In any discussion about the justifications for the war in Iraq, there comes the Zimbabwe point. Yeah, says the sceptic, but what about Zimbabwe, eh? If we go to war to liberate the Iraqis from the tyranny of Saddam, why won’t we lift a finger to free the victims of Robert Mugabe? Is it a kind of racism?
To which the answer is, of course not. It is just that no vital Western geostrategic interests appear engaged by the disaster of Zimbabwe. If we ran our cars on bananas, matters might be different. But since Zimbabwe is neither an oil-producer nor an avowed sponsor of Middle Eastern terror, the dictator is left on his throne. His people may be murdered, their farms stolen, their children facing starvation, but the Western powers content themselves with the wittering banalities of summit communiqués. The same apathy is detectable in our entire policy towards Africa.
Europeans and Americans alike spend many billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money every year to dump our farm produce in Africa, so demolishing local production. When you consider that 70 per cent of African employment is in farming, compared with less than 2 per cent in this country, one can see the evil of this policy. What can we do to make amends? We can lobby for reform of the Common Agricultural Policy. We can call for investment in Africa, and action against Mugabe and other tyrants.
And then we can send Africa copies of The Spectator, in the hope that it will spark new ideas, encourage a belief in freedom and free markets, and supply something different from the politically correct pap distributed by the UN and the NGOs.
The recipient schools, colleges and other institutions appear below. Many thanks to all readers who gave so generously to this cause, and welcome to new readers in Africa.
Comments
Join the debate for just £1 a month
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for £3.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just £1 a monthAlready a subscriber? Log in