Essay Networks

The government of Zimbabwe officially announced the introduction of the land reform programme in1985, declaring it would acquire more than 3,000 farms for redistribution. According to government figures, whites owned 40 percent of Zimbabwe’s agricultural land which is around 10 million hectares as recently as 1980, but black Zimbabweans live in over-crowded communal areas which have arid soil and have little or no access to water. (“The Politics of Land,” 2003). Because the people see land as an alternative source of income and food security, an inequality emerges from the situation. As a consequence of this unequal and race-based pattern of land occupation, the Zimbabwean government decided to take somewhat more solid steps and started the new land reform programme. This movement seemed to be a seeking process of democracy in the country. However, Robert Mugabe’s main point was that the land-reform was essential for poverty reduction, social stability and economic growth. In fact, the land-reform increased the unemployment rate, damaged the Zimbabwean economy and caused social problems.

Zimbabwe has been a colony of Great Britain since the arrival of Cecil Rhodes to the country in 1988. The Ndebele, inhabitants of the region, signed a treaty which allowed the British to mine gold in the area with the British South Africa Company in 1888. After the treaty, increasing flow of settlers led to war with the Ndebele in 1893. The Ndebele were defeated and a serious European immigration to the region began. The region became a colony with the increasing number of whites. In 1922 a referendum was held, and the referendum represented a clear disagreement between the whites and the blacks. Whites chose to become a self-governing colony rather than become part of the Union of South Africa. As a result of the referendum, Southern Rhodesia was founded as a colony of Great Britain. A land act which further improved white domination was passed which excluded Africans from ownership of best farming land in 1930. The labor law, which passed in 1934, prohibited the blacks from entering skilled trades and professions. As a consequence of these actions, blacks were forced to work in exchange for low wages on farms, mines and factories. In the 1965 elections, Ian Smith became the Prime Minister of Southern Rhodesia and made a unilateral declaration of independence. However, Britain did not recognize the declaration. The British government forced Smith to revoke unilateral declaration of independence and accept Black majority rule, but Smith did not withdraw the declaration. Great Britain cut all political ties with the newly renamed Rhodesia, and the African nationalist Zimbabwe African People’s Union and Zimbabwe African National Union parties started an armed fight against the regime in 1967. Ongoing negotiations failed to bring the two sides to an agreement during the 1970s. In 1979, a constitutional conference was held in Lancaster House in London. Patriotic Front, a union of Zimbabwe African People’s Union and Zimbabwe African National Union, leaders attended the conference and came to an agreement on a new constitution and a cease-fire. In the end, Smith wanted non-racial elections. In 1980 Mugabe’s Zimbabwe African National Union party won the election. After elections the new State of Zimbabwe became legally independent in 1980 (“Early History to British Control,” 2003). Robert Mugabe became the prime minister of a coalition government. Peace was maintained after the declaration of independence.

After a peaceful period of five years, the Mugabe administration declared that most of the land that belonged to white farmers would be distributed to blacks in 1985. Actually, this declaration brought a new conflict to the poor people of Zimbabwe. The government alleged that land-reform would provide justice for the people of Zimbabwe because the reform would allow the Zimbabweans to take the land which in fact belonged to them. Whites composed only 1 per cent of the Zimbabwe’s population, but they owned 40 percent of the most productive land as recently as 1980. Meanwhile, more than one million black families have struggled to survive on land that was allocated to blacks by the colonial regime. (“The Politics of Land,” 2003).

