TUESDAY 21 JANUARY 2003

__________

Members present:

Mr Donald Anderson, in the Chair
Mr David Chidgey
Mr Fabian Hamilton
Mr Eric Illsley
Andrew Mackinlay
Mr Bill Olner
Sir John Stanley

__________

Memorandum submitted by The BBC

Examination of Witnesses

MR PETER LONGWORTH CMG, Former High Commissioner to Zimbabwe, examined.

Chairman

Mr Longworth, may I welcome you on behalf of the Committee. You were the British High Commissioner in Harare from 1998 to 2001. Before that you were Consul General in Johannesburg. Clearly you know the area well and have a continuing business interest, as I understand it, in the region.

(Mr Longworth) That is correct.

We are confident that you will be able to assist the Committee in our consideration of the position in Zimbabwe. First, it would be extremely helpful to have your appreciation of the current political situation. Clearly we know that on 13 January Morgan Tsangirai, leader of the Movement for Democratic Change, told the BBC that he had been offered - when he met two leading members of ZANU-PF - an offer of talks and that they had wanted to discuss the possibility of forming a power sharing government pending the holding of fresh elections. The ZANU-PF spokesman characterised that as wishful thinking and President Mugabe himself has been quoted by Baroness Amos as saying "I am not retiring. I will never, never go into exile." It would be helpful for the Committee initially, from your knowledge of the dramatis personae, of your knowledge of the region, if you could say how you read those several matters.

(Mr Longworth) Thank you Mr Chairman. I am very glad to help the Committee insofar as I can. I think I would just like to preface my remarks by pointing out that I did, in fact, leave my post in Zimbabwe at the end of June 2001 and so my personal engagement with that country ended just over 18 months ago. I retired from the Foreign Service rather soon after that. I am not really in receipt of privileged reporting and I have not been involved in any kind of official discussions.

You keep in touch with the region.

(Mr Longworth) I keep in touch with the region and, as you rightly said, I am engaged in work now which gives me contact with people in the region, particularly in the business community, but I would not want to mislead the Committee into thinking that I had any great insights as to what has happened on the ground in Zimbabwe over the last 18 months. I was interested in the story as it broke. I was also interested, in fact, that it was Morgan Tsvangirai who actually broke it because he would obviously have found himself in an extremely difficult situation if he had allowed contact of that nature to proceed without it becoming generally known. I think he is a man under considerable threat and one of those would be a perceived risk of entrapment in the event that he were seen to be engaged in the affairs of people who were talking about the retirement or otherwise of Robert Mugabe. I can only speculate - and it can only be my theory - that a moment has now come within the upper echelons of the ruling ZANU-PF party where the President's continued tenure is seen as a liability to the future of the party and also to the ability of the party to stay cohesive. I think that there will be a number of threats which face them even though they do hold all the levers of security. The ZANU-PF ruling party is not without its factions and there have been, for many years, stories of one faction or another seeking to gain ascendency. The two personalities mentioned by Mr Tsvangirai -----

That is the speaker and the head of the armed forces.

(Mr Longworth) The speaker and the head of the armed forces between them represent a formidable combination. It is known, of course, that the speaker has a history as a head of the intelligence services and was largely responsible for events in Matebeleland in the mid-80's. He is a very powerful party figure and he is also a party figure who has become extremely prosperous, I think. There is no doubt that personally he is a very rich person and is involved in a number of business activities which have been characterised by a relationship between the ruling party and a number of business organisations, established really to provide the party and individuals with funds. However, he is a very powerful person and the fact that, having lost his parliamentary constituency in the general election, he was then immediately made speaker, shows there was a requirement by the President to keep him in the forefront of events, in the public eye and a visible political figure. The leader of the army, General Zvinavashe, is obviously a key person in the event that there should be changes in the leadership of ZANU-PF which might be contested since the army does dominate in the country and despite many, many stories that the army has split or there is the possibility of a coup, there has never been any evidence of that kind. They are suggestions that - certainly during my term - I always rejected as did my defence advisor. I think there is a possibility that the President may now regard his due time as past and that it might come as a relief for him to leave, but only if the transition could be managed in a satisfactory way. That transition would involve power passing to people in whom he had confidence and also in whom he had some confidence that the structures that had been established in ZANU-PF would be maintained after the President were to leave. I believe that Mr Mnangagwa and General Zvinavashe are not universally popular within the leadership ranks of the party and there have been stories of other attempts to form groups which might contest what has been seen as the inevitability of Mnangagwa's success into the President.

But this would not be just an initiative of the two men because presumably it would make them highly vulnerable and, indeed, would lead to expulsion from ZANU-PF if it were just them acting on their own.

(Mr Longworth) No, they would not be acting on their own. I think there has been a great deal of discussion on the leadership of the party. There has been discussion amongst the various clans and the various factions and the time may have come for Mnangagwa and Zvinavashe to break cover. Even if they did not make a decision to break cover themselves I think Tsvangirai has revealed what could well be the tip of the iceberg in terms of transition -----

Would this have been approved by the central committee, this initiative?

(Mr Longworth) I would not think so. If it had been approved by the President then it would have been a matter for the President and his close advisors. I do not think the whole of the central committee would approve the forward move by Mnangagwa and Zvinavashe.

Has this made them vulnerable?

(Mr Longworth) I think you are looking, as I said, at two quite formidable persons. One is a formidable political leader in the party; the other is the leader of the armed forces. I think they might well be vulnerable but I do not think they would be vulnerable for too long.

Mr Olner

I was just wondering, Mr Longworth, whether you would categorise these people as moderates and whether they would be willing to share their power with the opposition?

(Mr Longworth) I do not think I would apply the word moderate, no. I think they have been very close to the President over the years and one can associate them with the policies which he has adopted. I would, perhaps, speculate that they could be pragmatic in that they might not wish to be seen as the continuing leaders of a rogue state or a bankrupt country.

So you think this pragmatism is driven by self-preservation?

(Mr Longworth) I think it is driven by ambition. When you get that close to the top of power you would wish to achieve presidency if you were in Mnangagwa's place. I think, also, that Mnangagwa would feel much safer if he were president than if he were not president after Mugabe had left.

Do you think they would depose Mugabe or would they use persuasion to get him to stand down?

(Mr Longworth) I think deposing the President would be very dangerous and quite risky. I think that there would be a persuasion process.

I want to turn to the performance in advances since the September elections. I was wondering whether the Movement for Democratic Change is a credible government in waiting.

(Mr Longworth) I have to claim that I have not really had any detailed discussions with anybody in the MDC since June 2001. I would not want to given an opinion on that. I certainly would not want to prejudice their chances in any way by saying that I did not think that they were a credible opposition. It is important to bear in mind that the MDC, as its name suggests, is a movement; it is the Movement for Democratic Change. It is a group which combines a number of elements whose one common point, if you like, is opposition to President Mugabe and the way the country is being managed. In many respects these people are strange bedfellows. You have white commercial farmers, you have trade unionists, you have very radical academics; then you have a broad range of people from the urban poor to the urban bourgeoisie. I think they are all people who, as the election process has shown, are capable of mounting a campaign and capable of harnessing the mood of the people, but it is not for me to say how easy they would find it to stay together.

Is there anything specifically the British Government should be doing to strengthen the opposition forces in Zimbabwe?

(Mr Longworth) No, I think that it would be very unwise for the British Government to interfere in any way in the domestics policies of Zimbabwe. I think that on the one hand it is a country that needs to resolve its own politics; we need to make it clear that the framework within which we are prepared to work with the next government is set by human rights rules, good economic management rules and all that, but I think for us to give direct support to a party would be wrong on our part and certainly would do no great help to the cause of the party. I think one of the great difficulties the MDC has had has been the allegations which have been spread by the government media and government spokesmen that in fact the MDC was some kind of front for white farmers and the British government. Having been High Commissioner at that stage I can now say quite categorically that the British government had nothing to do with the formation of the MDC and that any suggestion that that is the case is either a deliberate falsehood or a mistake. Certainly if we were to become engaged in assisting the MDC in their electoral ambitions then it would be interpreted as proof of that lie.

