Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Blame game: Mugabe lashes out at UK

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 04 June 2008
ROBERT Mugabe, the president of Zimbabwe, yesterday blamed Britain for the collapse of his country's economy.
In a speech to a UN summit on the global food crisis, he claimed the UK and its allies had colluded to enforce trade sanctions that had wrecked his land reforms, widely blamed for bringing starvation to his country.

He defended his policy of seizi
ng land from white farmers, saying he is undoing a legacy left by Zimbabwe's former colonial "masters".

And he contended the land reform had been "warmly welcomed by the vast majority of our people."

"It has, however, and regrettably so, elicited wrath from our former colonial masters," Mr Mugabe said.

"In retaliation ... the United Kingdom has mobilised her friends and allies in Europe, North America, Australia and New Zealand to impose illegal economic sanctions against Zimbabwe," he added.

The sanctions, he claimed, aim to "cripple Zimbabwe's economy and thereby effect illegal regime change in our country."

Mr Mugabe's land-reform policies are blamed for turning a country once considered a regional "bread basket" into one suffering hunger and economic collapse.

However, his participation in the summit continued to cause controversy yesterday, as his presence was branded as "obscene" by both Douglas Alexander, the UK international development secretary, and Stephen Smith, Australia's foreign minister. Bert Koenders, the Dutch minister for overseas development, pledged to "ignore" Mr Mugabe during the summit.

Tom Casey, the US State Department spokesman, said Mr Mugabe's presence could only serve as "an example of what not to do in terms of managing agricultural and food policy."

He told reporters that Mr Mugabe's "misrule" has turned Zimbabwe into a "tragic" place where people do not have enough food.

As the summit continued to focus on the issue of solving the world food shortage, Ban Ki-moon, the United Nations head warned delegates that the world needs to produce 50 per cent more food by 2030 to meet increasing demand.

The secretary-general said countries must minimise export restrictions and import tariffs during the crisis and quickly resolve world-trade talks.

"The world needs to produce more food," Mr Ban told the Rome conference. "Food production needs to rise by 50 per cent by the year 2030 to meet rising demand."

However, claims that the rise of biofuels were contributing to the food crisis by replacing food crops were rebuffed yesterday.

Leaders of US, Canadian and European industries appealed to world leaders and to Jacques Diouf, who heads the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organisation, which is hosting the conference, to avoid any hasty condemnations or actions that would endanger the world embracing alternative fuels.

"It would be highly precipitous ... for the United Nations or other international bodies to single out biofuels as the major cause for escalating food prices and take actions that might lead to even higher food prices," the industry leaders said in a letter.

Lunch leaves bitter taste at hunger talks

WORLD leaders yesterday enjoyed a three-course lunch as they discussed solving the problem of more than 850 million starving people.

At the three-day talks on the global food crisis at the headquarters of the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO), leaders and delegates were served starters of sweetcorn and mozzarella vol au vents as well as pâté of pumpkin and crevettes. To follow there was a choice of cutlets of veal with cherry tomatoes and basil or snails a la romaine. Desert was a fruit salad with vanilla ice-cream.

White wine was served with the lunch, which took place on the top floor of the FAO's headquarters.

Topic on the agenda were rising food prices and the best way to tackle the problem which has seen several countries hit by rioting.





Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 03 June 2008 10:09 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Zimbabwe
 
1

Highland Mighty,

04/06/2008 00:32:41
We can expect a letter of support for Mugabe from Salmond with days.

If Iran and Lybia can be friends of the SNP then surely Mugabe can too.

What a fantastic government we have.
2

Scottish not British,

04/06/2008 01:10:23
#2
What about the refusal of the UK government to do anything about Mugabe when they could? the purely tokenistic gestures in dealing Mugabe have only served to embolden him and send the message that its OK to rig elections and torture and kill people who voice dissent. The only reason they didn't bother is because there's no oil there. Libya and Iran are unpalatable and objectionable choices as 'friends'. The Unionists are worse than the SNP from a moral perspective given that they send their own citizens to their allies without trial, a country that still carries out the death penalty, the same country that knowing of a bomb threat prevented their civil servants and diplomats boarding the Lockerbie plane yet allowed it to be filled with civilians? More unionist double standards how glad we all are to be under London's heel...

3

Maisie from Morningside,

04/06/2008 01:30:23
Zimbabwe achieved independence in 1980.

Nobody knew that Mugabe would go bonkers and it's certainly not Britain's responsibility.

