million Zimbabweans having fled the country in recent years, this has prompted an image of them fleeing rather than fighting.  Egyptians have the Palestinian cause to align themselves to, but Zimbabweans have been the black sheep of the region with no neighbours to which to align their plight to.

One significant aspect that has allowed the Egyptian protests to reach its high attendance levels is the apparent acquiescence of the army.  The police did not fare so well, and were sent scampering by the protesters early on, but images of soldiers hugging protesters shows the sympathy that exists between these to elements.  So far any sort of public action, of which I’m sure the brave women of WOZA! will testify to, has been met with utter brutality from the police who show no quarter to their fellow countrymen and women.  Apart from occasional  rumours of police striking in protest to their pay, their loyalty to the government has shown little strain in recent years.

Lastly, Zimbabwe does not occupy and geopolitical position of any significance.  Egypt is the centre of the Arab world, it’s fragility threatens the entire peace process in the Middle East.  There are tens of thousands of foreign tourists in the country at this time and Egypt is seen as a more moderate government in a volatile region.  Although the protests thus far have been effective, the stern words from the US undoubtedly had a say in Mubarak’s two step downs.  No such climate exists in Zimbabwe, where the only state with motivation to react is South Africa, which has done little thus far.

But if protests were needed to change the government, they were need not today but three years ago during the disputed elections of 2008.  The fragile equilibrium that exists there now has gone some way to repairing the damage done in recent years.  But if an election is called too soon and the campaign of terror is resumed by ZANU-PF, then perhaps it will be our last option.

 

Book Review: Dinner With Mugabe

Dinner With Mugabe

Heidi Holland

Penguin Books 2008

The title of Heidi Holland’s book Dinner With Mugabe is a captivating one, simply because it is such an unlikely scenario for any white journalist to find themselves in.  However, it is a slightly misleading title as it refers to a brief moment in 1975 when the author provided dinner and a safe house to the recently released from prison Robert Mugabe.  At the time hewas a relative non-entity compared to the international pariah he has now become. 

Holland’s book is an investigation in how this once mellow head-teacher turned into the monster he is today, tracking developments from his early childhood and important moments in his life that may provide some explanation to this mystery.  Holland does this by engaging with several people who knew Mugabe on a personal and professional level, including his brother Denato, the widow of Lord Soames, various members of the Rhodesian government including Ian Smith, and the enigmatic Professor Jonathan Moyo.  Holland uses psychological methods to construct a character sketch of Mugabe that has never been done before, which makes this book a compelling read.

The theme that reoccurs most frequently in this unauthorised biography is Mugabe’s childhood in Kutama.  He lost his two older brothers at a young age, and the responsibility to look after his family fell on his shoulders.  His father Gabriel left when Mugabe was young which led him to form a close bond to his mother.  The lack of a father figure is one explanation offered to Mugabe’s inability to take criticism all these years later.  Despite losing his brothers and father, he does appear to have had a fairly happy upbringing, spending a lot of his time reading or going to church with his mother.  As important as childhood is in the development of one’s character, I think this issue was probably overused in this book, as we are constantly reminded about his pious mother and lonely upbringing.

There are two moments in Mugabe’s life we are told of that I was convinced had a big impact on his later presidency.  Firstly, when Mugabe’s first son Nhamo died in 1966.  Mugabe was in prison when it happened, and was not allowed to attend the funeral despite convincing pleas’ that he fully intended to return to prison.   Holland’s description of this tragic affair is very emotional, and begs the question how long that type of animosity can be stored up for only to surface years later.  It reminded me that Mugabe was actually a human once, something I could not describe him as now. 

The second moment happened five years into Mugabe’s premiership, when an election is called for the 20 white seats reserved under the Lancaster House agreement.  Whites in Zimbabwe returned nearly all the seats to Ian Smith.  Denis Norman, Zimbabwe’s first Agriculture Minister, describes it in his interview with Holland as a “betrayal”, where Mugabe had done exceedingly well to placate white voters but they continued to vote along racial lines.  Even the most venomous Mugabe critics would agree that his first few years in office were a success, so I can certainly understand where at least some of his animosity towards white Zimbabweans would stem from.  Not that this would justify the action he would later take against them.

