The case for SA Sanctions on Zimbabwe
“I was born here, I fought here and I will die here. Anyone who opposes me will be bashed.” These were words uttered neither by a rabid reactionary, nor by some embittered war veteran (those 20 year old ambiguities whose sad plight is to be betting chips for the next desperate politician.) These were the words of President Mugabe, whose thirst for absolute power has consumed him completely. Arrests without pretext, tortures, beatings and even murders have become the daily bread of a nation bereft of food, income, dignity and now security. Yet none of this is new or particularly shocking. Humanity’s threshold of tolerance towards the macabre and the grotesque has become so high that the liquidation of an entire nation-its dreams, its pastures, and its people simply doesn’t make the ticker tape any more.
Yet what makes Zimbabwe’s story particularly remarkable is how avoidable this spiral downwards was. Indeed, the fault lies not in our stars but really within ourselves. 27 years ago, a nascent nation emerged on the African continent, born out of a bloody war which both sides-the Rhodesian and the Nationalists’ side- were desperate to put behind them. The rudiments of a constitution whose only interest seemed to be the land question was drawn up, elections held and independence gained. A guerilla party came into power promising and extending the hand of reconciliation to a frightened white populace. The very same Mugabe of current ‘bashing’ fame, called on whites to “leave Rhodesia and come to Zimbabwe”. Massive economic restructuring was engaged in. Schools were built, hospitals constructed and the promise of independence began to dawn upon the nation. Yet even then the tremors of totalitarianism could be felt. Over 10 000 people (most of them Ndebele) ‘dissidents against the cause of the New Zimbabwe’ were murdered by Mugabe’s militias and their bodies dumped in mine shafts. These matters went largely unnoticed. Britain called it ‘an internal dispute’. A man, whose faith in violence was steadfast, felt vindicated. Today, faced with a failed economy, a ruined public sector, a dying citizenry as well as a brain drain of phenomenal proportions, violence has become the last refuge of the incompetent leadership of Zimbabwe. Its repeated purges of the constitution -outlawing political meetings consisting of more than 15 people (or is it 12? Does it matter?), the banning of a local independent daily, the murder of journalists and the brutal destruction of over a million homes in a ‘clean-up’ exercise have desecrated every international treaty to which Zimbabwe is a signatory.
And completing the cyclic nature of history, of course is the customary silence with which this has been met. South Africa’s ‘quiet diplomacy’ gives credibility to a dictatorship. At the UN where it holds a Security Council seat, in much the same way Western powers eschewed discussion of the apartheid regime of South Africa,
it has vetoed any debate on Zimbabwe.
Yet South Africa’s silence is particularly baffling. Its unparalleled constitution, its independent judiciary and the nobility with which it has made the transition from its terrible past to this optimistic present is the source of envy for the entire world. And this makes it essential that South Africa react to the situation in Zimbabwe- quickly. International organizations have declared this year-the 3rd consecutive one- as a drought year for Zimbabwe. Given the destruction of the agricultural sector (only 28% of pre-farm invasion land is currently being cultivated) this portends catastrophe for over a million Zimbabweans. Furthermore, South Africa, with the second highest income gap between the ‘haves’ and the ‘have nots’ (as shown by its GNI coefficient of 0.8) has had its unemployment and housing shortage problems exacerbated with the influx of over 2 million Zimbabweans over the last 5 years.
It is therefore incumbent upon the South African government to impose targeted economic sanctions against the ZANU PF regime of Zimbabwe; to freeze all assets belonging to ZANU PF, ban entry of Zimbabwean government officials into South Africa and to deport kith and kin of the ruling elite back to Zimbabwe who may be here for travel or study purposes. Sanctions serve the purpose of enunciating what should be South Africa’s unequivocal position on the gross violations of human rights. Furthermore, this will hasten the exit of the ZANU leadership and force the crumbling party into a negotiation. The current equivocation of the South African government is rooted in its perceived need to fulfill petty loyalties to unworthy African governments whose support for Mugabe and for ZANU PF stems from the bond of criminality that links criminals. Mbeki believes that for African Renaissance and NEPAD (both of which are noble initiatives) to succeed South Africa cannot afford to isolate itself from the entire continent which for the moment seems in support of Mugabe. Yet the great responsibility of the powerful often involves the courage to walk alone. Sanctions will force the corrupt leadership of Zimbabwe to decide between feeding its starving populace and buying the latest Mercedes, between sending their children to expensive foreign universities and educating the growing mass of illiterate people, between freedom and oppression. In the realm of grand ideas, this relatively minor one-to curtail the privileges of the ruling elite may seem ineffectual. But forcing the corrupt government of Zimbabwe which lives in abundance while a nation starves may indeed make all the difference.
