I
have watched many BBC HardTalk programmes over the years and last night’s
programme with Welshman Ncube as the invited guest is, in my humble opinion one
of the “softest” ever!
The
British government, the EU, the USA and many other western countries rejected
that Zimbabwe's 2013 were free, fair and credible and that is why they refused
to lift the targeted sanctions against President Mugabe and his inner circle.
It was only later, under pressure from the Belgian government who wanted to
resume trade especially in diamonds and did not care about free and fair
elections, that the EU lift the sanction on everyone except President Mugabe
and his wife, Grace.
So,
for the HardTalk presenter to quote from Stephen Chan’s, Professor at London University’s School of Oriental and
African Studies, book 'Why Mugabe Won: The 2013 Elections
in Zimbabwe and their Aftermath' as if
this is a credible source is an outrage. The presenter, as did Professor Chan, accepted
the official result that Mugabe won 61% of the vote. The official result
included the votes of the hooded Zanu PF youths who were bussed from one
polling station to the next casting votes. The regime increased the number of
polling stations from 2 000 to a staggering 9 000 just a few days before voting
day.
Nearly
one million voters were denied the vote because their details had been
deliberately deleted or posted in a different constituent voters’ roll than the
one they expected. It must have been deliberate because that would explain why
the regime has stubbornly refused to release the verifiable 2013 voters’ roll
even to this day. The voters’ roll must be realised at least one month before
the elections, that is the law.
Of
course, Professor Stephen Chan must have seen the YouTube videos of the bussed hooded
Zanu PF youths, read the AU election observers report who complained of the
failure to produce the voters’ roll and mountain of other sources proving
beyond doubt that Zanu PF rigged the 2013 elections. It is clear that Professor
Chan ignored all this information, for whatever reasons that time alone will
reveal, and declare the election free, fair and credible and declared Mugabe
the winner.
Why
the BBC, with all its resources and reputation as a dependable source of
accurate information and whose staff pride themselves in being incorruptible,
chose to take Professor Chan’s word against that of the British government and
many other sources on Zimbabwe’s 2013 elections beggars belief!
In
the course of the interview, Professor Welshman Ncube admitted that the July
2013 elections were rigged.
I
half expected the HardTalk presenter to remind Professor Ncube that he and his
MDC friends were warned by SADC leaders not to contest the July 2013 elections
with no democratic reforms designed to stop Zanu PF rigging the elections.
“Why
did you contest the July 2013 elections with no reforms?”
Let
Professor Ncube waffle.
“The
opposition has not implemented not even one reform since the rigged July 2013
elections and yet you are preparing to contest next year’s election. Why are
you, once again, contesting next year’s flawed elections, in total disregard of
the SADC leaders’ recommendation not to and contrary to your own “No reform, no
election!” resolution?”
Sadly,
the HardTalk presenter never asked any of the questions above nor did she ask any,
one would consider hard questions.
So,
the BBC HardTalk programme was disappointing in giving some modicum of
credibility in quoting Professor Chan’s outrageous claim that “Mugabe won” the
2013 Zimbabwe elections when there is a mountain of evidence proving that he
rigged the elections. Then to make matters worse the present asked Professor
Ncube the questions the latter would wanted asked; they were that soft. If last
night’s BBC HardTalk programme is anything to go by, then the Corporation should
just change the title of programme’s to SoftTalk and be done with it!
2 comments:
Fielding more than one presidential candidate will split the vote and stop the opposition candidate winning in the first round but there will nothing to stop him/her winning in the run off assuming the total opposition vote in the first round was 50% plus one or more! So why even someone like BBC HardTalk presenter was wasting time about who will head the coalition is beyond me. I would expect the usual MDC supporter out there who does not know his left hand from his right hand on such political matters to be confused about the coalition but not a BBC HardTalk presenter as well.
The opposition coalition is just a red herring promoted by CIOs for Pete's sake!
I am surprised that BBC HardTalk fell for this grand coalition issue and made it appear as if it is important!
Fielding more than one presidential opposition candidate will split the vote and stop the opposition candidate winning in the first round but there will nothing to stop him/her winning in the run off assuming the total opposition vote in the first round was 50% plus one or more! If the first round is free and fair then why should the second round not be free and fair too. The focus therefore should be on making sure the elections are indeed free and fair.
So why was the BBC HardTalk presenter wasting time on who will head the coalition instead of making sure the elections are not rigged, again, is beyond me. I would expect the usual MDC supporter out there who does not know his left hand from his right hand on such political matters to be confused about the coalition but not a BBC HardTalk presenter as well.
The opposition coalition is just a red herring ruthlessly promoted by CIOs for Pete's sake! Zanu PF loves to distract the naive and gullible by setting the agenda for everyone. The regime is pleased to see the man years and the volume of space the nation is wasting talking about the coalition whilst completely ignoring the real game changer issue of stopping the regime rigging the vote!
Post a Comment