Pod Save the World - Mugabe is the George Washington of Zimbabwe

Episode Date: November 24, 2017

Tommy talks with Africa expert Ambassador Johnnie Carson about the coup in Zimbabwe that toppled Robert Mugabe, and the recent political turmoil in Kenya. 

Hello, POSA of the World fans. It is Tommy B. Tor, broadcasting live to you, well, not live taped, from the swamp. I'm in Washington, D.C. I'm at the United States Institute of Peace. We are adjacent to the State Department. I'm looking down over a whole bunch of monuments and memorials that I will not list out. But it's good to be back in town. I'm here to talk with former ambassador Johnny Carson, who is an Africa expert who served in the Foreign Service for 37 years.

years. We talked about what has been happening in Zimbabwe with the coup that finally took down Robert Mugabe. We talked about recent elections and political turmoil in Kenya. And we talked about why administration after administration fails to focus on Africa when it is in fact an entire continent with huge equities for the United States. Ambassador Carson met Robert Mugabe back in 1974 when he was still just a guerrilla fighter. So he is an incredible perspective on who he is and how he became the tyrant that we know today. So I think you will really enjoy the conversation. And by the way, if you hear some clicks,

there was a former White House photographer in here taking some photos of Ambassador Carson. So that's what you're hearing. Thanks for tuning in. I am honored to be here today at the beautiful United States Institute of Peace Building with Ambassador Johnny Carson. Ambassador Carson served in the Foreign Service for 37 years.

I'm going to name a few of your roles because I don't think we have time to list them all. Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of African Affairs, National Intelligence Officer for Africa at the National Intelligence Council, vice president of the National Defense University, Ambassador to Kenya, Ambassador to Zimbabwe, Ambassador to Uganda, served in Portugal, Botswana, Mozambique, Nigeria, and the Peace Corps. So there is no one better to talk about the issues I was hoping to talk about today in Zimbabwe and Kenya. Thank you so much for doing the show. Tommy, thanks to be with you again.

My first question is, you know, who is Robert Mugabe? How did he come to power and keep it for 37 years in a region where sometimes you see leaders have shorter reins? Robert Mugabe is the George Washington of Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe gained its independence in 1980 after a prolonged guerrilla struggle, which Robert Mugabe led. Prior to independence, Mugabe spent over a decade and a decade. a half in jail for resisting white colonial rule in then southern Rhodesia. He was released in the mid-1970s around 1975, early 1976, and he took over the Zanoo political organization, the Zimbabwean African National Union. He created the

the political structure, and he created the guerrilla movement, which ultimately brought down the Smith regime in 1979 and 80. He was initially the prime minister of the country, and as a result of constitutional changes, became president. Robert Mugabe, for those who have never met him, is an extremely articulate man, very polished, very disciplined, very resolute, very focused, very determined, and a man who is capable of manipulating other people to do some of the most heinous things that you can imagine. Robert Mugabe is a man of steel and willing to use that steel against his political opponents.

but he's also very articulate. He built the Zanu political party, and he made Zanla, the military wing, which is now the backbone of the Zimbabwean army, subservient to the party. An extraordinary man. I met him first in 1976 shortly after he was released from prison. At the time, I was serving as the deputy chief of the president. mission at the U.S. Embassy in Maputu, Mozambique. We had been trying for weeks and months to get an opportunity to meet him. He had been out of jail for approximately a year, and he was in northern Mozambique where he was with the fighters who were fighting against Zimbabwe. I traveled to

northern Mozambique with a person I later worked for and admired Stephen Solars, Congress. from Brooklyn, New York. And Steve Solars had been pressing the embassy to get a meeting. We finally got that meeting. I travel with Steve Solars up to a place called Kilimani in northern Mozambique. Four-seater airplane, no radar. We followed the coastline. Two South African pilots, white. We flew during the early hours to maximize our time on the ground. Three hours up, landed at an abandoned earstrip and I met Mugabe that day along with two other people who later became famous as well. Was this when you're working in the house? I later work for Steve Solars because after that trip we had and found a kindred spirit in one another and later yes he asked the Department

of State some several years later. If I I could come and work for him when he became chairman of the subcommittee on Africa, which I did. I greatly admire Steve Solars. But that was our meeting with Robert Mugabe. The contents of that meeting are widely known to anybody who knows how things are disseminated these days. So I won't tell you what I said about him. It could be easily found. Okay.

