Our War of Liberation (Robert Mugabe)

Our War of Liberation
Author	Robert Mugabe
Publisher	Mambo Press
First published	1983
Type	Book
Source	https://archive.org/details/robert-mugabe-our-war-of-liberation/
PDF	https://dn721607.ca.archive.org/0/items/robert-mugabe-our-war-of-liberation/robert%20mugabe%20%20OUR%20WAR%20OF%20LIBERATION.pdf

Introduction

The road to leadership is a long, cold and lonely one. The higher the path winds, the narrower it becomes, with many twists and turns. During the first surges amongst the uplands, one is swept along among the other comrades; later, the crowd thins out, and ultimately the mantle of leadership falls on the shoulders of one individual to climb the bleak track to the summit of power. For Robert Gabriel Mugabe, the first Prime Minister of the independent and democratic Republic of Zimbabwe, the road to the top was stoney, narrow, and convoluted. His steps were guided by a consistent pursuit of and adherence to basic principles; and avoidance of petty quarrels with colleagues and compatriots. On matters of principle he always dug in his toes; but when it came to procedures and personal relationships, he was the reconciler and the peace-maker amongst fellow comrades.

When ZANU was formed in August 1963 and the Reverend Ndabaningi Sithole installed as its president, not all the members approved of this decision. There were diverse objections to Sithole, but perhaps the most important was the fact that he and Joshua Nkomo (President of ZAPU) had accepted the concept of 15 seats for Africans in a Parliament of 65 members, granted under the 1961 Constitution. So vehement was the opposition to Sithole that some, among the hard-core founders of the party, had even contemplated initiating a move to choose another leader in Sithole’s place at the first ZANU congress at Gweru in May 1964. After much discussion, however, it was finally decided not to proceed with this, in order to avoid creating divisions in the new party. But Sithole brought about his own downfall. In 1968 he was charged with plotting to murder Ian Smith and other perpetrators of UDI, and when he was brought to trial in February 1969, he pleaded not guilty. He was sentenced to six years imprisonment. In mitigation he declared:

I wish publicly to dissociate my name in word, thought, or deed from any subversive activities, from any terrorist activities, and from any form of violence.

Sithole had thus recanted, and betrayed both the armed struggle and those men and women who were fighting for Zimbabwe. His lawyer had advised Sithole not to make such a statement. The Central Committee members in prison, and their detained supporters were angry. The external wing in Lusaka was equally disturbed. Opposition to Sithole’s leadership mounted both inside and outside prison.

After the conviction he asked to see Derreck Robinson, the head of the Special Branch of the Criminal Investigation Department. This request was granted. Sithole told Robinson that he could induce ZANU to desist from violence and to work within the constitution and the law. He maintained that if he were allowed to talk to Robert Mugabe and Leopold Takawira (who were in detention at the time) he could certainly get ZANU to co-operate with the Government.

Accordingly, such a meeting was arranged. So sure were the authorities of Sithole that they did not even bother to sit in on the discussion. Sithole complained bitterly to his two colleagues about the fact that certain young party members had given evidence against him. He showed them a letter written by the Reverend Grant to Ian Smith, protesting against the continued detention of Joshua Nkomo and Sithole, and asking for their release, on the grounds that they were law-abiding citizens. Smith’s reply had been to this effect: ‘‘These gentlemen know exactly what to do. If they promise to work within the law, they can be released at any time.”

Sithole said bluntly: “I am not prepared to stay the whole period of six years in prison. I am going to extricate myself from this.” When Mugabe and Takawira asked what he had in mind, he proposed that they write to Smith, promising that if they were released, they would work in accordance with the law and within the constitution. When they protested, he replied: ‘‘Once we are out, we can do anything. The issue is that we must get out first.”

By this stage, most members of the ZANU executive were in the Harare Maximum Security Prison: in addition to Mugabe and Takawira there was Simon Mzenda, Enos Nkala, Maurice Nyagumbo, Moton Malianga, Edgar Tekere, Eddison Sithole, Edson Zvobgo and Michael Mawema. When Mugabe and Takawira recounted their conversation with Sithole, the others were furious — and so were the many young men also at that time in prison, who had cheerfully accepted their sentences as their contribution to the cause, but now feared that they were going to be betrayed.

Mugabe and Takawira told Sithole of this reaction. Soon after this, Robert Mugabe was told by a Mr McGuiness, a CIO Senior Officer, that James Chikerema of ZAPU and Henry Hamadziripi of ZANU were urging that ZANU and ZAPU should unite under the leadership of Mugabe. Mugabe said it was the first he had heard of this, and in answer to McGuiness’ question as to how he felt about the proposal, he replied that when the matter was presented to him, he would make up his mind. This stage of his career can best be described as a plateau; with his instinctive wisdom, he felt it was imperative to pause, to survey, and not to make any hasty moves.

To the Executive, Mugabe subsequently said: ‘‘If the moment comes for me to make a decision, firstly I want to know who the author is of the proposal and what support it has; and then of course I will make my decision in the light of the situation as I see it. But all the time it will be the interests of the people which I will take into account rather than my personal comfort and safety.’’

1971 was the year of the Pearce Commission, despatched by Britain to assess the acceptability of the Home/Smith constitutional proposals. For the patriotic nationalists it marked the formation of the ANC as an umbrella organisation. A number of detainees were released. Those still detained — including Mugabe, Nkala, Nyagumbo, Tekere and Malianga — told their freed colleagues to go forth and do all they could to unite the people against the common enemy — the imperialists and their agents. They stressed that ZANU and ZAPU should work together. Comrade Mugabe and his colleagues maintained that the ANC should not be regarded as a substitute for ZANU, but rather as a common front for fighting against the Pearce Commission proposals.

At this time, Sithole was released from prison and became a detainee. Moves, headed by Nkala and Nyagumbo, were afoot to bring him to book for his various acts of disloyalty, but matters came to a head when the detainees were moved from Harare prison to Connemara prison near Kwekwe. In the smaller environment, it became obvious that Sithole was constantly consulting Special Branch personnel, particularly Derreck Robinson. It was rumoured that he was negotiating ways and means of securing his release. The Executive told him that they no longer had any confidence in him, and that he was not to represent them any longer. A number of party members felt that Sithole should be deposed, but here Comrade Mugabe’s innate fairness and desire to see justice done manifested themselves. He maintained that they should not depose a person in prison; they could not freely consult with others in the party, and they themselves were too few in number to take such a drastic step. How could they possibly justify taking a decision committing others when those people were not present? He emphasised that he held to this point of view not because he was unconvinced as to whether Sithole had a case to answer, but merely because in his opinion it was improper that such action be taken in the circumstances of a prison. It should wait until they were released. For him there could be no pushings over the precipice of political rivals when they were at their most vulnerable.

The Portuguese coup d’état of 1974 was to have far-reaching consequences for southern Africa. Mozambique and Angola were assured of their freedom under the leadership of progressive liberation movements who would be only too eager to assist their sister organisations in southern Africa. ZANU leaders in detention were moved to Connemara to make room for ZAPU detainees from Gonakudzingwa near the Mozambique border. At Connemara, Sithole had several contacts with Special Branch officials, especially Derreck Robinson. Members of the ZANU Central Committee in detention invited him to appear before them to explain his erratic behaviour then and in 1969. They also told him not to act on behalf of ZANU Central Committee. He was told that nobody had any confidence in him. Further he was told that if he was invited or summoned on behalf of ZANU he should decline the offer or instead Comrade Mugabe should go. At about this time Sithole was flown to New Sarum Airforce Base without explanation. Here he met Joshua Nkomo and representatives of President Kaunda, Mark Chona and George Chimpampata. Mark Chona told Sithole and Nkomo that his government was tabling proposals which could lead to Zimbabwe’s independence and majority rule. John Vorster, Prime Minister of South Africa, had accepted them. Smith was being asked to accept the proposals. It was necessary for both ZANU and ZAPU to do the same. Eventually there would be a conference to discuss the independence proposals. This was Chona’s message.

Sithole flew back to report to his colleagues. Comrade Nyagumbo described him as a quisling but Comrade Mugabe said that there was nothing he could have done. He had not known in advance the purpose of the visit to New Sarum. However, Mugabe expressed deep reservations concerning the détente initiative. He questioned the basis of the initiative and its specific objectives. He saw it as fundamentally antithetical to the armed struggle and therefore to the central objective of the struggle, namely, authentic majority rule. It is noteworthy that the promoters of détente were unable to obtain Smith’s acceptance of the concept of immediate majority rule based on one man one vote. Ndabaningi Sithole had told other ZANU Central Committee members at Kwekwe prison that one man one vote was to be seen as a rallying cry and slogan, not a goal to be immediately achieved.

A few weeks after the meeting at New Sarum airbase, Mark Chona journeyed to Kwekwe to talk with the ZANU detainees there. They had moved again from Connemara to Kwekwe. He began by speaking to Sithole, who then called in the others. Chona and his companion, Joseph Butiko, secretary to President Nyerere of Tanzania, invited the detainees to Lusaka to discuss Zimbabwe’s independence. The Executive’s reply was that they could not participate in any conference while they were still detainees or prisoners; and that they would not negotiate with lan Smith, but only with the British Government.

This was taken back to Presidents Kaunda and Nyerere. The message came back that they had been misunderstood. ‘‘We want to see how we can work out a solution,’’ the Presidents said. ‘“This is not a constitutional conference. We just want to work out a mechanism.”’

The Executive accepted this, and Comrades Mugabe and Malianga were chosen to represent the Kwekwe prisoners. They were flown to Lusaka by Vorster’s own jet, which he had placed at President Kaunda’s disposal for this purpose, and staffed with South African security officers.

The frontline leaders present at the meetings comprised Presidents Nyerere, Kaunda, Khama and Machel. Their reception of Comrades Mugabe and Malianga was cool, to say the least. They asked where Sithole was and why he had not accompanied them. The ZANU delegates replied that he had been suspended, but that they were not at liberty to reveal why. The leaders then expressed dismay at the split in ZANU, which paralleled that in ZAPU, and which militated against a strong nationalist voice at any constitutional conference to be held. They denounced the ZANU representatives, who, in Machel’s view, knew nothing about the struggle and were probably ‘‘Smith’s men’’.

The request of the delegates to consult with Herbert Chitepo — their own man in Lusaka — was refused by President Kaunda on the ground that Zambian soil would not be used for divisive purposes. For the remaining duration of their stay in Zambia, they were kept as virtual prisoners in State House, forbidden to move beyond its gates. They were not invited to the official meetings which Nkomo attended.

President Kaunda’s next move was to invite Sithole to Zambia in his personal capacity, bringing with him a colleague of his own choice. The Executive nominated Nyagumbo. When the two reached Lusaka, they met with Herbert Chitepo and Mukudzei Mudzi, and subsequently were received by President Kaunda. Nyagumbo did not mince words. He said to Kaunda: ‘‘We sent the man we had chosen, and you refused to talk to him. Why do you want to choose a leader for us? Do you remember that when we formed ZANU it was upon your advice? You said you were going to support us, but now you have deserted us’’.

Later, Sithole, Nyagumbo and Chitepo held their own meeting, at which Chitepo counselled against the removal of Sithole from the party leadership, saying that the freedom fighters could well become divided as the result of such a move. Chitepo wrote a letter to this effect to Mugabe.

Nyagumbo and Sithole went on from Lusaka to see President Nyerere in Tanzania, and President Machel in Mozambique. Both urged the retention of Sithole as leader of ZANU. By the time they returned to Kwekwe, Nyagumbo was convinced that Sithole should not at this stage be ousted. It was, of course, what Mugabe had maintained all along; and therefore it was formally decided to postpone the suspension until such time as it had been determined jointly by the National Executive of ZANU and the Dare. Throughout the discussions and debates, Comrade Mugabe’s eyes were set on the national goal of stepping up the liberation war, and attaining national independence; and not on the replacement of Ndabaningi Sithole. He always put principle before personal opportunity; the interests of the masses beyond those of individuals and the Party above everything else. As a result, Sithole was authorised to lead subsequent delegations to talks in Zambia, and was the signatory to the Unity Agreement of December 1974. Tortuous indeed had been the twists and turns in the road, but never once had Comrade Mugabe deviated from what he felt was the right track.

In Lusaka, the Frontline leaders wanted to unite ZANU, ZAPU, ANC, and FROLIZI. Their original plan was that Nkomo would be President of the unified movement, with Muzorewa as his Deputy and Sithole as Secretary-General. It fell through because the ZANU delegation did not accept the dissolution of the party and Nkomo's leadership. They wanted the war to continue. However, under heavy pressure an criticism from the leaders of the Frontline states, Sithole, Nkomo, Muzorewa and Chikerema signed the Zimbabwe Declaration of Unity of 8 December 1974. The ANC was made an umbrella organisation of ZANU, ZAPU, ANC, and FROLIZI with Muzorewa as a compromise Chairman. But ZANU’s position was clear — it regarded the ANC only as an umbrella organisation for several separate and distinct organisations. The separate organisations had agreed on a common programme of action against a common enemy. The so-called Tamba wakachenjera strategy was evolved by Mugabe himself. His insistence on the preservation of ZANU stemmed from his belief that ZANU alone could sustain and prosecute the liberation war.

On 12 December 1974 Comrade Mugabe and other members of ZANU were flown from Lusaka to New Sarum Air Force base where they were given warrants for their release. Once released, they began actively to recruit people to leave for training in Mozambique.

1975 was an eventful year for the patriotic nationalists. The majority of the leadership was released by the beginning of the year, but in February Sithole was imprisoned, on charges of plotting to kill his colleagues in the ANC, and also on obstructing the ceasefire arrangements. In March Chitepo, Chairman of the external wing of ZANU, was assassinated by enemy agents in Lusaka. Dare members in Lusaka were jailed and over 1000 ZANLA fighters were detained.

The Central Committee in Harare met at the Mushandirapamwe Hotel in Highfield, and it was decided that Comrade Mugabe should leave the country and go abroad in order to carry on the external work for which Comrade Chitepo had been responsible. Comrade Mugabe felt that he should be accompanied, and eventually it was agreed that Comrade Tekere should go with him.

This was a fateful turning point for Comrade Mugabe; although from now on, the climb would be steep, it would lead to the very top. Comrade Mugabe returned to his home in Kutama to wind up his affairs. When he returned to Harare, he was to hear that Nyagumbo had been arrested, and that the police had put Mugabe’s house under surveillance. During the next few days he was forced to move from one friend’s house to another, until, through Sister Aquina’s good offices, Comrade Moven Mahachi was contacted, and asked to drive the two men to Inyanga. They left at midnight on 4 April to begin their epic journey to Mozambique. They arrived in Rusape in the early hours of the morning, from where they drove to Chief Rekayi Tangwena’s co-operative, Nyafaru, arriving at 4.00 am. Mahachi had to attend a University seminar in Harare and had to leave again at 7.00 am, after just three hours’ sleep.

The next two days were fraught with potential peril. There was a police raid upon Nyafaru — by then Mugabe and Tekere were staying with Chief Tangwena himself. Mrs Tangwena had a spirit medium, who advised them to leave the following day by the mountain route. Comrade Mugabe had brought with him a great many books, and was forced to leave some of these behind. In a subsequent police raid, these were destroyed.

The journey from Nyafaru was long and arduous. Tangwena led them along an intricately winding path, struggling through tall grass and thick bush, falling into dongas, bogging down in mud and swamps. Eventually they arrived at Matambanadzo’s village on the Mozambican side of the border. They contacted the local FRELIMO representative, but he said he did not know them, and could not therefore assist them. They were forced to remain at the village throughout April, but in May decided to press on.

After many vicissitudes, ZANLA members got to hear of their presence in the area, and tracked them down. They were taken first to a Zimbabwe military base called Seguranza, where conditions were bleak indeed; there was very little food, clothing and shelter. Mugabe and Tekere used their last dollars to buy bread and biscuits for the comrades, but by June 25, the anniversary of Mozambique’s independence, they had to celebrate with madora, tsenza and wild fruit — the only foodstuffs freely available. Morale, however, was encouragingly high.

In September they moved to Village Catandika, a FRELIMO base, where for the first time they were able to make contact with the outside world. This, however, included a ZAPU/ZIPRA commander who had come to the area clearly with the blessing of the Mozambiquan government to assess the extent of support of ZAPU among the in-coming Zimbabwean refugees and freedom fighters.

The distressing news of ZANU’s banning in Tanzania reached them, and they had to reconsider their original plan of reaching Dar es Salaam and using it as a base for uniting the people and running the party. They had also intended to attend the OAU Liberation Committee meeting to be held in Dar es Salaam — but in the event, Sithole (released from prison at the insistence of the South African government) was sent as the official representative.

Chimoio was the next stop for Comrades Mugabe and Tekere. Here there were 3000 cadres, and hundreds more volunteers streaming in every day. Most, however, were untrained, and so Mugabe organised a training programme under the guidance of ZANLA commanders Hondo and Teurai Ropa, and several others. By the end of 1975, there were around 6000 recruits in Mozambique, either undergoing rudimentary training or waiting at camps to be trained as members of ZANLA.

After the failure of the Victoria Falls talks with the Smith regime, in September 1975, the Frontline states became anxious to revive the armed struggle, and to this end, ZIPA was formed. Comrade Rex Nhongo and Comrade Sadza arrived at Chimoio to organise ZIPA, and the ZAPU military commander was despatched there also, ostensibly to assist with the assimilation process, but in truth to recruit for ZAPU.

Comrades Mugabe and Tekere were suddenly removed in November 1975 and sent to Quelimane in the Zambezi province. The reason given was ‘‘security grounds” but in fact the intention was to neutralise ZANU.

ZIPA, as has been said, was set up with the blessing of the Frontline leaders — in an effort to bypass established national leadership in favour of the military commanders. From the start, it was crippled by internal contradictions. It was unable to establish itself as a political organisation. ZANLA and ZIPRA never merged within it. The Frontline leaders were ultimately forced to begin looking for a viable political formation to fill the void at meetings in Maputo and Dar es Salaam. In the meantime, Sithole had sent instructions to all ZANU branches abroad to disband and join the UANC — an organisation which had no link whatsoever with the armed struggle. No UANC representatives ever visited the camps nor made effective contact with the military organisation.

Early in 1976, Comrade Mugabe travelled to London and West Germany where he denounced Sithole as a paper tiger and spent force. He began re-establishing ZANU branches.

For its part, after the abortive Victoria Falls Bridge Conference in 1975, the ANC formed the Zimbabwe Liberation Committee (ZLC) in an attempt to take over the leadership of the ZANLA fighters. Sithole was made Chairman of the ZLC. He chose Noel Mukono and Simpson Mtambanengwe to head the military affairs and foreign affairs branches, respectively, of ZLC. Both men had lost their places on the Dare and Mukono had been involved in the Nhari revolt. This move was very unpopular with the ZANLA forces who regarded it as a reversal of ZANU decisions and betrayal of Comrade Tongogara who was in prison at that time.

Sithole neglected to attend to the needs of ZANLA guerillas detained at Mboroma. They became disgruntled. Subsequently, Zambian soldiers opened fire on ZANLA guerillas at this camp, killing eleven and wounding thirteen. Sithole also supported the arrest and imprisonment of the members of the Dare and ZANLA High Command after the death of Chitepo. By the end of 1975 there were new demands for the deposition of Sithole both inside and outside the country. Thus when four ZANLA Commanders visited Dare members and the ZANLA High Command at Mpika prison, it was agreed that Sithole should be removed from leadership. The four men took this decision to all ZANLA camps, one of which was Mgagao in Tanzania.

Early in 1976 the members of Dare wrote to Comrade Mugabe in Mozambique, asking him to take over the leadership of the external wing of the Party. His opinion was that a formal decision to remove Sithole had still to be taken. At about the same time came the famous Mgagao Declaration which attacked all ANC leaders: Nkomo, Sithole, Muzorewa and Chikerema, saying that the last three were incapable of leading the ANC. Sithole’s mistakes were singularly highlighted. The Declaration described Comrade Mugabe as an outstanding member of the Central Committee who had endured the rigours of guerilla life in Mozambique. The guerillas respected him and appointed him as their mediator with the ANC:

We will not accept any direct discussions with any of the three leading members of the ANC.... We can only talk through Robert Mugabe to them.

The Mgagao Declaration further stated that Sithole, Nkomo, Muzorewa and Chikerema were not committed to the armed struggle and the liberation of the masses of Zimbabwe. In other words, the cadres disowned the four men and recognised Comrade Mugabe as their leader and spokesman.

Comrade Mugabe was much moved by this expression of trust and loyalty. As for the Dare request, he delayed replying for a long while. He recalls: “I was still keen that the organisation should take a formal decision to remove the President, Ndabaningi Sithole, before anyone else could take over the leadership of the party. However, after much hesitation, I wrote back accepting their proposal’’.

In August 1976, President Machel invited the Zimbabwe leaders to Mozambique, ostensibly to view the scene of the Nyadzonya massacre, but in fact to sound out the situation in general. Comrade Mugabe seized this opportunity to declare to the Frontline leaders the re-emergence of ZANU as a political organisation committed to the armed struggle. Nkomo stated that he was a member of the ANC (Zimbabwe), Muzorewa was UANC, so was Chikerema, but Sithole now said that he was a member of the ANC/ZLC (Zimbabwe Liberation Council), formed after the abortive Victoria Falls Bridge conference. In fact, by then the ZLC was in the process of breaking up. Sithole had therefore made it clear that he no longer identified himself with ZANU.

As a result, in September at a Dar es Salaam meeting, ZANU reemerged as a fully-fledged party with the support of the Frontline states. The Frontline Presidents had been forced to eat their words, remove the bans on ZANU, and accept it as the vanguard movement for the fighting men and the masses. However, President Nyerere still insisted that ZANU and ZAPU should form a front.

In compliance with his appeal, the ZANU and ZAPU leaders returned to Maputo, where they hammered out an agreement forming the Patriotic Front. The principal negotiators in this regard were T G Silundika and J Z Moyo on the ZAPU side, and Edgar Tekere and Mugabe on the ZANU side. Nkomo was as usual vacillating. He had assured President Nyerere that ZIPRA would return to ZIPA, but at the same time he said that he supported the Patriotic Front alliance. The reason for this is clear; in his usual opportunistic fashion, he was prepared to go along with either ZIPA or the Patriotic Front, depending upon which transpired to serve his interests best — and those interests were centred upon securing the leadership of the nationalist movement in Zimbabwe for himself. In contrast Comrade Mugabe showed himself to be a man of principles who always considered Zimbabwe first. He was consistent in pursuing the goal of national independence through revolutionary struggle. He defined the method of that struggle as armed force by a united and mobilised people. Everything else took second place to the main goal.

Mugabe, Tekere, Silundika and Moyo made a joint public announcement concerning the formation of the Patriotic Front. One of the factors which had precipitated the alliance was the looming-up on the horizon of the Geneva Conference. This posed another problem for Comrade Mugabe. He felt it imperative that the imprisoned leaders of the Dare should be released in order to attend the conference. Moreover, some ZIPA leaders were asserting that they were acting on behalf of the Dare members, when this was not the case. Accordingly, Comrade Mugabe asked the Frontline leaders, and especially President Kaunda, to release the jailed men. They acceded to this, and thus at last Mugabe was able to unite both the external and internal leadership of ZANU.

In 1976 Comrade Mugabe set out to reorganise and revamp ZANU for the effective prosecution of the armed struggle. He was helped by the failure of ZIPA to merge ZANLA and ZIPRA forces. ZIPA also failed to organise a political organisation of its own. The ZIPA crisis deepened during the Geneva Conference, with its leadership refusing to go to Geneva to support ZANU. President Samora Machel ordered them to fly to Geneva to support the political leadership. Comrade Rex Nhongo and others finally went to Geneva to support ZANU leadership, but some malcontents remained behind fomenting trouble. On returning from Geneva, Rex Nhongo and Comrade Josiah Tongogara went to Chimoio to resolve the crisis. They found the ZIPA leadership preparing to take control of the army and to challenge the ZANU High Command. They were insisting that all members of the High Command should join ZIPA before entering any of the camps. When all the members of the Central Committee and Dare returned from Geneva, they decided to dismantle ZIPA and take full control and command of the army. The ZIPA leadership was invited to Beira to solve the problems that had arisen during the Geneva Conference. Comrade Mugabe addressed the meeting in his capacity as Secretary-General of ZANU. After the meeting ZIPA malcontents were detained by the Mozambiquan Government at the request of ZANU. At that point ZIPA ceased to exist and ZANLA re-emerged, with Tongogara taking effective control of its military operations. ZANU leadership then set out to reorganise the party and the army. Extensive reorganisation took place, ensuring better military training and improved supplies of food, clothing, and weapons.

The Central Committee too underwent some remodelling. ZANU’s original 1964 Constitution had been designed for what was then essentially a civilian organisation. By 1977 military structures and the programmes for the prosecuting of the liberation war were of paramount concern, and cognisance of these factors had to be taken officially. The Central Committee was thus enlarged to include both the political and the military leadership, providing for greater cohesion and effective organisation between ZANU and ZANLA. By September 1977 the reorganisation of the army and the Central Committee had been completed. A new constitution that would accord with the programme of the armed struggle was formulated. In keeping with the thrust of the new constitution, the Central Committee was enlarged to include both political and military leadership. The military leadership briefed the entire Central Committee on all aspects and progress of the war of national liberation. Comrade Mugabe could now see a flicker of light at the end of what had been a long, cold, stony and dark tunnel for ZANU and its leadership for at least three years. This work culminated in the historic meeting of the Central Committee in Chimoio in September 1977. The meeting marked the complete triumph of Comrade Mugabe’s strategy and efforts to resuscitate the party and to re-launch the armed struggle. Comrade Mugabe was formerly elected as President of ZANU and Commander-in-Chief of ZANLA. The enlarged Central Committee outlined the policies and programmes in prosecuting the war of liberation over the next three to four years. The speech of the President to the historic Chimoio meeting appears in this volume.

Consolidation of ZANU and ZANLA went on smoothly until 1978. In this year a group of power-hungry reactionaries led by Henry Hamadziripi, Rugare Gumbo, Mukudzei Mudzi, Crispin Mandizvidza et al. hatched a plot to seize power, destroy ZANU and merge with ZAPU thereby dislocating and paralysing the armed struggle. The plot was discovered fortunately, and, at the request of ZANU(PF) the perpetrators were detained by the Mozambiquan authorities. Ironically when they were released at the insistence of the British Government in 1980 they joined Sithole’s ZANU and not Nkomo’s ZAPU showing themselves to be inconsistent and opportunistic. After this incident ZANU and ZANLA became more vigilant and maintained strict discipline.

The year 1978 was declared as the year of the people, meaning the year when the party will mobilise and politicise the people. The following year (1979) was declared to be the year of the people’s storm. That meant embarking on a political programme of tearing down the political/administrative/economic structures of colonial Rhodesia. In other words, the establishment of liberated areas. By the end of that year, ZANLA forces had established a visible presence in at least half the countryside. 1980 was declared to be the year of the people’s power, and indeed a people’s government was established and independence achieved on 18 April 1980. The speeches published here were made between 1977 and 1980 when Comrade Mugabe was the leader in-exile. The headquarters of the Party at the time was Maputo, the capital of Mozambique.

It is also planned to publish the speeches made by Comrade Mugabe from April 1980 to the present. The striking feature running through them all is the consistency of the main arguments and the principles underlying the leader’s political action. The style and method of presentation of that argument, and those basic principles, will be different, but the central objective is unchangeable and immutable. This book will be the first in a series of publications about the ideas, thoughts, and principles of a man whose life and work Zimbabweans admire and esteem most highly.

N M SHAMUYARIRA

and

C M B UTETE

I. Call to Arms — the Basis of the Struggle and the Nature of the Enemy

1. Stand firm

Article in THE ZIMBABWE NEWS

No nationalist party in Zimbabwe has been subjected to such imperialist pressures as those systematically planned and mounted against ZANU over the past eighteen months. And yet no party could have emerged from those engulfing fires so resilient and redoubtable as ZANU. Born in 1963 in the midst of roughest storms — the peak of Nkomo’s mercenary stone-throwers — ZANU was dedicated, from its inception and as a matter of policy, to the principle of waging a revolution through a relentless armed struggle. In 1966, despite its previous proscription in 1964 and the arrest and detention of its leaders, ZANU shocked the racist settler lotus-eaters* and the citadels of imperialism and capitalism by launching Chimurenga No. 2, when seven of its ZANLA soldiers fought a gallant battle at Sinoia.

After years of effective re-planning and re-shaping of strategy, accompanied by intensive ground work and the politicization of masses, ZANU once more sprang a surprise on the enemy by opening the northeastern military operational front in 1972. One military victory then followed another, until that operational zone became the area most dreaded by the enemy settler forces. Alas, the imperialist is a master of cunning! It became clear to him that if our guerilla campaign continued unabated, Rhodesia would soon transform into ZIMBABWE. Hence, he contrived a deadly trap and christened it detente. A third party on our borders was employed to bait us into it. After responding to that party’s invitation, ZANU found itself hemmed-in and presented with a curious choice: either the acceptance of detente (and the hangman’s noose it dangled!) or a rejection of detente (and an immediate guillotine!) Calling its wits into full play, ZANU decided on a pretended acceptance of detente and the unity demand of it with its non-revolutionary and counter-revolutionary opponents, purely as a tactic to buy time for manoeuvre. In the meantime, it urged ZANLA forces to intensify the war and ignore the persistent calls for a cease-fire.

As a detente beater, the ZANU Central Committee and the DARE had jointly adopted a double strategy. Firstly, an intensified systematic recruitment campaign had to be mounted with due haste so as to build up the army and save the revolution. Secondly, the masses of Zimbabwe needed to be purposefully mobilized and orientated towards the acceptance of Chimurenga as their only salvation. This, from mid-December, 1974, has been the ZANU answer to detente. The results of the double organizational campaign have been overwhelming. Thousands of our young freedom fighters have crossed the border into Mozambique and hundreds more continue to pour in every month. Once in Mozambique, they come under the immediate control and management of our ZANLA Command. In Zimbabwe itself, the masses acclaim Chimurenga as their salvation and only effective means of attaining their long-awaited goal of independence. Could Zimbabwe be more ripe for revolution than that?

Against this background, it was the most irresponsible act of all for the so-called ZLC, an ill-conceived, ill-structured, illegitimate creature (for where is the constitution from which it derives its existence, powers and functions as an organ?) to try and assume control of such a solid and properly constituted military machinery as ZANLA. The rebuff it got from ZANLA was the right medicine for its misdirected ambitions. We cannot allow a bunch of incompetent, corrupt, self-centered and selfappointed counter-revolutionary tribalists to fiddle with so vital an organ as ZANLA. ZANLA is the saviour of the PEOPLE of Zimbabwe! So ZANU says to the ZLC, ‘‘Hands off ZANLA!’’ It should be remembered that ZANU and ZANU alone toiled to build ZANLA and only ZANU, therefore, is entitled to its full control and command. If the ZLC now feels anachronistic, which it is, then to dust it must go, for from dust it cometh and of dust it is made.

Following its rejection of ZLC control, ZANLA, operating under its own command, proceeded immediately to open two additional fronts in the east and south-eastern areas of Zimbabwe. Daily now the enemy counts his heavy losses and mourns his numerous dead. We are fully on the war-path. Now that principle and a high sense of dedication are our propulsive force as contrasted with the policy of expediency and opportunism followed by ZLC leadership, it is necessary for me to warn all ZANU freedom fighters, abroad and in Zimbabwe, against some antagonistic contradictions that militate against our revolution from the ranks of the party. Tribalism and regionalism are vicious negative tendencies that constitute a gross contradiction to our socialist philosophy in the name of which we should move side by side pursuing the genuine enemy. The socialism we believe in, and the socialist state we envisage, cannot stand the test of validity if it accommodates tribal or regional groupings. One of our Party songs has the following words, among others: ‘‘Zimbabwe ndeyangu. Zimbabwe ndeyedu.” All of us, therefore, are Zimbabweans, and there are no tribal superiors or tribally inferior persons, our socialism makes us all equal. We are all comrades!

In conclusion may I ask you to join me in congratulating our gallant ZANLA forces on keeping up the fight during the bitter days, nay weeks and months, of last year, but more than that on their most successful intensification of the war. Well done ZANLA! You are the pride of the PEOPLE of Zimbabwe. Keep up the good fight and remain vigilant!

Pamberi neChimurenga! Pamberi neZANU! Pamberi neZANLA!

2. The Chimoio and Tembue Massacres

Report in THE ZIMBABWE NEWS

The racist enemy forces of Ian Smith supported by those of Johannes Vorster, the racist Prime Minister of South Africa, attacked two of our transit camps. In both cases the camps were mainly civilian centres where our people have been engaged in serious self-reliance projects, such as education, agriculture, poultry, piggery, health and crafts.

The enemy, callous and inhuman in the extreme, and using French Mirage planes, vampire jets, canberra bombers and helicopters, cold-bloodedly massacred little children in school, patients in hospitals, workers on our farms and other productive projects. In all we have lost 100 comrades, most of them children, mothers, patients and physically handicapped people. In one case, thirty-five children of 9 — 14 were burnt in a classroom, in another, eight patients being taken to Chimoio hospital in ambulance were shot dead and the ambulance burnt; yet in another case, some twenty-five patients who were in hospital were cold-bloodedly shot dead and the hospital set on fire.

The enemy also destroyed farming equipment, such as harrows, planters and tractors, transport vehicles, water engines and similar equipment.

The naked attack on civilians including children and sick persons is a gross violation of international rules of war, especially of the Geneva Convention.

We wish to emphasize the attacks in question were effected by combined Rhodesian, South African, Israeli forces and mercenaries gladly provided by France, the USA, Britain, West Germany and other Western countries. The USA and Israeli mercenaries are particularly notorious for the callous murders and massacres in Vietnam and the Middle East respectively. This element has been imported into our area.

The use of French and American planes and the involvement of mercenaries from Western countries make these countries full accomplices of genocide and human torture against both the people of Zimbabwe and Mozambique. The involvement of Britain and the USA in the perpetration of these crimes makes a mockery of the principle of peaceful negotiations they have led the world to believe they are pursuing. They stand condemned not only as hypocrites but also as international criminals who know no bounds in their grand strategy to further their imperialist and capitalist objectives.

If the attacks of the last few days were intended to break the back of ZANLA and ZANU in the Patriotic Front they have dismally failed and the enemy knows it. We have repeatedly stated that we run no military camps whatsoever in Mozambique. Our military bases are well-established in Zimbabwe where thousands of our fighters have penetrated the whole length and breadth of the country and are pursuing the enemy everyday and every hour. We mourn the death of our children and all those brutally massacred. Their blood, like the blood of those massacred at Nyadzonia, Dabwa, and numerous other places, shall forever water the seed of our revolution and inspire us all to fight with greater resolve than before so the enemy can be completely annihilated and our revolutionary goals achieved.

We have no doubt that the recent attacks were calculated to create, in the enemy’s view, favourable conditions for the projected internal settlement talks between rebel Ian Smith and the African Quislings in the country. We regard such talks as nothing but a betrayal of the cause of the African masses of Zimbabwe. Those African stooges, Smith’s Four Yes Men, who will attend them, are nothing less than traitors who stand condemned by the suffering revolutionary masses of Zimbabwe. Their own children will spit on their graves.

Finally, these persistent acts of naked and unprovoked aggression by the rebel forces of Ian Smith and his imperialist masters upon the independent People’s Republic of Mozambique, must be seen as bullying offensive tactics meant to intimidate the Government and the People of Mozambique into breaking their ties of friendship and solidarity with the People of Zimbabwe. We are gratified, however, that the revolutionary experience, direction and persuasion of the Government and People of Mozambique under the dynamic leadership of President Samora Machel, has tempered them into supporting our liberation struggle without reservation. Our revolutionary unity is thus sustained by an acceptance by us of common principles and objectives. The year 1978 is for the People of Zimbabwe a decisive year in which our armed struggle will, whatever tactics the enemy employs, take a completely new phase.

Already the enemy’s position is weak. We have stretched his forces to the limits as we encompass the whole of the country with our operations.

Numerous farms have been deserted, his local administration has collapsed, his economy is crumbling, daily he suffers losses in the battle field, daily we are consolidating our hold in the semi-liberated areas. We cannot, and never will, lose.

Our forces are as intact as ever and the next phase of our struggle will clearly demonstrate who is suffering set-backs, who is winning and who is losing.

Our cause is a People’s cause and the people will definitely win. Smith is thus facing imminent defeat.

Pamberi neChimurenga! Pamberi neHondo: A Luta Continua!

3. 'Fight hard, fight harder...'

Radio address

The meaning of our revolutionary struggle

Pamberi neChimurenga and Revolutionary Greetings to you all our toiling masses and our brave and courageous fighting forces!

When in April 1966, the people of Zimbabwe decided to launch the armed struggle and the first group of our seven ZANLA fighters fought the famous Sinoia Battle, they resolved, once and for all, to free themselves totally from the savage and oppressive rule of the settler imperialists. This decision, accordingly, marked a qualitative transformation as much in objective as indeed in the means henceforth to be employed in the pursuit of the goal of freedom and independence.

The decision has these phenomenal revolutionary characteristics which must be noted and which together add up to the elements constituting the definition of our revolutionary struggle:

(a) The people had decided that independence was their inherent right which was not negotiable, whatever the circumstances. They would never debate the question whether to be free or unfree.

(b) The people had also decided that since Britain, the imperialist power, and her colonial settlers had paid no heed to their persistent peaceful appeals as a down-trodden community, they would henceforth use violence, and unleash it with full vigour upon the settlers and their regime until victory was attained. In other words the people had

(i) correctly identified and defined the enemy, and (ii) correctly selected and defined the means of struggle — namely the armed struggle, which now became the principal method of fighting the enemy.

(c) The choice of the struggle meant the launching of a people’s war. This in turn meant that the masses were: henceforth to be fully mobilised into fighting and supporting a war of liberation behind a vanguard revolutionary Party.

(d) The people, having chosen armed struggle as a means of liquidating imperialism, colonialism and settlerism, and of creating a new political order, wherein and whereby a social transformation could be generated, had viewed such armed struggle as meaningful. Let it be noted that they had chosen not just armed struggle but revolutionary armed struggle, in which armed struggle did not become an end in itself but a means or instrument to an end, namely political, economic and social change to bring maximum socio-economic benefits to the masses, away from selfish and racist individualism of the oppressive bourgeois class.

(e) By choosing and rallying behind the armed struggle, the broad masses of Zimbabwe had clearly chosen the revolution as the sole creator of their leadership and the revolutionary policies to guide them in creating a new social order. They had accordingly pledged themselves to utmost vigilance in their task of protecting their revolution against any would-be hi-jackers or traitors.

To summarize, the first object of our armed struggle is the attainment of total and unfettered independence so we can rule ourselves as we deem fit and develop our country in the general interests of the masses. This means we completely reject and would never entertain any discussion whatsoever which seeks to preserve the interests or privileges of a minority as this vitiates the principle of total independence and derogates upon the sovereignty of the people of Zimbabwe.

Secondly, the struggle we are waging is aimed at the complete and not qualified overthrow of the settler regime headed by Ian Smith through which imperialism is perpetuating its barbarous rule of our masses. Smith and his racist regime are the principal enemy of the people of Zimbabwe. Our war is directed against them. How then can any sane nationalist sit at the table with the people’s arch-enemy and not only eat sumptuously with him, but also allow him to propose how we should be governed. The people of Zimbabwe have never since 1890, been ruled by the settlers with their willing consent. Never! That is why we are fighting. That is why our ancestors fought Chimurenga chekutanga in 1896/7.

The stooges Sithole, Muzorewa, Chikerema and Chirau are now saying to the people of Zimbabwe, ‘‘Accept settler rule, accept land shortage, accept poor education for your children, accept suffering, detention and political imprisonment, accept the protected villages, accept tortures, murders and massacres of our innocent children.’’ This is what the Internal talks are seeking to do, perpetuate white rule and this historically has meant our oppression and suppression.

Sithole, Muzorewa, Chikerema and Chirau are today discussing Smith’s own plans and not the plans desired by the people of Zimbabwe. These four headless characters have no mandate whatsoever to indulge in the treacherous talks with the very savage we are working to destroy. Their treachery has exceeded bounds and now calls for our intervention. We must now classify these stooges together with the principal enemy. For where do they differ from Smith?

(a) Smith wants the settler army to continue, and Chirau, Muzorewa, Sithole and Chikerema say, ‘‘Yes Nkosi’’ to this.

(b) Smith wants the whites-only Public Service and Judiciary to remain as at present. Chirau, Muzorewa, Sithole and Chikerema say, “Hongu ishe” to this.

(c) Smith wants the Africans to have their own vote only for their own representatives at present. Chirau, Chikerema, Sithole and Muzorewa again answer ‘‘Tazvinzwa Changamire’’.

(d) Smith does not want any reallocation of land so that the white farmers can give up their farms and Africans acquire more land. Chirau, Muzorewa, Sithole and Chikerema again answer, ‘‘Zvakanaka Mambo, minda yedu yakakwana’’.

(e) Sithole, Muzorewa, Chirau and Chikerema have been addressing meetings of white farmers and businessmen giving them assurances and stressing that they want them to continue in the enjoyment of their exploitative rights and privileges. Smith says, ‘‘Well done my boys.”

(f) You know Sithole, Chikerema, Chirau have denounced the people’s struggle, our war for freedom as terrorism. They want the war to stop and have called fighters terrorists. Smith again says, ‘‘You have done well, boys.”

These four cowardly unprincipled creatures who have made their objective the destruction of our revolution have long been wholly and totally rejected by the Zimbabwean masses as political ciphers. They are indeed political ciphers which are in vain struggling to become digits. Yet the more they try the deeper grows their hollowness.

Just look at this naivety. It is they who prayed Smith to pronounce the phrase ‘‘Adult suffrage”, so he would appear to espouse the democratic principle of one-man-one-vote, even if he did not mean it. Smith obliged, and this became the unashamed pretext for their joining the talks.

But when we talk of one-man-one-vote we mean that every adult regardless of race in the country have, not just the right to a vote, but the right to a vote of the same quality, efficacy and strength.

You know Smith wants racial voters’ rolls with African voters voting for only African candidates. But when Africans can only vote for African candidates and white settlers for white candidates, the operative quality of the vote, its efficacy and strength becomes vitiated by the restriction as to the extent of its application. In this particular case, the restriction upon the vote is racial and detracts from the democratic nature of the vote by affecting its efficacy (or extent of its application) and equality of operation.

When a vote is related only to race, tribe or clan it looses its democratic character and assumes a racial tone. A democratic vote is one which can be cast either for or against a candidate not on the basis of racial or tribal affinity but regardless of his race, tribe or some such other vitiating consideration.

We should therefore never be deceived into believing that because Smith has uttered the phrase ‘‘Adult suffrage” he means the same thing as we mean when we refer to universal adult suffrage. He is employing the phrase in a subtle exercise to cheat us.

A further important point to be noted in respect of the principle of one-man-one-vote is that it can only derive its full scope and meaning where physical power (military power) has been equally and effectively transferred alongside political power to the people.

A parliament where the people of Zimbabwe have all the seats, say 100 members of Parliament, can only have meaning when the army is also a Zimbabwe people’s army. If Smith has the army and the Africans have a deceptive majority in Parliament, it is obvious that Smith has the power because he has the guns and the people with their votes have hollow political power. Our votes must go together with our guns. After all, any vote we shall have shall have been the product of the gun. The gun which produces the vote should remain its security officer — its guarantor.

What we stand for in the clearest terms are the following ojectives:

(a) The unrestricted transfer of full and effective power — namely both guns and votes — to the people of Zimbabwe.

(b) In order to attain the objective of such full transfer, all the present British colonial forces in Zimbabwe should be completely dismantled, so that our forces can take over.

(c) There should be no restraints or strictures imposed upon the sovereign power of the goal of our independent Zimbabwe, either in protection of any racial group or of any other class of people of Zimbabwe, or in the preservation of the vested political, economic or other interests of an external power or powers. We refuse to bear foreign harnesses, for we cannot be anyone’s horses. We should be ourselves, our own nation, with sovereignty resting nowhere else but in our people. This is the freedom we are fighting for, we accept to bear the harnesses imposed by our people.

Smith whose record of crimes against the people of Zimbabwe would make him hang a thousand times over, has forfeited beyond measure, his right to negotiate with us. The only valid kind of negotiations we are willing to allow this hard-core criminal is with our firing squad.

Of course, if he is willing to surrender we would grant him audience and listen to his message, but thereafter he should be made answerable for his crimes of wanton murder and genocide, to mention only the blood-letting felonies against the people of Zimbabwe. His book of crimes is of course inexhaustible.

We wish to warn those puppets who are indulging in internal discussions with the enemy to retract immediately from their treacherous course. If they should persist in conferring with and being used by the enemy, the people’s wrath will soon befall them. They should decide now, whether they wish to continue as traitors or jump onto the side of the people. They cannot have it both ways — sup with the devil and be with the people he oppresses.

Our Party and our Chimurenga forces remain fully determined to ensure that the enemy is completely crushed. There is, therefore, no question of negotiating with Ian Smith. For what do you negotiate with a criminal — a robber and wanton murderer? As you know, our fighting forces are now completely on top of the situation. We are ever on the offensive against the enemy who is running away from the farms he has wrongly occupied, from his luxurious schools and homes, from his exploitative businesses now closing down, from his citadel of power — from our country Zimbabwe. More than 2000 settlers are fleeing every month and hundreds more are dying all the time in the battle field. Our revolution annihilates all negative and reactionary forces that stand in opposition to the positive and constructive forces we represent. The war will continue, therefore, until inimical forces have been vanquished and a stage laid for the constructive and reconstructive social and economic process to take place.

