Ethnicity Conflict in Zimbabwe - Term Paper Example

Ethni Conflict in Zimbabwe Images of ethnic conflicts in other continents have stolen the limelight all over the western news media once they occur. However, when the same occurs in the African continent, it is given very little attention if any. This has been occasioned by the seemingly universal belief that, ethnic conflicts in Africa are an occurrence of every day and which deserves little attention otherwise the news providers will dwell in Africa and fail to report other sensitive matters in the world. When such conflicts attain some level in magnitude, then they are reported. In some other instances, they are only reported when the other areas of the globe have nothing worth talking off. This belief can be true somehow since Africans are viewed by the westerners as beings who murder one another brutally and thus do not deserve extensive media coverage which is accorded to other conflicts arising from negative ethnicity e.g. the Albanians and the Serbs. In Africa, the issue of ethnicity is well pronounced like I other continents. This is so because, each and every country in Africa has got a share of ethnic groups which are not less than 15 to be precise. However, in many countries, the big tribes are the ones which are more pronounced than the minorities and they always tend to use there numbers to marginalize the minority tribes. One of the main causes of ethnic conflict in Africa and which has made them severe than in other parts of the world is the fact that, colonial masters exploited as well as compounding inter-ethnic relations (Nnoli, O. 1998). As an example, in countries like Burundi, Rwanda, Cote dIvoire, Ghana, Kenya, Tanzania and Zimbabwe, the colonial masters utilized the method of segmenting the ethnic groups for their own advantage. The divide-and-rule policies which were highly favoured by the colonial masters assured the non-performance of the different ethnic groups. This protected them from the problem of insurrection thus making it easy for them to rule. To the masters, it was advisable to divide the existing and potential ethnic groups which they thought were threats to their existence. This was mainly done to pit them against each other so that they could use all their energies to fighting one another and not to think of overthrowing colonial governments which were imposted by the masters (Nnoli, O. 1998). According to Nnoli, O. (1998), this same strategy was used by the apartheid regime in South Africa to use the blacks to fight the blacks for their own developments-colonial rule. Colonialism entailed many cross cutting actions at all levels to the level of forming identities for the ethnic groups. Further, according to Taisier, A & Robert, M (1999), the divisive nature of capitalism in Africa is also another factor which is responsible for the severe ethnic conflicts which are felt in Africa. When people perceive another group as being economically secure, they often tend turn to ethnicity as a lean back and in particularly if those who are perceived to be economically fit belong to a different ethnic group than the others (Taisier, A & Robert, M 1999). This causes the need for every person to be economically viable which is mostly caused by those with the resources to equally distribute them to the various societies. Whether in rural Kenya, Liberia or in Mauritania, the main push into conflict is the socio-economic needs each one of us really values. Internal conflicts among countrymen who are citizen of the country also called civil wars have been occurring every now and then. This internal conflicts have been as a result of many factors which include; unequal distribution of government resources, ethnicity-mostly in Africa, job discriminations, authoritative rule among many others. By definition, these conflicts are defined as non-governmental organized violence in a country. In the world, governments attempt to attain a monopoly over violence inside and outside its borders. However, when the monopoly is lost, it leads to the emergence of a rebel organizations, an internal conflict erupts. The issue of ethnic conflict is quite evident in Zimbabwe which is currently facing the highest inflation rate in the world. To start with as Bangura, Y (2002) puts it, the referendum vote in 2000 and the parliamentary elections in 2001 brought all this into the limelight. In the discussions towards the two, the talk of ethnic representation took centre stage in the public debate. Each and every politician thought of his people and what they will really get from the elections as well as the referendum vote. It is common sense that, in most cases, these politicians don’t have the interest of the entire societies in their hearts but are after using the tribe for their own political gains; like the colonial masters. Zimbabwe has many ethnic groups in which the Shona account for over 60 percent of the entire population of the country. The Shonas’ are followed by the Ndebele which forms the second largest ethnic group. There are about 15 ethnic groups in Zimbabwe. In the country, there has been a tendency in academic as well as in policy circles to view ethnicity as pathological. However, as Bangura, Y (2002) puts it, ethnic fragmentation in Zimbabwe and in other African countries has been the major cause of the economic growth tragedy which has befallen many countries. The country has had its share of internal conflicts although to a small extend as compared to countries like Rwanda, Burundi and Sierra Leone, the kind of internal conflicts which have been experienced in Zimbabwe is of another type though tribal/ethnic. The government has been operating as though it belongs to few Shonas, they have been treating the other minority tribes as leftovers. This has been happening in the job market, in the provision of services by the local authorities among many other inequalities which are all directed to the minorities. As a start, the unequal distribution of government resources has been wanting and this has forced people to come together on noticing that, the distribution is done in the lines of ethnicity. Mugabe has been doing good things although always to his tribes’ men. This is a negative action and has led the country to lose the required cohesion among the tribes which could have led it to higher grounds. In the country, government positions (plum jobs) are given to the right individuals; from the tribe of the ruling class-the Shonas. The practice of alienating individuals due to their tribe leads to internal conflicts or war in many instances. Another factor which is contributing a lot is the fact that the colonial masters planted