Coordinated attacks as weapons to destabilise Mnangagwa's gov't

The West is very proud of its relationship with Africa and has invested heavily in ensuring that its economic interests on the continent are not threatened, undermined or dislodged. The rise of China as an economic powerhouse unsettles many in the West.

This comment is not a defence of the role of China and the growing partnership it is carving out on the continent. Rather, it seeks to consider what could be at play, while acknowledging the expectation the new administration has to deliver on. While the New Dispensation has made engagement and re-engagement one of the key pillars of its policies, it has also been clear that this position should not be misunderstood as a weakness on its part.

Last week, President Mnangagwa complained about what appears to be coordinated attempts at outright manipulation and misrepresentation of facts in order to portray a certain narrative based more on fiction than facts.

The country's detractors, the President pointed out, had declared cyber warfare against Zimbabwe in pursuit of a regime change agenda.

Ambassador Machivenyika Mapuranga, in one of the earlier interviews in his diplomatic career, explains that records at the Colonial Office in London refer to Australia, Canada, New Zealand, South Africa and Zimbabwe (then Rhodesia) as "white men's countries", earmarked for permanent white settlement. The long-term objective being to eventually outnumber the indigenous populations in these countries. Today, this policy is evident in the make-up of the indigenous populations in Australia, Canada and New Zealand.

South Africa and Zimbabwe are therefore the unfinished projects of this colonial policy and would tend to explain the West's obsession with these two countries.

The West has become adept at how it "cares for the people", which is why governments from that part of the world continue to provide extensive assistance to countries on the continent. The West also presents itself as the major benefactor of Africa during the past six decades.

In addition, it argues that in order for a country to reach its full potential, its wealth and natural resources must serve all of its citizens. It is incontestable that Africa has vast natural, mineral and agricultural resources as well as human capital.

Is it therefore, not ironic that after all these decades of being beneficiaries of the West's largesse, Africa continues to be portrayed as being a poor continent? Why hasn't the West's generosity lifted Africa out of the poverty trap, given the decades of development aid to the continent?

Whose growth has Africa's vast riches been fuelling? In order to understand the interest in and the current obsession with Zimbabwe, it is important to consider the predicament of just four countries - the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Chad, Libya and Iraq.

They have not known peace because of the West's interest and desire to control the natural resources of these countries. The West is good at calling out governments to address corruption and the illicit extraction of the wealth of African countries for personal gain.

These activities continue to undermine development and the well-being of the citizens of the continent. Yet it is important to understand whose economies are benefiting when Africa's kleptocracy spirits away the wealth of their nations. When Mobutu Sese Seko and Sani Abacha bled the economies of their respective nations, it is important to understand where and in which safe havens the stolen wealth was stashed away.

The West could start by ensuring the proceeds from corruption and other illicit financial flows are not welcomed and entertained in their jurisdictions. It should not be difficult to enact laws barring looting of the continent's resources by some of its elites, which find refuge in the West, if the West is serious and committed to ensuring Africans benefit from the wealth of their continent.

Africa's kleptocracy would then be forced to keep the wealth on the continent. This could in turn be used to power development on the continent and improve the well-being of its citizens.

The New Dispensation is not made up of angels and it is still to deliver on all its election promises, but there is more to the relentlessly choreographed attacks on Zimbabwe. Part of the warfare against Zimbabwe has to do with the perceived loss of influence and economic opportunities. It is also partly because of the entrenched belief that colonies do not cease to be colonies simply because they gained independence.

China's involvement in the construction of the new Parliament in Mount Hampden, the expansion of the Robert Mugabe International Airport, the Hwange and Kariba Power Stations represent significant losses for economies of the West. It is partly because of these lost opportunities and influence that regime change merchants are hard at work, plotting to destabilise Zimbabwe.

The West, and not China, has a well-documented history of destabilising and fuelling regime change on the continent since the time of slavery. That history record includes Patrice Lumumba's short-lived reign in the DRC in 1961; Kwame Nkrumah's ouster in Ghana in 1966; Chad's Goukouni Queddei in 1982 and Libya's Colonel Muammar Gaddafi in 2011.