Whilst reading the various fascinating accounts of people who worked closely with Mugabe, I couldn’t help but feel that you can only do so much without meeting the person face to face.  The last chapter is a treat, as Holland saves the best for last with a very rare interview with Mugabe himself.  Most of his replies are the ones you would expect from his anti-white, anti-British, anti-everything disposition, but Holland carefully maneuvers her way around his rhetoric to get some interesting snapshots of the man.  There is even an air of reason when he speaks of Tony Blair’s refusal to adhere to the agreements made between Zimbabwe and former Conservative Government, and the disastrous letter sent to him by Clare Short.  He even goes as far to admit that he didn’t have any control over the farm invasions, but merely interprets the invasions as peasants taking land from the ‘British’.

This is a very thought-provoking book that has allowed for a rare look at one of the most despotic leaders in the world.  One of sad realities that struck me whilst reading it is the endemic racism that seems to exist at every level of Zimbabwe, which origins go back over a hundred years.  Everything seems to be black this, or white that.  I can only hope that young Zimbabweans do not inherit this tendency from their older generation, as it will do no good if Zimbabwe is to have a prosperous future.  Another thing that struck me, which is something that Prof. Moyo touches on, is how Mugabe stumbled into office.  I wonder how differently things would have turned out had Herbert Chitepo become Prime Minister, or Joshua Nkomo, or Josiah Tongogara. 

As Holland concludes, Dinner With Mugabe was not intended to offer an explanation of how one man destroyed a country.  All of the draconian laws Mugabe continues to use to suppress his people were inherited from the Rhodesian regime, and there were many external factors that could have driven another leader to take the same decisions.  I would recommend this book to anyone with an interest in the region, as it provides a new level of analysis of Zimbabwe that was desperately needed and will no doubt be the last.

 

Zimbabwe and Wikileaks: More honesty than scandal

It’s been hard to avoid the recent events surrounding Wikileaks and the leaking of confidential government data, of which we have only seen the tip of the iceberg.  Whilst I do not agree with the leaking of this information, as I believe it is kept secret for good reasons, it has made compelling reading especially with regards to American views towards Africa.

Former United States Ambassador to Zimbabwe Christopher Dell is at the centre of the leaks with regards to Zimbabwe, which is unsurprising considernig his very open contempt for Robert Mugabe and his government.  I haven’t had a chance yet to read the original leaks, purely because everytime I try Wikileaks gets moved to a different server.  But there has been wide publicity in Zimbabwean and international press.

Andrew Meldrum, of whom most Zimbabwe watchers will be familiar with, gives an interesting account in the Global Post.  In it, he describes how Dell is almost amazed at the longevity of Mugabe, how he as skillfully managed to remain in power despite the ruin he created for his country.  Dell is also frank with his dissappointment with South Africa and its appeasement towards Mugabe, which he predicts will continue under president Zuma.  He’s correct on that assessment so far.

The Zimbabwean briefly describes how America thinks Mugabe is ignorant of economics (you don’t have to be an diplomat to know that), that Tsvangirai is indecisive and Mutambara clever but a lightweight.  American ambivalence towards Tsvangirai is disappointing but entirely justified.  He is described as a good, honest man, but largely let down by those in the MDC with the exception of Biti.

The idea that these leaks are going to have a negative impact on American-Zimbabwean relations, and even lead to changes in policy, is unfounded.  Nehanda Radio claims that  these leaks are going to have an “impact on politics” in Zimbabwe, but does not describe exactly how this will happen.  This is simply because there is nothing or great significance in these leaks, just some frank and honest correspondence from one diplomat to another.

American policy towards Zimbabwe has never been difficult to work out.  It outright rejects Mugabe as the winner of the 2008 elections and has openly shown support to Tsvangirai and the MDC.  The disappointment described by America of the MDC’s failure to make a real impact on the political situation in Zimbabwe are probably shared by the MDC.

These revelations will be soon forgotten, but do provide us with an interesting take on American policy, away from the usual polite diplomacy and smokescreens that accompany politics.

 

Jacob Zuma’s failed policy on Zimbabwe

Yesterday South African President Jacob Zuma asked the European Union (EU) to lift its sanctions on Zimbabwe.  (Full story here.)  This for me signifies the incredible disappointment that Zuma has been with regards to his troublesome northern neighbour.