Sir John Stanley

Mr Longworth, you said that you do not think the British Government should get involved in the internal politics of Zimbabwe. What policies do you think the British Government should be following towards Zimbabwe?

(Mr Longworth) I am a retired person; they do not pay me any more so I am not standing here as something who is party preaching. I think there has to be a general acceptance of the fact that we can only become engaged in Zimbabwe through persuasion. We can only explain what the requirements are in London, in the country, for continuing assistance to Zimbabwe, for continuing support if those conditions are not met to withhold it. I think to try to intervene in politics would be counter-productive. I do not think that would lead to any kind of stability after the present situation has passed because there would always be the suggestion that somehow or another the Brits have made an attempt to repeat their imperial role.

Are you suggesting, therefore, that the British Government should be wholly passive in relation to Zimbabwe, that we should be doing nothing whatever to try to relieve the humanitarian disaster in Zimbabwe? That we should be doing nothing in the international community, in the European Union with African States?

(Mr Longworth) I think the British Government has been very active in all the areas which you mentioned.

What policies would you like to see being followed?

(Mr Longworth) Let me first state that as a bilateral partner of Zimbabwe our influence there is limited to that of any other country. We are perceived in Zimbabwe - or were perceived when I was there - as having some kind of special role to play as the former imperial power. It was quite clear that the interests of the opposition to the government would best be served if it were made clear that the United Kingdom was not trying to pursue its former role. What we did wish to do, though, was to ensure that the broader international community became aware - as we had been - of the problems that the people of Zimbabwe were facing. We have to speak now about a time in, say, 1998/99 when the situation was not as desperate or as apparent as it is now. But we had a great deal of difficulty in persuading members of the European Community to take on board the likely course of events and to persuade them that there should be a broad approach based on sanctions and that we should also become engaged through the Cotonou Agreement and the other instruments available to the EU. I think that was a difficult diplomatic process and it can be characterised as a success. I think it is also extremely important to stay engaged with African countries - particularly the neighbouring African countries - and to maintain the dialogue first of all to gain their confidence in the British position; there is still very strong Africanist feeling that in some way we are continuing to pursue an imperial role and we first of all need to make it clear that that is not the case. We also need to make it clear that if it is a question of African solutions for African problems, then those solutions should be devised by Zimbabwe's neighbours with us being prepared to help as best we can.

Do you think the British Government was right to try to persuade the English cricketers not to play in Zimbabwe?

(Mr Longworth) That is a matter for the British Government. My personal view, I think, is not relevant to that debate. I happen to believe that it should be all out or none out. I think that the work should be done with the International Cricket Council and perhaps our own cricket board should be working towards that effect. I think it would be mistaken if the entire series took place in Zimbabwe without the British cricket team because at that stage it would be taken to reinforce the President's allegations that this is a racial issue in Zimbabwe. You have South Africans going; you have Kenyans going; you have Indians going; you have Pakistanis going; but you do not have any Brits. I think that would not actually help our position. It would, of course, help everybody's position if the whole thing were called off.

Mr Illsley

Could I just follow on from that. I understand what you are saying and it is quite an interesting point actually. Do you think that if the cricket tournament does go ahead is there a likelihood that the Zimbabwe leadership would use that as an expression to the rest of the world, that because the cricket matches can take place - and are taking place - that perhaps the situation in Zimbabwe is not as bad as some countries - namely perhaps us, the United States, the European Union - are painting it?

(Mr Longworth) I am sure that the leadership would attempt to use the leg of the tournament which takes place in Zimbabwe to their advantage. I am sure that is the case. I am sure it would be taken and demonstrated that there is acceptance of Zimbabwe in the world. But I think here we have to take account of the fact that very few people now believe what the Zimbabwean Government say, and certainly not in Zimbabwe. As I say, I think that the cricketers are in an extremely difficult position. I do not want in any way, through saying something in this Committee, to make it worse. I do believe that by seeing Britain isolated from the rest of the cricketing world in this way is going to create as many problems as it solves.

Mr Olner

We did it in South Africa.

(Mr Longworth) We did it in South Africa under different circumstances.

Mr Illsley

Do you believe that the Government and the European Union have come up with the right sort of sanctions given the problems that Zimbabwe has economically, the travel bans, the freezing individual assets? Do you think those are the right sanctions?

(Mr Longworth) You cannot actually go to Zimbabwe without realising that there really does need to be economic activity in that country at whatever level to provide something for people to subsist on. These sanctions were being muted at about the time I was High Commissioner and we looked very carefully at what kind of sanctions would be appropriate. The view was taken that we could not get into sanctions which impacted directly on Zimbabwean people. Unfortunately, by not taking those sanctions, economic activity has taken place which has been of benefit to the leadership. I think that is inevitable. I think that by targeting the leadership first of all we have actually identified the people we think are mainly responsible for the situation in Zimbabwe. Secondly, it is having an effect on them rather than on the people who might not be to blame.

Do you think there is any argument to extend the sanctions any further. New Zealand have targeted some 140-some individuals; I think we have taken action against - or banned - 79. Is there an argument to extend the sanctions against supporters of Zimbabwe? Commercial organisations, such as that, but without, as you say, affecting the population of Zimbabwe economically?

(Mr Longworth) I do not really think it is a numbers game, frankly. I have been out of the debate for some time. I am sure that as people qualify for sanctions, the sanctions should be applied to them. I would not really want to comment on it.

Mr Hamilton

As you know, on 19 March last year Zimbabwe was suspended from the Commonwealth. Do you think that was the right decision?

(Mr Longworth) Yes, but I think to be precise it was not suspended from the Commonwealth; Zimbabwe was suspended from the councils of the Commonwealth. It is still actually a Commonwealth member; it is just that member of the Zimbabwean Government cannot participate in official Commonwealth events.

Does that suspension from the counsel reduce the leverage that the Commonwealth has on the Mugabe regime?

(Mr Longworth) I think it certainly hurt the President that the Commonwealth had taken that action. I think it hurt that he had not been able to prevent his African colleagues from going that far. I think it was something which was upsetting and something which was telling. We have only recently had a meeting of Commonwealth Ministers of Finance in London; Zimbabwe was not represented. That hurts. I think the degree to which the Zimbabwe Government seeks to participate in international meetings in countries where individuals would otherwise be banned is an indication of how much this kind of exclusion hurts.

Should they therefore be expelled from the Commonwealth completely? Does Mr Mugabe care at all? You indicated that it hurts.

(Mr Longworth) I do not know . I do not believe that expelling anybody from the Commonwealth is a good idea. I think the Commonwealth is a unique organisation which, as we know, spans every kind of country from LLDC to members of the G8. At this particular time I think it is important that it is an organisation which incorporates so many creeds and beliefs. I think it is an organisation which does exert influence and I think the importance with which the Commonwealth electoral observer body was accorded is something which showed that the Commonwealth does matter.

Is that an argument, then, for continued suspension after March?

(Mr Longworth) I am sorry. I think you said expelled.

I said expelled earlier, but I am wondering whether - from what you say - suspension might be the best option. That hurts them but it does not kick them out completely.

(Mr Longworth) I think the Commonwealth has every right to feel aggrieved at Zimbabwe, particularly after the complete disregard that was paid to the Abuja Agreement18.7

Mr Chidgey

Mr Longworth, I would like to raise a few issues with you on regional developments. We have the humanitarian crisis which obviously is far worse since you were in post. Nevertheless, I am sure you have kept up to speed with developments. For example, the South African Minister of Labour visited three farms in Zimbabwe on 10 January, it is reported. After his visit he said that South Africa had a lot to learn from Zimbabwe about land reform. Interestingly enough, in the counter-part to that, earlier last year, Fergal Keane gave evidence to this Committee. He said that the United Kingdom should be pressing President Mbeki of South Africa to do more and that, in fact, he was a critical partner to resolving the problems in Zimbabwe with Mr Mugabe. He said, "When we put real pressure on Thabo Mbeki it has an effect". The questions coming from that to us is to what extent do senior members of the African National Congress feel some sort of solidarity with the Mugabe regime? What influence do they have, if any? And what influence, if any, do we have as a Government do exert on the ANC to exert pressure on Zimbabwe?