Land distribution first became an issue when the Land Acquisition Act was passed by the Zimbabwean parliament in 1985. The act was matching the “willing seller, willing buyer” clause of the1979 Lancaster House. The act gave the government the right to purchase immoderate land for redistribution to the blacks who are landless. However, the act had a limited effect because the government did not have enough money to pay compensation to the white landowners. In addition to under-funding, white farmers raised a strong opposition to the act. Some white farmers were obviously unwilling to sell any excess land while others overpriced their land. Because of the “willing seller, willing buyer” clause, the government was weak against the resistance of white farmers. As a result, between 1980 and 1990 only 52,000 families out of a target of 162,000 were resettled (McCandless, 2000). The Land Acquisition Act was enacted to boost the land-reform process by removing the “willing seller, willing buyer” clause in 1992. The act gave the government the power to buy land by force for redistribution. According to the act, a fair compensation was to be paid for land. Landowners were given the right to go to court if they did not agree on the price set by the government. Opposition movement of white landowners kept increasing until 1997. Britain withdrew financial aid to the land-reform programme and accused Mugabe of giving the land to his friends. As part of the execution of the 1992 Land Acquisition Act, the government published a list of 1,471 farmlands which are intended to be bought compulsorily for redistribution in 1997. In accordance with the 1992 act, landowners were given thirty days to submit written objections. In 1998, the government published the policy framework on the Land Reform and Resettlement Program Phase II which visualized the compulsory purchase of 5 million hectares from the 11.2 million hectares owned by commercial farmers, churches, non-governmental organizations and multi-national companies over five years (McCandless, 2000). The government drafted a new constitution with a clause which allowed the compulsorily acquisition of land for redistribution without paying compensation in 1999. The drafting period of the constitution was greatly protested by the opposition which was supported by white landowners. In February 2000, the government began compulsorily acquiring land, and Zimbabwe, having a history which is full of warfare and conflict, was driven into a new crisis (“The Politics of Land,” 2003).

Since the land reform began in 1985, the unemployment rate has been increasing each passing day in Zimbabwe. Main target of Robert Mugabe’s land-reform programme was white farm owners. However, black farm-workers and their families became the real victims of the programme. 1.2 million black farm-workers have been displaced since 1985. When a white farm-owner is forced to leave his farm, naturally the black farm-workers has to leave the farm as well. Most of the new owners do not want to have these workers work for them. As emphasized by Godwin, the black farm-workers spend their life on a farm and do not know any other profession. For instance, a farm-worker named Armando Serima says: “I was born at the farm, grew up at the farm, went to school on the farm, worked for the past eight years on the farm. My father died on the farm. All we know is farming. That’s what we want to do again” (Godwin, 2003). Farm-workers, being the most experienced blacks in agriculture, were expected to get some land from the redistribution of farmlands. According to Godfrey Magarabomba, director of Farm Community Trust, numerous farm-workers who are displaced will be unemployed for a long time (Robinson, 2002). Consequently, former black farm-workers who are currently unemployed compose a huge part of unemployment rate of Zimbabwe.

Mugabe administration’s land-reform programme damaged the Zimbabwean economy seriously. Zimbabwe has an agriculture based economy. Before the implementation of the land-reform programme, Zimbabwe was considered to be the bread-basket of the region. The number of privately owned commercial farms which had provided most of Zimbabwe’s maize has decreased since 1985. Mealie-meal is the main food for the Zimbabweans, and it is made from maize which became very hard to find in Zimbabwe. Only 200 of 4500 white-owned farms were fully functioning as of August 2003. Maize production was expected to decrease 70 per cent in 2003, and total wheat production of Zimbabwe decreased 52 per cent between 2002 and 2003 while the number of cattle herds fell from 1.3 million to 200,000 from 1999 to 2002 (Godwin, 2003). Decrease in food resources leads to scarcity and starvation. As stated by John Makumbe who is a professor at the University of Zimbabwe, the land-reform programme was like taking apart the backbone of an entire agrarian economy (Godwin, 2003). Tobacco production was said to drop by 50 per cent because 700 tobacco farmers had left the country by 1999. Because tobacco composes 40 per cent of Zimbabwe’s total exports, a decrease in foreign currency earnings was observed in 1999. Reports of Commercial Farmers’ Union proved that the amount of cotton and maize would decrease 50 per cent by 1999. Total agricultural production of Zimbabwe shrank since the beginning of land-reform programme. Financial system of the country was damaged as well because of the white farmers who had left the country without paying back their loans of millions of dollars to the banks. Two banks were collapsed by August 2003 (Godwin, 2003). As a result, the economy of Zimbabwe was ruined by the government’s land-reform programme.

