The Struggle Continues (50 Years of Tyranny in Zimbabwe)
By David Coltart
Published by Jacana Media (2016)
ISBN: 978-1-4314-2318-7

SIR Walter Scott wrote: “Oh what a tangled web we weave when we first practise to deceive.”
His words aptly describe the Catch-22 situation some Rhodesians find themselves in.
Rhodesia is gone.
Whites no longer have a controlling stake in the country.
It should forever be remembered that they were used to being the who’s who in Rhodesia.
However, the tables have turned; blacks now run the show.
To remain relevant, some Rhodesians, 36 years after independence, now claim to have interests of blacks at heart.
They tell us they have always been in our corner from the onset.
Honestly?
Are they genuine?
One such Rhodie is David Coltart, who during the liberation struggle served under the brutal British South Africa Police (BSAP).
In his book, The Struggle Continues (50 Years of Tyranny in Zimbabwe), Coltart shares his experiences in pre- and post-independent Zimbabwe.
His over-arching message, which is rather absurd, is he has been and is for the blacks.
Asked on what compelled him to write the book by a local daily, Coltart said: “I was motivated by a desire to write about my own perspective on events and also to correct what I thought were misrepresentations of key events.”
“I also think that there is too little written about Zimbabwe’s history and I hope my book encourages others to write their own stories.
“Own perception of history is inevitably subjective and the more people who write about our history, the richer, and more accurate that history will become.”
Coltart, in the book, frantically tries to convince the reader that indeed he has always been an advocate for the rights of blacks.
However, he sells himself short.
Rhodesian Prime Minister Ian Smith once described blacks in Rhodesia as a ‘happy lot.’
In a show of solidarity with his kith and kin, Coltart shares the same sentiments.
“Although most black citizens of Southern Rhodesia (Zimbabwe), Northern Rhodesia (Zambia) and Nyasaland (Malawi) had more rights and better living conditions than those who lived under the increasingly authoritarian and harsh apartheid regime south of the Limpopo, most were deeply suspicious of, and hostile towards, the Federation, believing that the racially discriminatory policies of Southern Rhodesia would be applied to both Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland,” he writes.
Dear Coltart, there is no better evil.
The living conditions of blacks in Rhodesia were appalling.
Life in Protected Villages was not fit for any human, but blacks had to soldier on.
Who is better placed to speak about experiences of blacks in Rhodesia than blacks themselves?
It is only fair for Coltart to let the blacks speak for themselves.
Surely they do not need an advocate in the form of someone who was sitting pretty and did not spend a single night in a ‘Keep’, or having to abide by curfew rules in townships.
“When I was born, Southern Rhodesia’s economy was booming,” says Coltart.
“Some of our best schools were built at this time, too, including my own school, Christian Brothers College (1953), and others, like Falcon College (1954), Peterhouse (1955) and Arundel (1956).
“One stark fact, however, is that most of this construction was for the benefit of the white minority.
“There was little similar development for black people.”
Indeed, Coltart, your kith and kin had reduced blacks to third-class citizens in their own country.
They did not deserve the best.
Coltart gives the impression he was against the war, but Coltart was also a die-hard Selous Scout – that notorious outfit in the Rhodesian forces that took no prisoners.
How convenient.
“In addition to its racist policies, it had negligently squandered several opportunities to avoid war,” he writes.
“I felt bitter that so many lives had been lost in a needless war and blamed the entire RF leadership for the lost loss of friends and even for my parents’ emigration.
“It seemed to me that the RF’s hard-line policies had radicalised black nationalists and poisoned an entire generation.”
Being caught in-between, Coltart preaches forgiveness; selective forgiveness though.
Forgive the whiteman for his atrocities, but persecute the black Government for any alleged wrong doings.
The writer props up events such as Gukurahundi and Murambatsvina and argues the ZANU PF-led Government should apologise.
In the process, Coltart exaggerates events to suit his own version.
“From the outset it was clear that they were not interested in finding dissidents,” he writes.
“Their target was the civilian population.”
As Education Minister, Coltart writes that he pushed for key historical events to be included in the curriculum.
“Unsurprisingly, Gukurahundi and Murambatsvina were not dealt with,” he writes.
To Coltart, it is as if the above mentioned are the only events that tell the Zimbabwean story?
Why did he not push for the Nyadzonia and Chimoio massacres to be dealt with?
It is clear Coltart has a hidden agenda.
After all, he claims issues of the blackman are his top priority.
These Nyadzonia and Chimoio attacks are significant in the history of the liberation struggle.
Should they be swept under the carpet because Coltart’s kith and kin are to blame for it?
Downplaying atrocities perpetuated by Rhodesians seems to be Coltart’s underlying message.
“While Mangoma was still sitting in a filthy police cell, the ZBC, in a blaze of publicity, reported that a little known ‘Fallen Heroes of Zimbabwe Trust’ had ‘exhumed 280 bodies from a disused mine in Mount Darwin providing evidence of massive human rights atrocities’ committed by the Smith government,” writes Coltart.
“The ZLWVA noted that the ‘remains showed that the Rhodesian government had committed genocide.”
Thousands of people killed by the Rhodesians do not deserve to be mentioned, he reckons.
Why is Coltart now preaching selective reconciliation and need for mutual trust?
Does a leopard change its spots?
Hopefully he does not expect a pat on the back because Zimbabweans know their heroes.