That's what independence means.
4

Itchy,

04/06/2008 06:50:11
Mugabe is retarded, like all Marxists.
5

yockel,

04/06/2008 07:15:26
If you listened to what Mugabe said about the UK, it was pretty accurate. He didn't mention his own failings of course.
6

Erchie Broon,

04/06/2008 07:36:19
Betcha Gorgon Brown will fly over to Harare in the next few weeks to apologise and offer billions in reparations.Then we will see him at Heathrow waving a piece of paper declaring "Peace in our time" a la Chamberlain.
Britain has become a Nation of wimps under Socialist rule allowing any petty Dictator or African Despot to shout the odds at us.
7

carrottop,

Dumfries 04/06/2008 07:38:05
Its the third world breeding like rabbits (and the English) that are responsible for the food crisis.
8

Louis Catorze,

04/06/2008 07:44:04
Snails as a main course? Dear oh dear...
9

Guga II,

Rockall 04/06/2008 07:53:51
#1 High and Mighty. You are a plonker.
10

Itchy,

04/06/2008 07:56:43
#5 Zimbabwe is independent, Scotland is not.

BTW you are a fascist. I have seen your posts on other subjects.
11

El Sabio,

Sibbertoft 04/06/2008 08:00:51
There is a comparison between Robert Mugabe and Henry VIII. Henry was twisted and warped so is Mugabe.

#4 Mugabe is not retarded, he is a psycopath

#7 You are correct. The British are so politically correct and do not wish to create waves or rock the boat
12

alba-cridhe,

New Zealand 04/06/2008 08:01:59
#4
Hey Itchy

do you even have the first idea about Marxism? or indeed Facism #11. or are we just playing a game of 'ism' bingo and your trying to see how many political ideologies you can fit into one day?




13

Unimpressed one,

04/06/2008 08:13:24
#2, Never mind the US what about Harold Wilson's Labour government. Had he supported Ian Smith's declaration of UDI and not instigated economic blockades, we wouldn't see the mess that is present-day Zimbabwe.
14

Anglofile,

04/06/2008 08:38:17
Assassination time me thinks?
15

,

04/06/2008 08:52:08
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
16

bluehead,

edinburgh 04/06/2008 08:53:11
there can only be one answer,that is to get rid of all
politicians,then the rest of us can live happily ever after
17

Edward,

04/06/2008 08:54:30
#5
Your a disgrace to compare the SNP with Zanu PF
the SNP government were democratically elected by popular vote and are a popular government
Where as Zanu PF were not elected domcratically to government, currently they should not be in government, as in the last election they did not win. Robert Mugabe was not democratically elected either and both he and Zanu PF are very unpopular with the people of Zimbabwe. If there was any comparing to do, perhaps you should compare with Gordon Brown and the Labour party, both unpopular and as far as I can recall Gordon Brown was not lected to the post of prime minister
18

,

04/06/2008 09:08:25
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
19

Iain's,

Barcelona 04/06/2008 09:29:14
Mugabe is right!

We should never have given the country its independence withouit wiping out tribalism and ensuring that the commercial farmers were safeguarded from nationalisation.

The "N" word fits Mugabwe perfectly.

20

ole sailor ,

shifting sands 04/06/2008 09:30:53
Whats MUGABE said backwards ?

E BA GUM !

quod erat demonstrandum
21

oder,

Scotland 04/06/2008 10:21:54
3 Maisie from Morningside,04

"Nobody knew that Mugabe would go bonkers and it's certainly not Britain's responsibility."

Not true! the Rhodesians knew, but they were white colonial`s so Britain doesn`t listen to them, Smith told the the British Government at that time(Harold Wilson) and the Thatcher government in 1980 that Mugabe would destroy Rhodesia!they choose to believe some one else rather than their own, as usual the British know best and put him into power by refusing to go along with the more moderate African leaders, in their haste to grovel to the "mad dog" of Africa the British made him a knight (buying his friendship?) and the political establishment went in to overdrive conferring all kinds of honours on a terrorist murderer (doctorate from St Andrews university etc.. now withdrawn) who has continued to this day with the only thing he`s good at "terror"

Mugabe is right! it is Britain's fault! for failing to understand and recognise the evil that he is! he was a chancer and Britain was conned and Rhodesia the breadbasket of Africa turned into the hell hole of Zimbabwe!to the utter shame of the rest of Black Africa
and in their hypocrisy stand by and watch this criminal operate, Shame on Britain! shame on humanity!
22

Dougie, Edinburgh,

04/06/2008 10:45:17
3 Maisie from Morningside

"Nobody knew that Mugabe would go bonkers and it's certainly not Britain's responsibility."