I repeat, Smith, his regime and forces must go. The people, their government, and their own revolutionary fighting forces must come In. This is our immediate goal. It is your goal. Fight hard, fight harder, fight hardest. Victory is in sight. Victory is certain.

Pamberi neChimurenga! Pasi naSmith nezvimbwasungata zvake! A luta continua!

4. 'To Arms, all of you...': The Year of the People (1978)

New Year’s Message, 1978

The year 1977 has closed and the year 1978 has set in. Revolutionary New Year greetings to you all and best wishes for even greater victories this year than in 1977.

Our revolutionary armed struggle has, but for external constraints of 1975, continuously and progressively spun time and the Zimbabwean territorial space from 1966 to 1977. Since January 1976, we have successfully maintained the offensive and vastly expanded our operational zones. By December 1977, the whole country had been turned into one vast military operational zone. Now, we feel proud, that our Zimbabwe National Liberation Forces can be encountered anywhere and everywhere in full force. Every district in the country has become a hot bed for the enemy and a favourable operational zone for us.

The year 1977, in particular, has been one of remarkable military achievements which speak for themselves:

(a) The enemy has been decimated in hundreds and put to flight in vast zones in which our fighting forces have been consolidating our position and creating with the masses and out of the masses revolutionary base areas.

(b) The enemy’s strategic military air bases and several police stations have been razed to the ground with many enemy air craft destroyed beyond repair. The latest such assault by our forces was that directed at Grand Reef, near Umtali, where we thoroughly ‘‘blessed’’ the enemy with heavy mortar and rocket fire.

(c) We have hit and dislocated the enemy’s lines of communication causing an effective disruption of the inflow and outflow of his goods, thus affecting adversely his trade. Hence his continuous unfavourable trade balance and the recent devaluation of his currency.

(d) The launching of urban guerilla warfare has spread panic hitherto confined to the rural settler community to the urban settler bourgeois and comprador class. Our double strategy of combining rural operations with urban attacks has mainly been responsible for the emigration stampede which has driven over 2000 frightened settlers from the country every month.

(e) According to plan, the enemy has been fully stretched and reduced to thin and most vulnerable military units which have daily fallen prey to our direct attacks, ambushes and landmines.

(f) The enemy’s losses in terms of both personnel and military equipment have risen so sharply, that coupled with his other military expenditure he has been forced to devote as much as 600 000 Rhodesian dollars a day, 1,2 million dollars every two days or 18 million dollars a month, or approximately 200 million dollars a year, to the war alone.

(g) We have destroyed several of his concentration camps, the keeps or so-called protected villages, freeing thousands of our people who are now being effectively organised into administrative units and mobilised into defending themselves and carrying on self-reliance projects in education, production and construction and in other allied fields.

(h) The enemy’s oppressive civil administrative machinery has been destroyed in vast rural areas and our peasant population in these areas can now live without the burden of taxes and school fees which their own meagre incomes can ill afford.

(i) We have captured many weapons and transport-vehicles from the enemy which have been of great assistance in our efforts to step up the war.

These are remarkable achievements. And I wish to say to all our gallant Fighting Forces; to our Party and to all Zimbabwean revolutionary masses who have supported the war, "Congratulations upon these victories and the telling blows which you have been dealing upon the enemy. 1977 has been a good year, a very good year for us and our struggle. You have done well. Maintain the offensive and for ever force the everretreating enemy into a worse defensive position. Continue our tactics of harassing him, hounding and pounding him from every corner, every position until he is completely annihilated."

Having said this, may I now draw your attention to the requirements — political and military — of 1978. They are the following:

(a) Now that we have encompassed the whole country with our operations, the basic power to our revolutionary struggle must be vigorously and systematically cultivated. The basic power to any revolutionary armed struggle is the People. A struggle which enjoys the full support of the struggling masses can never fail, no matter how protracted it may be.

Let us, therefore, in every sense of the phrase make 1978 the People’s Year, the year the broad oppressed masses have been totally and effectively mobilised in every village, district, province, city, town, mine or farm into supporting the war as their war. The people are the surest instrument for achieving true victory over the enemy.

As we move amongst them, like fish in water, let us constantly bear in mind that this massive water maintains its smooth kindness to the fish in feeding, hiding and facilitating their sometimes sleek and gentle, but often swift tactical movements.

But the organisation of the masses must conform to Party directives. The Party line is the only corrective line for the mobilisation and organisation of the masses. The people must thus be rallied behind the Party and the armed struggle.

(b) 1978 must equally be the year in which our Party, as the vanguard of the armed struggle, has also grown firm and has deep roots everywhere in the country. Again the strength and viability of any Party derives from the people. The roots of our Party are in our people. These roots must spread deep, wide and solid in 1978. The Party and the People and the People and the Party must have one and the same meaning. Organise the Party in the name of the People and the People in the name of the Party. Make 1978, therefore, the Year of the Party and the People so that we can also fully transform our struggle in both theory and practice into the People’s struggle.

(c) Our revolutionary fighting forces must always make a judicious and most economic use of our fire power so that maximum results are achieved by minimum resources. For the loss of one weapon let us seize two, better still four, of the enemy’s weapons. Our principle of self-reliance must accordingly be fully invoked so that we can use the enemy’s resources in destroying him.

(d) In as much as our war must continue to be fought on the basis of the principle of the full mobilisation and unity of the people, our Party will, and indeed must, continue in its revolutionary task of winning over and aligning itself with any democratic forces committed to the total over-throw of British imperialism arid colonialism, and its settlerist regime together with its physical instruments of capitalist domination and mass oppression. Unity on the basis of the armed struggle, that is, revolutionary unity, is the only form of unity that we hold dear.

(e) The unity of national democratic forces is a phenomenon of a national character, an event within national boundaries. Our war being a just cause and by virtue of its revolutionary nature, draws into its orbit the support of progressive revolutionary countries, organisations and forces the world over. Accordingly, apart from the dimension of national unity which it must assume, it must also acquire consistently an international dimension, but only to the extent of deriving material, political, diplomatic and moral support of the progressive and socialist international community, and not in respect of man-power. Therefore we must cultivate and maintain our solidarity with our natural friends and allies.

In this regard our alliance and solidarity within the Patriotic Front and our solidarity with the Front Line States, with OAU countries, with socialist countries, with other progressive countries and socialist and progressive organisations in non-socialist countries and with other liberation movements — such as SWAPO, PAC, ANC-SA, POLISARIO, FRETILIN, the PLO — must continue.

In the context of this international solidarity and the support we are enjoying, the year 1978 must, if our own fighting and organisational efforts double, be the decisive year. Remember, as the new year has opened, a most favourable terrain has emerged, with the new season. The enemy is frightened, he is in disarray and completely resigned to defeat. This is no moment to slacken our efforts. Let us hammer him to defeat. Let us blow up his citadel. Let us give him no time to rest. Let us chase him in every corner. Let us rid our home of this settler vermin.

Zimbabwe must be free now. The people are anxiously awaiting a new and independent state. To arms, all you brothers and sisters, to arms all you fathers and mothers: yes, everyone of you, comrades, workers and peasants, students and everyone, join on and fight on, bash the enemy for victory is in sight.

Victory is certain. Let us say in 1978: Pamberi-mberi neChimurenga. A Luta Continua!

5. The Year of the People’s Storm (1979)

New Year’s Message, 1979

Revolutionary greetings and New Year regards to you all, our brave and courageous, ever-advancing and ever-victorious ZANLA forces.

And to you all whom settler racist rule has rendered homeless and jobless, to you all maimed and physically incapacitated by enemy bombs and napalm, to you all the hundreds of thousands forced to flee from your homes into the bush or as refugees because of the barbarous rule of the rebel regime, to the thousands of our gallant youth and all students who are courageously resisting oppressive military conscription, revolutionary greetings and New Year regards.

To you the exploited toiling workers in industries, commerce, on mines and on white settler farms, revolutionary greetings and New Year regards.

To all our dedicated comrades outside Zimbabwe I send you equal revolutionary greetings and best regards for the New Year.

Our greetings and New Year regards also go to our truest allies and dearest friends, that is, to all our non-Zimbabwean comrades-in-arms.

In our last New Year message to you, I emphasized on behalf of the Party, the need we felt for a transformation in our political and military struggle so that the whole of our People would be completely identified with the Party and the Party with the People. The message similarly called for a full active involvement of the entire population in the liberation war in order to transform that war into a People’s war. To achieve this objective of a popular Party waging a popular struggle we declared 1978 as the Year of the People and assigned to the Party, as the People’s vanguard, the difficult task of mobilising through war and political action the broad oppressed masses and establishing Party organs in every province, district, village, city, town, farm and mine.

The rationale of our whole 1978 strategy was that since the objectives of our revolution were People-oriented, the People had to be recognised as the basic instrument of our struggle. Our imperative task over the years was, therefore, to harness all the forces within and among the People and direct them determinedly and purposefully in a common and united fight for the achievement of national independence. Accordingly, in fulfilment of our mission for 1978 we set out broadly and systematically to consolidate our political power and the position of military advantage we had acquired in the country, in particular, in the rural areas.

Now, we can happily and proudly assert as we report to you all our People, that:

(a) we have extended and consolidated our zone of military operations to encompass an area at least 85 per cent of the total area of the country;

(b) we have demolished and neutralised many enemy military and administrative bases and installations in an exceedingly wide area of the country, thus creating for ourselves the right of free movement across our operational areas and facilitating our task of consolidating power amongst the masses;

(c) we have carried out numerous effective sabotage operations and ambushes, aimed at effectively severing the railway and road systems, thereby neutralising the enemy’s ability not only to effect his trade within and without the country but also to move freely in the deployment of his forces;

(d) we have effected many successive attacks against enemy positions, routing, decimating and disintegrating his forces and effectively lowering his morale;

(e) we have in the process of our varied assaults captured huge quantities of enemy weapons, some of which are now being used by our ZANLA forces and the People’s militia but others of which are in our possession and which we shall display at an opportune moment in future. In addition, we have destroyed dozens of enemy planes and captured numerous enemy forces.

(f) In a vigorous and concerted campaign to clear the rural areas of the enemy and settler enemy supporters, we have freed many farm-lands from settler occupation and thus put an end to the system of exploitation and undue enrichment perpetrated for decades by the boers at the expense of the farm worker and the dispossessed peasant. This is a fitting act of the restoration of the People's land rights usurped under the Land Apportionment and Land Tenure Acts.

(g) In pursuance of a deliberate strategy to create greater freedom of our People, we set out to destroy those inhuman and filthy concentration camps called protected villages and freed hundreds of thousands of our People.

(h) Because we had inflicted defeat upon the enemy in vast rural areas and freed the masses, we established and consolidated liberated zones in which:

(i) the People are organised to administer themselves under the political guidance of the Party;

(ii) the People carry out well directed collective programmes of selfreliance in production and construction (e.g. in farming, animal husbandry, building their simple homes, constructing simple homes, constructing simple roads, crafts, etc.) and education, culture and health work;

(iii) the People are organised to defend themselves and remain ina state of military preparedness against possible attacks by the enemy, and to this effect units of the People’s militia have been established in some areas, and

(iv) the People are regularly organised and politicised through political consciousness and a constant awareness of our principal revolutionary goals, the correctness of our Party line, the nature of antagonistic forces at play and the deviationism in the present situation in the country.

(i) Taking advantage of our uncontested control of large rural areas, we have shocked the enemy into defeatism and despair by springing from these rural bases and assaulting key targets in towns and cities with devastating effect. In Umtali, our persistent mortar and rocket attacks have reduced this third largest town which once carried a large population of white settlers to a ghost city under constant siege by our forces. Ninety per cent of the settlers have deserted it. In Salisbury, the recent attack by our ZANLA forces upon the largest fuel storage depot in the heart of Salisbury has not only demonstrated to the enemy how the People’s revolutionary fire burns but has also exposed the utter weakness of the enemy’s lines of defence.

(j) We have either by direct attacks or through the effect of our general strategy brought about a halt to many settler business establishments in rural and urban areas, and these included factories and commercial enterprises. The effect has been to reduce drastically the enemy’s production capacity in several industrial sub-sectors.

(k) The call to organise the People in the name of the Party was also a call to mobilise them into taking one and the same political line as that determined and laid down by the Central Committee of ZANU during the Year of the People; therefore, the unity and identity of the People and the Party was demonstrated in the political sphere as follows:

(i) The Party and the People outrightly rejected the neocolonialist internal agreement whereby tyrant rebel settler leader Ian Smith with the collaboration of his three head-nodding stooges, Muzorewa, Sithole and Chirau, sought by political trickery, to preserve power in the hands of the privileged white settlers while paying lipservice to democratic principles and majority rule. Having rejected this treachery, the People also decisively rejected the three traitors and quarantined them into isolation as political lepers. Let every renegade be warned that he who defies the People’s revolutionary will court his own damnation and political eclipse.

(ii) The Party and the People stood together as we insisted with our unyielding consistency, in our discussions with the AngloAmericans, that any process leading to the genuine independence of Zimbabwe must constitute a transfer of total power from the colonial ruler, which is Britain, to the People of Zimbabwe. We firmly held the view that power is not only political but also military. The People’s votes and the People’s guns are always inseparable twins. Accordingly, our demand, always supported by the broad masses of Zimbabwe, was firstly, that there should be a complete dismantlement of the settler regime’s political and military structures and secondly, that there be an acceptance of our own army and police force as the forces of the country. There is no better defender and protector of political power won through the gun than the gun itself.

(iii) The people praised our exposure of unashamed dishonest clandestine manoeuvres by the Anglo-Americans to support and consolidate the internal accord by seeking to incorporate Comrade Joshua Nkomo as a party to it and proceeding therefrom to impose a political leadership acceptable to imperialism in complete defiance of the demonstrable will of the Zimbabwean People.

These were indeed spectacular victories and unequalled achievements. I take this opportunity to congratulate on behalf of our whole People, the Central Committee of our Party, which worked out the general political strategy for 1978, the High Command which concretised and effectively implemented that strategy in a programmed manner in which definite targets were chosen and assaults directed, the ZANLA forces upon the successful carrying out of the actual operations in the field. Praise, abundant praise goes to all our provincial and field commanders, to the sectorial commanders, to the detachment commanders and leaders of the ZANLA sections. You have done an excellent job. Keep it up.

I also take this opportunity to congratulate on behalf of the Party all the workers and peasants, the progressive trade union movement which supports the People’s struggle, all progressive intellectuals, our dynamic and revolutionary students and other youth in the country, the progressive churches and all the other democratic forces in the country on uniting with us in a common war front against settler fascism, racism, barbarity and oppression. You have, all of you, played your honourable respective roles in helping the symbiotic process of unity between the Party and the People to take effect. The unity achieved between our broad forces is unity in revolutionary action. Its success has spelt doom to settler minority rule and paved the way for the creation of a truly democratic state in Zimbabwe.

The forces are, however, not yet extinct. Indeed they are now operating more vigorously than before to Africanise the conflict which historically, politically, socially and economically has been a purely colonial one. The attempt to create a puppet regime and organise for it under a programme of military conscription an African force is obviously intended to transfer the arena of the struggle from its being colonial to being that of a civil war. It will be remembered that on the eve of their withdrawal from Vietnam the Americans toiled hard to raise a mammoth army for the puppet Thieu-regime and left that regime one of the heaviest arsenals a puppet regime has ever had. The Vietnamisation of the war never succeeded in effect and the puppet regime was overthrown as its forces, lacking in motive force, were pounded to defeat.

Similarly, in our situation, the configuration being contrived by the enemy is one where the African is made to fight his fellow African with the white settlers stage-managing the conflict from behind.

Let me state quite clearly and unequivocally that it is high treason and treachery against the people and the nation for anyone to further the interests of colonial settlerism and the oppressive system in its maintaining, by:

(a) collaborating with the Smith regime in promoting the internal agreement and thus resisting the will of the People’s revolution,

(b) agreeing to be conscripted into the settler army in order to wage armed resistance against the People’s revolution,

(c) acting as spy, agent or informer of the settler regime contrary to or in subversion of the People’s revolution and political interest,

(d) continuing to be a member of any of the political parties associated in the counter-revolutionary internal accord.

We urge all our students and other youth in the country to resist the call to conscription and either choose to go to prison or join the People’s military units. Never must you go down in history as one of the few reactionary elements to have fought on the enemy side against our own People.

To progressive elements among the white community, to the Indian and Coloured communities, I say you have absolutely nothing to fear as long as you stand for true democratic principles, equality, non-racialism, justice and fair play. These are the principles we are fighting for so that on their basis we can establish a society devoid of racial discrimination and where the will of the majority is predominant.

Let me now refer to the international front where the numerous successes on the home-front have been reciprocated by achievements of equal significance. The Year of the People was also a year of an intensive and extensive diplomatic campaign to win friends and allies in support of the struggle. Various Party delegations went on many organised visits abroad to socialist and other countries in a bid to consolidate old alliances and friendships, create new alliances and friendships, and raise increased material assistance for our armed struggle, and diplomatic and political support for our political quest for genuine independence. Our diplomatic strategy for 1979 is to continue these efforts and win more friends still.`

In respect of material aid, I am happy to say our position, though not yet satisfactory, has immensely improved. In respect of our stand on the Anglo-American proposals and in rejection of the internal agreement, the whole progressive community have given us the fullest support. We take this opportunity of expressing our gratitude to the Frontline States and several OAU countries which have, in addition to their political support for our joint stand as the Patriotic Front, extended material aid to us for the intensification of our armed struggle. We hail the Government and People of Mozambique for their correct stand based on principle Y 24 firstly, in continuing to provide us, in the face of savage acts of aggression by the settler regime, with transit facilities and for the development of our forces, and secondly, in maintaining complete sanctions against the rebel Rhodesian colony and refusing to open the border, and thirdly, in courageously bearing the suffering brought about by the regime’s acts of aggression and refusing to submit to that aggressive intimidation. Equal tribute is due to Chama Cha Mapinduzi, the Government and People of Tanzania, who have fathered our struggle and continue to nurture it. In relation to the present state of the Anglo-American proposals, emasculated and completely out of friendship with our aspirations, we have maintained that the British and their American partners have connived with the Smith regime in destroying those aspects which originally recommended themselves to us as a basis for discussion. We cannot, therefore, agree, to any constitutional conference with the British unless an acceptable basis were agreed with definite preconditions prescribing the demise of the regime and the destruction of its whole military machinery and accepting our Liberation Movement and its forces as the only legitimate authority to be seized and with full power. We can never ever accept a political arrangement that neutralises our present position of political and military strength inside the country. Let it be known that we presently administer a much vaster territorial zone and a far larger population than the Smith regime does. We are indeed the de facto government of the country. We cannot, therefore, undermine this reality of our predominance by agreeing to an illegimate political marriage with reactionary elements rejected by the masses. We want total power. And this we shall have. Comrades, let me now look ahead. The Year of the People has come to a close and a New Year has begun. The victories, events and political programmes of 1978 have built out of our People a united massive force whose impact the enemy, now demoralised and afflicted by defeatism, can never contain. Our People for years down-trodden and once beaten into abject surrender and unquestioning submission to the white ‘master’ so called are now united in a courageous bid to break their chains of colonial slavery. The settler empire stands doomed and the settler Tarquinus Superbus (Tarquin the Proud) is poised to flee before the gathering storm has engulfed him. For the whole of last year, we worked to build a united People enthused with revolutionary purpose. For the whole of last year, we worked to provide the people with a consolidated base for final action. For the whole of 1978, Smith has instead worked to create fury in the People. 25 His barbarous forces have massacred thousands of innocent civilians, maimed and incapacitated hundreds by use of savage bombs and napalm, rendered hundreds of thousands landless and homeless, raped and robbed the masses. Thousands of our able-bodied men and women have been rendered jobless. Several thousands have been imprisoned or detained or have just disappeared in typical fashion, they have been quietly liquidated. Now our youth are faced with the danger of conscription into the settler army fighting against their own parents. In acts of desperation the Smith regime is unleashing a genocidal campaign within the country and the neighbouring states of Mozambique, Zambia, and Botswana. The regime has run amock. The pattern of its desperate course is to destroy all in its way, human life included, before its final collapse and Smith jumps out, as he is preparing to do, to some sanctuary in South Africa or abroad. Our main revolutionary objective for this year must be to check the mad regime completely and bring the People’s power to every square metre of our sacred land and thus put an end to the regime’s cruelty. We give the People our ZANLA forces and all ZANU militants within the country the following tasks:

(a) The consolidated liberated zones must be well defended and the People become well protected against the enemy by creating a People’s militia in them.

(b) The semi-liberated zones must become fully liberated zones.

(c) The liberation war must be extended to every corner of the country and encompass all east and west and all north and south.

(d) The remaining enemy bases must be wiped out or become neutralised and everybody is being called upon to be more daring, take risks and make sacrifices.

(e) Economic targets should increase and be assaulted more massively using well-designed synchronised strategies. Let us get settler business to grind to a halt.

(f) The settler sanctuaries, namely the cities and towns, must become in 1979 even greater targets than they have been in 1978. Let us create a hell for the enemy in everyone of them.

(g) The farms still under occupation by unapproved settlers must be completely cleared of the enemy and turned into People’s lands.

(h) There should continue to be a complete identity between the Party and the People with the People playing a far greater role in action programmes than in 1978.

(i) Our programmes of self-reliance in production and construction, 26 education and culture, health and sanitary work must be intensified and continue to operate on a collective basis.

(j) Our politicisation programme in liberated, semi-liberated and contested areas must gain in intensity so that the political basis of our armed struggle is clearly understood by the masses and the political goals are appreciated.

(k) Our ZANLA forces must continue to increase considerably in number while the quality of their training continues to improve.

These are only the general tasks which should unfold themselves through concrete and practical plans and specific stategies aimed at the destruction of the enemy and the assumption of power. They are tasks which more than ever before call for greater action than we have hitherto been capable of. Working in full coordination, under the Party’s guidance and strict discipline we can accomplish them. Discipline has always been our watch word and let it continue to be so in 1979. Now that the People and the Party are one, the People’s power must actively manifest itself in organised mass actions supportive of the main ZANLA thrust. No one doubts any more the revolutionary commitment of our People. Have they not suffered and died for the noble cause of our liberation? Have they not made greater sacrifices than other Peoples in similar revolutionary situations? Have they not demonstrated throughout the Year of the People that they are prepared to make even much greater sacrifices than before? What then are they not prepared to do? Our war has transformed into a People’s War. Let us, therefore, demonstrate the People’s force this year. Let the People’s fury break into a revolutionary storm that will engulf and sweep the enemy completely from our land. Let every settler city, town or village, let every enemy farm or homestead, let every enemy post, nook or hiding place be hit by the fury of the People’s Storm. The People’s Storm must come with thunder, heavy rain and irresistible blasting gusts that will ransack the enemy strongholds. Let us call this year therefore the Year of the People’s Storm — Gore reGukurahundi. Let us proceed from the Year of the People to the Year of the People’s Storm and storm right through to victory and the creation of a nation based on People’s power. The People are a power, the People are a revolutionary storm. Simba revanhu igukurahundi. Long Live the People’s War. Long Live the People’s Storm. Pamberi neGore reGukurahundi. Pamberi neZANU. Pamberi neChimurenga. A Luta Continua! 27

6. The Struggle continues

The fighting masses of Zimbabwe who have suffered for so long for the liberation of their country must not believe or be led to believe that Lancaster is their salvation. Sure, if in the end Britain and us agree, the objectives the people of Zimbabwe have been fighting for will have been enhanced. But the Lancaster Conference should not deceive anybody because Britain is intent on the creation of a neo-colonial regime headed by Bishop Muzorewa and his colleagues. The masses, who have supported our struggle for so long, and all the fighting forces whose revolutionary zeal has brought the revolution to a stage where victory is now imminent, should continue to uphold the one instrument that we have used that far in order to promote our interests — the armed struggle, as the only method of finally achieving victory. As I said earlier on, if in fact the situation changes here at Lancaster, we could emerge with an agreement which would promote our revolution. But as things are, with the British working hand in hand with Muzorewa and racist settlers, we cannot see any agreement coming from Lancaster. So we must continue to look not to Lancaster but to our own spirit, our own zeal, our own determination, our own revolutionary commitment as the only source of our liberation, and the only method whereby we can achieve the goals for which we have been striving for so long. And so the struggle must continue. There should never be a let-down or slackening on the efforts of the fighting forces. If anything, the struggle must now be intensified. ZANLA forces, working hand in hand with the masses, must now assail all enemy citadels, the cities, the mining areas, the farms that have not yet been attacked, all the enemy bases, the routes that the enemy continues to repair after we have disrupted them. These must come under constant attack. Only through these efforts can we really be understood here at Lan28 i caster as being determined to achieve the only form of victory that can bring the millions of our masses independence.

A Luta Continua! Long Live The Year of the People’s Storm!

II. History, Instruments and Objectives of the Struggle: the Party, the Army, Party Ideology and Party Line

7. Defining the Line

From a speech held at a Central Committee Meeting at Chimoio between Aug. 31 and Sept. 8, 1977.

I am sure all of us recognize that this meeting of the Central Committee is unique. It is unique in the following respects:

(a) This is the first meeting of our Central Committee since its reconstruction last March, when new structural changes were made in order to suit ourselves to the situation facing the Party.

(b) This meeting occurs at a very important stage of our struggle, a stage when the war has gained significantly in momentum and its effects have begun to be felt by the enemy and we are, accordingly, called upon to review the war in terms of our general policy and strategy in order to intensify our war effort.

(c) This Central Committee meeting also comes at a time when imperialist manoeuvres aimed at the neutralization of our war effort and negating our successes are being advanced through the instrumentality of a home-based stooge and reactionary leadership which, while in theory it pays lip service to the principle of majority rule, is in practice pandering to the bidding of its imperialist and settler masters to the detriment of the people’s struggle.

(d) We are also meeting at a stage of our revival when the Party stands in need of a structural consolidation, a clear definition of departmental functions and a systematic streamlining of appointments so that the entire Party machinery can be geared to greater efficiency and effectiveness.

This Central Committee meeting, in order to achieve progress, has, in my opinion, to take stock of our past as indeed it must examine our present and proceed to cast its view into the future. This is an extremely important exercise in that our revolution is an ever continuous effort. Any useful assessment must only be undertaken in its correct perspective. The past, present and future constitute the time-frame or form in which our positive and negative actions, in continuous, creative revolutionary process, are pitted one against the other as we progressively move towards the attainment of our objectives.

I shall, accordingly, attempt a brief review of our history — the history of ZANU and our revolution with emphasis on the immediate past.

Brief history of our Party and its struggle

Only a few days ago we celebrated ZANU Day, the 8th of August, when, in 1963, ZANU was born in Highfield. From the moment of its concep- tion, it had to struggle for survival against thuggery and violence unleashed upon itby ZAPU. Its resilience, commitment to the struggle, and sense of direction distinguished it even at this early stage, for whilst it fought gallantly for survival, it took positive steps in planning for a people's armed struggle, thus defying the negativism of forces inimical to this form of struggle.

In May 1964, the Congress of Gwelo, which gave us a Constitution and a Party structure with the Central Committee and a National Execu- tive, mandated the leadership of the Party with the task of implementing the Party's action programme and planning the struggle in general. By July 1964 we had got our "Crocodile Group" into action, while our military training programme was set underway.

In September, 1964, the Party was proscribed and the leadership, ex- cept for those few who were outside the country, was detained. Adjust- ing itself to the new situation, the leadership, conscious of the mandate 'from Congress of the task of ensuring the continuation of the struggle with ZANU constituting its vanguard, delegated the task of waging arm- ed struggle to members of the Central Committee abroad, under the leadership of the late Comrade Herbert Chitepo.

After the establishment of the Revolutionary Council, armed struggle began with the Battle of Sinoia in April, 1966. The launching of armed struggle opened a new vista in our general struggle against imperialism and colonialism and regenerated a completely new confidence in our people's ability to fight for their freedom and independence. In the meantime, the environment of independence offered by Zambia, Bo- tswana and Malawi was yet another source of inspiration and con- fidence.

Our armed struggle naturally lacked experience both among the leadership and the cadreship, and soon we began suffering setbacks. There followed a loss of morale among our fighters and a gencral lack of enthusiasm on the part of our people to join the war. It must be said of our Party, ZANU, that it has never failed to adapt itself to the demands of any new situation. Accordingly, the leadership abroad, structurally adjusted itself as the external wing of the Party, gearing the entire machinery for a new military offensive, but preceded by an objective history of ZANU and our revolution with emphasis on the immediate assessment of the situation and an adaptation of strategy.

DARE having been formed, the revision of the general plan and strategy of the war began. Soon our fighters were fighting alongside FRELIMO in the Tete offensive. In December, 1972, we opened the North-Eastern (currently, the Tete) operational area. Thereafter, our armed struggle continued to gain an ascendancy and had by 1974 assumed proportions extremely frightening to the enemy. The detenle exercise of 1974 together with the internal revolt experienced by the Party were ingenious tactics in the enemy's overall negating strategy aimed at revers- ing our revolutionary thrust.

The harm done to the Party and the revolution by the revolt of 1974 within ZANLA and the accompanying detente exercise is as much common knowledge as common experience. The revolt though sooner suppressed than the detente exercise was contained, left a dent on the Party that has taken time to repair. Greater damage, however, resulted from the suppressive actions taken against ZANU in Zambia.

The vicious nature of the detente exercise is told in sequence by the occurrence of the following sad events:

(a) The assassination by the enemy of Comrade Chitepo in Lusaka;

(b) The arrest and imprisonment of members of DARE and the High Command in Zambia in order to neutralise the leadership of war;

(c) The arrest and detention of hundreds of ZANU cadres in Zambia;

(d) The deliberate halting of reinforcements to the battlefront as a means of exposing our fighters to the enemy.

Again, the resilience of our Party showed itself in this extremely difficult situation created by the enemy. Wherever we were, the majority of us consistently kept the ZANU torch burning, fully mindful of our Party responsibility, and with an ever-increasing commitment to the struggle. We put up a strong and principled resistance against imperialism and colonialism operating partly through the willing agency of our neighbours and partly through the treachery of our own President. Once we judged the moment for adaptability in posture was ripe, we struck a workable military alliance with ZAPU, called it ZIPA, and relaunched our struggle with a new vigour that confounded the enemy. As 35well as reviving and strengthening the old operational area off Tete, we ' opened new operational zones off Manica and Gaza provinces in Mozambique. ` The relaunching of the armed struggle became the first effective step in our bid to resuscitate the Party. We had succeeded in reconstituting our army, but we had not yet managed to re-establish the Party, especially now that the treachery and the apostasy of its top leader had become conclusive, causing a confused situation to exist in the whole fabric of our organisation, especially with the ANC domination of the political scene. The ANC, an amorphous and purpose-lacking body into whose orbit ZANU had found herself coerced, had striven hard, with the support of our treacherous leader, to smother ZANU. It became quite obvious to those of us who still stood by ZANU’s principles that only a full reemergence of the Party would place it in a strong position to prosecute the war and defend itself against onslaughts upon it. Hence, in September last year, at the meeting of the Frontline States held in Dar-esSalaam, the four members of the Central Committee who attended the meeting declared before the five Presidents the re-emergence of ZANU. In the context of a re-emerging ZANU, the cumulative effect of the various pressures we had exerted for the release of our comrades, soon bore fruit when the long-awaited event occurred. All the Comrades, except one, got released in October. In the meantime, the intensification of the armed struggle had prompted another subtle move by the British and the Americans to confound an imminent military victory by ZANU through a deceptive constitutional scheme whose effect would have been to leave effective power in the hands of the settlers. As a conference strategy, ZANU had formed an alliance with ZAPU. At the Geneva Conference (October — December 1976), the Patriotic Front succeeded in obstructing the enemy moves to establish a neocolonialist regime under cover of democracy and thus in winning yet another lease for the armed struggle. Party unity A brief historical background of ZANU and the struggle it has been waging has just been given. Throughout the fourteen years of ZANU’s existence the one unmistakeable feature that emerges is the unity that has bound together those of us with a greater commitment to the principles and objectives of the Party. I define Party unity as a harmony that draws us together under the 36 given leadership of the Party towards the achievement of its goals. Unity is in fact more than mere harmony. It is an active bond of aspirants who share in common given political beliefs. Unity is integrative of constructive or progressive or revolutionary forces in the direction of set goals. Unity is equally disintegrative of destructive or retrogressive or counterrevolutionary forces that operate against progress and so against unily itself. I take all those of us who genuinely believe in ZANU and accept its constitutional structure and objectives and are actively working for the fulfilment of its revolutionary goals, as ZANU’s constructive or progressive forces. On the other hand, destructive forces are those amongst us who arduously strive in any direction that militates against the Party line or who, in any way, seek, like the rebels of 1974 and 1975/6, to bring about change in the leadership or structure of the party by maliciously planting contradictions within our ranks. These constitute negative or counterrevolutionary forces because their actions are a negation of the struggle. We must negate them in turn. This is what is referred to as the negation of the negation. We cannot afford to lie low when cliquists, tribalists or regionalists are plotting daily to undermine the unity of the Party by fanning dissension and confusion. Party discipline ZANU is a Party full of experience. It is said experience is a great teacher; I wonder whether in respect of discipline we can claim to have learnt from experience. It cannot be denied that right from the Central Committee down to the smallest Party unit indiscipline pervades our entire structure. On a number of occasions, I have described discipline as having two dimensions — the external and the internal — emphasizing that the internal kind of discipline was the more important of the two. Internal discipline is a state of order within a person that propels him constantly to do right things. It is a stage of individual development that resolves the - contradictions within an individual. The pull to be selfish is counterbalanced by a greater pull to be selfless, the pull to drunkenness is countered by one to moderation, the pull to disobedience is negatived by that to obedience, the pull to sexual givenness yields to sexual restraint, deviationism is corrected by compliance, and individualism by collectivism. The individual must comply with the order laid down by the group. Our group is the Party called ZANU. ZANU has an order, rules and regulations which make its system — the ZANU system of behaviour. 37

When an individual cannot subject himself to discipline, then external discipline must apply. The Party must compel him to conform. This is where punishment comes in. ` We, who are members of the Central Committee, have to demonstrate by our own actions that we are entitled to demand of others compliance to rules of discipline. Let a greater consciousness of the tasks that confront us grow within us. Let us deserve to be ZANU. Party ideology The Party has accepted scientific socialism as its guiding philosophy. No one is born a scientific socialist. Marx was not, neither was Lenin nor Mao. Marx conceived the philosophy underlying scientific socialism. Lenin learnt, interpreted and applied it to Russia. Mao did the same in respect of China. We, who have accepted socialist theory as the basis of practice in our own countries, have a duty to read and understand what the fathers of that theory actually say. We also have to examine the theory in the light of our history and the environment of our country. Only in this way can we evolve from the pure ideology of socialism a workable practical ideology for Zimbabwe. The leadership must be warned that unless it can keep ahead of its followers, in its ideological education, it cannot justifiably continue to lay any sustainable claim to leadership. Ideology guides the Party. The leadership which leads the Party must, therefore, be ideologically oriented. Otherwise, such leadership becomes a misfit. Let us with haste transform ourselves so we can deserve to lead and instruct our followers. Literature abounds. Let us avail ourselves of it! The Patriotic Front is an alliance of ZANU and ZAPU. The two parties, which are its components, continue to maintain their identity as they workout more and more areas of agreement for unified action. No one can say just now whether these attempts will succeed, but it is better to try and fail than to fail having never tried. The British-American manoeuvres The British and Americans have just been holding a meeting in London. We understand they have agreed on a set of proposals whose general principles are:(a) Independence by September 1978; (b) Elections on the basis of one-man-one-vote; (c) Cease-fire before elections. To us, the fundamental issue is none of all these ideas. It is precisely the fact of effective control. The question we should have answered is whether our army will constitute the security forces of independent Zimbabwe. If the answer is ‘‘No’’, then there is no question of any agreement by us. There is no doubt that our operational areas will expand, and with it our ability to destroy the enemy and achieve victory. We cannot say precisely when the enemy will fall, but of this we are certain: He is on the run. If we maintain our Party cohesiveness and continue to uphold the armed struggle as the only form of revolutionary action capable of achieving true victory, true victory will come our way. The party has to surge forward with a unity of armed vigour and revolutionary purpose. As the leadership of the Party our task must be to lead and not to mislead, to inform and not to misinform, to persuade and not to dissuade, to encourage and not to discourage, to guide and not to misguide, to direct and not to misdirect, to unite and not to disunite. We must be leaders and not ‘misleaders’. We have to make a clear distinction between responsible leadership and irresponsible leadership. Our people expect great performance from us. Let us live up to their expectations. Pamberi neZANU! Pamberi neCentral Committee! Pamberi neChimurenga! 38 í 39

8. The Perspective of our Revolution

Article in THE ZIMBABWE NEWS

Our revolution is an ever progressive dynamic process set in the positive direction of achieving both immediate and long-term revolutionary goals. It has a past, a present and a future. Its beginnings lie embedded in a historical past in which colonial and hence capitalist forces had, since 1890, erected a strangely exploitative socio-economic environment where the new ruler became identifiable by the following selfishly individualistic characteristics: (a) The ruler was a settler who imposed his will upon the people and had never invoked and obtained their consent, hence the First Liberation War of 1896/7. (b) The ruler was a white man for whom race and colour decided a person’s status, thus creating a racial dimension in the matrix of antagonistic contradictions. The ruler had with impunity acquired vast land acreages. He defiantly and systematically dispossessed and disorganised traditional communities and upset the customary land system built on common ownership and common interest, by super-imposing upon it a new settler land-owner class and the resultant creation of an equally new class of land-hungry peasant population whose pervading grievance on the land issue has to this day constituted the main source of the existing generalised hostility towards the settler community. The Land Apportionment Act 1930, and the Land Tenure Act 1969, form the main legal instruments for ensuring the continuity of the inequitable division. (d) The settlers had, by employing borrowed or self-acquired capital and laying open the country to foreign multi-national investment capital and other forms of speculative capital, established a liberal economy Y. (c — 40 in which the primary industrial sectors (farming and mining) and the subsequent manufacturing and commercial sectors turned the African population (indigenous and non-indigenous) into a worker class whose remuneration, on the average, always fell below subsistence level. It was in the contest of these ravages upon the fundamental rights of the people, upon their economic resources and their political and social order, that even before the re-formation of the African National Congress in 1957 attempts were made by some small organisations like the old pre-1957 African National Congress, RICU (Reformed Industrial and Commercial Workers Union), a trade union body, the British Voice Association which, though a misnomer, was an organisation that fought for the recognition and respect of people’s right to the occupation and use of land and for the improvement of the general conditions of workers. Thus, in 1948, the whole Bulawayo was, for about three days, paralysed by a general strike called by the British Voice Association. The African politics of the time were reformist and not revolutionary, as they aimed at the correction of the grievances and not at the eradication of the root cause of these grievances — the political power base which was the birth-place of the entire oppressive system. Organisation was poor, for although the organisers were well-meaning, they were inexperienced and unknowledgeable. Ideological direction just did not exist, because the principles and objectives that formed the basis of action were superficial and not fundamental: superficial in that their general direction was the mere amelioration of the effects of colonialism and not the destruction of colonialism itself. The period 1957 to 1961 ushered in a stage during which the reformist politics transformed into a struggle for equal rights — political, social and economic. The parties championing the campaign were the African National Congress as re-formed in 1957 and the first real mass political organisation — the National Democratic Party 1960-1961. It was the NDP which, carrying over from where the African National Congress had left off when it was proscribed in February 1959, thoroughly drilled the masses into confidently upholding the principle of independence based on one-man-one-vote. With this shift from remedial politics to the politics of nationalism and self-rule, there had occurred a fundamental qualitative transformation in the political approach of the leadership. Alongside this new transformation came better organisation, planning and programming of political action. And yet no qualitative change in the means of political action took place. Between 1957 and 1961, the 41

assortment of actions selected as the means of struggle were those of secondary character — industrial strikes, boycotts (of buses, goods, shops and beer-halls) mass protests and demonstrations, passive resistance campaigns against destocking, the payment of cattle and dog taxes and the wide-spread contour-ridging programme, and non-collaboration with civil authorities. In adopting these means of struggle, the leadership in those days never intended to overthrow the enemy but rather draw in the hand of the colonial power so constitutional changes could be effected to bring about a government based on the principle of majority rule. The pressures were thus nothing more than a form of appeal to Britain and never took the form of a struggle against her, for she was viewed as a mediator who should mediate on the side of the oppressed. There was hardly any difference in approach when, in December, 1961, we formed ZAPU after the NDP had been banned. The most significant change was the deliberate abandonment of the methods of strikes, demonstrations and passive resistance as ‘‘official’’ means of struggle, even though a number of areas in the country persisted in their non-collaboration with civil authority and refusal to destock their cattle. The main reason for abandoning these methods was the extent to which they exposed thousands of defenceless supporters to wanton shooting, arrest, torture and intimidation by the racist police. A new policy in respect of ‘‘action’’ (as it was called) was to embark extensively on sabotage of industries, farms and commercial concerns by using any available destructive means — explosives, axes, spears, arrows and ordinary fire. The immediate objective of these forms of pressure remained unchanged, namely to push Britain to a constitutional conference to negotiate a settlement which would yield universal suffrage and therefore lead to majority rule. When at the end of 1962, ZAPU was banned, the inefficiency of these means revealed itself, for despite a spate of telling sabotage acts lasting over a period of just about a month calmness and peace soon reigned on the scene. It was in the process of a complete re-appraisal of the entire political situation vis-a-vis the methods hitherto employed to bring about political change that ZANU was formed on 8 August 1963. Whereas the methods of pressure employed hitherto had eschewed the use of direct force upon the enemy, ZANU became the first nationalist organisation to choose armed struggle as the chief means of subduing the enemy. The choice of armed struggle meant the building of a guerilla force, which in turn necessitated the careful planning and organisation of training facilities in those countries progressive enough to offer them. It 42 a also imposed on the Party leadership the responsibility to launch a wide recruitment campaign. The success of any recruitment campaign naturally depends on the degree of the people’s awareness, and this is usually an advanced stage in a people’s political consciousness. However, no serious problems were encountered in recruiting from amongst our Party Youth and by the beginning of 1964, though the violent conflict with ZAPU which sought our extinction was a great handicap, we had already produced some trained cadres, whilst many more left the country during the year for military training in friendly countries. The year 1964 must always be remembered as the year the Party was firmly and formally constituted together with a clearly stated Party policy which resulted in a Party action programme being adopted. The following important events in 1964 must be noted: (a) A ZANU Congress was held in May at Gwelo, which (i) adopted the Party constitution drafted by the interim Central Committee, (ii) adopted the Party statement of Policy which espoused socialism, (iii) elected the Central Committee of the Party and its National Executive, (iv) gave a mandate to the Central Committee to formulate and embark upon an Action Programme with immediate effect, (v) authorised the Central Committee to hold the Youth, Women congress. (b) The ZANU Central Committee, whilst recruiting and dispatching personnel outside for military training, decided that its action programme, which included armed struggle, could still start taking effect through the employment of local resources. Hence the many actions which occurred: (i) the Crocodile Group’s action in the Eastern zone, (ii) the sabotage acts in Fort Victoria area by a group of trained cadres which included the blasting of a railway locomotive engine, (iii) sabotage acts in the region of Salisbury involving explosive devices, (iv) the burning and destruction of settler farm property. These actions formed a prelude to the subsequent launching of the armed struggle in 1966. As opposed to the “‘pressure and leverage” 43

strategy of former parties, the ZANU strategy became one of absolute commitment to direct confrontation with the principal enemy. The enemy was clearly defined as Britain and her‘settler kith and kin in the country. Against this enemy was now to be employed armed struggle as the correct and principal means of confrontation with a definite view to causing him to relinquish power completely. Whilst the previous political strategy sought the accommodation of Africans within a settlerestablished and settler-oriented political order, the new strategy as conceived by ZANU envisaged the creation of a new political order in which sovereignty would repose in the people of the country whose right to an equal vote and equal participation would be constitutionally guaranteed. The new political order with a new power structure would provide the power base for the socialist policies that would be pursued. But whilst some general principles of socialism — common ownership of the land by the people through the state and the nationalisation of industries — were adumbrated, the further stage of basing the Party’s socialist thought on the principles of scientific socialist principles had not yet been reached. A future developmental stage in our ideological conception remained to be achieved. The launching of the armed struggle in 1966 with the battle of Sinoia opened new horizons. ZANU had demonstrated for the first time in seventy years (that is since the liberation war of 1896) that given a just cause, proper military training and political orientation, the African peasant and labourer could turn the political tables on the settler bourgeois community and liberate himself from his clutches, not merely by breaking him loose of the chains of bondage but by annihilating the slavemaster himself or fettering him with his own chains. The events which mark the escalation process of our armed struggle from 1966 have now become general knowledge. As a result of experience gained in the practical field of operations and from the revolutionary practice of other successful liberation movements, it was possible in 1972 to open the North-Eastern front from the Tete Province of Mozambique. A new stage had now been reached in the development of our methods of guerilla warfare. Our ideological conception had transformed and scientific socialism based on Marxism-Leninism became our ideology. The victories we scored from 1972 to 1974 for the first time actually frightened the enemy into contriving deadly schemes to negate the onward march of struggle. By employing a strategy to destroy ZANU, the enemy resorted to two tactical approaches. The first was to subvert a section of our forces plus some of our top leadership whose assigned task 44 7 was to cause a revolt within ZANLA. As the revolt wound in progress, an attempt would also be made through the second tactical approach to get ZANU totally submerged and extinguished in a merger under the ANC of Muzorewa. The double-pronged tactical approach nearly demolished our Party, but because of a dedicated core of Party hardliners with clear basic lines on both the military and political aims of the Party, we survived. We however emerged badly scathed. We lost our Chairman Comrade Chitepo and some of our cadres. The war virtually came to a standstill in 1975. By regrouping and aligning ourselves with ZAPU on the basis of armed struggle, we brought ZANLA and ZIPRA together to form ZIPA and in January 1976 the war once again rekindled, taking a completely new look. Two additional fronts were opened so we could launch attacks from three fronts — Tete, Manica and Gaza in Mozambique. Since then, and despite the disintegration of ZIPA, we have continued to hammer and batter the enemy from all sides. Fully stretched, our ZANLA forces now cover nine-tenths of the country, the enemy has been forced to resort to wanton attacks upon innocent civilians within or without Zimbabwe. Outside Zimbabwe, in the rear states of Mozambique, Botswana and Zambia his targets unashamedly have not only been defenceless civilians but also such civilian targets as schools, hospitals, bridges, railways and administrative centres. The evidence of his barbarous acts of naked aggression is most ample in Mozambique. The present stage of our struggle is thus one which, because of its escalation and devastating effects upon the enemy, will increasingly cause him to lose his sense of balance and make him run amok and, in his rampage, destroy anyone, everyone; anything that lies in his way. With our now having created liberated and semi-liberated areas, our task, as we hound and pound the enemy, must be an intensive systematic politicisation programme to disorientate the masses in liberated and semi-liberated zones away from the social pattern of colonialist society and its individualism, and accordingly orientate them towards a new social order and self-reliance in the following directions: (a) Defence, so they can defend themselves and constantly add on to the strength of ZANLA forces. (b) Production and Construction, so they can grow their own food and produce and construct other necessary wares, developing and sustaining the habit of industry. (c) Health and Hygiene, so they can operate their own medical service, improve their standard of personal and communal hygiene. 45

