A real crisis of confidence

Seemingly diagnosing some of the problems lying at the heart of the local economy, the central bank chief noted that negative perceptions were mainly weighing down confidence, which is a crucial ingredient in any economic development initiative.

“We must speak more positively about ourselves . . .

“We are renowned for being educated, but we are so negative about ourselves and those negative perceptions lead to more negativity and that leads to lack of confidence. But if we were to measure it, we are not a country with very bad policies. The policies are good, but we may not be publicising them very well. We have a number of comparative advantages which we can exploit,” opined Dr Mangudya.

For some strange reason, Zimbabweans are so self-deprecatory that they believe that nothing good can come out of Zimbabwe.
Anything and everything proposed by Government is viewed with so much cynicism that it becomes the butt of jokes, mainly by Internet trolls.

Since its launch last year, Zim-Asset, the country’s guiding economic document through to 2018, has been the stock-in-trade for many local comedians.

That was until last week when Engineer Walter Mzembi, the Minister of Tourism and Hospitality Industry, took over the mantle and became the subject of scorn, ridicule and outright vitriol for daring to declare that it is possible for Zimbabwe to bid for the Fifa 2034 World Cup.

Judging from the comments generated by the story on The Herald’s website, most people thought the gods were out to destroy the minister by first making him insane.

“Where are the priorities when we cannot guarantee power, clean water, etc, to say the least, before we engage in this flight of fancy?
“The bidding process itself is expensive without any guarantee of winning the bid and it is money that could be best used to alleviate the suffering. In any case, who is going to lend money for the infrastructural development that needs to be done, when we are failing to pay all our other debts that have to be paid before we can get any new lines of credit to revive the economy? But these people, in their cushy lifestyle funded by taxpayers, do not think of it and have developed illusions of grandeur.

“Inga zvavo vakagarika vanoronga zvokuzvifadza, ruzhinji rwuchidya nhoko dzezvironda. No wonder we are where we are when we have such misguided leaders who have become calloused to the suffering of many,” read one of the comments.

There was even more abuse.
But what seemed to underline most of these negative comments was the obstinate belief that even in two decades time the country’s economy and infrastructure will continue to be in its current state.

Well, admittedly, there is need for huge investment in local infrastructure, especially for a country that has been arrested by conflict and bitter feuds with America and the European Union bloc in the decade leading to 2009.

Had the country been under the same circumstances as other sub-Saharan economies that have been growing above world averages, the country would have made tremendous strides in addressing its infrastructure deficit. Even after a decade of stagnation, the country’s infrastructure still holds its own, relative to its regional peers.

But it is grossly naïve to think that even in the worst case scenario, our current economic circumstances will remain the same.
History continues to furnish us with countless examples of countries that have managed to totally transform themselves in the shortest possible time.

One of the seven emirates making up the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Dubai, and its capital Abu Dhabi, is now regarded as a capital of both opulence and excess.

Beginning as a fishing settlement, the emirate city underwent remarkable transformation, buoyed by the pearl industry in the 1930s.
However, the discovery of oil in the Gulf states in the late 1960s meant that petrol dollars were used to sponsor development programmes. But by 1980, the annual oil income had dropped to an all-time low. The emirate, under ruler and vice-president of the UAE Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al Maktoum, was, however, unfazed as it began re-inventing itself.

In just 25 years, the Sheikh had changed Dubai from a desert into a 21st century metropolis.
Dubai is now regarded as the “economic miracle of the desert”, and many local traders often visit it to purchase their wares.
It is not only Dubai that has radically transformed its economy.

Similarly, much of the foundations of success for China, with more than a billion people to fend for, can be traced back to less than 34 years ago. Market reforms ushered in by Deng Xiaoping in 1979 can be attributed to the phenomenal success of an Asian country few believed could rise to become the world’s second largest economy in the 21st century.

Economists now describe China in superlatives.
In 1979, China was inward-looking and its trade as a percentage GDP was only 9,5 percent.

Over the years, the Asian country has become the world’s largest exporter and the third largest importer, with trade contributing around 70 percent of GDP.

In a 30-year period, more than 600 million people had been lifted out of poverty. Narrating the success stories of these countries tempts one to believe that they had an easier route to success.

Far from it! They had to contend with trying endogenous and exogenous circumstances. So, clearly, we have to be fair to ourselves and believe that we can do it.

During the time of the inclusive Government, there was a private sector initiative to grow the economy to US$100 billion by 2040 premised on the country’s huge mineral resources. The initiative suffocated under a heavy dose of scepticism from various quotas.
Likewise, the land reform programme had no takers since its inception in 1999.

It was largely viewed as a failure.
It had to take a foreign study conducted by author Ian Scoones from the UK’s Institute of Development Studies at Sussex University over a 10-year period for people to take the exercise seriously. How absurd! Again, this is the same stigma that is facing the indigenisation and economic empowerment programme, as critics have argued that it is fated to fail.

Apparently, local critics, intelligent local critics for that matter, have been at the forefront of casting aspersions at the programme.
Such has been the tragedy of local economic policies — they have faced opposition from those that are supposed to know better. But Zimbabwe is not the only country in the world that is crafting policies driven by resource nationalism. Indonesia, Ghana, Zambia and other African countries are pursuing separate initiatives meant to maximise gains from local national resources.

But, really, all these visionary plans need to be aggregated so that local energies are galvanised towards achieving these lofty goals. There is nothing that Zimbabwe loses by trying.

It is bad enough that Zimbabwe has to contend with hostile nations in Europe and America, but what hurts the most is the ill-will generated by locals.

Most people think that the next person owes them a living, and this is why there is always the propensity to blame Government when policies fail to deliver their intended results. We are the people we have been waiting for. None but ourselves have the responsibility of transforming this country into a truly 21st century economy.

Unfortunately, the negative energy from many in our midst stands between our success and failure.

Feedback: [email protected]