(Mr Longworth) Of course I have views on everything you said except that I was High Commissioner to Zimbabwe and not South Africa.

But you were in Johannesburg at some stage?

(Mr Longworth) Yes, I was in Johannesburg. I think that it is important for the United Kingdom and for the countries of the developed world that South Africa and the other African states are kept in play on the issue of Zimbabwe and that they should be reminded on a regular basis that it is just not good enough to fall back on arguments which derive from the liberation struggle. I can appreciate that the ANC leadership and President Mbeki do have difficulties in coming out and condemning President Mugabe and I see there are a number of reasons. They are, in many respects, partners from the struggle. I think President Mbeki remains an African nationalist. I think he has taken a great deal of persuading that much of what President Mugabe has said about the UK's involvement in destabilising Zimbabwe is not true. I think probably he does believe that. I think there is also something else which is likely to become more of a factor in Africa, which is what really worried the ANC was the emergence of the MDC as a popular African party, multi-racial - something which had nothing whatever to do with the struggle - suddenly being in a position almost to overthrow one the great liberation movements. I think that has struck a number of serious alarm bells in various parts of the continent.

That is very interesting. I think from what you are saying, Mr Longworth, is that pressure from South Africa and other southern African countries might not be the best prospect of peace in Zimbabwe, primarily because they do not perceive it to be in their interests.

(Mr Longworth) I think it is difficult to lump Africa into a whole. The interests in South Africa and the management of the politics and the economy in South Africa are much more complex than, for example, in Botswana. One would expect that there is a lot of fudging which needs to take place in the upper leadership of the ANC on issues which are so emotive and so strongly relating to what in South Africa is a very recent struggle. ZANU-PF came in 20 years ago, but memories in South Africa of white domination are extremely recent.

Folk history. In that case, if the southern African countries, because of these very strong and diverse links in all sorts of factors, are in some way inhibited and therefore cannot be persuaded to act, what about other African countries with great influence? What about Nigeria? Do you see a role for countries such as Nigeria in having some influence?

(Mr Longworth) Nigeria and South African became engaged at quite an early stage. Presidents Obasanjo and Mbeki have both had joint missions and individual missions to discuss this thing through with the Zimbabwean authorities and also with the UK Government. President Obasanjo initiated a meeting between Robin Cook and Mugabe in Cairo, at one particular stage of the meeting of the OAEU. These countries have been engaged. I think that it is maybe naive for us to think that their priority is our priority. Their priority is the stability of their own country. There are important political factors that a leader of South Africa has to take into consideration.

Chairman

They also have a priority in terms of the image of the continent, in terms of inward investment and the deal they reached with the G8 at NePAD.

(Mr Longworth) I do agree, Chairman. I was going to come to this. The problem for South Africa and the others is that in trying to manage the political difficulties which they find themselves in with Mugabe - on the basis that the African search for consensus and respect for elders and so on - they are in great danger of losing the confidence of the international investor community.

Mr Chidgey

One final point on the regional aspects before we get into humanitarian. Do you think that the recent peaceful transfer of power in Kenya and the election of Mr Kibaki, might be another source of influence on Mugabe or would this be totally irrelevant so far as he is concerned?

(Mr Longworth) As I said earlier, we get into quite easy mistakes if we try to lump the continent together. We have seen a lot of very progressive things happening in African over the past five or six years. We have seen a market economy developing in Mozambique; we have seen good governments in Botswana; we have seen good things happening in Ghana and even good developments taking place in Tanzania which was once really thought to be at the bottom of the heap. It is not all a one-way street in Africa. I think that the Kenyan experience is something which should help people who wish to pursue fair elections in the rest of the country. That is not to say that the succession of power in Kenya is actually gone entirely into the hands of an opposing group. Quite a number of the members of the new administration were once members of the old one, but I think the lesson drawn from Kenya is that it is possible that in an Africa country an unpopular leader can be removed by a popular vote without too much violence associated with the election.

Moving on to the humanitarian crisis much of which I suppose has taken place since you left Zimbabwe I imagine. We are briefed that recent events have led to a situation now where I think it is some eight million people are facing starvation. Perhaps more seriously, we are informed and advised, that food aid which is being provided for Zimbabweans is being channelled and directed solely at those Zimbabweans who carry membership cards of ZANU-PF. It is reported that the reaction from Mr Mugabe's ministers is that they do not see any point in feeding members of the opposition because they are merely weeds. That leads us to ask you, Mr Longworth, whether you believe that the escalating food crisis in Zimbabwe is likely to affect the political situation in the coming months.

(Mr Longworth) Yes, I think it is. If it were to go anywhere it could be rather tragic. There is no question of what one might call a civil war, for example, in a country where only one party is armed and has control of the security services. But I do think there could be a rapid deterioration of society in Zimbabwe as a result of this starvation. I think, to be clear, it is something that we saw coming . We knew the famine was coming despite denials. There were a number of signals which we received quite a long time ago - two and a half years ago - that the ruling party would find it very hard to tolerate the management of food distribution to outsiders. This has been a traditional source of patronage. This is something that they would have been very unwilling to lose.

Given that it was clear that Britain, the EU and also the United Nations has been manipulated for political purposes in terms of how the aid is arriving in Zimbabwe, it is a key suggestion that the international community should take direct action to intervene in Zimbabwe. I said the international community, not the United Kingdom. May I preface this question with the fact that even now it is being debated in Parliament as to how one defines genocide. You will remember, of course, the Matebeleland massacres that took place in the 80's. You will know that we have intervened with the United Nations in Kosova, for example, for genocide. We are contemplating going into Iraq, one of the reasons being, we are told, is genocide. Do we not also have to bite the bullet and classify what is happening - or is likely to happen - in Zimbabwe as a deliberate attempt to kill large sections of the population who happen to be of a particular ethnic group and should we not be calling to the United Nations to pass resolutions in the security counsel calling for action under humanitarian rights, as we do elsewhere in the world?

(Mr Longworth) I am not an expert on how genocide is defined and I think in the case of Zimbabwe it is irrelevant because the actual aggression is directed towards members of political parties, people who do not support the government. You do not necessarily have to be Ndebele to be opposed to ZANU-PF nor to have voted against them in an election. I would not want to go down a track of saying that there is a genocidal thing taking place based on the difference between the Shona and the Ndebele tribes. It is based on support, or non support for the ruling party. This does not make it any better. I am not sure how you would define it. I do not think it is directed specifically towards one tribe. I think the United Nations does need to be brought into the debate. I think that we have tried; our European partners have been persuaded to join us in joint action. I think we have worked very hard with our African partners and within the Commonwealth and that process has been less than helpful, or less that totally helpful. I think that the United Nations should be involved. My view of human rights appreciations by governments is that there seems to be some inverse relationship between one's intention to pursue a human rights cause and the geographical, political significance of the particular country involved. I think actually to start doing what the Americans suggest is penetrative action in Zimbabwe will require a very, very big political will. It will require a huge amount of persuasion of the neighbours and the region. It is difficult to see how any kind of action could be taken without the support of the African neighbours. I think we are stuck with resolutions.

Mr Chidgey: Back to the UN. Thank you.

Andrew Mackinlay

I saw Peter Obourne's piece on television recently. I put down a parliamentary question following it. DFID really do not have up-to-date information as to the scale of the famine or potential famine on a regional basis. I do not know if you can comment on that, but it seemed to me that it also raised the question of resources in the British High Commission. Have we got enough there? Could we do more in terms of knowing the scale of the crisis?

