Ululations, tears as white Zimbabwean farmer returns to seized land
Business

Ululations, tears as white Zimbabwean farmer returns to seized land

RUSAPE, Zimbabwe (Reuters) – The last time white Zimbabwean farmer Rob Smart left his land it was at gunpoint, forced out in June by riot police armed with tear gas and AK-47 assault rifles.

He returned on Thursday to ululations and tears of joy from former workers and their families who were also kicked out – a jubilant return and the first sign that the president who has replaced Robert Mugabe is making good on a vow to stop illegal land seizures and restore property rights.

Scores of jubilant black Zimbabweans nearly knocked the 71-year-old off his feet as he and his two children stepped out of their car and onto their land for the first time in six months.

Smart’s case was taken up by Emmerson Mnangagwa, Zimbabwe’s then vice-president who heard of Smart’s violent eviction while at an investment conference in Johannesburg.

Mnangagwa became president last month following a de facto coup that ended 93-year-old Mugabe’s rule. In the latter half of his 37 years in power, Zimbabwe’s economy collapsed, especially after the seizure of thousands of white-owned commercial farms under the banner of post-colonial land reform. [L8N1OE2E7]

Land ownership is one of Zimbabwe’s most sensitive political topics. Colonialists seized some of the best agricultural land and much of it remained in the hands of white farmers after independence in 1980 leaving many blacks effectively landless.

Twenty years later, Mugabe authorized the violent invasion of many white-owned farms and justified it on the grounds that it was redressing imbalances from the colonial era.

White farmers complained that well connected people used state security forces to force them off their farms, sometimes in the middle of harvesting, even after the Mugabe government indicated, some four years ago, that land seizures were over.

“We are overjoyed, over the moon. We thought we would never see this day coming,” Smart’s son, Darryn, told Reuters.

“Getting back to the farm has given not just us, but the whole community hope that it’s a new Zimbabwe, a new country.”

Rob Smart, whose father said he started the farm from “virgin bush” in 1932, expressed confidence in the new government’s pledge to protect the commercial farming sector, a mainstay of the struggling economy.

“It’s early days but so far what they (the new government) said they are going to do they are doing,” he told Reuters.

Commercial farmer Darreyn Smart looks on as private secuty gaurd unlocks the gate to his farm house at Lesbury Estates in Headlands communal lands east of the capital Harare,Zimbabwe, December 21, 2017. REUTERS/Philimon Bulawayo

“We just hope this whole incident will give hope to other farmers, who’ve had the same situation.”

“NO CONFUSION”

Mnangagwa, who is under pressure to revive the economy ahead of elections next year, said on Thursday that he was resolute about the changes he was introducing.

“There is no business as usual. Things have changed, it’s a new era,” he said at a meeting with business leaders in South Africa.

“I‘m from the military. If it’s ‘left turn’ then it’s ‘left turn’. If it’s ‘right turn’ it’s ‘right turn’. No confusion.”

Mnangagwa’s new agriculture minister, Perrance Shiri, last week ordered illegal occupiers of farms to vacate the land immediately, a move that could ultimately see some white farmers who say they were unfairly evicted return to farming.

Shiri, a military hardliner who was head of the air force before being picked for the crucial ministry this month, called for “unquestionable sanity on the farms”.

For 83-year-old Anna Matemani, whose late husband worked on the farm, Smart’s return was long overdue.

“I‘m so happy he is finally back. He always helped us and the farm provides jobs for many of our young people,” said the grandmother of 15, who grew up and raised her children on the farm and witnessed Rob’s birth, wiping away tears.

Some of the Smarts’ joy subsided as they walked into their ransacked farmhouses.

The occupiers had looted property, including clothes, the children’s toys, three guns, bottles of 100-year-old wine and Smart’s late father Roy’s medals from when he served with the Police Reserve Air Wing in the former Rhodesia.

“I‘m sad about my grandfather’s medals,” Darryn Smart said, surveying a ransacked room.

“You can buy tables and chairs, you can’t buy that family history. But thank goodness we’re here.”

7 Comments

  • Mikel Watts 22/12/2017

    All the very best of luck to them. Please take note, none of this land was seized, it was negotiated for and legally purchased with ownership deeds registered as legally possessed. Why do you journos still persist in these lies? Lobengula occupied all land in Matabeleland and sold the land outside Matabeland to settlers for mining. All this land had been settled before by migrating tribes who DID sieze it from the San people, the white settlers negotiated, did not seize or steal it with violence as the Bantu did. Know your history, not the communist rhetoric that has caused you to starve and regress.

    • Fairbridge 22/12/2017

      We all live in hope that an educated non biased journalist will appear on the scene some day soon.

    • fidza 26/01/2018

      i think you read a different kind of history, it is well known fact that the settlers had kings sign documents pertaining to one thing, and unbeknown to the king was actually signing his land away. it was done through treachery, thats a fact. as for the san people they are known to be limited to the namibian/botswana/south african west coast only and there is no record that they were in parts of zim, zambia etc. its usually a white fantasy of trying to shift goal posts with unsupported facts…

      • Mikel Watts 21/02/2018

        More fool the king ?? The San never had a king but they still lost their land, how does that work for the bantu settlers? Not even an agreement just slavery and genocide, so much for historical myopia.

        • fidza 21/02/2018

          its is a known fact that whites from netherlands or england never had any treaties with the san people, they never had any permanent homes to begin with! It is factual that treaties were signed with kings e.g Shaka, Dingaan, Lombengula, Moshoeshoe and so on. The difference between the san whom whites claim are original owners of the land (which is ridiculous by itself) and the other bantu tribes is that bantus had permanent lands they occupied and hence the need for treaties to dispose of that land while the san simply wandered across the land often moving according to seasons (to find water etc)

  • […]  Ululations, tears as white Zimbabwean farmer returns to seized land […]

  • […] Ululations, tears as white Zimbabwean farmer returns to seized land […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *