A Decade of Economic Reform in Latin America

The primary aims of the Fund are to promote global monetary cooperation, exchange rate stability, and providing financial assistance to member countries ease balance of payment deficit However, member states, would have to accept and adopt the Fund’s lending policies which require participating countries to undergo structural reforms. Hence, structural adjustments are a set of macro economic stabilisation policies applied by (IMF) to borrowing countries and are designed for borrowing individual state, Furthermore, the underpinning principles on the IMF stabilisation policies are based on free markets or neo-liberal approaches which encourage minimal state intervention in the economy .So in this regard, borrowing countries are encouraged  adopt sets of policies .This essay will discussed the Fund’s stabilisation policies  and investigate their impact on adjusting countries with respect to human development .The essay will examine the International Monetary Fund stabilization policies on Latin America over the period of 1980 to 1990.The region is volatile with a history of exceptionally high inflation rates, record of unsuccessful both monetary and fiscal stabilizations as well as substantial macroeconomic instabilities.

 Therefore, this essay analyze the impact of IMF macroeconomic stabilizations policies in the region between 1980 to 1990 and  investigating  a decade of structural adjustments in this continent may  provide a higher degree of accuracy. Latin American countries endured severe economic crisis such as higher level of debt to global creditors and worldwide recession which worsened the region’s trade deficit. Given the state of the crisis in the 1980s, many countries in this region had to seek financial assistance from the IMF to stabilise their economies as well as reducing balance of payment deficit. Therefore all countries had agreed to set of structural adjustment packages attached to the loan and those were based on neo-liberal economic theory. The main principle of neo-liberal policies aim to transfer part of the economy from the state to private owned enterprises, reduce government spending and deregulation allowing free markets as a standard for economic efficiency.

So the period (1980-1990) under examination in this easy is essential in assessing the really impact of IMF structural adjustments on this regional grouping and each policy will be investigate in detail.

The stabilization phase of adjustment focuses on demand restraint policies, usually implemented by large reductions in government expenditure via measures such as subsidy removals, public sector employment cuts. In addition to that, IMF orthodoxy stabilisation policies involve realignment of the real exchange rate through devaluation, free trade, privatization and liberalization of interest rates and tax reform. Latina American countries have been following the soviet model of economic development where the state provides almost all basic needs such as education, health care and other social welfare spending. However, as the debt crisis and decline in demand for exports continued, expansionary fiscal expenditures merely collapsed due to lack of government funding as structural adjustments required the region cut their spending power in order to create a balanced and sustained deficits. The whole region had a fiscal deficit nearly $400 billion dollars including interest payments or almost 50% of regional GDP in the early 1980s (Theberge, A., 1999).However, budget deficits were improved significant during adjusting years but it had immediate cost on economic development.  

Fiscal policy

As the region went through structural adjustment processes, there were incidents of sharp rise poverty in Latin America throughout the 1980s and the number of households in extreme poverty rose to nearly 40%. However, the most people suffered from poverty were the rural population as it affected almost half of the region’s population .Furthermore, there similar episodes in urban areas where it grow from about 25% in early 1980s to almost 60% by 1990. In addition to that, inequality in all adjusting countries and the main victims were middle-income urban groups as most those communities became unemployed due to mere collapse of the formal sector economy. Real wages are usefully economic measures in determining the region’s wealth in any given time as inflations is being taken into consideration For example, a decade of structural adjustment in Latin American economies witnessed rapid decline in real wages than the previous three decades of post war period (Woller, G.M and Hart, D.K, 1995). Also the growing gap between the rich continued to widen as government subsidies were abolished thereby creating an unfavourable economic condition for the low income household earners. On the other hand, the rich were the main beneficiary of the crisis as global capital outflows allowed them to shelter their wealth and to capture speculative gains devaluation of their national currencies. Therefore, it appears as though IMF `s macroeconomic stabilisation policies had a negative impact on economic development as contraction government expenditure caused severe economic damage to the region  witnessed with rise of poverty  and inequality( Janvry.A and Saldoulet.E,1993).

Consequently, per capita income decreased dramatically during the early 1980s through the late 1980s pushing ordinary people into poverty as regional gross domestic products due to decline in investments .For instance, years of structural economic reforms in Latin American countries were associated with decline of formal sector productivity, which should be the main pillar for economic growth by providing employment and employment creation. Also reduction of government expenditures on public services such as the health care, education, subsidies and other welfare benefits further exacerbated the situation. Given that most household was either unemployed or engaged in informal jobs and adopting tighter monetary regime made investment unlikely as borrowing and loan repayment became too costly. Therefore, the Fund’s stabilisation policies look as if they had a negative effect on economic development in the region. Furthermore, there were incidents of recurring recession in the region because of lack of major investment necessary for economic development .Economic instability worsened by increase in domestic interest rates which in turn discouraged the overall investments required by adjusting countries in the region and thus there was a general decline in the overall investment level far below the 1970s. As a result, IMF`s macroeconomic stabilisation policies are most like to cause or worsen the economic crisis than solving it and there has been a lot of criticism about the Fund’s sponsored programs in adjusting among countries as structural reforms are too harsh especial for heavily indebted countries.

Liberalism of the domestic economy

Moreover, most Latin American economies were highly regulated, safeguarding inflow of foreign investments and outflow of profits remittances as well as establishment of firms. In addition to that, prices were controlled by the government, high corporate income tax rates and trade barriers made it were put in place as a measure of protecting domestic industries (Williamson.J, 2002).Therefore, contradict IMF-sponsor ed stabilization policies to liberalise domestic markets as  too much government intervention is believed damaging economic development.  The regulatory environment seemed as though it was not favourable to encourage investments which were necessary for economic development in the region. Thus the Fund’s stabilisation policies urged Latin American countries to deregulate their economies as a way of promoting competition and a free domestic market is perceived to encourage foreign direct investments. In that regard all adjusting countries started eliminating price restrictions, removal of government subsidies and adopting flexible exchange rates as well as devaluation of domestic currencies. Given the extent of the crisis, in the 1980s such policies appeared to have exacerbated the situation in Latin American region during adjusting years. For example, inflation rose from about 40% in 1980 to nearly 130% towards the end of 1980s and then, the average regional inflation rate was about 280% (Tanzi.V, 1992).

Therefore, easing price controls, removal of government subsidies, flexible exchange rates and subsequent devolution of domestic currencies gave rise to accelerating inflation causing massive human suffering. The cost of basic consumables products such as food, fuel, transport and health care rose rapidly in almost all participating countries mainly because of inflation and cuts in government subsidies. For example, there were incidences of malnutrition throughout the region  exceeding  50 % child population in many countries with Peru encountered the highest number of malnutrition cases (Woller. G, M. and Hart. D. K, 1995). In this regard, IMF`s structural adjustments programs look as if they encouraged economic instability  in the region as  national  income declined along with a decrease in human development.

Privatization

The Fund’s macrocosmic policies required all adjusting countries to private all state owned enterprise and national resources as privatization is perceived to provide effectiveness management than state run firms. Hence, effective administrations, may lead to better productivity which was necessary for economic development fro these countries. In other words, the whole policy objective on privatization was to reduce government involvements and to present a competitive economic environment for business. Therefore, fiscal deficits in Latin America was partly caused by over spending especial funding state owned companies which were making loses because of poor management  and inefficiency. Given that liquidity became a major problem in Latin American due to the debt crisis so, privatizations seem to be an important policy instrument to adjusting countries as governments can concentrate on other investments required for economic development. Though, privatizations provide the basis for economic efficiency and present favourable conditions for long term economic development to Latin American countries in the 1980s, the perceived benefits of privatization need a comprehensive analysis. Previously, governments were the main services provider of health care, education and transport as well as other social welfare benefits to citizen privatization seemed to have exacerbated inequality among various societies. Privatization of state owned enterprises in such an extreme case seemed to have played a major role in mere economic collapse of the region because it can encourage dramatic increase in inflation driven from the micro point of view. Given that, production declined during the 1980s to 1990 those few firms remained operational could increase their prices freely thereby inflicting inflationary gap. As a result, the cost of living increased in all adjusting countries as price of basic commodities rose sharply

Trade policy

The world economy experienced economic shocks 1980s due to rising oil prices and falling demand on exports for basic commodities in the world market. Given that the Latin American countries are primary based economies and as such much of their national revenues depended on exports to fund trade deficits and paying off to lenders as well as financing public services. As a result, the recession embedded pressure on the region which relied heavily on exporting export markets over the years. There was general a decrease in government revenues and worsening of balance of payments to almost all adjusting countries due to rising trade imbalance. As a result, they needed to borrow money from commercial banks and other international financial institutions to fund the growing trade deficits. This borrowing went own till most countries in the region could not afford to repay their loans obligations because of decline in national income (GDP) and it became evident when the Mexican government defaulted in 1982 (Theberge, A., 1999).The default resulted in further dramatic decline of foreign capital inflows to the region as financial institutions became reluctant to offer new loans to these economies. As the Fund’s orthodoxy belief that longer-term economic development is best promoted by market-oriented system demanded all Latin America o adopt structural economic reforms in order to access IMF financial assistance to correct the balance of payment deficits. Empirical evidence suggest that Fund’s orthodox   successfully helped adjusting countries reduce their trade deficits of about $4 billion in 1981 to a surplus of nearly $40 billion by 1984(Woller, G.M and Hart, D.K, 1995). Several studies however, found a positive relation between IMF –sponsored programs and improve in balance of payment for adjusting countries (Pastor, JR.M, 1987) acknowledged an improvement in terms of trade for adjusting countries in Latin America.

