In May 2008 South African President Thabo Mbeki commissioned four retired South African generals to visit Zimbabwe and report back on the violence that swallowed parts of the country in the wake of that country’s March 2008 presidential elections. The South African History Archive and the Southern African Centre for the Survivors of Torture now are petitioning the Pretoria High Court to force the government to release their report. It is difficult to imagine any justification for keeping such a document — and all supporting materials — under wraps.

From The Economist via Andrew Sullivan:

The obvious global narrative here is that we have actually seen a rollback of freedom in the last decade or so. But there are two notable exceptions: South America and, to a lesser extent, Africa.

For example, the map shows the democratic republic of the Congo as having backslid in the last eight years, but I am not certain that most observers would agree that the DRC was in any meaningful way “partly free” in 2001. I guess we’ve “lost” Mauritania and Western Sahara and Ghana (and again, it depends on how we are measuring these things — one could as easily argue that in 2001 Zimbabwe was still “partly free” but then again one could easily argue the opposite. Either way Zimbabwe has certainly gotten worse.) We have apparently “gained” Kenya (again — certainly debatable at least from the perspective of one who closely watched the political explosions there at the end of 2007 and into 2008).

Consider my scare quotations to be evidence of my cynicism about this whole exercise, but what I think it does tell us is that any narrative that simply asserts that things in Africa have continually gone from bad to worse and will continue to do so is based on a static, stereotyped, and too often racist, conception of Africa.

Tendai “The Beast” Mtawarira, the burly Springbok and Sharks prop who is easily one of the most popular athletes in South Africa, is a Zimbabwean national. This has never raised anyone’s hackles in any meaningful way in the past. But suddenly South Africa’s Ministry for Sport, at the head of which sits Makhenkesi Stofile, has decided that The Beast’s presence in South Africa is not justified. According to an advertisement placed in numerous media sources:

“The officials of the Saru [South African Rugby Union] even inform us that Mr Mtawarira ‘is currently on an exceptional skills visa (work permit)’. If such a work permit has been issued on the basis of his skills as a prop forward, the concept ‘scarce skills’ was vulgarised. The Sharks or any provincial unit or professional club may motivate for the issuing of a work permit for a limited number of foreign players or administrators. Such application must be accompanied by a COMPELLING motivation.”

First off, countries play fast and loose with these sorts of rules all the time. When I was living in South Africa for the first time, a local minister practically begged me to stay, largely on these “special skills” justifications. I am a historian by training, hardly an essential skill that would require an American when there are so many South African historians available. But it is possible that I could have filled a special niche that no one in South Africa fit exactly. The point is that officials make these sorts of decisions all the time. And so it is hard to draw any conclusion other than that Stofile’s ministry is grandstanding (at a cost to the state of at minimum R100,000) while at the same time fueling the xenophobia that has been stirred in the country over the course of recent months.  It is all well and good to want to develop local athletes. But is the answer really to go after a popular black Zimbabwean with threats that would amount to an expulsion order back to Robert Mugabe’s Zimbabwe?

It is easy to assert that the political negotiations in Zimbabwe have reached crunch time. But it might be more accurate to say that the negotiations that have been fraught from the outset are facing their last best chance of peaceful resolution. This assumes that both parties want peaceful resolution, or resolution at all, despite the fact that such assumptions would fly in the face of all that Robert Mugabe has done and said for the lasr decade in general and with regard to these negotiations, for the last year and a half.

The question for the outside world has continued to be what to do to prod Mugabe along, how to cajole and flatter the old despot when necessary, how to condemn and flagellate his regime the rest of the time, and how to recognize the sufferings of Mugabe’s victims in their millions. President Obama weighed in recently by honoring Women of Zimbabwe Arise, an organization that has steadfastly and bravely resisted Mugabe at considerable risk.

South African President Jacob Zuma, meanwhile, believes in providing encouragement for the Zim negotiations by asking for Zim’s reinstatement into the Commonwealth. I do not deny Zuma’s motives. He is not burdened by his predecessor Thabo Mbeki’s dithering nor is Zuma known as being especially sympathetic toward Mugabe. Nonetheless I think Zuma’s desire is premature. Mugabe has done little but delay and equivocate in a situation in which delay and equivocation serve Mugabe well. It is one thing to call for renewed aid to Zimbabwe in hopes of luring foreign investment and development support that the population desperately needs, and that can be withdrawn if necessary. Readmission to the Commonwealth should go to Zimbabwe only at the completion of this process, not now, when so much is left to be done and when Mugabe can reverse the few small gains with just a call to the men with guns.

