As highlighted in
various Regional and International agreements and initiatives, development
effectiveness is attained based on various key pillars, among them, country commitment (political
will), availability and efficient use of resources (human and capital) and
cooperation in doing business (trade).
Zimbabwe as a developing
country had vast of potential since its independence in 1980 from the colonial
rule. It is sad to note that Zimbabwe was once a bread basket of Africa,
ironically it has turned to be a basket case.
The victory that brought Zimbabwe to a new dispensation of independence was pinnacled with hope of a better and a sustainable economy. The emergency from an environment epitomized by suppression in form of colonialism gave Zimbabwe a clean slate to do better in national development.
It is however important to
hail the immediate post independence era in which policy formulation was
directed towards critical economic issues such education for all, eradication
of poverty, employment, consolidation of good foreign policy and regional
integration. The post independence era ushered with it names such as the
Bread Basket of Africa among other ululations directed towards the economic
strides that emanated from a promising economy.
The 1990s was characterized by various
happenings that shaped the events, among them the adoption of Economic
Adjustments Programs, the troubles brought by the Land Reform Program, the rise
of the opposition party Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), and the gradual
collapse of the economy due to reduced agricultural activity and compensation
payouts to War Veterans and increasing isolation by the International Community
due to cited governance and human rights issues.
To investigate the previously mentioned
points, Zimbabwe political environment plaid a major role in crippling its glamor towards effective development. Amidst a challenging domestic and
international environment, the Zimbabwean government has faced numerous
challenges in implementing the country’s development agenda.
The
politicians enacted unfavorable policies that limited foreign direct
investment. The Zimbabwe Indigenization Policy was said to
be at the center of government to acquire sustainable growth. However, the
policy has been criticized for lack of clarity and its vampire nature that
scare away foreign direct investment (FDI). The policy compels foreign owned
firms with a minimum capital of $ 500,000 to cede 51 percent of the shares to
locals.
Apart from policies, since year 2000 the ruling party ZANU PF has been accused of political violence and gross human rights violations, especially towards national elections, this has contributed to the increased isolation. The International community in the likes of European Union and USA imposed sanctions in Zimbabwe.
Apart from policies, since year 2000 the ruling party ZANU PF has been accused of political violence and gross human rights violations, especially towards national elections, this has contributed to the increased isolation. The International community in the likes of European Union and USA imposed sanctions in Zimbabwe.
As noted in the Report on Global Process
of Development Effectiveness (2014), the Western countries partnered in efforts
to mount pressure on Zimbabwe to improve the political, human rights and
governance state within the country. The United States promulgated the punitive
Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Recovery Act (ZIDERA) in 2001, to curtail
development aid and impose sanctions against the country. Western donor nations
and organizations similarly halted economic aid to and investment in Zimbabwe.
In October 2000, for example, the World Bank announced that it would extend no
more loans to Zimbabwe.
Similarly, in 2002 the EU imposed
restrictive measures on Zimbabwe through targeted sanctions, travel bans and
arms embargo under Article 96 of the Cotonou Agreement. The country was not
able to access capital in the form of direct overseas development assistance,
foreign direct investment or cheap international credit, which deepened crisis.
Confronted with these numerous challenges, Zimbabwe adopted the Look East
Policy (LEP) by focusing on China, indigenization and black empowerment
policies. China, guided by pragmatic realism, embraced the LEP, stepping in to
fill the gap left by the West.
As
the Government of National Unity ended in 2013, the ruling party has assumed
government and in the past year has been faced with internal factionalism that
has seen a series of events which threaten development effectiveness and
international relations. As cited in the Zimbabwe, Country Report on Global
Process of Development Effectiveness (2014), the parliamentarians who received
support in their communities for development projects from the American Embassy
under the Ambassadors Special Grants Program are being fingered as sell-outs an
part of a complex conspiracy for regime change.
The report further stipulated that, political
violence has since re-surfaced. With corruption scandals besetting the ruling
party, allegations abound of the involvement of Western countries in a supposed
plot to assassinate the President while removing individuals that were seen as
conservative and moderate. The political in-fighting has further divided an
already polarized country and CSO engagements with government at national and
local levels are increasingly seen and labelled as tantamount to implementing
Western interests.
The official discourse on aid is embedded
in the socio-economic and political history of the country which has triggered
key events over the years.
The relationship between most aid
agencies and the government has been very volatile, with aid agencies
criticized for meddling in local politics and being drivers of the regime
change agenda.
In this vein aid agencies have been
viewed by the state as largely representing the interests of their donor
countries rather than being genuinely philanthropic and are treated with
suspicion.
It is against such a background that in
2002, the government suspended operations of several aid agencies. Since then,
relations between the International aid community and the government of
Zimbabwe have been characterized by mistrust. It has been observed that there
is a general misconception about aid in Zimbabwe where most politicians see aid
as an end in itself rather than a means to an end, with the end being poverty
alleviation and socio-economic development.
To
this end, Official Development Assistance (ODA) in Zimbabwe is fraught with
lack of transparency, making it highly vulnerable to corruption by politicians
who use it for their own vested interests like gaining political mileage at the
expense of national development interests.
At the Second High Level Forum on Aid
Effectiveness (2005) it was recognised that aid can be a vehicle to produce
high impacts. The Paris Declaration was endorsed in order to base development
efforts on first-hand experience of what works and does not work with aid. It
is formulated around five central pillars: Ownership, Alignment,
Harmonisation, and Managing for Results and Mutual Accountability.
The year 2008 saw the Third High Level Forum on
Aid Effectiveness an even greater number and wider diversity of
stakeholders endorsed the Accra Agenda for Action (AAA). The AAA both reaffirms
commitment to the Paris Declaration and calls for greater partnership between
different parties working on aid and development. In this regard, Zimbabwe continues
to isolate itself through patronage politics.
The political instability attributed to the hovering of 146 % of GDP in external debt, the current external debt is estimated to be 10.7 billion. Zimbabwe’s domestic debt stood at $1,171 billion as of November 27, 2014 when Finance Minister Patrick Chinamasa announced his 2015 budget, with $264 million of that being in Treasury Bills issued mostly to banks and cash-rich companies for budget cash flow support. Sadly, 75 percent of the 2015 National budget which is pegged at $ 4 billion is gobbled by the pubic service wage bill at the expense of capital projects in form of infrastructure development.
Apart from the challenges being faced by
Zimbabwe in development effectiveness agenda, there is room for improvement and
claim the lost status, this can be done by ensuring a political environment
that is conducive for investment, address policy inconsistency, ensuring the
respect of human rights and the rule of law, collaborating with CSOs and
International partners for the causes of poverty alleviation among other.
Notes: CSO contribution to the Global Process of
Development Effectiveness: The Zimbabwean Context (NAYO, 2014)
OECDE, Better Policies
for Better Lives, http://www.oecd.org
Misheck
Gondo is a Policy and International Relations Expert. He is the Regional Youth Coordinator for SADC-AAYC.