I was relatively happy to see Zuma ascend to the office of president of South Africa, mostly because I suspected he would take a harder line on Zimbabwe than his predecessor Thabo Mbeki.  There was talk of trade union solidarity between him and Morgan Tsvangirai, and even ethnic hostility towards the predominantly Shona ZANU-PF.  But on the surface he appears to have achieved little.

His only claim to fame was his apparent influence in the creation of the unity government, under the Global Political Agreement (GPA, and what exactly is so global about this?).  But as Zimbabwe starts down another rocky road towards elections in 2011, the unity government can hardly be viewed as a resounding success.

What makes Zuma’s latest statement to the EU more startling is the topic of sanctions.  Robert Mugabe and his party still claim that the ‘evil and illegal’ sanctions against his regime are the cause of all ills in Zimbabwe, when this is clearly not the case.  If anything the sanctions are far too light, consisting of a mixture of travel bans and asset seizures.  For Zuma to take this case to the EU, it makes a mockery of his already poor efforts to deal with Mugabe.

Startlingly, the EU has recently announced that it has allocated €138 million by way of a development fund for Zimbabwe.  One can only pray that this money finds its intended recipients.

One possible explanation for Zuma’s policy could be an exit strategy for the ZANU-PF top brass.  In the case of Mugabe dying, or ZANU-PF losing the next election (no, I didn’t manage to type that without a wry smile), perhaps Zuma is negotiating a deal with them for a safe passage to escape prosecution, in return for granting concessions to the disputed GPA.  But even this possibility sounds like a long shot.

Zuma’s tenure as president is not quite over yet, and he has time to turn it around.  But up to now it has been very disappointing.  Not only has he failed to deal with Mugabe, but his treatment of Zimbabwean refugees in South Africa has been less than appealing.  I hope I’m proved wrong.

 

Zimbabwe at 30: time to look forward

I’m reaching that age where I will be attending several 30th birthday parties this year, although thankfully I’m still a couple of years away from my own.  This is also the year that Zimbabwe celebrates 30 years of independence, and just like all those who turn 30, we spend time considering all that has past in those 30 years.  In previous years I have always wondered how those born after independence, like myself, will view the events on the 18th April 1980.  But this year had a different theme, as it was time to stop looking backward and start looking forward.

On Friday 16th April I attended an event hosted by the Royal African Society (RAS) at the School of Oriental and African Studies, entitled ‘What Next For Zimbabwe?’.  It was hosted by Richard Dowden (Director of the RAS) and speakers included Lovemore Matombo (President of the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions), Gabriel Shumba (Executive Director, Zimbabwe Exiles Forum, South Africa), John Mawbey (South African Municipal Workers Union) and Margaret Ling (Treasurer, Britain Zimbabwe Society and Trustee, Zimbabwe Association).  The format of the meeting was based on brief presentations by the speakers followed by questions and answers and a general discussion.

Lovemore Matombo spoke first, telling us that Zimbabwe is currently undergoing a transition to democracy, but warned us that the current unity government is faltering due to continued state sponsored violence. Margaret Ling pleaded for Zimbabweans in the diaspora to be allowed back into the mix, as many were willing to return but most feared for their safety.  She also reaffirmed the high level of education that most Zimbabweans possess, even compared to the average English person.  But Gabriel Shumba said that the diaspora were still hesitant to become fully engaged, and that many Zimbabweans in South Africa are being treated inhumanely and need better treatment by the South African government.  Finally John Mawbey expressed solidarity with the people of Zimbabwe, and complained that South African President Jacob Zuma is not doing enough to lean on ZANU-PF.

The theme that resonated from the presentations and ensuing discussion was that of the diaspora, and how Zimbabwe needs them if it is to have any hope of recovering.  How exactly this will be done is anyone’s guess at the moment, as there is no unified structure or process in place.  Out of a population of over 12 million people, it is estimated that anything up to 4 million of those are outside Zimbabwe.  1/4 of the entire population of a state being displaced is almost unprecedented. 

