Land reform changed lives

struggle that the country faces. The unemployed nationalist believes Zimbabwe is at a point of no return as far as land reform is concern-ed and believes the Southern African country will get back into groove in a matter of years. Namibian newspaper, New Era (NE) spoke to Trust Mhaka (TM) on different matters, the land issue included

NE: Who is Trust ‘Mao’ Mhaka?
TM: I am an active member of Zanu-PF in Zimbabwe. Here in Namibia, I’ve been granted a bona fide membership of the Swapo Party, in the main wing. I am a simple nationalist strategist and a Pan-Africanist revolutionary. I am a revolutionary cadre, a land revolutionary to be specific.

NE: You have frequented Namibia several times, especially during the Sadc Tribunal hearing of the 79 white Zimbabwean farmers who were fighting for the land that was expropriated from them . . .
TM: As a patriotic Zimbabwean youth, I believe the future is our destiny as far as the land programme in Zimbabwe is concerned. I was well informed that the white commercial farmers, who are the sons of colonial settlers, were challenging the acquisition of land at the Sadc Tribunal.
They were led by Ben Freeth. Ben Freeth was not born in Zimbabwean. He is Zimbabwean by the fact that he is married to Laura Campbell, the daughter of Mike Campbell who was also challenging the acquisition of land in Zimbabwe.
Of course, the foreign media labelled it the land grab but ours was an uprising. We felt that it was time to get back the land that the ancestors of these farmers stole from us. I’ve been attending the hearings because although I am not formally employed in my home country, I am a graduate from the agricultural college and therefore I had an interest in the case. So I was eager to know what was happening.

NE: Where did the whole land issue start?
TM: In the Lancaster House Agreement of 1979, there are two key outstanding issues. The British government agreed with the then new government of Zimbabwe to buy land from white commercial farmers for purposes of re-distributing this land to landless black Zimbabweans. The other issue was about constitutional change. This was particularly where the constitution spoke about the right to own property and so on.
Yet there is no such thing as private ownership of land. The land belongs to the people or the state. The Patriotic Front, represented by Joshua Nkomo and President Mugabe, clearly agreed to the willing-seller, willing-buyer method. By then the Conservatives were in power in Britain with Margaret Thatcher as Prime Minister.
All along, our call has been ‘let’s share the land’. Eventually the willing-seller, willing-buyer method simply failed. People’s patience ran out around 1995 and 1996.
In 1997, when Tony Blair became Prime Minister, the British government wrote a letter to Zimbabwe saying they would not honour the Lancaster agreement because it was the Conservatives and the Labour Party that agreed to it. That’s what really angered the people of Zimbabwe, particularly so because the liberation war in Zimbabwe was about land.
The British government had agreed with the Patriotic Front that 10 years after independence the land issue must be resolved. It wasn’t resolved because of the change of government in Britain. But there was no change of government in Zimbabwe, so why must that affect us? That’s what sparked the revolution.”

NE: How is the current land situation in Zimbabwe? Have the intended beneficiaries benefited?
TM: The intended beneficiaries of the land programme are people from all sectors and classes. It intends to benefit everyone, as long as people apply. We have opposition members who now have land, as well as those from the ruling party. White people also own land, although the size of their farms has been reduced so that there’s enough land for everyone.
This is despite the Western media’s claims that the land programme is only benefiting Zanu-PF members. I am a member of the ruling party and an agricultural graduate but I own no land. Professionally, I belong to the new breed of farmers but I haven’t benefited from the programme although I have applied but it’s a process that has to be gone through.
The government is making efforts to ensure that there is increased agricultural production. But we are not at a stage where we can say Zimbabwe has reached its desired level, as far as agricultural production is concerned. But confidence is high that this would soon be achieved.

NE: My understanding is that there are people who grabbed farms and stayed there till now. Yet other people are required to apply for land formally. Why the inconsistencies?
TM: What happened in the late 90s was a revolution and I guess government understood the people’s frustration. Some people, especially the youth, did not have any relevant farming skills so they did not really bother to expropriate land. So some of us went to school first to acquire the skills. Some people grabbed more than one farm and government is against this. There will be no multiple farm owners.
There’s now a land audit going on which will determine who owns how much land and the President is very clear on this issue where he says none would be allowed to be a multiple farm owner.

NE: Zimbabwe was in the past dubbed the breadbasket of Southern Africa. How is the country’s current food security, especially in the wake of the land grabs?
TM: The food security situation is not really well and this is due to severe drought that has been haunting the country since 2000. The drought basically started in 1992 but it became worse in 2000. The past decade has been very bad as far as climate change is concerned. But also contributing to the bad food security situation was the transition when ownership changed from white farmers to black citizens.
White farmers had experience and they had access to financing because they had collateral. They could easily get loans and remember all banks in Zimbabwe are British-owned.
Currently, access to capital is the major challenge, mostly because of the economic war that the imperialists have waged against us. Economic warfare has poisoned all sectors. Production has been severely affected by sanctions. It’s not like here in Namibia where you have Agribank which helps everyone, including young people.

NE: How is the grabbed land being used in Zimbabwe? Is it being used for commercial or subsistence farming purposes?
TM: Some of these people have never owned land in their lives. Those poor souls. Many people used it for subsistence farming to feed their families. Government has now established the National Economic Empowerment Fund, which beneficiaries of the land reform programme can use as collateral to acquire funds from the banks. This would help those who want to use the land for commercial farming.

NE: What is the young Zimbabweans’ perception of the newly introduced Indigenisation Policy, which will require foreign companies to relinquish the majority of their stakes to Zimbabwean investors?
TM: Many young people see this policy as a noble idea from government, particularly so because it falls under the ministry of youth. This policy would also compel banks to start helping aspiring black farmers because in the past they only considered mostly white farmers. We support the President on this.”

NE: Speaking of the President, he was recently elected again to be Zanu-PF’s presidential candidate in the upcoming elections, results that drew criticism in some quarters because of his age. Your own views?

TM: “As a member of the party, I am saying we have a constitution which was followed to elect him. Age can only wrinkle the skin but not the state of mind. As the youth, we are very proud of President Mugabe, who played a key role in the Lancaster House Agreement. We, the youth are saying he must address those noble goals before he retires. If the president goes before the land issue is resolved, it will create problems for Zimbabwe. Any change of government in Zimbabwe is likely to reverse the progress that has already been made.

NE: Your party, Zanu-PF, was accused of stealing the 2008 elections. What really happened during those elections?
TM: We did not steal the elections. The MDC, the opposition, stole the elections. They are saying we stole the elections and we are saying we have been duped. Before those elections the party held elections to elect its candidate. Before that, the Americans infiltrated the party structures. You’d recall that Dr Simba Makoni was a member of the party’s Politburo. It was at the time when Christopher Dell was the US ambassador to Zimbabwe. At one press conference, Dell remarked that he would work together with some civil-minded people in Zanu-PF with a view to weaken the party.
Simba Makoni wanted to stand as the party candidate. He is a sell-out. He lost the elections within the party and he decided to stand on a Zanu ticket but as an independent candidate.
He did and got 8.3 percent of the national presidential elections vote. President Mugabe got 42 percent and (MDC’s) Morgan Tsvangirai got 47 percent. Simba Makoni and President Mugabe both stood on Zanu-PF tickets and if you put their votes together, it will give you more than 50 percent of the total votes.
People voted for Zanu-PF and any popularity survey would have proven that. That’s what created conflict, leading to the formation of the unity government. – New Era.