Mugabe: Power, Plunder and the Struggle for Zimbabwe by Martin Meredith
Published by Jonathan Ball Publishers (2008)
ISBN: 978 1 86842 291 3

THE Sunday Telegraph describes it as “a well-written chronicle of Zimbabwe’s degradation, this book is of great value.”
But Martin Meredith’s Mugabe: Power, Plunder and the Struggle for Zimbabwe is just another smear campaign on Zimbabwe by a bitter whiteman.
The book is a clear indication of how cunningly the author joined the bandwagon of writers that have realised that any literature demonising President Robert Mugabe and his Government is a ‘golden fish’ for publishers.
It has become common knowledge among both local and international writers that for one to have their works published they should disregard facts and attack President Mugabe.
The book seeks to trace the history of Zimbabwe after independence to 2008 with a bias towards President Mugabe’s role as Head of State.
Meredith describes President Mugabe as a leader who at first was a true revolutionary hero who went on to destroy the country.
He showers praises on President Mugabe for his stance towards white people after the country attained its independence.
“He (President Mugabe) called for stability, national unity and law and order; promised that civil service pensions would be guaranteed; and pledged that private property would be protected,” he writes.
“To most whites, who had never seen him before, Mugabe appeared articulate, thoughtful and conciliatory.”
What the white folk enjoyed most about the stance taken by President Mugabe is that they continued living the life they had before in Rhodesia except for some changes of course.
They remained on the farms, and as Meredith writes, “no longer did they face military call-up, economic sanctions or petrol rationing”.
“Now they were free to take up old leisure pursuits abandoned during the war: trips to the Eastern Highlands, boating on Lake Kariba, weekend game viewing.”
All hell breaks loose when President Mugabe and his Government start to implement the principles of the struggle.
History teaches that the locals had taken up arms against the Ian Smith regime so that they could take back the resources chiefly land that had been taken by the whites.
Blacks wanted the opportunity to once again be the masters of their own destiny by controlling and running the affairs of the country.
As Meredith puts it, things in Zimbabwe started to take a downward spiral after 2000.
But why 2000?
It was at that time when the Government fully implemented the Land Reform Programme.
This meant it was now time for the 4 000 white commercial farmers to say goodbye to the luxurious lives they had lived at the expense of the black majority.
Hence it is not surprising that Meredith, bitter just like the white folks that lost out on the land starts to vilify President Mugabe for such a noble programme that empowered the blacks.
“By 2000, Zimbabweans were generally worse off than they had been at independence: average wages were lower, unemployment had trebled, public services were crumbling, and life expectancy was falling,” writes Meredith.
The author just like many castigates the programme and to him it spelt doom for Zimbabwe.
“The farm seizures spelt the end of commercial agriculture as a major industry,” he writes.
“Hundreds of thousands of farm workers and their families were left destitute; many were driven off the land by ZANU PF youth militias.”
If only he had just waited a while before he concluded, Meredith would have realised that now the resettled black farmers are turning around the agriculture sector.
Meredith also gets it wrong when he suggests that farm workers were also at the receiving end after the Land Reform Programme.
Instead what he and his folks should know is that the programme turned the lives of the workers for the better as they were upgraded from being mere labourers to farm owners.
Over 400 000 black households benefitted from the Land Reform programme.
Meredith also explores the Gukurahundi subject and just like his kin he distorts facts showing he does not have a clear understanding of what happened.
To him he sees it as an opportunity to try and play the race card and pit the Shona against the Ndebele.
Well, Meredith should have realised by now that Zimbabweans despite their different ethnic backgrounds have the same goal which is to develop Zimbabwe and forge ahead together.
They may be diverse, but they are one as Cain Mathema puts it in his book, Zimbabwe Diverse, But One.
Again, Meredith jumps the gun and suggests that the MDC was the solution to Zimbabwe’s challenges.
Once again, if he had waited a bit longer before he concluded he would have realised that Zimbabweans were soon to see through the MDC that it was nothing, but a party formed to push the agenda of whites.
Just like Zimbabweans saw what the MDC really stood for, they will see that Meredith’s book is just another attempt by a bitter white man to tarnish the image of a good man, President Robert Mugabe.