South Africa is also experiencing a ‘brain drain’, although not quite to the levels of Zimbabwe.  To counter this, the South African government set up the Homecoming Revolution , a ‘non-profit organisation aimed at reversing the South African skills shortage’.  The website includes information on jobs, schools, banks, citizenship issues and stories of those who have returned from overseas back to South Africa.  They recently had a fair in London which I attended, it was the complete one-stop exhibition for those wanting to return to their home.

From the discussion I attended, I am convinced this is exactly what Zimbabwe needs.  Of course, Zimbabwe is dealing with its own internal problems, and some may think that the issues and concerns of Zimbabweans who have not left are more pressing.  But it is absolutely vital that the diaspora is united and some sort of movement is created to help those return, no matter where they are in the world.  For those that do not want to return as they have set themselves up in their new countries, then they must be allowed and encouraged to send money back to Zimbabwe to their friends and family.  But those millions of returning Zimbabweans will bring skills that their country desperately needs, and an organization that facilitates this can streamline the process of returning skilled workers. 

I have refused to allow myself to become depressed over the downward spiral Zimbabwe has experienced over the past 30 years, it’s time to look forward and to consider what action need taking to help rebuild our home.  The returning of the diaspora must be high on that list.

 

My 13 year anniversary of leaving Zimbabwe

The 6th of December is always a humble occassion for me each year, as it marks the date in 1996 that I left Zimbabwe to move to South Africa.

That day is still vivid in my memory.  Only 13 years old, me and my mother waved my grandfather and uncle goodbye as our train pulled out of Bulawayo Train Station on its 30 hour journey to Johannesburg.  I was too young and naive to realise the full implication of what was happening, in fact I remember being quite excited about the prospect.  I had visited South Africa often in my childhood and the idea of living in Johannesburg was enticing, especially after things had become more trying for us in Zimbabwe. 

I remember the first few weeks as being very exciting.  It was nearing Christmas and all the shopping centres were buzzing, our cats and dogs had arrived from Zimbabwe too, and we were staying in a huge rented house in Weltevreden Park.  But within a couple of months I would be in school and it would be a tough year.  I was a year ahead of my age group and the work I  was doing was quite difficult.  I became distinctly aware of being different to the other students, although I made friends with a couple of other Zimbabweans who had recently moved down too.  I would eventually settle in and make friends, all whilst my Zimbabwean identity became stronger.

When I left in 1996, things were not really that bad.  There had been small price increases, and the Bulawayo Chronicle had lost some of its independent voice by then, but there were no signs of things to come.  I witnessed all of Zimbabwe’s major events from outside Zimbabwe, such as the opening and closing of the Daily News, the 2000 referendum, the first farm invasions, and the subsequent collapse of the economy.  Even being quite young when this was happening I couldn’t avoid a feeling of abandonment, that I should be there doing something. 

I visited Bulawayo frequently between 1996 and 2001 as I still had family there.  Everytime we drove up Esigodini Road I was thrilled to be home, although each time the city looked a little worse for wear.  One of my favourite trips up was in 2000, when me and my best friend drove up for an end of year road trip to Victoria Falls to celebrate finishing school.  Although I can claim the last time I set foot in Zimbabwe was in August 2009, when I was in Zambia and crossed the halfway point on the Victoria Falls bridge!

So after 13 years, where to now?  Sometimes I have felt like I will never get to go back home, but developments over the past 18 months have filled me with hope.  It is tragic that so many white Zimbabweans who left the country have completely abandoned it, but for me there would be no greater pleasure than to return and help rebuild my country.  I will always take flak for being absent from the country during its most trying time, but so was a quarter of the population.  My greatest dream would be to return to Bulawayo and to get into some form of local government, perhaps do some teaching or open some schools in the bush, I would work in a bar if I had to.  Because even after 13 years I have never stopped dreaming about Zimbabwe at night and have never stopped calling it my home.

 

Well done WOZA!

Yesterday Women of Zimbabwe Arise (WOZA) were awarded the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights Award, in a ceremony at the White House.  President Barack Obama was there to hand over the award to the founding members Magodonga Mahlangu and Jenni Williams, and video can be seen here.

I am a great admirer of Obama, and in particular his talent of making speeches.  I watched his speeches in Moscow, Cairo and Accra, but for me this was one of his finest.  In his presidential campaign, he spoke endlessly about hope, and I think he met the manifestation of hope in the form of WOZA.