When do you think he transformed from this freedom fighter, this George Washington figure, to much more dark, tyrannical figure? When was that change? Or do you have a sense of what changed over time? Robert Mugabe never changed. Our perceptions and our understanding of who Robert Mugabe actually was became more in focus as the context and events around him changed. Robert Mugabe was always a discipline, focused, resolute person who was a strong socialist, if not, in fact, even further leaning than that. Robert Mugabe never imposed a one-party political system in Zimbabwe in the 1980s and 1990s, but he sought to do so, and people sought to do so. and people sought to help him do it.

But there were a number of strong democratic forces inside his own party among individuals who thought they could one day succeed to the presidency who kept him on the straight and narrow. He's always been an authoritarian figure. He's always been a disciplined figure. He's always been extremely focused and he's always believed in. control of the things around him. What brought things to an end was corruption, like it does in many places around Africa. In 1997, 98, just as I was leaving Zimbabwe as ambassador as ambassador, just as I was leaving Zimbabwe as ambassador, the Herald newspaper of Zimbabwe as well as several other smaller newspapers

began to run a number of exposés about the Zimbabwean War Veterans Pension Fund. After 1980, the government had set up a pension fund for those, individuals who had actually fought in Zanu and Zapu to bring about the country's independence. The Herald investigative reporters discovered that these funds had been misappropriated and embezzled and that the pension fund had virtually run out of money. And they asked, why was this happening if, in fact, the government had put ample funds into the pension benefit plan, was the money gone? And they discovered that members of Mugabe's cabinet, senior members of their family, wives and children, many of them who had been overseas studying and out of the country and never involved in the fighting,

had received large payments from the fund. And it set off a scandal. And the opposition and others pointed to the fact that this was an increasingly corrupt government and that individuals inside that government were stealing funds that should have gone to the war veterans. Mugabe then, in reaction to the protests on the street, by individuals working with the veterans started to take over and take over white land-owned farms. And it began the confiscation of white-owned farms. And when that happened, the farming sector, which was one of the country's strongest,

started to decline. Economic confidence in the country started to disappear. Production declined, and the economy started to begin to sink into a depression, which led to high inflation around 2005, 2006, where there were trillion percent inflation in the country and where the country's money lost all of its value. But it was corruption that killed it. So fast forwarding a little bit. So recently Mugabe fired his vice president and seemingly in the wake of that decision, the army took control in a military coup. But he didn't formally resign until yesterday, Tuesday, we're recording this on Wednesday. And he didn't go easily. As you said, he's a tough customer. Why do you think the military and his own political party finally decided to move on him?

What do you think was the tipping point? The dismissal of Vice President Emerson, Manangagwa, around November 6, 7 when he was pushed out. It is important to remember and think about this, not so much as a political coup deta against Robert Mugabe or against the political party that he has been associated with, Zanu P.F. What this was is a military coup or a military intervention against Robert Mugabe's wife, Grace Mugabe, a 52-year-old. A 52-year-old. politically ambitious, a woman who thought that she could succeed her husband when he died or when he stepped aside. Robert Mugabe is gone. One of Africa's real aging tyrants has been pushed off the

political stage. But none of the instruments or institutions that he created over the last 37 years, which kept him in power, have in any way changed or been altered. The man who succeeds him, Emerson Monangagwa, who is supposed to be sworn in on Friday, is a political clone of Robert Mugabe. He is a 75-year-old version of the 93-year-old Robert Mugabe. And the instruments that he inherits to run the country with will, in fact, be the Zanu-P-F political party that Robert Mugabe creative. And it will be backed up and supported by the Zimbabwean military, which is an outgrowth of Zanla, which was created by Robert Mugabe. So it sounds like there's some good news, which was he wasn't not able to install his wife. But I feel like I've seen a lot of folks on Twitter and the news are