(Mr Longworth) I think I am going to ask to be excused the question. I do not know the size of the High Commission. I know that there has been a restructuring, for example, and the commercial section is now very much depleted because there is very little commerce. I honestly would not want to be drawn into a debate on resources.

Throughout the past months I have been looking, when I read the press reports, for the mischief which apparently the British Government are apparently guilty of. I look for mischief in the British Government, but on this I cannot fault them. It does seem to me that there are protestations that somehow the British Government can and should be doing things but they are not doing them. From your observations is there anything more that HMG should be doing which they are not doing?

(Mr Longworth) It is very difficult to influence someone who really does not care about the suffering of people or the views of the international community. If you accept that you are not able to use force against Zimbabwe to bring down a government - which most people would accept - then it is very difficult to see how you can influence the course of events. Believe me, not a day goes by without my wondering if we could have done something during my tenure in Zimbabwe to have stopped this happening. I do not think we could. I think the moment that President Mugabe found that he had lost the referendum on the new constitution and that his power base was vulnerable, then I do not think anything was going to stop this happening.

Chairman

One final matter to help the Committee, you know South Africa, you know Zimbabwe, what are the levers which South Africa could use if it were so minded to influence? One, presumably, is the electricity supply Eskom, there are debts. Can you just give a series of headings of the degree of dependence of Zimbabwe on South Africa?

(Mr Longworth) I would say that a while ago there were more opportunities for South Africa to take action than there are now because the economy in Zimbabwe has now been reduced to almost subsistence level. You get to a stage where identified sanctions are not necessarily as effective as they might have been. Everybody quotes electricity because it is said that that was the threat that was used against Ian Smith and which brought Rhodesia to the negotiating table.

Are there debts which could be called in?

(Mr Longworth) I am out of date, Mr Chairman, but there were very large debts to the South African Electricity Utility. There are debts elsewhere.

Chairman: That is very helpful. Mr Longworth, you have been of great assistance to the Committee. Thank you very much.

MS GEORGINA GODWIN, Journalist, SW Radio Africa.

Chairman

Ms Godwin, may I welcome you to the Committee. You are a journalist who works for SW Radio Africa. I believe the SW stands for Short Wave.

(Ms Godwin) That is correct.

The radio station has been broadcasting from the UK to Zimbabwe for one year. You style yourselves as "the voice of the people of Zimbabwe" and among your staff are many journalists who, because of the oppression, have fled that country.

(Ms Godwin) If I could just say, the independent voice of Zimbabwe is what we call ourselves. Also, we have not fled; we came her specifically to broadcast into Zimbabwe because that is the only way Zimbabweans can receive any electronic views.

So there are no journalists who have actually been expelled.

(Ms Godwin) We have now all be expelled according to the media. Under what law we are not sure

Mr Olner

It is nice to know that journalists sometimes get reports from the media. The Guardian newspaper recently has alleged that Short Wave Radio Africa is funded by the United States Government. Is that true?

(Ms Godwin) I have absolutely nothing to do with the funding side of it. What I can tell you - which is something that everybody keeps asking us - is that we have absolutely no connection in any way shape or form with the British Government. I am the news producer; I do not deal with funds. I really could not comment on that.

What about the American Government?

(Ms Godwin) I would not know. I do not deal with the funding side.

Is it possible that the company can let this Committee know where the funding comes from?

(Ms Godwin) Yes. You would need to speak to the person who deals with that department.

Do you know how many listeners you have in Zimbabwe to your station. I know it is very difficult to get precise numbers. Do you have a target audience in Zimbabwe?

(Ms Godwin) As you say, you cannot go around with a clipboard. We believe we are looking at a couple of million people, but we are not entirely sure. We know we get 24,000 hits a day on our Internet site, on average, which is quite large. Not only do we broadcast on short wave into most of southern Africa we also broadcast worldwide on the Internet. To get accurate figures is impossible.

Is there a particular section of the community over there whom you target and who respond to the hits that you mentioned?

(Ms Godwin) We broadcast in all three main local languages so really we are not singling out any one part of the population. It is just an alternative to the state media and obviously anybody who wishes to listen and is able to, does.

In your own views as a journalist, do you think that the British Government should be doing more to assist independent journalists and news gatherers in Zimbabwe?

(Ms Godwin) I think you are always going to come against the problem that the British Government is perceived as a kind of colonial ex-master, imperialist, western, nasty running dogs, et cetera. I am sure you can fill in the blanks. I think that is always going to be a problem. But of course media is one of the most important ways. People cannot make informed decisions unless they are getting that information; they need information in order to be able to make up their minds about anything, particularly political things. If they are not hearing the voice of the opposition, if they are not hearing that there are alternatives, then it is very, very hard for people. I think that any government - not only Britain - who want to help the situation in Zimbabwe could do so by helping the media.

I was mentioning them before about the funding, America being one of those powers that threw off the UK colonial yolk many, many years ago, do you think they have a specif role in ensuring broadcasting and journalistic freedom in Zimbabwe? Or are the Americans themselves perceived as colonial masters of the past?

(Ms Godwin) I think Britain and America particularly are perceived in that way. I think that anybody who is doing anything to help democracy in Zimbabwe at the moment is perceived in that way.

Mr Illsley

I want to follow on from a comment made earlier that there is no connection between yourselves and the British Government, no funding or assistance. An article appeared about a year ago on the Guardian web page where there was a quote that said that your "broadcasts into Zimbabwe irritated and embarrassed British officials". I wondered whether there was any truth in that and whether there has been any backlash towards you from the British Government in terms of the fact that you broadcast it from this country.

(Ms Godwin) There has been no backlash because there really is no contact.

At all

(Ms Godwin) Yes. As far as that particular Guardian report goes we found most of it erroneous. We wrote and complained to the Guardian at the time.

You are not aware of any criticism from the British Government?

(Ms Godwin) No.

Sir John Stanley

What is your approach to news broadcasting? Are you seeking to establish facts? Are you seeking to give balanced view points? What is your news broadcasting policy?

(Ms Godwin) Obviously it is to give people the facts and also to give them a chance to speak for themselves. We are not a news organisation in terms of news organisations that you would recognise. We are all telephoned based. We are on the phone all the time to people who then tell their own stories to us and those stories are then broadcast. It is not our opinion; it is people who we are speaking to on the telephone who are saying, "This is what happened to me today" or "This is what I think". It is usually the voice of Zimbabweans, sometimes the voice of people from elsewhere, analysts and such. But very much the voice of the people.

Do you invite the political parties to comment, both the government and the opposition?

(Ms Godwin) Yes, we phone both the government and the opposition every single day. The last government minister who spoke to us was Philip Chiyangwa and that was several months ago. We have not given up phoning government ministers, but they no longer take our calls.

And the opposition?

(Ms Godwin) They do. They see it really the only electronic means that they are able to get their voices heard.

Are you subject to any electronic interference from the Mugabe government? Any attempts to jamb you?

(Ms Godwin) Short wave itself is notoriously difficult. It is prone to interference by weather and all sorts of things. We are unable to establish whether when we go off air that is interference by any other force than weather.

Does the Mugabe government engage in any form of police activity or repressive activity against those who listen to your broadcasts?

(Ms Godwin) Yes, we have had reports - particularly recently - about people being beaten up because they have been listening to our programs.

Have you had any evidence of people being beaten up, imprisoned et cetera as a result of participating in your programmes?

(Ms Godwin) Once again, yes, quite often. This is why a great deal of the people who give us information either will not go on air or will not give us their names.

Do you put people on air on the basis they will conceal their identity, or do you ask them to always reveal their identity?

(Ms Godwin) We give them that choice. If they wish to do it anonymously then we let them.

Mr Hamilton

Are you and your colleagues involved in the radio station based here effectively exiles now from Zimbabwe?