Wrong on both counts. Ian Smith warned that black rule in Zimbabwe would be disastrous. Zimbabwe's hardly exceptional, misrule, corruption and tribal violence are the norm in Africa. Britain could easily have supported Ian Smith but instead, it undermined him.
23

Biker,

Ayr 04/06/2008 11:11:24
Surely Smith should have considered this prior to demanding UDI? As soon as majority rule was introduced Smith and his cronies were always going to lose.
The problem was that before independance the colonialists were happy to keep the blacks in their place and provide next to nothing in the way of proper education. Hence the present situation abounds.
Mugabe is a crook and thug, and sadly has the support of the armed forces so upsetting his power base is always going to be difficult. Even when he loses an election he is still immovable.
I dont regard the man as articulate in the least. I watched his address to the conference and he came over as a sad little man with little regard for his own people. he must be worried as the value of his stolen money must be worth next to nothing.
24

TimW1234,

Ottawa, Canada 04/06/2008 11:19:38
Mugabe is a deluded, delusional, syphilitic old man who is the laughing-stock on the international stage.

He is quite adept at blaming everybody else but himself for the appalling situation in Zimbabwe and that must be a symptom of his incipient Alheimer's and tertiary syphilitic condition.

He is the scum of the earth and where is a good assassin when you REALLY need one?
25

Gusto,

04/06/2008 11:32:54
"Nobody knew that Mugabe would go bonkers" - who knows that he is?? Spoken to his shrink have we? You can invade and destroy a county and you're NOT nuts??. Get a grip colonialists!
Its a repetition of poor old Mr Boogie - Idi Amin - if he was'nt nuts before, the CIA, MI5 and Mossad made sure he ended up nuts.
26

hullohullo,

04/06/2008 11:52:30
Hes the only one to blame for his country going down the pan! have you seen the photos of his house? it just shows where the millions of pounds he has cyphoned from his own country have went.
27

Neal! Whit? Haud yer Whisht!!,

04/06/2008 11:56:32
Marxist? With a 'tache like that?

He's probably not nuts, although he may be demented! After all he's 80-something now, yes?

It strikes me that an Assassination would not be in Zimbabwe's interest. Looking at it logically, if he's 'taken out' in any way other than an election or 'natural' death the Military will step in, declare Martial Law and then we will have a situation we have all seen before in all parts of the world . . .
28

Media 1,

south africa 04/06/2008 12:07:58
Once an African leader, always an African leader! And therein lies the problem..
Having never pushed themselves to build an economy or grow an infrastructure, Africans battle to manage economies and infrastructures! It is generally not the African way for leaders to look after the masses, it is the leaders right to live in opulence whilst the masses worship him and thank him for whatever scraps he decides to offer them.
Mugabe is an African, he cannot be expected to think on a level that is common for most Europeans. He is intellectually crippled, always has been!
But he will be dead soon and Zimbabwe will embrace Britain again. Mugabe's name will be removed from every single book and he will be remembered as the man who destroyed Zimbabwe! He is an animal and the people of Zimbabwe know that.
29

oder,

Scotland 04/06/2008 12:26:52
26 Biker,Ayr 04/06/2008 11:11:24

"Surely Smith should have considered this prior to demanding UDI?"

Yes! but if you know its wrong or won`t work as Smith did! do you give in and allow your country to be destroyed 20 or 30 years earlier,a beautiful country ruined by a thug, how about the ability to do the job? the 1999 argument was turned down because it would not possible to bring up a African ruling class in so short a time! Rhodesia at that time had the highest number of Africans in School 1 in 6 not great by European standards but exceptional by African standards! the worst Ethiopia 1 in 111, black Africa have not bettered this record today,if it were possible the number of African countries who have independence would be sailing ahead today unfortunately this is not the case,Africans have equality, with it comes equal responsibility, and looking at Africa responsibility is one thing they can`t/wont handle,to now claim its the whites/British is to acknowledge that black Africans were not ready for majority rule! justifying what Ian Smith said in the first place!
when do African become true equals? its fine to have a revolution, but you have to get over it at some time, can`t blame it on the reasons for having it in the first place! you need to move on! Mugabe didn't he cant do the job period! the myth that its all the white man fault is the excuse used by tyrants and dictators for their own excess!
30

Allan(handofgod137),

04/06/2008 12:55:18
The only real solution to afria's problems is to reinstiute colonialism.
31

Media 1,

cape town 04/06/2008 13:05:02
#34 Allan

You are 100% correct! But that is the perfect solution for a perfect world.
African people who live and work in Europe and America, Australia or New Zealand find it easy to intergrate and live responsible European lives because the powers that be are white as are the systems. But place them under black leadership in a predominantly black societies and the wheels will come off because there is no support structure, no systems, no planning, no competence, no forethought and no hope.
I have studied this continent, I have visited different places and I can tell you now that African rule is a disaster at every single level. Sure there are capable Africans, but they are few and far between. And worse still is that the few Africans who pull up their socks and become lawyers and doctors, drive flash cars and live in big houses because they have worked for it, are accused by the black masses of being coconuts. White on the inside!
I live here with millions of other white people and NONE of us get this continent! Its a mind f@ck
32

morris,

edinburgh 04/06/2008 13:06:33
1 Stupid statement !

