Talk:Operation Murambatsvina

Untitled
Why does the UN and the United States of America take it upon themselves to invade Iraq, Libya etc. but they never do anything about Robert Mugabe and the likes? legitimate question which deserves to be clarified on wikipedia (which seems to predominantly serve United States agenda). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.188.14.114 (talk) 15:57, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Someone should mention whats going on in Bulwayo, everyone seems so focused on Harare but from what ive been hearing its been just as bad over there. I'm also sure the Chinese are all smiles about this, no more black market so they can dump their cheap crap all they want on Zimbabwe and make the poor people there even poorer. Mugabe talks about Colonialism all the time but he doesnt recognise it when its in the shape of his Chinese cronies.
 * Is he letting in Chinese immigrants like in Yugoslavia and Tonga?

I wonder if we should have a section on those NGOs which are still working in the country helping those affected? The ones left in are all keeping a low profile, look: SOS in Zimbabwe

NPOV
Some perspective on the topic of the evictions in Harare is needed; and this article fails to provide it.

What we are observing in Zimbabwe is extremely distressing. What's even more distressing is that slum clearance is fairly common practice in Third World states in dire straits. Countries such as Brazil, China, and India routinely bulldoze and clear slums with a number of stated aims, including combating the crime and disease associated with these impoverished settlements, clearing land for redevelopment projects, and reining in the informal economy in order to free up resources for the market. Earlier this year in Bombay, for example, hundreds of acres were freed up in a slum clearance that leveled around 90,000 shanties and left about 300,000 people homeless. The land was cleared for new high-rises, which are popping up rapidly in India, with its booming economy.

The strategy behind the land clearances in Zimbabwe, which is suffering from a collapse in its formal exchange, is more puzzling. Thus, allegations that the motivation behind the demolitions in Harare are political from the international community deserve serious attention. Still, little evidence has surfaced suggesting that the humanitarian toll of Operation Murambatsvina has been the worst involving slum clearances that sub-Saharan Africa and other states in the Third World have seen.

So long as this article fails to put the events in Zimbabwe in the same perspective as it would similar programs in other parts of the Third World that maintain better relations with Washington, London, and Brussels, it is an advocacy piece against the Mugabe regime, not an encyclopedia article. 172 | Talk 14:10, 31 October 2005 (UTC)


 * The onus is on the other articles to come up to standard, not for this one to 'dumb down'. There is space given to the Zimbabwe government response already. What are your suggestions for improvement ? Wizzy&hellip; &#9742;   07:24, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply. I added a few details in the article relating the events in Zimbabwe to problems seen elsewhere in the Third World. I think I'm mostly done. But hopefully others will be able to add more helping put the events in more broad context. 172 | Talk 20:13, 1 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Perhaps there should be an article on slum clearance that explains how it is a global phenominon and points to other wikipedia articles on examples of such. I'd do it, but I don't know very much about the topic yet.  --Schwael 00:52, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi, we have seen it all before, that does not mean we can condone what Mugabe is up to.. The "slums" in Zimbabwe were not all tin shanties, TV reports showed established brick buildings which are superior in Africa being bulldozed. Wiki has enough know how to ensure that the article fits the standard. South Africa had District Six but they tried to put Mitchell's Plain in its place.. Regards, Gregorydavid 22:08, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I dare say some of the slum clearances in other countries were improper, but in places like India they are clearing valuable land so that new more modern housing can be built. The Zimbabwe example was nothing like that. It is not an overcrowded country and no-one has plans to do anything worthwhile with the cleared land. There was no profit motive, just a political motive. Scranchuse 03:46, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

While I agree that this event needs to have an entry and that it is, indeed, tragic--I think some effort should be made to make this entry more objectively written. Phrases like "all of whom are in need of emergency relief and resettlement following the loss of their homes and livelihood" are semantically charged and seemingly unverifiable. Is it really "all" of them? Much of this article reads more like an Amnesty International report and less like and encyclopedia entry. &#39;bitchen&#39; ric 21:40, 31 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't think that the writing style of the facts should come into question - the facts are what are important. The world continues to watch Mugabe rip the life out of Zimbabwe and yet, for reason or reasons unknown, are reluctant to do anything about it...


 * I think the writing style of any "facts" entered in WikiPedia should always be scrutinized. Statements like

"Whichever figures are correct, it is clear that large numbers of people have been affected, all of whom are in need of emergency relief and resettlement following the loss of their homes and livelihood. The clearances have been condemned both internally and internationally."
 * should be either credited or exorcized.


