The Parliament of Zimbabwe is planning to send a delegation to Washington to lobby United President Joe Biden to lift sanctions that have cost the country more than US$42 billion since they came into force more than 20 years ago.
Energy Mutodi who introduced the motion in Parliament yesterday said the delegation would also lobby the United States congress to lift the sanctions.
Biden was one of the sponsors of the sanctions law, the Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act, in 2001.
The US recently announced visa restrictions on those stifling democracy in Zimbabwe though it did not name anyone.
Here is Mutodi’s motion:
MOTION
UNCONDITIONAL REPEAL OF ZIDERA BY THE US GOVERNMENT AND LIFTING OF UNWARRANTED AND ILLEGAL SANCTIONS ON ZIMBABWE
HON. DR. MUTODI: I move the motion standing in my name That this House: DESIROUS to have the heinous and illegal sanctions, unilaterally imposed on Zimbabwe by the Government of United States of America after the enactment of the draconian Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act (ZIDERA) by the George Bush Administration, unconditionally removed to pave way for a prosperous sovereign state;
COGNISANT that the United States of America Government has not forgiven Zimbabwe for rightfully possessing the land that people won after a hard fought and protracted war;
DISMAYED that these evil sanctions have caused gross human suffering to ordinary Zimbabweans as they are not just targeted to individuals who are banned from visiting and operating businesses or bank accounts in the United States, but indiscriminately affect ordinary citizens who have to contend with severe economic hardships such as hyperinflation, exchange rate volatility and high levels of unemployment;
MINDFUL that the imposition of these illegal sanctions has led to massive skills flight resulting in our people migrating to seek employment and other opportunities elsewhere;
FURTHER COGNISANT that the Land Reform Programme is irreversible and will always be sustained;
RE-AFFIRMING ENGAGEMENT AND RE-ENGAGEMENT with all will always be sustained;
NOW THEREFORE, resolves that;
(a) A delegation from Zimbabwe Parliament be sent to the United States of America to present a briefing paper to the President of the United States of America and Congress requesting their administration to expeditiously and unconditionally repeal ZIDERA which has caused so much suffering to ordinary citizens of our country;
(b) The delegation engages the United States of America Congress to lift the unwarranted and illegal sanctions on Zimbabwe;
(c) Zimbabwe presents its case to the United Nations by the end of December, 2023 so that these illegal sanctions imposed on our country are unconditionally lifted once and for all;
and (d) The United States of America Government to engage with the Zimbabwean Government on terms that promote mutual benefit through economic and political cooperation.
HON. SHAMU: I second.
HON. DR. MUTODI: I move this motion for the unconditional lifting of the sanctions imposed on the Republic of Zimbabwe by the Government of the United States of America in 2001. Mr. Speaker Sir, the motion to have the ZIDERA unconditionally removed is based on a report by SADC Permanent Mission in Geneva which was produced in December 2020. The report discussed the impact on Zimbabwe and the SADC Region of the unilateral sanctions imposed by the United States of America and the European Union.
In its introduction, the report indicated that Zimbabwe’s Land Reform Programme has led to the United States of America imposing illegal sanctions under the so-called Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act of 2001 which was amended with a view to further tighten its provisions in 2018. In it, the US Government inter alia instructs the US Executive Director to each international financial institution to oppose and vote against any extension by the respective institution of any loan, credit or guaranteed to the Government of Zimbabwe or any cancellation or reduction in indebtedness owed by the Government of Zimbabwe to the US or any international financial institution.
Supplementing these sanctions are executive sanctions, executive order 13288 of March 2003 which have been renewed on a yearly basis. It is clear that the sanctions are all-encompassing, contrary to claims that they are ring-fenced and targeted against a few individuals.
The EU also introduced its own sanctions regime in February 2002, while the EU lifted most of its sanctions in 2014, those against the Zimbabwe Defence Industry Company, senior Government officials and service chiefs as well as an arms-embargo are still in place. The EU insists that it will maintain the sanctions under constant review in light of political and security developments in Zimbabwe.