(Ms Godwin) Well, we think so. We are not quite sure. There was a report in the State Press listing 119 people - Mr Blair was number one and I was 116, slightly behind - which said that we were banned; we could not go into Zimbabwe and our assets would be seized or frozen. None of us have actually tried to go back. I understand that our assets have not actually been frozen, but I do not think any of us really had anything much. The honest answer is that I do not know; we are not about to try it.

What an extraordinary situation to be in. Can I move on to the current political situation and recent developments. What is your assessment of last week's report that key figures in ZANU-PF may be seeking to strike a deal with the opposition?

(Ms Godwin) To go back to what Mr Longworth said, I believe that there was never a direct meeting between Mnangagwa and Zvinavashe and Tsvangirai. It was always between them and retired Colonel Dyck. I do not think that a direct meeting actually took place outside of the failed negotiations which happened some months ago. Yes, I believe there is a lot of jockeying going on and I think that possibly what we are seeing - again I should stress that I speak as an individual here and not for the radio station - is a bit of a feeding frenzy within ZANU-PF, that suddenly it has become clear that the leadership post is going to become vacant; he has to go. I think Zvinavashe coming out and saying that was reminding people of that and saying, "By the way, don't forget, I am head of the army". I also think that perhaps we are leaving out one key person here who is retired General Solomon Mujuru, otherwise known as Rex Nhonga which was his Chimerenga war name. I think that Mujuru is very well respected by Mugabe. Obviously I have no privileged access either to ZANU-PF policy or to Mr Mugabe's mind, but Mr Mugabe surely must have heard that Mr Mnangagwa has been marked as the one to take over from and I would think that possibly Mujuru is the one he trusts more. Mujuru has been known, as I say, as the king maker.

Are the actions of those people within ZANU-PF motivated by genuine concern for what is actually going for the repression and democracy and freedom of speech as well as the current economic crisis, or is it simply about self-preservation?

(Ms Godwin) Of course there is power and there is greed, but I do not believe that every single member of ZANU-PF is an evil person. That is surely just not possible. I am sure that people have seen the writing on the wall, that it is all going to be over soon unless something is done. There must be people within the party who want a return to democracy, but on the other hand of course there is an enormous amount of money being made by such people as Zvinavashe and Mnangagwa out of the Congo and other means. People are ripping it with smuggling maize and sugar and foreign currency. Anybody in a position of power now is rich. What is your alternative? You make a lot of money and have a farm or go to jail if we are no longer in power; what would you take?

Is there actually any moderate faction within ZANU-PF?

(Ms Godwin) I think Mujuru may be the moderate to a degree. I think he is well respected and he has the backing of people who are moderates or rather he backs those that are seen to be moderates like possibly Simba Makoni, who is now no longer in the government.

Does that group of people stand any realistic chance of deposing Mr Mugabe?

(Ms Godwin) I believe so. I think deposing is perhaps not the right word. If he were guaranteed immunity I think he would go. But therein lies another debate.

In your opinion how has the morale of the opposition been affected by its failure to wrest power from ZANU-PF?

(Ms Godwin) They are continuing to contest in court the illegitimate election and I think that they are determined to carry on fighting, that they will take this through the courts even though the courts are themselves not necessarily what they should be. I think that they are very strong with themselves. I think that they are determined to see this thing through. The fact that Mr Tsvangirai is willing to cooperate, that he is willing to talk to emissaries from Mnangagwa or indeed from Mugabe is a good sign.

Is there still strong popular support for the Movement for Democratic Change?

(Ms Godwin) Enormous, I believe.

What more do you think the British government can do to help the MDC or to encourage at least a peaceful democratic solution?

(Ms Godwin) I think that any direct help to the MDC would be a mistake because of how Britain is perceived. Also the Political Parties Finance Act completely prohibits any international funding for political parties. Obviously it would be illegal to fund them in any way. What the British Government could possibly be doing is to expand the sanctions, perhaps not just increasing the number of names of the list but the number of people affected by it in terms of family members, of children at school, overseas. That sort of thing is going to hurt. Eventually, surely, those honourable men who I believe must exist within ZANU-PF will see that it really is hurting their families or their businesses or whatever it may be.

May I ask you, Ms Godwin, are you optimistic that there will be a change soon and that there will be a return to democracy soon?

(Ms Godwin) I change my mind every ten minutes depending on who has just phoned to tell me about their rape, torture or whatever. One minute we think yes, it is going to be OK; we're going home. Then the next it is not. I am sorry, I cannot answer that question.

Chairman

What is your reading of the mood of the population? Anyone with eyes to see can see the enormous deterioration of the economy of the country, can see the fact that the roads are not being made up, can see the general malaise. Are the people who telephone you and any others as best you can get them, are they cowed? Are they feeling they want to do something? How do you best characterise the prevailing mood of the population?

(Ms Godwin) I think it is very difficult. People do want to do something but they need to be led and it is very difficult for the MDC to call for any sort of mass action because, of course, the leaders would then be arrested and there would then be no leadership whatsoever. Tomorrow, for instance, there is a stayaway called for by the National Constitution of Assembly, who are the people who are trying to get the constitution changed. It will be very interesting to see how well that is supported. I think people are very, very angry, but then again if you are hungry you do not have that much energy. It is very difficult. As you say, you would have to be blind not to see what is going on around you. Of course people recognise that and want it to stop, desperately. It is easy enough for people like me to be activist but when you are doing it without health insurance and without recourse to lawyers and when you know you might get away with it today but tomorrow they are going to come and kill your family, it is very, very difficult. The people of Zimbabwe have been incredibly brave with no backup really and I think the people are just trying to look after themselves; they are trying to feed their families; they are trying to do whatever they can to survive and they hope that this thing will just end.

Those that have portable skills presumably are tempted to leave.

(Ms Godwin) Absolutely.

How significant is the exodus of trained people from Zimbabwe?

(Ms Godwin) I believe it is enormous. I do not have figures.

Presumably you have colleagues in London.

(Ms Godwin) Yes, particularly, as you say professionals, health professionals particularly. It is going to have a long term affect on Zimbabwe because even if there is a regime change those people are now earning foreign currency, they are here or in America; they are not going to go back with any degree or urgency I do not think. I feel that should there be a regime change the best possible thing that could happen would be - and I believe that the MDC have this on their agenda - to make it an attractive package for young Zimbabweans or trained Zimbabweans to go back to the country; tax breaks or whatever, just to encourage people to go back and rebuild the nation. But even if they do that it is going to be generational I think.

Mr Chidgey

You heard the questions I asked Mr Longworth earlier on the humanitarian side. I am rather interested in the context of this problem - huge problem, disaster really - of the eight million who are at risk of starvation. Reflecting on the reply you gave a moment ago about the reaction of the people of Zimbabwe, you rather echoed a comment made in April last year by Richard Dowden (whom I am sure you know of), who said "There is no sign, that I have seen, of a great popular uprising. The poorer people get the less likely they are to cause that sort of trouble." In the context of your 24,000 hits a day on the web site, the sort of feedback information you are getting from the people of Zimbabwe, what is your understanding of the current extent of the severity of the food crisis in Zimbabwe? Do you have a feel for what actually is happening throughout the country?

(Ms Godwin) Undoubtedly there is a famine and as there should be no famine in a democracy; this is man-made and let us make no mistake about that. Yes, there has been a drought but the dams are 70 per cent full. I think that that is a very, very important point to take on board before even discussing this. The people there are angry, as you said, and are hungry. There is not going to be an uprising, I believe, because there is not the energy for it for a start. But I think there are degrees of starvation. All starvation is wrong, obviously, but I do not think you are looking at people who are dying this minute; you are looking at vulnerable people in the society - people who are HIV positive, the elderly, children - who are dying right now. The rest is still to come. It undoubtedly will come unless something is done, but I think right at this very minute people are not dropping like flies in the street but they are only having one meal every two or three days perhaps.