(d) Collectivism, so they can get inducted into the pattern of a socialist co-operation as they live, produce, construct and operate in administering, defending or otherwise caring for themselves. (e) Organic Unity, so they are organised in their various areas into coordinated basic units of the Party in their upward gradation toward central control, the function of decision making following the principle of democratic centralism (free discussion in the context of the organs and decisions reached binding all). (f) People-Army relationship, so they can appreciate and practically experience the operation of the principle that ZANLA is their army, which does not only fight for them, but also leads them to realise, that they constitute an even greater and more powerful army than the enemy colonial forces. Unity, Co-Operation, Co-ordination with the army should be the running theme. The year 1978 is the decisive year in our whole struggle. Our armed struggle will transform both qualitatively and quantitatively. Our scope of targets will expand and the intensity of each blow upon the enemy, each assault, each battle, must yield the long awaited desired results. A qualitative and quantitative transformation of armed struggle presupposes not just new strategies and tactics but also their effectiveness in the given circumstances of the enemy’s counter strategy and tactics. Now that we have learned a lot about our enemy and also in the light of our mistakes, set-backs and the numerous victories we have scored, our operations of 1978 must bring victory within sight. More than ever before, our first principal instrument in the war must remain our people, the second of course, our gun. Let us fully and systematically mobilise the people so that our war in 1978 is fought not just for but by the people. Let us make it people’s war. It must, however, always be borne in mind that the People’s armed struggle is only one stage of our revolution. The historical analysis above has shown that there have been the following stages: (a) The stage of the growth of the people’s awareness of the oppressive system yielding grievances, and resulting in the establishment of organisations within the unjust colonial system seeking remedies to them and leaving the system intact, but nevertheless resorting to peaceful methods of pressure. (b) A further stage in the political development and consciousness of our people when oppression was identifiable not only with the grievances felt but also with the colonial system and political structure begetting 46 * them. In this case the proper remedy was seen as those non-injurious pressures, which were nothing more than secondary methods of struggle, but which were now directed at non-violent or constitutional change, with the colonial power intervening to bring this about. (c) The second stage transformed itself into a third stage in the choice and definition of the correct and most efficacious means of struggle which now became armed struggle or the method of violence. Similarly, the enemy became correctly identified as not just the settler community and its regime but as the colonial power as well. A further development at this stage was ideological, leading to the acceptance of the principles of scientific socialism. This brought a socialist revolutionary dimension to the struggle and demands of us that the enemy’s political structure be dismantled to create room for a new political socio-economic order, erected on completely new premises that have greater love for the people in their roles as workers and peasants. Our political objectives are, therefore, also the short and long term objectives of our military-revolutionary struggle. The achievement of military victory remains our most immediate objective which will be attained the moment the enemy has either fled or surrendered and our army is in place of his. This in turn creates the opportunity for political control and organisation of the people. Thirdly the resultant political environment and the power base it offers becomes the spring-board to our socialist revolution. But now we must wage the war, fight and win! We must destroy the Smith Regime, that is why in 1978 we must say Pamberi nechimurenga! A luta continua! 47

9. ZANU carries the Burden of History

Article in THE ZIMBABWE NEWS

The distinguishing features of our nation such as cultural homogeneity (even heterogeneity), our biological and genetic identity, our social system, our geography and our history, which together characterize our national identity, also combine in producing out of our people a national vigorous and positive spirit which manifests itself in the consistently singular direction of its own preservation. The scientific law of survival A people as a national entity, always retains a capacity for its own perpetuation and hence for the onward carriage of its biological and genetic heritage and with it its own political, social, economic and cultural heritage. Equally, it has a given capacity, which manifests itself in given capabilities, to defend itself against forces either internal or external which would operate against the inherent right of self-preservation and selfdetermination. Our experience of the Portuguese aggressions Thus, when the Portuguese imperialism in the 16th and 17th centuries sought to establish its hold on the land, then the empire of Munhumutapa, the people constantly and vigorously repulsed the enemy, especially from the then gold-mining north-eastern region of the country. Even after the Portuguese momentary victory of the 1620’s when the Munhumutapa Mamvura and his successor son acquiesced in Portuguese suzerainty and allowed the Portuguese free passage, the masses of the people broadly remained opposed to the puppet monarchs and their imperialist masters. The fact that Mamvura, in order to ascend to the throne against Kapararidze, the rival prince generally preferred by the people, had mortgaged.the people’s national will by soliciting Portuguese military 48 intervention — and binding himself to subservience by a sell-out treaty in 1662 which exacted tribute from him and his people to the King of Portugal in Lisbon, proved only a temporary reverse. Modern Mamvuras Mamvura is not without his counterparts in present-day Zimbabwe, for in the treachery of Ndabaningi Sithole, Tondekai Muzorewa and Jeremiah Chirau we see history repeating itself. And though it was not until the 18th century that the Portuguese were finally expelled from the hinterland and until 1974 that they were completely defeated in Mozambique, Angola and Guinea Bissau and Cape Verde, it certainly will not be long before the settler dynasty of Ian Smith and his willing stooges is similarly liquidated by the people’s national will and commitment to national sovereignty. British imperialist aggression Portuguese imperialism having been effectively curbed in the 18th century in respect of the area constituting present-day Zimbabwe, a new imperialist and colonialist thrust was launched from the south in a context in which British, Dutch, French, Belgian and German imperialists vied with each other for control of portions of Africa. Colonialism has always been the handmaid of capitalism and nowhere has this principal-agent relationship between capitalism and colonialism been better demonstrated than in Zimbabwe. British colonialism had superimposed itself by military conquest over defeated and disintegrating Dutch colonialism in the far East and south Africa, creating thereby an intricate matrix of contradictions with sharp political, economic and social dimensions. Boer and Briton fought each other for political power as they fought each other for control of the economic resources in the wake of the discovery of both diamonds and gold at Kimberley and on the Rand respectively. At the base, the struggle between avid fortune-seekers had brought to the fore a bigotted Briton, one Cecil John Rhodes, who, by outbidding, outclassing, throttling, cheating and deceiving his prospecting fellow partners and speculative opponents alike, had emerged a millionaire committed to the territorial expansion of British colonialism. Having won his power-war at the individual capitalist level, Rhodes now sought to transform his individual capitalist gains into national colonial gains. All Africa to the north was to him fertile ground for British colonialism. And the Botswana King Khama having, through missionary persua49

sion, opted for a British protectorate status for his country, Rhodes’ most immediate target became the reputed Munhumutapa hinterland north of the Limpopo. ` Purporting to have extracted the right of entry from Lobengula in form of what later became known as the Rudd Concession, a swindling instrument which Rhodes utilized as pretext for seizing our country, he proceeded with great speed to create a colonising share-holder company, charged by royal charter for the purpose. The British South Africa Company was financed by Rhodes, and when a strange assortment of 200 gold-sniffing fortune speculators had been found and the terms of armed occupation well dictated by him, the group of racist adventurers soon hoisted the flag of British imperialism and capitalism on our soil. The act occurred on 12 September, 1890. Capital had on this occasion acted as the end and means of colonialism. Antagonistic contradictions The September 12 flagrant act of aggression, the subsequent landgrabbing gold speculation and capital investment that went with it imported to the country new dynamics of conflict, that from the very onset ramified sharply antagonistic contradictions. The trend had hardly begun towards the inevitable creation of a class structure when, first, in 1893 the Ndebele community and secondly in 1896 to 97, the whole Shona-Ndebele community rose up in arms to expel the enemy and liberate the fatherland. When in 1896, the settlers were on the verge of defeat and British colonialism was about to collapse, Britain hurriedly sent reinforcements to sustain its newly established colonial system and our people thus suffered military defeat. The British South Africa Company, the settler community, and British colonialism, had gained, by usurping our people’s right to sovereign independence and negating the traditional social process, a new lease of life. The forces of revolutionary resistance were henceforth forced to remain latent but galvanising. From now on, the capitalist objectives of the royal charter granted to the British South Africa Comapny on 29 October, 1889, were to be implemented with full commitment. These were: (a) the extension of the railway from Kimberley northward towards the Zambezi; (b) the encouraging of immigration and colonisation; (c) the promotion of trade and commerce; and (d) the securing of all mineral rights in return for guarantees of protection and security of rights to the tribal chiefs. 50 * The fourth object which purported to accord to the tribal chiefs protection and the security of their rights did not gain that fulfilment, and mineral rights were acquired in defiance of the chiefs and their communities in the same way as, if not alongside the manner in which land was acquired. Blood-sucking exploitation The objects of the charter either expressly or implicitly authorized the occupation of the land for economic purposes. In their fulfilment, capital investment was to be attracted firstly, into the extractive and infrastructural areas, and secondly into the constructive or secondary sector. Labour — both cheap and forced — has been as much the product of the social circumstances of profit-oriented capital investment as indeed it has been the new creator of investment capital, in turn creating a new environment of class-formation in which the capital-sponsored bourgeoisie emerges as the economically and so politically and socially dominant class as opposed to the oppressed and exploited working class. So it was when capital acquired through cheap labour in South Africa and Britain invested both in agricultural and mining sectors of Rhodesia’s primary industry, the socio-economic circumstance that immediately arose was one which impelled the newly established mining and agrarian bourgeoisie to draw, by forcible methods, cheap labour from the African peasantry. The creation of the envisaged infrastructure (railways, roads and bridges) also became possible through forced labour. An exploited working class thus soon emerged alongside a peasantry whose total land size had begun progressively to diminish as the size of the white settler community progressively increased in accordance with the second object of the charter — to encourage immigration and colonisation. The matrix of contradictions The creation of a new civil administration in the context of the establishment of a new political order based on the monopoly of power by the settler community, the forcible acquisition of land by the settlers and the entrepreneurial pursuits of mining, agriculture, trade and commerce, ushered in a matrix of antithetical relations which exemplified themselves in the following potentially dialectical pattern and eventually led to a violent conflict: (a) The White Settler Community (i) became the ruling dynasty 51

(ii) became land and property owners and thus constituted a bourgeois and comprador class ” (iii) as ruling class made laws in protection of its political and ownership rights (iv) by social practice and legislation racially discriminated against the black community and colour became a passport either to privilege or to exploitation, the white men became a master-race (v) by social practice, exploitative practice and legislation actively prohibited the educational and socio-economic development and transformation of the black community (vi) his head forever digging deeper into the sand, the settler soon established a solid social wall between the white community on the one hand and the black community on the other, ignoring completely the suffering this caused (vii) realizing the imminent danger of war, he armed himself to the teeth and created a large army. (b) The Black Community (i) refused even to recognize the ruling right of the whites as justly attained and thus always regarded them as usurpers (ii) individual ownership of land and natural resources cut across the traditional concept of collective ownership while the deprivation of land has always remained a major source of grievance (iii) the creation of a class of industrial workers, whether by persuasion or coersion, also was resisted as undermining communal and family life (iv) however once created, the worker-class continued to feel grieved by the meagre wages paid them as often happened in urban areas (v) the effect of the settler social, political and economic discriminatory practice was to constitute every black man by virtue of his colour an underdog; he was held as a servant per se. (c) Educational and economic (i) the narrow educational and economic avenues grudgingly allowed him in his limited sphere eventually created in him an increasingly greater political consciousness and an awareness of his lost fundamental rights, hence he started organizing himself first for the correction of the wrongs and injustice, but later for the overthrow of the oppressive system (ii) in 1966, the Africans launched armed struggle to liberate themselves. 52 The above analysis no doubt shows how the conflict situation has developed to the point where the contradictions, created and manifesting themselves in various socio-economic and political areas (though initially generalised as between the two communities en bloc), have eventually bred armed hostility between the self-same communities. In the process as the line of demarcation between the rights and the interests of the employer and the rights and interests of the worker became drawn so also was the point of conflict established. Similarly as the rights and interests of the new farming bourgeoisie became defined, conversely the rights and interests of the peasantry (that is of some 85% as at present) became proscribed, thus creating a generalised situation of conflict as peasant hostility became directed towards the whole settler community. Struggles for national liberation can operate to defeat their own objectives unless they are properly organized and properly led. The earliest nationalist movements such as the Southern Rhodesian African National Congress (up to 1957) and the British Voice Association, lacked, firstly, the sound basis of well defined principles and objectives; secondly they lacked committed, clear and courageous leadership; thirdly, they had no effective methods of purposefully appealing to and mobilizing the masses; and fourthly they were devoid of a motivated nationalist ideology. They were thus bound to be short lived. So they were never a real link between the nationalist uprising of 1896 — 1897, which aimed at the overthrow of the then newly established B.S.A.C. regime for they aimed at the correction of the wrongs by praying and appealing to the violent wrong doer without either the means of violence or the intention to overthrow him. The leaders of these organizations thus never really fully appreciated the demands of the situation nor did they feel with the same intensity the burden resting on them as Nehanda and others felt in 1896. They felt overwhelmed by the national experience of defeat and subjection to the settler usurpers. They did what, within the limits of their comprehension and the circumstances of the moment, was possible. And yet even that which they judged as possible translated itself into the impossible, and the grievances they had sought to remedy — such as land shortage, forcible ejection from acquired lands, meagre wages, poor accommodation in industrial areas, etc. — received but little palliative correction. The major grievances went unheeded by the ruling white dynasty. In the context of the struggles of other nations such as those of the Congress Party of India (up to 1948), that of the C.P.P. of Ghana (up to 1957), that of Algeria and Kenya, that of the granting of independence to several African countries by 1962 and that of well-based, well-organized 53

and well directed several nationalist movements such as the ANC of South Africa in 1950 — 1952, PAC later, ANC and later UNIP in Zambia, ANC and later the Malawi Congress Party in Malawi, the Zimbabwean nationalists found ripe circumstances replete with variegated movement experience for the launching of an effective nationalist movement exposing well-defined principles and objectives and with a leadership at the time predominantly, though not wholly, clear-minded and courageous. The rise of modern nationalist movement Thus when the ANC was launched in 1957, there was an appreciable mobilization of people in certain urban and rural areas of the country, but the approach was not very removed from remedial or reformist politics. However, with the creation of the National Democratic Party in 1960, the Nationalist Movement, for the first time in the country’s history, fought for the change of the system of government. The leadership of the NDP, in their discharging of the burden of history, effectively mobilized the people towards the acquisition of political power, and weaned them off the idea of seeking the mere correction of their grievances. They clearly stated their ultimate political objectives as majority rule, and thus organized strikes, boycotts, demonstrations, sit-ins and industrial sabotage, in 1960 — 1961 in pursuance of this objective. Like the ANC, the NDP failed to comprehend the requirements of the situation in terms of the correct methods of struggle. Its resort to strikes, boycotts, demonstrations, etc., were not intended to overthrow the settler regime but rather as a means of pressure upon both the British Government and the settler regime to democratize the parliamentary system and its franchise leading to majority rule. Whilst this type of struggle succeeded in Malawi and Zambia, as indeed in Ghana and several other African countries, it just could not work in Rhodesia and South Africa, where the bigotted racist settler communities, having acquired self-rule in respect of whites in Rhodesia in 1923, and independence in respect of South African whites in 1910, were pledged to wage armed resistance against any change undermining their position. The realisation that an oppressive bourgeoisie that sustains itself and maintains its exploitative civil and socio-economic structures by armed force can only be overthrown by armed force employed as an instrument of the broad masses had not dawned upon the NDP leadership, and neither did it upon the leadership of ZAPU of 1961 — 1963. True, the burden of struggle yielded by history was felt. True, nationalist goals were clearly defined and on the basis of salient principles. True, the ” 54 method of struggle was defined and pursued on the basis of as to sabotage and violence though limited only to the economic institutions and structures. True, cadres were sent for military training. And yet the immediate objective was never to overthrow settler colonialism by force, but rather to create persuasive pressures capable of making Britain act in convening a constitutional conference to negotiate an agreement based on majority rule. This approach sadly enough persisted in some nationalist circles. More sadly still it sold itself effectively to several of our supporting brothers in Africa, and friends and symphathizers in the international community who have been led to believe that our struggle is aimed not at the direct seizure of power but at causing a constitutional conference, to be held presided over by the colonial power with all existing parties, whether genuinely nationalistic or bogus or even reactionary, contesting equally for fair and impartial treatment. With the launching of armed struggle by ZANU in April 1966, and also by ZAPU later in the following year, and the improvement of guerilla warfare strategy and tactics by ZANU in 1972, there had now occurred a transformation in the evaluation of not only the methods of struggle but also in the appreciation that power could only be transferred with the total overthrow of the enemy or with the advent of his abject surrender. And as the struggle later intensified and more fronts were opened in 1976, ZANU had, by mobilizing the broad masses through the instrumentality of the war, lent the national struggle both its motive force and its correct perspective. It should be constantly borne in mind that our revolutionary process being a historical social process carries with it from the social past to the social present, and in terms of both our present and future attainable goals, not only the antithetical burden of the reactions of our two broad racial communities historically locked up in bitter conflict and within that broader conflict situation, that of the deepening strive between the existing classes but also the synthetical and therefore more positive burden of mobilizing those groups which constitute the motive force of the Zimbabwean revolution. Thus, our peasantry, middle, poor or landless, the workers, our youth, students, intellectuals, petty bourgeoisie and even those religious groups and persons who support the national liberation struggle, should be constituted into a national democratic front to be violently pitted, as democratic anti-settler-imperialistic forces, against the colonialist system, its regime, the renegades national and reformists and the reactionary puppets of history falling upon us as the revolutionary 55

vanguard organization will have in turn been translated into the national task of establishing a national basis for the revolution. Accordingly, the struggle originally pioneered by a few would have transformed into a revolutionary national struggle for national liberation and national independence. The cementing bond between the national democratic forces is, of course, their common suffering, their common opposition, their common aspirations and their common national destiny. Since our revolutionary burden is both historical and national and our revolution exists in a world context whence its historical dimensions derive, by virtue of the overall situation creating it, and since the international community has long experienced identical antithetical relations and contradictions resulting in the seminal revolutions and the emergence of socialist states and progressive forces, there is therefore an additional burden on us to create a rear revolutionary alliance with these international forces in our fight against a common enemy and for common goals. The task of overthrowing bourgeois empires and creating in their place national democracies offering ripe circumstances for programmes of social transformation is thus as much a national as indeed it is an international one, welding together as it must, and on both fronts, all truly democratic forces. A vanguard party leading a revolution must have the basic principles of its revolution well laid down. The objectives of such revolution must be clearly defined, and the means of the struggle correctly chosen in terms of a clearly identified enemy and enemy situation. The ideology of our party (adopted) in 1973 as Marxist-Leninist and Mao Tse-tung Thought must provide both the direction and motivation for the Central Committee, members of the High Command and General Staff down to the commanders of the army’s sectional units. All should be fully conversant with the basic principles of our ideology. We are not a social club, nor are we just any Party. We are a socialist Party committed to a scientific socialist ideology whose basic principles are clearly enunciated. We cannot be anything else and pretend to be working for the people. Nevertheless, since the requirements of our present situation demand an alliance with such progressive national forces as may not have the same ideological orientation with our Party members, the bond between us and them must be that defined above — our common commitment to the overthrow of settler-imperialism and the achievement of popular democratic power. Within the Party, however, ideological education must continue to intensify. To summarize, the evil imperialist and colonialist act of aggression 56 i and forcible occupation of our country has over the years yielded opposing relations between the white coloniser community and the black colonised community, the effect of which has imposed upon our broad masses the intolerable burden of: (a) being perpetual political underdogs in their own country, (b) being subjected to a brutal social and legal system that has dehumanized them, (c) being willy-nilly turned into a class of exploited workers and of a poor or landless peasantry most land having been seized and apportioned to a settler farming bourgeoisie, (d) being brutally massacred, hanged, tortured, quarantined in squalid conditions of hunger and disease, detained and imprisoned for opposition to the system, (e) maliciously denied opportunities for educational, technical, social and cultural development, and (f) being racially despised and discriminated against, and otherwise insulted and down-graded. In order to resolve this bitter struggle and rid themselves of untold suffering the people of Zimbabwe have accepted the historical burden demanding of them in its discharge the supreme sacrifice of their own lives. They have embarked on war as the most effective means of ridding their country of the scourge of settler imperialism and regaining their lost sovereign status. The revolutionary task of waging armed struggle have been undertaken, the complete discharge of the burden will only follow when the task has been fully accomplished. The full accomplishment of the task now requires that our war should with immediate effect assume new proportions in intensity and the dimensions of its strategy. The enemy must continue to be harassed day and night by our directing attacks as much on his person as on his home and property. The farms he has deserted must come under the effective occupation of our well-organized and well-politicized peasantry and should alongside other liberated rural areas, constitute our revolutionary base areas for the purpose of consolidating our gains and the fight to new zones. Throughout the active involvement of the broad masses must remain the sine qua.non of our revolution. Ancillary to the accomplishment of our immediate task is the intensification of our training programmes. And yet basic to the fulfilment by our liberation movement of its most immediate revolutionary task is the equal task upon our allies and friends to reinforce our struggle with arms 57

of the right quantity and quality, and the intensification of their diplomatic and political support for us. ; The burden of history still remains undischarged, but the unfolding tasks being pursued in its discharge have resulted in the total wounding of the imperialist monster. The settler and puppet regime is collapsing. The people are winning. Victory is definitely in sight. The burden will and must need be discharged!

10. The Inception of ZANU

Speech on ZANU-Day: August 8, 1978

Revolutionary greetings to all our revolutionaries! Once again, and now for the fifteenth time in the year of our existence as a Party, we are celebrating the anniversary of our birth, the birth of ZANU and our Revolution. It was on August 8, in 1963, that ZANU was formed in Highfields, Salisbury. A group of leading Comrades who had wearied of the then existing ineffective means of waging the struggle for national liberation and independence decided to launch a new political party, fully dedicated to armed struggle as a principal method of effecting change, the essence of which would be the complete overthrow of the oppressive colonial system and the substitution for it of a new political and socio-economic order with a popular base and people oriented. The formation of ZANU was as much an historical event as it was a necessary and logical step in the revolutionary process of our country. Imperialism and colonial settlerism, being by nature oppressive and exploitative, always have a potential for creating deadly instruments for their own destruction. The oppressor stands opposed to the oppressed, the exploiting bourgeois to the exploited worker, the land seizing bourgeois farmer to the impoverished peasant holder, and overall the ruling settler minority community to the ruled broad masses. The relationship, antagonistic in nature, yields sooner or later a situation of active opposition, resistance, revolt or aggression by those subjugated against those subjugating them, such being legitimate means of attaining political power, constituting an instrument for correcting and transforming the existing oppressive socio-economic order. It was this pervading phenomenon of class antagonisms, gaping clearly for the adoption of the instrument of armed violence against the ruling settler bourgeois class, that gave rise to ZANU. 59

For years, since 1890, our people either as impoverished peasants or as illpaid workers, had struggled in vain for a remedy to remove the burden of racist oppressive rule and socio-economic disabilities that followed in the trail of European occupation and settlement. Their grievances and petitions humbly put before the settler regime had not only gone unheeded but had also been ironically followed by increasingly sterner rule and harsher economic measures that found embodiment in statutes. Oppression and deprivation became legalised. White states and black states became legalised in contradistinction. The Land Apportionment Act, 1930 and later the Land Tenure Act, 1969, which became the white man’s ‘‘Magna Carta’’, was to the African the basic law of insulting segregation, deprivation and indignity as well as an instrument for maintaining the master-servant relationship. In a situation where a small minority, 250 000 in 1962 as against five and a half million Africans then, held by sheer force of arms, more than half the total land acreage of our country, denied political rights to the Africans, maintained two wage scales, a colossal one for themselves and a meagre scale for the blacks, operated two discriminatory educational systems, the poorer and restricted being the African one, and accorded themselves a superior social status and the Africans an inferior status, there was only one option left for us. This was to employ the very instrument they wielded in safeguarding their self-endowed fortunes and privileges in order to overturn their system and overthrow their false kingdom. They had employed the instrument of force to create injustice. We also chose force to create justice by destroying injustice. From its very inception, ZANU was unequivocal in its approach to the liberation struggle. It purposefully chose war as a means of achieving liberation. It must always be borne in mind that a system sustained by violence can only be overthrown by violence. War can only be defeated by war. So, because the essence of settler power was force, ZANU decided to adopt the very method of force to defeat it and create a just system based on people’s power, whose main anchor and guarantee shall remain popular force. Accordingly, if ZANU at its birth was to become a truly revolutionary movement, it had to forge an instrument of force, sharp and devastating to the enemy. This sharp instrument was ZANLA, whose structure only materialised some years later. Today, ZANLA stands as a mammoth liberation army, dreaded by the enemy but revered and adored by the people as the vanguard of their liberation struggle. After the formation of ZANU, the struggle in Zimbabwe definitely assumed a completely new form. It will be remembered that not long ago, on April 28, we celebrated the twelfth anniversary of the Sinoia 60 Battle. We did so because the Battle marked the beginning of a revolutionary epoch in our country that has seen the settler citadel crumbling from the devastating assault by the people’s forces, as the march to national independence and people’s power proceeds. l Throughout, the fundamental principle adhered to by our ZANLA orges, has been that of the governance of the gun by our politics ‘politics governs the gun.’’ In other words the war we are waging being á liberation war, has political principles and objectives governing it. It is in pursuance of our set political objectives and in accordance with our ee principles that we are fighting a bitter war and sacrificing our ives. . Our political goals and arch-political principles were given us originally by our Congress held at Gwelo in May 1964 through our Political Constitution and Policy Statement. After the banning of our Party and in the absence of congress the Central Committee became our policy-maker and the source of supreme directives for the performance of our functions and tasks in both political and military fields. Political direction translates itself into the direction of our war, for before we took up arms we had realised the existence of a political problem requiring guns as a remedy. This is why I said in September last year, at the First Enlarged Session of our Central Committee, that the trajectory of our bullets is political, and so indeed is the final target. Remember, our gun differs from that of a robber in that ours is political and the robber’s criminal. We have a political cause while the robber has a criminal cause. Our cause being a people’s cause is just and selfless in essence. The robber’s cause being individualistic and selfenriching is unjust and selfish. Our fight has therefore proceeded with full honour and justification It is the fact of its being in the interest of the broad masses that has attracted to it the full support of our People and of the International Community. True, the road from 1963 to 1978 has by no means been a smooth one. There have been numerous difficulties and problems the whole way through. The enemies of our Party and revolution have attempted at every stage to destroy us, but because of our strong principles that defy opportunism, and revolutionary commitment that refuses to yield to defeat, we have proved resilient and redoubtable to the utter shock of our enemies and conspirators. True revolutionaries know no surrender and cannot yield on matters of principle. They thus differ in commitment from opportunists who are easily swayed and turn traitor to the people’s cause for mere love of money or other personal comforts. 61

It is principle and commitment that held us together as a Party during the rough days of 1963 — 1964. It is principle and commitment that sus| tained us against the imperialist strategy of 1974'— 1975 which sought our : ruin and nearly destroyed us. It is principle and commitment which con| tinue to act as the anchor of our growth, transformation and develop- 1 1 | ment as a political and military organisation. Now we can proudly say that our party and gallant forces are leading the people of Zimbabwe to a true victory and genuine independence.

11. The Role of ZANU in the Struggle

For, are we not operative in 80% of the country? Are we not in control of the vast areas of the country where we run our own administration and the people have been freed by us from torture and brutality by the enemy? Is the enemy now not showing visible signs of crumbling? We are indeed now on top. We stand poised for victory. Yet the road from 1963 to 1978 has been long and bitter. It has indeed been a long march, but a march certainly worth the effort. For, defeat now inevitably awaits the enemy. He cannot escape it. Never! On our part victory assuredly awaits us and cannot elude us. Never! The hour, however, remains crucial and the final blow, the most decisive knock-out by the people’s mailed fist, must be effected soon. The enemy is battered and dazed. Let us now move towards him with all our mustered reserve, remembering always that ours is a people’s war, fought by the people and for the people. Let us therefore now lead the people to victory in a bond that binds them firmly to the Party and the Party to the people. Let us now create for the people and out of the people a new nationhood that transcends regional and other parochial Address to the Guild of Mozambican Journalists in Maputo: October 28, 1978 Comrades, Let me begin by expressing my delight and gratitude to you for extending this invitation to me to address this august association — the Guild of Mozambican Journalists. In doing so, I must express my profound appreciation for the objective and progressive manner in which the members of this Guild have promoted through correct reporting stresses and emphasis on fundamental issues and principles of policy, the socialist revolution now unfolding in this country on well-defined ` Marxist-Leninist lines. Allow me also to compliment you for the consistent and correct way in which you daily portray the Zimbabwean situation and the revolutionary armed struggle we are waging in our attempt to overthrow the combined forces of colonialism and reaction. It is an extremely difficult task to choose a suitable topic for this gathering taking place at a time when the Southern African situation is daily transforming in complexity as imperialist forces wade themselves into the political scenes of Namibia, Zimbabwe and South Africa, ostensibly to assist the development of the process towards the establishment of democratic societies, but clandestinely, and this is their whole object to assist the forces of reaction to ascend to power by subtle covert manoeuvres to neutralise and negate the revolutionary forces which stand for progress. As we struggle to replace imperialism and colonialism with democratic systems based on people’s power, the imperialist forces are waging their own struggle to slide from colonialism to neocolonialism, from a system of direct colonial control to a system and an indirect control through puppets and renegades. The need for a revolu| | tionary vanguard movement in such a complex situation with clarity, consistency and imbued with revolutionary purpose becomes obvious. I | The most solid base for the effective mobilisation of the whole people is always the Party. Let us accordingly continue to build the Party in Hl accordance with the historical revolutionary experiences of the last fifteen years, ensuring true unity, discipline and revolutionary pur| posiveness. We have had a rich and admirable fifteen years. Let us look j forward to an even richer and more glorious future for our Party and our y People. i May I thank all our allies and friends for the unstinting support over l the years which has helped us to develop an invincible army. We wish i that their assistance shall continue and indeed increase. | | ij | affinities. | | a , 63

felt, therefore, that I should speak to you on ‘‘The Role of ee the struggle against imperialism and settler colonialism in Zimbabwe”. . ZANU was the fourth-born national party in the country. Born in August 1963 it had three elder brothers, two of whom had died asa result of the settler regime’s action in proscribing them. The African National Congress (ANC) formed in 1957 had been banned in 1959 when its leaders were detained. Comrade Joshua Nkomo was its leader. In January 1960, a new party, the National Democratic Party (NDP) was launched, and it was at that stage that I joined active nationalist politics, but the NDP was banned in December 1961. Again its leader had been Comrade Joshua Nkomo, although at the interim stage it had first been Michael Mawema and then the late Comrade Leopold Takawira. In December 1961, ZAPU (Zimbabwe African People’s Union) was formed to replace the NDP, and it too was banned in September 1962. Its leader had also been Comrade Joshua Nkomo who continues to lead it after three successive bannings. l l This background of political parties espousing the nationalist cause must serve to underline the persistent theme that the Zimbabwean struggle against colonialism is of long duration. There is a rich revolutionary past which constitutes our historical rear to the armed struggle which started in April, 1966 and which we continue to wage. This past is also our resource of revolutionary experience upon which we draw constantly for inspiration. It is also a mirror of the correctness or wrongness of our line of struggle in terms of its objectives and final goal, and of the methods of our struggle in terms of the definition and identification of the enemy, his methods of operation for resisting change and negating the thrust of our struggle. l Bo ZANU was thus born against a background of a rich and nourishing past and equally a past replete with political mistakes and blunders and wrong orientation of the whole nationalist struggle. Let me briefly portray what I have in mind. l l During the period of the ANC, i.e. 1957 — 59, which was a period of the Central African Federation, the ANC’s struggle was both national in terms of the objectives in Zimbabwe, but Federal, also in terms of the common objective to dismantle the Federation shared by the ANC of Malawi and the ANC of Zambia (later UNIP). It was the common action strategy to destroy the Federation worked out in Malawi by the leaders of the three nationalist parties that led to the banning of the ANC of Zimbabwe and the ANC of Malawi in 1959 and the detention of their leaders. In respect of the national front, the ANC in Zimbabwe had a strategy of non-collaboration with civil authority in rural areas and boycotts and 64 ” strikes for urban centres. In rural areas, Africans refused to dip their cattle in conformity with the official destocking programme. The organisational effect of this strategy was good in some areas, but the areas affected were very few and the level of overall mass action was thus never achieved. In the urban areas, similarly, some boycott of buses and a few shops was organised for a limited period only, mainly in Salisbury. Again the action was not widespread nor was it lasting. The African National Congress also lacked clarity in its ultimate objective. Although there was some talk of majority rule, the political struggle remained reformist in the sense of seeking remedial measures — more land, higher wages, better houses, more cattle, less taxes, no racial discrimination in public places. The principle of power totally transferring to the people had not emerged in any concrete form. During the period of the NDP and ZAPU (ZAPU before it adopted the method of armed struggle) 1960 -— 1962, the political objectives became clearer and the principle of political power to the people expressed through the slogans ‘one-man-one-vote’ and ‘majority rule now’ took a solid concrete form. Equally, during this period the methods of struggle acquired both a quantitative and qualitative change. The old methods of non-collaboration were not discouraged but certainly not encouraged vigorously except in respect of strikes and demonstrations undertaken simultaneously in 1960 and 1961 respectively in the major urban centres. The rationale here was that the emphasis of single grievances, having in the past orientated the minds of the people in the direction of seeking superficial and only temporary remedies, tended to mislead the people and fell short of the necessary political awareness of the colonial situation. What was being fought was not destocking or land shortage or any other injustice in the politico-socio-economic system, but the system itself. It was necessary, therefore, to educate the people into grasping the fundamental problem, that of acquiring power as the instrument of bringing about reforms in a comprehensive manner. To educate the masses, mass rallies were held throughout the country in rural as well as in urban centres. The lesson went home and the broad masses started clamouring for one-man-one-vote. During this period, the methods of struggle adopted were now a stage or two in advance of those of the ANC. In addition to strikes, boycotts and demonstrations, there were planned acts of sabotage. Petrol bombs were first used in 1960, explosives by way of gelignites in 1961, but mainly in 1962 to blow up commercial shops, factories, petrol installations, etc. In 1962, we completely ruled out strikes because we believed they had negative effects upon the struggle by virtue of creating 65

grievances against the Party resulting from dismissals or arrests. Sabotage alone was thus resorted to in 1962 and factories burnt down, tobacco and cattle plantations were destroyed, and so was stock on settler farms. The actions had no permanent effect as they lasted for a brief period only, nor were they comprehensive enough. During the whole period 1957 — 1962, the strategy of the struggle was not to overthrow the enemy but to exert enough pressure on the British Government to cause constitutional change in the direction of majority rule or one-man-one-vote. The Constitutional Conference held in 1960 — 1961, although it introduced for the first time Africans into Parliament sanctioned a staggering racial disparity in the distribution of seats (50 white — 15 Africans) that it became an effective instrument of mobilising increased opposition to the settler regime and support for majority rule. The period followed the banning of ZAPU in 1962 and the election victory of the Rhodesia Front in December that year groped for a radical transformation in the nature and means of struggle. It was at this stage of adjustment in our struggle that contradictions emerged within the nationalist movement and those of us who believed in the total overthrow of the settler regime through armed violence formed ZANU in August 1963. At its inaugural Congress of May 1964, the Central Committee which had just been elected, was given a mandate to organise a programme of action against the settler regime. The Central Committee in compliance with the wish of Congress decided to organise armed struggle in its stages. The first was to be one of military training, but one also during which a series of violent action could be embarked upon. Hence the organisation of the Crocodile Group which operated in the Eastern part of the country and the Sabotage plan that operated, although ineffectively within the city of Salisbury and in other centres resulting in the blowing up of a railway locomotive in Fort Victoria. ZANU was banned in August 1964, but in 1965, the Central Committee having been incapacitated through the arrest of its members inside the country, authorised those who had remained outside to come together and form a Revolutionary Council (later transformed into DARE, the Supreme War Council) under the chairmanship of the late Comrade Herbert Chitepo and carry on the task of prosecuting the war and overthrowing the settler regime. The Revolutionary Council was formed and in April 1966 we launched our first battle at Sinoia when seven of our gallant fighters fought the enemy heroically until they ran out of ammunition and became over66 * powered. They all died in that fight. Within a few months of this battle ZAPU cum ANC(S.A.) also launched their attacks. a The intervening period was hazardous. We lacked experience in guerilla warfare and all the units that entered the country were accounted for by the enemy. The morale of fighters appeared to be increasingly sagging. The population inside the country became dispirited, so did we, the leaders in prison, although we never lost hope and continued to signi = DR A descriptive of the situation inside the country to rade Chitepo. We co i ini iti i A o unselled improved training and political orienIn 1971, DARE decided to place its fighters alongside those of Frelimo in Tete. Thus, after nearly two years of such experience we started an offensive in the North-Eastern zone of the country and opened a new front. For two years we worked to expand our operational zone as we now moved amongst the people like fish in water. But the imperialists now came up with a new strategy. The detente exercise of 1974—75 was clearly aimed at destroying our struggle with its emphasis as it was, on the ceasefire. We are glad that the Frontline Presidents now admit that they were wrong in insisting on a ceasefire as this gave an advantage to Smith. But ZANU suffered setbacks through the loss of its Chairman, Comrade Chitepo, and subsequent arrests which neutralised our fighters. ' l The period 1972 to 1974 had also been one of ideological transformation which enabled the Party to identify the struggle not merely in terms of its nationalist nature, in that it was aimed at national liberation and the attainment of national independence, but also in terms of its class e In 1973, DARE had on authority from the Central Committee E ae socialism deriving from Marxist-Leninist principles as By 1974, therefore, both the struggle and the ideology of the Party had undergone qualitative change. It was against this background that we resisted in 1974 entry into the amorphous body called the ANC where most elements were either reactionary or non-revolutionary forces completely uninterested in the war we were waging. We feared to have our revolutionary zeal and the revolution itself diluted if not directly negated. Events were to prove us right, and the period 1975 remains a dismal chapter in our war of liberation. Our inbuilt reserves and tactics in the Strategy to beat both the imperialist enemy and our opponents however came to our rescue. We know clearly who our enemies were and who were our friends and allies But the situation had become confounded and leaders who had never 67

lifted a finger violently against the settler enemy were given undeserved recognition. We appeared to be destined for oblivion. We had to act quickly. Soon after the death of Comrade Chitepo, our Central Committee met in Salisbury and appointed me to come and head the Party outside the country as Comrade Chitepo had done. I was accompanied by Comrade Tekere, a member of our Central Committee. We came into Mozambique, but both Zambia and Tanzania were banning ZANU and ZAPU in preference for the ANC headed by Muzorewa. We had a member of our Central Committee, Comrade Muzenda working in Lusaka as Deputy Administrative Secretary for the ANC. It became necessary to revive the war. We felt we should unite ZANLA and ZIPRA into a military front. And so discussions between the late J.Z. Moyo and ourselves ensued. It was agreed to form ZIPA — a military entity of ZAPU and ZANU — with no association whatsoever with Muzorewa’s ANC element in the overall ANC merger or Chikerema’s FROLIZI. ZIPA was a genuine expression of our revolutionary outlook and belief in the unity of progressive forces faced with a common enemy l and a common destiny. The front was however an experiment and it died partly from old wounds — the contradictions of the past and partly from lack of leadership guidance. Muzorewa, and not the leaders of ZANU and ZAPU, was the legal and acceptable head of ZIPA. We would not tutor and guide our fighters because the role had been usurped by a nonrevolutionary who cared nothing about the war. It was a sad position. Nevertheless, within the same year we attempted another front at a political level and in October 1976 we were able tọ announce the formation of the PF as an alliance of ZANU and ZAPU. The alliance still exists despite the machinations of the imperialists, and our desire is that, if we cannot now consolidate it, let us at least preserve it until a ripe moment when we can achieve maximum unity. On its part, however, ZANU has shown its remarkable consistency in: (a) its correct definition and identification of the enemy; (b) the definition of its means of struggle in facing that enemy, which also determines its rapid approach in refusing to sup with such enemy and insisting on the war as the only negotiating language with him; (c) its approach to the war as a revolutionary instrument for the masses and wielded by them — hence the emphasis on the war transformation into a people’s war; 68 (d) its proclaimed ideological approach as charting the goal of the revolution pre-independence and the revolution post-independence; (e) its association and solidarity with its revolutionary allies and friends — and its desire to expand this circle. This consistency stems from adherence to principle which we refuse to sacrifice to expediency. This is the phenomenon lying beneath our present military effectiveness which manifests itself in the control we have in the rural areas where we have created base areas in liberated zones and the encirclement of the enemy gradually taking effect in the areas that still remain his stronghold. Going by the past, taking stock of both our failures and successes, the revolutionary road we are walking will surely lead to victory. A Luta Continua! 69