The US and EU sanctions against Zimbabwe are illegal and unjustified because they violate Chapter 41 of the United Nations Charter which states that sanctions can only be decided by the UN Security Council. Cognisant of this, in its resolution 39/210 of 18 December 1984, the UN General Assembly called on developed countries to refrain from threatening or applying trade restrictions, blockages, embargos and other economic sanctions incompatible with the provisions of the charter of the United Nations and in violation of undertakings contracted multi-laterally or bilaterally against developing countries as a form of political and economic cohesion which affects their economic, political and social development.
The Vienna Declaration and programme of Africa which was adopted by the World conference on Human Rights on 25 June 1993 was more specific calling on the states to refrain from any unilateral measure not in accordance with international law and the charter of the United Nations that creates obstacles to trade relations among nations and impeach the full realisation of human rights set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and international human rights instruments, in particular, the rights of everyone to a standard of living adequate of their health and wellbeing, including food and medical care, housing and necessary social services.
In September 2014, the Human Rights Council adopted a resolution on human rights and unilateral cohesive measures. The resolutions stressed that unilateral cohesive measures are contrary to the United Nations Charter, International Law and International Humanitarian Law and the norms and principles governing peaceful relations amongst States. It highlighted that these measures result in socio-economic problems in the targeted countries. In this regard, the council decided to create the mandate of the special rapporteur on the negative impact of unilateral cohesive measures on the enjoyment of human rights.
The former late Special Rapporteur and the current Special Rapporteur, Ms. Elena Douhan stressed unquestionable negative impact of these measures on the enjoyment of all human rights and therefore, called on those States that have imposed sanctions against other states to lift them.
The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, in its Nairobi Conference titled ‘Moving Towards an Inclusive and Equitable Group or Economic Environment of Trade and Development’ adopted at its full tenth Ministerial Session, clearly pronounced itself in paragraph 34 when it said the following;
“States are strongly urged to refrain from promulgating and applying any unilateral economic, financial or trade measures not in accordance with international law and the Charter of the United Nations that impede the full achievement of economic and social development particularly in development countries and that affect commercial interest”. These actions where cited as to hinder market access, investments and freedom of transit and the well-being of the populations of affected countries. Meaningful trade liberalisation will also require addressing non-tariff measures including inter alia unilateral measures where they may act as unnecessary trade barriers.
Mr. Speaker Sir, I will move on to the overall impact of the US imposed sanctions on Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe has lost over US$42 billion in revenue over the past 19 years because of the sanctions. This includes lost bilateral donor support estimated at US$4.5 billion annually since 2001, US$12 billion in loans from the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank and the African Development Bank, commercial loans of up to US$18 billion and a GDP reduction of at least US$21 billion. As a consequence, the significant progress that Zimbabwe had made in the development of its infrastructure as well as health education and other social service delivery systems has been severely reversed. This has resulted in the most vulnerable sections of the population sinking in deeper poverty. For instance, the proportion of the population in extreme poverty rose in the aftermath of sanctions.
Mr. Speaker, to this end, Zimbabwe’s quest to attain the United Nation Sustainable Development Goals has also been impacted on. Further felt sanctions against Zimbabwe are affecting the smooth running of regional groupings such as the SADC. The SADC macro-economic conversion targets of low inflation, sustainable budget deficits, minimal public debt, equitable current account balances as well as the formation of a regional monetary union and the movement towards attaining regional industrialisation agenda are being compromised by Zimbabwe’s inability to meet most of its target.
Mr. Speaker Sir, I will now move on to the effects of the sanctions on the main sectors of the Zimbabwean economy. On the access to credit lines, Zimbabwe’s balance of payment’s position has deteriorated significantly since the imposition of the sanctions. Zimbabwe access to international credit markets was blocked following the enactment of ZIDERA. The country has been forced to virtually operate on a hand to mouth basis resulting in a significant build-up of external debt arrears. This unfavourable development has worsened the country’s credit worthiness as the country’s international financial risk profile escalated. Subsequently, this led to the drying up of traditional sources of external finance from the international financial institutions, with the country receiving no support from the African Development Banks since 1998, the IMF since 1999 and the World Bank since 2001, In essence, the IFIs stopped their support to Zimbabwe by instituting a number of suspension of balance of payment support, technical assistance, voting and related rights by the IMF and the declaration of illegibility to access fund resources.
