Some programmes have been criticised for providing a welcome ―band-aid‖ for victims, but ignoring the wider issues affecting people‘s well-being, sometimes promoting a ―premature reconciliation‖ between victim and perpetratorlv, or turning a blind eye to ongoing human rights abuses. Using the TRC in South Africa as an example, Hamber also draws attention to the way in which interventions can inadvertently favour particular ways of dealing with issues (sadness, grief, forgiveness, for example,) while other expressions of emotion (anger, desire for revenge) are less acceptable and therefore pathologised, suppressed, or acted out in other contexts. The consequences of this for peace-building and for mental health are important; it could be argued that Zimbabwe has suffered over a long period from the lack of opportunities for these kinds of emotions to be expressed and dealt with in an appropriate way. Thus, trauma and mental health become political programmes as much as mental health initiatives. In a context such as the Zimbabwean one, with repeated waves of widespread violence and a sustained culture of impunity (and immunity) distinctions between victims and perpetrators themselves may become very blurred. While in the midst of continuing conflict, and in the absence of legal and political structures of acknowledgement and protection (as in the case of Zimbabwe), one primary function of mental health professionals and human rights workers will be the essential role of ‗witness‘ .lvi Bearing witness to suffering and violence is itself a mode of social and psychological healing. There is a powerful discourse in Zimbabwe around trauma; people feel they are part of a traumatised nation and want their suffering to be acknowledged, with the damage to relationships and the social fabric to be made good. Any initiative will have to allow opportunity for stories to be told and to be inclusive of all those who have suffered and wish to participate, whether or not they have identifiable physical or mental health problems. Drawing on wide experience elsewhere in Africa, Wessells argues that a shift of emphasis is needed at community level towards a focus on well-being, bringing trauma work into line with development and peace-building , which both have a positive orientation, and highlighting the overlap and mutual interdependence of these spheres of work. Well-being is related to a range of factors including the long-term stability of the community and the ability of families and individuals to earn a livelihood. Peace will be short-lived if long standing differences are not addressed and ways found of interrupting the cycle of violence within communities and the transfer of issues and beliefs from one generation to the next. Development workers will find that they cannot make progress when people are still pre-occupied and distressed by what has happened to them and divisions within the community are not resolved. So it becomes very clear that , in post-conflict situations, organisations and workers who often regard themselves as working in distinct domains need in fact to work in close cooperation with each other, understanding each other‘s approaches and incorporating thinking from each other‘s disciplines into their work so that a holistic way of working develops. However, it will also be important for mental health practitioners to be highly aware that ‗positive‘ approaches, while obviously valuable, can easily be unwittingly used to disenfranchise grief, loss and suffering: a process that could have negative mental health consequences itself. This does not mean that the mental health needs of communities which have suffered from conflict or violence will be entirely met through development and peace-building programmes. It is crucial to identify different needs, to recognise that a wide variety of approaches will be needed, and to work towards the integration of work at different levels. The guidelines produced by the Inter Agency Standing Committee in 2007 reflect the need to bring together mental health and more general work for psycho-social well-being, which Wessells highlights Though there has been some criticism of them for under-rating the importance of prompt mental health intervention,xlvii they provide an extremely useful framework for planning and organising, including vital ―Do No Harm‖ principles (p.3) and a do and don‘t check-list (p.15). Designed for emergencies (situations where services have broken down, people have been displaced and lost their livelihoods either through natural disaster or conflict and war….)- and in some respects the highly politicised and ongoing conflict situation prevailing in Zimbabwe does not completely fit with their designation- they are nevertheless extremely relevant to the ongoing situation found within the country.