Following is a letter written by Zimbabwean Ambassador to Iran S.C. Chiketa in response to a letter by Mohammad Fayyaz that was published by the TEHRAN TIMES earlier this month. The TEHRAN TIMES often publishes letters by readers, but this does not imply endorsement of the views of the writers, and the TEHRAN TIMES definitely does not endorse all of the views of Mr. Fayyaz. Dear Mr. Fayyaz:

I write to you having read your open letter to President George W. Bush (Part 1) as published in the Tehran Times International Daily of September 9, 2003.

In your reference to my country Zimbabwe, the tone and content of your letter reveal that you have signed up on and are peddling Bush and Blair's accusations that, by giving the black majority of Zimbabwe their land, the Zimbabwean leadership is a dictatorship.

For your own information, the People of Zimbabwe fought a war of liberation from 1962-1979 to install (an until then non-existent) democratic system of government and to reclaim their land that had been forcibly grabbed and systematically and violently confiscated without compensation. The 1979 Lancaster House Conference Constitutional framework was agreed upon and war ended only after Britain and the United States had agreed to contribute funds to purchase land/farms from the white farmers for the purpose of distributing it to and resettling the indigenous blacks. When the then Democrat President Jimmy Carter was defeated by the Republican Ronald Reagan, the U.S. reneged on the promise to assist Britain with funds to purchase farms from white farmers. Not to be outdone by the Republicans under Ronald Reagan, Tony Blair's New Labour Government that had already stolen the Conservative Party political platform followed the American example and also reneged on the agreements reached at the 1979 London Lancaster Conference. Funds to purchase farms from white commercial farmers to distribute and settle indigenous Zimbabweans dried up as the British New Labour Government dissociated itself from the commitments made by the British Conservative Government. Tony Blair's British Government claimed that they were not bound by agreements made by a previous British Government! The Zimbabwe Government could not and would not on its own continue to honour and to be bound by the Lancaster House Agreement in so far as they related to the question of the purchase of land for redistribution to the indigenous people. Since the other parties to that Agreement had reneged on their commitments the Zimbabwe Government was free to resume the struggle for the land from where it had been left off in 1979. For this decision, my country which until then had been held as a shining example of a politically stable country with a democratic government begun to be vilified, denounced, demonized and called a dictatorship. In an attempt to undermine and reverse the land redistribution program, the British Government and the white commercial farmers funded and financed the labour movement and transformed it into an opposition party, the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC). In addition, sanctions were imposed and, at the instigation of the British Government and supported by the USA, the IMF and the World Bank denied the country any further loans and the balance of payment support which it had enjoyed until the country decided to resolve the land question on its own and in accordance with the laws of Zimbabwe. However, nothing could stop the land redistribution exercise. The exercise continued and has just been completed.

The land policy is aimed at the equitable distribution of land, ensuring social justice, racial harmony, political stability, improvement of the economic situation of the majority of the people in the rural areas, and putting the idle land into production. Every Zimbabwean, black and white, who would like to farm, is entitled to one (farm).

However out of a guilty conscience, to deceive the international community, and to justify their hostile actions before the international community, Britain and the USA have branded President Mugabe a dictator and have gone further as already been indicated and imposed sanctions on the country and its leadership.

The claim that Zimbabwe is under a dictatorship is contradicted by the following facts: Zimbabwe is a multi-racial Southern African country with a multi-party democracy. There is freedom of speech and a free press. Though Zimbabwe is an overwhelmingly Christian country, other religious groups such as Hindus, Moslems, Jews, Buddhists, etc. freely practice their faiths. Furthermore, though three political parties are represented in Parliament, there are actually more than five (political parties) in the country. General parliamentary elections are held every five years while Presidential elections are held every six years. Bi-elections are held whenever there is a vacant seat in Parliament due to death, ill health, or resignation of a Member of Parliament. The first general election was held in 1980 and since then, general elections were held in 1985, 1990, 1995 and 2000. The next general elections are due in April 2005. These elections have been observed by officials from the contesting political parties, independent local observers as well as invited observers from several countries and international organizations. Such observers have in the past elections declared the elections to be transparent, free, and fair. The last general elections which were held in 2000 and in which the ruling party won 62 seats and the two opposition parties 58 seats were declared by the majority of the observers who actually were in the country to be free, fair, and transparent. In addition to parliamentary elections the country holds Executive Mayoral elections. Currently the opposition holds all but one of the Executive Mayoral posts in the major towns and cities. Such a scenario hardly speaks of a country under a dictatorship. One wonders then where the writer of the letter gets his facts that lead him to such a false conclusion. For, he leaves the impression that the victim of the unjust colonial legacy and of the hundred years of brutal colonial rule is the white man!

Furthermore, the country holds Presidential elections every six years. The last Presidential election was held in 2002 and President Robert Mugabe was re-elected with a majority of over 400,000 votes.

It speaks volumes of the country's respect for democratic values when one considers the fact that the opposition parties and civic society organizations are recognized and are free to operate in spite of the fact that these same parties and organizations receive funding from the British and American governments that are hostile to the current Government in Zimbabwe. Furthermore, the fact that human rights violators like the former Prime Minister of Rhodesia whose government was responsible for more than 50,000 deaths is still a free man residing at his farm in Zimbabwe is an attestation of President Mugabe's respect for human rights. It was this same respect for the value of man and his rights that was behind President Robert Mugabe's declaration of the policy of reconciliation so that the Zimbabweans would forgive one another, reconciled as they concentrated on rebuilding their country as a united nation.

I am thus surprised that such a reputable paper like the Tehran Time chooses to swallow hook, line, and sinker the propaganda that is disseminated by the western media that is supportive of the discredited U.S. and British Governments that are known the world over that they lie and peddle lies, and that are known to have hostile intentions towards the current leadership in my country. Worse still, the author of the said article allows himself to be used to propagate such lies and thus misinform the friendly people of Iran. The fact of the matter is that these two countries' leaderships have told lies and "sexed" reports about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, they are telling lies about dictatorship in Zimbabwe, they are telling lies about many other things and countries, and they will lie again as long as it helps them attain their objectives, the domination and control of the world resources and world hegemony. It’s high time the world and Mr. Fayyaz realized this and stop aiding and abetting them in deceiving the world public opinion. These countries are not led by angels, they are led by people whose interests are and will always be first and last, their national interests. Their national interests may coincide with my national interests, but for the most part and particularly with regard to the land redistribution question, their interests are in direct conflict with my country's national interests. It should also be noted that the two countries have even defied the United Nations as well as world opinion in pursuit of their national interest.

I hope that your paper will publish this response and clarification in order to make available the correct information to the readership of your esteemed paper. I am for ever available to you Sir should you need any more information and further clarification on my country. S. C. Chiketa Ambassador