Consequently, the country’s external arrears have continually increased. Mr. Speaker Sir, there are also noted impacts on the country’s financial services sector on the international financial transactions on the investment and growth of the economy and also on the agricultural sector impact on the industry and manufacturing sectors, impact on the mining sectors and also on the energy sectors.
Mr. Speaker Sir, I will zero in on the impact of the sanctions on the tourism sector. Bad publicity has dealt Zimbabwe’s tourism sector a negative blow. This is because Zimbabwe is falsely perceived as an unsafe and risk country to visit with the likes of the United Kingdom, USA, Germany, Australia and others issuing negative travel advices to their citizens. This drastically reduced the number of tourists’ arrivals from the West. There is also an impact on the health sector and also on the current prevalence of Cholera and other waterborne diseases in Zimbabwe.
The Government of Zimbabwe was very successful in the containment of pandemics prior to the introduction of sanctions. However, with the advent of ZIDERA, the ability of the country to fight diseases such as HIV and AIDS and Cholera has been affected mainly because of the lack of funding to fight these diseases.
In conclusion, to the impact of sanctions, Zimbabwe is willing to engage with sections of the international community which imposed sanctions. It is not a situation where we are not willing; we are actually willing as enunciated by our President when he took over Government in the Second Republic. The latter, which means United States must remove the illegal sanctions immediately and unconditionally to allow the country to move forward. Zimbabwe and its SADC partners therefore call upon the United States to unconditionally remove the sanctions which were imposed on the country in the year 2001 by the George Bush administration.
It is in pursuit of the aspirations of the SADC report that this Parliament must do its part and take it upon itself to seek justice for the people of Zimbabwe who have suffered so long due to the sanctions. Mr. Speaker Sir, on Section 4 part 5 (c) of ZIDERA under the heading – Multilateral Financial Restriction, it is stated that until the President makes the certification described in Section (d) and accepted as may be required to meet basic human needs or for good governance, the Secretary of the Treasury shall instruct the United States Executive Director to each of the International Financial Institutions to oppose and vote against any extension of the respective institution of any loan credit or guarantee to the Government of Zimbabwe, any cancellation or reduction in indebtedness owed by the Government of Zimbabwe to the United States or to any International Financial Institution. On Section 6 under the heading – Sense of Congress on Actions to be taken against individuals responsible for violence and the breakdown of the rule of law in Zimbabwe, the ZIDERA Act reads in part as follows;
It is the sense of congress that the President should begin immediate consultation with the governance of the EU member states, Canada and other appropriate foreign countries on ways in which to
-Identify and share information regarding individuals responsible for the deliberate breakdown of the rule of law, politically motivated violence and intimidation in Zimbabwe.
– Identify assets of those individuals held outside Zimbabwe.
-Implement travel economic sanctions against those individuals and their associates or family members.
Mr. Speaker Sir, it is important to note that this Act has come upon us as part of an operation of the U. S. Foreign and Defence Policy. It is imperative that I unpack the U. S. Foreign and Defence Policy especially highlighting the human error element that exists in its establishment, particularly pointing out that there are phases where the United States of America has come up with some irrational foreign policy decisions which affects millions of people worldwide, not only in Zimbabwe and particularly those in the affected countries.
I will give you striking examples where for instance, Congress blocked the rational foreign policy decisions by its President and on the other hand, instances where Congress supported irrational foreign policy decisions by the President of the United States. In doing so, I wish to bring this House to the understanding that the decision to impose ZIDDERA by the U.S. Government may have been arrived at through an irrational foreign policy decision making process by the United States Congress.
I will give you one striking example during the presidency of Bill Clinton where the President faced congressional defiance when he proposed the need for the U. S. to pay its dues to the United Nations and when he proposed the lifting of sanctions against the Republic of Palestine which he thought no longer accept U. S. interest and also in 1993, when he made a rational decision to send troops into Bosnia to enforce low prime zone and support NATO Operations sponsored under the United Nations. In Bosnia, U. S. troops operated on a multilateral neutral force and Clinton’s rational decision was stopped by Congress in a clear show of irrationality of the U. S. Foreign Policy.
