Hello Mr Pilger
Im not sure if this letter will reach you; but as you are a major supporter of Green Left Weekly and for a second reason given below, I thought it best to send you a letter ive written to GLW on the issue

Of president Mugabe of Zimabwe and the continued demonisation of him mand his government.

Unfortunately,Ive just discovered that you have recently written:
'Once the wretched Robert Mugabe is gone, Zimbabwe will get the same treatment. Offering a billion pounds’ worth of “aid”, the British government will lead the return of capital, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund to restore what was, long before Mugabe’s wrecking, one of the most exploited and unequal societies in Africa'

This is completely false. Mugabe has not wrecked the economy: that the work of the IMF and the economic sanctions, called for by the MDC. If it were true, 'the wretched Mugabe' would not be so popular in africa, as you do note:

'The South African president, Thabo Mbeki, is said to have been recruited to get rid of the obstacle that is Mugabe, but he is cautious, no doubt recalling that Mugabe, on his last visit to South Africa, received an embarrassing ovation from the black crowd. This was not so much an endorsement of his despotism as a reminder that most South Africans had not forgotten one of the ANC’s “unbreakable promises'

 http://www.johnpilger.com/page.asp?partid=484

What despotism? Maybe having read the above, my letter below is in vain. In it you will learn that Fidel Casto also endorses president Mugabe. You will also learn that both Stephen Gowans, Greg Elich and australian Rob Gowland have written very extensively on Zimbabwe, and I would urge you to read them. Are these three endorsing despotism?

I must remind you that Zimbabwe is under the same sort of economic terrorism that Chile (under Allende) endured , Iraq endured and Haiti has endured. Why? Because their leaders were independent of foreign control and the US sort to have them removed by making the economy scream. You and GLW surprisingly find yourself on the same side as the western press, upon whom you seem dependent for your information. But as you are in London, you should have no trouble contacting Baffour Ankomah, editor of New African. He has written on Zimbabwe and interviewed Mugabe.

 editorial@africasia.com

Anyway, below is my letter. I wil be sending it to other leftwing sites, to make them aware of the regime change campaign shamefully being endorsed by some woefully misinformed left wing people.

Meanwhile I offer the following as alternative views on Zimbabwe:
 http://www.raceandhistory.com/Zimbabwe/
 http://www.swans.com/library/art8/elich004.html
 http://www.counterpunch.org/gowans03232007.html

 http://www.cpa.org.au/booklets/zimbabwe.pdf Gowland explains in detail what has really happened in Zimbabwe. His work and Gowans and Elich has been ignored by GLW.

Kind regards
Brian
================================================================================================================================




Hi GLW
What do president mugabe of Zimbabwe and Fidel Casto have in common: both are victors in wars of liberation, both are regularly demonised by the capitalist countries. Where do they differ: in their treatment by Green Left Weekly.

Where GLW is clueless, Castro is aware: In a 2002 meeting with Mugabe, he had this to say, as reported in the Zim Herald and told by Rob Gowland: 'Castro told president Mugabe that he was 'confident in Zimbabwe's victory despite the obstacles"'

 http://www.cpa.org.au/booklets/zimbabwe.pdf
No mention here of Mugabe being an authoritian capitalist terrorisng his country…

In 2006, President mugabe attended the NAM summit, where Granma, had this to say:
'The first to take the floor was Robert Mugabe, president of Zimbabwe who, in the name of Africa, thanked the Cuban people and government for their hospitality and organization of the event.

He expressed the absolute confidence of the African nations in Cuba’s leadership of the Movement and reiterated his conviction that when this troika is ended and we arrive in Egypt, the next summit venue, we will have recovered the role that the Movement had one day in international relations and the much desired revitalization will be a fact.

