By Takura Zhangazha*
In a lead story that appeared in a local weekly , Deputy
Minister of Mines Mr. Fred Moyo was reported
as confirming that there has been a somewhat recent discovery of a potentially
vast diamond fields stretching from East to south Eastern Zimbabwe. These fields are thought to be the equivalent to
the size of one of our SADC neighbours, Swaziland. They have also already been placed in what the
deputy minster referred to as the as Umkondo Basin.
Admittedly, revelations of such a profound nature and
potential economic impact for the country, must be taken very seriously. Both
by the government and all Zimbabwean citizens.
Especially where it relates to our perennial political and economic controversy
that is diamond mining.
As it has turned out, it’s a revelation that appears more
intended to promote government’s ZimAsset programme, before any tangible measurement
of either the extent of diamond or other mineral deposits therein or any effective
development of a state minerals exploration company
Furthermore, the immediate reference to the diamond mining companies
already in Chimanimani as probably getting first preference in relation to
exploration indicates that the government is acquiring its information from the
same corporations.
While the news story has a rather sensational headline, ‘Billion
dollar Diamond Fields’, it does alert us to a number of matters concerning our
governments attitude toward mining, minerals exploration and economic progress.
Key among these would be that the government is seeking to
claim economic success on the basis of speculation or unmeasured
potential. And sensationally so. This is regardless of the fact that prior to the
cited interview given by Ministry of
Mines officials, it has been in the
public domain that there has been unexplained diamond explorations in Bikita which
falls in the same Umkondo Basin.
Add to this the unaccounted for diamond mining in Marange
and there is enough evidence that the problem lies deeper than claims of the
discovery of new ‘billion dollar diamond fields’. It then becomes a question not of ‘lessons
learned’ but ‘problems unaddressed’.
Desperation to make ZimAsset a success on the part of government
should not be allowed to cloud real issues. Let alone to make sensationalist
claims to the media without outlining either a comprehensive plan with a specific
time frame. Or at least a socio-economic assessment of what any such diamond
exploration in the Umkondo Basin will have on peoples’ lives. Both in the
regions in question as well as nationally.
What also comes into view and question is the nature of the
relationship between the government and the mining corporations that have
tended to know the country’s minerals resources more than the former. An important question would be the extent to which
the government intends to set the pace of both exploration and eventual mining.
This being done without falling victim to the desperation it
has exhibited in order to makes its economic blueprint, ZimAsset, palatable to the
people of Zimbabwe. As is tragically the
case with the Chiadzwa diamond fields, government and the people of Zimbabwe
are the ones who have been led and shortchanged by mining company interests.
And as always, this begins with exploration as was the case
with De Beers which has been accused by government of dishonesty about what it
knew. Naturally the government might be
smarter or less complicit in aiding secretive private mineral exploration its
leverage is however limited to that elephant in the room called ‘investment and
technology’. Both of which the government
is having a hard time acquiring.
A final and even more
important perspective to the Umkondo Basin sensational announcement is that it
does not explain the issue of what the import is for the millions of people who
live in it. Particularly the majority of those who live in its rural areas. Both in the short and long term.
It is inadequate to generalize about the ‘nation’ when one
has talked about a basin the size of Swaziland in which not only mining becomes
a significant factor but the dramatic changes that will be seen occurring to
peoples livelihoods. That is, from mainly subsistence and semi-commercial
farming to having potential monoliths of mines with attendant changes to environmental and even political
landscapes.
These are phenomenal considerations that the Mining ministry
officials’ reported comments in the media
initially do not seem to be cognizant of. In fact, it may be a case of an underestimation
of the serious import of such a national matter for the purposes of ill contrived
political expediency.
If the Mines ministry was seeking to come across as organized
and honest as regards the immediate past of repressive, disorganized exploration
and extractive mining of diamonds in the region, such statements attributed to it do not help its intentions. And given such evident political expediency, we
are obliged to ask the question, ‘what came first, ZimAsset or the Umkondo Basin?’
*Takura Zhangazha writes here in his personal capacity
(takrua-zhangazha.blogspot.com)
No comments:
Post a Comment