12. First Zimbabwe Women’s Seminar

Opening Address

I wish to greet you all in the name of the Central Committee of ZANU, in the name of our National Liberation Army (ZANLA) and in the name of the seven million struggling and oppressed masses of Zimbabwe. You are happily gathered here today in response to the call by the Party, through its department of Women’s Affairs, to hold a very important Seminar, and historic meeting convened with three definite objectives. The first is for you to study, analyse and assess the role of women in the national struggle and in the effort to develop a socialist society in our country. 7 The second objective is to assist our Central Committee in organising and shaping the Department of Women’s Affairs in both form and content so that we have a viable, intact and effective women’s organ capable of serving as an instrument for educating and mobilising women alongside their men-folk both in the performance of revolutionary tasks and in achieving equality, dignity and respect. The third is to work out a practical programme for women including set tasks for accomplishment this year in accordance with the overall Party programme and its general tasks. The role our women should play today in the bitter struggle against imperialism and colonialism is determined by the degree of their freedom, readiness and commitment to play that role. Custom and tradition have tended more to favour men than women, to promote men and their status and demote women in status, to erect men as masters of the home, village, clan and nation, but pin down women as mistresses of the same home, village, clan and nation. Admittedly, women have, even in the context of the family, village, clan and nation, been allowed sometimes a significant, but at other times a deplorably insignificant, role to play. The general principle governing relationships between men and women has, in our traditional society, always been that of superiors 70 i and inferiors. Our society has consistently stood on the principle of masculine dominance — the principle that the man is the ruler and the woman his dependant and subject. Thanks to education and enlightenment, some change in the attitude of men to women has occurred. Thanks also to the equalising effect of the oppressive racist settler system, cruel, exploitative and suppressive to both sexes alike, men and women have jointly shared a common deprivation, and so a common grievance, formed a common war-front and built a common fighting force against a common enemy — the colonial settler regime. Thanks further still to other nations’ experiences and their influence upon us, there is now a growing opinion in our society in favour of the emancipation of women. It is necessary, therefore, to study the role of the Zimbabwe women both generally in society and specifically in the context of the national struggle against white settler colonialism, with a view to ascertaining the degree of her participation and the extent to which the structures of tradition and custom have yielded to new circumstances, the law of necessity and the call for cultural transformation in her favour. Pre-colonial Status of Women Before the forcible occupation of our country by the British settler column in 1890, tradition and customs, whether it was Shona or Ndebele recognised a patriarchal society. The head of the family was the man. He it was and not the woman who gave ‘‘his blood” to the children all of whom became known after him and naturally belonged to his clan adopting both his mutupo (totem) and chidawo (praise name). The woman continued to maintain her clan and blood ties with her own family and never lost her mutupo although she might have lost her chidawo. She was thus regarded a stranger to the man’s family — mwana wevaridzi. The child born of her, despite the nine months he spent in her womb, was never hers by customary right of ownership; he remained her child only as long as the marriage between her and the husband was good. Even when the marriage was good, the man, when angry with her over her handling of children or in any other provocative circumstances, would chide her for ‘mishandling’, ‘spoiling’ or ‘neglecting’ ‘‘his children’’. The wife too when fed up with the husband not infrequently appealed to him to take ‘‘his children’’ and allow her to go to ‘‘her home’’. A woman became a man’s wife upon payment by the man to the woman’s family of dowry. In Shona and Ndebele society this was partly monetary, but principally, in form of cattle. Customary law never 71

regarded dowry as a price paid for the woman but more as a token of gratitude from the man’s family to the woman’s family. The payment of the dowry entitled the man to marry the woman, bring her to his home and demand her domestic and agricultural field services. In every case no woman could marry without parental consent. Society being patriarchal, women were not allowed to sit at court to hear cases, although they were allowed to become witnesses. Family property could only be owned by men, save in the case of domestic utensils, personal gifts of direct bequests. Women could, however, personally acquire property, through kinds of personal labour or share of dowry paid for the daughter. Men practised polygamy, but no polyandry was conceivable in both Shona and Ndebele societies. The moral uprightness demanded of women was most exacting. They had to be virgins before marriage, otherwise some compensation to console the ‘unfortunate’ man who married a non-virgin had to be paid. All in all, the woman’s position was despicable. But there were definite recognisable features of an area of her limited dominance. She was the midwife. She shared with men the rare phenomenon of being a spirit medium. She also could inherit from a parent or ancestor, or acquire through association and tutorship, knowledge of indigenous herbs and potents or the power of divining. She could in a similar way become a much dreaded witch. Within the family she had a strong hold over the girls whom she brought up her own way, in most cases to become as good mothers and housewives as she herself. Thus, while all sons pursued the father’s or grandfather’s masculine line towards manhood and marriage, all the daughters in the family followed the feminine path to womanhood and marriage. Certain activities were common, such as working in the crop fields, herding cattle (though principally a boy’s function) and collecting firewood. Wars were naturally fought by men but women provided all the necessary food from the rear, while they took care of the property in the absence of the men. It was never conceived that they could go to the front and, alongside men, attack the enemy with spears, battle-axes or bows and arrows. This then was the traditional position before European settlement in 1890. The woman’s role in society was mainly supplementary to that of the man. 72 Settler Colonialism and its impact The instrument employed by Cecil John Rhodes and the British Government of the day in acquiring our country was a company granted a charter for occupational purposes. The British South Africa Company was formed and sponsored by colonialist Rhodes in its operation of 1890 when it hoisted a British flag in Harare calling it Fort Salisbury. The colonial venture revulsed and angered our entire nation. First, the Ndebele a segment of the Zulus who had come to Zimbabwe under Umzilikazi and had settled in the western region around Bulawayo, organised a War of Resistance against European occupation in 1893 but suffered defeat. However, in 1896 — 1897, followed a more national liberation war, Chimurenga I, which was led by Mkwati, Nehanda and Kaguvi, while such chiefly heroes and regional commanders like Mashayamombe and Makoni participated in it with remarkable bravery and honour. Our people were defeated because of the superiority of British weapons and all the leaders got martyred. In the war situation necessitated by the forcible seizure of our fatherland, we notice for the first time a woman hero as the spirit medium of the rising to the occasion inspiring, directing, commanding and leading men in the battle against the enemy. Nehanda Nyakasikana, appears in our war annals of post-colonial Zimbabwe as the first war heroine and martyr. She did not lead just a battalion or regional army but a national army in a national struggle for the overthrow of Company rule and recovery of the fatherland. She was defiant and obdurate to the end, refusing to compromise and subject herself to a process exacting her penitence for a just Liberation War she had proudly, valiantly and justifiably fought but lost. Nehanda was obviously a distinct and exceptional character who rose to revolutionary ascendancy, not by mere display of leadership qualities such as her command, courage, bravery and planning ability, but by principally her spiritual power as a spirit medium. Our society has always feared and respected women possessed with spirits or medicinal power. They strike the men with awe and invoke in them a subservience that no doubt contradicts their general traditional attitude to women. It is in those rare circumstances that our women have sometimes commanded men. It was indeed in those circumstances that Nehanda was able to demonstrate her powers and to command the respect of men. After conquest, however, many spirit mediums were hounded, persecuted and suppressed. Many went underground and began operating only in a limited capacity. At the same time as the spirit mediums were 73

being persecuted, the Chiefs and Headmen who had been involved in the joint planning of the national war strategy were either put to death, demoted or kept under strict surveillance. * A general intimidation campaign was waged throughout the country by the British South Africa Company security forces, property being destroyed or confiscated, women being raped and men being whipped, tortured or incarcerated. With the establishment of large individual farms and the development of town and mining centres, traditional life suffered a social disturbance as men, partly voluntarily and partly under compulsion supplied the cheap labour that was needed there. Women also began to be drawn to these centres, chiefly as ‘‘nannies’’ or ‘‘house girls’’. Thus our men and women gradually became equated as servants to the white man in the same way as conquest and imposition of white settler rule had equated them as the vanquished turned into subjects. Both sexes were racially discriminated against, despised and insulted. They became known socially and legally as ‘‘natives’’ their customary law as ‘‘native law’’, their marriages as ‘‘native marriages’’, their education as ‘‘native education’’, their agriculture as ‘‘native agriculture’’, their languages as ‘‘native languages’’, their art as ‘‘native art”, and the townships set aside for them in urban centres as ‘‘native townships’’. They were also ‘‘munts’’ and ‘‘umfazis’’, but more commonly ‘‘boys”’ and ‘‘nannies’’, the cheap meat they could afford to buy being given the butcher’s designation of ‘‘boys’ meat’’. African men and women had the same reaction in these circumstances. The white man had usurped their land and impoverished them alike. The white man was a common enemy to both. He was exploiting man and woman alike. He continued to suppress man and woman alike. It was not surprising that when the nationalist movement sprang up, men and women joined hands in the struggle in the same way as they had been joined together by conquest and the established oppressive and exploitative political and socio-economic system. The National Struggle and its impact on the Zimbabwean Woman Here it 1s necessary to study the role played by our women during the non-violent stage of the struggle (1959 — 1963) as well as during the armed conflict stage (1963 — 1979). The first stage can be correctly referred to as the Political Struggle Stage while the second can be regarded as the Armed Struggle Stage. 74 P The Political Struggle Stage During the days of the African National Congress, the National Democratic Party and in the earlier ZAPU period, the struggle was mainly political in form, consisting in regular mass meetings, occasional demonstrations, strikes and boycotts. Public rallies were always a successful feature when our women attended them in large numbers, chanting slogans and nationalist songs, ululating and dancing. This gave the meetings the necessary emotional and rousing effect which boosted morale and gave the impetus to go on with the struggle until final victory. True, there was excessive dependence upon political agitation with its meetings and speeches as the principal form of struggle, but then armed struggle had never been conceived beyond being complementary to political agitation. Women indeed proved to be more active than men in their political organisational work. In the urban townships of Highfield, Harare, Mabvuku, Sakubva, Mpopoma, Mzilikazi, Mambo and all the others, the women and the youth were the most dependable pressure groups for mobilising support. When the whole country was called upon to go on strike in July, 1960, following the arrest of the leaders of the National Democratic Party, among whom was the late Leopold Takawira our late Vice President, men, women and the youth, formed a solid front against the settler regime and mobilised the African labour force first in the whole of Salisbury, then in Bulawayo, Gwelo and Umtali to go on strike. The strike was one of the most effective and most paralysing actions the country had ever experienced. This was despite its short duration of roughly three days. In 1961, after men in other strike bids had failed to respond to the nationalist call for several strike actions, the leadership of the National Democratic Party resorted to a new feature — a demonstration by women against the 1961 Constitution which had created a Parliament of 65 seats and allocated only 15 seats to the Africans, while giving the remaining 50 seats to the whites. Its other object was also to protest the continued arrest and detention of the ANC leaders. The demonstration was organised through the instrumentality of the Youth and Women’s Movements. In both Salisbury and Bulawayo, but more especially in Salisbury, the women’s demonstration was a resounding success. Tens of thousands of women with children on their backs surged into the Salisbury City Centre at the Prime Minister’s, then Edgar Whitehead’s, offices to register the Party’s protest. Two thousand women were arrested and put into Salis75

bury prison, this was only after ferocious police dogs had been set upon them and inflicted injury on many. The arrested women when charged in court and fined, refused to pay the fines preferring to serve their gaol sentences. Alas, this they were not allowed to do, for it was the men, and not the women who had brought about the collapse of the demonstration. Men, husbands, I mean, came to prison and threatened their wives with divorce unless they agreed to the payment of fines, which the husbands had readily brought. They told them that unless that were the case they could find other wives in their places by the time they returned. Women had shown greater courage and resolve, indeed far greater commitment than the cowardly men. It was because of the men’s reluctance to participate in strikes and demonstrations that we decided, when we formed ZAPU to avoid the method of strikes, boycotts and demonstrations. Then we had also concluded that it was better to strike at the settler’s property through acts of sabotage and cause the enemy economic loss than to expose our supporters to torture and suffering through mass strikes and demonstrations that invited brutal police action. In respect of collective actions entailing participation of localities, men, women and the youth always joined hands. This was so in regard to crop, mainly maize and tobacco, destruction campaigns, which required teams of men and women to ‘‘invade’’ chosen farms and cut down acres of the crop. The operation was carried out usually at midnight or in the small hours of the morning. The realisation had consolidated itself in the people’s mind that the white settler was the avowed enemy of the whole African race. The suffering he had caused had been to both men and women and accordingly, men and women, constituting as they did the entire African Community, found a common bond of action in the nationalist movement. All the nationalist movements in which I have been, the National Democratic Party (1960 — 1961), ZAPU (1961 — 1962) and ZANU (since 1963) have _ based themselves on a structure which provided for the membership of men, women, and the Youth of both sexes. There is the ZANU Structure at the Branch, District and Provincial levels: e The main body (which includes men, women and youth), e The Women’s Arm, and e The Youth Arm. We believe our Party would not be complete without these components at every structural level. The dynamism of a party comes from. the inclusion within it of dynamising components — namely the Women’s and Youth components. The combination with the main body 16° produces that vitality, characteristic of a revolutionary movement. We are not just a world of men but also a world of women. Our national Organisations, especially our national liberation movement, specifically ZANU, cannot afford to ignore the role of the Zimbabwean women in our political struggle. The Armed Struggle Stage When we formed ZANU, we had concluded that the methods that we had adopted in ZAPU had not proved effective. In any case, the whole conceptualisation of the struggle in terms of its objectives and the means necessary for their attainment became completely changed. We no longer espoused the objective of the struggle as the convening of a Constitutional Conference by Britain. We were now for the over-throw of the settler regime, a task which demanded a radicalisation of the means of waging the struggle. Armed struggle now took the place of the method of political agitation. But armed struggle required training. At first, and for quite a considerable period thereafter, we concentrated only on the training of young men in the use of weapons and on carrying out guerilla warfare. Thus, the first group of six cadres to go to China in 1963 and the second of 50 to Ghana in 1964, did not include a single woman cadre. True, we secured in 1963 and thereafter some secretarial and academic scholarships for girls to train in such places as Ghana, Tanzania, Britain, Nigeria, United States, Yugoslavia and other places, but we never sent any of our girl comrades for military training. Girls were unable to fight, we concluded, because they were physically weaker than men. However, when the War began and experience in the field dawned upon us, whilst we also drew our lessons from other revolutions such as those of China and Mozambique, it became obvious that we had missed out on an important aspect of our ZANLA. We had neglected our women. We had relied on our conservative tradition and allowed it to narrow our concept of the struggle as that carried out by men to the exclusion of women. But we had got a re-awakening and thus began vigorously training our girls in the art of war. We turned out first a few, then a few hundreds, then several hundreds until we had several thousands. Has this been in vain? Who today can deny that this was a correct decision? Of course, that decision has been justified in every respect. We have seen how gallantly our fighters of the Women’s Detachment can perform. Not only do they feed the front by carrying war material to it from 77

the rear, but they also fight on the front and become exposed to the enemy’s bullets in the same way as men. Our women have scored numerous victories alongside the men. They have demonstrated beyond all doubt that they are as capable as men and deserve equal treatment, both in regard to training and appointments. It is because of their proven performance that we have agreed to constitute a Women’s Detachment with its own commander who should become a member of the High Command. It is also necessary, I feel, that at this very advanced stage of our armed struggle we should promote more women to the High Command. We are gratified that we have a large number of women officers at the General Staff level. As our ZANLA grows, the number of women officers is also bound to increase. This is certainly development and transformation, which naturally must be preceded by the transformation of the individual. Let us examine briefly the spread of women over the echelons of the Zimbabwe African National Liberation Army and examine the distribution of their functions and the tasks they perform. Although in the High Command there is only one woman, Comrade Sheba Tavarwisa, who is also Deputy Secretary of Education and Culture in the Central Committee, in the General Staff, there are now scores of women officers, while in the Army generally several thousands of women cadres gallantly serve in one role or another. In the various operational departments of ZANLA, our women cadres can be found daily performing set tasks. We find them in the Department of Operation, in the Army Commissariat, in the Logistics and Supplies Department, in the Department of Security and Intelligence as officers and cadres, in the Department of Training as instructors, in the Department of Personnel, Production and Construction, Medical Service, Education and Culture, Welfare and Transport. In the Medical and Educational Department, women nursing cadres and teachers are performing wonderful work. I am sure, when the representatives of the Departments here give you a brief account of their work, you will readily appreciate some of the good work that has been taking place. Let me just single out the Commissariat work that is taking place in the Operational Areas, especially in the Liberated Zones. We have sent into the country teams of women cadres to carry out in several areas political work amongst our people. They talk to fathers, mothers, boys and girls, and the response has been wonderful all over. The women cadres, like her male counterpart, is, everywhere she goes, a fighter, a political activist, and a producer. Every ZANLA cadre carries three weapons: 78 ¢ The gun to fight the enemy with and defend the masses. e Politics to give the direction and purpose of the struggle. e The hoe for production, so we can eat, be healthy and be able to fight. We shall continue to build a large women’s force through intensified military and political training. It is not only our belief but is indeed now Party Policy to develop our women not only politically and militarily, but also technically and professionally so that we prepare ourselves fully for the War as well as for the struggle after victory. In this regard, the needs that are felt most amongst women in terms of their advancement should manifest themselves in their particular forms through the various Party Departments, but generally and more earnestly and in a coordinated form through the Department of Women’s Affairs. This brings us to the subject of this Department in the context of Party Organisation. The Party Organisation and Women When ZANU was formed in August, 1963, it recognised clearly the fundamental role of the woman as an activisit alongside her male counterpart in the Party. That is why provision was made in our Constitution for the creation of the ZANU WOMEN’S LEAGUE. ZANU Women’s League This is a women’s organisation which is also a component of the Party. It builds itself upwards from the Branch level to the District, Provincial and National levels. The executive committees of the Women’s League shall at every level comprise the same number of people as those of the Main Body at a corresponding level. At the Branch level of the Women’s League there shall be the following office bearers: Branch Chairman, Branch Vice Chairman, Branch Secretary, Branch Treasurer, Branch Organising Secretary and Branch Publicity Secretary. The District Council of the Women’s League shall have the same number of office-holders as those stated above. The Provincial Council of the Women’s League shall have the following officers: Chairman, Vice Chairman, Secretary, Administrative Secretary, Treasurer, Financial Secretary, Organising Secretary and Publicity Secretary. The National Executive Committee of the Women’s League is elected by Provincial delegates at the Inter-Provincial Women’s League Conference. The Executive Committee comprises the following persons: Chairman, Vice Chairman, Secretary, Administrative Secretary, 79 te ee

Treasurer; Financial Secretary, Organising Secretary and Publicity Secretary. . Because of modifications in our pattern of organisation resulting from the experience we have gained over years, there are bound to be qualitative changes in the old structure. We now have, for example a Political Commissar at every level of the Organisation and this function would have to be reflected in all the executive committees. During the period 1963 — 1964, before the Party was proscribed, it never became possible for us to constitute the Women’s League and the Youth League. We must begin working towards it now, although it is not practically possible yet to establish a full Women’s League. The Women’s League is, at every level, subordinate to the corresponding main organ of the Party. The Women’s League Branch to the Main Branch, the Women’s League District Provincial Branch to the Main Provicial Branch, and finaly the National Executive of the Women’s League comes under the Party’s National Executive Committee, falling directly under the Department of Women’s Affairs. But what is the composition and structure of the Department of Women’s Affairs? Department of Women’s Affairs The Head of the Department of Women’s Affairs is the Secretary for Women’s Affairs, elected by Congress, or in the absence of Congress, elected by the Central Committee. Under her is the Deputy Secretary for Women’s Affairs elected by the Congress of the Women’s League. At the moment the Central Committee has elected Comrade Teurai Ropa as the Secretary for Women’s Affairs. This meeting would, therefore, have to elect one for approval by the Central Committee. We have proposed that there be an Administrator for Women’s Affairs who will work under the Deputy Secretary for Women’s Affairs. The functions of the Women’s Affairs Department are three: e Political e Military e Diplomatic (External Relations). There must, therefore, be three wings: e The Political Wing e The Military Wing e The External Relations Wing. Each wing should be headed by a Secretary. The three Secretaries are directed by the Administrator. As much as possible this meeting must help us to complete this structure. The Administrator and the three Secretaries will be finally appointed by the Central Committee, but this 80 s meeting can, through the Secretary for Women’s Affairs, make nominations which the Central Committee will be free to approve or reject. e The Secretary for the Political Wing shall concern herself with the organisation and functioning of the Women’s League and shall therefore report to the Department of Women’s Affairs on the activities of the League as well as carry departmental instructions to the League. The Secretary for the Military Wing, who shall also be the Commander of the Women’s Detachment, shall concern herself with the organisation and functioning of the Women’s Detachment and shall regularly report on the activities of the Detachment to the Department of Women’s Affairs as well as carry departmental instructions to the Detachment. The Secretary for External Women’s Organisations shall establish and maintain contact with external Women’s Organisations and regularly report on relations with them or on their important activities, to the Department. We are determined that the Department of Women’s Affairs shall be a well-defined viable entity of the Party’s organic structure. The role of Women in Socialist Countries Women in both socialist and non-socialist countries have participated in the struggle for emancipation. As a Liberation Movement with a socialist programme we are particularly interested in the role and position of women in Socialist countries, so we can, by comparison, judge our progress or lack of progress in the process for the advancement of our own women. The Soviet Union Lenin, the brain and hero behind the application of Marxist-Leninist principles of the Soviet Union, held extremely progressive views about women. He wrote in his works: “If women are not drawn into public service, into militia, into political life, women are not torn out of their stupefying house and kitchen environment, it will be impossible to build even democracy, let alone socialism.” (Coll. W., Pr. Publ., Vol. 23, p. 32, 1964) Today, women in the Soviet Union comprise 51% of the entire labour force. The law, of course, forbids employment of women in difficult and harmful forms of work. The People’s Republic of China Mao Tse-Tung, the greatest exponent of Marxism-Leninism after Lenin and Stalin, who was the brain and hero behind China’s revolutionary struggle, condemned the system under which PINE women were. He says in his works: “As for women, in addition to being dominated by these three systems (The state system, the clan system and the supernatural system) they are also dominated by the men. . . and (which) are four thick ropes binding the Chinese people, particularly the peasants.” (Mao Tse-Tung: Selected Works, Vol. 1, Foreign Language Press, Peking, 1975, page 44.) It is Chairman Mao who also said, ‘‘When women all over the country rise up, that will be the day of the victory of the Chinese revolution.” Last year, in September, the women of China held their Fourth National Women’s Congress which gave a new impetus for women’s full participation in the socialist revolution and construction. Mao had foreseen that the abolition of ‘‘the clan system, superstition, and inequality between men and women” would follow ‘‘as a natural consequence of victory in the political and economic struggle”. (Selected Works, Vol. 1, page 47.) The Socialist Republic of Romania The achievement of socialism in Romania resulted in the creation of conditions in which women were accorded full equal rights and enabled to participate to the best of their ability in all domains of activity. Women account for more than half of the country’s population. The leading body of the women’s movement is the Women’s National Council elected by the National Conference. The Romanian Communist Party attaches great importance to women’s capability and is greatly concerned about their role in the entire economic life. When we visited Romania in November last year with Comrade Teurai Ropa, we held a meeting with a delegation of the Trade Union Confederation which included Cornelia Filips who, in addition to being the Secretary of the Central Committee of the Confederation, is also the Vice President of the National Council of Women. We arranged for Comrade Teurai later to meet leaders of the NCW. We also went to a textile factory, one of the largest in Europe, in which more than four-fifths of the workers are women who are highly skilled. Generally, there is serious attention paid to the promotion of women in society in all its fields of activity. The Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia The Women in Yugoslavia having participated in the resistance struggle 82 : against fascism and nazism during the second world war and, alongside their menfolk, defeated the enemy, paved a way to their emancipation in society. Now the Constitution of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, like the constitutions of many other socialist countries, protects their right of equality. Section 154 of that Constitution provides: ‘‘Citizens shall be equal in their rights and duties regardless, of nationality, race, sex, language, religions, education or social status, all shall be equal before the law.” But the Yugoslav women are not only equal with men before the law, they are also equal with them in the political and socio-economic system thus enjoying the same rights and privileges and bearing equal duties and reponsibilities. The Republic of Cuba President Fidel Castro, the valiant fighter who had led the Cuban Revolution, states, in the Report of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Cuba-to the First Congress that the Cuban women in tradition of struggle can be traced back to the days of cruelty of the conquerors and the whip of the slave-holders. The participation of the Cuban woman continued to increase as the situation demanded. The women finally created their own organisation on Agust 23, 1960 and this is the Federation of Cuban Women (FCW), which united all existing women’s revolutionary organisations. The Federation now has 2 127:000 women workers, peasants, students, housewives, professionals and others. The Federation of Cuban Women has striven hard to enhance the dignity and advance the social and human emancipation of Cuban women. Already much work has been undertaken to eradicate remaining prejudices against women and to achieve their full equality and liberation. This was also the objective of the FCW’s Second Congress held in November, 1974. The Socialist Republic of Vietnam Ho Chi Minh, the illustrious leader of the Vietnamese liberation struggle once said, ‘‘If the women are not emancipated, socialism is only halfestablished.”’ The women of Vietnam fought a heroic struggle against American imperialism, bringing down United States aircraft, capturing US pilots, setting US warships ablaze, and bravely protecting their villages. One of the present leaders of Vietnam, Le Duan, has written as follows in his Selected Writings describing the Vietnamese concept of a new woman: ‘‘(She is) one who carries out well her duty as a socialist 83

citizen. One who fulfils satisfactorily her noble function as a‘wife in the family. As a matter of fact, in every society a woman is a citizen, mother and wife.”’ (Foreign Languages Publishing House, Hanoi, 1977, p. 381.) The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea The Great Korean leader, Comrade Kim II Sung, recalled in his ‘‘Address to the Communist Workers of the Women’s Union scheduled to attend the First Conference of the Democratic Women’s Union of North Korea”’ in 1964, that for ages in the past the Korean women were despised socially and in their homes because of the old feudal idea of respecting the man and despising the woman. Women had no freedom of marriage and were not allowed to leave their homes at will. They were even sold as chattels. Kim Il Sung advocates some measures for purposes of organising and advancing women such as the following: e Casting aside backward customs and habits handed down from old society. e Intensify education among women so as to increase their political awareness and grasp of knowledge. e Intensify enlightenfnent work so as to wipe out superstition. e Mothers should be fitted to play an important part in the education of their children. e There should be an intensive campaign to wipe out illiteracy among women. * Women workers must be encouraged to participate actively in nationbuilding. ¢ There should be provided equal rights between men and women and the utmost care of women because they are physically weaker than men. Women workers should be granted maternity leave and get paid 100 per cent of their salaries. ° Women cannot get their rights as gifts. They themselves should actively fight for them. e Women intellectuals should be mobilised properly for national work. Our women intellectuals can do a good deal to eliminate illiteracy and promote cultural enlightenment. They can work in many fields including education, culture and public health. e The Women’s Union would do well to organise and run many smallscale nurseries and kindergartens. (Kim Il Sung: On the building of the workers’ Party of Korea, Vol I, Tiri Languages Publishing House, Pyongyang, 1977, p. 196 to 1.) 84 In Africa Socialist States like Tanzania, Guinea, Mozambique, Angola, Ethiopia and Guinea Bissau, have all encouraged and organised women’s organisations which promote both the full and active participation of women in the diverse activities of the State and the emancipation of women towards equality with men. In Mozambique, there is O.M.M. (Organisation of Mozambican Women). At the First Conference of the Mozambican Women held in 1973, President Samora Machel in his Opening Speech stressed the main theme of the Conference as: ‘‘To study questions concerning the emancipation of women, to find lines of action which will lead to the emancipation.’’ President Machel deplored the status of women whom he regarded as: ‘‘The most oppressed, humiliated and exploited beings in society. A woman is even exploited by man who is himself exploited, beaten by the man who is lacerated by the palmatoria, humiliated by the man who is crushed under the boot of the boss and settler.” He emphasized the need for the emancipation of women as a fundamental necessity for the Revolution. (Samora Machel: Mocambique, Sewing the Seeds of Revolution, Committee for Freedom in Mocambique, Angola and Guinea, London, 1974, p. 21 — 24) Today in liberated Mozambique, the O.M.M. is working vigorously for the advancement of women in all spheres of life. Conclusion I tried to give you the nature of the problem facing us today regarding the status of the woman against a background of circumstances which have enhanced her role. The colonial system which was superimposed upon the traditional system created for the woman two levels of oppression — that of traditional society as the first level and that of the political and socio-economic system suffered by both the man and the woman as the second level. I tried also to show that the grievances generated by the colonial system were shared by all members of the African community. Hence the need that arose for men and women together as equals under oppression to join hands in the common struggle for national liberation. The national struggle, therefore, especially at its higher level, when it became armed national struggle, became as much a process towards the liberation of the nation as towards the emancipation of the woman. The Party has, by waging armed struggle, created, therefore, a process generative of forces that will result in the total liberation of the 85 woman. But the Party has also a specific and distinct organic structure to ensure the full enrolment of women and their active participation in a struggle in which they alone will reap a double reward — national liberation and, in its context, their own liberation. It is thus imperative that this meeting should take definite decisions relating to: e The maximisation of women’s involvement in the liberation struggle in general following the Party line and direction. e Maximum recruitment of women with all kinds of potential into the Party as both military and political cadres. e The formation of a definite programme with specific tasks for fulfilment by the Women’s Affairs Department, bearing in mind the eleven tasks for this Year of the People’s Storm (Gore reGukurahundi). e The compelling need to study the needs of each and every woman cadre in ZANLA so as to assess the kind of assistance the Party can give towards her intellectual and technical advancement. e The organisation of the units of the Political Wing of the Party and the Women’s Detachment and the fighting of divisive tendencies and narrow concepts. e The organisation of a programme of establishing contact and sound relations with progressive women’s organisations in other countries. e The intensification of women’s political, educational, medical, productive and other functions in liberated and semi-liberated areas. è The formulation of a programme for the promotion and maintenance of the moral and cultural integrity and respect of the Zimbabwe woman. e A survey of customary law practice and tradition with a view to the modification of those aspects which inhibit the emancipation of woman. e The expected role of the male cadres and Party militants in working alongside the women cadres and Party militants for the progress towards the emancipation and advance of the woman. I have the pleasure in now declaring this meeting open and wish you well in your deliberations. I hope this meeting will be a great experience to all of you and ourselves. We have to achieve progress here so we can be ın step with the military advances and victories accruing to us every day. Thank you. 86 z

13. ZANU: Sixteen Years of Struggle

Speech on ZANU Day: August 8, 1979

Revolutionary greetings to all our Party members and ZANLA forces, the struggling broad masses of Zimbabwe and all our ardent supporters. We celebrate, today, the historical day when the Party, to which the majority of the revolutionary people of Zimbabwe belong, was born. The 8th of August shall always live in the annals of the history of Zimbabwe as the day that marked a turning point in the political struggle of the Zimbabwean masses. It was indeed the day the current revolution was born, for the birth of ZANU was the birth of a political architect of our present revolutionary struggle. We thus owe to ourselves through the viable organs of our unique organisation tons of congratulations. l When we congratulate ourselves on this day, we do so not in pride and arrogance, but in humble joy and satisfaction that the years spanning the period August, 1963, to August 8, 1979, have seen an image as ZANU rise in political and military greatness and strength. Once upon a time, when many people were, through violent methods of pressure, turned away from us and the international community was persuaded to believe that we were a mere splinter group, we faced difficult times. As time went on, especially following the launching of the armed struggle by us in 1966, the image of our Party began to improve and, finally, we became accepted by our toiling masses as the vanguard of the revolution. Today, no one ever doubts our role and fighting performance in the country. Today, everyone accepts that without us the political situation in the country would have remained stagnant and the British unmoved and acquiescent. Today, even the enemy admits that he is losing the war and that we shall emerge victorious. Our down-trodden masses on their part, having thrust themselves completely behind our fighting forces and the Party leading them, are, as they show greater courage and assume greater risks than before, assailing the battered enemy from all sides. There is now panic amongst both set87

tlers and reactionaries alike. The emigration rate continues to rise upward of 2 000 a month as the liberation drive under this year’s banner of Gukurahundi gains in intensity. l It is now seven months since we, at the dawn of last year, declared this year as the ‘Year of the People’s Storm’ — Gore reGukurahundi. The eleven tasks we set ourselves for fulfilment this year are unfolding with greater momentum under set programmes arranged by the Party. As you will remember we gave ourselves as the major task for accomplishment this year, that of checking the mad regime — now the unholy alliance of racist Ian Smith and puppet Muzorewa — and bringing People’s power to every square metre of our sacred soil. I feel proud to report that, over the last seven months, our ZANLA forces, operating under the able command of our Chimurenga High Command and the general directives of the Central Committee has accomplished to a great measure each of the eleven tasks set for them under the programme of the ‘Year of the People’s Storm’. Thus, we have within half year: (a) Consolidated several liberated zones, defended them effectively against the enemy, and created units of the people’s Militia Force in many of them. (b) Turned several semi-liberated zones into fully liberated zones (c) Extended the liberation struggle westwards to the border with Botswana and north-westwards to areas like Lower Gwelo, Nkai Lupane, Gokwe and several others, while all the east north and southern areas remain massively our consolidated areas: (d) Pipes several more of the enemy’s military and administrative ases. | l (e) Destroyed many more of selected economic targets such as fuel storage depots, industrial enterprises, electric plants and installations and others. (f) Brought war to the cities and towns with greater intensity (g) Freed many farms from settler control, handing them ove: to the masses. (h) Established greater identity between the Party and the people by involving the people in the administration of freed areas through the creation of village and district committees under the general direction of the Party, as well as by assigning them action programmes against the enemy, thus recognising the salient principle that the decisive weapon in our struggle is the People. (i) Reinforced our programmes of self-reliance in production and con88 ” struction, education and culture, health and sanitary work in all operational areas and ZANLA camps. (j) Intensified our political programmes to raise the level of political consciousness amongst our cadres and the people alike, and (k) Recruited thousands more cadres into ZANLA who are currently undergoing training. We have, as a revolutionary Party, thus been doing very well as we worked assiduously and systematically towards the fulfilment of our set objectives for the year. We cannot congratulate ourselves yet before the full results of our operations are known; and to have the full results means continued operations based on the programme of the eleven tasks. In pursuing our operations, it is extremely important to realise that the enemy we are fighting is not yet completely vanquished. Accordingly, whilst we derive joy and encouragement from our unequalled gallant performance over the last seven months, we have to remain exceedingly vigilant and avoid relaxing our efforts. Similarly, we must recognise the need to assail the enemy’s remaining strongholds in the cities and towns with greater courage and bravery, recognising that only through daring the taking of greater risks will any systematic strategy for destroying the more difficult enemy bases succeed. ZANU began on the basis of courage and bravery in sustenance of cherished sacred principles. It is courage and bravery which we portrayed in April, 1966, when we became the first nationalist movement to launch armed struggle. It is courage and bravery which spurred us to open the north-eastern front in 1972 and the two additional fronts in the east and south-east respectively in 1976. It is indeed through courage and bravery that we have extended the war to over 90% of the total land area of the country. Let us, therefore, see more of this courage and bravery demonstrated by all the ZANLA forces and the people as a whole. The Year of the People’s Storm (Gore reGukurahundi) must be a year of daring. We have to overthrow the regime before more harm and suffering is done beyond the level of harm and suffering already experienced by the masses. On the political front, our Party is firm in its refusal to let the revolution and the suffering masses down. We refuse to be persuaded that the present Thatcher Government in Britain means well for the people of Zimbabwe, after it has pronounced itself in alliance with the illegitimate and wholly unrepresentative Smith-Muzorewa regime. We cannot accept apparent shifts in entrenched positions as positive change. Change must be real and concrete to be acceptable. Our position as ZANU in respect of any British Settlement plan re. 89

mains clear and categorical. We demand, as always, that any such settlement plan, to be acceptable to us, must recognise the following principles: (a) That the people of Zimbabwe become sovereign in and over their country through the transference of total and unfettered power to them from Britain. (b) That the present Smith-Muzorewa regime be completely disbanded so as to create a clear and irreversible process towards genuine independence. (c) That the combined armed forces of the illegal regime be dismantled and our Liberation Forces be constituted the national army of Zimbabwe. These are fundamental principles from which ZANU cannot deviate. Any British Government which wished to negotiate with us has, therefore, to take serious cognisance of our solid position. It must be clearly understood that the people of Zimbabwe have not been fighting for the mirage of power but for the effective control of the instruments of power and the right of genuine independence enabling them to proceed to transform the political and socio-economic system as they wish. This is our formidable stand, and the people of Zimbabwe can rely on us to uphold to the full their political rights and interests. We have a Party history as consistent and principled revolutionaries. We cannot besmirch that history by accepting half-measures and deceptive solutions which, under false pretences, speak of majority rule when in effect they operate in the interests of a bigoted minority, thus perpetuating minority rule. . The sixteen years of our life as ZANU have been years of bitter experience gained through a bitter struggle. They have, however, been years of transformation and development for the Party, its leadership, its fighting forces and the broad masses of Zimbabwe. They have accordingly also been years of the transformation and development of the struggle through the re-orientation of the method of such struggle and its adopted means. It was the fighting ZANU which transformed the political struggle into an armed struggle. It is the fighting ZANU still at the centre of the raging armed struggle. You and I have cause, therefore, to rejoice and be proud of our Party, but you and I still have a mission to accomplish. Zwe neni tichine basa. Pamberi neZANU! Pamberi neGore reGukurahundi! Pamberi neChimurenga! A.luta continua! 90 3 IT

III. Constitutional and Political Developments in Zimbabwe 1975 — 1979

14. Independence is not negotiable

Address to the Tanzanian Association of Journalists

Comrade Chairman and Comrade members of the Tanzanian Association of Journalists, I feel greatly honoured to have been invited as your guest speaker this afternoon. It cannot be doubted that in a world where ideas, opinions and ideologies vie with each other and where the tradition has grown for governments to utilise the press as an instrument for influencing public opinion, your role as journalists has indeed become a most important one. The old saying, ‘‘the pen is mightier than the sword” would nowadays sound an understatement for journalists undoubtedly rule the world — the world of minds. I am deeply impressed by the cool and balanced nature of the editorials in the Tanzanian Press and by the factual objective character of the news items. Please continue the excellent job of educating, informing and constructively directing the minds of the public. You have a great responsibility to make or unmake, to build or destroy. Comrades, I thought I should address you briefly on the present political scene in Zimbabwe. ‘‘Complex’’, ‘‘intricate’’, ‘‘baffling’’, “confused” and ‘‘confusing’’ are only some of the adjectives I have heard in reference to the existing situation. Against the background of a raging guerilla war, the British have introduced constitutional proposals which they have led the world to believe can yield a peaceful settlement. On their side they have thought it proper to incorporate the Americans as members of their team. On our side, they have refused to deal exclusively with the Patriotic Front and have chosen as equal participants to the PF the home-based bogus leaders — Sithole, Muzorewa and Chirau. On the settler side, they have now recognised yet another delegation, besides that of rebel Smith, sup93

posedly representative of the whites outside the orbit of the Rhodesia Front. Can it be doubted that right from the very onset Britain has sought deliberately to confuse the situation by introducing far too many actors into the scene? Then let us proceed to examine Britain’s own actions in relation to her proposals. Owen first proposed to us the following steps in the envisaged process towards effecting a transition to independence: (a) Discussion and agreement (b) The resignation of Ian Smith and his regime (c) The ceasefire (d) The lifting of sanctions by the United Nations (e) The installation of the Resident Commissioner in Salisbury. Because he had offered us nothing concrete we insisted that he should put down his thoughts. The result was the White Paper entitled ‘‘British Proposals for a Settlement on Rhodesia’’. And yet no sooner had he published these proposals than he began implementing them without formal discussion having taken place between himself and ourselves. Soon, new negotiators — Lord Carver and General Prem Chand — were ushered in to discuss transitional arrangements leading to a ceasefire, the subject of a ceasefire having been only a third step in his proposed process. Owen himself had now dropped off as a negotiator and any political discussions on the independence constitution were a matter to be handled by Lord Graham. In other words, the negotiation procedure had become double-pronged. All matters that had to do with the transitional period were assigned to Lord Carver assisted by General Prem Chand; while all those affecting the independence period proper were assigned to Lord Graham. This parallel procedure created even greater confusion. As we know, the Carver-Chand mission was an absolute failure while that of Lord Graham never took off the ground. At that stage, Owen had already begun back-tracking, for after assuring us in Lusaka that all military arrangements in respect of the transitional and independence period could only be discussed with the Patriotic Front, he widened Lord Carver’s terms of reference to include as participants the’ home-based bogus leadership even though they had no armies. Then came Owen’s inept handling of the proposed Malta meeting which served to show us that far from wanting to remove Smith he was in fact now seeking to give him not only a long lease of life but also an effective role to play. Smith took advantage of the circumstances he conceived favourable to him. By granting a series of amnesties to Sithole, 94 z Chikerema and others of their supporters he had effectively blackmailed them into accepting his invitation to participate in the so-called internal settlement talks. And by mere utterances of the phrase ‘‘adult suffrage”, even though he had deliberately omitted the qualification ‘‘universal’’, he swung both Owen and Vance onto his side. After all, what the British proposals as set out purport to do is to create a neo-colonialist independent state of Zimbabwe headed by a puppet government. Smith has the same view — a parliament and government predominantly African with - physical power remaining in white hands. The British and the Americans thus find no valid basis for opposing him, more especially, as he is working to preserve their own vested economic interests. Like the British Government, the Smith regime is terribly worried at the prospect of a military victory by the Patriotic Front forces. Smith sees his settler kingdom crumbling. The evidence: Numerous settler farms are deserted: 1 500—2 000 settlers flee every month; white schools are closing down; 600 000 Rhodesian Dollars are spent on the war daily; the Rhodesian Dollar itself had been devalued; hotels and business establishments are closing down; civil administration had been effectively disrupted in two-fifths of the rural areas; every able bodied white must ` now do at least seven months of military service. Another hard push this wet season would yield a further accelerator to the crumbling pace. The circumstances are thus most grim for the regime and the British. Our operations now encompass practically every district in the country, with greater concentration on rural than urban areas. This has been deliberate strategy on our part, for the African population is thicker in rural than in urban areas, while the European settler population is thinner in rural areas and concentrated in towns. Of the seven million Africans, six million live in rural areas. Apart, therefore, from the favourable terrain of the rural areas, the population spread in these regions combines with the natural features to offer maximum advantages for our guerilla operations. Hence our effectiveness and the untenable situation of the settler forces. Confronted by the reality of an imminent downfall, Smith has turned a sadistic killer who tortures, kills and massacres not to survive but because he can no longer survive. How else does one explain the Nyadzonia, Chimoio, Mapai and within the country, Dabwa, Musami and other massacres? How else does one explain the daily list of dead civilians allegedly caught aiding or running with the guerillas? How else can one explain the incarceration of thousands of civilians either directly in gaol or herded like goats into what ironically are called ‘‘keeps’’ or at times 95

‘protected villages’’? How else can one explain the persecution of missionaries who support our just cause? To be or not to be is his question. The slings and pangs of outrageous misfortune are not assailing him singly but in company with a surging and engulfing ‘‘sea of trouble”. Will he survive or will he not? Will European rule and its economic structure of privileged whites and underprivileged blacks, of master and servant, of the white landed class and the impoverished peasantry, of the exploiting bourgeoisie and exploited worker, last? The British and Americans are all at one with Smith in trying to puzzle out this question. Hence the prevarication by Owen and his support for the internal settlement talks. Hence his praise for Smith’s savage and brutal massacre of our innocent women and children at Chimoio. Hence Owen’s false belief that the attack at Chimoio would induce us to compromise with, that is, surrender to, Smith. British vested interests must be protected at all cost. This brings us to the role of the Patriotic Front in the military and political fight against British imperialism, colonialism and capitalism. Reference has already been made to the effect of our guerilla activities. It is our task and intention to escalate the war so the enemy can be finally annihilated. It is equally our task to preserve our Front and indeed to consolidate it as both political and military Front so we can continually confront the enemy with one solid approach. But we have to be guided by principle and not expediency. It is in accordance with the universally accepted principle of the right of a people to self-determination, that we have informed the British: (a) that independence is not negotiable and what is negotiable are the modalities of bringing it about, (b) that democratic elections based on adult universal suffrage must precede independence, (c) that a transitional power structure in which the Patriotic Front is the principle power holder and the British Government a minor power holder should be the starting point of a smooth process to independence, (d) that Smith, his regime and its forces must be dismantled and make way for the Patriotic Front forces to be constituted into the national army of the country, (e) that the nature and quality of our independence cannot be determined for us by the colonial power but by the people of Zimbabwe whose independence it will be. In any case the people of Zimbabwe cannot accept any fetters to their sovereignty. 96 On the basis of these principles, we have expressed our willingness to enter into any fruitful discussion with the British provided they come to us with clarity of mind and unequivocation. Our war cannot end until the objectives for which it has been waged are attained. And, naturally, if victory comes to us through the barrel of the gun, as victors we shall first assume independence and work towards elections later. Thank you again for this privilege of addressing you. 97

15. Imperialist Plot to create a ~Neo-Colonialist Zimbabwe

Radio Address on February 24, 1978 after the return from the Malta Constitutional Conference, I

Revolutionary greetings to you all the struggling oppressed masses of Zimbabwe and to you all our ever-advancing and ever-offensive fighting forces. Congratulations upon the telling victories scored, and successively against the panicking, thoroughly demoralised, ever-retreating and ever-defensive racist settler forces. Congratulations upon the most effective use of the gun to uphold the justice of our cause, and the justice of our cause is the justice of our gun. Our fight is just because our cause is just. Equally, because our cause is just, our fight is just. It is indeed our right, nay our duty, to wage a relentless armed struggle for freedom and independence in order to attain political, social and economic justice. These are the ideals for which we are sacrificing our lives, for only their attainment can truly transform us into a society vested with dignity and respect. While successful battles have been successively raging at our military fronts, the British Government have, as usual, been playing their double game of running with the hares and hunting with the hounds — a duplicity verging on utter dishonesty. As they confer with me and Comrade Nkomo, they are also, sometimes openly, but at other times furtively, deliberating with racist rebel Smith and the treacherous threesome of renegade and quisling Sithole, stooge Muzorewa and puppet Chirau. We met the British and Americans at Malta from 30th January to Ist of February. We submitted to them our own proposals for unfettered independence, that is an independence in which we shall be our own masters, and for a transitional process which would equally ensure that that type of independence would be attainable. We insist that during the 98 * transitional period which is to last only six months, effective power must be in our hands. To this effect we proposed at Malta, to the British, that there should be a Governing Council in which we would play a predominant role and assume the powers of defence and law and order, while the British Resident Commissioner acted in a mere supervisory capacity. The British, who want to play the role of the imperialist lion, rejected this proposal and wanted the portfolios of defence and law and order to be assumed by them. The British also wanted racist murderer Smith, Muzorewa and Sithole to be included as equal partners with us in the Governing Council we proposed. At the same time, they seek to confound and neutralise and indeed extinguish our fighting forces and the dedicated and ideologically conscious cadreship which we have built over years, by a devilish scheme which, as it is, in one way purports to remove some of the Rhodesian fascist forces, while in another way, in fact does rebuild them. Thus the envisaged total effect of the Anglo-American settlement strategy is to achieve the following anti-revolutionary objectives: (a) The seizure of the political and military institutions by Britain, during the transitional stage as weaponry for the manipulation of the situation in a direction sustaining imperialism and colonialism in their neo-colonialist form. (b) The effective destruction of our army under the guise of creating a new army with a purportedly national appellation. (c) Having destroyed our armed forces, they would like to proceed to demolish our Party and its very political image through the manipulation of the instruments of internal security (the military and the police), the existing laws and the racist administrative machinery. (d) The sponsoring and promotion of reactionary forces comprised of Smith, Muzorewa, Chirau and Sithole in an unholy solidarity against our revolutionary leadership and the forces behind us in a bid to foist upon the toiling masses a neo-colonialist regime inimical to their social interest but® promotive of rampant individualism and capitalism. (e) The defeat of the revolutionary process now rapidly unfolding in the country. The overall strategy is naturally to erect, out of our country, not only a buffer zone to prevent the revolution catching on in South Africa but also a solid economic and political, if not military, base for an imperialist 99

| and capitalist counter offensive against the socialist revolution in Mozambique. What is imperialist strategy for Zimbabwe vis-a-vis Mozambique is also imperialist strategy for Namibia vis-a-vis Angola. We have seen through this strategy and have decided to resist it. Malta was, therefore, a failure, because the British, aided and abetted by their American friends, are determined to work for the defeat of our aspirations — the aspirations of the oppressed masses of Zimbabwe. We reject out-of-hand the British dictatorship and manipulative schemes because they are designed to block our revolution and to benefit the fascist and counter-revolutionary elements in the country at the expense of the people. We cannot allow acquiescent stooges to be made our rulers. Those who don’t fight, neither shall they rule! We firmly stand by our revolutionary principles which alone have to this day given us and our struggle the correct direction. The game of chicanery, guises and disguises, which the British play in their dishonest policies towards Zimbabwe- and its people can never succeed against those principles. It is for the sustenance and indeed victory of these principles that we have presented to the British and American teams at Malta our very clear proposals reaffirming what we, in 1976 at Geneva, affirmed, namely: (a) That independence is a sovereign right of the people of Zimbabwe and cannot be negotiated nor qualified. (b) That total power must transfer to the people of Zimbabwe through their revolutionary leadership. Power transfer requires that both political and military instruments be jointly placed in our hands. Our army remains the bulwark of our political power. If the vote is the product of the gun, then the gun which has created it must continue to protect and secure it. Guns and votes are inseparable partners. Accordingly we insist that enemy forces must go out and our forces take over. If Britain does not accept this, then our war continues. (c) That the enemy police force which is both political and para-military should be dismantled and the only acceptable elements be integrated into our own police force. We must remove the bad policemen and only keep the good as defined by us. We have asked the British and their American friends to reconsider their position. Britain and her settler kith and kin being responsible for the oppression, suppression and repression of our people and our country, have a duty, a compelling obligation to make concessions. Surely, we, the slaves and serfs in our own country who have chosen to take to 100 s arms in order to overthrow the slave-masters cannot be expected to make any concessions. We enjoy no rights and privileges and have therefore absolutely no concessions left to offer to our slave-masters in quest for our freedom. The only offer we can give is that of war. Our war must thus remain hot. It must grow hotter, nay hottest. The people are fully behind us. Now is the time, therefore, to punch the enemy hardest. Smith must be blown to smithereens. Our just cause will win if we continue to trust that power can only come from the barrel of the gun and not from Genevas or Maltas. Pamberi neChimurenga! Pamberi neMhomho yeZimbabwe! Pamberi neZANLA Forces! A Luta Continua! 101

16. Rejecting the ‘Internal Settlement?’

Address to the Security Council of the United Nations on March 9, 1978 on behalf of the PF.

