. . . every action begets a reaction
By Prof Jonathan Moyo
THROUGH the US Treasury Department, and in the hope of improving the effectiveness of and the impact of its ‘Magnitsky Global Sanctions Programme’ to further its foreign policy objectives, the US wants to use the sanctions similar to Magnitsky adopted by other countries.
The US wants to create a circle of opportunities for it to impose alleged human rights or corruption-related sanctions in some kind of a multilateral matrix, in the vain hope of rivalling the multi-lateralism of the UN Security Council sanctions.
However, because every action begets a reaction, the US multi-lateral experiment to globalise Magnitsky and to use it as a new imperialist policy tool is ill-fated, not least because it is certain to precipitate commensurate multilateral-solidarity responses; not only from the countries that have been targeted by the US Magnitsky imperialism, but also from the Global South in general, and in particular from emerging progressive multilateral organisations, such as the BRICS.
The 21-year-old US sanctions regime on Zimbabwe, based on the failed 23- year old regime change policy in ZDERA, should have, by now, taught the US that its unilateralism is doomed to fail, even if it is wrapped in the false language of promoting human rights or fighting corruption; or it is pursued under supposedly multilateral schemes like the ‘Magnitsky Global Sanctions Programme’, which are, in fact, nothing but naked US imperialist foreign policy tools.
The only sanctions that can work from a multilateral point of view are those built on, and imposed by, membership-based multilateral bodies such as the UN and its sub-regional affiliates, like the AU; anything else, such as the so-called ‘Magnitsky Global Sanctions’, is just drama.
The Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act: An Assessment, December 2021
A major and hitherto undiscussed consequence of the revoked Executive Orders is the end of the easy money to NGOs in Zimbabwe and the country’s main political opposition, which came with the ‘national emergency’ funding purportedly for democracy, governance, media, capacity building and related regime change activism; which has been flowing like tap water since March 6 2003.
The revoked orders were used by the US as a convenient cover to corruptly channel and abuse millions of US dollars, of which US$26 million was pledged by ZDERA, in the name of all sorts of regime change initiatives for which, 21 years later, there’s between little and nothing to show for it, and, therefore, lots of money down the drain and hence nothing tangible to audit.
There are untold movie-like stories about how briefcase NGOs became the order of the day in Zimbabwe’s civil society over the last 21 years of the revoked Executive Orders, as getting easy money under the guise of dealing with Zimbabwe’s ‘national emergency’ declared by the US became a lucrative industry.
The fact that nothing is being said about this open and well known secret in Zimbabwe’s donor and civil society communities is yet another window into the duplicitous and hypocritical politics of the US government, which typically looks for corruption anywhere except under its own nose.
Insofar as the sum and substance of the revoked US Executive Orders was the pursuit of regime change, about which there’s no doubt, it amounted to an onslaught on Zimbabwe’s sovereignty; such that those who associated with that regime change agenda or who were part of it, basically engaged in treachery against their motherland and thus have some serious introspection to do.
It is important to emphasise the following outcomes of the revocation Executive Order 13288, Executive Order 13391, or Executive Order 13469:
While Biden’s statement that “. . . all persons blocked solely pursuant to Executive Order 13288, Executive Order 13391, or Executive Order 13469 were removed on March 4 2024 (the authorities of the Zimbabwe Sanctions Programme) were removed on March 4 2024 from OFAC’s Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons (SDN)] List . . .” the true position is, of course, that some were moved or transferred to another sanctions list, in that they were ‘transitioned’, to the ‘Magnitsky Global Sanctions Programme’. Therefore, the US-Zimbabwe sanctions programme remains, albeit under a different basket.
Given that Biden’s statement said
“. . . all property and interests in property blocked solely pursuant to the Zimbabwe Sanctions Programme was unblocked on March 4 2024 . . .”, it would be instructive, in fact necessary, to quantify the value of this unblocked property.
How much was blocked?
What was particularly most significant about Biden’s Mach 4 2024 Executive Order terminating Executive Order 13288, Executive Order 13391 and Executive Order 13469 on the US ‘Emergency With Respect to the Situation in Zimbabwe’ is that, at long last, OFAC will remove the Zimbabwe Sanctions Regulations ‘31 CFR Part 541’ from the Code of Federal Regulations.
These are the destructive regulations that made the Zimbabwean economy scream over the last 21 years.
Their removal is not a small thing by any stretch of the imagination as it will, among others positives, lower Zimbabwe’s sovereign risk and reduce the cost of doing business in the country.
Whether framed as a situation of a ‘national emergency in Zimbabwe threatening US Foreign or Security Interests’; or as a ‘Zimbabwe Sanctions Programme’ or as ‘Transition’ to the ‘Magnitsky Global Sanctions Programme’, the coercive US sanctions measures in the revoked Executive Orders 13288, 13391 and 13469 were a violation of Zimbabwe’s sovereignty and a breach of international law.
Zimbabwe has the sovereign right to self-determination with respect to the making of both its domestic and foreign policies under international law.
This is the one principle that the US government has not understood and not respected over the last 21 years; and yet the same US has no qualms about touting the importance of national sovereignty for Ukraine, just as an example of its duplicity and hypocrisy.
On the back of the foregoing, the issues that are outlined below are further highlighted and explained in the order they’re listed for information, context and analysis of the implications of Biden’s Executive Order 14118 discussed above:
λ Biden’s Executive Order terminating a false 21-year-old national emergency
λ ZDERA as the enabling Act for the US ‘Zimbabwe Sanctions Programme’ since 2001
λ First and only US ‘Presidential Proclamation’ on Zimbabwe sanctions made in 2002
λ First US Declaration of False ‘National Emergency’ in Zimbabwe in 2003
λ Second US Declaration of False ‘National Emergency’ in Zimbabwe in 2005
λ Third US Declaration of False ‘National Emergency’ in Zimbabwe in 2008
Biden’s Executive Order 14118 terminating a false 21-year-old national emergency
It is trite that Biden’s March 4 2024 Executive Order 14118 primarily revoked Executive Order 13288 of March 6 2003; and with that revocation it follows that the additional steps that were subsequently taken to fortify the primary 2003 Order, under Executive Order 13391 of November 22 2005, and Executive Order 13469 of July 25 2008, must, consequentially, also fall away.
Tellingly, the reason given by Biden for the revocation of these Orders is that the declaration of a national emergency in these three orders “. . . should no longer be in effect . . .” and “. . . is no longer needed . . .”
But, crucially, there’s no explanation as to why the ‘national emergency’ should no longer be in effect and is no longer needed; or why, in any event, it was needed in the first place on March 6 2003 or for the last 21 years.