Fiery Financial Gazette columnist, Mavis Makuni has commented on the recently published document entitled The Zimbabwe We Want: Towards A National Vision for Zimbabwe. In her article Men of the cloth who would rather sup with the devil she says

The church leaders involved in this subterfuge should ask themselves why the government of Zimbabwe is prepared to listen only to them when it has done everything under the sun to close democratic space and crush dissent in all other respects. These clergymen must surely be aware of the heavy-handed manner in which the government has dealt with opposition party and civil rights activists who have tried to promote the ideals the nation is now being urged to focus on in the church-initiated blueprint.

Meanwhile the Editor of the Zimbabwe Independent, Vincent Kahiya discussing the same Church document says in his Editor’s Memo headed Bigoted criticism

I took time this week to read through the National Vision discussion document prepared by three ecumenical groups in Zimbabwe and presented to President Mugabe last Friday.After reading the 50-page document, titled The Zimbabwe We Want, I was left in no doubt that some of the critics of the initiative by the churches, especially those having a go at individual prelates, had not read the whole document. The attacks were bereft of substance largely because the critics have not focused on the contents of the document but have elected to critique the process by which the paper was created.

Kubatana is also receiving response from some of our subscribers. Mike says

The attempts by elements of the church to go it alone, ignoring their erstwhile partners in civil society, to engage with the criminal and illegitimate regime are reactionary, collaborationist and counter-productive. The fawning attitude demonstrated towards mugabe by Trevor Manhanga are an insult to those who are struggling for a new Zimbabwe. The bishop is deluded if he thinks that mugabe is capable of engaging in genuine negotiations; mugabe only uses such initiatives to distract, delay and divide. He has no intention of addressing the crisis in this country since that would require an end to his denialism and an admission of culpability.

Nduramo in his email to us makes reference to a point Mavis also raises, namely that of the lack of “national” consultation in the preparation of a “national” vision document. He says

The “Zimbabwe We Want” vision document re-affirms the Government’s desire to be in control at the pulpits every Sunday. The ‘WE’ in the ‘Zimbabwe we want’ is a fallacy representing ZANU (PF). Who is the ‘WE’ refering to in this case, when millions of Zimbabweans were not consulted?

This entry was posted on November 3rd, 2006 at 12:25 pm by Bev Clark and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.