3-Assignment-664

Submitted to
Dr Saeed Shafqat

Submitted by
Muhammad Bilal
17-24008

Zimbabwe after the unilateral declaration of independence goes on the track of democracy where
due to colonial factor most of the countrys best lands were held by white people i.e. 1 percent of
the population owned 70 percent of the commercial farms in the country. Disparity of economic
resources like white minority dominating major resources created ethnic hatred and leaded
violence in Zimbabwe mostly on white people by indigenous Zimbabweans. These violent
behaviors of indigenous people werent spontaneous but funded and encouraged by the Zanu-PF
government of President Robert Mugabe. Mugabe uses this demagogic strategy to win the
political support of majority of the indigenous Black people. He portrayed white men the real
enemy of the indigenous black and asked black people to strike fear in heart of white people as
they were not Africans and Zimbabwe is for Zimbabweans by promising that he will confiscate
and redistribute the lands owned by white people to the indigenous people. Many describe the
situation of the Zimbabwe as Anarchy if it was anarchy it was born of democracy. Demonizing
Mugabe is easy but he had behaved as highly vote seeking politician though on the cost of many
lives and damages to countrys properties. Meanwhile when Mugabe met no promise of the
people plus complying with IMFs free market austerity measures led inflation unemployment.
On the other hand free market oriented opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC)
funded by British people was like the party of the white people and for the white people as the
only black face in the party headquarter was of security guard only in front gate gives chance to
Mugabe by playing race card to win the election. Results of which Zimbabwes currency and
stock market collapsed all crops ruined and Aid agencies estimate that more than half a million
people in Zimbabwe face starvation. The dilemma of Zimbabwe was if you disturb the interest of
white people foreign investment fled away but land seizer in Zimbabwe was a part of global
pattern as if outsider dominates indigenous wealth indigenous people demands it back as a result
of democracy.
In case of Indonesia after Suharto Indonesians were euphoric, it was considered that
finally this will bring peace prosperity and legitimacy but actual result of fall of Suharto
autocracy creates violence against Chinese ethnic people and leaves two thousand people died.
Than cancelation of Chinese rice contract creation of cooperative administered by inexperienced
Indonesians led food crisis and led even worst situation to Indonesians.
In both of the cases above nationalization results in backlash of market as indigenous
were not as competent to run the economy and personal interests were on priority rather to
stabilize domestic economy and enjoy the fruits later on.