3 Even more stupid statement !
33

Nell,

Far from the Struan 04/06/2008 13:07:17
A palindrome of Robert Mugabe is "E ba gum Trebor".
34

Why can't I use my usual name?,

Glasgow 04/06/2008 13:14:55
#35, I hadn't heard that much elsewhere.
35

morris,

edinburgh 04/06/2008 13:31:20
32

Whilst I share your opinions of Mugabe,I doubt that the answer is once again embrace Britain particularly (and certainly not in isolation).I presume you mean embrace European democracies one of which is the UK.
Even Scotland does not do that as you are only too well aware, (but dont agree no doubt).
A change of government(s) is all they require,I would have thought,and sooner or later they will rid themselves of the dictators and tin soldiers who invariably feature in every countrys history. They will probably need help from neighbouring African nations however,and like it or not they are one continent and failure of one is surely bad news for all.
I must confess to a double standard here however. I did not approve of the invasion of Iraq because it was oil based, despite loathing Saddam Hussein
I would be quite happy to see UNited Nations authorise an invasion of Zimbabwe however, and take this despot out.
I cannot justify it probably,since no approval exists for such a move even from Zimbabwe opposition leaders as far as I know, but I would support it nevertheless.
You are well placed to keep us up to date here. Would Zimbabwe citizens welcome an invasion(apart from Mugabe supporters of course)?
36

Luke Skywalker,

United Kingdom 04/06/2008 13:51:22
36 Morris - Maisie at no 3 is NOT making a stupid statement. In principle she is correct (her only mistake was to make the statement about an idiot) and please remember that if we go down the independance route.
37

Andrah,

Embrugh 04/06/2008 14:38:28
From the bread basket of Africa to a complete basket case in less than 30 years. Another triumph for socialism, or perhaps it is more complex as Media 1 alludes to?
Sadly yet another poor reflection on the totally ineffective and corrupt UN, who allow criminals like Mugabe and his well-heeled goons to come to a "Food Summit" when his people are starving and sound off at their enemies -- you couldn't make it up!!
38

Bob Fae Fife,

04/06/2008 16:07:51
Lets just go in and take it back. It has been proven time and again that these people do not have the mentality to rule themselves.

Oh and before anyone says it I am not racist!!
39

ddmc,

04/06/2008 16:24:53
Mugabe hasn't always been mad, he's 84 & been in power for 28 years, power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely, you lose touch with reality, a bit like thatcher & bliar although they were removed from power before they could cause any more damage
40

Bemused and above it all,

04/06/2008 17:03:31
At least Mugabe HELD an election, at least there was some attempt at PRETENCE of the PROCESS of an election!
As far as I'm concerned he's more democratic and honest than Gordon Brown, who has held how many elections to secure his mandate as prime minister despite promising to? But hey, lets blame the SNP, Salmonds a diddie!
41

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 04/06/2008 17:10:12
#46

Brown took over as the leader of the party in power. We do not have a Presidential election we have a Prime Minister who is the leader of the party in power. To call what happened in Zimbabwae an election and even compare it to the Uk just shows how bitter some people are.
42

Bemused and above it all,

04/06/2008 17:17:02
47#
Really? So to promise an election to provide creedence to his mandate, then not do it and cling onto the current shambles is admirable?
Sorry Mugabe, like Thatcher, does what he says, I am doing whats right for me, you are getting shafted! As little as I may like them at least their straight!
43

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 04/06/2008 17:28:36
#48

So Mugabe is straight? What about th election he just lost so didn't bother announcing the result. take your medicine.
44

Biker,

Ayr 04/06/2008 18:39:20
oder. Perhaps I missunderstand you. If Smith (as he did) anounce UDI and then regect the 1999 proposal, he effectivly allowed the black middle classes to call the shots immediately. Had he accepted the 1999 proposal he would have had close on 30 years to provide the education and infrstructure through education. Sadly he did not and hence we have the situation as it is now. A complete cluster f@ck
45

Biker,

Ayr 04/06/2008 18:40:15
oops should read "reject". sorry fat fingers tonight.
46

Itchy,

04/06/2008 19:24:01
#16 Yes, I do know the meaning of the word.