Mr President, on behalf of the struggling people of Zimbabwe and the Patriotic Front, the spearhead of our people’s revolution, we wish to express our appreciation to you and members of the Security Council for permitting us to address you on this occasion in the history of our country. Today, we appear before this august body to discuss the deteriorating situation in our country. Mr President, the coincidence of your presidency over this august body and your country’s colonial responsibilities over our country, makes this session of the Security Council a special one, particularly considering the fact that your person has had the opportunity to direct efforts to find a negotiated settlement to the problem of our country. We hope that your own experience with the Smith regime and its agents will help this session to find means of averting the catastrophe that hangs ominously over the heads of our people. Smith’s regime, barbarous and genocidal Mr President, members of the Security Council, despite the violence, terror, and brutality that we daily experience from the terroristic despotism that is “Rhodesia”, we appear before you in a constructive spirit and frame of mind. Yes, Mr President, wanton mass killings of our people by the racist Rhodesian regime have reached genocidal proportions. Yes, men and women, the young and the aged, in fact, whole families are being daily uprooted from their homes into concentration camps which have neither sufficient food nor sanitation facilities. This barbarous treatment of our people by the racist white minority regime threatens to destroy completely any chance for racial harmony in our country. Despite this racist recklessness of the Smith regime against our poor people, we continue to maintain the progressive position that in 102 s Zimbabwe we are not fighting white people but a racist system whose continued existence poses a serious threat to the security of Africa as a whole. On our part as leaders of the Patriotic Front of Zimbabwe, we have been involved in this tough struggle against the evil that is ‘‘Rhodesla” for too long now to respond emotionally to Rhodesian acts of barbarism. After so many years in hard struggle, we have come to appreciate the fact that any struggle whose principles are based on emotional _ responses to the evils that it seeks to correct, cannot succeed. Hence our position that armed struggle is the only effective means of bringing about meaningful changes is a well considered position. This is a position that we hold firmly and consistently. British responsibility and complicity Since we first brought the colonial problem of Zimbabwe to the attention of the United Nations two decades ago, this problem has continued to exercise the minds of the international community. At the beginning of our international campaign, particularly before 1965, our efforts to make the international community appreciate the gravity of the problem posed by minority rule in Zimbabwe were sabotaged by the British, who then argued that Southern Rhodesia was a self-governing colony whose decolonization fell outside the normal United Nations Trusteeship frame of reference. Encouraged by this attitude of Britain, Rhodesian settlers under the leadership of Ian D. Smith seized power in 1965 and declared themselves unilaterally independent of Britian. Since then the efforts of Britain in the United Nations and the attempts to end minority rule in our country have taken the form of seeking to return the Rhodesian regime to legality, a position that is not the same as the liberation movement’s objective of liberating the country from minority rule. Mr President and Members of the Security Council, we wish to stress the fact that the liberation movement of Zimbabwe has never questioned Britain’s constitutional authority over the colony of Southern Rhodesia. However, it is also true that Britain’s objective of returning the regime to legality (particularly when the administering power begins to act as if she wants to bring about this through the efforts of the liberation movement) has flown in the face of the main objective of the liberation movement, namely total liberation from minority rule. The difference between Britain’s tactics and our stand It is against this background that today the Patriotic Front’s interpretation of the results of the so-called ‘‘internal settlement’’ differs fundamentally with that of the British government who seem more in103

terested in returning Smith to legality than in removing him. Hence in 1966 Britain and the illegal regime held what are known as the Tiger Talks near Gibraltar. The British had two objectives i in these talks, namely (a) to get Smith to promise not to declare Rhodesia a Republic; (b) to ask Smith not to impede progress toward majority rule. The following year in 1967, Britain and the regime again met in what are called Fearless Talks. In both these encounters with the regime, the British government was more interested in returning the regime to some form of legality. Here lies the difference in principle between us and those that have been telling the world that the results of the so-called ‘‘internal’’ settlement represent ‘‘a step in the right direction’’ The Geneva debacle Mr President, Members of the Security Council, as you all know, even these British half measures to deal with the problem and other subsequent attempts to transfer power to the majority of the people of Zimbabwe have failed because the Smith regime would not contemplate any arrangement that sought to alter its institutions of power. All these pointless attempts foundered on the same rock — which is foxy and racist Smith. Although the Patriotic Front and the British Government may disagree on exactly why the Geneva Conference failed, there is no blinking to the fact that in Geneva, Smith’s contempt for Africans was unmistakenly clear. After the Geneva fiasco, the British and the Americans put together what some people call the Anglo-American plan for Zimbabwe. While the Patriotic Front agree to consider the proposals as a basis for negotiations the Smith regime rejected these proposals outright, and opted for negotiations with African elements opposed to the liberation movement. We give this brief resumé of Smith’s prevarications and deceitful tactics not because we want to express any preference between the Anglo-American plan and the so-called ‘‘internal’’ settlement, but to underline the fact that the Smith regime has never conceded the possibility of handing over power to the Zimbabwean majority. Smith and African traitors Understandably, the fraud that the Smith regime has been able to draw with the assistance of African stooges and traitors has received a great deal of attention in certain western circles. This support for the so-called “internal” settlement by western reactionary elements does not surprise us because these are the same forces that have kept the Smith regime afloat in flagrant violation of United Nations sanctions against that 104 7 regime. At no stage in the history of our struggle, have these forces given us encouragement, let alone support. Internal settlement, a conspiracy What is the nature of the ‘‘settlement’’ conspiracy of the Smith regime? As can be expected from professional racists, the ‘‘settlement’’ conspirators have predicated a settlement of the country’s problems upon the principle that blacks and whites in Zimbabwe shall remain separate communities. Hence the whole scheme seeks to divide power to the Zimbabwean community through racial channels. This can be seen from the text of the eight point agreement signed by Ian Smith and the three black puppets, namely: (a) Bill of Rights: There must be a justiciable Declaration of Rights to protect the rights and freedom of the individual. This must provide in particular protection from deprivation of property unless adequate compensation is paid promptly. This in truth is a Bill of Race, not of Rights. (b) The Judicature: To make the Bill of Rights effective, there must be an independent judiciary free from political influence. To ensure a competent bench there must be high qualifications for the appointment of judges. (c) Public Service Board: To maintain the confidence of the public service and also to maintain the confidence of the people in the professional neutrality of the public service, the Public Service Board (or commission) must be established as an independent body, whose composition and functions should be entrenched. (d) Retention of Administration: In order to provide a smooth transition and to ensure the continued efficient administration of the country, the civil service, the Police, the defense forces, and prison services should be retained in a high state of efficiency and free from political interference. (e) Pensions: This is a most important aspect for the retention of white confidence. Pensions payable from the Consolidated Revenue Fund must be guaranteed and freely remittable outside the country. With regard to private pension funds, the rights to employees and other persons who are members of private pension funds must be guaranteed. (f) Citizenship: In order to encourage whites to remain, provision for dual citizenship must be retained. (g) Entrenchment of Constitutional Provisions: The above provisions 105

must be entrenched so that the majority of two-thirds plus six of the membership of Parliament is required for their amendment. (h) White Representation in Parliament: To retain the confidence of the whites in regard to the entrenched safeguards in the Constitution, one-third of the seats in Parliament should be reserved for direct election by white voters. In short, the eight points agreement speaks for itself with respect to how Smith and his puppets have sought to entrench white privilege in our country. If we consider the fact that the present war in Zimbabwe is the culmination of a crisis built upon institutionalized racial separation, then we can see that the creation of an apartheid franchise cannot solve the problems of our country. It is for that reason that the Patriotic Front of Zimbabwe has maintained the position that it is fighting for a non-racial society because we do believe that any solution based on racial lines is no solution. “Internal Settlement” does not end war Mr President, we believe that those who have found South Africa’s apartheid policies morally indefensible and intellectually grotesque, cannot characterize Smith’s creation of a constitutional homeland as “‘a step in the right direction’’ because there is no qualitative difference between South Africa’s constitutional homelands and Smith’s constitutional homeland solution to our problem. According to the eight-point agreement signed in Salisbury, the so-called ‘‘internal’’ settlement does not address the transfer of power to the majority with respect to the institutions of power that are the linchpin of the racist colonial system of the Rhodesian minority regime. For a fascist and colonialist regime, these strategic institutions of power as the civil service, the judiciary and security forces are central to the effectiveness of the regime. In the so-called “‘internal’’ settlement these institutions will remain as they presently stand. If you accept the centrality of these institutions for any government to function effectively and if you consider the fact that 100 per cent of the Rhodesian judiciary is white, 99,9 per cent of their civil service is white, and the whole leadership of the security forces is completely white, then you understand the fact that in terms of real power, this agreement does not settle anything. The agreement does not constitute a settlement because it cannot end the war raging in the country. The situation in Zimbabwe is a war situation. No agreement that does not take into account the realities of this war situation can produce a settlement. The reality is that only those locked in combat are capable of bringing 106 Ka about a settlement. Similarly, the composition of the future army of Zimbabwe is a matter for those in control of the fighting. It is only the Patriotic Front liberation forces that can guarantee the irreversibility of majority rule and independence. To the masses of Zimbabwe who actively support armed struggle and form its rock base, the agreement is a betrayal of the struggle. These masses continue to pay heavily at the hands of Smith’s terroristic assassins who shoot them as ‘‘curfewbreakers’’ or summarily execute them for collaborating with freedom fighters. The sacred duty of the Security Council Mr President, Members of the Security Council, we know that this august body as the guardian of international peace and security must, needs take a serious view of attempts by the Smith regime to concoct a “settlement” which is bound to deepen the conflict. The Patriotic Front totally rejects the so-called ‘‘internal’’ settlement by the illegal, racist regime and its African puppets. This means that as far as we are concerned armed struggle continues until our people’s demands for a complete transfer of power are met, and we shall work for the complete overthrow of the existing colonial regime, now joined by a small clique of black puppets. In this regard, the Security Council should follow the example of the Organization of African Unity (OAU) ministerial council which, meeting in Tripoli, repudiated the Salisbury agreement as a fraud designed to protect guarantees of privilege for the white minority. Mr President, as we have already noted above, the so-called settlement is conceived within the framework of South Africa’s definition of African self-determination as exemplified in the obscene creation of the Transkei and Bophutotswana homelands. In this connection, members of the Security Council should take note of the fact that Mr Smith and Mr Vorster have designed a common strategy to concoct similar ‘‘settlements” in Zimbabwe and Namibia. This is to say that the agreement between Smith and black puppets in Salisbury immediately encourages South Africa to move in the same direction in Namibia. Shall members of the Security Council permit the creation of a belt of puppet regimes across Southern Africa, the chief purpose of which is to make the world safe for apartheid? Mr President, Members of the Security Council, we call upon the United Nations Security Council to repudiate the so-called Salisbury agreement in the name of peace and justice, and reaffirm its condemnation and isolation of the illegal regime of Rhodesia. In the meantime, Mr President, we want to reaffirm our position, 107

namely that any attempt to find a negotiated settlement to the problem of our country by by-passing the liberation forces of the Patriotic Front which now control more than two thirds of the country will not solve anything. The masses of Zimbabwe are solidly behind us, hence our capability to sustain the war despite the Salisbury fraud. 108 ‘

17. After the Kilimanjaro Conference (Malta II)

Address to the Nation on April 17, 1978

We came to Dar-es-Salaam ready and willing to negotiate with the British Government and their American friends a settlement which would transfer full political and military power from Britain, the colonial power, to the people of Zimbabwe through us (PF) their authentic representative. We came to Dar-es-Salaam thus to uphold the sovereignty of our people and the people’s fighting forces. We came determined to lay the process to genuine national independence. In order to ensure that the road to genuine independence was clear, definite and irreversible, we insisted firmly on the following matters being agreed: (a) That the power to administer the country during the transitional period must be vested in a Governing Council in which the Patriotic Front has a majority and that the executive powers relating to the control of the army and the police (that is the powers of defence and law and order) must be shared by both the Patriotic Front and the Resident Commissioner representing the British Government. (b) That the Smith-Muzorewa-Sithole-Chirau army and police force must be disarmed, dismantled and demobilised and that our forces should replace them. We expressed our willingness to integrate into our forces, i.e. into our army and police force, acceptable elements from them. (c) That if the United Nations peace-keeping force was to be acceptable to us, then it had to be agreed that it would come to disarm, dismantle and demobilise the regime’s forces, guard the barracks of the regime’s forces, guard all the military bases and installations, guard 109

the border against external aggression, and that in doing that they would work in conjunction with our forces. We were, however, disappointed to find that the British and American team was not prepared to commit themselves clearly and unequivocally to these matters. They remained completely intransigent and unreasonable throughout the discussions. They showed clearly their bias and preference for the illegal regime of Smith, Muzorewa, Sithole and Chirau. We are, therefore, fully convinced that the Anglo-Americans are seeking a method of giving full support to the fascist regime in the country. They are not after a genuine settlement. We must, therefore, not deceive ourselves into believing that independence is within reach. No, it is not. Our guns must thus continue to blast the enemy in the name of the people and with the power of the people. The surest victory for the people and the surest defeat of the enemy can only be the product of our armed struggle. Only through it can we achieve genuine independence and the people’s power and sovereignty. Let us fight on!’’ Pamberi neChimurenga! A Luta Continua! 110 5

18. Ignore the April Bogus Elections

Radio Address from Maputo on the eve of the April bogus elections: April 16, 1979

Revolutionary greetings to all workers and peasants, to all men of profession, to all our farmers, and to all our students. Revolutionary greetings to all fathers and mothers, to all brothers and sisters throughout our troubled country of Zimbabwe. Revolutionary greetings to you all the valiant members of the ZANLA forces in all parts of Zimbabwe. Revolutionary greetings to you all sons of the soil. Tonight, I want to speak to you all my people on a serious matter which involves our future, your future as Zimbabweans and our integrity as a people who have over the last 89 years stood together in our quest for true independence from the alien yoke of white minority settler rule. You are all aware that your sons and daughters first took up arms in 1966 to fight the white minority regime as a result of the call we made as a Party. They have, ever since that historic Battle of Sinoia, waged on the 28th and 29th April 1966, been intensifying the armed struggle, day by day, week by week, month by month and year by year. Throughout these years, the enemy has resisted change, vowing openly to perpetuate his evil and barbaric racist minority rule over us all. We ignored his claims to invincibility. We persevered throughout 1972, 1973, 1974, 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978 right to this very moment when I am talking to you. We liquidated thousands of the enemy in the rural areas driving survivors into urban areas. In the process, we liberated vast territories, established firm base areas everywhere and established our own alternative People’s institutions in those areas. At first, the enemy denied the reality of our revolutionary gains. However, by 1978 they had to face realities. The declaration of martial law in 90% of Zimbabwe was the 111most eloquent confession and admission that the enemy could no longer rule 90% of the country. When Ian Smith and his white racist henchmen realized that their days were numbered, they approached three traitors — Abel Muzorewa, Ndabaningi Sithole and Jeremiah Chirau in order to enlist them and their small cliques of supporters into a criminal partnership against you, all our people and against your war for true independence. These four evil men, Smith, Sithole, Muzorewa and Chirau, concocted what they called an internal settlement but which in truth was a criminal contract enshrining a conspiracy to sabotage our war and thereby denying you the fruits of victory. As partners they unleashed terror throughout Zimbabwe burning down villages and destroying grain; closing down schools, clinics and hospitals; placing hundreds of thousands of Africans in so-called Protected Villages; deporting whole communities; pillaging and plundering livestock; maiming, raping, murdering and massacring thousands of our people, in a vain attempt to stop the war. They launched and intensified aggressions into Mozambique, Zambia, Botswana and Angola with the twin purposes of disrupting our strategic rear and destabilizing those progressive free nations. All these criminal programmes failed to achieve their evil purposes. You, our people have remained steadfast and unshaken in your support for our war. Our ZANLA forces grew from strength to strength and moved from victory to victory. In desperation, Smith and his black traitor-partners proceeded to announce what they called ‘Constitutional Proposals’. Being aware that the African population would never approve of it, the treacherous proposals were put only to the whites because they alone had everything to gain under it. Two months ago, the regime announced a new constitution and scheduled elections for 20th April 1979. We now know that these crooks have arranged for these so-called elections to start tomorrow, Tuesday, the 17th April. You must have all heard that we, your fighting forces, are unalterably opposed to these so-called elections. The reasons are too many and too obvious to be all given here. It should be enough to say that:(a) The New Constitution perpetuates racism in our country. We all know that the white members of Parliament will all be elected by whites while African members will be elected by Africans. This kind of racism is what we have been fighting to smash all along. We want a totally non-racial society in Zimbabwe. (b) The New Constitution is undemocratic. There can be no justification 112 * for giving 28% of the seats in parliament to white settlers who constitute only 3% of the population. Besides, the 72 so-called African members of Parliament will be hostages of the 28 whites as they will not be able to amend those sections of the constitution that entrench inequality, injustice, racism and greed. This we will oppose by arms until final victory. (c) The New Constitution will create a government that will be unable to function, let alone to improve the life of our people. We know that whoever will be the black so-called Prime-Minister will be a mere puppet chairing a cabinet of do-nothing puppet ministers. He will be unable to dismiss any minister without the approval of the head of his party; each party will be represented in the cabinet; there will be no national policy; there will be no national purpose. All that the new regime will be able to agree on is the intensification of murders and massacres and the levying wars of aggression against neighbouring countries. (d) The New Constitution provides for a Defence Force Commission which will be exclusively white. This Commission will author and carry out murders and massacres on our people freely confident that the black puppet Prime Minister will bear the blame and accept responsibility. there can be no army in an independent, free, Zimbabwe that will be led by white settlers. We will fight this army to the bitter end, until final victory. (e) The New Constitution provides for a Judicial Service Commission composed of whites alone. This commission will run the courts and administer so-called justice. We know from experience that white racist judges have never been able or willing to do justice to any Africans brought before them for trial, especially where the accused is charged with the crime of desiring liberation and of taking steps to ensure that he is free. We will fight these courts with our guns until final victory. (f) The New Constitution creates a Police Service Commision that will be run by all white commissioners. We know from experience that Rhodesian racist police have carried out acts of terror, torture, murder, rape and massacres on our African population. They carry out combined operations with the racist armed forces against our people and the Frontline States. We will fight this racist police force, with our guns, until final victory. (g) The Police Service has also been placed under an all-white Public Service Commission. These racist commissioners wil ensure that whites continue to dominate the entire public service sector of 113government. This cannot be permitted in an African country for whatever reasons. We will use our guns to shoot down such a public service until we can totally and completely-root out racism from the system. Public Statutory corporations which administer such major public interests as the Railways, Air Rhodesia, RISCO and the Lowveld Development Authority will also be all white. By our blood and guns we will oppose this. (h — Fellow Zimbabweans, you are being asked to vote for a moneyhungry, power-hungry, bought-out clique which will be used by the enemy to perpetrate the system against which we have been fighting over the years. Power will remain in white hands; the land will remain in the hands of a small racist capitalist class and its black bourgeois partners; wealth will remain in the hands of these vultures. You the people, for whom thousands of your children have died to liberate will remain hewers of wood and drawers of water. We will never accept this. We therefore now ask you to listen carefully. (a) For all our people living in the urban areas we say to you: (i) From tomorrow the 17th until Sunday the 21st April, you should make sure that you, your wife and children remain inside your homes in order to avoid being injured or killed. We are going to oppose the regime’s forces who will be going around forcing people to go and vote. We do not want any of our people to be hurt. (ii) You must not go to vote. There is no reason for you to vote in an election whose sole purpose is to perpetuate minority rule. If soldiers of the regime come to your house to compel you to go and sell-out your country refuse openly to go. Rather die than commit such a crime on your people and country. If you are given voting papers, tear them up and continue to sit in your homes. If you have to go out to buy food, be careful not to be injured in any fighting that might occur. If fighting starts, you should do all you can to help your ZANLA forces. (b) For those who live in the Tribal Trust Lands, we advise you to abandon your home and go into the bush once you hear that the enemy is coming to compel you to vote. Do not cooperate with the enemy. Inform the ZANLA forces in your area of any news about the 114 Das movement of the enemy coming to make you vote. Do not forget to look after the children carefully until the 22nd April. (c) To those of you who live on White Farms, we have a special advice. We know that your employer is going to compel you to be at a particular place in order to compel you to vote. You should take every step to escape and hide somewhere on the farm or disappear into the bush. You may lose your job but not for long. We will liberate Zimbabwe soon, should you get information regarding the time and place of voting on your farm, inform the ZANLA forces in your areas. (d) To those of you who are working on the mines, we advise you to refuse to go to the polling stations, the mines will be closed down, so you will not be working. Do not stay in your compound because the enemy forces will come there to force you to vote. If they somehow find you, refuse to vote under any circumstances. Make sure your children are safe as there can be gunbattles anytime, between our forces and the enemy. For those of you who are working in Zimbabwe but are not ZIMBABWEANS, we ask you to realise that our struggle is your struggle too. Do not vote. You do not want to bring misery on the ZIMBABWEAN people. Your working conditions will be much better after the Zimbabwean people have achieved true freedom and independence. Last, let me now speak to every member of the ZANLA forces in the field, I am speaking to you as your commander-in-chief tonight. From tomorrow morning your tasks in relation to these bogus elections begin. Remember your orders and programmes. Remember that these elections are evil and your task is to make sure they do not take place. You should take great care to protect women and children during the next four days. You must hit the enemy and carry out your programmes fully. We know you will not let the People down. Good night, Revolutionary Greetings to you all. Down with the Elections! Down with Ian Smith! Down with Abel Muzorewa! Down with Ndabaningi Sithole! Down with Jeremiah Chirau! Victory is certain! Pamberi neChimurenga! (e — 115

19. The Basic Political Position of the Patriotic Front

Press Statement in Dar-es-Salaam on August 18, 1979

1. The reality in Zimbabwe is that of a war situation in which the Liberation Forces of the Patriotic Front representing the interests of seven million Zimbabweans are locked in a bitter conflict against the forces of the rebel regime representative of the racist settler minority. 2. The historical development of the present conflict situation consistently demonstrates that Britain, as the colonial power since 1890, has in successive stages, not only deliberately refrained from exercising her colonial responsibility towards the Zimbabwean people, but also yielded to the racial demands of its settler minority community to the extent of acquiescing in the illegal act of the unilateral declaration of independence. 3. Since the Patriotic Front Forces assumed the revolutionary task, it redressed the imbalance of power between the oppressed and subjected majority and the oppressive minority ruling class through the instrumentality of armed struggle. By its sweat and blood, therefore, the Patriotic Front became the effective and decisive factor in the decolonisation process which the decolonising power had failed to accomplish. Accordingly, by the fact of the advance of the liberation struggle resulting in the establishment of firm and indisputabie control over a vast region of the country and the extension of its military operations to over ninety per cent of the total land area of Zimbabwe, the Patriotic Front, which enjoys the fullest support of the masses, has become the only dominant force operating against the settler colonial system, thus diminishing the role of Britain as decolonising power to the extent to which it has become merely nominal. 4. By virtue of its established military and political position, the Patriotic Front has become the sole, legitimate and authentic represen116 s tative of the people of Zimbabwe, without whose consent no settlement of whatever kind could ever succeed. 5. The Patriotic Front, recognising that the process of achieving an acceptable constitutional agreement is necessarily a movement from war to peace, holds that the basis of any desired constitutional settlement cannot fall short of the complete removal of the causes of war, through the disbandment of the oppressive and racist regime together with its . physical instruments of control, and its consequent replacement by a truly democratic government into whose control the liberation Forces are placed and transformed into the People’s Army. 6. The movement from war to peace, being a movement from an undemocratic and oppressive settler minority rule to a democratic system, cannot at the same time be based on a constitution of the very racial and undemocratic system it seeks to destroy. To do so is not only to vitiate the principle of democracy, but also to sanctify illegality and racism. Similarly, to incorporate in a purportedly democratic constitution provisions creating a special position for groups or communities or according such groups or communities any preferential treatment on no other basis than those of race and colour is repugnant to the principles of democracy as we understand and cherish them. All citizens, being equal before the law, must enjoy equal rights and privileges. 7. The process of establishing peace from war must aim at the achievement of genuine independence through the utilisation of such modalities as are promotive and not inhibitive of the process. In this regard, the election process leading to the emergence of the government of an independent Zimbabwe should not only be democratic but should also come under the supervision of such persons or groups of persons, as possess an objectivity and impartiality which are beyond question. The conservative Government of Britain having publicly endorsed the fraudulent elections held by the present illegal regime in April as ‘Free and Fair’’ and having pronounced themselves in favour of lifting sanctions, has forfeited every right to supervise the process of change. It is decidedly biased in favour of the illegal regime. 8. Any proposed scheme envisaging the solution of the Rhodesian problem must be consistent with the expressed wishes and interests of the people of Zimbabwe and the course which the international community, in particular the OAU and the United Nations, has prescribed and advocated with consistent. vigour over the last seventeen years, that is from 1962 to 1979. During this period, the United Nations, has demanded consistently that Rhodesia be decolonised to the satisfaction of the people of Zimbabwe. Both the General Assembly and the Security Coun117

cil rejected UDI in 1965 at the request of Britain (Resolutions 232 and 252). In 1977, Britain sought before the Security Council, a Resolution empowering the United Nations to supervise elections in Zimbabwe under the Anglo-American plan. In March 1978 the Security Council passed a Resolution rejecting the March 3 so-called internal settlement and called for a solution based on the United Nations Resolutions on Rhodesia. 9. The Patriotic Front has always recognised that the principle of serious negotiations to bring about genuine settlement leading to the total transference of power, from the settler racist minority to the majority of the people of Zimbabwe, could not be excluded as an additional means of resolving the present conflict. The Patriotic Front, therefore, expresses itself in favour of entering into serious negotiations with the British Government with a view to assessing whether any substantial area of common agreement exists between Britain and itself. 10. By accepting the British invitation to attend the proposed Conference, the Patriotic Front must clearly be understood to have done nothing more than indicate its willingness to negotiate a solution. It rejects both the proposed constitutional framework, which has as its basis the illegal internal settlement constitution, and the proposal of a ceasefire it unjustifiably makes. The war will therefore continue until the objective of liberation has been achieved. 118 ‘en

IV. Remembering Heroes of the Struggle and their Revolutionary Legacy

20. ‘Chairman Chitepo taught us to take up arms and fight’

Speech on Chitepo Day: March 18, 1978. Members of the Central Committee, the General Staff and ZANLA Forces present here tonight. For the third year, we again gather to remember the death of our ' | beloved Chairman, Herbert Chitepo. As we commemorate his death we also remember the death of Comrade Shamiso who died with him on the same occasion. Today is heroes’ day. We don’t only remember Chairman Chitepo and Shamiso, but also those hundreds or thousands of our ZANLA Forces who have shed their blood in the struggle to liberate Zimbabwe from colonialism and imperialism. This is not the only one of the several heroes’ day we observe. On June 15, we will all have to pause, in similar fashion, to honour our Vice President: Leopold Takawira, who died on that day. The life of Comrade Herbert Chitepo has been elaborated upon by so many people. We know that he was a very highly educated Zimbabwean. We know that he was a brilliant lawyer. We also know that he was a revolutionary leader of outstanding quality and genius. Comrade Vice President, Simon Muzenda has talked at length of Comrade Chitepo’s life. I shall not dwell on that today. What we have heard is about Comrade Chitepo’s life. I want to talk to you about the essence of his death and his legacy to us all. It is true, Herbert Chitepo was a highly learned man. Yes, he was a brilliant lawyer. But, most important of all — as your song tonight makes clear, he was the one who taught us to pick up guns and liberate ourselves. But in the end, it dawned on him that it was futile to seek to defend 121

the oppressed in the imperialist court before imperialist judges. The Judge’s father made the law, his brother interpreted it and his young brother enforced it. He saw that as thousands and thousands of the down-trodden were being herded into jail for their resistance to oppression — it was not much use trying to defend them in courts by word of mouth. It was useless being a lawyer in those circumstances. He saw clearly that what made the oppressed to be arrested, to be unemployed, to fail even to improve their lives even though they may be educated, was because of their subjugation by imperialism. He immediately concluded, on the evidence, that lack of state power in the hands of the oppressed was the primary cause. He prescribed the medicine for all the ills. He called upon the Zimbabwean masses to take up arms in order to achieve independence and freedom. Once free, education, unemployment and other ills get cured in due course. Without political power firmly in the hands of the people, without jobs and food and other necessities of life, there can be pretty little anyone can do to help the oppressed who are being terrorised by imperialism in its courts and before its judges. This naturally led him to leading the armed struggle. We spent long years in restriction and detention from the day ZANU was born. We were imprisoned at Whawha, Sikombela and Salisbury Prison after ZANU had been banned in 1964. At our first congress in 1964, months before the ban of ZANU and our imprisonment, the Central Committee, by resolution, commanded us to wage the armed struggle against the enemy. We immediately embarked upon a programme to send as many comrades outside the country as circumstances would allow. We wanted them to undergo military training in order to confront imperialism fairly and squarely. Those we sent for training that year included Comrade Ndangana who is well known to you. We sent some to the People’s Republic of China. However, when they returned, we had not set up adequate machinery outside our borders for utilising fully their skills and talent. We carefully analysed the situation and concluded that those few members of the Central Committee, who were outside should create a structure for the prosecution of the armed struggle. This was when we as members of the Central Committee, in restriction wrote to Comrade Herbert Chitepo who was in Tanzania at that time, charging him with the task of leading the armed struggle from outside. We commanded Comrade Herbert Chitepo to quit his legal profes122 5 sion, gather other Central Committee members together who were outside Zimbabwe and constitute a Revolutionary Council in order to lead the war. We pointed out to Comrade Chitepo that the Gwelo Congress of May 22 — 23, 1964, at which he had been elected Chairman of the Party, had specifically mandated the Central Committee to lead a revolutionary war against settlers and imperialism. When our Sikombela letter reached Comrade Chitepo, he promptly resigned his job as Director of. Public Prosecutions in Tanzania and moved to Lusaka, Zambia, to set up the Revolutionary Council and lead our war effort. Comrade Chitepo then became the Chairman of the Revolutionary Council which had been set up. This was in line with a decision taken by the Central Committee, that the armed struggle should be intensified. Indeed our armed struggle started with the battle in Sinoia in April 1966. After this battle, there was further training of more cadres. It was, however, difficult for ZANLA Forces to be increased until 1972. Members of the Revolutionary Council also received training. Furthermore, more cadres were sent to China and Tanzania for training so that our armed struggle would be intensifed. What line was our armed struggle to take? Which ideology were we to follow? From 1966 to 1969, our armed struggle had not intensified until members of the Central Committee and the Military High Command decided to lay down concrete and specific guidelines for the serious start of the armed struggle. This planning took place going along with Frelimo Soldiers into the Tete Province of Mozambique. Then in December 1972 our armed struggle began in the North East of Zimbabwe. The armed struggle started on the lines that guerilla warfare should follow: getting the support of the masses because without the support of the masses guns will achieve nothing. Then our guerillas infiltrated Zimbabwe, they worked among the people, sought their support and got it. Then the actual fighting started. But it should be noted that these were difficult days because not all the people supported the armed struggle. Not all African States supported the armed struggle. In 1974, we had many enemies within the Party. There were rebels within our High Command. We lost many lives following the activities of the above mentioned rebels. More rebellious activities were stopped by Comrade Chitepo. Comrade Chitepo called for the intensification of our armed struggle. Comrade Chitepo condemned the spirit of tribalism and regionalism; Comrade Chitepo stood firm against leadership based on 123

tribal or regional inclinations. Comrade Chitepo also refused to stop the war because of the so-called settlement talks that were going on in 1974 in Zambia. : The détente exercise which involved us, Smith and Vorster, almost confused and sabotaged our armed struggle. But we refused to stop the war. Comrade Chitepo and us stood firm on the issue that the war should not stop. Those leaders who were involved in the détente exercise wanted the war to stop while talks were going on, but we refused because once the war was stopped it would be difficult to restart it. This would also give the enemy a chance to re-organize his forces. The enemy would also occupy areas which our forces would have occupied. Our insistence that the war should continue received strong opposition as a result of the détente exercise. A new suggestion came up during the period 1974—75 that all Zimbabwe liberation groups should unite under one umbrella. Our Party was not opposed to this proposed unity set-up. What we opposed was to stop the war. What we proposed was a type of unity to intensify the armed struggle. However, we were bulldozed into this unity under the organisation called the African National Council (ANC). We were aware that getting into this unity would eventually stop our armed struggle. 1975 saw a serious set-back in our armed struggle, which had been built since 1972. Our Central Committee was convinced that working in the ANC led by Muzorewa would be counter-productive as far as the armed struggle was concerned. We therefore decided to keep our identity as a Party even under this unity and pledged that the war would continue. Sithole was present when we made this pledge. When we were released from detention we pledged ourselves to continue the war and intensify our recruitment of the cadres for military training. During the three months when the détente exercise was going on, we went around the country and recruited many more cadres. We knew that if the détente exercise failed, Smith would arrest and detain us. Our members who lived outside Zimbabwe, led by Comrade Chitepo, vowed that they would continue the armed struggle. Indeed when Smith saw that the war was not stopping, some ZANLA supporters inside Zimbabwe were rounded up in February 1975. Then on March 18, news came of the death of Comrade Chitepo. That was not all. Our members of the Central Committee, High Command and cadres who were in Zambia were rounded up by the Zambian government. Inside Zimbabwe our members such as Maurice Nya124 x gumbo, Lazarus Machichi and John Mutasa who had been recruiting cadres for military training were arrested. After all these developments available members of the Central Committee met in Highfields, Zimbabwe and decided that I and Comrade Tekere would leave Zimbabwe and regroup and reorganise Party members outside the country. So, on April 4th, we left Zimbabwe. We had agreed that the armed struggle should be taken up where Comrade Chitepo had left off. The armed struggle then continued once again as our Central Committee had decided and pledged. We were surprised to hear that the leadership of the ANC which we had been forced to join was denouncing ZANU. We tried to enter into negotiations with it in an attempt to bridge our differences, but all was in vain. It set up its own offices, designed its own propaganda machinery and denounced ZANU, everywhere. But we stuck to our point that the armed struggle would continue. But now our Party is stronger and will continue to become stronger. Some died in the revolutionary struggle, others were crippled. Could there be any justification then to sabotage the armed struggle? What will those who died have died for? Comrade Chitepo and others did not stop the war because others had dropped out. The war must continue. We must bring the masses to the revolutionary struggle which our comrades have died for. This is not the time to retreat. If we did this then we will have destroyed all that Comrade Chitepo and others stood for. What then did they die for? Are we independent yet? Should we lay down our arms? We have not won our independence, that is why we are in the bush. We must liberate our country. It will indeed be liberated by the gun. We have whole-heartedly dedicated ourselves to this cause. The war to which we are dedicated, transforms us. It revives us, it inspires us. We have our aspirations, that of liberating our country. If we are bound together as one people with one desire, then no one will divide us. Our war must teach us to forget our tribal affiliations. If it fails in this regard, it will have achieved nothing. Pamberi neHondo! 125

21. The Chinhoyi (Sinoia) Tradition

Speech on Sinoia Day: April 30, 1978

Revolutionary Greetings! Today exactly twelve years ago, seven gallant ZANLA fighters, Simon Chimbodza, Christopher Chatambudza, Nathan Charumuka, Godwin Manyerenyere, Peter, Ephram Shenjere, David Guzuzu, who in pursuance of the Party’s Chimurenga programme, had entered the country and camped just outside Sinoia, fought a dour, gruelling and bloody battle against a massive enemy ground force supported by helicopter gunships and bombers. The battle lasted over twelve hours during which the enemy suffered many casualties and had several of his aircraft downed. Having run out of ammunition our gallant seven fell. It was a heroes’ death. The Battle of Sinoia has marked revolutionary importance for the Party and the people of Zimbabwe. Its significance lies in the following:(a) It was an acceptance by ZANU and by the people of Zimbabwe that the methods of non-violence which had been tried again and again by the nationalist movement were ineffective against an imperialist and colonialist enemy using his whole military, political and economic machinery in defence of his acquired position. The Sinoia Battle was therefore an expression of our total commitment to armed struggle as the principal form of struggle against imperialism and colonialism. It marked a stage of transformation and in the means of struggle, from the innocuous and less violent, to the violent basing itself on the gun as the main violent weapon. Whereas the main instrument of violence in 1896 was the spear, now it is the gun. (b) The Battle of Sinoia is the connecting link between the First Liberation War (Chimurenga Chokutanga) fought by our ancestors in 1896 and 1897 and the Second Liberation War (Chimurenga Chechipiri) which we are now fighting. It symbolizes the continuity of our 126 * struggle since the beginning of white settlerism, whilst it also underlines the continuity of the negative forces of oppression, suppression and capitalist exploitation against which our progressive and revolutionary forces are pitted. The continuance of colonialist oppression can only be effectively fought by a continuance of the oppressed masses’ open and armed hostility. (c) The Battle of Sinoia was an expression of the new courage and bravery that had emerged with the formation of ZANU as a revolutionary Party from its very inception. At the May (1964) Congress in Gwelo, the Central Committee which had just been elected was given an unrestricted mandate to wage the struggle for the Liberation of the country. The Sinoia Battle was the Party’s response to the people’s call at Gwelo for effective courageous action to overthrow the colonialist and settlerist system and restore the power of the masses. (d) The Battle of Sinoia was not only a demonstration of courage and bravery, but of the spirit of sacrifice which alone is the product ofa deep sense of political awareness, absolute loyalty, and full commitment to the people’s cause. The sacrifice and heroic determination of the seven ZANLA fighters exemplified a new revolutionary Spirit that was soon to infuse the masses. ZANU had not only evolved a new approach to the struggle, but had also evolved a new psychological condition necessary in all of us who regard ourselves as freedom fighters. Political consciousness and ideological commitment constitute a necessary mental and emotional condition upon which the effectiveness of our physical firing skill depends. Indeed it is the awareness of our political goals and our commitment to their attainment which spurs us to action. Our guns thus become revolutionary guns whose trajectory points towards the political objectives to which we aspire. The Battle of Sinoia also teaches us a good lesson in revolutionary history, that in order for the vast oppressed masses to be fully mobilised and revolutionised there is need for a vanguard group or organisation which must first pioneer the way. ZANU was this revolutionary vanguard. In April 1966, at Sinoia we established this principle. In 1972, in the north-east, we re-established it and expanded it. In 1976, we firmly consolidated it as we opened new fronts in the east, south-east and south. And looking at the situation now in April, 1978, we all feel extremely gratified by the transformation we have brought about in the individual Zimbabwean and in the people as a whole. (e ww 127

(f) The Battle of Sinoia also exploded one myth, which had acquired a strong-hold upon our people, namely that the white settlers are invincible. Their death at Sinoia destroyed their ‘‘immortality’’ and created in our people military self-confidence and for that matter a superiority complex, which is the inexhaustible source of morale and hope for sure victory. Since then we have continued to demonstrate that the oppressed black man can, in quest of his freedom, kill his white oppressor, and the slave his slave-master. Today, the white settler forces are falling in battle in countless numbers at the hands of our invincible forces — the sons and daughters of the oppressed poor peasants and exploited workers. Twelve years have gone by since Sinoia. As we look over the years we are thrilled at the victories we have successively scored over the enemy. Our success should, however, not be measured merely by the series of battles we have won but by the overall situation our war has created in the country. Let me, therefore, assess its effectiveness over the years, firstly in respect of us — the struggling people — secondly in respect of the enemy and thirdly in respect of the political, social and economic situation in the country, and fourthly in respect of the international community: 1. The struggling masses The war has welded together the peasantry who constitute nearly 6 million people, the working class which comprises over 600 000 people, the intellectuals, the students, themselves mainly sons and daughters of the peasantry and the proletariat and the African petty-bourgeoisie. In other words, the war has become a people’s war for the attainment of national independence in the context of a democratic state, which offers the necessary preconditions for the social transformation we envisage. Through the war, we have submerged whatever minor contradictions have existed amongst us and we have done so out of our recognition of the need to completely destroy the common principal enemy in pursuance of our immediate common objective — the establishment of a national democratic state. This also explains why we have linked ourselves in a common front with ZAPU which we call the Patriotic Front. Through the instrumentality of our war, we have created a collective revolutionary awareness in the masses of the guiding principles of our revolution, the objectives of that revolution and the surest means for their treatment. Thus, the masses have been purposefully mobilised through revolutionary motivation. Today the masses fight alongside our 128 : ZANLA forces, feed them, supply them with useful security and intelligence reports and information; nurse our wounded; carry out selfreliance productive projects in liberated zones; administer their own areas; and generally cooperate in disrupting civil administration and the oppressor’s economy. Before 1966, we Zimbabweans were despised as people who cannot fight. Today everybody, including the enemy himself, recognises us as good, tough and unyielding fighters. 2. The enemy The enemy has undergone a negative transformation as a result of the effectiveness of our war. Once he regarded himself as invincible. Today, he is a defeatist on the verge of surrendering. Pounded heavily from all cardinal points and in his major military bases and sanctuaries, he is ever retreating as we ever advance towards him in order to demolish him. Over 2 000 settlers are running away every month whilst hundreds more have perished in battle, only since the beginning of this year. His army is over-stretched, that is why South Africa has been sending troops under one guise or another to Rhodesia. The enemy situation is desperate. Our situation is most favourable. There can only be one loser — the settlers and their unashamed stooges — Muzorewa, Sithole and Chirau. There can only be one victor — the people as led by us, for the people can never lose. 3. The political, social and economic situation Comrades, as you are aware, the economic situation has, because of our armed struggle, badly deteriorated. The settler regime is fully aware of this, for there is lack of foreign currency; the railways are not fully functional because we have been hitting at them hard and regularly; businesses are closing down; there is great unemployment and a flight of skills; there is hardly any investment of capital, either generated within the country or coming from abroad. And yet the regime continues to spend as much as 1,2 million dollars a day on defence from the taxes forcibly extracted from the oppressed people. Because of the serious military position and the deteriorating economy, the settler regime, feeling threatened, has tried to modify its political strategy so as to bring into its orbit unprincipled and completely naive stooge leaders, whom Smith has found easy to manipulate by luring them with salaries and beautiful homes in the whites’ only suburban areas. Smith thinks he can, by using stooges as shadows of the real power resting in the hands of the whites, deceive the toiling masses into accept129

ing his regime as a democratic one. The people of Zimbabwe have not been fighting for 12 years because they detest the white looks of Ian Smith and his colleagues. Of course not. The addition of black faces does not amount to any democratic change in the oppressive system. Our twelve-year old war aims at the complete overthrow of the entire colonialist politico-socio-economic system and its replacement by a truly democratic one vesting political and economic power in the people. It is, therefore, not just the change in or modification of the form, but change in both the form and content of the entire system. That is the objective of our struggle. 4. The International Community The armed struggle we are waging is not only inspired by the struggle and victories of other peoples and countries, but receives support and acclamation from the whole progressive international community and progressive organizations in capitalist countries. It is accordingly necessary, that if we are to promote our revolution and the attainment of its goals, our struggle should be placed in the context of identical struggles, and our national front should be strengthened by an international alliance with our allies and friends in the international community. The struggle against imperialism, colonialism and capitalism is as much a national struggle for us the people of Zimbabwe as it is an international struggle for us together with the progressive forces opposed to imperialism, colonialism and capitalism, either because of their own historical experiences, which are identical or comparable to ours, or because of their ideological commitment to the same objectives as ourselves or because, on purely humanitarian bases, they espouse the cause of human freedom and justice. These forces are willing allies and must be mobilised in full. Our joy over the last twelve years has, therefore, been the growth in the international dimension of our unity with those forces. Through them and from them we have succeeded in obtaining substantial material, diplomatic, political and moral aid that has played an important role in our endeavours to reinforce our war effort and consolidate our gains in the battlefield as well as in the political and diplomatic spheres. We are gratified that the international community has refused to be drawn into recognising the naked treachery of the professed stooges and quislings — Sithole, Muzorewa and Chirau — who have decided, for reasons of personal material comfort and benefit, to side with and support the enemy against the people and their cause. Is there any greater 130 s, betrayal than that of fighting against your own freedom and the freedom of your own people? Our twelve-year old revolutionary war has been a period of profound experiences, the nature of which has transformed both the individual and society, orientating all of us towards commitment to principles that defy expediency and opportunism. And as long as we continue to stand firm on principle, opportunism will founder on the rock-bed of such hallowed principle. It is principle which defines traitors, renegades and reactionaries. It is principle which condemns them. It is principle which rejects them. The unyielding principles of our revolution have caused us to gain acceptance in the international community. They mirror the quality of men and women and expose treachery. In our struggle against imperialism and colonialism we have to vigilantly guard our revolution against the forces of reaction that resist and contradict it. The principal enemy employs both open and insidious tactics in his strategy. Thus, while the British openly and publicly declare full commitment to the process for the transference of power, they at the same time strive to build into that process disguised mechanism, whose effect will be to retain that power. As they pay lip-service to the principle of immediate independence, they are at the same time contriving methods of neutralizing the nature and quality of that independence. This underlines the principle that imperialism cannot in all sincerity be expected to wind itself up. It must be hammered to total defeat, and total liquidation. During the last twelve years we have also learnt the character of the British and their settler kith and kin and we have come to only one conclusion that they can only be driven out of our country by the gun. Let us, therefore, continue to uphold our revolutionary principles as pronounced by our Congress at Gwelo in May 1964. Let us also derive inspiration and courage, loyalty and commitment from the Battle of Sinoia and its seven heroes and continue to adhere to the Party lines as the only correct line for all of us. Let us be inspired by the heroes of the First War of Liberation, (Chimurenga Chokutanga), Mkwati, Kaguvi, Nehanda, Mashayamombe, Makoni and others with whom we are linked not only in blood, but equally in revolutionary spirit, and let us remember that our War of Liberation is a continuation of the first war. Let us restudy our experiences from 1966 to 1978 and identify the areas of our gains and setbacks and thereby be able to correct our mistakes and build on our corrections. Let us take pride in our war and our countless gains but never become 131

complacent for although the enemy is battered and dazed he has not yet been knocked out, and let us thus never forget that only a dead imperialist is a good one. Let us thank and never forget our allies, especially the Frontline States and the socialist countries and progressive organisations. Let us continually bear in mind the people’s untold suffering and be inspired by such suffering into fighting harder; let us make our war the people’s war. Let us for ever despise and abhor the traitors, renegades and quislings who have chosen to uphold the white settlers’ cause and to work against the people’s cause. Let us make their fate identical with the fate of the settlers. Let us with revolutionary zeal and in spirit, word and deed say ever more thunderously: Pamberi neChimurenga! A Luta Continua! 132 x