It can be so frustrating that after nearly 30 years of Mugabe’s dictatorship, there doesn’t seem to be anybody willing to stand up to him anymore.  But it takes the women of Zimbabwe to prove this assumption wrong, as the members of WOZA have taken countless beatings and never backed down.  They are an inspiration to Zimbabweans around the world for their courage, bravery and determination.

But there is still work to be done.  WOZA deserve all the accolades they receive, but there is still so much to do.  It’s not very often that Zimbabwe has a good day, but the 23rd November 2009 was one of those.

 

Zimbabwe’s holocaust? Not really Mr. Freeth

I have just finished reading Ben Freeth’s article on Sokwanele, where Mr. Freeth details the awful circumstances of the burning of his farm and his wider thoughts on the motives for this.  My heart goes out to him and his family, I cannot image what it must be like to see such a beautiful farm go up in flames, especially after standing up to so much intimidation over the years.

 

But I have a problem with the use of the word ‘holocaust’.  I think he has gone too far to compare his plight to that of the Jews in Europe being persecuted by the Nazis.  He goes on to say:

Living in Zimbabwe, I can not help feeling that a NAZI nationalist type agenda lives on in the hearts of some of the African leaders today.  Just as racism was the central and pervasive theme of NAZI ideology, so it is under Mugabe in our time.

The message being spun to the party adherents is that all Zimbabwe’s problems are related to the white man.  Mugabe calls the white men “criminals” just as Hitler called the Jews “criminals.”

The first issue is a numerical one.  It is widely known that about 6 million Jews were killed during the course of the Holocaust, by a variety of methods that included being worked to death in work camps.  I still struggle to comprehend how this level of slaughter could have taken place so recently in our history.  But my Mr. Freeth’s own figures, Zimbabwe’s whites once numbered 270,000 are now down to about 20,000.  Of these 250,000 whites that no longer live in Zimbabwe, how many were killed by ZANU-PF?  Some were, and I knew some, but to call these whites the ‘victims of the final solution’ is dishonest and distasteful.

 

The second issue here is colour.  Whilst most of the commercial farms that Mugabe and this thugs targeted were owned by whites, there were a handful owned by blacks too.  For every commercial farm owned by a white family, there were huge numbers of black families who were displaced by the invasion and occupation of the land.  And what of Billy Rautenbach, the white businessman who is known to have worked with Mugabe and benefited from the farm invasions?  Let’s be honest about those whites who have left Zimbabwe too; the vast majority are probably living with a high levels of comfort in the UK, South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, etc.  Unlike the huge numbers of Zimbabwean refugees in South Africa, which even today are suffering xenophobic attacks in Cape Town and Johannesburg.

 

As I said, my heart goes out to the Freeth family, and I hope they continue to farm in Zimbabwe.  But I believe it is wrong to compare the problems of Zimbabwe to the genocide of Jews.  Mugabe has certainly played the race card, there is no denying that, but the causes and consequences of this go car beyond skin colour.  The only people to have benefited from the farm invasion are ZANU-PF bigwigs, and they would have invaded these farms if they were black, white, brown or yellow owned.  Money and power are the roots of Zimbabwe’s problems, not race.

 

Zimbabwean sports mercenaries

This weekend was a busy one for sport, with the Autumn International rugby fixtures taking place across Europe and the England cricket team playing their first matches against South Africa.  What struck me about them was the presence of Zimbabweans in both sports, performing well but not for their home countries. 

 

Much has been written about the various Zimbabwean sportsmen and women who represent other countries, but it still makes uncomfortable reading for me.  Like the skilled workers who have fled Zimbabwe for better lives elsewhere, so to have our sports stars fled to make viable careers out of their talent.  Similarly, as Zimbabwe tries to attract its skilled workers back, so to should some effort be made to encourage these sports stars to help develop the sport back home.

