Zimpapers Logo

The above sounds like a title of a book about Zimbabwe’s agriculture under siege by opponents of land reform. In fact, Zimbabwe can aptly be likened to a boxer in the ring doing battle with his hands shackled behind his back and still resists attempts by the opponent to send him to the floor.

That, then, is a picture that comes to one’s mind at the onset of the rainy season when all systems are supposed to be go for the country’s agriculture which has for years been a pillar of Zimbabwe’s economy.
Unfortunately, however, not all systems are go as farmers mull over inadequate inputs to make the next farming season a resounding success that puts paid to the campaign by the external enemy to render the reform programme a failure.

This sad scenario is in stark contrast to surging food output in some neighbouring countries that previously held out a begging bowl to Zimbabwe or produced just enough food for their subsistence.

Last Sunday, Zambia celebrated 46 years of independence  under the theme “Consolidating Our Independence Through Food Security”. Yet many years after independence, that country struggled to feed itself, bought food from Zimbabwe and even invited Europeans to come and grow food as Zambians paid little heed to President Dr Kenneth Kaunda’s call for them to “go back to the land” and produce enough food for themselves.

Ironically, some of the food grown by local farmers rotted away because the National Agricultural Marketing Board (NAMB) failed to collect the produce for storage at the country’s silos. Now, however, the country seems to have got its act all right.

Over the border in Malawi, at the same time, the government took steps to boost agriculture through President Kamuzu Banda’s Young Pioneers, the much-feared youth wing of the Malawi Congress Party.

This writer and other journalists from Zambia toured maize and tobacco farms run by the pioneers and wrote extensively about the impressive performance of the young Malawians.

But that was nothing compared with agricultural success of that country. President Bingu wa Mutharika is hugely popular with ordinary Malawians for making them break into the realm of greater success in food production as a result of subsidised inputs that his Government provides. A nation whose bellies are full is a happy and secure nation.

At independence in Zimbabwe, the peasantry produced more food than white commercial farmers because of subsidised inputs provided by the Government of the day. Today, because of a strong case that exists to shut up the enemies of the reform programme which has made land available to 350 000 blacks, the Government should make every effort in ensuring that   beneficiaries of the reform programme especially receive maximum support to put agricultural production back on a keel as an enduring back borne of the economy.

This necessarily means that subsidised inputs of, for example a bag of fertilizer that at present probably costs seven times more than the cost of a similar bag in Malawi, and seed are provided, and timeously too so that the planting season finds the farmer waiting and raring to go.

To expect any of the country’s black farmers to seek financial support for inputs from sources other than the Government is to expect too much as those sources remain too close with their money, or will hack off a huge chunk of flesh for lending the farmer a hand after the harvest.

And all this in spite of the resilience with which the Zimbabwean farmer should be credited with in the face of the odds ranged against him/her in the form of the illegal western sanctions and the activities of some Zimbabweans who seem to be running with the hares and hunting with the hounds.

Tobacco production, which netted more than 100 million kilogrammes from 70 millions plus kgs focused earlier, demonstrates the unquestionable role that agriculture plays as the queen of Zimbabwe’s economy.

This is despite a projection by the International Monetary Fund to the effect that Zimbabwe’s economy would this year grow by 6 percent, revised from an earlier estimate of 2.2 percent and with local economists saying earlier this week that the mining industry was a major contributor to the growth while agriculture and tourism played a significant part.
Be that as it may, Zimbabwe cannot hope to rely too much on minerals, which are depleting assets. Witness several mines that have shut down for being uneconomic to operate, either because the minerals have virtually run out or for other compelling reasons.

The soil, on the other hand, never runs out, nor becomes uneconomic operationally either as long as one fertilizes and guards it against erosion.
Thus anyone with a propensity for agricultural politics which supports the anti-land reform lobby should not be allowed any free reign as the politics of the stomach should take precedence over all else if Zimbabwe is to weather all storms ranged against her.
This means the nation should put money where its mouth is.