Zimpapers Logo

Wallace Musakanyi
MULTILATERALISM is the moral fabric and glue that binds nation-states together in the international system. It fosters mutual cooperation amongst states, collective action and the need to respect international law and international institutions in the conduct of international relations.

In the same context, for almost two decades now Zimbabwe has been under sanctions imposed by UK, USA, Canada, Australia and EU in response to the land reform programme that the Government of Zimbabwe took through the Amendment 17 of the Constitution which allowed expropriation of land without compensation. Unilateralism is an antithesis of a co-operative and cordial multilateral mechanism so are these sanctions imposed against Zimbabwe.

Zimbabwe, as a product of a protracted and violent liberation struggle, projected its post-independent governance infrastructures in line with the desire to regain its sovereignty which in the aftermath of its independence had been trapped by the Lancaster House Conference. As such, the land reform programme was a panacea that was meant to address the colonially enabled imbalances although it had some fault lines.

The nature of Zimbabwean sanctions exists in the form of targeted sanctions as well as multilateral financial restrictions. Some of the government officials, State-owned enterprises and institutions have been sanctioned. The Zdera Amendment Act (2018) sanctions targeted 141 individuals and 56 companies.

The Act further placed financial restrictions that block debt cancellation to Zimbabwe, prohibits financial institutions like the International Monetary Fund, World Bank and Africa Development Bank to extend any loan to Zimbabwe without the approval of the US President.

The European Union prefers to call its own set of sanctions as restrictive measures and they have been passed in line with Article 96(2) (c) of the Contonou Agreement to include suspension of budgetary support to Zimbabwe, suspension of financial programmes as well as an embargo on the sale, supply, transfer of arms, assistance or training related to military service and travel ban and freezing of assets to the individuals that have been placed on targeted sanctions.

A critical interrogation of the sanctions that were imposed against Zimbabwe establishes massive paradoxes that are captured by contradiction between international law, norms and values and the interests of the Western powers which downplay these cardinal values.

Articles 39 to 42 of the United Nations Charter clearly state that economic embargoes (sanctions) can be used in the conduct of international relations on the condition that they are authorised by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). Nevertheless, sanctions imposed against Zimbabwe were passed outside this multilateral forum but were imposed unilaterally without the approval of UNSC.

In addition, international norms which must be respected in the conduct of international engagement, foreign policy and diplomacy, that is non-intervention and state sovereignty are chocked by these sanctions. Specifically, the Zdera has extraterritorial application because it’s a national legislation which is in conflict with the legal equality of states.

This depletes the sovereignty and autonomy of a state which must always be adversely respected.

These sanctions further contradict with the basic international principles of the United Nations Charter because it deprives and violates innocent civilians’ right to personal development and self-determination.

Nevertheless, the implications of the sanctions have been costly, they have brought bad publicity thereby restraining the republic from massive investments.

They have also led to low credit rating. This reveals how sanctions work by inflicting damage on a targeted country.
Zimbabwe’s access to international credit markets has also been blocked by the imposition of sanctions so is the country’s Balance of Payment position. It has significantly deteriorated as a result of these sanctions.

Zdera, EU and UK sanctions also violate the golden principles of the World Trade Organisation, which are the most favoured nation and national treatment.

These principles are aimed at liberalising world trade by prohibiting countries to discriminate between their trading partners and treating both foreign and locally produced goods equally.

This was largely affected by the EU set of sanctions that banned Zimbabwe’s beef and tobacco exports as part of the sanctions. Zdera likewise poses serious challenges to the Zimbabwean exports in line with a multilateral and non-discriminatory rule -trading system.

Researches conducted in relation to these sanctions also forecasted how detriment they have been to the economy at large.

They projected that Zimbabwe lost an estimated US$42 billion plus another estimated US$4,5 billion annually for more than two decades.

The study further revealed how another staggering US$2 billion was also lost in IMF, World Bank and African Development Bank loans.

This has advanced the economic hemorrhage of the republic as a result of aid cut, lack of long-term investment as well as fiscal support from the aforementioned international financial institutions.

The other crucial aspect that coincides with the need to have these sanctions lifted is the reform agenda enunciated by the New Dispensation through governance and foreign policy mechanisms in order to foster cordial relations with the West.

To further amplify this demand, the re-engagement and engagement exercise and Zimbabwe’s readmission into the Commonwealth programs are actually work in progress.

Part of the demands that have been set by the Western countries in order for the sanctions to be lifted include governance reforms and restoration of the rule of law. The Second Republic on the other hand has been proactive in ensuring the implementation of these measures.

At the crux of these sanctions were the fault lines that were associated with the fast-track land reform program and in a move to rectify this hurdle, the Government launched the global compensation scheme, a policy aimed at compensating white commercial farmers affected by the land reform.

This is also in tandem with international law standards through the precedence set by the Charzow Factory Case which stipulated that reparations must as far as possible wipe out all the consequences of the act and re-establish a situation that would have existed if the act had not been committed.

Governance reforms in line with democratic and liberal values have also been on the cards as noted by the repealing of repressive laws like the Public Order and Security Act (Posa) as well as the Indigenisation and Economic Empowerment Act.

Policy mechanisms such as the Zimbabwe is Open for Business as well as the Re-engagement exercise are also in sync with Western liberal values which makes the lifting of the sanctions imposed against Zimbabwe imminent.

Sadc has also been critical in amplifying the fight against these sanctions. Through diplomatic pressure, member states set the October 25 as the Zimbabwe Anti-Sanctions Day taking into cognisance that these sanctions are not only a challenge to Zimbabwe but they also affect regional integration in southern Africa at large.

The sanctions that were imposed against Zimbabwe are trapped by massive contradictions which violate international norms, international law, multilateral principles as well as the sovereignty of Zimbabwe. The reforms that have been undertaken by the New Dispensation are sufficient to have these sanctions lifted.

* Wallace Musakanyi is a final year Masters in Politics and International Relations candidate at the University of Zimbabwe.

He can be contacted via [email protected].