EU court verdict racist

SO the European Union's General Court has thrown out a complaint against sanctions imposed on former Attorney-General Johannes Tomana and 120 other individuals and companies, claiming that the punitive measures are legally legitimate?In this pen's humble opinion the court's decision is a non-event steeped, as it surely is, in blatant ethnocentrism. Or, otherwise, the rejection of the complaint, is racist and pegged on Western imperialism's overall economic sanctions imposed on Zimbabwe in 2002 to protest the country's reclamation of its land, an inalienable right, through land reform, to try to reverse the appropriation of our Godly endowment through regime change.

Many of the illegal sanctions fell away last year - lifted under pressure from various progressive forces elsewhere in the global village - but President Mugabe and the First Lady, Grace Mugabe and the Zimbabwe Defence Industries remain subject to asset freezes and travel bans with Tomana, now Prosecutor-General, other individuals and companies remaining on the EU's blacklist.

On first imposing the sanctions the West had hoped for a worst-case scenario under which they believed the embargo would completely cripple Zimbabwe's economy with a backlash in the form of people rising against the Zanu-PF government to bring about its fall and in the process reverse the reclamation of land from farmers of European stock who had too much of that asset in order for blacks who needed it the most to be settled on the land.

The West's contention was and still is that white-owned farms are sacred cows and should never have been touched under land reform so blacks could have remained in abject poverty without land as a source of both food and income.

Nothing therefore could be more racist than the West's ethnocentric position on land reallocation to blacks. And so when the illegal sanctions failed to achieve their intended superlative objective we started to hear deafening noises about "human rights violations" by Zimbabwe's government because land possessed by whites was brought into the reform equation.

But come to think of it; when in the 19th century poor Europeans left their cold countries for space and sunny weather during the scramble for Africa, none carried pieces of land on their backs among their baggage. Instead they seized the choicest pieces of land on the continent while hapless natives watched helplessly — as what happened when Europeans drove away native Americans from their land when first crossing the Atlantic Ocean.

But did the world hear of any so-called human rights violations by whites against indigenous blacks? The answer is no because, for Big Brother, blacks had no rights to talk of and so in the imperialist's view there were no human rights violations committed at all.

And anyway, the Zanu-PF government moved in to acquire land after Britain reneged on a promise made during the Lancaster independence talks to pay compensation for white owned farms that the Zimbabwean government would require in implementing the land reform programme. What was worse was that the United States government passed a law imposing sanctions on Zimbabwe in support of Britain and tigress America's cubs in continental Europe lined up behind London and Washington with their own sanctions to try to break the spine of the Zanu-PF government.

Contextually, therefore, the blacklisting against Tomana and other individuals and companies should be viewed as nuances of the grand, satanic Western economic embargo against this nation.

Stated otherwise, Western countries, driven by a war-war rather than by a jaw-jaw culture do not want to be seen to have surrendered to pressure to lift sanctions without a fight, hence the decision by the EU General Court on Wednesday.

It is nothing short of laughable - and a typical example of clutching on straws to save face - for the EU court to claim that Tomana was "engaged in activities that seriously undermine democracy, respect for human rights and the rule of law".

But what examples has that court given to support its assertions? None whatsoever because Tomana is not guilty of any of those charges. And anyway he does not run a kind of fiefdom of his own in Zimbabwe so that, perhaps, he would use what carte blanche powers at his disposal to engage in the violations over which the august EU court indict him.

At any rate the West has a tendency for gullibly swallowing even the flimsiest of complaints from quisling opposition parties in Zimbabwe as violations by the Zanu-PF government of the human rights of opposition political groups.

But of course, nothing could be further from the truth as some of the little parties opposed to the ruling party and its government tend to be proactive in both their rhetoric and behavior to try to court sympathy and monetary support from imperialist Western governments for whom opposition parties in Africa appear to be used as Trojan horses for imperialism's hegemonic desires in foreign lands.

As for the asset freeze and travel ban by the West on President Mugabe, the First Lady and the Zimbabwe Defence Industries, only the running dogs of imperialism will continue to endorse the measures as legitimate.

The truth, of course, is that because of his principled stand against imperialism and all of its machinations, our President is seen in the West as their number one enemy and a stumbling block to their contemporary imperialism while, on the contrary the progressive world regards him as a hero as it does all other leaders of liberation movements in power in Africa.

Moreover, does the world possess such shocking short memories as to forget that during the struggle to liberate the African continent from colonial rule liberation movements were demonised by the West as "terrorist organisations" with their leaders and fighters classed as "terrorists"?

It is no secret that imperialists still do not trust liberation movements in power and wish they were removed yesterday to pave way for stooges who will open up their country's rich resources for plunder by imperialists.

As such the asset freeze and travel ban for Zimbabwe Defence Industries should surprise no one because the aim is to weaken the country's defences so the enemy might march in without firing a shot to depose the government of the day should and when that need reaches a scintillating peak.

Lest anyone forget this looming threat, the British would have long invaded Zimbabwe militarily to unseat the Zanu-PF government had not South Africa under the astute and progressive leadership of the then President Thabo Mbeki refused to be used as a staging post for the invasion of this country.

It would appear that the security of this country economically as well as of other countries on the continent hinges on a strong South - South co-operation between Asia and Africa.

Thus a Look East policy by Africa and the Asia Africa Commemorative Conference in Indonesia  in which President Mugabe chaired a session looks set to open new opportunities for unprecedented social, political and economic co-operation between the two continents. President Mugabe's address to the summit as chairman of the African Union and the presence of other African delegates at the summit should see a surge of interest by Asian countries in economic cooperation and the exploitation of Africa's rich natural resources for the benefit of players in both continents with Zimbabwe and other African countries using the cooperation as a point of departure on the road to industrialisation, Africa's new, fervent desire.

And when that happens you (yes, you) can be sure that any sanctions on Zimbabwe will fall away as more European countries sneak in for new ties with Zimbabwe so they will not be shoved in the shade by Asia economically and politically.