| Submit your comments on this article |
| Africa Subsaharan |
| Putting the Spin Into South Africa Land Reform |
| 2005-12-04 |
| There are many who believe that when the government steps up its land reform programme next year there will be... "a Zimbabwe in SA". The British media, in particular, routinely view developments south of the Limpopo from a perspective heavily influenced by the Zimbabwean experience. Which was why they were invited to a briefing at SA House last week on the pace and progress of land reform - and another fine lunch. Land and Agricultural Affairs Minister Thoko Didiza and high-ranking officials in her department were there to inform them that they should forget about Harare's "land reform programme", and bear in mind that absolutely nothing of the sort was going to happen in South Africa when the government comes for the land, as the government must. But the journalists would not let the matter lie, and pressed Didiza on "Zimbabwe". Yes, the minister said, the South African government "understands" the widespread criticism that it is reluctant to put pressure on Zimbabwe over President Robert Mugabe's controversial land policies but, no, it does not regard such criticism as "justifiable". Didiza and her delegation were at pains to stress that whatever the form of land restitution, it would be "fair and equitable" and would take place with due regard to the rule of law. In other words, no Zimbabwe in South Africa. As the land summit in July revealed, progress has been slow - in 11 years, a mere 2.9% of white-owned farm land has been transferred to blacks through government programmes, raising doubts as to whether the "non-negotiable" target of 30% in black hands by 2014 - regarded by some as unrealistic - would be met. Recent comments by Deputy President Phumzile Mlambo-Ngcuka that the government was abandoning the "willing seller, willing buyer" principle has unsettled some. This, according to commercial farmers, was a vital tenet of the land market, but, as Didiza said, the "willing seller, willing buyer" principle had also underpinned land reform in Zimbabwe - and look at where it got them. Add to this a peasant clamour for wholesale expropriation, and for a rewriting of the Constitution to protect the right of the landless to invade vacant land, and it seemed, to the pessimists at least, that the rapid decline into Zimbabwe-style chaos was all but upon us. Not on her watch, Didiza stressed once more. "One of the advantages that we have had as a country is that we have never dodged our own issues. Neither have we dodged other issues that have happened on the continent and in the world. Whether that has been a feelgood for others or a little irritating, unfortunately, that is how we are seen, and I think that having faced those issues squarely, particularly for our own country, has helped us to move forward. "Obviously, the approach that South Africa took with regard to Zimbabwe was that we were going to engage with Zimbabweans, firstly to understand from themselves as to why they undertook to move the route that they moved." Didiza accepted that her government had failed to support and train agricultural land reform recipients. Whether this was an effective PR exercise or brief or spin session, who could say... Certainly, when it ended, talk among the journalists drifted back to the fare before them, a table groaning with the fruits of the land, as it were. Bottles of fine wine were opened, but remained largely untouched. A pity. Fortification may be needed to weather the coming storm. |
| Posted by:Pappy |
| #1 As of today, i see nothing occuring in SA politics that will stop the inevitable pitch into d00m other than a revolt. ? |
| Posted by: Red Dog 2005-12-04 01:51 |