different to previous ones by local authorities was the rhetoric of criminality: “There are no sacred cows. Criminals have been hiding in the shacks and we are after them. They shall face the wrath of the law.” 17 • Go back where you came from Government officials were unrepentant about destroying homes in the towns, arguing that any “indigenous” Zimbabwean by definition had a rural home and that therefore to destroy somebody’s urban home was not significant – people should simply “go back where they came from, to the rural areas”. OM can therefore be seen as an attempt at social engineering, to force people out of the urban setting and into more remote rural settings – where ZANU PF has political and social control in most parts of the country. As this report will illustrate, if this was the intention, it has failed: the vast majority of people displaced from demolished structures remain in urban centres. Motives - undeclared: • Threat posed by increased organisation of the informal sector - fear of an urban uprising Over the last few years, the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) had been slowly organising and integrating the informal sector into their structures: the informal sector now supports 80% of Zimbabweans and this was an obvious and strategic move for the unions, who were losing membership through loss of jobs in the formal sector, and who were also concerned about the lack of rights and solidarity within the informal sector.18 This structuring had been done countrywide, without drawing much attention from government, over a period of several years. When the Central Intelligence Organisation (CIO) realised that this was what had happened, they sounded the alarm, and the informal sector became targeted as a possibly formidable source of resistance to government in the future, representing as it does, millions of Zimbabweans. OM coincided with an increase in urban unrest in Harare, where there had been minor protests around lack of service delivery, which had been forcibly quelled by riot police. The CIO had allegedly received intelligence of plans to escalate urban discontent. The demolitions were intended to destroy the informal sector’s ability to organise; they were also to depopulate, and to enhance police and army control, of town and city centres. • Punishment of opposition supporters The urban areas have consistently voted for the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) in all national and local elections over the last five years. OM has been seen as an act of retribution and a reminder that ZANU PF effectively can do what it wants even in areas where there are MDC elected local councils and Members of Parliament (MPs).19 • Control of the towns The demolitions have allowed government to increase their administrative control of urban centres. OM enabled ZANU PF to punish urban voters for consistently voting in favour of 17 The Chronicle, 13 June 2005; “Makokoba structures removed”. Police Inspector Smile Dube of Bulawayo. Interview with senior ZCTU member, who believes strongly that OM was primarily aimed at crushing the increased capacity of the informal traders to organise themselves. 19 SPT, June 2005, discusses the contempt of ZANU PF for urban dwellers, who are referred to as “totemless”, and not really authentic Zimbabweans, in the prevailing rhetoric during OM. 18 16