this in the lives of many Zimbabweans. The Ndebele were to follow Nkomo while the Shonas were to follow Mugabe thus, this led to the differences which are being felt in the country. In Zimbabwe, nationalism was an organizing principle and its first elections were basically a referendum on white settler rule (Bangura, Y 2002). Without exception, the tendency for the majority groups to act as a single group in the first years once they attain independence is usually very strong. In this case, the ruling party, Zanu-PF, brought together the aspirations of all the sections of entire society which were disadvantaged during the reigns of the white rule. However, the country still faced the problems of funding, but the party held the land reforms in order to keep the rural citizens a bit happy so that it could remain in leadership for quite some time. At that time of independence, the ruling elites inherited a healthy budget as well as a good economy which meant that, it they could pursue better progressive policies and projects in both the education and the health fields for all Zimbabweans while providing job opportunities with a good income to the urban low, middle class and other workers from all walks of life. However, the major political divide among Africans in the early years of Zimbabwe’s independence was ethnic mainly, Shona versus Ndebele. Joshua Nkomo, who led the Ndebeles, had a party called Zimbabwe African People’s Union (ZAPU) and he with his tribes men were worried that there would be marginalization although their worries were well founded (Bangura, Y 2002). In Zimbabwe according to Moyo, K (2006), tribal resentments by politicians and rivalry are a possible threat to the nation building process. After independence, Mugabe used the Gukurahundi massacres as an excuse for absorbing his rival party, ZAPU, thus leading to a one-party state. The move was a clear example of liberal democracy which was based on a voluntarily social contract; not coercion (Moyo, K 2006). After Nkomo’s appointment, the Matebele (Nkomo’s tribe land) have become a politically persecuted minority which needs protection from the Shonas. To Moyo, K (2006), they are to suffer the consequences of the bad policies which are made by a government; a government they have did not choose and which they have continuously shown their disapproval of. However, the party with the majority numbers wins the election and Mugabe has been the president since then till today. His economic policies have been a let down to the once prosperous nation in the southern part of Africa. All in all, he continues to enjoy much support from his Shona tribe and he is assured to be re-elected again in the coming general elections. The much felt crisis which is being felt in the country is as a result of tribal inclinations. Zanu PF which belongs to the Shona feels that, primarily it is a revolutionary party and the is the only factor that delivered Zimbabwe from the yoke of colonial rule in 1980 forgetting the menace it has brought to the whole country and not to the Ndebeles alone-but his tribes men, the Shonas included in the suffering (Mabhena, N 2006). According to Mabhena, N (2006), many Zimbabweans don’t belief that, Zanu PF has never been a national party but a party formed to seeking to stand for the mere interests of those who administer it as well as their friends and relatives. It is a party which is founded on splitting Zimbabwe into two tribal groups- the Shona and the Ndebele. To the party, Shonas must provide national leadership. The party has always had in their leadership many Shonas taking up key leadership positions with a few of Ndebeles who are perceived as apologists making up the to the leadership elites (Mabhena, N 2006). These Ndebele apologists often behave like guests in the party and make no decisions or raise questions on the development of the other half of the country-parts which are for the Ndebeles. To Moyo, K (2006), the Matabele issue is critical and cannot be wished aside. This should not be taken to negate the fact that there are other small groups in the country, such as the whites, and the Asian community. Zimbabwe is home to these people. In almost the same manner as the nationalists were against the white community running overall affairs from a position of privilege, there is still a reasonable concern that the Shonas are using their majority position in the political arena in a similar way and to drive the minorities to an edge where they cannot be rescued. Further, the land reforms agenda sponsored by Mugabe has not gone without much effect to the other tribes. Although the whites were to relinquish their huge tracts of land to the Africans, the militias which were generally from the ruling party did unleash terror to every body; whites, workers and other innocent men. However, those who suffered the most were not from Mugabe’s tribe; Shona but from the tribal minorities. The land which was to be repossessed form the white farmers were mainly meant for the leaders tribes men and some few cronies from the other tribes. In conclusion, the tribal ethnicities felt by the other countries are also felt in Zimbabwe. The Shonas feel superior in that, the president of the country is from that tribe and thus they treat the others has less equal to them. This has led to the internal conflicts being felt in that country since the election of the president; Mugabe for that matter is caused by his influence among the Shona and they have the sense of association with him but in real sense, they are suffering with the rest of the country following his weird economic policies. Had it not been for the ethnic differences in the country, then a good leader could be leading them to greater heights and not Mugabe. Further, tribalism has led to some ten thousands of the citizens of that country to go to exile in South Africa which is an ally so as to try to get a job to cater for their needs. Reference Bangura, Y (2002). The Herald - Zimbabwe News Online: "Government of national unity should be rejected". Available from: http://www.unrisd.org/unrisd/website/newsview.nsf/(httpNews)/455776F48F8CD19EC1256C1C003F2BBE?OpenDocument Mabhena, N (2006). The tribal warlords that rule Zimbabwe. Available from: http://www.newzimbabwe.com/pages/opinion64.12515.html Moyo, K (2006). Ndebeles a minority that needs protection. Nairobi: General Printers Nnoli, O. (1998). ETHNIC CONFLICTS IN AFRICA. Nottingham: CODESRIA. Taisier, A & Robert, M (1999). Civil Wars in Africa, Roots and Resolution: A comparative analysis of the causes and consequences of Africas civil wars. Retrieved 04 February 2008, from, http://mqup.mcgill.ca/book.php?bookid=283 Read More