Zimbabwe's Very American Election
April 7, 2005
By Gene C. Gerard
Last week, the African nation of Zimbabwe held parliamentary elections.
It was viewed, both within the country and by foreign observers,
as a referendum on the country's elderly and dictatorial ruler,
President Robert Mugabe, who has been in power since 1980. Mr. Mugabe's
party, The Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front, won
71 seats in the election, while the opposition party, the Movement
for Democratic Change, garnered only 39. Both the opposition party
and independent observers have accused President Mugabe of stealing
Morgan Tsvangarai, the leader of the Movement for Democratic Change,
said Mr. Mugabe won only through the use of intimidation tactics
and vote-rigging. The U.S. State Department called the election
"seriously flawed." And Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice stated,
"the election was not free and fair." Yet ironically, it appears
as if Zimbabwe's election was very American-like, if our election
in 2004 is any indication.
President Mugabe and his party attempted to manipulate the media.
His government essentially runs all media outlets in Zimbabwe. Consequently,
coverage of his administration and his party's campaign was heavily
biased. Also, a law was enacted in November that made it illegal
to practice journalism without a government-issued license, and
subjected anyone guilty of this offense to a prison sentence. In
February, his government barred foreign journalists from reporting
on the impending election without governmental approval, which was
Since our own election last November, we've learned that the Bush
administration also attempted to manipulate the media. Various journalists
have admitted to being paid by the government to promote President
Bush's agenda. In addition, the administration has admitted to creating
fake "news" stories, with actors portraying reporters,
to promote President Bush's policies. The stories were distributed
to television media outlets for use in their nightly news segments.
President Mugabe's government attempted to disenfranchise voters.
Absentee ballots were only mailed to civil servants, diplomats,
and uniformed members of the military and security forces living
abroad. Yet there are over one million of Zimbabwe's citizens in
other African countries. Likewise, the Bush administration took
great efforts to ensure that military personnel serving abroad had
every opportunity to vote. But other Americans living abroad, particularly
in Europe, had enormous difficulties obtaining absentee ballots
in time to vote, if at all. One report of Americans living in Rome
indicated that as many as 90 percent of those who requested the
ballots did not receive them in time to vote.
According to nongovernmental organizations which monitored Zimbabwe's
election, there were significant problems at polling stations. Election
officers who were appointed by the Mugabe government were accused
of barring the opposition party's voting monitors from polling stations.
As a result, by some reports, as many as ten percent of Zimbabweans
who attempted to vote were turned away, on the grounds that they
lacked proper identification, or were voting in the wrong district.
Additionally, when an election complaint was lodged, there were
not enough independent judges to rule on the complaints, given that
most had been appointed by President Mugabe or were members of his
In our election last November there were various complaints of
problems at voting polls. Many of these complaints occurred in Ohio.
Republican polling monitors in Ohio outnumbered Democratic monitors
by almost two-to-one. Consequently, when Republican monitors objected
to someone attempting to vote, there were not enough Democratic
monitors to refute the objection, resulting in the disenfranchisement
of some voters. Also, virtually all voting complaints in Ohio were
resolved by their Secretary of State, J. Kenneth Blackwell, who
was also the co-chairman of President Bush's re-election campaign
in Ohio, and could hardly be regarded as independent.
Other similarities between the two elections are equally compelling.
In the 2002 Zimbabwe elections, President Mugabe's supporters were
accused of killing hundreds of opponents. In order to demonstrate
that the elections last week were fair, he invited hundreds of foreign
observers to watch the elections. After our questionable election
in 2000, the U.S. State Department, for the first time ever, allowed
the United Nations to officially monitor the 2004 election.
President Mugabe's party bused-in loyal audiences whenever they
held a campaign rally, in order to pack their campaign sites. The
Bush/Cheney '04 Campaign never allowed the general public to attend
any of President Bush's rallies last fall. All attendees were required
to have an invitation, and the invitations were only mailed to registered
Republicans in the county in which Mr. Bush was speaking.
Both presidents manipulated the electorate in grotesque ways in
order to win their elections. By most estimates, half of all Zimbabweans
are undernourished. Starvation is a sad and common part of life
in that country. But last year, President Mugabe ordered the World
Food Program and Save the Children Federation to discontinue distributing
He announced that the country had become self-sufficient, and
that his government would now allocate food resources. This forced
Zimbabweans to rely almost entirely on the government for food.
Consequently, Mr. Mugabe's government began to distribute food only
to those who had a voter registration card showing that they were
members of his ruling party. In fact, the party routinely handed
out food at their rallies.
Similarly, President Bush played on the fear and worries of Americans
in order to ensure his re-election. His campaign relentlessly insisted
that another terrorist attack was inevitable if not imminent, and
that only Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney could save us. They portrayed
Senator Kerry as weak on defense and confused on national security.
Vice President Cheney infamously stated in a town hall meeting in
Ohio last October that the greatest threat we now faced was a nuclear
or chemical weapons attack in one of our cities, and that Mr. Kerry
was not tough enough to prevent it.
The Bush administration, and indeed many Americans, love to hold
up America as a beacon to the rest of the world. They insist that
we are the ultimate democracy to which totalitarian governments,
third-world nations, and banana republics should attempt to emulate.
If that's the case, Zimbabwe is already very American.