WE are no longer fooled when our former colonisers advocate regime change, ostensibly in order to promote ‘human rights’ and ‘good governance’.
We now know that these saintly sentiments are mere camouflage for a people with an insane appetite for other people’s natural resources.
We have Libya and Iraq as examples.
Muammar Gaddafi and Saddam Hussein were killed because the West wanted to control the oil from these countries.
The West wants compliant leaders who are willing to surrender the sovereign right to control their resources to their erstwhile colonial masters.
Zimbabwe is on the list of those countries considered to be causing an ‘unusual threat’ because of its unambiguous determination to be in full control of its resources.
This is against the vast array of minerals, some of which are still hidden in Zimbabwe’s soils, ready to be exploited.
Economic minerals like gold, chrome, lithium, emerald, platinum and diamond, among others, have always been the envy of the West.
We would have been less concerned if our colonisers wanted to use wealth obtained from our minerals to benefit us.
Alas that’s not the case!
Instead, wealth siphoned from our mines is shipped to European capitals for the benefit of the colonial powers.
What they consider to be of value from us is our cheap labour only.
And of course this is their policy from the very beginning.
Cecil John Rhodes, at the forefront of colonising us, was not ashamed to leave behind a racially exclusive will from his African diamonds fortune.
He bequeathed to his Anglo-Saxon cousins, including those in America and Britain, the Rhodes Scholarship.
Non-whites and women were excluded from Rhodes’ ‘generous offer’.
But this is not peculiar to Rhodes.
Gullible Iraqis and Libyans initially ululated at the demise of their leaders, hoping for ‘good governance’ and respect for ‘human rights’ soon to follow.
Nothing of the sort happened.
Indeed they are now worse off.
Oil wealth from their countries is lining up the pockets of these Western invaders.
The West is not ashamed to resort to dirty tactics in their bid to control natural resources of sovereign states.
We still remember how British think-tank, Chatham House, engineered the formation of MDC, a party they hoped would act as their puppet in order to control the natural resources of this country.
And when De Beers was refused licence to operate in Marange, we still remember concerted efforts by the West and their cousins in Australia and Canada to have our diamonds labelled ‘bloody’.
We still remember the ‘strong’ cases by the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme (KPCS) and former US Ambassador to Zimbabwe, Dr James McGee, in their attempt to stop certification of Zimbabwe diamonds.
Paradoxically, all this was an attempt to deny Zimbabweans sovereign authority over their own resources.
However, if Zimbabwe continues to export its minerals in raw form, the dream of having full control over our minerals will remain a mirage.
The countries where the minerals are refined and moulded into various articles are the true beneficiaries.
What with the jobs that would have been exported together with the minerals!
Zimbabwe needs a strong beneficiation policy.
Pronouncements made from time-to-time and later withdrawn won’t do.
Before colonial days, history tells us we were already smelting our minerals, thereby adding value to our raw materials.
The Government must redouble its efforts to make sure all its minerals are processed here.
We also believe in the formation of a permanent body of knowledgeable people tasked with gathering information on the status of minerals and an exploitation strategy.