ZimbabweÂ's Very American Election
by Gene C. Gerard
www.OpEdNews.com
Last week, the African nation of Zimbabwe held parliamentary
elections. It was viewed, both within the country and by foreign
observers, as a referendum on the countryÂ's elderly and dictatorial
ruler, President Robert Mugabe, who has been in power since 1980.
Mr. MugabeÂ's party, The Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic
Front, won 71 seats in the election, while the opposition party, the
Movement for Democratic Change, garnered only 39. Both the
opposition party and independent observers have accused President
Mugabe of stealing the election.
Morgan Tsvangarai, the leader of the Movement for Democratic Change,
said Mr.
Mugabe won only through the use of intimidation tactics and
vote-rigging. The U.S. State Department called the election
Â"seriously flawed.Â" And Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice stated,
Â"the election was not free and fair.Â" Yet ironically, it appears as
if ZimbabweÂ's election was very American-like, if our election in
2004 is any indication.
President Mugabe and his party attempted to manipulate the media.
His government essentially runs all media outlets in Zimbabwe.
Consequently, coverage of his administration and his partyÂ's
campaign was heavily biased. Also, a law was enacted in November
that made it illegal to practice journalism without a
government-issued license, and subjected anyone guilty of this
offense to a prison sentence. In February, his government barred
foreign journalists from reporting on the impending election without
governmental approval, which was rarely given.
Since our own election last November, weÂ've learned that the Bush
administration also attempted to manipulate the media. Various
journalists have admitted to being paid by the government to promote
President BushÂ's agenda. In addition, the administration has
admitted to creating fake Â"newsÂ" stories, with actors portraying
reporters, to promote President BushÂ's policies. The stories were
distributed to television media outlets to use in their nightly news
segments.
President MugabeÂ's government attempted to disenfranchise voters.
Absentee ballots were only mailed to civil servants, diplomats, and
uniformed members of the military and security forces living abroad.
Yet there are over one million of ZimbabweÂ's citizens in other
African countries. Likewise, the Bush administration took great
efforts to ensure that military personnel serving abroad had every
opportunity to vote. But other Americans living abroad, particularly
in Europe, had enormous difficulties obtaining absentee ballots in
time to vote, if at all. One report of AmericanÂ's living in Rome
indicated that as many as 90 percent of those who requested the
ballots did not receive them in time to vote.
According to nongovernmental organizations which monitored
ZimbabweÂ's election, there were significant problems at polling
stations. Election officers who were appointed by the Mugabe
government were accused of barring the opposition partyÂ's voting
monitors from polling stations. As a result, by some reports, as
many as ten percent of Zimbabweans who attempted to vote were turned
away, on the grounds that they lacked proper identification, or were
voting in the wrong district. Additionally, when an election
complaint was lodged, there were not enough independent judges to
rule on the complaints, given that most had been appointed by
President Mugabe or were members of his party.
In our election last November there were various complaints of
problems at voting polls. Many of these complaints occurred in Ohio.
Republican polling monitors in Ohio outnumbered Democratic monitors
by almost two-to-one.
Consequently, when Republican monitors objected to someone
attempting to vote, there were not enough Democratic monitors to
refute the objection, resulting in the disenfranchisement of some
voters. Also, virtually all voting complaints in Ohio were resolved
by their Secretary of State, J. Kenneth Blackwell, who was also the
co-chairman of President BushÂ's re-election campaign in Ohio, and
could hardly be regarded as independent.
Other similarities between the two elections are equally compelling.
In the 2002 Zimbabwe elections, President MugabeÂ's supporters were
accused of killing hundreds of opponents. In order to demonstrate
that the elections last week were fair, he invited hundreds of
foreign observers to watch the elections. After our questionable
election in 2000, the U.S. State Department, for the first time
ever, allowed the United Nations to officially monitor the 2004
election.
President MugabeÂ's party bused-in loyal audiences whenever they held
a campaign rally, in order to pack their campaign sites. Although
not widely known, the Bush/Cheney Â'04 Campaign never allowed the
general public to attend any of President BushÂ's rallies last fall.
All attendees were required to have an invitation, and the
invitations were only mailed to registered Republicans in the county
in which Mr. Bush was speaking.
Both presidents manipulated the electorate in grotesque ways in
order to win their elections. By most estimates, half of all
Zimbabweans are undernourished.
Starvation is a sad and common part of life in that country. But
last year, President Mugabe ordered the World Food Program and Save
the Children Federation to discontinue distributing food aid.
He announced that the country had become self-sufficient, and that
his government would now allocate food resources. This forced
Zimbabweans to rely almost entirely on the government for food.
Consequently, Mr. MugabeÂ's government began to distribute food only
to those who had a voter registration card showing that they were
members of his ruling party. In fact, the party routinely handed out
food at their rallies.
Similarly, President Bush played on the fear and worries of
Americans in order to ensure his re-election. His campaign
relentlessly insisted that another terrorist attack was inevitable
if not imminent, and that only Mr. Bush and Mr.
Cheney could save us. They portrayed Senator Kerry as weak on
defense and confused on national security. Vice President Cheney
infamously stated in a town hall meeting in Ohio last October that
the greatest threat we now faced was a nuclear or chemical weapons
attack in one of our cities, and that Mr. Kerry was not tough enough
to prevent it.
The Bush administration, and indeed many Americans, love to hold up
America as a beacon to the rest of the world. They insist that we
are the ultimate democracy to which totalitarian governments,
third-world nations, and banana republics should attempt to emulate.
If thatÂ's the case, Zimbabwe is already very American.
Gene C. Gerard genecgerard@comcast.net teaches American history at a small college in suburban Dallas, and is a contributing author to the forthcoming book "Americans at War." His previous articles have appeared in Political Affairs Magazine and Intervention Magazine.
A
