No to traditional IMF Esap
The FlipSide with Kuthula Matshazi
AS THE International Monetary Fund proceeds with its so-called consultations with the Zimbabwean government, it must be borne in mind that this is an organisation that has troubled Zimbabwe and many other countries in the developing world. Duncan Green describes the IMF in his book Silent Revolution: The Rise of Market Economics in Latin America thus, ““The acronyms of faceless international organisations do not usually start riots, but the three letters IMF (International Monetary Fund) provoke explosive reactions throughout Latin America””.
These riots are a result of angry expressions by victims of IMF instituted policies of economic structural adjustment programmes that promise to bring prosperity to a country and its people but end up delivering profound misery and deaths. The IMF does not necessarily care about the welfare and prosperity of its client countries but just wants to ensure that they engage in any form of economic activity that would enable them to repay the loans they owe to the majority shareholders of the organisation, the Western countries. In fact, the sustained Esaps were initiated in the early 1980s at the onset of the ““debt crisis”” which culminated in Mexico failing to pay its dues and subsequently armtwisted to embark on this painful programme. The consequences have been clear to many. The Mexican and other Latin American economies have been undulating viciously hence such explosive reaction to IMF in Latin America.
The reason why the IMF affords to force client countries to embark on its economic structural adjustment programmes is because it preys on countries made vulnerable by the vicious neo-liberal capitalist global economy. One of the main reasons we are being forced to subject ourselves to Esap is the shortage of foreign currency which is a result of sanctions called for by the opposition political party, the Movement for Democratic Change against Zimbabwe. As a result of MDC actions, the United States government of George W Bush instructed all international financial institutions to stop giving Zimbabwe development assistance while British Prime Minister Tony Blair has worked with his European and other Western allies to drastically scale down bi/multilateral relations with Zimbabwe. All this was done to punish Zimbabweans for duly repossessing their land from the descendants of the early colonisers.
As the IMF engages the government, we expect them to scrutinise whether the government of Zimbabwe is balancing its books and accounting for all the public funds. In terms of economic structural adjustment, we hope that the IMF team will ensure that the government indeed engages in a deep rooted adjustment. However, this adjustment should not conform to the usual IMF ““Esap Template”” that has been transposed from one country to the next in the same manner but different wordings. This demands that we reject the conditionalities these ““experts”” from Washington want to impose on us like opening up our markets in the name of free trade to Western goods and businesses when they do not reciprocate that gesture. Or being told to produce food for export markets when we do not have any food to eat. The food that we grow and export becomes extremely expensive for us when we import it. We do not want Western countries coming to take most or all huge business opportunities.
The economic structural adjustment that we want is where Zimbabweans take charge of the economy with the IMF financing that programme. It will be incumbent upon individual local business entreprenuers to then invite foreign companies in order to attract investment and technology. This kind of Esap is contrary to the usual IMF led programme which is built around Western countries’’ businesses playing a prominent role in the revival of the economy. Recently, Zimbabwe committed itself to investing in science and technology to harness the vast raw material potential that exists in Zimbabwe. For instance, the idea to turn the moringa into fuel. With adequate funding these are the kind of the re-engineering processes that IMF need to focus on as opposed to their commitment to opening up new business opportunities for Western entreprenuers.
The then Ministry of Finance, Planning and Economic Development and the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe had come up with a viable economic turnaround programme which was sabotaged by the MDC and its sanctions. We should consolidate that turnaround strategy with the IMF demonstrating an equal measure of commitment to that particular programme. Supposing for once IMF genuinely cares about Zimbabwe, it should then advise its leaders to firstly, instruct MDC to communicate positive messages that would encourage people to see Zimbabwe in good light. Secondly, IMF should advise its bosses to in turn, advise the Western countries to lift the sanctions that are a hindrance to our economic adjustment programme. If this is done, it is guaranteed that we shall prevail as evidenced by the gains achieved in 2004.
The IMF should also take into consideration that we have developed new markets under the ““Look East”” policy and should be prepared to support our initiatives. There is nothing wrong with diversifying just as much as the Western countries are also rushing to the East especially China. But I am being naïïve here because the reason why IMF is being patient with Zimbabwe is likely a political ploy to prevent Zimbabwe alligning itself with China. This would be a move contrary to the interests of the Western countries.
An economic adjustment programme led by Zimbabweans would have the effect of reversing the brain drain since our vastly skilled workers and professionals would come back home with capital to set up business ventures. The commitment to do so was evidenced by several meetings the RBZ Governor Dr Gideon Gono conducted with Zimbabweans –– only to be scuttled by the twin British and MDC sabotage and sanctions programmes.
Back to Homepage
|