You make the point that the crisis does not seem likely to affect the political situation over the coming months because the people are just too weak - spiritually, morally and physically - to take any action themselves. Is that right?

(Ms Godwin) I believe so.

Which brings us on to what external factors could be brought to bear. We have already heard that some intervention by Britain would be counter-productive; the intervention through the EU is not working; the Commonwealth is more or less powerless; and the UN, until they can define what genocide is, do not really have a mandate to involve themselves either. Coming back to this point that it does not really matter how you determine which people are going to be starved together or else killed quickly. With those sorts of numbers it is an international crime, regardless of how you identify them or who the perpetrators are. That is my view. Perhaps I should be asking you the question, is it your view? I would like to pursue this. We feel increasingly frustrated by the fact that the British Government cannot involve itself. It cannot involve itself in sponsoring a political party in a foreign country, quite right. Everybody else seems to be hidebound too. Do you feel that the people of Zimbabwe are seeking some form of involvement from perhaps the United Nations to help them in their plight?

(Ms Godwin) Absolutely. What we hear over and over again is that we need UN peace keeping people in here supervising the food distribution. That is the one thing that Zimbabweans keep telling us. I also think that the NGO's, the people distributing food, have a moral duty to speak out which they are not doing. We phone them up and ask them to give us interviews all the time and they say that if they speak to us then what little they are doing to help will be stopped. Maybe it will be stopped, but how can they stand there and see that this person is on the list so that they get fed and this person does not, and not say anything? This is what is happening. It is an open secret in Harare that on the Save the Children trucks you see people in ZANU-PF youth militia uniform. That goes on every day. Who is talking about it? You ring up all these aid agencies; they do not want to speak about it. It is a terrible thing and I believe they must surely take on board this responsibility. They are watching people starve whilst feeding other people. They need to do something about the people they cannot feed.

Mr Illsley

I think you touched on this a moment ago in terms of sanctions. You heard the questions posed earlier. Do you agree that the list of people affected by sanctions should be extended. I think you mentioned people studying abroad and the families of people who are already targeted. Would you like to say a few words on that?

(Ms Godwin) And businessmen too. I think there are a lot of people who are propping up the regime with their businesses. There are an awful lot of people who are dealing with the regime and they should be stopped; people who are resident both in this country and, I believe, in the United States, who would be very hurt by that. Particularly if the rest of the EU could be brought on board with this. I know that it is British Government policy - and I would say that I agree - that for Britain to act alone is not nearly as effective as Britain acting with her EU partners.

I mentioned earlier in questions to Mr Longworth and he agreed that direct sanctions against the people of Zimbabwe would be counter-productive. But there are articles beginning to appear suggesting that perhaps the United States might be looking at financial sanctions. Do you agree that that would be counter-productive or do you think we might have reached a stage where some limited sanctions would be helpful?

(Ms Godwin) What sort of sanctions?

I think on a financial basis.

(Ms Godwin) I think we should perhaps be looking at people who supply Zimbabwe with grain. Who sells it to them? Who sells Zimbabwe fuel? Who provides all of this stuff? The grain is then distributed in a partisan manner. I think we need to look at the suppliers and perhaps international pressure could be brought to bear upon those people who are propping up the regime by selling them things.

A question on the visa regime. Are there any problems with regard to the issue of visas to ordinary Zimbabweans? Are there restrictions on their travel? Is that causing an issue?

(Ms Godwin) I think it is problem for asylum seekers. People who really need to get away in a hurry are having difficulty.

Finally from me, the cricket question. I know that you have been a little bit outspoken on this in the past. What is your view on the cricket world cup?

(Ms Godwin) I do not know whether you saw Fergal Keane's report last night when he interviewed the Mayor of Harare who said that what is really going to happen - what is really going to hurt - is that the Barmy Army and the teams themselves will not see any violence or experience any difficulty or discomfort. That is because all the Zimbabweans who might be wanting to show that to them will have been locked up and intimidated over those weeks during the matches. I think that anybody going there, any international person coming in for that purpose, is hurting Zimbabwe because people will be locked away or whatever. I think picking up a cricket bat and playing international matches in Zimbabwe, you might as well be clubbing people to death yourself frankly. Also, if you think cricket is a problem, wait until Mugabe goes to France for the Afro-Franco summit. Should he go I think the cricket is just the very, very tip of the iceberg in terms of reaction.

Sir John Stanley

You spoke about the equivocal position of some of the NGO's and you referred to the Save the Children Fund. What do you find is the position of the UN agencies which are operating in Zimbabwe? Has the World Food Programme got any material activity going on there, for example?

(Ms Godwin) Yes, the World Food Programme is distributing food but, as you know, they have to distribute through various organisations. WFP choses to distribute through ORAP (the Organisation for Rural Associations for Progress). The person who runs ORAP is Mrs Sithembiso Nyoni; she is a ZANU-PF MP.

Are you saying then that the UN is actually guilty of party political selective distribution of food?

(Ms Godwin) I am, actually. I believe they may not be doing it deliberately, but they are certainly aware of the ORAP link; it has been brought to their attention several times.

What about other UN organisations in Zimbabwe? Is the UN Refugee Organisation present at all? Any other humanitarian UN organisations?

(Ms Godwin) Yes.

Is UNDP there?

(Ms Godwin) UNDP is there and there was a story about them today which I am trying to recall, but cannot. Yes. But again there is this whole problem of internal displacement. There is a lot of wrangling about words because people are being thrown off farms - ex-farm workers - and they are internally displaced. There has been an international argument that until these people are actually refugees outside their own country not a lot can be done.

What is your perception of the UK's DFID organisation in Zimbabwe, in terms of any role it is playing there?

(Ms Godwin) Once again, more could be done and if one sees that the right thing is not being done one should speak out surely.

Have you had any contact with DFID people in Zimbabwe?

(Ms Godwin) Once again, we are told that we cannot ask any political questions and not to interfere with good programmes.

Chairman

Are there any suggestions that British Government agencies are tainting their own work by funnelling it through organisations linked to the Mugabe regime?

(Ms Godwin) Not that I am aware of. But every organisation there seeks permission and has meetings with the regime in order to be able to distribute their food. Whilst I understand that may have been necessary, surely regular meetings do not have to take place. Surely it is take it or leave it; here is the food, do you want it?

What about the EU? Are there any allegations made about EU assistance?

(Ms Godwin) Not to my knowledge.

Mr Olner

Some senior people from Matebeleland did suggest that one of the quickest ways to make Zimbabweans sink and perhaps get rid of Mugabe was to stop sending food because actually the food was propping up his regime. Would you go along with that?

(Ms Godwin) I think that the food is propping us his regime, but it is very hard to suggest that one's own people are starved.

You are going to let us know about the funding of SW Radio Africa. Could you tell us how many personnel are involved in this country?

(Ms Godwin) Eight.

Chairman

Ms Godwin, you have been of great help to the Committee. You have given us information, some of which we were not aware of. Thank you.

(Ms Godwin) Just before I go I really wanted to say that I would possibly have spoken out more but I am very intimidated - as I am sure my colleagues here who have been raped and beaten are - by the presence of the Zimbabwean High Commissioner. Thank you.

MR JOE WINTER, Journalist, BBC World Service.

Chairman

Welcome, Mr Winter, to the Committee. You were the World Service's correspondent in Zimbabwe. You were expelled in 2001, since when the World Service has had no permanent presence in Zimbabwe, but have reporters in neighbouring countries or in London. Can you first of all tell us about the coverage of the World Service in Zimbabwe? What can you tell us about the listener profile?

(Mr Winter) First of all I would also like to go back and make a couple of alterations to the introduction. I now work for News On-Line. When I was expelled from Zimbabwe I was working for the World Service. Also, since then we have had a Zimbabwean journalist who replaced me, Lewis Machipisa, who has carried on working and sending regular reports.

Inside Zimbabwe?

