adminTZ: As your term in Zimbabwe ends, how would you assess your stay in the past few years?
CR: It has been interesting and fascinating. I have seen many things change and still changing, in particular in the area of the economy. There have not been big changes, but certainly the country is moving in the positive direction. There have been minor changes in the way we (US and Zimbabwe) conduct dialogue as we tried to sit down and find solutions and focus on things of mutual interest.
I have interacted with a broad range of people from Government, the community, the civil society and students across the country. I must say my meetings with students have been the most important.
TZ: How do you reconcile your views of Zimbabwe before coming here and now that you are leaving?
CR: Your views on a place you have never been to are very sketchy. My knowledge of Southern Africa was limited as I had never been here. The media tends to provide sketchy details as they focus on what is newsworthy. The coverage I was exposed to prior to coming here tended to be mainly on the negative. So, I cannot say I had a clear picture of Zimbabwe. . . but I waited to form my own opinions. Zimbabwe has its own negative, but also its positive aspects that need to be highlighted.
TZ: Have relations between Zimbabwe and the US improved since your coming to Zimbabwe?
CR: I hope so! The relations are not perfect, but relations among countries are not meant to be ideal. At first the engagement was very emotional and things were said on both sides. We were like elephants fighting and trampling on each other. However, we have been able to change that.
TZ: What would you say were the keys and impediments in your diplomatic work in Zimbabwe?
CR: The impediment was the toxic relationship we had which we tried to move away from. It takes time to build a relationship and listen to each other. On the positive side, the people are the strongest point. You find that when you go beyond the surface you begin to focus on issues and find that there are rational people. I wish we could have done that much earlier, but I am not unsatisfied with where we are as the relationship is much better now. Of course there were occasional irrational sniper attacks, but we have space for things that matter to improve human dignity . . .
TZ: Some people say your style of diplomacy varied from that of your predecessors. How can you describe yourself as a diplomat?
CR: My view of diplomacy is that it is an art not a science. It is about finding mutually acceptable ways of solving problems and agree to disagree without being disagreeable. It is about building bridges rather than burning them. My style is to focus on what you want to achieve and do the necessary things to achieve it. That is my diplomacy whether I am selling books or I am learning something new.
TZ: And lately you have apparently been “softening” towards Zimbabwe to the extent of remarking on the opportunities here in tourism and the economy, for example. One paper here quoted you as regretting US’ hardline stance on Zimbabwe. How much should we read into this?
CR: It is regrettable that we have wasted so much energy by focusing on the negative. However, my views have not changed much as I have always said it was regrettable to be spending time arguing. I made it clear that we should be sharing information. I said the same thing in July 2011. There has been a colossal waste of energy on both sides for far too long.
TZ: You have met President Mugabe, and you once spoke charitably of him. What is your take on the man?
CR: He is a very intelligent man. In my own meetings with him he has been very engaging even when we do not agree since we come from different backgrounds. I respect his views and our conversations have been cordial and polite. The last time we met we spent one hour and we only differed for seven minutes . . . we talked at length about the economy and he expressed gratitude for US assistance in education and health.
TZ: And your assessment on the leadership of his fellow GPA principals, PM Tsvangirai and Professor Mutambara?
CR: Every senior official is different in this scenario where they have had to deal with decades of conflict and artificial divisions. However, I think it will be more appropriate for the people of Zimbabwe to assess their top leaders. What I think matters in Washington.
TZ: On the contentious issue of the Zimbabwe Transition to Democracy Act, how has this policy and law shaped Zim-US relations?
CR: The sanctions have had no significant effect and actual impact, but have generated tones of rhetoric. Zidera directs US executives at multilateral lending institutions to vote against the extension of new loans to Zimbabwe or cancellation of its debts.
However, Zimbabwe had not been able to access loans at the World Bank or IMF because of its debts and has not made any fresh application for the US to vote against. There is no evidence of macro economic impact of the sanctions.
TZ: The European Union has been revising its sanctions regime, but the US seems adamant. How would you explain this discrepancy given the fact that in Section VI Zidera actually provides for the consultation between the US, Canada, the EU and what it calls “appropriate foreign countries”?
CR: The difference between the US and the EU is that we have different approaches. The EU has a schedule for review while the US has a continuous review process. It is not correct that we have not changed. In 2009 there were 140 individuals on the list and there are now 121 individuals.
The list is periodically reviewed based on the events on the ground and information to make changes. There are no major changes, but we do make changes . . . they are not as fast as with the EU because of government bureaucracy.
Zimbabwean individuals on the list are in the company of thousands others and staff dealing with them are no more than five. It can be difficult to move a piece of paper in a bureaucracy. Some of us who have worked in the system have come to accept this.
We talk frequently with the EU and Canada to ensure policy consistency. But they are sovereign countries with domestic constituencies and considerations.
TZ: What is your response to perceptions by some people here that the US’ extension of sanctions to diamond companies is a way to close all avenues that Zimbabwe might find to escape the harmful effects of sanctions?
CR: Whoever says that has not done their homework. There are quicker and more effective ways of bringing an economy down. For example, how many diamond companies are operating in Marange? Four! And how many companies are on the list? Two! The decision to include the two companies was based on the ownership of the companies in which a sanctioned entity has more than 50 percent ownership.
On the impact of sanctions, I would be hard-pressed on information of how the sanctions have impacted because I am not privy to how the companies operate and the information given on the impact has been conflicting.
TZ: How do you see relations between your country and Zimbabwe growing in the future?
CR: I think they will get better as long as we continue talking to each other especially on things of mutual interest such as health, education, agriculture and business.
TZ: What are the handy tips you may offer to your successor Mr Wharton in dealing with Zimbabwe?
CR: Keep your goal and keep working towards it . . . Things do not happen overnight. It easy to burn a house, but it takes time to rebuild it. Focus on the positive.
TZ: Now that you are formally leaving the political and diplomatic field, what are you going to miss about Zimbabwe and what do you set your sights on?
CR: I am going to miss the people — people make the country. Zimbabwe has beautiful scenery and wildlife and I have taken thousands of photos of wildlife. I have tens of thousands more pictures of people and they are the most memorable. I have 8 000 friends on Facebook and I will carry them with me!
TZ: You are a writer, should we expect a piece on Zimbabwe in future?
CR: Probably. I have several things I need to do immediately. I need to do some more research on Great Zimbabwe. I also want to do a piece on minority people like the Tonga and other smaller groups that have been ignored by history, but are unique and fascinating.
I also want to focus on the youth of Zimbabwe who make 65 percent of the population. A lot of focus has been on the older guys but the 65 percent are the future.
Online Reporter