cheering the coup almost. Premature. Pree mature. Cues, though, I mean, I think the history of coups or the history of violent or fast political changes can be more instability, more bloodshed. Do you think that's where this is going? Is there any chance you think things could improve for the people in Zimbabwe? They could. Okay. They could. I know out there that there are large numbers of Zimbabweans who want to believe that the downfall of Robert Mugabe, will usher in the political and economic reforms that they have long sought. And there are large numbers of people in the international community who recognize the enormous potential that Zimbabwe has always had, who also believe that this is a beginning point

of change. But it is premature. at this point to say that the aspirations and the hopes that they have are going to be borne out. Because as I say, right now Emerson Manangagwa is a man who is more like Robert Mugabe than not. And the instruments and structure that created Mugabe are still in place. The other thing that is possible here is that we can possibly see a continuation of the autocratic dominance of the Zanu P.F. political party, a strong grip on the instruments of government by this group, but in fact begin to see some opening on the economic side. It is possible that Emerson, Monongagua may open up the country. There has been discussion that he would likely invite back some of the white farmers who lost their land and create a more open business and commercial

environment for businesses that want to invest. Zimbabwe has enormous upside potential as a country. It has every one of the elements that is required for strong sustained development. And so he may do that. And if he does open up the economy, there is some hope that the country's bleak economic circumstances would change. This is, however, a time in which the international, communities should seek to actively re-engage in Zimbabwe, to encourage Emerson Mangagwa and those around him, not only to open up the economy, but open up the political space for NGOs and other democratic opposition groups.

I want to turn to Kenya. Kenya has also been dealing with a whole series of contested elections and political turmoil that results from them. We could probably start this conversation as far back as 2007. But more recently, there were two presidential elections this year alone that were reviewed by the Supreme Court. The first election in August was nullified because of irregularities that indicated efforts to steal votes. In my mind, you know, that is a huge problem. but the good thing is the Supreme Court threw out those results. But it seems like the bigger challenge is that in this instance, the international community

is really messed up by leaping to certify the elections too quickly pushing Kenyans to accept the outcome. Secretary Kerry, who I greatly admire, praise the Kenyan Electoral Commission for having done an extraordinary job and having a free, fair, incredible election, and then urge the opposition to get over it and move on, and then the results were thrown out. Now, Kenyatta was elected in the second, in the due over election. But I guess I'm wondering is, how did the international community get this so wrong? And are there consequences and costs to these mistakes? I would say that the international community did not get it wrong.

And that the international community that is a part of the larger democratic community, community that believes in strong democratic institutions, independent judicaries, which we'll talk about, independent legislatures and co-equal branches of government, and who fundamentally believe that people in democratic societies have a right to select their leaders. I think they didn't get it wrong in the sense. I think it's not to say there weren't some missteps in Kenya among politicians and among some of the organizations that manage elections, but there may have been some small missteps in the international community. But I will strongly endorse and continue to strongly endorse in many parts of the world and especially in Africa the need for observation of elections.

Absolutely. First and foremost by local observers, but secondarily by international observers. Because international observers help to legitimate outcomes, help to provide public space for local observation, eliminate the kinds of small, petty ballot boxing stuffing, intimidation of voters and manipulation of counts that used to go on. So observation, both domestic and international, continue to have importance, Kenya, and what was happening there. And I think in looking at this election, you have to think of what you referred to in the context of 2007.

