Busisa Moyo, the chief executive officer of United Refineries and former president of the Confederation of Zimbabwe industries said: “I am yet to meet a single businessman worth his salt who is pro-sanctions.”
“We have spoken out against this & so has @steve_hanke. Sanctions should also be a crime against humanity in the near future at ICC because they are equally brutal to issues they purport to address.”
Moyo was adding his voice to the growing debate on sanctions against Zimbabwe imposed by the European Union and the United States 16 years ago.
The European Union has eased most of the sanctions against individuals except former President Robert Mugabe and his wife Grace. It also still has sanctions against the Zimbabwe Defence Industries, accompany set up by the military.
The EU also maintains an arms embargo on Zimbabwe though it has issued some exceptions. Its sanctions on Zimbabwe were extended to 20 February this year.
US sanctions on Zimbabwe are more comprehensive affecting 141 individuals and enterprises. They also bar multilateral financial institutions from doing business with Zimbabwe.
US sanctions on Zimbabwe are ostensibly meant to “effectively promote democracy, good governance and economic recovery” but they seem more aimed at regime change.
One of the greatest follies of the US sanctions on Zimbabwe, however, has been the misleading statement that they are targeted only at the 141 individuals and entities listed.
This is the argument that has been used by proponents of maintaining sanctions on Zimbabwe such as Todd Moss of the Centre for Global Development.
Moss told the US Senate Foreign Relations Sub-Committee on Africa last month that Zimbabwe was blaming US sanctions for its failure yet there were no “trade sanctions against the country”.
Continued next page