(Mr Winter) Yes. In Harare and also somebody in Bulawayo, the capital of Matebeleland, Thabo Kunene. He has often been sending reports both for the World Service and for News On-Line. There has been some coverage and certainly Lewis Machipisa has been sending possibly daily reports - or every other day - whenever there has been a big story in the past two years.

Are there any restrictions on their work, their travel?

(Mr Winter) No, but now a new law restricting the work of journalists has just come into effect and so they are both waiting for accreditation under this new law. Mr Machipisa is waiting. I believe that Thabo Kunene in Bulawayo is currently in hiding. They have had certain threats. On Sunday the information minister publicly, in an interview with a state newpaper -----

Is that Mr Moyo?

(Mr Winter) Yes, Jonathan Moyo. In an interview with the Sunday Mail, a state-run newspaper, Jonathan Moyo called Lewis Machipisa a sell out for working with the BBC, which is obviously some kind of threat.

Is that feared as a prelude to something worse?

(Mr Winter) It is possible. He has also had threatening phone calls and things, yes.

What can you tell us about those who listen to the World Service in Zimbabwe? What research have you done?

(Mr Winter) I believe it is a fairly high number of people listen to the World Service in Zimbabwe. It is not as many as the World Service would like because across Africa the World Service is trying to set up FM relay stations and in Zimbabwe that has not been possible; the government has not allowed that to happen. I have forgotten the figures, the actual numbers of people. But Lewis Machipisa was just telling me the other day that he was stopped at a police road block and the policeman asked him his name. He gave his name and the policeman said, "Ah, you work for the BBC". As he was telling me this story my heart was sinking; I was expecting the policeman to get out a truncheon and start hitting him or something. He said that he worked for the BBC and the policeman said, "I love your stories, I really enjoy it; I listen everyday to focus on Africa". So there is a wide cross-section of people who listen to the World Service.

Mr Illsley

You mentioned that the FM relay stations cannot be implemented in Zimbabwe. What is the situation with getting broadcasts into Zimbabwe? Is the resource there from the World Service and from the BBC in general to ensure that transmissions are broadcast widely in the country or are there problems there? Are there are other issues that the BBC should be looking at to provide more resource? Or should the Government provide more resource?

(Mr Winter) It is broadcast via short wave which is broadcast from somewhere in the Indian Ocean I think. There did used to be a medium wave transmitter based in Rusitu and I believe that has stopped within the BBC World Service. The future is FM rather than medium wave. That has possibly not helped the coverage in Zimbabwe. The BBC cannot broadcast on FM in Zimbabwe. The Zimbabwean Government has no control over short wave broadcasts.

The World Service are looking to get FM relay as far as it can around the world. Presumably short wave will still be available within Zimbabwe for people who listen.

(Mr Winter) Yes, certainly.

The World Service were not planning to transfer over to FM relay before the more recent problems began in Zimbabwe were they?

(Mr Winter) In America they have stopped broadcasting in short wave. There are some people who are not happy with that. In Africa, certainly in Zimbabwe, the majority of the population are still rural so you cannot cover the whole country on FM. The idea was always to have FM in the big towns where short wave reception is less good because of all the interference of mobile phones, TV's, radios and buildings. You would have FM in the big towns and short wave for rural areas. I am not aware of any move to cut down short wave transmission to Africa.

Is there anything the British Government should be doing to assist in this situation, to assist in the protection of journalists, or do you think that is not necessary?

(Mr Winter) Certainly I would hope that if anything were to happen to Lewis Machipisa or Thabo Kunene or anyone else who is working for the BBC I would hope that, even though they are Zimbabwean, the British High Commission there would be able to help them, as they certainly helped me a great deal and were very useful when I was expelled. I would hope that if the secret police went round to their houses in the middle of the night that they would be able to fall on the services of the High Commission.

Chairman

You said you were expelled. What were the reasons given for your own expulsion?

(Mr Winter) There were various differing accounts. The information minister officially said that there had been a problem with renewing my accreditation but there were also other things. He was also talking about the coverage of the BBC and things. There are two departments. Tthe Department of Immigration summoned me in and said "Your permit to stay in this country has been revoked". They were saying I could leave and then reapply to come back under these new rules for accrediting journalists. But the information minister gave a different account. He actually accused me of bribing a civil servant in order to renew my work permit, which is completely untrue. Basically I think the real reason was an attempt to throw out the BBC and make a big public stand against the BBC possibly as a way of intimidating other journalists.

Mr Olner

Are there any BBC journalists in Zimbabwe at all?

(Mr Winter) There are Zimbabwean journalists who are working for the BBC fairly regularly, or have been working fairly regularly until a couple of weeks ago.

The BBC sub-contract them, do they?

(Mr Winter) Yes, they are freelance.

How many journalists would you say there are in Zimbabwe able to put up a stand against a regime without being threatened by it? I am trying to get a feel of it. Is there no press freedom within Zimbabwe? Or is there a little bit?

(Mr Winter) The situation is about to change. We are not sure. There has been a new law called the Freedom of Information and Access and Privacy Act. It is a rather strange name, but it has been passed and is in the process of being made effective. For the moment, for example the Daily News which is a privately owned newspaper, is still published every day. But they now have to register with the newly created Media Commission.

This is a licensing regime?

(Mr Winter) Yes. They have to get permission to publish a newspaper from the Information Ministry. As of now that licence has not been granted because it has not yet come into effect. If that licence was not granted then that would really make a huge change to media freedom. For the moment they are still being published and there are other weekly newspapers such as the Financial Gazette, the Zimbabwe Independent, the Zimbabwe Standard. There are at least three which are still being published weekly. Within the next couple of weeks or so that situation may change.

It may well be that the Mugabe regime will look on any broadcast whether it be from the BBC World Service or whether it be from SW Radio Africa to be tainted by ourselves. Are there any African countries who broadcast into Zimbabwe?

(Mr Winter) South Africa certainly. There is something called Channel Africa which was set up by SABC (the South African Broadcasting Corporation) and that is a short wave station for Africa. You can also get SABC on satellite TV. That is obviously for a privileged few. Otherwise I do not think there are very many. I do not think other African stations are broadcast.

Mr Hamilton

Mr Winter, can I just turn to the extent of the humanitarian crisis. We have discussed this quite a lot this afternoon. As you know, up to 8 million people are estimated to be at risk of starvation in Zimbabwe at the moment. On 30 April last year the journalist Richard Dowden argued that "There is no sign, that I have seen, of a great popular uprising. The people in the towns who have suffered most through price rises and so on have tried demonstrations and they turn quite nasty. The poorer people get the less likely they are to cause that sort of trouble." What is your understanding of the current extent and severity of the food crisis in Zimbabwe?

(Mr Winter) It is extreme and severe. Up to eight million people are facing hunger and are extremely hungry at the moment. There are not many crops in the field so that situation is only going to deteriorate in the near future, and certainly in terms of food in the shops. People have to queue up for bread, for sugar, for basic foods. People are quite hungry. As Georgina said earlier, it is not cases of mass starvation and massive deaths from starvation at the moment.

Would your information back up what Ms Godwin said about the fact that most people now have a meal maybe once every two days? Would that be accurate?

(Mr Winter) Yes. Certainly in the rural areas the situation would be more severe. In towns a lot of people would have lost their jobs and have no income as well. But in towns there are more ways somehow of finding a few Zimbabwean dollars from somewhere or other and getting a loaf of bread or something. Certainly the situation is severe.

Is there any evidence or do you have any information that ZANU-PF officials have diverted food aid for their own use?

(Mr Winter) There have been several reports supporting that argument. There was a report from a Danish minister speaking on behalf of the EU at the time saying that that was happening. And the Americans. And also the Danish physicians for human rights were saying that. I think there have been widespread reports along those lines, yes.

Sir John Stanley

Mr Winter, is the BBC World Service providing an on-line news service?

(Mr Winter) Yes.