Right. In December of 2007, there was an election in Kenya. It was a highly contested election. And the outcome of that election set off enormous violence. Some 1,600 people were killed. Hundreds of thousands were injured. and Kenya literally without the intervention of then Kofi Annan, the former Secretary General, was on the verge of a civil war. The contest then was between Rilodenga, the candidate who has now lost three times in a row, and Wai Khabaki, the president, who won in

2007. Although it is highly disputed, I believe in that 2007 election, that Riloh Odinga actually won. There are scholars out there, and I talk to them in this town, and I talk to them overseas, say that it's not the case. But I remember following this election, quite closely from the perch in which I was sitting at the time. And it looked as though Ril Dingo had won before the count stopped, became more opaque. And before the election commissioner and commission could explain what the hell was happening. And in an instant, I remember sending a little. note to our then ambassador out there and saying, please congratulate Ril Odinga and his wife, Ida,

on a election of victory well won. The next day I woke up to find out that the count had stopped, that no one could say what was happening. The election was now in dispute. Later that Saturday, evening, again, I look to see what is happening. And they say Kabaki has won. And the next morning, early Sunday morning, he was sworn in as president. Two weeks later, the country was engulfed in conflict. Yeah. And it lasted for five, six weeks as people and community started to move from east to west to align themselves with their ethnic communities. And as commerce, stopped. It was a shame. Now, fast forward. No doubt that Ril Dingo's run in two more elections, 2011 and 2015. I think in each of these instances, people have sought to improve, among other things,

the way elections have been run and held and put in place mechanisms to decrease the level of potential for conflict. In this election, I think people were looking and saying, let us find a way, let us find a way to ensure a transparent election, election that is well managed, well run, transparent. that is creditable. The Election Commission in Kenya had an enormous job. They had an enormous job. They were running an electronic election where there was digital verification of registration of individual voters and transmission electronically of the ballots. But this is one of the most complex elections ever held in Africa, if not in the world, because there were six different ballots, at least that everyone had to deal with, president and vice president at the national level, legislative elections at the national level, gubernatorial or provincial governors or

provincial governors at that level, legislatures at the provincial level, and municipal mayors, including in places like Nairobi, Mombasa, Kasumu, and other major cities. Major elections and major cities. This was a huge election. Countries with large populations, India, Nigeria, don't try to run elections like this. We don't try to run elections like this. I wouldn't say we've perfected vote counting. We haven't perfected vote.

vote county. But, you know, we have it broken down and staggered over two and six-year periods, gubernatorial elections, you know, or frequently not held when we have national elections and presidential elections. We just had that in Virginia. No one would try and do it. And it was being done with an election commission that had only been in office for about six or seven months, only six and seven months. Had a staggering job. And more than that, six and seven months, And probably only two of the election commissioners really had any prior experience in running an election. So it's very, very complicated. The reality is, is that in the final vote tabulations in the first round of this election,

there were not the electronic verifications of some of the vote tabulations. And the opposition party, led by Riala O'Dinga, challenged the legitimacy of the election based on administrative and procedures that were not followed. And because electronic tabulation sheets did not, in fact, come in and follow the paper sheets. The court said bravely and had a right to say that all of the procedures were not followed. We want a review of this case, and they decided on a rerun. The court never questioned the vote count and tabulation. The judges said that the process and procedures were wrong. Right.

So to that point, I mean, I was wondering, you know, we talked a lot about Mugabe and Zimbabwe. we talked about the political instability as a result of these elections and protracted electoral processes in Kenya, is it possible to quantify the cost of that political instability to the Kenyan people or to the people in Zimbabwe? Like, is there a way to understand the macro cost of a bad or failed leadership in countries that are, have enormous potential? And the answer is yes. And I think there are probably a number of ways to do it that are. are fairly evident. When there is political instability, when there is civil conflict, when there is ethnic and regional strife that grows out of these conflicts, it has a

dramatic impact on the economy of a country, the image of a country, and its environment to attract both domestic and international investment. It has the capacity to slow down trade, interrupt trade, and to generate the kind of economic backlash that has consequences of a measurable impact and consequences that linger long after the problem has been resolved. Kenya, for example, and this is one of the reasons. reasons why 07 and 108. Kenya is a relatively modest-sized state, but Kenya is, in fact, the most important country in East Africa and East Africa and the Horn. It has been a long-standing

