The Disturbing Truth Behind Ramaphosa’s Praise for Zimbabwe—What It Means for South Africa!
The scene was set in Harare, where President Cyril Ramaphosa delivered a speech that many are calling one of the most embarrassing moments for a South African leader.
As Zimbabweans endure the harsh realities of economic collapse, with millions fleeing their homeland for survival, Ramaphosa’s words echoed in stark contrast to the suffering of those waiting at the Baitbridge border.
He stood there, seemingly oblivious to the plight of these individuals, making outrageous claims about Zimbabwe’s “high level” of agricultural success and governance.
What exactly is this “high level” Ramaphosa speaks of? Is it the catastrophic hyperinflation that has rendered the Zimbabwean dollar worthless? Is it the staggering unemployment rate that has forced millions to seek opportunities abroad? Or perhaps it’s the fact that Zimbabwe, once known as the breadbasket of Africa, now struggles to feed its own people? Ramaphosa’s praise for Zimbabwe’s policies is baffling, especially when juxtaposed with the desperate conditions that have driven so many to cross into South Africa seeking a better life.
In his speech, Ramaphosa expressed admiration for Zimbabwe’s agricultural shows, stating, “We do have agricultural shows in South Africa, but let me say much as ours are impressive, yours has impressed me more.
” This statement is not only insulting to South African farmers but also indicative of a troubling mindset.
South Africa boasts a thriving agricultural sector that contributes significantly to the economy, exporting food across the continent.
In contrast, Zimbabwe relies on imports and international aid to feed its population.
Ramaphosa’s comparison raises serious questions about his intentions and the direction he wishes to take South Africa.
As he continued, Ramaphosa referred to Zimbabwe as a “shining example” of agricultural development, urging other nations to learn from their practices.
This is particularly alarming given that Zimbabwe’s agricultural policies have led to a dramatic decline in productivity, with over 4,000 commercial farms disrupted and a 70% drop in agricultural output.
The very policies that Ramaphosa praises have resulted in widespread food insecurity and economic hardship for millions.
The implications of Ramaphosa’s admiration for Zimbabwe’s approach are profound.
He seems to be positioning himself to adopt similar policies in South Africa, which could lead to disastrous consequences.
By calling Zimbabwe a model to emulate, he risks steering South Africa down a path of economic ruin, mirroring the very crisis that has devastated Zimbabwe.
One of the most troubling aspects of Ramaphosa’s speech is his assertion that he wishes to learn from Zimbabwe’s experiences, stating, “This is something that I want to carry back home to South Africa so that we can also be like you.”
This admission is chilling.
What lessons does he intend to bring back? How to create food shortages? How to render the currency worthless? How to drive productive farmers out of their fields and into neighboring countries?
The reality is that the empowerment of small-scale farmers in Zimbabwe has not resulted in prosperity; instead, it has led to economic collapse and mass migration.
Many of these farmers now find themselves in South Africa, struggling to survive and support their families.
Ramaphosa’s intention to replicate this model in South Africa is not just misguided; it is potentially catastrophic.
As he concluded his speech, Ramaphosa lamented missing out on witnessing Zimbabwe’s agricultural transformation firsthand, expressing regret for not being there to observe the policy implementations that led to such economic disaster.
This sentiment reveals a troubling perspective—one that sees the collapse of a nation not as a cautionary tale but as an opportunity for learning.
The stark contrast between Zimbabwe’s agricultural decline and South Africa’s relative stability underscores the dangers of blindly following in Zimbabwe’s footsteps.
While South Africa has chosen a path of negotiation and gradual reform, Ramaphosa’s praise for Zimbabwe’s rapid transformation suggests a willingness to abandon these principles in favor of populist policies that could destabilize the economy.
In conclusion, Ramaphosa’s speech in Zimbabwe is not merely a diplomatic gesture; it is a clear indication of his intentions for South Africa’s future.
His admiration for Zimbabwe’s policies and practices should serve as a warning to all South Africans.
If we allow these misguided ideas to take root, we risk repeating the mistakes of our neighbors and plunging our nation into a similar crisis.
The time has come for South Africans to demand accountability and clarity from their leaders.
We cannot afford to ignore the lessons of Zimbabwe; our future depends on it.