22. Liberate Yourselves

Speech on Takawira Day: August 8, 1978

Leopold Mukumwaidzi Tapfumaneyi Takawira was born in 1906 in Chilimanzi, Zimbabwe. He was educated at various schools including Kutama Mission, Makwiro, before going to Holy Cross Mission near Fort Victoria. He was such a brilliant and diligent student — always hungering and thirsting for more knowledge. His hopes and wishes were soon fulfilled when he was admitted at Mariannhill College, Natal, in fascist South Africa where he matriculated. After matriculation and acquiring a teacher training diploma, he returned home to join the teaching profession, where he proved so capable, that he soon became headmaster of a Government school in Highfield. The thirst and hunger for more education, however continued. So, in 1952 when he was already an established educator and headmaster, he decided to enter Pius XII University College, Roma, Lesotho to read for the Bachelor of Arts degree. He did, however, not stay for the three required years to earn the degree, but he had read widely in the fields of classics, literature, history, administration and political science. Back in Zimbabwe in 1954, Comrade Takawira rejoined the teaching profession. He soon became a member and leader of the African Teacher’s Association (A.T.A.), wherein he actively worked in organizing other African teachers in order to improve their rights, salaries, working conditions and the equality of education given to the African students. At the time, no legislation had been enacted forbiding teachers from participating in politics. In 1954, he was transferred to Driefontein Mission in the Midlands but he was soon back in Salisbury, where he was able to participate in the early development and growth of African Nationalism. Soon thereafter, Comrade Takawira joined the Voice Association led by B.B. Burombo, in which, for a brief period, he served as a committee 133

member. He also became a member of the old African National Congress, which had been formed in the early 1930’s. It did not take long before the politics of the old ANC and African Voice Association were transformed, by the peoples’ national grievances into agitation. The birth of the Salisbury Youth League in 1955/1956 marked the end of the beginning. It also signified the beginning of the new politics that emerged with the birth of the new Southern Rhodesia African National Congress in September 1957, which incorporated and superseded the Youth League. Comrade Takawira became a member of the new organization. Following the ban of the ANC in February 1959, Comrade Takawira and others prepared and paved the way for the formation of the NDP in January 1960. The new organization was led by Michael Mawema. Comrade Takawira became founder-member of the NDP and chairman of its Harare Branch. Later in the year, he became President of the NDP when Michael Mawema resigned. The NDP was banned in 1961 by the racist government of Edgar Whitehead, but soon thereafter the Zimbabwe African Peoples’ Union (ZAPU) was formed in December 1961. Comrade Takawira was a member of the National Executive, one of its most popular members, and a very active participant in the then popular mass organization. His popularity was due to his untiring participation and the very active role he played in relaying messages of liberation to his fellow comrades. It was typical of him, for example, to address five rallies in three days as he did on the 12th, 13th and 14th of April 1962, when he spoke at rallies in Tsonzo, Chikore, Chirinda, Bocha in Marange and at Florida Hall in Umtali. In Umtali he held his coloured audience spell-bound throughout the meeting. It was at this meeting, that he told the coloured population, to realize where they really belonged and to remember that their British fathers did not care for them. He also spoke of mental colonization, and told his audience, that it was beyond the imagination of colonized minds to accept that an African could ever become Prime Minister. The racist Rhodesian police were following every speech he made. It was at this juncture that the fascist police decided to arrest him. Early, during the 1961 constitutional talks, Comrade Takawira was in London, as the NDP representative. This conference ended up ina sell-out agreement giving only 15 seats out of a house of 65 seats to the African people of Zimbabwe. Comrade Takawira, who always had the people’s interests at heart, outrightly condemned the 1961 sell-out constitutional agreement, even before he left London. One of Comrade Takawira’s outstanding abilities which other 134 s, nationalist lacked was that he could immediately point out anything that was against the interests of the Zimbabwean masses, despite the existence of the repressive laws passed by the Edgar Whitehead colonial regime. Where he addressed a rally, Comrade Takawira was accused of breaking the fascist Law and Order (Maintenance) Act, which among other things stated that every political activity was subject to governmental approval as means of silencing African Nationalists. Subsequently, nearly after every meeting, he was accused of being subversive in his speeches. At one of his meetings in Mashaba in 1962, Comrade Takawira was arrested on the platform by the racist Rhodesian police. The racist Magistrate sentenced him to 14 days imprisonment. The days were increased to 28, but Comrade Takawira still demanded for more, after which the embarrassed racist magistrate refused to make a further increment. The masses, mostly peasants from the surrounding areas and from Chibi District, came rioting, wielding axes, and demanded the release of Comrade Takawira. He was released the same day. Although this hostile attitude of the racists towards the late first VicePresident of ZANU, foreshadowed his future death at the hands of the racist, and imperialist agents led by Ian Smith, this did not scare or deter him from his work; instead, he increased his activities in the interests of the masses. The death of Comrade Tichafa Parirenyatwa, who was the VicePresident of ZAPU, was followed by the ban on ZAPU, and all the leaders and activists were detained in 1962. Comrade Takawira, together with his colleagues — like the late Chairman of ZANU, Comrade Herbert Chitepo, actively contributed in formulating a new line of action for the liberation of the Zimbabwean people, which could meet the demands of the new historical revolutionary epoch. At this period, Africa was still in its initial stages of fighting against colonialism, that led to the formation of the OAU, which had its first meeting in Addis Ababa — Ethiopia, in 1963. The Zimbabwe nationalist leaders were also present, to present their problems. Shamefully, no programme was presented, as was the case with other delegations. They wanted to form a Government in exile, but without any army or trained men. Different opinions appeared in the minds of various Zimbabweans towards the leadership of the then only nationalist organisation in Zimbabwe. The majority of the leaders (ratio of about 7-— 5), decided on forming a new organization, with new policies, ideologies, and methodology. Comrade Takawira and his colleagues left Tanzania towards the end of August 1963, where they had gone when they decided on a govern135

ment in exile. They returned home solely to implement the new decisive step-ahead in the struggle which they had planned. This led to the formation of ZANU — The Zimbabwe African National Union, on the 8th of August 1963, in Highfields Township, Salisbury — Comrade Takawira was actively involved as co-founder of the party. He became Vice President. The Party’s programme aroused the morale of the masses, who were quick to respond because the founder-members of the new party — ZANU, were in close links with the masses of the people of Zimbabwe, cutting across all the classes within the Zimbabwe society. For instance, Comrade Takawira had most of his supporters among the youth, because he had intense interest and faith in youth activities. After the Party, ZANU, had sunk deep roots within the people, the First Congress was held in Gwelo on May 22, 1964, where he was elected as its first Vice-President. The youth were organized for sabotage, with Comrade Takawira being one of the activists performing this task. The enemy discovered in him a zealous revolutionary and an ardent believer in violent armed struggle. The ban of ZANU on August 26, 1964, was then followd by the arrest of all the ZANU leadership and activists, who were detained at Whawha detention camp. Throughout his stay in detention, the enemy kept his eye on Comrade Takawira, because he was a man of uncompromising principles and dynamism. In 1965, before rebel lan Smith’s notorious UDI, he led a delegation from detention to meet Arthur Bottomley, a British envoy, for constitutional talks on the independence problems of Zimbabwe. Comrade Takawira and his delegation went to the airport where they denounced the intended treacherous manoeuvre, before Arthur Bottomley could land. Comrade Takawira held a press conference, after which Bottomley tried to have private talks with him. This, the first Vice-President of ZANU, firmly rejected, and proceeded to openly denounce Arthur Bottomley. Comrade Leopold Takawira was an obstacle to the racist plans of Ian Smith and his settler regime. As a result, the racists planned to disrupt his political career by terminating his life. One day, while he was in detention in the Sikombela Forests, Comrade Takawira was taken to Connemara Prison privately, where he was brutally tortured by the racist police murder squad. From there he was taken to Salisbury prison. In spite of all these brutalities and untold hardship, he did not draw back but instead persisted in actively advising and strengthening the stand of his colleagues to oppose UDI, colonialism, settlerism and national capitulationism. He was unwell for five years after the tortures. 136 Because of the injuries sustained from brutal torture and ill treatment by the fascist Rhodesian police, Zimbabwe was robbed of one of its most precious sons on June 15, 1970, and the whole country wept. The pains of the loss of Comrade Takawira were clearly reflected in the headline of the newspaper Moto, which read: ‘‘The lion roars no more — lying in Chilimanzi’’. Comrade Takawira was buried at his home in Chilimanzi. This was ‘the end of a great revolutionary — Comrade Leopold Tapfumaneyi Takawira, the first Vice-President of ZANU, who had lived and finally died for the struggle, murdered by the imperialist apologists of Ian Smith. Even though they killed him, his words and inspiration shall forever live in the hearts and minds of the people of Zimbabwe. When commemorating the death of Comrade Takawira, we must also remember the countless heroic comrades, who died in the enemy detention camps, prisons and concentration camps and in the battlefields, where they were engaged in the titanic struggle against agents of imperialism. The only way for honouring these beloved heroes, is through total dedication to the struggle and final liberation of the fatherland. Zimbabwe — by the final liquidation of all forms of oppression. ‘‘A ` revolutionary never dies but falls, and continues to live in his deeds and in our hearts.’’ 137

23. Victory is the only Tribute to a Hero

Speech on Chitepo Day: March 18, 1979

Herbert Chitepo fell today four years ago. His death was as untimely as it was tragic. It was on the morning of March 18, 1975 that, as he was in the process of driving his car from the yard of his house in Lusaka, the explosion which took his life and that of two others, Comrade Shamiso and a Zambian child, occurred. As the enemy felt jubilant that his shot had successfully hit the target, the whole membership of ZANU, a vast percentage of the Zimbabwean masses, our allies, friends and supporters in the international community were joined together by shock and bereavement in a common cause enjoining all to carry on the noble mission Comrade Chitepo had left unaccomplished. In Salisbury, all the members of the ZANU Central Committee came together in Highfield as soon as the news of Chitepo’s death had gone round, and organised a mourning ceremony attended by thousands of enraged mourners, including Chitepo’s only surviving sister, her husband and other relatives. Addressing this huge crowd of our members, supporters, sympathisers and Chitepo’s relatives, on behalf of the Party, I emphasized that the death of Chitepo would continue to stir us into a greater resolve and commitment in our pursuance of the struggle until victory was achieved. I remember asking the people to give us just a little more time to readjust and reorganise ourselves so we could carry on the fight to the finish. Why, you may ask, did we really need more time? What readjustment and reorganisation need to be done? These questions can be answered by a little historical sketch. Chitepo leads revolutionary council In May 1964, at the Gwelo Congress of the Party, Comrade Chitepo had been elected Chairman of ZANU with definite functions in the Party. But in 1965, as most members of the Central Committee found them138 5 it became necessary for somebody to function on behalf of the Central Committee in promoting the national struggle for liberation through the instrumentality of war. It was the Central Committee which the Gwelo Congress had specifically charged with the responsibility of organising the national struggle. And so it now became the duty of the Central Committee as it stood physically fettered to decide to delegate this vital function to those members of the Central Committe who were outside the country, and so away from the threat of arrest, detention and restriction. We accordingly decided: e That there should be formed outside the country a Revolutionary Council comprising in the main all the Central Committee members abroad plus such other available prominent members as it was possible to co-opt; e That this Revolutionary Council would be headed by Comrade Chitepo, who also was to take the initiative in bringing about its formation; That the Revolutionary Council would organise the Liberation War in terms of the recruitment and training of fighters, their equipment and deployment; e That the Revolutionary Council would remain subordinate and accountable to the Central Committee. Indeed, the Revolutionary Council had come into being at the beginning of 1966 under the chairmanship of Comrade Chitepo. Indeed, it had launched armed struggle in April of that year as seven valiant ZANLA fighters fought the courageous Battle of Sinoia. Indeed, the Revolutionary Council had now transformed into DARE RECHIMURENGA (the Supreme Military Council). Indeed, the liberation struggle had, by December 1972, taken a new and most favourable turn with the launching of the north-eastern offensive and the opening of our first real operation front. These were by any standard great achievements in the development of the revolutionary struggle. The sudden death of Chitepo now heralded a well-knit, well-rehearsed enemy strategy to reverse the historical process we had set in motion. Why enemy killed Chitepo As the death occurred ZANU, which had been coerced into an alliance with reactionary and renegade forces in the UANC headed by the inept and head-nodding stooge, Bishop Abel Muzorewa, was fighting for its 139 f \ f i 1 1 fl | I | f] i | selves restricted by the enemy regime to Sikombela in the area of Gokwe,

political survival as a Party. The enemy’s political strategy was to get us so completely submerged that our identity as a Party would vanish, thus creating a favourable situation for the emergence of a reactionary leadership preferred by him and his agents. The enemy’s military strategy was to assassinate the external leader of our liberation war, lay the blame upon the entirety of the Supreme Military Council (DARE RECHIMURENGA) and the High Command as a pretext for destroying them so as to put an end to the war. Let it not be forgotten that the creation of the ANC in December 1974, the death of Chitepo in March 1975, the subsequent arrest of members of the Dare, the arrest of members of the High Command and the arrest of over two thousand of our cadres in Zambia, the deliberate blocking of reinforcements to the north-eastern front, the nauseating demand for a cease-fire and the persistent requirement that we negotiate with racist Ian Smith, were all components of the strategy of the detente exercise of 1974-1975. These events put us off-balance. We thus needed to reorganise and readjust ourselves so our Party could once more reassert itself as the only revolutionary movement in the country. We had to turn the defensive war we had been compelled to fight in the north-east into an offensive war and extend our operations to the other geographic zones of the country. We just had to wriggle out of the clutches of the ANC and its complete lack of revolutionary concern and re-establish the Party as the overall planner and director of the national struggle. As a Party, when we now look back to 1975 and in retrospect scan the four years that have gone by in terms of our performance as a liberation movement, viewing our achievements against the gruesome background of assassination, plots, arrests and contrived accusations led by the enemy at our extinction, the wonder, indeed the miracle, is that we have accomplished so much in our revolutionary struggle. On the contrary, the enemy has, despite his inexhaustible military resources, been fighting a losing war struggle in 1976. Because of its irrevocable commitment to the unjust cause of preserving a racist and undemocratic system, the rebel settler regime has been massively rejected by the toiling masses, as indeed it has been decisively rejected by the international community. As the people are a decisive factor in the liberation war of the nature we are fighting, our victory is as assured as the enemy’s defeat. In March 1979, we are certainly entitled to feel satisfied that to a very great extent we have paid fitting tribute to Comrade Chitepo and all other heroes in the only form they would accept as revolutionary, that is 140 by firing more bullets and liquidating the enemy in increasing numbers. We have achieved remarkable progress. Muzorewa and Sithole betray us It should, however, be constantly borne in mind that the enemy, though fast crumbling, is not yet defeated, and that currently he is resorting to tactics aimed at putting Africans against Africans. He is doing this with the fullest collaboration of his avowed stooges. We cannot forget that in 1975, when Herbert Chitepo died, Muzorewa was in Lusaka, having gone there to broadcast over Radio Zambia a cease-fire message to our Forces and the people of Zimbabwe. Now, four years later, Muzorewa, together with renegade Sithole, has become Smith’s ready partner in the internal scheme perpetuating white supremacy. Whereas four years ago, Muzorewa as a sonorous megaphone merely appealed to us to stop fighting the white man, has now definitely joined hands with his white bosses in fighting his own people. The case of Chakandiwana Sithole has even more aggravating circumstances. Up to the time of the death of Chitepo, Sithole had worked with us in raising ZANLA and leading the struggle for national liberation. But after the death of Chitepo, in utter dishonour of him, he switched sides and started on the most treacherous of any conceivable roads to an imagined position of power. Like Muzorewa, he too has joined hands with the enemy to fight the very army and the very fighters he once strove to raise. To our joy, both these idiotic characters now find themselves trapped between the vengeful wrath of the revolutionary masses and the intransigence of the settler minority to their quest for political power. Thus caught between the two forces Scylla and Charybdis, they have no choice but await their damnation. These irreligious characters, who value their personal glory more than the freedom of the masses, who pray to the whiteman as their only god and are pledged to sacrifice the whole black race to appease their monstrous deity, have become impervious to reason and immune to morality. For what man of reason would opt as they have done for continued white minority rule? What man of morality would join forces with the white oppressor in the brutal massacres of his own people? Muzorewa and Sithole are irretrievably heading for their damnation. Those whom the gods wish to destroy they first make mad! - The vast oppressed masses under the guidance of our Party have resolved to have absolutely nothing to do with the internal settlement and reject as well all the puppet leaders associated with it and the fraudulent 141

elections proposed under it for April. We completely refuse to be identified in any way with any white supremacist, scheme perpetuating the subjugation of our seven million people. We thus also refuse to participate in the elections meant to legitimise the settler minority regime. Our immediate objective Our main task today as we remind ourselves that the sad death of Comrade Chitepo and Comrade Shamiso is no other than to strengthen ourselves in our affirmed stand to move in their footsteps and refuse to be enticed into betraying the revolution. Arising from this solemn undertaking are the ancillary tasks which demand accomplishment by all our people and our ZANLA forces. We must, all of us, address ourselves this day to the scheduled fraudulent elections as follows: e Every Zimbabwean has a duty to boycott the deceitful elections completely and refuse to vote even if enemy guns are pointed at you / him / her. e The phoney elections must be totally disrupted wherever, whenever and however the enemy tries to hold them. Our ZANLA forces have a duty to guide and protect the masses during the bogus elections. e Any enemy forces or any persons whatsoever interferring with the masses in order to coerce them into the bogus elections must be routed. All our people are earnestly requested to follow the directives issued by the Party through our victorious ZANLA forces. There should be oneness of action and a complete identity between the masses and our forces for our cause is one — the defeat of the enemy and the attainment of national independence. We should thus unite in killing the elections as we have united in defeating the enemy in many areas of the country. If we continue to stand together under the banner of the Party and the banner of freedom, true freedom for the seven million oppressed masses, we shall certainly win. It is total victory which constitutes the optimum tribute to our dead heroes like the late Comrade Chitepo. In this Year of the People’s Storm, Gore reGukurahundi, we intend, as we stated at the beginning of the year, resolutely to fulfil our eleven tasks, and proceed to encircle and annihilate the enemy until total power is vested in the people. Already, remarkable progress has been made in that direction. The additional task I am giving all our people on behalf of the Party 142 is to ignore completely the results of the phoney elections and continue to lend full and active support of the ZANLA forces. Victory is not only certain, it is also imminent. I wish to thank all of those of our unyielding supporters who refused to be intimidated by the enemy into voting against their will, and there were millions of you. You did well to save the honour of the people of Zimbabwe. To all ZANLA forces who performed magnificently in our anti-election campaign by guiding, directing and protecting the people, we say to you Zimbabwe owes a debt of profound gratitude. It was a task well fulfilled. We are proud of you. We have the fullest support of the Frontline States, the OAU and the United Nations and of all progressive forces of the world over. If we work much harder, we shall soon be victorious over Smith and his puppets. The spirit of Sinoia must go on. The people can never lose. It is the puppets and their masters who are losing. 143

24. A Revolutionary never dies

Speech on Takawira Day: June 15, 1979

Today we commemorate for the ninth occasion the tragic death of our late Vice President, Comrade Leopold Tapfumaneyi Takawira. The manner of his death has been described on each of the previous occasions we have commemorated. As we remember him, we are also reminded, and have been constantly reminded, that the enemy callously murderous in nature, is always seeking for various ways and various means of destroying our revolutionary struggle. He not only conducts massacre campaigns against the civilian population, both within Zimbabwe and without, but he also plots and perpetrates the extermination of individual leaders. Indeed, the bloody hand of imperialism has manifested itself in this inhuman direction in colonial situations undergoing the process of transformation through the instrumentality of national struggle, especially where such struggle assumes an armed character. In the case of Portuguese colonies, we saw both FRELIMO and PAIGC, suffering like ZANU has done, the irreparable loss, through naked assassination of their leaders, Dr Eduardo Mondlane and Amilcar Cabral respectively. The enemy assassinated Eduardo Mondlane by a parcel bomb and Amilcar Cabral by bullets. The methods employed by the Rhodesian settler regime have not been dissimilar to those employed by the Portuguese. The late Comrade Takawira died of harsh and cruel imprisonment which created conditions under which he contracted a malady which the settler doctors refused to diagnose and for which care and treatment were completely denied him. This has been but one method the enemy has employed in his evil attempts to eliminate the nationalist leadership and disrupt the revolutionary struggle. As you are aware, the enemy has employed other equally deadly methods of assassination and savage treatment of our people. 144 s Loss turned to victories It is now exactly nine years since the enemy caused the death of our late Vice President. During this period, our armed struggle not only got replanned and re-oriented, but it also acquired a people’s base and gathered a fresh momentum when in December 1972 a new enemydazzling offensive was begun and the first real operation front was created in the north-eastern part of the country. Four years later in 1976, our ZANLA forces forged two additional fronts in the east and southeastern zones of the country. Since then, we have proceeded to extend our operational zones and transform the earlier operational areas into liberated zones and consolidated revolutionary base areas. Thus, in several areas of the country, our people have become completely freed from the enemy’s suppressive control and are now organised into popular collective power units, the various people’s committees running their own affairs on a collective social basis. In defence of these zones of power, the people have raised militia units and maintained the highest level of vigilance possible. Such zones of freedom and self-determination are growing by the day and fast encroaching upon the dwindling enemy’s urban strongholds, where ' already economic life is undergoing a process of purposeful and wellcalculated disruption, as the lines of communication between one city and another are being effectively severed and economic targets within and without those cities are constantly being attacked. The Rutenga line linking Rhodesia’s settlerdom with South Africa’s boerdom has been rendered permanently in-operative for several months. The SmithMuzorewa empire is crumbling even before it was able to stand on its feet. This, briefly, has been the impact and pace of the struggle since the sad death of our beloved Vice-President. If Comrade Takawira had remained alive, he would have been extremely gratified to see certain of the qualities he possessed as a true revolutionary manifested in practice. For just as he was a valiant revolutionary fighter, dedicated, loyal to the Party and the cause, disciplined, brave, daring and unyielding, so are most of our ZANLA forces valiant fighters, dedicated, loyal to the Party and the cause, disciplined, brave, daring and unyielding. It is these qualities that go to make victory while their absence makes for defeat. Struggle demands total commitment Let us examine them and weigh their significance in relation to the national and class struggle we are waging. First, our national struggle being 145

in objectives and by the nature of its means, not just a revolutionary struggle but an armed revolutionary struggle, demands of us all, the leadership, cadreship and the totality of our straggling masses, full commitment and absolute dedication. In this regard, a high level of political and ideological consciousness becomes, not merely the motivation behind, but also the common base of our commitment to, and participation in the national struggle. Secondly, political and ideological consciousness must, as it enhances our great understanding and appreciation, also invoke in us unswerving loyalty to the Party and the just cause it champions. The Party charts the political and ideological line which must provide us, if we are its loyal and faithful members, with the only correct direction worth following and the only valid basis on which we can all become united as fighters with a common cause — the cause of freedom and national independence. This is certainly the basis on which we refer to ourselves sometimes as revolutionaries and at other times as freedom fighters. Thirdly, loyalty to the Party, presupposing as it does a high level of political consciousness and not mere sheepishness or blind following, prompts within each true member an inner sense of order and orderliness that dictates conformity in behaviour and regulates our inter-actions and relationships with each other as revolutionaries bound by the same objectives. Our struggle is thus a high form of discipline demanding a definite inner and outward pattern of behaviour from each participant. The orders of the commander would undoubtedly fall on deaf ears and invoke no reaction if the forces he is commanding have acquired no inner patterns of discipline. A high sense of discipline is therefore a prerequisite to effective operation and thus a precondition to victory. Its contrary, indiscipline, is not only an outward state of chaos and disorganisation on the part of an individual and individuals suffering from it, but also speaks of an inner state of chaos and disorganisation on the particular individual or individuals evincing it. Indiscipline, being a low level of political consciousness, is thus the surest precondition to defeat. Fortunately for us, our ZANLA forces have by and large, demonstrated a high sense of discipline as against the enemy’s forces whose chaotic and completely unprincipled behaviour has led to their suffering numerous defeats, losses and the capture of many of their forces, especially the detestable auxiliary forces now surrendering in their hundreds to our forces, Fourthly, a committed revolutionary fighter motivated as he is by a high degree of political consciousness and powered by a high sense of discipline is brave, daring and unyielding. 146 Bravery and daring are qualities absolutely necessary in an army that wants to achieve victory. They emanate from the underlying quality of dedication and commitment that defies opportunism and demands of us maximum sacrifice. Many of our fallen heroes have, like Comrade Takawira, chosen death rather than succumb to the enemy and do his bidding. On the contrary, avowed opportunists and crawling stooges, like Ndabaningi Sithole and Abel Muzorewa, lacking a revolutionary commitment and the spirit of sacrifice, have easily capitulated to the enemy and become not only his most faithful dogs but also his most sonorous megaphones. Just imagine the idiocy of a person who, as Muzorewa is doing, claims that as puppet Prime Minister he, and not his white masters, has power over the army. We must admit that one good effect of the process of our revolutionary struggle has been the winnowing out of all political chaff and opportunists and categorising them as a class of their own, opposed to the general interest of the broad masses and pursuing individual rather than collective interests. Takawira’s dedication — our yardstick Today is thus a day of reflection. The reflection must proceed in two dimensions, vertical and horizontal. The vertical reflective process is a process of self-examination and self-analysis using the qualities of a hero like the late Comrade Takawira as criteria. It is the measurement of the self in terms of the qualitative demands upon him from the revolution. Each one of us should, through introspection, therefore, subject himself to thorough self-criticism by posing himself the question whether he possesses the following qualities: e The unswerving loyalty of a true member of ZANU to the Party and its principles. e The behaviour and discipline expected of every member of the Party regardless of his status and requiring that we obey orders. e Full commitment to the struggle and high sense of sacrifice that accepts death and suffering for the just cause. e Courage and bravery, requiring that we take risks as we show our readiness to make sacrifices. e Endurance in the face of hardships and a determination to overcome them and turn our disadvantages into advantages. e Industry, the spirit always to work hard and perform every task given us both completely and satisfactorily. 147

e Vigilance, an ever present state of mind that controls our tongues but sharpens our eyes and ears in defence of the Party, its principles and its leadership. e The determination and preparedness to learn and continue learning in order to acquire new skills, new insights, new tactics, and new experience, for the improvement of our performance, so we can transform our revolutionary struggle by first transforming ourselves as individuals. These are only some, but by no means all, the requirements expected of a revolutionary. However, it should be borne in mind that we are not in the revolution as individuals but as part of a collective entity comprising the broad masses of Zimbabwe. That is why we now talk of our war as a People’s War. It is, therefore, necessary that the vertical process of introspection, of self-examination be followed by the horizontal process of examining our inter-action and the working relationships existing between us. Our late Vice-President was never an individualist, but a beloved personality who raised cheering crowds wherever he went. He never entertained false rumours, gossip and clandestine activities critical and destructive of others and aimed at promoting particular individuals or group interests. He was in every sense an objective, open-minded and honest person. He strove to unite and not to divide or disunite people. Let us examine ourselves, therefore, in terms of our relations with others and see how much our actions from day to day promote correct relationships and preserve a viable social base for unity. Only when we act from such a collective base can the qualities enumerated above acquire any revolutionary significance. The orders the leaders give must invoke ready response from the subordinates, while the requests and grievances of the subordinates must also receive due attention by the seniors. But it must be understood that the orders from the top should always have the quality of orders — they must be just and proper! Similarly, the requests and grievances from the juniors must be just in order to merit proper attention. Whilst we should recognise the role and status given us by the Party, there should constantly exist the common denominator — the equaliser — the persistent fact of our comradeship and the mutual respect that it demands, from those below for those at the top and from those at the top for those below. Comradeship demands the spirit of tolerance and desire to educate others. We should always try to invoke in others a greater degree of con148 sciousness than they have and help to transform them into better revolutionaries than they are. This way alone can we claim to be walking in the footsteps of such a hero like the late Leopold Takawira. If in the past we have not tried to act as he did, I ask you all to try to do so from this moment. 149

V. International Solidarity, External Relations and Various Interviews

25. Church and State in Independent Zimbabwe

Sr Janice: The Christian Churches in Africa are often accused of having worked hand in hand with colonialism. What is your view of the role the Churches have played in Zimbabwe? Mugabe: The accusation is justified to a very great extent. If you study the history of the Church in South Africa, Zimbabwe and elsewhere in Africa you will discover that originally the Church tended to side with the colonial authorities. Colonialism itself was completely wrong and unchristian but the Churches at first held it as justified. Missionaries came to Africa to spread the gospel but in the process of opening the way for themselves in jungles of Africa as they called them, they also opened the way to colonialism. Society became organized on the basis of race and the Churches supported the racist and oppressive legislation to a very great extent. Land was divided between the races. In our own case the Land Apportionment Act of 1930 and later the Land Tenure Act of 1969 assigned land purely on the basis of colour. The best land was given to the whites and the most, even though the Africans were in the majority. The Churches and schools were all divided on this basis. There was compulsory education for whites that didn’t apply to the blacks | and the whites were able to send their children to schools without even paying the fees the Africans were forced to pay. Naturally the best | ; An interview with Sr Janice McLaughlin | | | | | schools were for the whites. That’s still the system in Rhodesia and the Churches supported it on the whole. | ; ; ; ; But there came a time, and I think this was a result of the rise of nationalism in Zimbabwe, when the Churches started to adjust. In | 7 153 gradual stages they worked against the racial patterns and their voice was heard in criticism of government laws especially the Land Tenure Act and the colour bar that applies in the’ socio-economic system. When UDI (Unilateral Declaration of Independence) was declared in 1965 the Churches were among the first institutions to denounce the Act and to refuse to accept that it would promote social justice in the country. The Churches, therefore, have played a role in the past which tended to be supportive of the regime, of minority rule in our country, but by and large they have now adjusted to reality. We are happy to say that as we operate we find much assistance and support from the Church. It is only in respect to a few Churches that we remain unsatisfied. Of course, the Dutch Reformed Church is opposed to majority rule, but even in their case, they have now Africanised and put Africans in control. Sr Janice: From ZANU’s formation in 1963, how has it related to the Churches? Mugabe: ZANU has had good relations with the Churches. We derive our backgrounds, all of us, from association with the Churches, from having been brought up in Christian institutions. Even where some people ended up by going to a state school they still had a background of some Christian education. Though the majority of us who went to school have gone through missions, this does not mean that we all agree on the role the Churches have played in our struggle. Various viewpoints are held. Some people believe that the Churches have played a retrogressive part. Others feel that in the past the Churches have played a retrogressive role and then tended to move in the direction of progress. You also get a segment which believes that African religion has tended to give way to Christian and foreign religions and these must be given room or scope for development. Our Party accommodates all kinds of religious views whether they be Christian or traditional African religious beliefs. At this stage we believe in mobilising all forces which agree with us in the destruction of the colonial system and the establishment of a government deriving its authority from the majority of the people. We believe in working in harmony with all Church institutions and with all progressive forces that accept this objective. We also maintain that as we operate in the country just now the 154 reality of our social religious system must be taken into account. The Churches, by and large, are the dominant influence among our people. They have established schools, hospitals and clinics in the rural areas and they are there to serve the people. We have adopted the policy that we must deliberately work together with them, seek their assistance, get them to understand what we are fighting for, that our cause is not anti-Christian — it’s anti-imperialism and anticolonialism — and that the Churches should assist us in attaining the objective of a just society. So wherever we operate we appeal to the Churches for help. We appeal to them to allow us to politicise the people under their control because we believe that everybody must be mobilised so that the total commitment of our people can be achieved. We have had immense response from the Churches in various areas. Only in very rare cases have we encountered opposition from the Churches. Sr Janice: The killing of missionaries was widely publicised in the West and has resulted in a lot of negative opinion about the liberation forces who were blamed for the murders. Can you explain your stand on these incidents? Mugabe: Well it stands to reason that if we are committed to working in harmony with the missionaries and their institutions, we can’t at the same time be working for their destruction and annihilation. We proceed from the principle that the war we are fighting is a just war which must necessarily be supported by all those dedicated to the principles of justice and fair play in society, and accordingly we cannot work against missionaries who support these goals. Also quite a high percentage of our people are devout Christians who practise their religious beliefs. We accept this reality. We are not there to persuade people to abandon their religious convictions. No. We are there to promote the good there is in Christianity, together with the missionaries who are capable, we cannot at the same time do something against them. Now there is this propaganda that we want to destroy the Churches and that the missionaries at Musami and at Elim Mission in recent times have been killed by our forces. We have denied it and we continue to deny it. We are sincere about this. We are in no way responsible for those killings. We have made full enquiries and in every case the reports we received point to the possibility that these assassinations have been committed by the Selous Scouts. It must be realized 155

that some of the forces Smith has been recruiting, including mercenaries from Vietnam, have no shame or restraint when it comes to shooting blacks. They are just cowards in camouflage. They are conditioned to kill and they enjoy it. They just go around assassinating people and we believe that it is they who are responsible Obviously it’s not possible for us to establish conclusively the fact that they have done it, but circumstantial evidence points in this direction Then the question may be asked, really what do we stand to gain by killing missionaries? What do we ever stand to gain? Does that promote our military progress in any way? Aren’t we capable of establishing by virtue of purely logical reasons, that an act of this nature would be a set-back to our revolution? Let nobody doubt us when we say we did not commit these acts of brutality. Our performance in the battlefields, which is supported by various reports, speaks of the great harmony existing between us and the people whereas Smith’s own performance speaks of atrocities as exemplified by the callous and indiscriminate attacks on refugee camps — Nyadzonia where his troops killed some 700 of our people, and last year Chimoio and Tembue where another 300 were riurdered His troops go all out to brutally commit such massacres. We operate on the principle that the war we’re fighting is a people’s war and therefore derives its support from the masses. We can’t at the same time be killing these masses — and when we talk of the masses we don’t Just mean the blacks themselves. We mean everybody — black white or coloured. They are the people. And finally when we establish our society we hope these non-racial features will predominate. Sr Janice: ZANU has stated that it is guided by Marxist-Leninist principles and this has aroused fears in some Christian circles that it will attempt to stamp out religion. It has also been used by Smith when he claims that he is fighting to defend Christianity against Communism What in fact is ZANU’s policy toward religion? Mugabe. I don’t understand how the Christian Churches can be repelled by Marxism and Leninism. To tell you the truth I don’t understand it They may not accept perhaps what they call the godlessness of materialism, but the basis of organizing society which brings people to work together to avoid rampant individualism seems to be in harmon at least with the Catholic Church. The other Churches where the = sionaries work on a semi-collective basis but mind their own inye affairs — well I probably could understand their opposition < 156 s But I can’t understand the Catholics saying that the basis of collective organization is unchristian when in fact this is the manner in which they organize themselves. They work together. They live together. They don’t have individual property. And this is precisely what we would like to establish. And then there is the aspect of love which comes into it. When they preach of love what do they mean? Is there love when Rockefeller exploits the whole society and purely by virtue of inheritance or his having speculated and built up capital he acquires property at the expense of society and exploits his labour. I don’t think that’s Christian love. I think the Christian Churches must take a new look at the doctrine of Marx and Lenin. True, Marx made some statements which are unpalatable, such as that religion is the opium of the masses, but Marx still conceded that people must be allowed freedom to believe as well as not to believe. Societies aspiring to Marxist-Leninism allow religion to be practiced. I’ve been in Ethiopia where the majority of the people are Christian — either belonging to the Orthodox Church or to Western Christianity — and the government has accepted that. In Vietnam I went to Ho Chi Minh City, the former Saigon, and a great gathering was organized for me by the Communist party and comprised, apart from the party officials, the Buddhist and the Christian religious leaders, the deputies of the assembly, the former puppet generals as they call them, and the Fang representing the Chinese nationals. This is how they are going about the achievement of their independence as a sovereign power. They are organising everybody to work together to contribute toward the reconstruction of society. Similarly in Hanoi where independence came much earlier and the transformation also took place earlier the Churches continue to function and the state has adopted a kind of impartial viewpoint about it. I don’t believe that Marxist-Leninism runs counter to Christian practice, if one emphasizes practice. I think the organization of society on Marxist-Leninist principles is the best thing that could ever occur in the sphere of trying to get people to work together towards building a harmonious society. The individualism of the West allows so many contradictions and we have had a perpetual state of conflict between those who have and those who have not. This is not to say that people must completely be deprived of their personal property — of course not. And we ourselves say that we can never apply Marxist-Leninist principles in the same way that they have been applied in the Soviet Union or China or even here in Mozambique. These principles as we apply them must take into account our own 157 local situation, our history and traditions so that we end up with a system that is in accord with the aspirations of our own people. As far as ZANU is concerned we would allow the free practice of religion, any religion whatsoever. After all, religion is a matter of conscience. Sr Janice: While many Churches support your goals, they often question the use of violence to attain them. What is your response to the criticism of the armed struggle? Mugabe: The Church will be acting unfairly if it criticises the violent aspect of the struggle. If people resort to violence for violence sake then obviously the Church must raise her voice in criticism, but where people have pursued their struggle for liberation firstly through nonviolence, by appeal to the powers that be to improve their lot and bring about change that would satisfy the majority, then I cannot understand them. Our struggle started by being non-violent. It assumed some measure of violence which was aimed at the destruction of property during the days of the ANC (African National Congress), even the old ANC before 1957. People used to pass resolutions year in and year out and no change ever took place. In fact every year the situation became worse. Land became a bitter question because people did not have enough land to till and the little they had was very poor. Schooling was inferior and various other social ills increased. When the ANC and the Youth League then merged the measures adopted were still those of non-violence but aimed at drawing the attention of the British Government as well as that of the local authorities to the ills confronting the people. So you had boycotts, strikes and demonstrations but the problems were not solved. The ANC was banned in February 1959 and the leaders arrested and detained. Then the National Democratic Party was launched in January 1960. It was at that stage that I joined our nationalist politics, coming back into the country in about May of that year. The methods were still those of strikes and boycotts but in the NDP we decided to go a step further by adopting some measure of violence. This was when we started throwing petrol bombs at factories. The violence was not aimed at individuals. That again failed to win any results. We had massive demonstrations by women, thousands of whom were arrested and were detained in Salisbury or Bulawayo prisons. That too yielded no results, and the 158 * more we did that, the more we exposed our people to arrest and we felt this was being counter-productive. In ZAPU (Zimbabwe African People’s Union), we decided to drop the idea of mass ee and strikes and we resorted strictly to sabotage. Only nine ues S after ZAPU was formed in 1961 we were organizing this type of bene tage and causing damage to factories, farms and plantations. Bu i is yielded no results. l peo decided to go a step further and organize a struggle. At that stage we disagreed on how far we should go : ar split up. Those of us who wanted an outright campaign l or e ZANU (Zimbabwe African National Union) and we have a l wage armed struggle to this day. We believe it is the only way o n ing about peace. Armed struggle is not being waged for the ey : violence. It is an instrument for securing the necessary peace and the necessary justice in the country. Sr Janice: As you look ahead to the future, what do you see as the role of the Churches in a revolutionary Zimbabwe? Mugabe: This depends entirely on what the Churches themselves will feel they can do, but from the point of view of the State, I PEAN that quite a number of changes must occur and these changes mig 7 very well affect the role of the Church. For example, I believe that e pe tion should be organized by the State. Education is the basis, in i the source, of those vital skills which we’ll need to establish a n social order. So as far as its quantity and nature is concerned, t i State must organize education in line with the ideals and objectives 1 wants to achieve. This is not to say that the Churches should not be allowed to ed tise religion, and they should continue to operate such services as they have been running, health-clinics and so on, and also to teach. They should be allowed to organize teachers and to participate in the running of the educational system. . The Churches should not be tampered with when it comes to the practice of religion. However, I fear there might be some conflict between the Church and the State in the transformation of the socioeconomic system. The State, as I have said earlier, would want to work for the benefit of the masses rather than of individuals and so an educational system which is geared toward those goals would Da to be evolved. In the past, I think the Church has advocated the nace of people to educate their children as they please. Now you can't ee

160 it both ways. If you educate your children as you please, the State tends to lose because the State has certain definite goals to achieve and children must be educated according to thosé goals. i The State is not acting just as the State. It is acting as the voice of the people, the masses. This is why we say that our government must derive its authority from the masses. If the masses agree with us then there should not be any conflict between the Church and the State There should be harmony instead. So I believe that in the area of pure religion the State must not interfere, but in the area of socio-economic development the Church mus i t also not interfe State. re with the goals of the