 * WikiPedia is an arena for reporting facts, not a platform for activisim. This:"It has been subsequently pointed out that many of the people affected originate from neighbouring countries and therefore do not automatically have a rural base in Zimbabwe. For those that do, the fuel crisis in the country makes travelling long distances either impossible, or prohibitively expensive. Instead, those who have friends or family whose homes have not been destroyed have tried to shelter with them, creating massive overcrowding. Others have resorted to sheltering in church yards, many are sleeping rough by the road side, and some have dared to return to sleep in the open beside their destroyed homes.""The clearances have not been restricted only to homes. Demolished buildings include a Roman Catholic orphanage which had been run by a group of nuns, office blocks, a Sunni mosque, a World Bank-funded public lavatory and schools."
 * ...is subjective without citation.


 * Who are the "commentators" refered to in the "Alternative reasons for the clearances" section?


 * Much of this entry smacks of bias. I'd like to see it objective, but I don't have the means or research at hand to correct it. There fore, I am suggesting that this article be reviewed for Neutral Point of View. Neutral point of view


 * &#39;bitchen&#39; ric 18:59, 7 September 2006 (UTC)


 * For the moment, at least, I've added a bunch on f tags. Sukael \o/ 11:58, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Operations Murambatsvina & Garikai
First of all, I was very pleased to see that the original writer of this subject has seen their way clear to acknowledge that the enlarged photographs of Mbare were taken from my blog. Thank you for that.

The whole operation was a disaster - no matter where you look - anywhere in the country, and we now know that it was a operation to disperse the build up of what Mugabe percieved as an opposition powerbase within the cities.

Having destroyed the 'illegal' dwellings, the stated intention was to rebuild suitable housing away from the main centres - this we see as having backfired and stalled as the government has run out of money and materials. Last week they handed over incomplete houses to victims, and asked them to complete the houses! Where do the impoverished people secure the required funding to complete what the government promised?

Now there is the rejection of housing/shelter aid from the UN. First of all Mugabe said that Zimbabweans are not a 'tent' people)I think if you asked any of the affected people, they would have taken tents!) and now have rejected the UN model house as a structure 'fit only for Africa.'

Murambatsvina was a catastrophe for the people of Zimbabwe and Garikai only serves to prolong the suffering of the people.

The real aim here was to destablise the people and make them have something else to worry about, so that the ruling party can get on with what they do best - ruining a once beautiful and productive country.


 * Regarding the picture licencing, can you re-licence them under the GFDL or something ? Otherwise the pictures will eventually be deleted from wikipedia, as it is insufficient now. The before/after pics dramtically show what happened (how were they taken, by the way ?) Wizzy&hellip; &#9742;   15:28, 26 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I was sent the photos by a friend in SA as very small images. Using a wonderful program that I have a enlarging little by little and running each step through filters so as not to lose the resolution gave me the images I posted on my blog, which have been reproduced by the original author of this subject in Wikipedia. Obviously the pictures were taken from aircraft, but WHO took them, I have no idea. And if the pictures do disappear, at least they will still be available on my blog for prosperity...


 * I think you mean "posterity." :) &#39;bitchen&#39; ric 21:40, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Regardles of whether my writings are grammatically incorrect, or not as objective as some people would like to see, the fact remains that I have lived in Zimbabwe under this brutal dictator, and it was his government that made my continued residence in his land impossible.


 * Could you please sign your comments with four tilde (~) characters? That will let us all know who we are conversing with.&#39;bitchen&#39; ric 18:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

House demolition
Hello. I invite people still working on this article to help inform the debate at House demolition. We are discussing what scope to assign to that article: specifically, whether to incorporate material about house demolitions everywhere or to just cover the Israeli use of it in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. nadav (talk) 06:58, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I'd like to second Nadav's invitation. The discussion as I understand it is not whether we should cover the Israeli use of it only, but rather whether we should devote a section of that article to the Israeli use of it, and specify in the lead that house demolition is a controversial component of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.  Most of the literature on house demolitions focuses on the I-P conflict, and the expertise of most editors of the House demolition article is in the Middle East.  Editors knowledgeable about Africa and with good sources in hand would be very welcome there.--G-Dett 14:05, 10 June 2007 (UTC)