from international donors.177 President Mugabe, however, has accused Britain of being “at war” with Zimbabwe,
wishing to restore its own version of colonialism. 178
European Union
In October 2001, after months of diplomatic confrontation, the European Union formally opened
consultations with Zimbabwe under article 96 of the Cotonou Agreement that regulates the E.U.’s relations with
the African-Caribbean-Pacific (ACP) group of countries. Article 96 integrates human rights and good governance
criteria into E.U.-ACP relations. If there is no progress on human rights issues within seventy-five days after
formal consultations are opened, “appropriate measures,” that is, sanctions, may be undertaken. The E.U. named
political violence, media freedom, independence of the judiciary, illegal occupation of properties, and the way in
which the 2002 presidential elections would be conducted as its particular concerns. In February 2002, when
Zimbabwe refused to allow access to its chosen team of election observers, the E.U. introduced targeted sanctions
against key members of President Mugabe’s government, including provisions for freezing assets and visa
restrictions.
United States
The U.S. government repeatedly condemned political violence and the breakdown of the rule of law in
Zimbabwe in 2000 and 2001. In addition, the U.S. Congress passed the Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic
Recovery Bill (the House of Representatives passed the bill in November 2001, and the Senate in August 2001),
signed by President George W. Bush in January 2001, ordering U.S. representatives to oppose extensions of any
loans to Zimbabwe by the international financial institutions and authorizing the president, in consultation with
foreign governments, to take action against the individuals responsible for politically motivated violence and the
breakdown of the rule of law. The bill set out conditions for these measures to be lifted, including the restoration
of the rule of law “including respect for ownership and title to property,” and “commitment to equitable, legal,
and transparent land reform consistent with the agreements reached at the International Donors’ Conference on
Land Reform and Resettlement” of 1998. In late February 2002, following the imposition of E.U. sanctions, the
U.S. introduced similar sanctions on the Zimbabwe government, under the terms of the Zimbabwe Democracy
and Economic Recovery Act.
Commonwealth
A committee of Commonwealth foreign ministers, including the foreign minister of Zimbabwe, met to
discuss the situation in Zimbabwe, in Abuja, Nigeria, on September 6, 2001. The communiqué of the meeting
“recognised that as a result of historical injustices, the current land ownership and distribution needed to be
rectified in a transparent and equitable manner.” The ministers also agreed on the following:
(a) Land is at the core of the crisis in Zimbabwe and cannot be separated from other issues of concern to
the Commonwealth, such as the rule of law, respect for human rights, democracy and the economy. 179 A
program of land reform is, therefore, crucial to the resolution of the problem;
(b) Such a program of land reform must be implemented in a fair, just and sustainable manner, in the
interest of all the people of Zimbabwe, within the law and constitution of Zimbabwe;
177
Conclusions of the Meeting of the Committee of Commonwealth Foreign Ministers on Zimbabwe, Abuja, Nigeria,
September 6, 2001. Elsewhere, Britain has stated that it is willing to contribute £35 million, provided that land reform is
carried out “on these principles: without violence; according to the rule of law; genuinely empowering the rural landless poor
in Zimbabwe and giving them a stake in the land rather than distributing land on a haphazard basis after violence, or on a
cronyism principle which has unfortunately been the case in the past.” Edited extract from a press conference given by FCO
Minister of State Peter Hain, at 10 Downing Street, London, October 25 2001, available on the Foreign and Commonwealth
Office website, www.fco.gov.uk.
178
“Mugabe renews attack on Britain,” BBC website, January 12, 2002.
179
This statement was challenged by many in Zimbabwe, including the Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum, which stated
that “Although land is an important issue, the main reason for the crisis in Zimbabwe is not due to the land problem, but has
been induced by bad governance and serious misuse of power.” Complying with the Abuja Agreement: Two Months Report
(Harare: Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum, December 2001), p.4.
Human Rights Watch
39
March 2002, Vol. 14, No. 1 (A)
Select target paragraph3
Add to table of contents