You certainly are one. Every post you have made consists of 'I don't like this, tax it and then ban it'. The state knows best about everything to you. That is why you are a fascist.
47

Itchy,

04/06/2008 19:25:14
#13 I know about Marxism. It pretends to be of benfit to the 'workers' but just gives loads of power to the state.

Mugabe is a consistent Marxist.
48

Itchy,

04/06/2008 19:34:29
#29 Mugabe, through his own free will, has imposed Marxist-Leninism on his country and the mess is there to be seen.

Zimbabwe did not starve under British rule and did not starve under Ian Smith's rule either. It is starving now.
49

John Blackley,

Florida 04/06/2008 20:28:39
It is grimly amusing that Robert Mugabe - who, remember, took a flourishing, economically viable country and reduced it to a refugee camp - points the finger of blame at Britain in order to divert the attention of his citizens away from his own disastrous dealings.

It is alarming that a number of people - including some who comment here - buy it.

While Zimbabwe was sinking into failure and ruin there were any number of African countries, currently hosting Zimbabwean immigrants, who might have intervened. As Mugabe was draining the very lifeblood from his country, the organisations representing African countries might have intervened. When Mugabe took up murder, torture and intimidation as electoral strategies, the United Nations might have intervened. (Yes, that last was said more in jest than in hope.)

Mugabe may point the finger. That means nothing whatsoever in reality.
50

oder,

Scotland 04/06/2008 21:58:37
50 Biker,Ayr 04/06/2008
Rhodesia like every other African country today did not have the facilities or the means to supply the vast majority of Africans with education although they were the best in Africa for the amount of Africans at school
20% of their national budget (1972)was spent on education it has never been matched by any African country, and even far exceeds many countries elsewhere including the UK,like all countries you never have enough to go round! Britain was colonial master in Southern Africa from 1801 to 1960s and with their vast resources didn't educate the Africans (because even the British did not have the resources to do it) the idea that some how 240,000 white Rhodesians could now do in 30 years what the British Empire could not do in 159 years is just laughable! shows just how out of touch(as usual) and total lack of reality from the British governments, the truth of the matter was Britain was washing its hands and didn`t give a hoot about Rhodesia!
if Rhodesia was judged as an African country which it was, instead of a European country which it wasn`t it would be the shinning light of Africa! maybe not perfect by your standards! but remember its an African country, show me any African country that has gone from bushveldt to breadbasket in 67 years that is a great achivement indeed.The Rhodesians where betrayed by by the British who were quite happy to play the racecard regardless of the concequences, as long as they got out of it.
51

yoric,

04/06/2008 22:33:58
Just another crisis in another African Country, been there bought the t shirt.

Africa is better off governing itself, free of its old colonial master's.

Yeah sure.
52

Biker,

Ayr 05/06/2008 19:25:39
oder . Thanks for the comments. In principal I agree but still lay most of the blame at the Smith regime. It was after all their rule which took Rodesia out of the British sphere, knowing that the likes of Mugabe would take control.
Your points are well made however about lack of interest by Britain prior to that period, and I still maintain that had the population been properly educated instead of utilised as low paid workers, the situation would be very different to what we witness today.
53

oder,

Scotland 06/06/2008 00:30:12
59 Biker,Ayr

the Rhodesians were more"British" than the British themselves! it was the British government that decide to abandon Rhodesia! Smith had little choice but to declare UDI,Harold Wilson could not get Smith to agree to the destruction of his country! then threw Rhodesia to the wolves in the UN because the colonial masters were not prepared to argue the case for responsible government! a legacy that has happened in many countries, but especially in Africa! you have to have the means to educate people! its not a crime or fault if you don't! how do you justify blame in this situation
you could argue that it was inevitable that Mugabe would take over, are you suggesting that Smith should have allowed Rhodesia to be turned in Zimbabwe in 1960?
who in their right mind would do such a thing! Britain had decided that in her interests Rhodesia should be sacrificed, Smith didn`t agree righly so! it was his country.
54

alba-cridhe,

07/06/2008 11:37:50
#53/54

You have clearly shown your ignorance and would suggest you go back to college and actually read up about Marx.

If you knew anything about Marxism you would note that he made it clear that his ideologies of socialism only work when there is enough for everyone and that socialism cannot be jumped straight into. The people must be ready.

What has happened in Zimbabwe is not consistent with Marxism and for you be lazy enough to suggest so you can stick a nice label on it and blame Marx is wholly wrong.

You'd be just as well blaming every god/ deity for every crime thats done in his name by people who dont understand what they read.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.