HARARE (Reuters) - South African President Thabo Mbeki said on Wednesday that outside players like the European Union or the African Union could not impose conditions for a solution to the Zimbabwe crisis.

(Advertisement)
Mbeki, who has been mediating the Zimbabwe matter since 2007, is pushing for talks that would pave the way for a power-sharing deal between President Robert Mugabe's ruling ZANU-PF and Morgan Tsvangirai's Movement for Democratic Change.

The South African leader has resisted Western calls to condemn Mugabe for holding a presidential election marred by violence and boycotted by Tsvangirai.

African leaders at a summit in Egypt issued a resolution calling for Mugabe's government and the MDC to negotiate a unity government, with Mbeki continuing in his role as mediator.

"The AU and SADC (Southern African Development Community) cannot dictate the outcome of negotiations between Zimbabwe and political parties," Mbeki told the South African Broadcasting Corp.

He also bristled at an EU declaration, made at the end of the African summit, that it would only accept a government led by Tsvangirai.

Neither side in the Zimbabwe crisis appeared ready to follow the line suggested by the AU.

Mugabe's spokesman rejected a Kenya-style power-sharing government and the MDC ruled out negotiations.

MDC Secretary-General Tendai Biti said on Tuesday that Mugabe's decision to go ahead with the June 27 election "totally and completely exterminated any prospects of a negotiated settlement".

AU SPLIT ON MUGABE

Mugabe, 84, was sworn in for a new five-year term on Sunday after election authorities announced he had won about 85 percent of the vote in the run-off, which was condemned by monitors and much of world opinion as violent and unfair.

Tsvangirai defeated Mugabe in the presidential vote on March 29 but failed to win an absolute majority.

The MDC leader reluctantly agreed to participate in the run-off but pulled out less than a week before because of violence in which he said nearly 90 of his followers were killed. He was arrested five times during the campaign.

There are fears Zimbabwe may be engulfed by further violence if the MDC and trade unions take to the streets to protest Mugabe's election rather than negotiate with the Zimbabwean leader, who has ruled since independence from Britain in 1980.

Although there is support for a power-sharing deal modelled on the one that ended post-election violence in Kenya earlier this year, the AU is split on how to deal with Mugabe, still seen by many in Africa as a hero of the anti-colonial struggle.

In the strongest public statement from one of Zimbabwe's neighbours since Mugabe's victory, Botswana called for Mugabe to be barred from the AU and SADC. Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga also has called for Mugabe to be suspended from the AU.

The summit did not back a U.S. push for U.N. sanctions against Mugabe, including an arms embargo.

(Additional reporting by Cynthia Johnston and Daniel Wallis in Sharm el-Sheikh, Nelson Banya and MacDonald Dzirutwe in Harare, Paul Simao in Johannesburg; Writing by Paul Simao and Barry Moody; Editing by Richard Balmforth)

thank GOD some people are seeing past britain and its allies ridiculous stance,just goes to show dialogue is the key to resolving the crisis rather than sanctions which wont affect mugabe and his cronies

lucabrasi:

. . . thank GOD some people are seeing past britain and its allies ridiculous stance,just goes to show dialogue is the key to resolving the crisis rather than sanctions which wont affect mugabe and his cronies

I understand dialogue is better than sanctions, but who should be involved in the dialogue? Is it the:

The WEST that have stated that they are not prepared to do a dialogue with Mugabe as president, so in essence Mugabe has to renounce his presidency before that can happen?

Or is it the MDC on behalf of the WEST's stooge, Tsvangirai, who have stated that Mugabe's decision to go ahead with the June 27 election has "totally and completely exterminated any prospects of a negotiated settlement"?

Or is it Mugabe who vehemently oppose the Kenyan-style power sharing government and neo-colonialism the WEST is trying to ram down his throat?

The only three options on the drawing board is millitary action (war), coup or ^more sanctions. 

Whichever way you look at it, this battle playing out in Zimbabwe is borne out of the leader of the armed national liberation struggle, saying that the WEST should not only free us from colonial rule but also from WESTERN economic domination.

And the response he has gotten so far from the colonial masters has a significant impact on the fate of our beloved Africa. Hopefully this resistance would not be futile and in vain. Roll on African's second, and hopefully final liberation.

My heart bleeds.