We all consider, said Mugabe, that this Summit has been one of the best, while asking for the transmission of “our extremely warm message to brother Fidel for his prompt recovery.”'

 http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:Y6DxFdkRZvwJ:www.granma.cu/ingles/2006/septiembre/domin17/39clausura-i.html+zimbabwe+mugabe+granma&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=5&gl=au

So given Cubas pleasant reception of president Mugabe, over many years, why has GLW persisted in its attacks on Mugabe and his government? Has it been deceived by the mainstream media hysterical media demonisation campaign?

Why has GLW not made use of the work of Stephen Gowans and Gregory Elich, both left wing comentators, and both well versed in the issue?

Is it because Gowans has written:
'In their zeal to demonize Zimbabwe's Zanu-PF government it sometimes seems that members of the "independent left" are working for the US government. The reason why is that many are.'

…
'Australia's Green Left Weekly, and the Zimbabwe International Socialist Organization, have both backed the opposition MDC from the start (in fact, the ISO is a founding member) [6]. The problem with the MDC is that it's the US and EU vehicle for strengthening a neo-colonial domination of Zimbabwe and of white farmers for stopping land reform.'

 http://www.raceandhistory.com/Zimbabwe/2007/0804.html
Instead, and as if to illustrate Gowans thesis, we have Norm Dixon, who believes Mugabe is carrying out a terror campaign:

'Zimbabwe’s authoritarian capitalist government, headed by President Robert Mugabe, has unleashed a massive wave of police brutality and destruction in an attempt to terrorize the country’s fiercely anti-government urban working class and other poor city dwellers.'

 http://www.worldpress.org/Africa/2095.cfm
Someone should tell Fidel and the Cubans, because they seems unware of this. Authoritarian? Capitalist? The above statement that appeared in the GLW for 2005 is pure bilge. It’s the poor who have bene consistently voting FOR Mugbe and ZANU-PF. The alernative is the MDC, which is both funded by foreign governments (an act illegal in the US) and has a policy of neoliberal privatisation:

'The establishment of a new opposition party, the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), in September 1999, found instant support from Western leaders. Significant funding from Western sources enabled the party to rapidly grow to the point where it won 57 out of 120 seats in the June 24-25 2000 parliamentary election, less than one year after its creation. Ostensibly based in the labor movement, the program of MDC reads like a call for a return to ESAP. A policy paper issued by the party spelled out its plans for privatization. Upon taking power, the party plans to appoint a "fund manager to dispose of government-owned shares in publicly quoted companies." The boards of all public enterprises would be "reconstituted," and the new boards would be "required to privatize their enterprises within specified timetables...with an overall target of privatizing all designated parastatals [public companies] within two years." The interests of Western capital would not be ignored

 http://www.swans.com/library/art8/elich004.html

Is Norm aware of this? Is GLW? Are both aware that the MDC's base like the base for Bush: is the urban MIDDLE classes NOT the urban poor, let alone the rural majority of zimbabweans. It is these latter people for whom the war of liberation was fought. They are the ones driving Mugabes very uncapitalist policies: esp the reclamation of land stolen from them by the white invaders. Doesn’t it seem strange that Norms capitalist should be having talks with the worlds leading critic of capitalism: Fidel Castro?

So why is a leading left wing paper like GLW supporting making common cause with the MSM and neoliberal foreign funded political party?

Its revealing that GLW publishes the writings of Dixon and Patrick Bond where both are clearly Pro-MDC, while refusing to publish the work of Stephen Gowans and Greg Elich?

Why has GLW not reported on Tsvangirais remarks that even the BBC reported:
'The Movement for Democratic Change leader told 20,000 supprters at a rally on Saturday that if Mr Mugabe did not want to step down before the next elections scheduled for 2002 "we will remove you violently". '

 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/952796.stm
Why has GLW not reported on president Mugabes repudiation of violence:

'President slams violence'
 http://www.herald.co.zw/inside.aspx?sectid=34757&cat=1

GLW is self described as 'Australia's Radical Newspaper' and it is on most issues. But as the decision of Bond and Dixon over Elich and Gowans is an editorial one; on Zimbabwe, it is as conservative as the Australian.

regards
Brian