friend of the United States. But Kenya is the economic keystone for the entire region, the port of Mombasa serves not only Kenya, but it serves southern Sudan. It serves Uganda. It serves Rwanda. It serves Burundi. It serves the northwest corner of Tanzania. And it is relevant and importance, even in the deepest parts of the Congo, Kisangani, the bend in the river, in the eastern part of the Congo,

looks more to Nairobi in the east than it does to Kinshasa in the west. All of the trade goes through there. Oil, trucks, railroads. And so when Kenya is economically disturbed by political upheavals, it means the ripple effect goes out through the region. But it's not only transportation, it is also finance and banking service because they are the key bankers throughout the region. Communication, they are the key there.

They're the key agricultural producer in the region as well. And they are the center of a great deal of economic vitality, not only in that country, but rippling out into the region. There also, and have been for many years, our most important security partner. Right. And also the most important security partner in the region for the British. The British since the end of the Second World War have always used Kenya as their warm weather training ground for all of their troops. And of course, we have had an unbroken relationship with that country since 1963. And after the bombing of our embassies in 1998, our security collaboration has increased quite significantly.

And we too have a strong security relationship. Everything that we've done in that region, whether it's responding to the Rwandan genocide of 1994, provide restore hope in Somalia back in 89, 90, provide refugee assistance in southern Sudan. Those have all been built on the back of Kenya. The air bridge into Rwanda was Kenyan. The air bridge into and shipbuilding bridge into Somalia was Kenya. And our ability to get into southern Sudan when it was in conflict made an airport that nobody even knows about and can pronounce Locochokio, one of the most significant airports in Africa, because we were flying in tons and tons of relief materials.

Locucho on an average day look like an aircraft carrier somewhere in the South Pacific fighting in the battle midway. Every president comes in and tries his hand in Middle East peace, or they give big speeches and fret about China, and they talk tough about trade relations in the military. And it feels like every president, even the best intention, ends up treating an entire continent without the mind share and economic investment. that it deserves or really warrants for our security needs. Why do you think that happens and how do we right-size the focus of the United States government towards an entire continent? Long overdue. Long overdue. Africa is increasingly important not only to the United States but to the global community. And if we continue to place Africa and the concerns and interests of Africa on the back burner, ultimately we will be the losers. We need to work more actively and in partnership with

African countries, all of them and some of them more than others. Fifty-four countries out on the continent. We're increasingly aware that things that happen in Africa can have an extraordinarily negative impact in perception and reality on the global community and that their security concerns are a part of our global architecture for security. And I'm not just talking about kinetic military, not just fighting El Shabab or fighting AQI-E or AQI-M or any of the other groups that are out there. But here I'm talking in this instance that we need to be partners in the area of public health in helping to ensure that the threat of Ebola in Liberia and Sierra Leone doesn't become a global threat or a threat.

to the health of the United States. Remember Ebola? Everyone listening. Yes. And Ebola is just one of some 12 hemorrhagic fevers that exist out there that could easily be transmitted. Working with Africa to deal with health pandemics that can move as swiftly as an airplane taking one sick passenger to an unknowing sick passenger to another country. We need to be working there. We also need to be working with Africa on issues of human trafficking, small arms movements, illegal drug movements, cocaine and heroin, which can move through Africa into Europe and back into the Americas, including the United States because of weak security forces on

the ground at Africa. We need to be working with Africa. with respect to issues of climate change. So all of these are out there, but we should also recognize the potential that Africa has. And this is demonstrated by the demographics that are out there. Africa is the youngest continent in the world in terms of age. it is also the fastest growing continent in terms of population growth.

Today, Africa and the 54 countries constitute 1.1 billion people. By 2050, that number will be up to 2.2 billion people. to give you some micro indicators of what I'm talking about or what we're talking about. Nigeria today has approximately 185 million people. It is the largest country by population in Africa. It is the seventh largest country in the world by population. It is the sixth largest Muslim country in the world by population. Its Muslim population is larger than all of Egypt's Muslim population.