South African Government (Pretoria)

21 July 2008
Posted to the web 21 July 2008

Harare

Zimbabwean leaders Robert Mugabe of Zanu-PF, Morgan Tsvangirai of the Movement for Democratic Change and Arthur Mutambura of the MDC-Mutambara, signed the following agreement in Harare today in the presence of Southern African Development Community facilitator President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa.

PREAMBLE

We the Parties to this Memorandum of Understanding;

Concerned about the recent challenges that we have faced as a country and the multiple threats to the well-being of our people;

Dedicating ourselves to putting an end to the polarisation, divisions, conflict and intolerance that have characterised our country's politics;

Determined to build a society free of violence, fear, intimidation, hate, patronage, corruption and founded on justice, fairness, openness, transparency, dignity and equality;

Recognising the centrality and importance of African institutions in dealing with African problems, and agreeing to seek solutions to our differences, challenges and problems through dialogue under the auspices of the SADC mediation, supported and endorsed by the African Union;

Acknowledging that we have an obligation of establishing a framework of working together in an inclusive government;

Desirous therefore of entering into a dialogue with a view to returning Zimbabwe to prosperity;

Recognising that such a dialogue requires agreement on procedures and processes that will guide the dialogue.

NOW THEREFORE AGREE AS FOLLOWS:

1. Definitions

The 'Memorandum of Understanding' ("MOU" shall mean this written agreement signed by the Principals.

'The Parties' shall mean ZANU-PF, the two MDC formations led by Morgan Tsvangirai and by Arthur Mutambara respectively.

'The Principals' shall mean the President and First Secretary of ZANU-PF, Robert Gabriel Mugabe, the President of the one MDC formation, Morgan Richard Tsvangirai and the President of the other MDC formation, Arthur Guseni Oliver Mutambara.

2. Declaration of Commitment

The Parties hereby declare and agree to commit themselves to a dialogue with each other with a view to creating a genuine, viable, permanent and sustainable solution to the Zimbabwean situation and, in particular, to implement this Memorandum of Understanding.

3. Representation

The Parties will be represented by two representatives each in the dialogue.

4. Agenda

The Parties have agreed to the following Agenda:

4.1. Objectives and Priorities of a new Government

(a) ECONOMIC

(i) Restoration of economic stability and growth

(ii) Sanctions

(iii) Land question

(b) POLITICAL

(i) New Constitution

(ii) Promotion of equality, national healing and cohesion, and unity

(iii)External interference

(iv)Free political activity

(v) Rule of law

(vi) State organs and institutions

(vii) Legislative agenda priorities

(c) SECURITY

(i) Security of persons and prevention of violence

(d) COMMUNICATION

(i) Media

(ii) External radio stations

4.2 Framework for a new Government

4.3 Implementation mechanisms

4.4 Global political agreement.

5. Facilitation

The Dialogue shall be facilitated in accordance with the SADC and AU resolutions.

6. Time frames

The Dialogue commenced on 10 July 2008 and will continue until the Parties have finalised all necessary matters, save for short breaks that may be agreed upon for purposes of consultation. It is envisaged that the Dialogue will be completed within a period of two weeks from the date of signing of this MOU.

7. Venue

The Dialogue shall be conducted at such venues as shall be determined by the Facilitator in consultation with the representatives of the Parties.

8. Communication with the media

None of the Parties shall, during the Dialogue period, directly or indirectly communicate the substance of the discussion with the media. The parties shall refrain from negotiating through the media, whether through their representatives to the Dialogue or any of their Party officials.

9. Decisions by the Parties

The Parties shall not, during the subsistence of the Dialogue, take any decisions or measures that have a bearing on the agenda of the Dialogue, save by consensus. Such decisions or measures include, but are not limited to the convening of Parliament or the formation of a new government.

10. Interim measures

10.1 Security of persons

(a) Each Party will issue a statement condemning the promotion and use of violence and call for peace in the country and shall take all measures necessary to ensure that the structures and institutions it controls are not engaged in the perpetration of violence.

(b) The Parties are committed to ensuring that the law is applied fairly and justly to all persons irrespective of political affiliation.

(c) The Parties will take all necessary measures to eliminate all forms of political violence, including by non-state actors, and to ensure the security of persons and property.

(d) The Parties agree that, in the interim, they will work together to ensure the safety of any displaced persons and their safe return home and that humanitarian and social welfare organisations are enabled to render such assistance as might be required.