26. We need Arms

Speech at the 15th OAU Summit in Khartoum in July 1978

On behalf of all the liberation movements, may I express our heartfelt thanks for being invited to this, the 15th Assembly of the Heads of State and Governments of the OAU. I wish to express our gratitude to his Excellency President Gaafar Niemery, the Government and the people of Sudan for hosting this 15th Assembly of the OAU and for the abundant hospitality and kindness being accorded us. It is not flattery to say that the Sudanese people are as insurpassable in their virtues of charity, kindness and simplicity, as they are in their endeavours to promote the cause of liberation, unity and co-operation in Southern Africa. The fact that they have hosted this summit is proof enough of their Government’s commitment to the fulfilment of the noble aims and objectives for which the OAU stands. We are indeed deeply indebted to them for their unswerving role in promoting materially our liberation struggles not only alongside other OAU States, but also on bilateral basis with individual liberation movements. We hope they will continue to do so until Africa is completely rid of imperialism and colonialism and the right of selfdetermination has been achieved in every part of the continent. Enemy vindictive raids Your Excellency, allow me to take this opportunity of expressing our appreciation and gratitude to the OAU in general and to the Liberation Committee in particular for the assistance given us since the last summit conference in Libreville towards our efforts in intensifying the liberation war in our respective countries. These inputs have, we are glad to say, created a new momentum in our respective theatres of struggle as the war got envigorated. We wish to single out for special mention the significant role played by the Frontline States over the year in fully supporting the double tactics of our strategy in Namibia and Zimbabwe of, firstly, continously intensifying our armed struggle and never allowing the graph to fall and secondly, negotiating with firmness with the colonial powers for our national independence. We believe that in these two situations victory is in sight. i And victory in Namibia and Zimbabwe will inevitably lead to the victory in South Africa. In providing their countries as the necessary rear to our war fronts, the Frontline States have in the process borne the brunt of the enemy’s vindictive raids resulting in heavy loss of civilian life and destruction of economic and civil installations in Mozambique, Zambia, Angola, Botswana. And yet far from slackening, the Frontline States have shown us in these grim circumstances an even greater determination to continue their support for our cause. We feel exceptionally indebted to them. We should also like to thank all those other states which over and above their contributions to the OAU, have extended to our movements material aid on a bilateral basis. We trust these countries will increase in number over the next year. Your Excellency, the scenario in each of our various countries depicts the intense conflict between the revolutionary forces and the resisting colonial forces. In Namibia, SWAPO, after systematically escalating armed struggle, not only succeeded in overthrowing the Turnhalle Strategy but also in driving Vorster into not only agreeing to negotiate with SWAPO but also into accepting that no constitutional agreement in Namibia could be viable without the blessing of SWAPO. We trust that the recent Luanda meeting will lead to a settlement capable of bestowing unfettered sovereignty upon the people of Namibia. Patriotic Front rejects internal settlement In Zimbabwe, the intensification of the liberation war by the Patriotic Front has forced the reactionary Smith regime to seek an unholy alliance with internally based puppet leaders in order to reply to the quest for national independence, with a contrived plan of fake independence, in the hope of off-setting the popular direction towards genuine independence. The Patriotic Front has unequivocally rejected the so-called internal agreement anc its architects. If the present military and political momentum is maintained, and this we are determined to do, the internal agreement will be as dead as the dodo before the year ends, and the road to victory will have to be shortened. At the same time as we are waging the armed struggle, the Patriotic Front has also been engaged in constitutional negotiations with the British government and their American friends. Unfortunately, the intransigence and equivocation of Britain which expresses her reluctance to 162 " E eee it df =i bring about genuine independence have led to the failure of the talks. The Patriotic Front has, in spite of this, expressed its willingness to attend a fully-fledged constitutional conference to discuss the independence constitution for a free Zimbabwe. There is no positive response yet from the British. In those circumstances there is no alternative but continued armed struggle. It should be mentioned that as the liberation war in Zimbabwe has grown hotter, the internal regime in its desperation has grown more genocidal and callous towards the civilian population, more especially in the face of growing solidarity between the people and the ZIPA fighting forces. That the racist regime is mowing down innocent civilians is a matter being carefully played down by the Western Press and other media. However, in spite of the numerous atrocities being perpetrated against them, the people of Zimbabwe remain firm in their resolve to prosecute their liberation war to the finish. In South Africa, the arrest of several armed freedom fighters is proof that the people of South Africa have now entered the stage of armed struggle. The situation is indeed ripe for revolution. Serious losses in South Africa l The people of South Africa have this year suffered serious losses in the fall of two of their heroes, Steve Biko, black consciousness leader and the President of PAC, Mangaliso Sobukwe. Both were men of courage and vision. We shall always miss them. Today as the 15th Assembly of the Heads of State and Government of the OAU convenes here in Khartoum, Nelson Mandela has reached the 60th year of his birth, a birthday which he is forced to celebrate in the precincts of prison on Robben Island. We, who are bound with him in his revolutionary principles and objectives must today rededicate ourselves to the just and selfless cause for which the South African racist regime has incarcerated him. We salute his indomitable courage and bravery. Incarceration, torture and political murders are part of the weaponry of the Vorster regime. And yet to the masses of South Africa these are but sources of further inspiration in their just struggle for liberation and the establishment of a fully democratic society. As mass mobilisation and the military action grow, the struggle in South Africa being heroically championed by both the African National Congress and the Pan Africanist Congress is reaching a stage where Vorster and his regime will be forced to reckon with the objective realities of the situation. In all our situations, Namibia, Zimbabwe and South Africa, the need to increase material aid is still great. We need arms — arms — arms. We 163

need training facilities. Give us these, please, we plead and we shall do the rest. Your Excellency, I wish to express our solidarity with our Palestinian brothers in their just struggle against Zionist colonialism. Their fight is our fight. We may also trust that the question of the Western Sahara will be resolved in a manner satisfactory to its people as led by POLISARIO. Lastly, the Patriotic Front wishes to thank its sister liberation movements — SWAPO, PAC and ANC for choosing it as their spokesman in their reply to the address by President Niemery. Thank you. 164

27. Once again: A luta continua!

An interview with the Mozambique News Agency (AIM) Aim: The Zimbabwe liberation struggle has reached the point at which Smith himself has admitted that his armed forces are not coping with the situation. His strategy now, he says, is to get Washington and London to support the ‘‘Internal Settlement’’. Are you concerned that there is now a real possibility of imperialist military intervention in your country? Mugabe: Yes. The invitation to Smith to visit the US, although it came from the Senators, had the blessing of the Carter administration, which gave him the visa. This is a development which causes us great anxiety. Previously, both the British and the Americans took the stand that the Smith regime had to be removed from power. Once we agreed on the necessary transitional arrangements leading to independence, it was necessary to be sure that any government established during the transition would be one that would exclude the Smith regime as such. The regime was to be disbanded, its forces dismantled and our forces were to constitute the base of a new army. Those requirements have now apparently become a thing of the past and the British and the Americans are now drifting towards supporting the internal arrangement. Given the present trend of our war, Smith is going to fall very soon unless something is done to sustain him. Britain and the United States fear the fall of Smith and so the preparatory ground is being cultivated for real intervention by the Western powers hence the talk of an interventionist rescue force. The British press has been putting these ideas across to test international reaction. There is also a rumour that the British would like to use Zambia as a 165

base for such an operation. There is nothing to authenticate this but there is apparently this talk about a force going to ‘‘rescue the whites’’ from that country. We feel that Britain has no moral obligation now to come to the rescue of the regime, which after all has committed treason against the Queen. Britain is now working against the people of Zimbabwe by seeking to establish an ‘‘independent”’ state with a government that Britain itself will direct, a government of stooges who did not lead the people during the revolution. But we are sure that by intensifying the war and building firm solidarity with the Front-line States, the OAU, the socialist countries and other progressive forces, our revolution will be sustained and will be able to withstand any resistance from the imperialist powers. Aim: Military intervention would be much simpler for imperialism if a black puppet regime acceptable to at least some African countries could be installed in Salisbury. This in turn could lead to problems among the liberation forces if there is not a clear definition of the enemy. So how does your organisation define the enemy? Mugabe: From the beginning we defined the enemy as imperialism and colonialism, which, in our particular situation, work through the agency of the settler regime. Today the enemy is under great pressure from the liberation struggle so he begins to plant contradictions in our midst. The Front begins to be a point that worries him. Once we came together under the umbrella of the ANC, but in no time the enemy found agents from amongst us and today you have Muzorewa and Sithole siding with the enemy. Once your own brother has decided to work against you and becomes the agent of your enemy, you cannot distinguish him from the enemy. The masses have to be educated about this. In March this year, when Smith co-opted Muzorewa and Sithole into his internal arrangement and made them part of his regime, we undertook a campaign to mobilise the masses by explaining the true meaning of the arrangement, showing how adding on a few Africans did not change the character of the regime. It was still an expression of imperialism and colonialism. We remember what the Americans did in Vietnam towards the end. They tried to ‘‘Vietnamise’’ the conflict and raised a huge army for the Thieu regime, withdrawing when they felt they had built up a neocolonialist force which could resist the revolution. But the people 166 * stood together and the Thieu regime fell in 1975. We believe that a as edu : try: similar thing is about to happen in our country l Instead of the enemy wearing a white skin he is soon going to wear a black skin. Already his skin is half black and half white and we know the process is to try and vest power in the hands of persons agreeable to imperialism. The puppets are being sorted out for a neo-colonialist government. But our task is clear: to step up the armed struggle and mobilise the masses to resist any attempt to maintain the exploitation and the oppression by handing the whip to a black man instead of a white man. ee The masses are being educated so that they can distinguish the enemy and his agents from the forces fighting for progress and freedom. Aim: Smith has said that he is ready to attend an ‘‘all-Party’’ Conference. The use of the phrase ‘‘all-Party’’ raises an interesting question: how many parties are involved in the conflict? Mugabe: The phrase ‘‘all-Party Conference’’ is a very unfortunate one. It was used by David Owen in Dar-es-Salaam at our April meeting where the idea of a constitutional conference was first mooted. Bs accepted it, even though we felt it was a deviation from what we ha expected as the next stage, which was to discuss the independence conE the British talk of an ‘‘all-Party Conference’’, what they have in mind is the idea that the ‘‘internal’’ group has four parties, ang that the Patriotic Front has two. Our view is that the ‘‘internal’’ groups have come together and formed a regime and are therefore one Party. Muzorewa, Chirau, Sithole and Smith himself constitute one regime and we are directing our struggle against that regime. The British look at this group from a multiple point of view because it serves their purpose to do so. They are thinking in terms of numbers when it comes to voting in a government council. Their idea ya that the Patriotic Front, with two leaders, should be married to the ‘‘interce with four leaders. gate ae the original idea. If that was objectionable to us then at least they wanted parity. They don’t conceive that in any arrangement iotic Front should have a majority. E a e as we are-concerned, the negotiations are not between us and the ‘‘internal’’ group. We know we are fighting this regime but we refuse to recognise it as a party to negotiations with us. We take the 167

position that since Britain is the colonial power, our negotiations must be strictly with Britain and if Britain invites the “internal”? group they must come as an extension of the British delegation. We reject any view that seeks to establish parity between the Patriotic Front and the ‘‘internal’’ group by way of constituting a governing council or some other governing body during the transitional period to independence. Any arrangement made must recognise the Patriotic Front as the authentic expression of the people of Zimbabwe and so it must have a majority on any governing council. We offered the British our proposals at the meeting in Dar-esSalaam but the British felt that the disparity we wanted was too great. They wanted parity. But at the end of it all there was a compromise but maintaining the principle that the Patriotic Front should have some majority. We do not object, therefore, to an “‘all-Party’’ conference, despite the nomenclature. But we do not accept that there can be such a conference without pre-conditions. There are conditions, however, which have already been accepted by the British, for example, the removal of Ian Smith, the dismantlement of the Rhodesian forces and their replacement by a force based on the Patriotic Front. Aim: Option B of the recent British proposals indicates that the British are now thinking in terms of no elections before independence. What are your views on this? Mugabe: It’s quite clear what the British have in mind. Previously they blamed and criticised us for not wanting democratic elections before independence. They accused us of seeking to establish a dictatorship. As far back as 1976 when we went to Geneva, this was the British point of view. And we laboured the point that in fact we were very democratic. We envisaged elections before independence. We affirmed and reaffirmed this stand. Now that the British know that we are for democratic elections and now that they also know that the broad masses in the country support us, they are having second thoughts about the desirability of holding elections before independence. They fear victory by the Progressive forces and so they now want to ensure that an arrangement is made whereby elections are circumvented and a governing group, they call it a governing council, is installed in power, with a distribution of seats that favours the reactionary forces. And now if independence is given to the country on 168 i that basis there would obviously be a reactionary trend which reverses the revolutionary trend that we have set in motion. This is what the British would like to see now become the course of events in Zimbabwe. Aim: In recent statements you rejected future United States participation in future talks on Zimbabwe. In retrospect do you consider it was a mistake to have allowed the US to become involved in the first place? Mugabe: We agreed to have the United States join our negotiations with Britain as British partners because Britain had assured us that they alone could not lay down the process to independence effectively without the participation of the United States. They were looking forward to the Smith regime being asked to resign, and if Smith refused to resign, then he would have to be pushed out of office. And the British argument was that if the United States were involved, they could add to the pressure that Britain was going to exert in getting rid of Ian Smith. So on that basis we were persuaded to agree to the involvement of the United States. Our feeling was also the feeling of the Front Line Presidents. But now, after the United States has proved its complicity with the illegal regime by facilitating the visit of the regime’s officials to the United States, it has become quite clear to us that we made a blunder in agreeing to the United States participating in our discussions. They have no legal status to participate in the negotiations, which concern us and the British. Britain is the colonial power and it alone has the proper status to negotiate the settlement proposals with us. Aim: It seems that there has been a significant intensification of the armed struggle in the last few months, that is to say, in the dry season, which is not usually considered the best time for the guerillas. What are the main factors which have led to this development? Mugabe: Well, this is not the first time that we have been on top during the dry season. Last dry season, in 1977, we were On top and our offensives continued. The enemy was always on the defensive, and we were happy to consolidate our positions during the dry season. And SO when it came to the rainy season we were in a much better position to launch further attacks and make a selection of new targets. We have proceeded to do that with great effect. 169

Having consolidated our positions in the rural areas, where our peasant population is to be found, it can only be a logical step now to carry the war to the enemy strongholds itt urban and industrialised centres. And so our next strategy should see us in a far stronger position. l This dry season we have not been offset by the enemy strategy, which has been to hit the Frontline States, which give us rear support. But this has been a kind of psychological warfare to try and impress the international public that the Rhodesian forces are still on top, to try and cloud the position of disadvantage which they have inside the country. And so we feel very happy that this dry season has not seen the enemy taking the initiative as he had hoped to do, that he is still defending his position and is not carrying out any remarkable offensives against us. We continue to make progress and we hope this progress will eventually lead us to a position where the enemy is encircled and we are poised for his annihiliation. Aim: What progress is being made towards stronger unity, especially in the military sense, within the Patriotic Front? Mugabe: The Patriotic Front is not a merger, we are an alliance, we are a front that recognises the existence of two distinct movements, ZANU and ZAPU. We nevertheless recognise the need for unity and this is why we established in J anuary last year a coordinating committee to try and work on areas of agreement and a programme for the creation of complete unity between us. So the principle of unity is acceptable to us. In respect to the military side, we have worked out a programme for uniting our two forces, first in respect of training our fighters together. There is already a set of syllabuses for purposes of training. There is also the structure of the High Command which we have worked out in the Coordinating Committee and which is agreed between ZANU and ZAPU. There is a code of discipline that we have worked out. But these are theoretical positions and the practice of it hasn’t come yet. Aim: Turning to the diplomatic front, what was the objective of your recent visit to Angola? . Mugabe: As far as Angola is concerned, we have felt a very long time that our relations with the MPLA needed cultivation and we wanted 170 " to bring the MPLA very close to ourselves. We spoke to President Neto and members of the Politbureau and briefed them fully on the military and political situation in our country and on the present Anglo-American manoeuvres. And naturally we asked for assistance. I believe the visit has done us a lot of good. Aim: You have also been to Vietnam, Korea, Cuba and China. Mugabe: Yes, we want to build a solidarity of socialist countries around our struggle. And our emphasis was that there should be increased material aid, now that we have spread our operations over 80 per cent of the country and now that we are going to attack harder targets. We explained that it was absolutely necessary that not only the quantity but also the quality of arms should improve, My visit to Cuba was the first that a leader of ZANU has paid to that country and we found President Castro very responsive, prepared to be informed as broadly as possible about the events here. Cuba has now appointed someone here to liaise with us. In general, we are happy that we are bringing as many socialist countries close to us as possible. As our endeavours continue we hope to find ourselves in the orbit of all socialist countries, with the Soviet Union and China included in this solidarity. Aim: What about your visits to Ethiopia and Pakistan? Mugabe. In Addis Ababa we established good relations with the revolutionary administration. They have given us some scholarships, they are training our cadres in civil aviation and we hope that this kind of cooperation is going to continue. l E I passed through Pakistan in transit and met the Foreign Minister. We expressed our needs and they have since sent us some 500 tons of rice and some clothing, for which we are very grateful. Aim: You have said that the Zambian Government’s recent decision to open the border with Rhodesia was ‘‘embarrassing’’. Embarassing in what way? Mugabe: It is embarrassing in two major respects. First, we have been fighting a war with the support of Zambia to achieve definite objectives. In our strategy we have worked to destroy the enemy’s military strength as well as his economic strength. Now, with the opening of 171

the border, the enemy is going to derive economic benefits which will strengthen his economic position and so go to strengthen his military position. If the enemy is economically viabte he also becomes militarily viable. And so this is one respect in which the Zambian decision has worked against our objectives of weakening the enemy and neutralising him economically so that he can be neutralised militarily. Then also, it is well known that the railways have been our targets. The Zambian goods are now having to move along the two rail lines to South Africa. What the Zambian decision asks us to do in reality, although the Zambians haven’t said so explicitly, is to maintain a kind of ceasefire along the railway lines, which would obviously give the enemy some breathing space. Is it therefore expected that we should honour and respect the passage of goods now to South Africa and from South Africa? This is the position we find embarrassing. The Zambians, l hope, will rethink their position. We appeal to their better judgement, and we hope this decision will be reversed. Aim: Major attacks on Zambian territory were carried out by the Rhodesians a few days after the border opening. What do you feel is the significance of this? Mugabe: These attacks serve to emphasise this one point: that the enemy remains an enemy until he is defeated. He does not, and never will, transform into a friend. Whatever enticements, gimmicks and tricks the enemy uses which create the impression that he is transforming into a friend are extremely deceptive. The enemy continues to cheat and deceive. And so we who are waging armed struggle against the enemy, and our brothers who have been giving us full support, must always be on the watch-out that dealings with the enemy may in fact place us ina position of disadvantage. One would have expected that soon after the opening of the border Smith would have reciprocated by refraining, at least for some time, from attacking Zambia, but this has not been so. Smith remains a brute, callous in the extreme, a murderous gangster, and we have known him to be this all the time. He should be treated as such. We on our part will not be deterred by the fact that Zambia has opened the border. We will continue to wage the armed struggle with the fullest vigour and with the same consistency as we have done in the past. 172

28. The Real Meaning of Solidarity

Address to a solidarity mass rally organized by the International Conference of Solidarity with the Struggles of the African and Arab Peoples against Imperialism and Reaction: September 17, 1978 in Addis Ababa. Comrade Chairman, Comrades and Friends, I regard it as a great privilege and honour to have been asked to speak on behalf of our liberation movement. It is a great honour still to have the privilege of addressing the broad revolutionary masses of Ethiopia in this historic city of Addis Ababa, the centre of revolutionary Ethiopia. May I express the deepest gratitude of all our liberation movements to the revolutionary Government and Heroic People of Socialist Ethiopia for hosting this conference currently being held in solidarity with our African and Arab struggle against imperialism and reaction. I wish also to take this opportunity of hailing our brave and courageous revolutionary leader, Comrade Mengistu Haile-Mariam, the Chairman of the Provisional Military Administrative Council and the Council of Ministers and the Commander-in-Chief of the Revolutionary Army of Socialist Ethiopia, the PMAC and the broad masses of Ethiopia for Me decisive victory scored over the age-old feudal bourgeoisie and in defence of Ethiopia’s territorial integrity and national sovereignty. Indeed, it is such struggle and victory over imperialism and reactionary forces which constitutes the theme of our present conference. Allow me to hail you once again for your noble and just revolutionary struggle against imperialism and reaction. Comrade Chairman, our liberation movement is currently engaged in a bitter struggle against a common enemy — imperialism and the forces of reaction it generates — identifiable by its manifest character and its mode of operation as it imposes its control both upon our body politic and economic resources of our respective countries. I proceed hereunder 173to give a few examples of similar behavioral characteristics that clearly identify imperialism’s dangerous methods of gaining control, consolidating its power and resisting our revolutidnary struggle: (a) (b) 174 In the Middle East, for example, and completely out of the blue imperialism created the Zionist state of Israel in 1948 imposing it upon and against the wishes of the Arab people in general and the Palestinian people in particular. To consolidate its power in the region, imperialism proceeded to arm Israel with huge quantities of arms, including some of the most sophisticated weaponry. The re-inforcement and consolidation of Zionist colonialism was thus a means of and became clearly identifiable with the consolidation of the regional political and economic interests of USA, British and French joint imperialism. As Arab unity grew stronger posing a challenge to Israel, first by manifesting itself concretely in the Arab-Israeli war of 1967 and secondly by demonstrating a further subsequent development as clearly shown by the Arab military performance during the 1973 war, the imperialists then resorted to a deceptive peace strategy engineered by that notorious imperialist envoy, Henry Kissinger. It was a strategy of divide and rule. It was clear that if brother was turned against brother, Arab solidarity would crack and Zionist colonialism and with it Western imperialism interests in the region would gain a new lease of life. The strategy succeeded and thus undermined the just cause of our Palestinian brothers as championed by the PLO, thereby making their struggle more difficult and more protracted. In Western Sahara, imperialism fanned the burning appetites for expansionism and aggrandizement of Morocco and Mauritania respectively and decreed that they were legitimate claimants to the territory thus sanctioning its extinction by seizure and apportionment. This act of desecration effected in broad daylight was a crime of armedrobbery committed against the people of Western Sahara. Its other effects have been to turn brother against brother, as Morocco and Mauritania willingly constituted themselves into agents of France which arms and fortifies Morocco in its expansionist policy, while Morocco in turn militarily sustains Mauritania. France in this case is actually behaving like the legendary carnivorous monster which bade a man who stood helplessly before it but before whom also stood a helpless sheep he had stolen and was ready to kill: ‘‘Well done, feed on your sheep and afterwards I shall feed on you too.’’ But Western Sahara is not a Moroccan sheep nor is it capable of being stolen. We (d) are glad that POLISARIO is dealing effectively with the robbers and teaching them a salutary lesson. In South Africa, Britain, having wrongly granted an Anglo-Boer minority independence in 1910 in defiance of the interests of the majority, has proceeded over the decades and in collusion with her sister imperialist powers (the USA, France and West Germany) to heavily arm and strengthen the apartheid regime. Indeed, through their joint efforts these powers have not only granted South Africa a license for the reproduction of the mirage and other kinds of arms but have also provided her with nuclear know-how as if this were a reward for the increasing oppressive measures and barbarous acts the Vorster regime is perpetrating. In the pursuance of her apartheid policy and the creation of Bantustans, the South African racist regime has been setting one ethnic group against another, in an attempt to diffuse and ameliorate the antagonism inherent in the sharp contradictions in the relationship between the oppressor and the oppressed, the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. However, the liberation struggle is bound to gain momentum. In Namibia, German colonialism having been defeated during the First World War, colonialism by proxy was imposed on the territory in the name of a mandate later turned into a trusteeship at the inception of the United Nations. But for the opposition of the Namibian people under SWAPO and the pressure of the International Community, the South African regime would have long annexed Namibia as a province of South Africa in the same way by which it unashamedly and in a totally immoral and untenable manner has laid illegitimate claim to Walvis Bay. The scheme of annexation of Namibia having foundered, South Africa now resorted to the political chicanery of setting up the Turnhalle Commission as a prelude to the creation of an envisaged internal regime which it hoped to manipulate in its own interests. She whipped up in the process counter-revolutionary forces opposed to SWAPO and tried to set tribe against tribe and brother against brother, whilst her troops continued illegally to occupy Namibia brandishing NATO weapons and committing murders and atrocities upon the rightful owners of the country — the Namibian People. In Zimbabwe, my own country, Britain, having colonised the territory in 1890 and subsequently allowed events gradually to develop to a stage where the Smith regime unilaterally assumed independence in 1965 in complete defiance of African wishes and proceeded to adopt measures to consolidate colonial settlerism with its obnoxious 175

system of capitalist exploitation of both our proletariat and peasantry, facilitated the regime’s acquisition of huge quantities of arms. It cannot be said that Britain, the USA, West Germany and France did not know that the Smith regime was acquiring NATO arms. Nor can it be denied that these imperialist powers allowed their countries to become fertile recruitment ground for mercenaries now re-inforcing Smith’s army. Further, Britain has, by subtle double strategy of, on the one hand, overtly appearing to be seriously negotiating with the Patriotic Front on the basis of her so-called settlement proposals of Ist September, 1977, and on the other hand, covertly promoting the internal agreement, been clandestinely aiding and abetting the treasonous illegal regime and its puppet collaborators Muzorewa, Sithole and Chirau in consolidating itself. Indeed, its clandestine and disreputable manoeuvres which now stand exposed have been aimed at splitting the Patriotic Front and ending the war. It is part of the strategy of divide and rule. However, our liberation forces, guided by correct political direction based on solid principle, have upset the internal accord which now stands on the verge of collapse. We are destroying the internal settlement. As we do so, we also pledge to stand sternly against the clandestine machinations to split the Patriotic Front and to maintain and consolidate our unity. Imperialists had hoped to Africanise the Zimbabwean conflict through the creation of an internal settlement purportedly supported by Africans, in the same way as they attempted in Vietnam to create the internal reactionary Thieu regime in opposition to the progressive and revolutionary forces then waging the liberation struggle. If they failed to Vietnamise the conflict in Vietnam, how could they ever succeed in Zimbabweanising the conflict in Zimbabwe? In both situations, we also notice how imperialism when faced with the threat of a collapse, has recruited forces of reaction from the ranks of the very people in whose name and for whose interest the revolution is being waged. In both cases, it has been the forces of the broad masses working under a revolutionary vanguard movement that has destroyed reaction. The reactionary partnership of Smith-Muzorewa-Sithole-Chirau is now in utter disarray, while our National liberation forces incessantly and forever more victoriously pound the enemy in his citadel day in and day out. The Smith-Muzorewa-Sithole-Chirau regime is now 176 desparate. It has just announced its intentions to compulsorily conscript Africans into the settler army. We challenge it to go ahead! Comrades and Friends, imperialism and reaction are inseparable bedfellows in all colonial or neo-colonialist situations. This is indeed so in the Middle East, in Western Sahara, in South Africa, Namibia, Zimbabwe, as indeed it is also the case in Chile, Nicaragua and Paraguay. In every one of these cases, the ruling regime is armed to the teeth by the imperialist power(s) manipulating the regime. It therefore behoves any nationalist movement that sets upon the course of national liberation towards the goal of attaining national independence to recognise that an armed regime can only be effectively overthrown by an armed liberation movement. We have recognised in Zimbabwe that the necessary requirements — the sine qua non — of a revolutionary struggle aimed at national liberation are the following:(i) The existence of a well-recognised revolutionary vanguard movement with clear political goals. (ii) The existence of a clear ideology charting out a clear ideological line. m Gii) A clear analysis of the conflict situation resulting in a clear definition and identification of the principal enemy and the reactionary forces supporting him. i (iv) The choice of appropriate means of struggle in relation to the position and strength of the identified principal enemy and the adoption of armed struggle against the enemy whose resistance is based on forces of arms. (v) The building of a guerilla army to wage guerilla warfare. l (vi) The mobilisation of all democratic forces and of the whole people in è a process of transforming the struggle into a people’s struggle. Comrade Chairman, the people’s war being a people’s revolutionary event, the victory that ensues from it must in concrete terms be a people’s victory translating itself into various social programmes geared firstly towards the control of resources by the people and, secondly, towards a socio-economic transformation that is peọple-oriented. For us now, however, the major concern is about the intensification of our liberation war in a final bid to annihilate the enemy. Let us spell out a few of our gains. We have gained control in most rural areas where six million of our population of seven million Africans live. We have destroyed nine major enemy military bases and several of his civil 177administrative and police outposts, broken up most concentration camps (called protected villages or keeps) into which over half a million of our rural civilian population have been herded like cdttle. We have ruined the enemy’s economy and many economic enterprises have closed down. We have paralysed the railway and road systems. More than 50% of the European settler farms have been deserted and overally, the settlers are fleeing the country at double the admitted rate of 1 500 to 2 000 a month. We have downed scores of the enemy’s planes over the last two years and continue to shoot them down every week. Since the beginning of this year, we have killed several hundres of enemy troops, capturing many, including substantial quantities of arms and ammunition. We have, to the great jubilation of our masses, established people’s liberated zones, these being areas controlled by our victorious people and which have been transformed into revolutionary base-areas administered by the people themselves and operating self-reliance projects relating to production, construction, education and health. From these rural base-areas, we are proceeding towards a new stage of our war, that of pounding and encircling the enemy in urban and industrialised centres. That is why we are shelling selected targets in the cities and harassing the enemy there. Once upon a time, the Rhodesian white settler held himself immortal and invincible. But now he has become our cannon fodder. Now he is a frightened man whose morale has sunk to its lowest ebb. Now we are hitting him from every angle. Comrade Chairman, allow me to acknowledge that we do not owe these innumerable victories to ourselves alone. They are firstly a product of solidarity between us and our brothers in Africa, especially the Frontline States that continue to provide us, at a great risk to themselves, their countries as our rear bases. Secondly, they are a product of solidarity between the liberation movement we represent and the Socialist countries from where most if not all our weaponry comes. Our gratitude goes to them. Thirdly, they are a product of solidarity between us and the socialist and progressive forces in the capitalist countries. To them, I also wish to register our indebtedness. Let me also state here that as we hail the victory of the revolution in Ethiopia we express our delight at the release of Ethiopia’ capacity and at its preparedness to aid our liberation cause more concretely than in the past. We hail and commend the revolutionary role played by Cuba, in keeping with its internationallist duty, when it came successively to the 178 aid of first, Angola and secondly, Ethiopia, at their invitation to defend their integrity and sovereignty and repulse enemy aggression. Comrade Chairman, the viability of revolutions lies not merely in their ability to defend themselves but also in their ability to defend each other. It is this phenomenon of revolutionary interactivity which secures, nourishes and consolidates them, as at the same time it promotes their growth and extension in both the national and international dimensions. Let it not be forgotten that one revolution begets another! The Bolshevik Revolution’s success and the subsequent creation of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as the parent socialist state meant the eventual success of socialist revolutions in China, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, the G.D.R., Korea, Romania, Yugoslavia, Vietnam, Cuba and here in Africa; in Mozambique, Angola, Guinea Bissau, Congo Republic and now in Ethiopia. Who would have imagined in 1917 or even in 1945 that a socialist revolution would one day be Africa’s experience? Let the Pinochets, Somozas, Begins, Vorsters and Ian Smiths take note, for the workers and the peasants of the world are uniting; they have nothing to lose but their imperialist chains. Comrade Chairman, our peoples have but one struggle, one awaited victory and one destiny. Let us, therefore, stand and struggle as one! That to me, fellow comrades; is my meaning of solidarity! Long live our international solidarity! Long live proletarian internationalism! Long live Socialist Ethiopia! Forward with the Revolution! A Luta Continua! 179

29. Our Socialist Programme will come from the People

Interview with David Martin of the LONDON OBSERVER and Phyllis Johnson from the CANADIAN BROADCASTING CORPORATION: October 7, 1978 in Maputo

Question: What political system do you advocate for an independent Zimbabwe? Would you elaborate a bit more? You have been quoted as saying that Zimbabwe should be a one-party Marxist state. Mugabe: Yes. What we have said in the past is that we should like to establish a socio-economic system which is based on MarxistLeninism. When we said that, we didn’t mean we are going to impose that system. We are going first to derive authority for it from the People and if the People accepted our Party, naturally they would have accepted our principles. We adopted, as a Party, scientific socialism as far back as 1973. So, this is the basis, on which we would like to operate politically and socio-economically. Question: What would your economic policies be in terms of land distribution, bank institutions, essential services and private enterprise? Mugabe: Well, you would have to have definite programmes of development of course. But you can’t start off by nationalising everything. You have got to take into account the realities of the situation. However, the genuine policy would be one of socialising industry. In respect of agriculture, we have no difficulty because our own traditional system is identical with the Marxist-Leninist approach: at least, in so far as ownership of land is concerned. Land has never belonged to individuals, neither has it belonged to the chiefs as in West Africa. 180 It has always belonged to the People as a whole. We must go back to that traditional position which as I have said, coincides also with our present scientific thinking. al i

Question: Forty per cent of the land, I know, is in the hands of the white minority. Companies like LONRHO own several million acres of land. How would you deal with this? Mugabe: The principle is the same whether land is owned by multinationals or by just local companies. It doesn’t make very much difference really. What we would like to see established is a system which brings land into the ownership of the People as a whole. This means the state will act as the custodian for the whole People. And all land owned by foreigners, some of it is really not managed by their owners or by its owners. Some of it is run from capitals like London and so on. Such land whose owners are absent must come into the first category of land that is taken over almost immediately. I don’t know whether that answers your question but this is what we have been talking about. We haven’t worked out a definite system as to the various stages of the take-over but the main principle is that eventually all land must be owned by the People as a whole.

Question: It’s one thing to vest all the land in the People but another in terms of who exploits that land. I understand that will belong to the People. But, how do you deal with the problems such as 40 per cent of that land can’t be occupied by the minority? Sure, you will have to na- . tionalize? Mugabe: The Land Tenure Act will have to go. That’s our first target. You just¥an’t run the country when the iniquitous piece of legislation stands in your way. It will obstruct all your programmes. It is the white man’s Magna Carta as the Rhodesian Front has called it. And since you have overthrown the colonial system, you should also ensure that you have absolutely nothing to do with the Land Tenure Act as it is. You have to amend it radically. Which means you should never allow the position where the minority own or possess most of the land per capita.

Question: Would there be a role for private investors in Zimbabwe? Mugabe: Once again that’s a question which we cannot answer 181categorically. At the first stage, you will have to cope with the system that has private investment anyway. And you are not going to start by seizing everybody’s property. That would be impractical. You must proceed however towards a system where there is far much more collective control than private control. And all the time you are eliminating the area of private control in favour of that of control by the People as a whole. But I do not rule out co-operation in future. A kind of partnership between foreign enterprise and the state on the basis of your wanting to derive the technical know-how. Or should you feel that a certain product can best be manufactured by a company in a capitalist country, you can strike an agreement between that company and the state of the nature that Italy struck with the Soviet Union when Fiat went into the Soviet Union to produce cars. It was, I know, unpopular in some circles but that type of agreement you cannot really rule out where you would like to import technology as quickly as possible. Question: As far as the banks are concerned, they control the direction of most of the money flow within a state such as in agricultural industry, commercial farmer or peasant. Now what will your first action be in dealing with this problem? Will you leave the status quo and want to compete with your own state banks, will you want to nationalize banks entirely in the process of being able to direct your money in the areas where you want it to go? Mugabe. | think the banking system is a very vital sector which must receive immediate attention from the government. If you are not in control of your money by centralising the control, then you might very well run the risk of money leaving the country and your being sabotaged by bankers and accountants who do not belong to you. This has happened in several African States and we don’t want it to happen in our own country. And so, my own view is really that we should seize the banks as quickly as possible. Mugabe: Yes, nationalise them as quickly as possible. But I can’t see you nationalising other commericial banks which might have been established in the country in toto, but the major ones you certainly have got to take control of. Mozambique did allow the other commercial banks to continue but they took control of the central bank. 182 Question: You mean nationalising? + ? yi We Question: What do you want to see in the country’s social structure, in terms of education, health services, law and human rights? Mugabe: Lots of changes in that area. To take education alone, the present system is racial as you know. You have schools which are intended for whites and there is a system for blacks, another system in between for coloureds, sometimes coloureds are admitted into European schools. We will not be content with a position where these schools will be exclusive, no. They have got to be all placed on par. And admission to them must be on non-racial basis, allowing children to attend them perhaps because they come from the particular area in which the school is situated. That type of consideration, yes, we are prepared to reckon with but certainly the racial character has to go. In respect of other social amenities, the various other institutions, of course, the same principle must apply. We must establish a non-racial society and this also goes for the residential areas. You are not going to allow people to reside in a particular area merely because they are white and others to be excluded because they are blacks from those areas. That type of privilege has to go almost immediately. Question: In terms of health, does that mean a lot more in the rural areas? Mugabe: In terms of health, oh yes, of course, you have got to send more hospitals to the rural areas, literally. Just now we have an artificial position of unemployment, in respect of nurses and yet the health services in the rural areas are so bad. You have to bring about a position where almost every part of the country can boast of a clinic, a village boast of dispensary and the whole region boast of a good hospital. e Question: What would you like to see change in terms of particular laws in the present situation? Mugabe: The field of legislation is a difficult one to handle. Our laws derive in part from the Roman-Dutch system, in part from the British system, criminal law and the procedure, the criminal procedure; and also in part from the African law, that’s the law which applies to the African Community. It’s necessary to have one legal code for everybody. You can’t have a set of laws applying purely to blacks and not taking other races into its ambit and then another code for whites. That kind of legal discrimination has got to go. But you can’t see us 183

divert our legal system of some principles that we have derived from either Roman-Dutch law or British law in that they will not differ very much from the principles that you might want to see established and deriving from your espousal of Marxist philosophy. Morality is morality, a murderer remains a murderer whether he is in the socialist or capitalist system. But the forms of punishment of course, might differ, and you may therefore have to consider such forms of punishment as you feel are more effective. What is lacking in the present legal system is the corrective aspect. This is the punitive aspect — people are punished. I have been to prison and so I know what obtains, this is a punitive system. Now you have got to have a kind of corrective system, not that a punitive system is not corrective, but what I mean is that you have got to educate people, you see, to reform so that they acquire better habits, acquire a better attitude to life. Question: What would your stand be on capital punishment? Mugabe: I am one of those who believe that capital punishment is really not a happy event, but this is not to say our Party accepts that view point. I would be happier if it were abolished really. Question: In terms of human rights what would vou like to see entrenched in the constitution? Mugabe: I would like to see a constitution enshrining the usual liberties, civil liberties, freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of irreligion and the right of people to assemble as they wish. You know the usual civil liberties. Those have got to be in a constitution. i But you cannot at the same time as you are enshrining the civil liberties, also enshrine privileges based on a racial togetherness of certain communities. That would cut across the principle of non-racialism which we would like to see cut across the society and all our socioeconomic system, and so we cannot have rights for minorities. Let anyone ask us to have rights for the majorities if one can talk of them, — rights for the whole people — sure, but not for minorities. Who are the minorities in our particular case: people of British, German, American, French extraction. Why can they not integrate? We would like to see them integrate. Not that they should lose their culture as such, oh no. The cultural heritage of a people, as long as that doesn’t work against the heritage of others, we can enshrine ina constitution. But the right of a minority to be treated in a special man184 i Ms Ñ = Ret en: a a i ner, politically, through the assignment of an exclusive number of seats in parliament, that one no, certainly no! Question: The settlers appear to fear the possibility of your coming to power. What assurance can you offer them? /) Mugabe: I am really their best friend. I don’t see anything that they should hate about me. This is an unfortunate thing that they have decided to call me a bad name. Give a dog a bad name and hang it. But I stand for the rights of the majority of the people and not just for the rights of all the blacks, of all the people and what we say in respect of our people, we also say in respect of the British, the Americans, the Germans, the Coloureds and Indians provided they are prepared to be seen as one with the majority of the people. Well this is it. If their fear derives from the fact that they would like to preserve their privileges, then there is nothing we can do about it. It’s a fear that derives from their desire to perpetuate an evil system and you can’t pity them, you can’t sympathise with them. Question: Would you try Mr Smith and other principals for war crimes? Mugabe: Mr Smith is a criminal, he has committed all kinds of very serious crimes. The massacres he has committed here upon Zimbabwean refugees in Mozambique, upon the civilian population here in Mozagbique, in Zambia, in Botswana, all these put together warrant very stern judgement by the people. They call for the death penalty in my opinion, but again I am not the person to pronounce it. I can only judge that this type of evidence merits the passing of capital punishment, but we will have him tried by the people if by the time we take over he will still be around. Question: Mr Smith says you are a criminal. You have to be tried if you should be tried, how do people outside, people who are not involved in this thing, how do they tell the difference, how do they judge these two accusations? Mugabe: Well, first it is common knowledge, isn’t it, that Smith declared unilateral independence — that’s the illegality, that’s treason in itself. In the context of this legality, he has continued to enact vicious laws of the nature that is intended to protect his position of illegality and has used laws as means of committing atrocities against 185

| the people. How many has he sent to illegal detention? How many people has he hanged without fair trial and using his political legal code as it were, a legal code which is intended to entrench his political position? We have taken up arms to fight illegality; the illegality which Smith committed made oppresion assume a greater intensity than it would have assumed if Rhodesia had continued as a British colony without the phenomenon of illegality being brought into it. Those of us who have taken up arms to fight the criminal regime, surely must be seen as lovers of peace because we want to remove a criminal from the scene. He and his criminal code must go. He and his whole settler system which is now sustained by this illegality has to go. And so we expect the outside world to judge us as people who have taken up arms in order to establish peace. Question: Do you share the fear of the Western Press that there could be civil war between ZANU and ZAPU after independence? Mugabe: No, I don’t share that fear at all. I don’t see any possibility of this happening really. We are constantly discussing our relationship in the Patriotic Front, and one thing we have agreed to do is to merge our two Parties immediately we get back home and fight elections as one, and when we say this, we have nothing to fear. We would like to merge, starting from grass-root. If in one area you have a ZANU and ZAPU branch, the two branches must be brought together and the people choose a new executive, and we proceed that way throughout the country, up to the district level, then to the provincial level, then you go to the congress. You have got to bring the two people who are members of the two parties together, and you cannot do it from Mozambique or Zambia. You can only do it from Zimbabwe. Now once that has been done, we do not see the possibility of two armies existing, there would then be one army and we reckon this will eliminate what other people fear as a real civil war possibility. Question: What have you achieved in terms of unity within the Patriotic Front and what do you see as the major obstacles in the way of total unity? Mugabe: We have achieved quite a lot and we created, as you are aware, a Co-ordinating Committee in the Patriotic Front which meets from time to time to review mainly the political situation, but also the question of our relationship and the possibility of our coming closer or 186 z working much more closely. We went as far as to visit each other’s camps last year and we had an assessment brought to us by the Committee which was established for the purpose and their recommendation was that we should work from the base, starting by merging our training programmes and bringing cadres to work together in the training camps and then proceed on the establishment of the jointcommand and then we have joint-operations. This is the theoretical basis that we have accepted but the practice is yet to come. We have differed here. The ZANU approach is what we have just given here. That we expect a political merger at a later stage when all of us are together with the People back home. ZAPU’s own view point is that we should start merging our political parties here, and then we proceed on the merger of the two armies, our own view being that you cannot merge the two political parties outside here. You must start by merging the two armies and in any case we are here under an obligation thrust upon us by the People to wage a war of liberation. This is why we are outside here, and so it is necessary if not imperative for us to bring our two military sides together, so we can fight more effectively. This is our view point but we have never been able to reconqle the two view points. Question: So far? Mugabe: So far, yes. Question: In terms of what you just said, what would your reaction be if Britain and others intervened militarily to end UDI and undertook immediately to begin decolonisation within a limited period? Mugabe: If Britain intervened at this juncture, they would have to reckon with the fact that we are already present militarily in the country and we would ourselves be thoroughy displeased if they decided to intervene at this late hour. Where were they all along? And so we would regard such intervention as not meant to put down the rebellion which has lasted for thirteen years, but rather to reverse the revolutionary process we have set in motion. Accordingly, we would regard any such troops that are sent into the country as meant really to fight us and accordingly we will not shirk our responsibility in continuing our fight to the end. But if Britain would like to discuss the question of reaching an agreement with us and they do it with all sincerity, we are prepared for any such discussion. We are prepared to see that tran187

sitional period, a transitional process put in motion provided its acceptability, of course, means that the present regime and its forces must go and that our forces must take control, of the security situation in the country. Question: You said you would be thoroughly displeased if the British intervened militarily after all these years. Does that mean that you will fight against them? Mugabe: If they come without our consent, obviously we will. We will be fighting colonialism, and this will be sure proof that the British would like to recolonise our country. Question: The British government has always insisted that there have to be elections before independence, given some indications recently, may be they are changing their minds. What is your attitude towards this change and what is your attitude towards elections? Mugabe: Our attitude towards elections has been very consistent since Geneva. At Geneva, the British accused us of wanting to circumvent elections, wanting to impose our rule upon the people without the people having chosen their leaders and we demonstrated at the conference that we are for elections. We continued to demonstrate this willingness to subject ourselves to a test of acceptability by the people. But we are surprised that after the British accused us all these years of wanting to run away from elections before independence that they themselves are now running away from the principle of elections before independence. Question: Why do you think they are doing it? Mugabe: They are doing it precisely because they have discovered that if elections were held, we would romp home as victors. They are afraid of the people choosing us as their rightful representative, as the government of the country. Pure and simple. Question: Do you want to attend an all-party conference which your coleader has said is dead and buried? Mugabe: No, I don’t think Comrade Nkomo has said an all-party conference is dead. What he has said is that, taking the view of the British 188, Fa fa y! 4 ti i 1 +) + and the Americans, that for this conference to succeed, Smith must be present, and also taking into account that Smith has recently embarked upon means of the nature that point in the opposite direction, of the internal agreement; in these circumstances, therefore, there was absolutely no possibility of an all-party conference being held or succeeding, if it were held and that therefore, he sees it now not being the forum from which any settlement of the nature that is acceptable to us would be forthcoming. Question: What kind of particular conditions would have to change in your view, to make an all-party conference possibly successful? Mugabe: I should say that the question of an all-party conference is not ours, it’s not a Patriotic Front thing. This is a British initiative, completely, and we leave it to the British. Our own initiative has all along been the waging of the armed struggle. But we have agreed to the suggestion by the British and the Frontline States that it will not do us any harm if, as we are fighting, we negotiate with the British. The British feel that the present stage requires that the Patriotic Front, together with the parties inside the country, meet and discuss their proposals. But as far as we are concerned, the position we have maintained is that for us.to attend such a conference, Britain must assure us that the idea is not to try and constitute a marriage between us and the internal group. Britain must be prepared to negotiate directly with us. If the other people come, then we have no objection to their attending sucha conference. They do so as invitees of Britain and as an extension of the British delegation, which is the view we held at Geneva. Once those circumstances have been given, we will be prepared to attend the conference. Question: As long as you are talking to the British? Mugabe: Yes, the British and not negotiating directly with Ian Smith. Question: What about in New York? Are you prepared to attend an allparties conference in New York if it has been preceded by Mr Smith touring the United States? Mugabe: 1 don’t see any reason even if Smith had not gone there, I don’t see any validity for the British choosing the United States as a venue for such a conference. Why should we travel all that long journey to the United States? I don’t see any reason why we should go to the 189