Land Acquisition also caused social problems all around Zimbabwe. One of the social problems that has occurred is violation of gender equality in the distribution of land. More than 87 per cent of the land-owners who are registered with the government are male although 23 per cent of the farmland was jointly owned and less than 5 per cent of the farmland was totally owned by women. Furthermore, fewer black women owned the identified land in terms of area when compared to white women. According to Sam Moyo’s study, entitled “The Political Economy of Land Acquisition and Redistribution in Zimbabwe 1990-1999,” more women needed to be given land in order to maintain a better gender balance in land distribution, in land ownership, the agrarian composition and in the society at a large scale. (2000).

Besides gender problems, the programme caused a status of social instability among the country. The continuing and usually violent land distribution movement created an anarchic environment throughout the country. As a consequence of the scarcity of food, people are fighting for food on the streets everyday. Moreover, the opposition party, Movement for Democratic Change, and United Nations representatives accuse Zimbabwe African National Union -Patriotic Front, Mugabe’s party, of using food as a political weapon by giving it to the supporters who carry the card of Zimbabwe African National Union – Patriotic Front and refusing to give food to Movement for Democratic Change members. Movement for Democratic Change spokesman Renson Gasela states that one will be a second class citizen unless he proves that he is a Zimbabwe African National Union – Patriotic Front supporter (Dunn, 2000). Another way of having food is participating in the government’s “food for work” program. Traditionally, members of families with no harvest and no money to buy food work in public jobs in exchange for food. The government does not allow Movement for Democratic Change members to register for “food for work” programs (Menezes, 2003) Poor black Zimbabweans got the hardest hit from the land-reform programme. In addition to social chaos, United Nations specialists worry that the reform will trigger an internal migration movement from rural areas to cities which will further increase the unemployment rate.

To sum up, the land acquisition programme which has been exercised since 1985 and intended to maintain economic stability and peace in the society has led to an increase in unemployment rate in the country, a decline and recession in Zimbabwean economy and numerous social problems. Robert Mugabe’s Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front Party has pushed Zimbabwe into a very miserable and highly destructive situation in terms of economy and society. It is still possible to see people killing each other for food both in rural and urban areas. The situation may lead to a new civil war in poor Zimbabwe. The government feels the increasing pressure from the United Nations and Great Britain. Great Britain, being the ex-colonial power, should take more effective steps in terms of land-reform and force Mugabe administration to stop land acquisition by force.

References

Dunn, K. (2000, November). New diaspora: Zimbabwe’s farmhands [Electronic version]. Christian Science Monitor, 92, 8-10.

Early History to British Control. In Columbia Encyclopedia. Retreieved December 13, 2003, from http://www.encyclopedia.com/html/section/Zimbabwe_History.asp

Godwin, P. (2003, August). A land possessed [Electronic version]. National Geographic, 204, 13-20.

McCandless, E. (2000, April). Reconciling relationships while pursuing justice: the case of land redistribution in Zimbabwe [Electronic version]. Peace & Change, 25, 225-238.

Menezes, G. (2003, May). Letter from Zimbabwe [Electronic version]. Nation, 276, 27-30.

Moyo, S. (2000, March). The political economy of land acquisition and redistribution in Zimbabwe 1990-1999 [Electronic version]. Journal of Southern African Studies, 26, 5-32.

Robinson, S. (2002, August). Eviction day arrives for the white farmers [Electronic version]. Time Europe, 160, 25-27.

The politics of land (2003, August)[Electronic version]. National Geographic, 204, 106-108.