THE US House Foreign Affairs Sub-Committee on Africa, Global Health, Global Human Rights and International Organisations held a hearing on September 12 2013 titled ‘The Troubling Path Ahead for US-Zimbabwe Relations’.

The hearing included three testimonies by deputy assistant secretary Shannon Smith for the Bureau of African Affairs, Arthur Gwagwa of the Zimbabwe Human Rights NGO Forum, and Imani Countess the Africa region programme director for Solidarity Centre.

There are several themes that ran in the three testimonies that are informing on just how troubling America and Zimbabwe’s relationship is going to be now that Robert Mugabe and ZANU PF are once again in total control of government.

There is this unbelievable notion in Washington that the elections were seriously flawed and as such the regime change agenda missed an opportunity to topple another ‘despot’, who is a hindrance to America’s interests not just in southern Africa, but in Africa.

The one clear indication that I can read from all this is that unlike their European counterparts, the Americans are not going to remove the sanctions in the hope that easing the sanctions regime will open up opportunities to Zimbabwe’s vast resources.

“The seriously flawed presidential and parliamentary elections of July 31 were a missed opportunity for Zimbabwe.

“The United States and other members of the international community had clearly communicated, both publicly and privately, a willingness to consider rolling back sanctions and other restrictions on Zimbabwe and charting a path to full normalisation of relations – if Zimbabwe demonstrated that it was ready to allow its deserving people to freely choose their next government through a fair, peaceful, and credible election.” – Deputy Assistant Secretary Shannon Smith

Coming to the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and the African Union (AU), the disappointment in Washington cannot be masked by diplomatic nuances.

The view that the two organisations chose to ignore their own standards and failed to address irregularities highlighted by ‘credible observers’ in determining that the elections were free and fair has taken root.

Of course these credible observers are civic society groups that America has been funding since as far back as 2000 in order to “separate the people of Zimbabwe from ZANU PF”

“True democracy will come to Zimbabwe only when the Zimbabwean people are free to exercise the rights afforded to them in their new Constitution, free of fear and manipulation.”

This is mere rhetoric that America spouts in cases where it does not have concrete evidence or legitimate reasons for interference.

This moral high ground that America pretends to take is of course a veil to hide this country’s imperialistic tendencies and predatory culture.

So what will be the way forward?

There is going to be continued support for ‘democratic institutions’ because the fight is not yet over.

While politically the MDC-T has failed to seal the deal, civic society organisations will continue to operate under their mandate creating space for action and dialogue with an eye to further the regime change agenda.

There is going to be an increase in financial support from America to groups that advocate popular political participation and those that promote citizen voice and civic expression.

“There is a strong civil society on the ground that can serve as the foundation for new justice”. – Imani Countess Africa region programme director, Solidarity Centre (AFL-CIO)

The illegal sanctions will be maintained because they have proved to be very effective in making ‘the economy scream’ and for a while they did “separate the people of Zimbabwe from ZANU PF.”

Five years is not a long time, and if the economy remains stagnant, there is a strong possibility that this will influence a change in voting trends.

While there might be hope in some quarters that America will take a cue from the European Union (EU) and stagger the removal of sanctions, that hope is clearly misplaced.

The debate on the removal of Zimbabwe’s sanctions in the EU has been characterised by Britain’s need to punish Zimbabwe for her Land Reform Programme, the need for resources and the threat China poses in quest for new markets, and finally need for the bloc to project unity on issues as a way to remain strong and focused.

America has a reputation to maintain and the investment she has made in her attempts to topple President Mugabe is too significant for her to just write it off.

It is yet to be seen on which road Washington will take to effect regime change in Zimbabwe.

The defeat of the MDC-T might see America turning focus to ZANU PF and trying to manipulate that party and ensure candidates that she deems less hostile to her predatory tendencies make it into office and thereby effecting regime change by removing the ‘nationalist/hard liner’ component of the party and replacing it with the ‘moderates’.