Zimbabwe has started withdrawing troops from the country’s diamond fields at the behest of the countries behind the Kimberley Process. Now, to be fair, this is one Zim-related narrative that is not simply part of a larger “Mugabe = Bad” narrative. The troops were posted at the diamond fields in Marange in the eastern part of the country in order to clamp down on illegal mining. But before long the solution was worse than the problem, as Mugabe’s troops began engaging in pretty blatant human rights violations, which is too frequently par for the course for Zimbabwe’s military, which has operated with impunity for too long, especially after 2000 or so.

Here are stories that should keep you busy as you head into a November weekend. If you are reading this from the US, Europe or elsewhere in the northern hemisphere, winter is fast approaching. If you are reading from Africa or the southern hemisphere, winter seems like a distant concept. Either way, enjoy. Commentary as appropriate:

The Christian Science Monitor (via McClatchy Newspapers) has an interview with Eritrea’s elusive President Isaias Afwerki. Afwerki is widely seen as a strongman uninterested in human rights who is also centrally involved in exacerbating the crisis in neighboring Somalia. Let’s just say that the (admittedly interpolated) interview doesn’t disabuse us of any of these notions.

On the good news front, we are accustomed to seeing various global rankings of various human indexes with African states lagging way behind. It is worth noting, then, that the World Economic Forum’s 2009 Gender Gap Review is out and that South Africa (7th), Lesotho (10th), and Mozambique (26th) all rank in the top 30. By way of comparison, the United States ranks 31st. (Via Matthew Yglesias.)

Botswana is widely recognized as one of the true success stories in sub-Saharan Africa. Which is why it was reassuring to hear the country’s President, Ian Khama, speak out against Robert Mugabe’s delaying tactics and general bad faith in moving toward power sharing Zimbabwe and his call for new elections. Now, whether new elections would change Mugabe’s general approach remains to be seen, and it seems a mite optimistic to think that even elections with a clearcut anti-Mugabe outcome would force the old despot’s hand, but we can hope, can’t we?

It looks as if Nigeria is poised to become the country with the fastest growing construction rate in the world.

Could journalists please stop resorting to references to “The Dark Continent” when referring to Africa, and could I redouble that request for those who will be writing about next year’s World Cup in South Africa? Thanks.

Has anything changed in South Africa in the last 15 years? Let me give you the simple answer: Yes. Enormously. Nonetheless, you should absorb a  series of papers, “The Dinokeng Scenarios” that address South Africa’s many challenges.

The Zimbabwean unity government talks have shown virtually no movement in months. The parties barely speak to one another, with the beleaguered opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) briefly staging a walk-out from talks before returning last week and thus, in the words of some, stepping “back from the brink.” The situation is the source of high-level discussions among the region’s Southern African Development Community (SADC) leaders, who, in “when did you stop beating your wife” fashion have had to publicly deny that the oversight organization they created to address Zim, The Joint Monitoring and Implementation Committee (JOMIC), is “toothless.” The Prime Minister, Morgan Tsvangirai of the MDC practically has to plead to be considered an equal partner with President Robert Mugabe and his ZANU-PF party — a plaintive wail that seems to fall on deaf ears. The government, with Mugabe’s ZANU-PF clearly flaunting control of the police and judiciary, has brought what seem to most observers to be patently absurd “terrorism” charges against MDC parliamentary aide Roy Bennett in what increasingly appears to be a show trial. And Zimbabweans living outside of the country are still afraid to go home.

And so what are we to make of the fact that some still argue that all sides are committed to making a power-sharing agreement work and the news that Tsvangirai, in returning from his boycott, is giving Mugabe and his cronies a month to work out a deal? Frankly I have no idea. Perhaps MDC is gluttonous for punishment. Maybe both sides are simply circling one another like exhausted boxers. Maybe whistling past the graveyard is reassuring.

But it seems to me that delay only helps Robert Mugabe. The current status quo, with Mugabe the de facto first among supposed equals may not be status quo ante in which Mugabe loomed supreme, but it is far better for him than a real power-sharing agreement. As it stands now Mugabe is still the single-most powerful individual in the country with the support of a minority of the people but a majority of those with guns, the only majority that matters. In a draw, Mugabe wins. And Mugabe can seemingly play for a draw endlessly.