United States. But now that Smith and company have been invited by the United States to visit the country the situation has become even worse. We cannot see ourselves being invited to the same venue. Question: So you are not prepared to go? Mugabe: We cannot see ourselves agreeing to go to a country which is in the process of granting recognition of the illegal regime in defiance of the position adopted by the international community. The Carter Administration when it took office, assured us that it was going to change United States policy and make it as realistic and as objective as possible. That they would do their best to change the Nixon-Ford position of friendly relations with the illegal regime of Ian Smith and that they were going to reverse the Byrd Amendment. In due course, the Byrd Amendment was repealed, but now we see the Carter Administration receding into the same position where they assured us they were going to move the United States policy from, back to the Ford and Nixon positions. So the United States administration is gradually showing us that they prefer the illegal regime of their friends to the Patriotic Front and the people of Zimbabwe, as their friends. This is a very serious position and I will be one of those who will be against the United States being chosen as a venue. In fact, I would like to propose to Comrade Nkomo in the Patriotic Front that we push now for the ousting of the United States from our talks. It is a very serious position the United States has drifted into and we can’t take it lightly. l Question: I just want to switch to a few brief questions on the war. Can you tell me briefly what is the current state of the war. How far advanced and in what stage is it? Mugabe: Yes, it’s a very vast field. We set out at the beginning of this year to transform our war into a people’s war. Previously of course, the war had been fought by ZANLA forces, the people assisting with food, intelligence information and so on. But we felt this year was a decisive one and had to adopt a double strategy: (a) To encompass the massive support of the people, so that the people are brought into the war and see it as their war and not just a war being fought for them, but war being fought in reality by them as well. This necessitated naturally the creating of the favourable conditions. We were also prompted into thinking this 190 way, by the fact that we have liberated quite a number of areas in the country and we were creating revolutionary base areas in the zones. a (b) Then we also felt that this is the year to consolidate our political power amongst the people. This would have the advantage, not only of getting the people to lend the full support to our war effort, but also of combining with them in destroying the internal agreement. And so we set out to achieve this double objective. I think we have achieved the two objectives in many respects. The people have responded magnificently. In the areas where they were still in the “protected villages’’, we went all out to destroy the ‘“‘keeps’’ and after we had destroyed many of them, the enemy decided to abandon those of them which he couldn’t protect. And this is what has happened. And it is a joy for us that the people are out, because we are more mobile, we are more active and move faster when we are operating amongst the people. And in respect of the ‘‘internal’’ agreement, we have as good as destroyed it. In respect of the actual military targets, we have been concentrating all along on strengthening our hold on the rural areas, destroying enemy installations, establishments, civil and otherwise, in the rural areas, driving away the farmers. We are still in the process of doing that and ensuring that our territorial zone of control grows larger. We estimate that we are fully operating in over 80 per cent of the total land area. We are in control of other areas, in others we are still contesting with the enemy. And so moving from this zone, the rural zone of control, we are able now to launch our attacks on urban and industrialised centres. That is why we are now moving in and encircling Umtali, encircle other smaller towns for a start, and we are operating in the periphery of Salisbury, Gwelo, Umtali and so on. We feel that, given the necessary supply of arms during the next three or so months, with the coming of the rains, we shall be more effective than we have been so far. But we are very happy at the progress that we have made. We have intensified our war in severing the lines of communication, disrupting the railway system, and roads. Recently of course, we blew up a bridge, the Tokwe bridge, which is on the road from Fort Victoria to Beit Bridge. I held a meeting there of the National Democratic Party as far back as 1961. Then the road was not tarred but in recent times the road has got tarred. And it’s therefore a very strategic bridge, it’s blown up. Other small bridges which have been blown, have not been reported to the press, but our communiques do carry reports of the blow-ups that have taken place. And so 191we feel that we have been making great headway, militarily. The effect of this, of course, has been to demoralise the settler community and the emigration rate continues to rise as you are aware and the population of the settlers is dwindling all the time. Their farming capacity has also diminished, but the enemy is going to do his best during the forthcoming season, we know, in protecting those areas which he regards as the life-blood of the country. Question: But we can expect more pressure on the economy and the cities? Mugabe: Yes, more pressure on the economy and the cities, that’s bound to come. Question: We come back to the rural areas. Have you established what would be called liberated areas or semi-liberated areas? Mugabe: Yes, we have definitely. The problems that are arising now are quite immense and perhaps we hadn’t foreseen them. But these are usual problems of food, clothing and medicines. Just now there is a great demand for medicines and food and we have been taking some drugs from here, from our stores into the country, as well as some clothing. We hadn’t started that with food, but now we have to, for two reasons: firstly, some of the people who have been thrown out of the ‘‘keeps’’ as it were to go back to their homes, have not got enough food. Some of them have decided even to abandon their homes to go into the forest, we have to look after them. Then secondly, there is the issue that our forces have grown so much in number over the last nine: months or so that the people cannot sustain them from their resources and hence we have to make all efforts to try and get some food, clothing and medicines from outside. Question: Can you put the figure of the number of people in the liberated zones? Mugabe: We just estimate that the number could now be between half a million to three quarters of a million or so, perhaps more than that. Question: Are you willing to put a time-scale on the period before Smith’s regime accepts the military defeat? Mugabe: No! No time schedule, none at all. Could be any time. Could 192 s e ee be five years end, ten years end, but whatever it is we are prepared to get to the end. fy Question: Could you have relied on China for much of your support? Traditionally, ZANU has relied on China. Mugabe: True, we get substantial support from China, and it’s no secret. We tell our socialist friends this, all of them, they know about it. But China has always said that they attach no strings to the aid they give us... never. . . . They are not going to use that military aid asa weapon to orientate us in the direction of their own views. They give us assistance in order for us to liberate our own country. This has been the understanding. So there has never arisen the question of having to balance oneself as between the one side and the other. And as we have been getting this help, we have also been trying to win other socialist friends and get them to support us. This is the ZANU line. The fact that we get help from China doesn’t make us to get married to China as such. Question: Are you making progress in winning the socialist friends? Mugabe: Yes, we feel we are making good progress. We feel that our socialist friends now understand us better, previously perhaps they didn’t. But with the consistent line we have pursued all along and the victories we have been scoring, they have been taking note and we have been having discussions. Almost everybody is now more responsive than previously. Question: The final point. . . The OAU bars trade and various forms of contact with South Africa but this is not followed by all member states. You will be in a particularly difficult position after independence. You have a lot of trade links with South Africa. Will you act to cut . . . to sever these links immediately after independence or will you assume more pragmatic longer term plans? Mugabe: The one thing we cannot change or we cannot modify vis-a-vis South Africa, is our commitment to the liberation of the masses there. But, having said that, there is also an obligation on us to be committed to the line which the OAU takes. We cannot be out of step with the -OAU and so we will fully abide by the OAU decisions. In respect of © our own bilateral relations with South Africa of course, it cannot be 193expected that over night we will sever relations with it. It will take time. We will, therefore, in that respect be pragmatic. Question: That is in terms of your economic relations with South Africa, not political? Mugabe: On political relations, that’s obviously clear. We cannot ever reconcile ourselves to apartheid.We just can’t. We can’t reconcile ourselves to rule of majority by minority. Question: Are you prepared to act as a rear base for the South African fighters in the same way that Mozambique has played this role for you? Mugabe: That’s a question that should be answered when we take over. But as I say we will play our part in line with the OAU position. If it’s demanded of us by our friends that we should do the same service to our South African brothers and sisters as Mozambique, Zambia and Botswana have played in respect of us, we will certainly play that role. But again I emphasize, nothing that we do will be out of keeping with the desires of the OAU. 194

30. Liberation Movements from Southern Africa strengthen Solidarity with Italian People

Opening Address to the Southern Africa Solidarity Conference in the City of Reggio Emilia, Italy: November 24, 1978

We, who are leading relentless struggles in our various areas of Southern Africa, have learned through experience that our own efforts, though primary and vital for our liberation, do need reinforcements by way of material, political, diplomatic and moral support from all our friends and natural allies. Our fighting front will forever need supplies’ from your reinforcing rear. This is the meaning and the essence of our solidarity. For such solidarity is indeed an alliance of activities in continual reciprocal interaction directed at the achievement of common goals. What we rejected We rejected at Malta the scheme to create a British one-man dictatorship as amounting to the recolonisation of Zimbabwe at a time it was urgent that Britain should hasten the decolonisation process. Hence we insisted that the administration of the country during the transitional period should be under a governing council holding full legislative and executive powers. We equally would not accept the involvement of the United Nations in a military role supportive of a colonial power. All in all, Malta resulted in a further impasse, but achieved the one result that we knew clearly each other’s thinking. In April 1978, a further meeting was held in Dar-es-Salaam between 195 the Patriotic Front and the Anglo-Americans at which the following points were agreed upon: What we accepted (a) That the Resident Commissioner could hold full executive powers only in respect of defence and law and order matters provided: (i) the army and the police forces were constituted by our liberation forces; and (ii) the Minister of Defence and the Minister of Law and Oder were Patriotic Front men and the Resident Commissioner acted after consulting with them; (b) That the United Nations could send a military force constituted of units from countries acceptable to us provided that the function also included the dismantlement of the Rhodesian forces and the grounding of the Rhodesia Air Force, the controlling of the weaponry and the guarding of the border with South Africa during the interim period; (c) The Governing Council we proposed need not have overwhelming Patriotic Front majority as long as the principle of a Patriotic Front majority was recognised in constituting it. Manoeuvres Dismally Failed The imperialist clandestine manoeuvres to break the Patriotic Front and reinforce the accord dismally failed. The Patriotic Front remains as solid as it was and continues to be opposed to the creation of a neo-colonialist state in Zimbabwe. Once the imperialist divisive manoeuvres had been exposed, the ` Anglo-Americans began working on a strategy to legitimize the Smith regime and legalize UDI. The readiness with which the Carter Administration facilitated their visit to the USA, not only by Smith but by Smith and his entire Executive Council, is an indication in that direction. .. . Now the British and their American friends are decidedly bent on supporting Smith’s racist regime. There is ample evidence exemplifying the newly-esablished attitude. The Anglo-Americans have now abandoned their proposals. The present British proposals are not merely a modification of their Original ones, but their complete antithesis. The new proposals reverse the fundamental requirements that the Anglo-Americans, the Patriotic Front, the Frontline States and the United Nations had agreed on as cornerstones to any transitional arrangements leading to independence. 196 7 Here is the astounding change of face by the British and the Americans: Change of Face (a) Smith and his regime no longer need to be disbanded now; (b) The regime’s forces must remain intact, that is the regular army, the air force and the police force; (c) The liberation forces we lead will ipso facto no longer constitute the basis of the envisaged Zimbabwe National Army; (d) Now even the salient and sacred principles of democratic elections before independence have become expendable; (e) Now the Anglo-American proposals are no longer a necessary basis for discussions. The Patrotic Front stands firm on the principle that power, total power, should be transferred without any qualifications or inbuilt constitutional neutralising mechanisms. Only Effective Instrument It is these unending and completely negative British antics in the face of an oppressive colonial system yielding great suffering for our people that prompted us in 1966 to take to the armed struggle. Our belief, therefore, remains that armed struggle is, in our circumstances, the only effective instrument for achieving our goal of national independence and thus creating peace in the country. Only the armed struggle can put an end to the constant acts of naked aggression being perpetrated by the racist regime against the Frontline States of Mozambique, Zambia, and Botswana, in a similar manner as they are perpetrated against Angola by the South African apartheid regime. The armed struggle has placed us in an effective position of control in most of the rural areas of the country where we have created liberated zones being administered by us and completely severed from the regime’s administration. The enemy’s civil and military administration bases and establishments have by and large been destroyed in these areas. The rail and road links have suffered substantial disruption. Settler farms have been deserted in most areas. The economy is grinding to a halt as the regime continues to spend over $1,5 million a day on the war alone. The morale of the settlers is at its lowest ebb and the emigration rate, now officially admitted to be 2 000 a month, continues to rise. We are now effectively poised for the destruction of the enemy in his urban strongholds. That is why the country’s towns are getting more and more encircled by our forces. : Politically, our liberation war having effectively won the fullest support of the broad masses, has isolated the puppet leaders and identified them with the principle enemy. This was the effect of the popular rejection of the internal accord now being promoted for acceptance by Britain. Now that the masses of Zimbabwe have brought victory within sight, we feel that the final blow is going to need the fullest backing of all the democratic forces the world over. The scene is growing more and more discomforting as the imperialist powers, shocked by our military gains, are consolidating their own forces and are now more openly than before, supplying the settler regime, through South Africa, with huge quantities of weaponry, aircraft and personnel. At the same time they are fastworking on a strategy to intervene militarily should the Salisbury regime collapse. Re-christening Exercise In the meantime all is being done to reshape and rebuild the image of Ian Smith. The strategy appears to be to use the envisaged all-party conference for this re-christening exercise. The scene being prepared is one which ushers in new actors. Owen and Graham have been stood down in the same way as was Ivor Richard following the failure of Geneva. In the same way Owen’s proposals are no longer desired. Thus the introduction of Cledwyn Hughes and Callaghan himself is part of the strategy to abandon the old proposals in preference for the new, so as to make it possible to accommodate Ian Smith’s objections. The imperialist strategy is both military and political. Accordingly, in view of the gravity of our situation and the overt clandestine enemy political manoeuvres, we have a duty to appeal to this conference to undertake concrete programmes of mobilising our support. =e ee ee ee ET O Ñ j KAY ji öğ ried = . SS ee Eee Sn ee See = e E n et a ~ 7 P

31. Dawn has begun in Zimbabwe

Address to the Extraordinary Session of the Coordinating _ Bureau of the Non-Aligned Movement in Maputo: January 31, 1979

Comrade Chairman, Your Excellencies, Combatants-in-arms, the Patriotic Front of Zimbabwe salutes this Extra-ordinary session of the Coordinating Bureau of the Non-Aligned Movement. We feel privileged to stand among you, professing with you, the same common ideals that have been the binding and galvanizing force behind the movement since its founding three decades ago. Our faith and commitment to the principles of Non-Alignment is so absolute that we feel delighted to assure you, here and now, that we look forward to joining your ranks, shortly, as a sovereign independent state of Zimbabwe. That’s a promise! We feel particularly elated by the fact that the Bureau has chosen to meet here in Maputo, the capital of the People’s Republic of Mozambique. For us, in Southern Africa, Maputo is not only the capital of a young socialist Republic. It is a symbol so serene, so immortal. It represents 500 years of tears, blood and suffering of the Mozambican People under the yoke of an alien Portuguese imperialism. No one will ever. know exactly what it means for a people to be enslaved by another for that long. Science has yet to invent a scale that can accurately measure 500 years of pain, hunger, humiliation, disease, ignorance, torture and death. We in Zimbabwe have some idea — after having been subjected to these deprivations for 89 years. It is hard to imagine how Zimbabweans could survive another 400 of the same! But Maputo and Mozambique are a symbol of a different kind now. Here, the invincibility of the combined power of the People was once again tested and once again, it triumphed. Mozambique is therefore a shrine attesting to the power and glory of the broad masses of the people once their eyes are opened and their will properly directed by a selfless, 199

dedicated leadership. We salute Camarada President Samora Moises Machel, FRELIMO and the Mozambican fundamental principle that man makes history. Many an oppressed people gained inspiration from the victories, against seemingly impossible odds, of the peoples of Mozambique, Angola, Guinea Bissau, Vietnam and Cambodia in this decade. These were impressive victories. These were our victories. Mr Chairman, Your Excellencies, Fellow combatants, we join with all those comrades who moved a vote of thanks to the brilliant speech delivered by Comrade President Samora Machel yesterday evening. It was a message from a statesman — scanning the horizon and pointing out the possible dangers and pitfalls that lie in wait, to disturb world peace, stability and freedom in our region here in Southern Africa. It was a message from a vigilant combatant who makes it his business to unravel the potents of the times. We join him in his reading of imperialist designs and imperialist goals. Th€ moral was clear: Until we have driven the last imperialist from the African soil, woe unto him who discards his gun under one or other illusion. Lastly, Comrade President Samora’s statement was a message from an African socialist, straight-forward, direct and analytically ruthless. We salute him, FRELIMO, and the people of Mozambique. This extraordinary session meets at a time when the situation in Southern Africa has assumed compelling dimensions, particularly as a result of the intensified armed struggle now raging in Zimbabwe and Namibia and the growing revolutionary militancy of the broad masses of the oppressed people of Southern Africa. This is a time of crisis in this region. It is a time when all our friends and allies must stand-up and be counted. Among our allies and friends is the Non-Aligned Movement. ThisMovement’s commitment to the liquidation of colonialism and imperialism is a matter of public record. We have appreciated your political, moral, diplomatic and material support in the past. Today, we call upon you to increase your help to match the intensification of the war by our combatants. The Zimbabwean people thank you and salute you. The Frontline States deserve special mention. None of them is rich. None of them has yet solved the basic needs of their people in the areas of health, education, industrialization, etc. And yet none of them has shirked the responsibility of standing side by side with the Patriotic Front in a joint effort to overthrow, root and branch, the barbaric, brutal, Sadistic, capitalist, racist regimes in Rhodesia, Namibia and South Africa. It is not enough to say thank you after all the lives that have been 200 i sacrificed and the property destroyed in the countries on our account. We can only thank them by liberating our people as quickly as possible. i re pledged to do. ee ee acting through the OAU have played an equally important role. The OAU’s Liberation Committee has been the major instrument in coordinating Africa’s Liberation Movements efforts to rid the continent of the scourge of imperialism, racism and colonialism. We i ortunity to salute them. l ua ae around the world have assisted us in our war. They have discharged and continue to discharge their RARES solidarity obligations in our region. Proletarian internationalism shou never be allowed to degenerate into a mere slogan. We express our profound gratitude and indebtedness to them all. Alongside the socialist states, progressive organisations and peoples around the world, too numerous to mention here, who have rallied to our cause must always be remembered. To all these allies, we say, here and now, give us more assistance in 1979 for dawn is just beginning 1n D nas and Comrades-in-arms, its my honoured task to now brief you fully on the progress and problems of our war. A my friend and Co-President, Comrade Joshua Nkomo, has been P by other pressing concerns of the war not to be here, this is a joint statement accurately covering the war being waged by our Patriotic Front forces and all fronts. In 1976, our combined leadership in ZANU and ZAPU met in this very city to analyze the matrix of the imperialist manoeuvres in our i try. The British and American governments had, after their eee join private study of our war, concluded that their agents were fast a ground. They had quickly resolved that their imperialist interests wou be best served by a resort to diplomacy. They came up wn the so-called Anglo-American plan styled ‘‘Proposals for a Settlement , calling be a conference of the parties to negotiate what was called a peaceful solution to the Rhodesian problem’’. It was immediately proposed that a the parties meet in Geneva during the month of October 1976. a Assembly is aware of the trail of events since then in connection wl sals. ve red the mood of imperialism well. We appreciated the fact that our opposing forces were ganging up, were uniting their resources = order to make a concerted counter-attack against us, separately, thereby seizing the initiative. We resolved to establish our own Patriotic Front as 201a bulwark against all imperialist and reactionary forces. So the Patriotic Front was born. The common agenda called for a single Saint negotiating position at all future conferences and in our diplomatic offensives. Our enemies prophesied a speedy disintergration of our unity — principally out of fear. They feared that our front would totally negate whatever offensives the enemy might plan. History has proved us right. We have consolidated our unity ever since. While a great deal remains to be done, the determination and spirit to succeed is there in us. Rome was not built ina day. However, let us remember that Rome was built. We resolved that our fighting forces must intensify the armed strug. gle in order to checkmate and neutralize the enemy’s moves on the _ diplomatic terrain. We were aware that a well-calculated and carefully executed diplomatic offensive by the enemy could prove as devastating an ambush upon our struggle similar to an ambush neatly laid in the jungle upon a unit that has cast out vigilance and unity. Since bullets and bazookas speak louder than words, we vowed to escalate the armed struggle even as we agreed to enter into constitutional negotiations seriously and in good faith. Our double-pronged strategy was richly rewarded. With the unflinching support of the Frontline States, we confronted the enemy side at Geneva in October 1976. By December the enemy side had collapsed as the Patriotic Front insisted on nothing less than total transfer of power to the people of Zimbabwe. Ian Smith, the man who had mercilessly massacred over 700 unarmed men, women and children at Nyadzonia in August 1976, suddenly found himself baffled and completely unable to sell his Kissinger plan. In despair, he left for Salisbury, never to return. His British masters, caught in their own trap, attempted to place the blame for the collapse of the conference on our side. The attempt failed. Ian Smith’s intransigence aided and abetted by the British Government, had wrecked the conference. For the Patriotic Front, it was time, we judged, to intensify the armed struggle in Zimbabwe. l Throughout 1977, our Patriotic forces emphasised military operations. We infiltrated thousands of our cadres into many of the fifty (50) magisterial districts in the country. Some were political commissars charged with the task of politicising the broad masses and deepening their ideological consciousness. Others transported arms and material to every vantage point in Zimbabwe. The war soon assumed new proportions as we intensified our operations extending them to wider zones. 202 y We realized that once our strategy to win the rural areas succeeded, E the 7 000 white racist farmers throughout the country would feel so in- f. \secure that most would, in time, abandon their ill-gotten estates and dr retreat to the security of the urban areas. As 1977 wore on, the majority, A : \in fact did so. In many areas, our forces found themselves alone with the ‘peasants, able to complete the consolidation process and the establish'. ment of liberated zones without which it would not have been possible to | preserve our revolutionary gains and use them in turn as a new base for acquiring more gains. ae The regime’s forces reacted in typical fashion. Hundreds of thou| i . sands of peasants were herded into concentration camps (so-called proA’ te tected villages) which, as we all known, miserably failed in Mozambique W: and elsewhere. The food stores of the masses were set ablaze and i destroyed; their livestock in many areas were poisoned or shot and left to "perish. Many innocent men and women were slaughtered each week, GC allegedly caught in cross-fire, or ‘running with terrorists”. The strategy was to terrorise the masses into submission and abandoning the struggle. It failed. By October, 1977, the regime was terror-stricken. Our forces repeatedly stormed the concentration camps, liberating thousands of our |". people. Our surprise attacks, ambushes and near-regular engagements | i © multiplied. It became clear that thousands of the racist settlers were fleeS; . ing the country every month. Settler morale plummetted to its lowest ebb. The economy sagged badly and man-power supply reached desyi perate levels. tye In desperation, the enemy plotted the Chimoio and Tembue masj}. sacres in an attempt to shore-up morale. This did not alter the realities on . the ground in Zimbabwe. We responded appropriately, smashing airbases, economic targets and vital communication net-works. Then we started carrying the struggle into the cities. We had the initiative in our hands. We have never lost it since. British and American imperialists went into caucus and emerged with yet another swindling plan: The British proposals for a settlement in Rhodesia of September 1977 on the basis of which the Patriotic Front was invited to meet the British and the Americans in Malta and Dar-esSalaam respectively at the beginning of 1978. The agents of imperialism, |. Jan Smith and the three puppets, Sithole, Muzorewa and Chirau, refused _ to attend. We attached no significance to their non-attendance as our “a © position had always been that we negotiate with Britain and no one else. In Dar-es-Salaam we refined our negotiating position, took the Anglo-Americans by surprise and made positive concessions without affecting the principle that total power must be transferred to the people of; Zimbabwe through their sole and authentic representative, the Patriotic Front. Power, to us, has always included ‘military component in its meaning. We insisted therefore, that our liberation forces had to displace and replace all colonial forces. The Anglo-Americans found this demand too much to accept. | Since Dar-es-Salaam, the armed struggle had achieved several, substantive, qualitative leaps. (a) The incessant, deadly blows we rained upon the enemy soon smothered the imperalist sponsored so-called agreement of March 3, 1978. The enemy, who had looked to the so-called internal settlement as a military strategy to dampen the fires of the war, suddenly realized that he had fueled it. (b) The enemy, in an attempt to keep his head above the sea of an armed people — lashed outside with a new ferociousness. The savage and criminal massacres of refugees in Frontline States were intensified, resulting in the grisly murders of thousands in Zambia, Mozambique and Botswana. It was a repeat of 1976 and 1977. Despite these extreme provocations the Patriotic Front did not repay in kind. We have not, to date, attacked one white school, hospital or nursery. It would be primitive to do so. We are revolutionaries. Ian Smith and his cohorts are criminals. (c) The broad masses of the Zimbabwean people rose to the occasion in 1978. They responded to our call to completely identify themselves with our fighters and together, to intensify the war. The enemy agents, sent into the country-side by Smith, Muzorewa, Sithole and Chirau to subvert the People’s war effort were arrested by the masses and brought to justice soon. No agents have since set-out on those criminal missions. Saboteurs, carriers of poison, spies and other ilk soon dwindled to near-vanishing point. (d) As a result of the People’s revolutionary gains, the Patriotic Front found itself faced with new responsibilities and new challenges in the service of our people. We are now attempting with meagre resources to provide basic necessities. Medical supplies which yesterday were solely for our fighters, must now be shared out among our people. On a small scale, we are beginning to grapple with our people’s educational needs. To defend and secure their areas from the cowardly enemy attacks, we have to share the arms which we badly need to storm the urban areas. We will, with your help, do more this _ year. 204 ‘ E © (g) The urban areas became increasingly less secure for the enemy in 1978. As delegates here remember, we gave Ian Smith a Christmas present of his entire life last year. The biggest fire in Zimbabwe’s history resulting from our forces’ attack upon the oil storage tanks in Salisbury gave every racist settler a sampling of how furiously our people’s revolutionary fire burns. The worst shocks now await them, in 1979. The enemy is now feeling the noose around its urban neck. By proclaiming martial law in what now amounts to 90 per cent of Zimbabwe, Ian Smith and the three black traitors have admitted to the world that their civil authority is now effectively guaranteed into the ten per cent of Rhodesia in what our forces are now contesting in earnest. We propose to take full advantage of our uncontested control in most of Zimbabwe to spring from these rear rural bases and assault key targets with devastating effect. In anticipation of this, the enemy had proclaimed twenty-four hour curfews in the large urban areas such as Bulawayo and Salisbury. The enemy is now desperate for man-power. As every one here knows, the regime has announced its intention of conscripting, by force, African Secondary School and University students. This will fail. Our young people have made it known that they will never take up arms against their own parents and themselves. We have definite plans for negating this desperate tactic. (h) On the diplomatic Front, the Anglo-American proposals having been overtaken by the qualitative development of the armed struggle and having been abandoned by their authors, now appear as dead as the dodo. The cessation of the British shuttle and shuffle diplomacy was confirmed recently by Cledwyn Hughes in his report to the British Prime Minister Callaghan, who apparently had no other choice but to accept it. Ian Smith and the black traitors reached a dead-end at the end of 1978. The promised independence did not materialise. They were wise enough to realise that an election could not be held in over 80 per cent of the country. They changed their song. Only yesterday, Ian Smith conducted an all-white referendum because that appears to be the only diversionary tactic he believed he can pull-off. We all know that the results are irrelevant. The so-called ‘‘Zimbabwe-Rhodesia’’ majority rule constitution due to be implemented on April 20, 1979 will be the fifth “‘independence” constitution in thirteen years. Unlike its predecessors, it is a travesty in the extreme. 205

Since the Greeks, no sovereign state, but ‘“Zimbabwe-Rhodesia’’ will have a constitution under which neither the executive nor cabinet nor the legislature will have any say or control over the army, the police, the public service or the economy. Whether it be traitor Muzorewa or traitor Sithole or traitor Chirau who will be styled ‘Prime Minister”, he will have less than one per cent of the authority of Kaiser Matanzima or any of the Bantustan leaders. The country will be effectively under white minority rule. It will be the autonomous, all white commissions that will constitute the new white, racist minority regime. The essence of the present system will, the enemy hopes, continue in that stupid disguise. (j) Our correct line abides forever. The Patriotic Front rejects any arrangement that seeks to preserve the present evil system in Zimbabwe. No cosmetic change of the capitalist beast will satisfy us. The degenerate, racist and exploitative system must go. We want total power for our people. We want full unabridged, undiluted sovereignty over our natural resources and over our own destiny. The regime pretends not to hear our demands. Our bullets are however fast opening its ears as they instil fear and panic into the minds and hearts of the racist. Mr Chairman, Your Excellencies, Fellow Combatants, the war in Zimbabwe has reached a critical stage. Dawn is here, but we still have a short while to go. Please help us to achieve it sooner. Conclusion : Mr Chairman, Your Excellencies, Fellow Combatants, we have given a brief account of the war being waged by the Patriotic Front. We would be failing in our duty if we did not bring you our fraternal demands and requests. The Patriotic Front has the honour to present for your consideration two draft resolutions. We urge you to adopt them unanimously. They are weapons in our arsenal for the speedy conclusion of this war: (a) The first Resolution deals exclusively with Zimbabwe. Here we would have you hold, inter alia, that we, the Patriotic Front are the sole and authentic representative of our people and that Muzorewa, Sithole and Chirau are traitors. We would have you admit us into full membership of the Non-Aligned Movement; have you affirm our 206 : armed struggle programme, and have you increase your material and other assistance to us. i. (b) The second Resolution deals with the question of exportation of mercenaries and arms from certain countries to Southern Africa. We believe, Mr Chairman, that this resolution is a major contribution to peace and justice in our region. Mr Chairman, I might here add, that the 32nd Ordinary Session of the Liberation Committee meeting in Dar-es-Salaam on the 16th January, 1979 adopted two very similar resolutions upon our sponsorship. The Non-Aligned Movement cannot afford to do less. A luta continua! Pamberi neChimurenga! Pambili Lempi

32. Appeal to all Progressive Mankind

Article in THE ZIMBABWE NEWS

Our Party, the Zimbabwe African National Union, which operates within the Patriotic Front, is seeking financial and material aid to maintain thousands of Zimbabweans who cross the border from Rhodesia into Mozambique. Due to the intensification of the liberation struggle in Zimbabwe, the influx of displaced Zimbabweans into Mozambique is increasing considerably. We estimate that more than 57 000 Zimbabweans are now living in Mozambique in camps which are jointly administered by the Mozambique Ministry of the Interior Services for Refugees and the Zimbabwe African National Union. Uppermost in our minds is the existing shortage of food. This is made more acute by the continuous influx of our displaced people. We are faced with the problem of providing them with food, clothes, education, social and medical services. Background: Rhodesia is still a British colony. It is in the grip of the rebel, minority and racist regime of Mr Ian Smith which maintains a brutal police state. Because of the refusal of the Smith regime to accept genuine majority rule in Zimbabwe, the Zimbabwe African National Union found no other way of gaining the freedom of our country than by training ourselves across its borders to liberate it and to re-gain our people’s right through an armed struggle. A guerilla war started and has now spread to most parts of the country. So far there are more than three and a half million people living in semi-liberated areas inside Rhodesia. Repression, by the Smith regime, of the civilian population provoked their exodus into Mozambique. From July, 1975, following the independence of Mozambique, the number of Zimbabweans crossing the border and given assistance through the Mozambican authorities has steadily increased to its present level. The Government and people of Mozambique are making great con208 i tributions towards the welfare of our people. They are in the fore-front of observing UN sanctions against Rhodesia; engaged in a programme to repatriate ex-Mozambican refugees who had fled to Tanzania during the period of Frelimo’s struggle against the Portuguese minority rule in a Mozambique; and their country is in the process of achieving selfim. reliance. The Zimbabweans in Mozambique are in two categories. The first category is of girls and boys in their late teens and young men and women under the direction of ZANU Central Committee. These were i: motivated to leave their country by the desire to liberate it from the oppressive and inhuman conditions prevailing in Rhodesia. They compose the liberation forces and are catered for separately. The rest of the Zimbabweans in Mozambique are catered for in three main centres: Doroi, Toronga and Mavudzi. Our latest count reflects that there are 17 000 living in Doroi, 12 000 at Toronga, 6 000 at Mavudzi and 22 700 at small centres elsewhere. They arrive unheralded and so » their reception has so far not been adequately provided for in terms of financial and material aid. We are in most urgent need for food, clothes, medicines, educational and agricultural equipment. We want to increase the production of food for them and thus improve on our self-reliance projects of production and small scale industries such as building, Ẹ. carpentry, motor-mechanics, water purification and telecommunications. Food: Our daily meals consist of our staple food, sadza, and relish of beans and rarely a little meat and/or vegetables. Our Department of Welfare and Transport revealed that in the last two months we used food to the value of 934million escudos. This means that until we can produce our own maize in sufficient quantity to meet our needs, we shall require the following items of food every two months: Foodstuff Quantity Estimated Cost in Escudos Beats: vice ce tidtac ees dat eee ees 200 tons 1 000 000 Maize-teéal ou. cece kc ccee se eb aenes wean 500 tons 2 000 000 SUPA ss ae easton eReader esac 60 tons 500 000 SS) Sn 50 tons 50 000 "a Nutrovit o.2.2a i lawerte ead aa ees 10 tons 700 000 209

Dried Meat............... ccc cece eee 500 tons 3 000 000 Whole Milk i446 04h ca ewes epg 5Q0 tons 1 500 000 Vegetables (to supplement our supply)... 500 000 Cooking oil i465 fiw A da wisn ene weds 500 000 A total estimated cost of: .............. 9 750 000 We are able to produce our own maize and vegetables but not in sufficient quantity to meet our needs. The importance of food to healthy minds and bodies cannot be over-emphasized. This will mean less medicines! Clothes and blankets: Until we are able to make our own clothes, we shall require clothes for all sizes of people from babies to old men and women. We have a greater need for men’s clothes. These can be conveniently worn by girls and women at work and other occasions. Shoes are also in short supply. They are essential for protection against jiga-fleas. Any second-hand item of clothes is most valuable to us. Warm clothes are needed for babies and young children who are susceptible to pneumonia. Our nights are often very cold, particularly during winter. We need a lot of blankets which are obtainable in Mozambique. Medicines: Our department of Health has prepared and issued a comprehensive list of medicines that we require and the common diseases that affect us in the camps. The list is too long to attach to his letter but can be sent to those interested on request to the Secretary for Health, Caixa Postal 393, Chimoio, Mozambique. There is need to provide accommodation of a semi-permanent nature such as prefabricated houses to accommodate our patients. Provision of camp-beds would be an essential comfort. Related to health is the rehabilitation of our comrades who were disabled during the Nyadzonia massacre in August, 1976. Most of them lost vital limbs. They are mostly refugees who were caught unawares. We shall be most grateful for facilities to rehabilitate them.

Education: Presently we have an enrolment of over 10 000 pupils with a further 20 000 destined for Adult Literacy classes. Our schools range from creches to secondary.

We are short of the most basic school materials. We are often forced to undertake our lessons under the trees and frequently use the earth for written work. Our youths are very keen to learn and are intelligent. Educational material in the form of blackboards, chalk, exercisebooks, pencils, ball point pens, rubbers, maps, laboratory equipment, 210 text-books on English, Portuguese, French, Geography, Economics, ccountancy, Bookkeeping, Administration, Short-hand, Sciences (Bioogy, Chemistry, Physics), Mathematics, Arithmetic, Shona and Ndebele -are most urgently needed. We hope to produce our own text-books in due course. For this we require type-writers, duplicating machines and assorted paper. We also need literature of a progressive nature to stock a Central Library which we would like to establish for all our schools. If more detailed information is required, it is available from the Secretary for Education and Culture, Caixa Postal 393, Chimoio, Mozambique. Production and Construction Equipment: We have just created a new Department of Production, Construction and Development to take care of our self-reliance projects such as food production and small scale industries. We need tools to enable us to undertake building, carpentry, handcrafts and tailoring work. Rolls of cloth, sewing machines, sewing thread and needles are also needed. Vegetable seeds are needed all the year round but during our rainy season, which sets in in November, we require seed-maize and beans to plant. We also need fertilizers. Should you wish to make a financial donation to us, we shall be pleased if you would please remit it to the Zimbabwe African National Union, Caixa Postal 743, Maputo, Mozambique. Alternatively funds can be transferred to our banking account number 20.00.50.934.825 with Banco de Mozambique in Maputo. In this case a separate advice will enable us to locate the donation and acknowledge its receipt.

All material donations should be sent to us through the port of Beira and addressed to the Zimbabwe African National Union, Caixa Postal 393, Chimoio, Mozambique. The bills of landing should be sent to our office at Maputo. The same applies for goods sent by air-freight.

We wish to continue to develop our disciplined hard working way of life which will offer a constructive pattern for the future development of our country. In our camps of young Zimbabweans in Mozambique and within Rhodesia, there are significant points of new growth. It is in these camps that the new spirit is being born, developed and put into effect to break through the current deadlock and to give courage and confidence to the people of a new Zimbabwe.

The current situation in Rhodesia is well known. There is a gulf of understanding between us and the oppressive colonialist regime. But consequently upon our action to liberate our country, talks were held at Geneva and new “proposals for a settelement’’ are put forward by the Anglo-Americans. Our objective is to live in a free and independent Zimbabwe. This has yet to be achieved. “African leaders” within) Rhodesia may talk with Mr Smith to achieve an “‘internal settlement” ‘This has happened many times before. We, across the border, are train! ing to provide the National Army for Zimbabwe. This will safeguard the country’s security and maintain our people’s law and order. This causes a noble one and we cannot go back on it. We are supported by the presidents of the five Frontline States and recognised by the Organisation of African Unity.

We are aware of the need for wise and farseeing statesmanship to unify our country by bridging the artificial racial gulf and to heal the wounds and bitterness caused by the current war. Our party is prepared for this task which can only be performed by those who are involved in the war and which should be done during the early stages of the coming into being of the new state-of Zimbabwe.

This appeal to supporters who are seeking the way to constructive action for the national liberation of Zimbabwe is made in the belief that help given to us now will help us to avoid further loss of life through mal- nutrition and disease. It will help us to help ourselves through our self- reliance projects.

Our Financial and External Affairs Departments are willing to send small delegations to friendly countries who wish to organise fund-raising campaigns. They will address public meetings and give further informa- tion about our liberation struggle.

Finally, we must thank the Government and people of the People’s Republic of Mozambique, other progressive governments and various United Nations agencies and progressive organisations and individuals for the support that has enabled our liberation struggle to progress to its present stage. We hope that their help will continue to come until our country is free and our people are able to return to share equal oppor- tunities with their fellow citizens.

With our revolutionary greeting — Pamberi neChimurenga!

References

Most of the documents published in this volume have first appeared in This has happened many times before. We, i zx , PP y r e, across the border, are train’ E the Zimbabwe News (ZN), the official organ of ZANU and ZANLA during to provide the National Army for Zimbabwe. This will safeguard the 1 3 ing the war. Exact references are given below, but titles may differ country’s security and maintain our people’s law and order. This cause is y . a noble one and we cannot go back on it. We are supported by the 1 | presidents of the five Frontline States and recognised by the Organisation I A . Stand firm: ZN, vol. 9, No. 2, Jan. — May, 1976, Sf. . The Chimoio and Tembue Massacres: ZN, vol. 9, Nos. 5/6, July — Dec. 1977, 34 — 36. . Fight hard, fight harder . . . : ibid. 42—45. . To arms, all of you... : ZN, vol. 10, No. 1, Jan. — Febr. 1978, 3-5. . The year of the People’s storm: Pamphlet published by ZANU headquarters, Maputo, |! i | A Anglo-Americans. Our objective is to live i i 1 g j o live in a free and independent ýpi We are aware of the need for wise and farseeing statesmanship to unify our country by bridging the artificial racial gulf and to heal the mAh WN = wounds and bitterness caused by the current war. Our party is prepared for this task which can only be performed by those who are involved in the war and which should be done during the early stages of the coming 1979, 11 — 30. . The struggle continues: ZN, vol. 11, No. 3, Sept. - Oct. 1979, 6f. . Defining the line: ZN, vol. 9, Nos 5/6, July — Dec. 1977, 10-14. . The perspective of our revolution: ibid. 17-21. i 9, ZANU carries the burden of history: ZN vol. 10, No. 2, May — June 1978, 5- 10. of African Unity. 1 a | | | i | into being of the new state of Zimbabwe. t i i | | T . . . I i | Be i i pr fer anne ae cave iad way to constructive R10. The inception of ZANU: ZN vol. 10, No. 4, July- August 1978, 5—7. i liberation of Zimbabwe is made in the belief that i 11. The role of ZANU in the struggle: ZN vol. 10, No. 5, Sept. — Oct. 1978, 6-9. ji help given to us now will help us to avoid further loss of life through mal- i $: 12. First Zimbabwe women’s seminar: ZN vol. 11, No. 1, Jan. — June 1979, 13 — 20. nutrition and disease. It will help us to help ourselves through our self- # 13. ZANU: Sixteen years of struggle: ZN vol. 11, No. 2, July- August 1979, 6—7. | reliance projects. a 14. Independence is not negotiable: ZN vol. 9, Nos 5/6, July — Dec. 1977, 30 — 32. l 15. Imperialist plot to create a neo-colonialist Zimbabwe: ZN, vol. 10, No. 1, Jan. — Febr. | | | | Our Financial and External Affairs Departments are willing to send E 1978. 6f | small delegations to friendly countries who wish to organise fund-raising | a 16. Rejecting the internal ‘settlement’: ZN, vol. 10, No. 1, Jan. — Feb. 1978, 29-33. : campaigns. They will address public meetings and give further informa- 17. After the Kilimanjaro Conference (Malta II): ZN, vol. 10, No. 2, March — April 1978, | tion about our liberation struggle. E 42. | Finally, we must thank the Government and people of the People’s x 18. eee bogus elections: Pamphlet published by ZANU headquarters, Maputo | Republic of Mozambique, other i f E he nee : i U F d Nati q j progr GSSIS governments and VATIONS sA 19. The basic political position of the Patriotic Front: ZN, vol. 11, No. 2, July — August : | nited Nations agencies and progressive organisations and individuals 1 1979, 35. | for the support that has enabled our liberation struggle to progress to its Æ 20. Chairman Chitepo taught us to take up arms: ZN, vol. 10, No. 2, March — April 1978, | present stage. We hope that their help will continue to come until our 4 Be e nanan a | country is free and our people are able to return to share equal oppor- 4 ae ee aie coe ee a June 1978, 11—13 | tunities with their fellow citizens. , 4 Be ge ay oe ee ees Pau | With luti see : i 3 $. 23. Victory is the only tribute to a hero: Pamphlet published by ZANU headquarters, | ith our revolutionary greeting — Pamberi neChimurenga! E Maputo 1979, 7-12. | 4 i p. 24. A revolutionary never dies: ZN, vol. 11, No. 1, Jan. — June 1979, 10- 12. Mm 25. Church and State in independent Zimbabwe: part of this in ZN. vol. 10, No. 4, i j Ki July — August 1978, 10f. Full text in Doctrine and Life (Dublin) vol. 30, March 1980, | $ 177 — 184. | E 26. We need arms: ZN, vol. 10, No. 4, July — August 1978, 44- 46. | i "A - 27. Once again: a luta continua! : ZN, vol. 10, No. 5, Sept. — Oct. 1978, 3-6. l n 28. The real meaning of solidarity: ibid., 36 — 39. | E a 29. Our socialist programme will come from the people: ZN, vol. 10, No. 6, Nov. — Dec. | 1978, 3-10. 1 30. Liberation movements from Southern Africa strengthen solidarity with Italian people: ibid. 30—32. 212 213

31. ae = in Zimbabwe: Pamphlet published by ZANU headquarters, Maputo32. Appeal to all progressive mankind: ZN, vol. 9, Nos. 5/6, July — Dec. 1977, 56f. |

Glossary of Abbreviations

ANC African National Congress (Also ANC-SA) African National Council

BSAC British South Africa Company

SWAPO South West Africa People’s Organisation

FRELIMO Front for the Liberation of Moçambique (Frente de Libertacao de Moçambique)

FROLIZI Front for the Liberation of Zimbabwe

NDP National Democratic Party

OAU Organisation for African Unity

PAIGC African Party for the Independence of Guinea and the Cape Verde Islands (Partido Africano da Independencia da Guiné e Capo Verde)

PF Patriotic Front

PLO Palestine Liberation Organisation

POLISARIO Popular Front for the Liberation of Saguia al-Hamra and Rio de Oro

UDI Unilateral Declaration of Independence (Rhodesia)

UNIP United Independence Party (Zambia)

ZANLA Zimbabwe African National Liberation Army

ZANU Zimbabwe African National Union

ZAPU Zimbabwe African People’s Union

ZIPA Zimbabwe People’s Army

ZIPRA Zimbabwe People’s Revolutionary Army

ZLC Zimbabwe Liberation Council