10.2 Hate speech

The Parties shall refrain from using abusive language that may incite hostility, political intolerance and ethnic hatred or undermine each other.

11. The role of SADC and the AU

The implementation of the Global Political Agreement that the Parties will conclude shall be underwritten and guaranteed by the Facilitator, SADC and the AU.

12. Execution of the agreement

This agreement shall be signed by the Principals in the presence of each other and shall be witnessed by the Facilitator.

Signed at Harare this 21st day of July 2008.

Robert G. Mugabe

President, ZANU-PF

Morgan R. Tsvangirai

President, MDC

Arthur G. O. Mutambara

President, MDC

Thabo Mbeki
Relevant Links
Southern Africa
South Africa
Zimbabwe

SADC Facilitator

Busy_body:

Or is it the MDC on behalf of the WEST's stooge, Tsvangirai, who have stated that Mugabe's decision to go ahead with the June 27 election has "totally and completely exterminated any prospects of a negotiated settlement"?

How is Tsvangirai a stooge of the West? Any proof to this ignorant slander?

Busy_body:

Or is it Mugabe who vehemently oppose the Kenyan-style power sharing government and neo-colonialism the WEST is trying to ram down his throat?

Again, any proof to this falsehood? Why is the West trying to ram neo-colonialism down his throat and not doing same to other nations? When the West imposed sanctions on Nigeria during the Abacha regime was it because they wanted to force neo-colonialism down our throats?

Busy_body:

Whichever way you look at it, this battle playing out in Zimbabwe is borne out of the leader of the armed national liberation struggle, saying that the WEST should not only free us from colonial rule but also from WESTERN economic domination.

This is not entirely true . . . the battle is of one man whose greed for power has ruined a nation. There are many democratic nations in Africa, are they under colonial rule? Do you fight the West by undermining your own local elections?

Busy_body:

And the response he has gotten so far from the colonial masters has a significant impact on the fate of our beloved Africa. Hopefully this resistance would not be futile and in vain. Roll on African's second, and hopefully final liberation.

My heart bleeds.

My heart bleeds for gullible Africans like you.

davidylan:

How is Tsvangirai a stooge of the West? Any proof to this ignorant slander?

Once again, Tony Blair made no secret of this when he was in power. Not a month went by without this being discussed in Parliament.

George W.Bush made no secret of this either. Check out the Zimbabwean Democracy and Economic Recovery Act about it's declaration to impose its own opposition media, NGO, etc. Also check out the United State department's Supporting Human Rights and Democracy report.

Why should the US government in the latest Human Rights report categorically state that they would do everything in their power to undermine Mugabe, discredit him for his failed policies and support anyone who criticises him?

davidylan:

Again, any proof to this falsehood? Why is the West trying to ram neo-colonialism down his throat and not doing same to other nations?
This is not entirely true . . . the battle is of one man whose greed for power has ruined a nation. There are many democratic nations in Africa, are they under colonial rule?

It is not news that in the mid-90's, the West attempted to impose their neo-liberal economic reforms on Zimbabwe via the IMF. IMF told Zimbabwe to pay full market value for the land they wanted, mind you, this was the land that was forcefully taken from the Zimbabwean by the european settlers.

The bone of contention in the objective of the Lancaster House agreement was that Britain would buy the land from the white settlers to give the blacks. They got shafted by the conservative party. The Labour party too in 1997, reneged on the promise and instead said they would loan money to Zimbabwe to buy the land.

This was the reason Mugabe snapped, and reclaimed the land from the whites and told them to seek compensation from London. This was when the West, with Claire Shorts at the forefront, started to label him as a dictator and an authoritarian.

davidylan:

My heart bleeds for gullible Africans like you.

Learn to think outside the box once in a while.

Wasn't it common news that Mugabe with his ZAPU and later ZANU party, barged his way to win the 1980 election with intimidation and brutality, by toppling the elected democratic leader Bishop Abel T. Muzorewa? Wasn't the decision to tell the Bishop to step aside for Mugabe and his cohort, done and dusted in London, during the Lancaster House agreement to fob him off his obsession with land reform?

What about Sir Robert Mugabe's alledged Matabeland massacres? Why wasn't there talks of regime change and sanctions then? What changed?

Just recently, the International Crisis Group, a right wing group, acknowledged that despite all, Mugabe's popularity in Zimbabwe is increasing whilst people are dissatisfied with Morgan Tsvangirai.