Saturday, May 19, 2007
Infinity(∞)
“Bigger than the biggest thing ever and even bigger than that.” This was Douglas Adams’ description of that mind-bending, awe-inspiring and even frightening concept that is known as infinity. At some point or other we have all fixated upon what the largest number is, the furthest distance we can travel or whether the universe goes on forever. The earliest Hindu thinkers decided in around 4th century BC that infinity was that which could not be measured arithmetically. This quality therefore was equated with the concept of a timeless, space less God. Throughout history, infinity has troubled philosophers no end - especially the Greeks. The Atomists of Greece believed that space could be separated into individual points, a view that was challenged by Zeno, who in a series of famous paradoxes illustrated that in fact, finite things are made of infinite quantities of smaller things. Since then, thinkers assorted- mathematicians, philosophers even psychologists have pondered on this ultimate ineffable.
In mathematics, which one mathematician views as the science of infinity, various attempts have been made to bridge the gap between the infinite and finitude-to complete the incomplete, to catch it and tame it. Cantor, the father of the modern concept of the infinite, through a series of logical paradoxes developed set theory according to which everything is based on finite sets and showed that infinite sets are not bigger finite sets, that the two types of sets were substantially different. He went on to show that there are different kinds of infinity- of different sizes, a non-intuitive concept of magnificent proportions.
Astronomers continue to ponder on the infinitude of space. A world without end is something we humans have tried to rationalize since we studied the movement of the spheres. Yet despite our best available evidence which suggests that the universe is infinite, this is based on a finite observable part of the universe. Therefore perhaps, the question of the infinitude of space shall always remain unknown.
The human mind has struggled to grapple with the concept of infinity. Simone de Beauvoir, the French writer said, “I am incapable of conceiving infinity and yet I do not accept infinity.” Our very language seems firmly rooted in the finiteness of things. We have starting points and ending points (determined by us). We count, and then we stop (our decision, imposed on an infinite universe). We put one thing inside another (and the container is contained by the atmosphere, which is contained by Earth which is contained by the Galaxy and so on, ad infinitum). In all these cases, we arbitrarily define both the parameters of the system and the rules of inclusion or exclusion. Yet, we fail to see that WE are the source of the finiteness around us. The evolutionary pressures to survive seem to have produced in us this blessed blindness. No decision can be based on an infinite amount of data. No commerce can take place where numbers are always infinite. We had to limit our view and our world drastically, only so that we will be able to expand it later, gradually and with limited, finite, risk.
Yet the ability “to see the world in a grain of sand, and to see heaven in a wild flower, hold infinity in the palm of your hands, and eternity in an hour” as William Blake did, is in a sense, liberating. An American organization, called the Society for Dissemination of the Concept of Infinity has traveled throughout America posting up billboards with the words “Have you thought about Infinity today?” They seem to believe that if human beings accept the concept of a boundless universe the daily concerns that bedevil us begin to seem trivial in comparison. Yet often the very opposite is achieved. Martin Buber, an Israeli philosopher described how trying to grapple with the concept of infinity often made him suicidal with fear. The Greeks coined the term aperiophobia, to describe the fear of infinity that gripped those who pondered on it.
Yet can infinity actually exist? Using my unique opportunity to play the layman’s card, I’d hazard the thought that along with romantic love, dark matter and the existence of hidden dimensions, the idea of infinity may be one of those concepts whose causal connections lie beyond the grasp of current science. The Harvard mathematician Robert Kaplan thinks it is a purely theoretical construct existent “only within the fertile imagination of the mathematician,” and that, as Aristotle believed, only potential infinities can exist. In other words, we don’t know whether infinity can or cannot exist.