There were also instances where the Congress supported irrational decisions by the President of the United States especially during the presidency of President George Bush. It is during this presidency that the United States…
HON. MATEWU: On a point of order Mr. Speaker Sir. I believe the 20 minutes allocated to the Hon. Member has elapsed.
THE HON. SPEAKER: Order, Order! Hon. Member, this will be the second time that you are being advised again to be educated. – [Laughter.] – The mover of a motion has no limit. This is not from me but from the Standing Orders. So I encourage you to revise your Standing Orders accordingly. Hon. Dr. Mutodi, you can proceed.
HON. DR. MUTODI: Thank you Mr. Speaker Sir. I was indicating that during the presidency of President George Bush, we witnessed so many irrational decisions by the U. S. Government such as the invasion of Iraq where President Saddam Hussein was eventually assassinated under the claim of holding to weapons of mass destruction which later proved to be false. It is also under the same period that Zimbabwe was imposed or slapped with the illegal sanctions just because there was overwhelming support for the U. S. President in his foreign policy. It is clear that the foreign policy was baseless and based on unfounded facts which need to be fought by this Parliament.
Mr. Speaker Sir, having unpacked the irrationality of the U.S. foreign policy and having suggested that the ZEDERA was passed during a period of overwhelming presidential concurrence during President W. Bush’s administration, I am proposing that this House send a delegation to the United States of American to present a briefing paper to His Excellency the President of the United States of America and to Congress on the need for the U. S. Government to consider the repeal of ZIDERA and start a process of engagement and political and economic cooperation for the mutual benefit of both countries.
During the year 2023, I presented a briefing paper at the School of Government at the University of Birmingham on the Zimbabwe sanctions. It is this briefing paper that can be modified and panel beaten by this Parliament and then presented before the United States of America Congress and the President.
I will go through a few headings of the briefing paper. On its heading, it actually presents a question on whether the U.S should change its stance of sanctions against Zimbabwe. On its introduction, the briefing paper states that Zimbabwe is a country of about 15 million people located in the Southern African region. It is a member of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and African Union (AU). Zimbabwe has formally been a British colony named Rhodesia from 1965 to 1979 sharing the border with South Africa, Botswana, Mozambique and Zambia.
Its successive leaders since 1965, Ian Douglas Smith, 1965 to 1979, Robert Mugabe, 1980 to 2017 and Emmerson Mnangagwa, 2017 to date. Rhodesia first existed as Southern Rhodesia in 1923 when it was annexed at the British colony at the request of Cecil John Rhodes, a British imperialist. It was part of the British Monarch between 1965 and 1970 with Queen Elizabeth reigning as the Head of State. Between 1963 and 1980, there was war in Zimbabwe in which the black majority population fought for the independence of Zimbabwe from Britain in order to remove a white minority government led by Ian Douglas Smith and to install a majority rule.
The main grievances by the black nationalist leaders led by Mr. Robert Mugabe included racial discrimination which gave whites more rights than blacks including the right to vote, the right to education among other rights, land distribution imbalances where whites who constituted 4% of the population on the 90% of productive land and forced labour as blacks worked on the whites farms and factories for very low wages. The war, mainly a gorilla warfare ended in 1979 following a cease fire agreement for the Lancaster House Agreement where it was agreed that Britain would fund Zimbabwe’s land reform exercise.
Zimbabwe therefore gained independence on 18th April, 1980 with Robert Mugabe elected as Prime Minister and it initiated a land redistribution exercise using the willing buyer willing seller system until the black population became restless due to the ineffectiveness of this system as the whites left were not prepared to dispose their land. Between 2000 and 2002, there were widespread farm invasions mainly by former liberation war fighters targeting white owned commercial farms. At last 4 000 white farmers of British, Germany, South African and American origin were dispossessed of their land and they were alleged human rights abuses on the farms during the compulsory acquisition of land during the period mentioned.
On the issue of sanctions, the briefing paper states that the United States Government, under President George W. Bush’s administration, imposed unilateral sanctions against Zimbabwe in 2001, following human rights abuses against some White farmers which allegedly happened on farms. Some White farmers were reportedly killed in cold blood, while others were allegedly assaulted or forcefully removed from their farms. There were allegations that some crops were destroyed and some investments were destroyed as well.
