This mounting pressure forced the Government to initiate its “fast-track land reform programme” in 2000.16 The institutional framework of governance in post-colonial Zimbabwe retained structures, laws and an “elite” attitude and culture used during colonial times despite the liberation from minority rule in 1980.17 The nationalist elite seemed to have perpetuated the colonial mentality of high standards for a few at the expense of the majority. In the end, while the liberation struggle was against the ‘white settlers’ and the economic and political power they monopolized, the Government was not able to reverse the unequal and exploitative nature of colonial capitalism itself18 . 1.4.2 The Economic Crisis The background to the current economic crisis has several aspects: the inherited ‘colonial economy’ of Rhodesia, the post-independence Economic Structural Adjustment Period (ESAP) of the early 1990s, and the result of the economic policies undertaken since. By Sub-Saharan African standards Zimbabwe at independence in 1980 inherited a relatively sophisticated and diversified economy, but it already suffered from a large fiscal deficit, low economic performance, high unemployment, price controls, and a lack of foreign currency19 . Many analysts point to the failure of ESAP in the early 1990s as a major negative economic turning point. The austerity measures imposed by the ESAP led to, inter alia, the massive retrenchment of skilled and unskilled labour and of the civil service; the closure of many manufacturing industries; general price increases; and the deterioration of social services. These factors, combined with the liberalisation of the economy, led to the gradual but systematic decline of the formal economy and to the growth and emergence of the informal sector, especially in the rapidly growing towns and cities of Zimbabwe. Three political factors deepened the economic crisis in the late 1990s. First the appeasement policy towards war veterans adopted in 1997 when the Government decided to issue cash handouts to ex-combatants who had threatened to destabilize the government with a public display of discontent at the time. The handout sparked an inflationary spiral from which the economy has still to recover 20. Secondly, Zimbabwe’s military intervention in the conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo had serious consequences in terms of budgetary allocations and deficits. Thirdly, the ‘Fast Track’ land distribution programme of 2000 negatively affected agricultural production, the mainstay of the Zimbabwean economy. It prompted the imposition of targeted sanctions from the European Union, the US and several Commonwealth countries.21 While these sanctions were not directed against the economy per se, they contributed to the polarization of national and international media and the domestic political environment and also led to negative travel advisories that heavily affected the tourism industry. The Zimbabwean 16 The invasions were mainly led by war veterans but also by peasants from the largely communal lands and unemployed city residents (Report of UNDP Mission to Zimbabwe, October, 2000) 17 Submission by Deprose T. Muchena. 18 Ibbo Mandaza, Zimbabwe: The Political Economy of Transition, 1980-1986. Codesria, Dakar Senegal. 19 Zimbabwe’s economy was also heavily subsidised (mainly by South Africa) during the Smith regime that was under economic sanctions. It led to a relatively self-sufficient economy, which after independence and liberalisation of the economy and loss of subsidy, became unsustainable. 20 The cash hand-outs in1997 are often attributed to have kicked off the downward spiral of the economy, as the Zimbabwe dollar fell from 1:10 to 1:27 in the same year. Today, the official exchange rate is 1:10,000 (and 1:23000 in the parallel market). 21 These were imposed on select members of the Government and ZANU-PF members, banning them from travelling to and freezing assets in these countries. 16