South Africa has announced that it will miss a self-imposed deadline of 2014 to redistribute a third of the country’s land from white to black farmers. There is much to lament in this decision. Land reform is necessary, many of the black masses have not seen the benefits of the New South Africa that have been enjoyed by a slowly growing few, and this news provides grist for the mill of the ANC’s critics from the left.

And yet if the nightmare of land reform in Zimbabwe has taught us anything it is that it is better to do land reform right than to do it fast. Even as we lament the delay — 2014, after all, will mark two decades since Nelson Mandela’s election symbolized a new dawn in the country’s history — we should celebrate the way in which South African officials have not used land reform as a weapon. Consider Robert Mugabe: In the years prior to 2000 Mugabe and his ZANU-PF used the threat of land reform as a Damocles sword hanging over the head of the country’s whites without at the same time developing a coherent, structured, equitable plan for redistribution. Thus when the dam broke in 2000 and Mugabe let land “reform” go forward, chaos and violence reigned. Redistribution became a form of delayed retribution against white farmers. Those who took the land over often had no clue how to utilize it and what was once the breadbasket of Africa became nearly useless agriculturally. These disastrous policies are almost certainly the single biggest cause of the country’s economic calamity over the last decade.

A bad land reform policy, and especially one that is so brazenly used as a political weapon, is worse than no reform at all. If delay in South Africa means that there will be an equitable, coherent plan, perhaps we can live with delay. At the same time, to steal and paraphrase a quotation from the American Civil Rights Movement, land reform delayed is land reform denied. The purpose of this delay needs to be to ensure that when redistribution does happen, South Africa has all of the resources to ensure its success. The lesson of Zimbabwe looms large. Let’s hope that the South African government is drawing the right lessons from Zimbabwe’s shame.

Let’s begin the new week with a roundup of stories from across Africa, with commentary as apropos:

Mozambique’s voters went to the polls last week and it appears that, as with every national election since independence in 1975, they have returned FRELIMO to power. One voter seems to have captured the consensus opinion: “I voted for Frelimo. Why? That’s what I’m used to.”

Tunisians went to the polls recently as well. They too returned their current rulers, though most observers believe that the overwhelming victory of President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali’s and of his ruling party in parliament, the Constitutional Democratic Rally (RCD), was not free of coercion.

The deadly violence aimed at protesters in Guinea last month? Apparently it was premeditated.

Is Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan the new Trevor Manuel? By this, I mean, is Gordhan going to overcome ideology and politics to become a respected leader in the ANC hierarchy? (Trevor Manuel, of course, is in a stronger position than ever, so technically, he is the new Trevor Manuel, but still.) Gordhan is receiving rave reviews for the budget he put forward last week. Even the cranky opposition (from left and right) seems impressed.

In looking at tourism in South Africa, David Smith is convinced that Johannesburg’s biggest selling point is the Apartheid past. Over the years I have come to really love Joburg, but Cape Town it is not, especially on first blush. Still, if people go for the grim history, maybe they will stay and explore before moving on to the Western Cape, Durban, Kruger, or wherever else they intended to go after arriving at OR Tambo Airport. As a historian, I’ll just say that there are worse things than to use history as a drawing card.

The Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (MEND) has declared an indefinite ceasefire. However tenuous, the ceasefire represents good news in a conflict that many have seen as being virtually intractable.

Should the United States consider intervention in Somalia? The Washington Post’s editors pose that question. Their answer, basically: Maybe. Mine: Tread lightly.

Not news: The political situation in Zimbabwe continues to be unstable. News: It might be getting worse, as ZANU-PF violence against supporters of the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) has escalated in recent days.

Do you want to ask South African President Jacob Zuma a question? Of course you do! Here is your opportunity.

Finally: It’s a sporting bonanza! 2010 and the World Cup is just around the corner. The Proteas are preparing to host England (and to restore some pride after their less-than-robust performance as the host team in the recent Champions Trophy tournament). The Springboks are gearing up for a European tour that will take them to France, Italy, and Ireland and will hopefully provide an exclamation point to an epochal 2009 season.

The talks toward creating the unity government in Zimbabwe have stalled again. And the hardliners in Robert Mugabe’s ZANU-PF party appear to be the most interested in ensuring that no long-term agreement is reached, although Mugabe is stirring the pot by hinting that he might replace ministers from the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), including Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai, who have been boycotting recent proceedings. The only real news here would be if any of this came as a surprise to anyone.