Its Muslim population is substantially larger than any Arab-speaking state in the Middle East in terms of population. But yet Nigeria is growing more rapidly than all of Western Europe. Wow. on a day-to-day basis every 24 hours. There are more children born in Nigeria than in all the Western Europe, from Sweden down to Sicily and from Poland over to Portugal. This is a huge demographic. And by 2050, looking at the middle range of the demographic tables of the UN,

Nigeria's population will go from 185 million to approximately 400 million, and it will move from seven to three in terms of population displacing the United States. We have 325 million people in this country. By 2050, we're expected to have 400 million people. Nigeria will have 400 to 405 million people. That's a very good reason to pay attention. And we see this playing out, but in a different kind of a way. We see the movement and exodus of people going from Iraq, Syria, Iran, into Turkey and parts of the Arabian Peninsula and going across to some of the Greek islands out there in order to get into Italy and to Greece.

We see them moving into the Greek islands. what we are now starting to see a little bit is the enormous movement of Africans across the Sahara into Libya and other places to get to them. And if you look at what's been happening off the coast of Italy and Lampedusa, places like that, you see the enormous numbers of people who are on the move today from Africa looking for better opportunity, looking for jobs, looking for stability, looking for peace, but looking for a better way to live. That can be turned into a positive.

Africa has enormous upside potential, enormous upside potential. It needs roads, it needs airports, it needs housing, it needs hospitals, and there's a consumer market out there. But it's also a continent that is still very rich in mineral resources and with lots and lots of agricultural potential, industrial potential, and investment opportunities. We need to rethink it how we look at Africa, embrace it, partner with it, work with it. The numbers will speak for themselves. and if we don't embrace those numbers in a positive way, those numbers may, in fact, overwhelm us in a negative way. Right.

My last question for you is just one group that you do see very present in some parts of Africa are conservative American Christian groups that seem to be exporting some of our worst cultural and political fights abroad. In Uganda, you've seen activists stoking anti-LGBT, sentiments and laws. You've seen Americans pushing for restrictions on abortion rights in Kenya. In your personal opinion, why are these groups able to gain traction in places like Uganda? What do you make of this effort to, you know, sort of take these conservative laws and fights abroad? I am a strong liberal. And I believe in our democratic values and principles.

We should be exporting those democratic values and principles abroad, and that means freedom of speech, freedom of association, freedom of religion, freedom to form trade unions, but we should be expanding our freedoms and our liberties for every community in the United States. These are not only communities of color, but these also extend equally to the lesbian and gay and transgender community. Their rights should be equal to the rights of every other American and every other individual in the world. We shouldn't be exporting things that restrict freedoms that make people less. equal that make people less tolerant. We should be exporting the values in democratic principles that make us recognize our equality and our shared values. And this is where we ought to be. This is the space that we should occupy. And I would say the commitment should be towards advocating and promoting and enhancing the fundamental democratic values that we have, including

tolerance, including respect for individual rights and religious freedoms wherever they are. Right. Ambassador Carson, people who listen to this show have heard me complain a lot about efforts by the Trump administration and Secretary Tillerson to gut the State Department to cut senior foreign service positions. And I just wanted to point out that the types of men and women who are retiring are the types of men and women who are on rickety airplanes in 1974, going to runways in the middle of nowhere to meet Robert Mugabe for the first time to report intelligence over the course of 37 years that is critical to our understanding. So I hope we will remember to appreciate and revere those individuals as much as we do, the U.S. military

and other institutions this country that deserve our respect. So thank you for doing the show. Thank you for your service. And it was an honor and a pleasure to be here. Tommy, thank you very much. Thank you. Pleasure. Thank you for enjoying Pod Save the World

during your post- Thanksgiving food coma. Appreciate you tuning in. If you want to see more stuff, including photos of my dog, go to the Pod Save the World Facebook page or follow me on Twitter at TVTor 08.