What sort of hits is it getting each day? Do you know?

(Mr Winter) It is getting overall about nine million a day, of which somewhere around two or three million are for the international service.

What sort of length of broadcasting is taking place into Zimbabwe?

(Mr Winter) There I am talking about the written stories.

I am talking about audio broadcasting now.

(Mr Winter) A day broadcasting to Africa you would have somewhere around three hours. Three hours specialist for Africa. There are around twenty-one hours overall which are broadcast in Africa which is not purely African news and African affairs.

Is all that being received inside Zimbabwe?

(Mr Winter) Yes.

Do you think the World Service could be doing more to give more news and information access to people inside Zimbabwe?

(Mr Winter) I think they could be doing a lot more if their journalists were allowed to operate in Zimbabwe. Not being allowed to operate in Zimbabwe does make life more difficult. But you can still interview a lot of people over the telephone and re-broadcast those interviews.

Is the World Service doing enough to make that telephone source of news available and public? Do people feel they can contact the World Service as easily as they can contact SW Radio Africa, for example?

(Mr Winter) A lot of Zimbabweans may not phone up. It would generally be up to the people in London who are producing the day's programme to see the news and to phone up the people involved in the news. One of the problems might be publically interviewing people on the street - vox pops - for which you would get into trouble with the authorities. Getting the view of - not that there is such a person - the ordinary person in the street might be difficult. You can generally get hold of the opposition activists, occasionally some government ministers and various players in the political scene.

You will be aware that around the world when you are dealing with regimes that are trying to restrict news - oppressive regimes - you can only get feedback by actually soliciting invitations from people inside the country concerned to ring out. I wonder whether, from what you are saying, that the World Service is doing enough of that.

(Mr Winter) There are more interactive programmes on the Internet where there is always a form for you to send in your comments about this story or occasionally will ask questions. Just last week we had a discussion, a talking point, on the Internet about this possible offer between Emmerson Mnangagwa and Tsrangirai and so people were able to send in their comments on that story. That is more for the Internet side of things, but obviously your average Zimbabwean does not have access to the Internet.

From your own personal history and knowledge of Zimbabwe, give us your overall perspective on how successful the independent media are being in being able to inform people inside Zimbabwe as to the realities of world opinion as to what is going on inside that country.

(Mr Winter) I think in towns people are very well informed. Even if they no longer have the money to buy a newspaper people talk to each other. One person would read the newspaper, spread the word around. Also the newspaper vendors help. If you cannot afford whatever it is to buy a newspaper, you can pay a small fee to read it from the vendor. That is one way of getting information around. The big problem has always been in rural areas where people have less disposable income and even if they have the disposable income a newspaper certainly would not be sold in a local shop in a small village. That has been a problem. On top of that there has always been a monopoly of broadcasting from within Zimbabwe. The newspapers and short wave radio and satellite TV provide the only non-state news. People in rural areas who listen to their radios - FM or medium wave - generally only get the state broadcasts.

Andrew Mackinlay

You heard me ask the former High Commissioner, for me the sixty-four thousand dollar question is, is there anything more which the British Government should be doing which it is not doing? In your opinion? I am desperate, if you like, to find this gold nugget - and I am not being facetious - but there is all this inference in our press and media here in the UK that there is a magic wand that the UK could wave and I am really hungry to find out what more we should be doing. I wonder if you can help us on that?

(Mr Winter) Unfortunately not. I do not think there is much more to say. If the British Government did anything overtly would just play into the government's hands in terms of portraying Britain as a meddling, former colonial power. Doing things through international organisations, lobbying through international organisations would be the way that the British Government could seek to change policy in Zimbabwe.

There is one other thing which I want to explore - this will be using you almost as a dress rehearsal for the Minister - and that is that it seems to me if the shortage of nutrition is so widespread and it is on-going, there comes a point - and presumably someone somewhere must be able to project it - where it stops being lack of nutrition and becomes a famine on a large scale. It is not a shading; it does not gradually happen. Presumably there are whole regions where the vast majority of people are of the same nutritional value. You go through a threshold and we would then have a mass famine in a key part of Africa which then does raise the political stakes internationally and here in London. The British Government have a policy of saying that they would not stand idly by and see a repetition of what happened in another part of central Africa. What is your assessment - although you are a layman on this - as to the extent and depth of the nutritional deprivation across Africa? It would seem to me that there is going to be a month this year, presumably, where, if what we are told is true - and I have no reason not to believe it - we will actually have people dropping down dead in large numbers. Then it does raise the question for South Africa, the Republic of South Africa, for the European Union, for the international community because they do not want to see a repeat of other things they acquiesced in central Africa.

(Mr Winter) First of all, I do not think there would be a threshold, a sharp dividing line. One factor that is making the situation in Zimbabwe much, much worse is the prevalence of HIV and AIDS which is up to about 25 per cent to 30 per cent of the people. That is a large number of people. A lot of people are weak anyway and their immune systems are not functioning properly so they are more vulnerable. Those people, the elderly, the young would probably, if the situation does not change, are going to be in the front line and become weaker before other people, before healthy young men and women.

If there is no change - and there is no indication of any change - we are suddenly going to wake up and realise there are problems on a massive scale, problems of malnutrition. There will be people who are not just hungry, they are actually dying in the gutters, as it were. It might be coupled with or aggravated by the extent of AIDS, but that is a quarter of the population any way. It seems to me that whilst this afternoon I actually have some sympathy with the British Government it seems to me that there comes a point where the international community has to say that this is now anarchical and we cannot acquiesce on this any longer.

(Mr Winter) The situation will gradually get worse. I am not sure what the time frame is, at what point it is going to develop from a few people (who are already very weak from AIDS) dying into massive numbers. I am just not sure. I believe the harvests are around April so that will provide some respite for some people around April. The rains have not been great and the harvest is not going to be wonderful but there will be some crops which will be harvested around April which will provide some respite.

Mr Bill Olner

Just a quick question on this because it has been fairly well reported that not only is the drought a problem for us in Zimbabwe, but a lot of the famine is self-induced because the land is not being farmed. Is that true?

(Mr Winter) I would like to say that a lot of the commercial farming, the white-owned farms, have generally be producing tobacco and cash crops rather then maize.

Zimbabwe used to be the bread basket of Africa. Now we have the view, through journalists, that farms were failing because the land had been given away and was being badly managed. Is that true?

(Mr Winter) To a large extent.

If it is true to a large extent there will not be a bonus coming with the harvest when it comes.

(Mr Winter) A lot of maize, which is the basic food, even before the land reform programme was intensified recently, was grown by small scale black farmers who were growing crops either on a subsistence level or on a very small commercial level. Those people would not have been directly affected by the land problems, so that is still going on except that the rains have failed. But there is still going to be some production.

Chairman

I think Mr Mackinlay asked the key question. Our job as a Committee is to monitor the British Government. There is no particular failing which you can point out to this Committee which we can highlight when we see the Minister.

(Mr Winter) Speaking personally, certainly not on behalf of the BBC, I think possibly going back a couple a years I remember Peter Hain using some rather undiplomatic language and I do not think that helped the situation.

But in the current situation, unlike Mr Obourne in his documentary who seemed to think the British Government should be doing great things, you do not fall into that category.

(Mr Winter) I do not think so. I saw that documentary and I do not think that sending the British Army or anything like that into Zimbabwe would help the situation at all. I think possibly what could be done is long term planning because the current situation is not viable. In the long term there are going to be several issues as to what happens. For example, talking about the land reform programme, that is going to have to be settled if there is a regime change; at some point there is going to be some change of government one way or another and then there is going to be an enormous legal dispute about who owns the land and things are going to be worse than back to square one. Some kind of help in long term planning can be ignored. People are focussing on whatever the short term policies are, but -----

Chairman: Not for our Committee today. Mr Winter, thank you very much indeed for your help. The Committee will now be going into a private session, so could the room be cleared.