What we do know for sure however, is that the idea of infinity will continue to frighten and liberate humankind in one way or another….forever and ever.
“Bigger than the biggest thing ever and even bigger than that.” This was Douglas Adams’ description of that mind-bending, awe-inspiring and even frightening concept that is known as infinity. At some point or other we have all fixated upon what the largest number is, the furthest distance we can travel or whether the universe goes on forever. The earliest Hindu thinkers decided in around 4th century BC that infinity was that which could not be measured arithmetically. This quality therefore was equated with the concept of a timeless, space less God. Throughout history, infinity has troubled philosophers no end - especially the Greeks. The Atomists of Greece believed that space could be separated into individual points, a view that was challenged by Zeno, who in a series of famous paradoxes illustrated that in fact, finite things are made of infinite quantities of smaller things. Since then, thinkers assorted- mathematicians, philosophers even psychologists have pondered on this ultimate ineffable.
In mathematics, which one mathematician views as the science of infinity, various attempts have been made to bridge the gap between the infinite and finitude-to complete the incomplete, to catch it and tame it. Cantor, the father of the modern concept of the infinite, through a series of logical paradoxes developed set theory according to which everything is based on finite sets and showed that infinite sets are not bigger finite sets, that the two types of sets were substantially different. He went on to show that there are different kinds of infinity- of different sizes, a non-intuitive concept of magnificent proportions.
Astronomers continue to ponder on the infinitude of space. A world without end is something we humans have tried to rationalize since we studied the movement of the spheres. Yet despite our best available evidence which suggests that the universe is infinite, this is based on a finite observable part of the universe. Therefore perhaps, the question of the infinitude of space shall always remain unknown.
The human mind has struggled to grapple with the concept of infinity. Simone de Beauvoir, the French writer said, “I am incapable of conceiving infinity and yet I do not accept infinity.” Our very language seems firmly rooted in the finiteness of things. We have starting points and ending points (determined by us). We count, and then we stop (our decision, imposed on an infinite universe). We put one thing inside another (and the container is contained by the atmosphere, which is contained by Earth which is contained by the Galaxy and so on, ad infinitum). In all these cases, we arbitrarily define both the parameters of the system and the rules of inclusion or exclusion. Yet, we fail to see that WE are the source of the finiteness around us. The evolutionary pressures to survive seem to have produced in us this blessed blindness. No decision can be based on an infinite amount of data. No commerce can take place where numbers are always infinite. We had to limit our view and our world drastically, only so that we will be able to expand it later, gradually and with limited, finite, risk.
Yet the ability “to see the world in a grain of sand, and to see heaven in a wild flower, hold infinity in the palm of your hands, and eternity in an hour” as William Blake did, is in a sense, liberating. An American organization, called the Society for Dissemination of the Concept of Infinity has traveled throughout America posting up billboards with the words “Have you thought about Infinity today?” They seem to believe that if human beings accept the concept of a boundless universe the daily concerns that bedevil us begin to seem trivial in comparison. Yet often the very opposite is achieved. Martin Buber, an Israeli philosopher described how trying to grapple with the concept of infinity often made him suicidal with fear. The Greeks coined the term aperiophobia, to describe the fear of infinity that gripped those who pondered on it.
Yet can infinity actually exist? Using my unique opportunity to play the layman’s card, I’d hazard the thought that along with romantic love, dark matter and the existence of hidden dimensions, the idea of infinity may be one of those concepts whose causal connections lie beyond the grasp of current science. The Harvard mathematician Robert Kaplan thinks it is a purely theoretical construct existent “only within the fertile imagination of the mathematician,” and that, as Aristotle believed, only potential infinities can exist. In other words, we don’t know whether infinity can or cannot exist.
What we do know for sure however, is that the idea of infinity will continue to frighten and liberate humankind in one way or another….forever and ever.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)