admin
The Herald, October 29, 1979
MR DAVID Ennals, a former Member of Parliament with Britain’s Labour Government said in Salisbury yesterday that the co-leaders of the Patriotic Front, Mr Joshua Nkomo and Mr Robert Mugabe, must be prepared to modify their demands at Lancaster House if the talks were to succeed.
Interviewed at a Salisbury hotel before leaving to return to London, Mr Ennals said the blame for any failure to reach agreement at the conference would rest with the PF if it was not prepared to make major concessions.
“Equally, Lord Carrington should be prepared to show flexibility in being prepared to adjust to what I believe is a timetable too tight to be acceptable,” he said.
“It must be a matter of give and take in the corridors of Lancaster House.”
Mr Ennals spent three days in Zimbabwe-Rhodesia “to bring myself up to date with recent developments”. He has just spent three weeks leading a parliamentary delegation visiting Malawi, Kenya and Zambia.
During his three days in Salisbury, Mr Ennals met several ministers, representatives of the UANC, ZANU, the RF and ZDP, as well as representatives of the Zimbabwe Farmers’ Union and Accor.
“There is no doubt in my mind that people are looking with real hope to the outcome of the Lancaster House conference,” he said.
“The achievement of agreement on the constitutional was a real breakthrough. The second step — the agreement on transitional arrangements — is no less important and can no more be rushed than the debate on the constitution.”
Mr Ennals said the proposals for the appointment of a British governor and a commissioner to supervise the elections appeared to be widely accepted in Salisbury.
Where there was disagreement, however, was on the proposal to limit the transitional period to two months.
“The only group I met who felt that two months was a ‘workable’ period was the UANC, who saw a short campaign as an electoral advantage to Bishop Muzorewa and his supporters.
“On the other extreme, I found very little support for the period of six months or more as proposed by the Patriotic Front. Nor did I find — from blacks or whites — any support for the UN military force.”
LESSONS FOR TODAY
- Elections in Zimbabwe is an emotive subject in as much as it is a game changer.
- What people from both sides of the aisle forget is that it took a lot of sacrifice and suffering for ordinary Zimbabweans to have the right to vote.
- Advocates of human rights choose to turn a blind eye to the realities of history that yesterday’s colonisers now deem themselves as champions of human rights and the rule of law in Zimbabwe.
- If Zimbabweans had not reclaimed their land two decades ago, there would be no property rights to talk about, meaning that there would be no means of production. It would be power without glory.
- It is evident that although the Rhodesians and British relented, their animosity for the Patriotic Front was quite there for all to see, and is still evident.
- Although the Second Republic under President Mnangagwa has declared that “Zimbabwe is a friend to all and an enemy to none”, it continues to reel under economic sanctions imposed by Western powers (its former colonisers).
- The SADC region is impacted by those illegal sanctions. That is why they set aside October 25 as an anti-sanctions day.
Online Reporter