So, this forms part of the background situation that then called for the sanctions. Then the United States Government responded to this situation through what is called ZIDERA. It was passed into law by congress in 2001, to promote allegedly democracy and economic recovery of Zimbabwe. Following the Land Reform Exercise, the Zimbabwean economy suffered major viability challenges including unstable currency, hyperinflation, high unemployment levels of over 90% coupled with a growing informal sector due to the retrenchment of skilled personnel, high levels of poverty and prostitution as well as high levels of HIV and AIDS.
There were also increasing resent among citizens in increased support for the opposition parties and civic society advocacy groups, who were allegedly fighting for good governance. The Government is allegedly to have responded through the media space, through Access to Information and Privacy Act, of course which they said was to limit the publication of falsehoods against the country and also perpetrating instability by these journalists who were publishing false stories in some cases.
Due to this development, the sanctions were imposed by the United States (US) Government in two forms. One of them being economic sanctions and the other being targeted sanctions. I will move on to the targeted sanctions. The US Government implemented targeted sanctions against senior Government officials and civil servants, who were believed to be at the centre of human rights abuses in Zimbabwe. So, the briefing paper also tackle the sanctions under that heading. It also tackles the human interests of promoting democracy, ensuring that there is multilateralism and all that sort. It also touches on the forced action, which the US Government takes, chief among them is the diplomatic engagement that needs to be taken. Under this heading, the diplomatic engagement involves using diplomatic means to engage with the Zimbabwean Government on terms that promote mutual benefits through economic and political cooperation. It is proven that where States cooperate for mutual economic gain, they are least likely to engage in any conflict that may disturb the attainment of absolute cause.
So, it will also go on to talk about the costs that will be incurred during the sanction lifting process and the benefits that will accrue to both countries and the possibility of congressional support. Already in the United States Congress, a Senator called Jim Inhofe has already tabled a motion in the US Congress to repeal ZIDERA. The rationale for this motion is that the US sanctions are hurting ordinary Zimbabweans. It is not the political elite that they are talking about. Over the past 20 years, the US sanctions have failed to achieve their intended results according to their own interpretation and they are no longer relevant after President Robert Mugabe left office. The sanctions have impacted severely on women and children, and a significant number of economically active Zimbabweans have left the country into the diaspora, mainly South Africa, the United Kingdom (UK) and Australia. Many have left their wives and children, bearing the brunt of economic hardships, partly blamed on the US sanctions.
The Briefing Paper will also look on the international support for diplomatic engagement and under this heading, it reads as follows; the imposition of sanctions on Zimbabwe happen during the leadership of Mr. Tony Blair, as Prime Minister of the UK. Mr. Blair’s disagreement with President Robert Mugabe on the way in which the Land Reform would be funded inevitably resulted in the chaotic Land Reform Exercise which precipitated the sanctions against Zimbabwe by the US, EU and the UK.
However, following the Brexit, which is the movement of the British State from the European Union (EU), the EU cannot continue to enforce these sanctions. Also following the election of President Emmerson Dambudzo Mnangagwa as President of Zimbabwe, there is no longer need for the continued imposition of sanctions. The President has fought to improve relations between Zimbabwe and the UK – [HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.]- President Mnangagwa has implemented a re-engagement policy aimed at normalising relations between Zimbabwe and the West, apart from instituting fiscal transparency and other economic reforms. The Government of Zimbabwe has also applied to be re-admitted into the Commonwealth, a group of former British colonies, meaning that the Government is prepared for any reforms required for such admission. The efforts of President Emmerson Mnangagwa in improving relations with the West therefore deserve international support.
I will look on the downside risks, the implication on the wider US strategy and recommendation. The recommendation is to have the US Congress remove the sanctions unconditionally and immediately. This should be done through a delegation sent to the congress and to the President of the United States of America. This delegation is being sent by this Parliament to ensure that they appear before the congress and the President and advocate for the unconditional removal of the sanctions. I thank you.
Source: ZimInsider