 

Much was said last week about the possibility of Tendai ”the Beast” Mtawarira being dropped from the Springboks, due to complications with his citizenship and passport.  This was rather odd, considering he has become a regular in the team and is a crowd favourite with his catchy nickname.  Last year he lined up in the Springbok front row with another Zimbabwean, Brian Mujati, who is now playing for the Northampton Saints.  These two form a long tradition of Zimbabweans representing South Africa at rugby, with other notable names such as Gary Teichmann, Adrian Garvey and Bob Skinstad doing so recently.  This tradition, combined with a common border and shared history, has meant that Zimbabweans representing South Africa has never been a massive problem, if anything they are admired for making the step up.  But what of the others who represent countries further away?

 

This weekend saw David Pocock play a stormer for Australia against Ireland in Dublin.  He presents another interesting case, in an interview with SA Rugby magazine he says he still visits Zimbabwe frequently and still considers himself Zimbabwean.  This attitude contrasts to South African sports stars who represent other countries who appear very quick to turn their back on South Africa and blame the government for not reaching the higher levels of their sport. 

 

The England cricket team is currently being coached by another Zimbabwean, Andy Flower, possibly the finest cricketer Zimbabwe ever produced.  Their current squad is also filled with three South Africans, namely Andrew Strauss, Kevin Pietersen and Johnathan Trott.  Not only did Flower lead England to victory in the 2009 Ashes, before that another Zimbabwean, Duncan Fletcher, did the same thing in 2005.  Andy Flower certainly did his bit for Zimbabwean cricket, when he and Henry Olonga wore black armbands at the 2003 World Cup to mark the “death of democracy” in Zimbabwe.  Knowing  of the consequences, neither of them are allowed back into Zimbabwe.

 

I’m not entirely sure where I’m going with this, but at the very least it is a small snapshot of the wonderful athletes Zimbabwe has produced, and how the collapse of Zimbabwe has forced them to apply their trades elsewhere.  They are all products of the wonderful school system that Zimbabwe has, although this too has suffered in recent years.  Perhaps as Zimbabwe struggles to its feet, in a few years time the likes of Beast, Pocock and Flower can return if only to assist in the rebuilding of our sports institutes.

 

44 years since UDI

The 11th of November is marked worldwide as the day the guns fell silent in 1918, marking the end of the Great War. Heads will be bowed to remember the slaughter that took place on the fields of Europe and further afield.  But the anniversary is shared by another controversial day, that of the 11th of November 1965, when the government of Rhodesia declared unilateral independence from Britain, UDI.

 

UDI still divides opinion of many people; some remembering fondly the years of sanction busting, the Frontline states calling for a full invasion by Britain, the Commonwealth and United Nations unable to come to an agreement on what to do.  Even in Britain, people were split by those seeing at as an extension of Apartheid from South Africa, and those rushing to help their ‘kith and kin’ with many people flying over to join the army. 

 

Much has happened since that day in 1965.  A bloody bush war followed by independence, years of stability until Mugabe’s ill fated land reformation in 2000 and the downward spiral since.  What makes looking at UDI 44 years later even more interesting is to see the full circle that Zimbabwe has come.  Like Animal Farm all over, those who fought for independence are now seen as destroyers of independence, the draconian laws used by Ian Smith to control the opposition are once again being used by the Robert Mugabe regime, the opposition is crippled by splits, and the country is subject to sanctions again.

 

For me, the legacy of UDI is the needless violence that followed.  Thousands and thousands of young and old, black and white, male and female killed in one of the most violent bush wars in Africa during the 20th century.  UDI prolonged a dictatorship for 14 more years, and as every year goes by those 14 years slip into insignificance when compared to the problems it created and how little it achieved.

 

I always wonder what would have happened if Rhodesia had moved to majority rule and independence in a similar manner to that of Zambia.  Would Zimbabwe have leaders that respect democracy, instead of the murderers in power now who were instead revolutionised by the war?  Would it have played a greater role in ending Apartheid and bringing independence to Mozambique?  It certainly would have changed southern Africa the way we know it today.

 

In a country that is still passionately aware of its history, UDI is still a contentious issue.  Listening to the propaganda being spewed out by ZANU-PF, they still refer to UDI and the Lancaster House Agreement as if it happened last week.  

 

As historians prepare to write their revisionist theories of Zimbabwean history, UDI too will undergo more scrutiny in years to come as people’s perception of it change from age to age.  Rather than dismissing it though, it is vital that we learn more about it and understand it, as it will help us understand the events of the 44 years that followed it.