I was more interested in reading the comments on an article about the postponed New Zealand cricket tour to Zimbabwe on NewZimbabwe.com, than the actual article itself. The assertion by David Coltart that Zimbabwe is safer than the UK and other countries is resoundingly accurate. That is if you’re a member of a visiting sports team. But if you’re a human rights defender, an information activist, or a member of the general public who wants to wear an MDC t-shirt, you’re in big trouble. One of the readers who commented on the Coltart article likened Zanu PF to a terrorist organisation. How right, or wrong is this suggestion? Another reader berates Coltart for flip-flopping because until fairly recently, Coltart would have grabbed with two hands, any excuse for a sports boycott whether the grounds for the boycott were defendable, or spurious. Then again, I’d be interested to know whether this same reader who thinks Coltart has flip-flopped would praise Coltart for calling for a boycott of any international soccer team that wanted to play in Zimbabwe? I think not. New Zealand is using security as an excuse. They don’t want to tour Zimbabwe because of the Mugabe regime. And perhaps they have issues with Mugabe being the patron of Zimbabwe cricket. In which case they might well have to stand to attention on the green grass of Harare Sports Club and shake Mr M’s hand. And of course, Coltart, in a bid to woo the Kiwis, like many other politicians, suggests that the GNU has replaced a dictatorship when it clearly hasn’t.

This entry was posted on March 24th, 2010 at 12:48 pm by Bev Clark and is filed under Reflections, Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.