Furthermore, IMF macroeconomic stabilization policies required Latin American countries to ease exchange controls to allow free movement of capital and this policy is believed to encourage foreign direct investments into the host countries. Faced with liquidity and persistence of trade deficits, the region desperately needed foreign capital to develop their economies but easing exchange control resulted in excessive capital outflow.  Several countries like Venezuela, Argentina and Mexico were among the worst affected countries in some case capital outflows exceeded foreign debt during structural reforms (Pastor.M.Jr, 1990).The majority of capital outflows went to pay international creditors and Latin American citizen who transferred their assets abroad, it was estimated that, the region had almost $350 billion of stock in foreign markets while external debt was less than that in 1987. The capital flight had a negative impact on economic development to adjusting Latin American countries as excess capital outflow could trigger economic disturbances and eventually become a crisis. As countries in Latin America tried to resuscitated, they faced a formidable challenge because liberalise trade and exchange control increased the rate of capital outflows. The immediate implications were reduction in earnings and decline in income needed for economic development.

Discussions  

The IMF sponsored structural adjustments appeared to have a negative impact on economic development in Latin American countries.  Economic development is measured in various social-economic indicators such as per capita real GDP, better education facilities, increased in taxable bases, job creation and improves in health provisions in a country or region. Therefore, the Fund’s macroeconomic stabilization policies were intended to create economic wealth in the region for the benefit of all Latin American citizens to have access to quality life styles but the outcome was negative. The economic crisis in Latin America continued to deepen throughout the structural adjustment years a sign that might mean some of the policy prescriptions were inappropriately adopted in the region. As a result, all major social and economic indicators in the region deteriorated rapidly during the structural adjustment years. The regional GDP per capita decreased to the 1970s level, for example the decline in Peru and Argentina was about three times worse than average regional GDP per capita. Also inflation rocketed in the same decade of IMF sponsored programs in Latin America and the worst cases were witnessed in Argentina, Peru, Uruguay and Mexico (Lago, C.M, 1997).In addition to that, the real wage rate especially in urban areas declined sharply in the 1980s to 1990 in all countries except in Colombia and in countries like Peru, Argentina, Uruguay and Mexico the average real wage was far bellow the 1980s.It seems as though ,the intended policy objective of the International Monetary Fund failed to promote economic development as portrayed by rapid decline in socio-economic indicators in the region.

Furthermore, IMF`s structural adjustments appeared to have failed to encourage the creation of formal employment in Latin America since almost all countries suffered from high unemployment during the course of structural economic reforms. The most affected countries were Chile, Colombia and Costa Rica although unemployment slightly declined in the mid 1980s it could have been caused by expansion of informal employment in that same period. Therefore, deterioration of major economic indictors in the 1980s coupled with cuts public expenditures social services inflicted incidence of poverty and inequality among various social groups. The share of government expenditure on public services such as education, health care and welfare was considerably lower than the 1970s (Lago, C.M, 1997) in countries like Chile, Peru and Mexico. Moreover, capital flight was a major problem in Latin America relaxation of exchange controls at a time of economic instability so resources were transferred abroad which further exacerbated the crisis in the region. In addition to that, IMF conditionality programs discouraged all adjusting countries from importing goods in order to reduce the balance of payment deficits. Given that, the region required capital goods such as heavy machines for primary production, restricting imports might have adverse effects on regional output (GDP).

However, overall it appears as though IMF macro-economic stabilisation policies failed to promote economic development throughout years of structural adjustment programs in Latin America. The main problem is the rapidity with which IMF performance targets are to be met and loans are repaid. Given the short-term nature of the Fund’s lending activities, borrowing countries are expected to carryout dramatic economic reforms within a very short space of time (shock therapy).As a result, the IMF orthodoxy policies failed to encourage economic development in a decade of Latin America’s structural adjustments. Contrary, it took several years for industrialized economies to develop of which the process of market-oriented reforms and modernisation in developed countries did not occur over night, yet IMF`s paradigms demanded rapidity. As a result, most countries were unsuccessful to implement all policies due to higher degree of opposition .Civil unrest in capital cities across the region such as Buenos, Aries, Caracas and Santo Domingo were common throughout the 1980s (Lago, C.M, 1997) and in some case threatened democratic elected governments. In this regards, the economic reforms of 1980-1990 in Latin America brought huge social, economic and political cost to Latin American countries  instead of promoting long-term economic development as perceived by the IMF`s orthodoxy paradigms. The fast shrinking real wage rates, rising unemployment and deregulations sparked sharp increase in prices of basic commodities as well as in government expenditures exacerbated/ worsened social-economic indicators in the region.

Though, the overall neo- liberal economic reforms in Latin America seemed to have worsened the economic crisis in the 1980s compared to their intended objective of promoting long-term economic development ;It must be said that IMF is not the creator of the crisis, these countries had a long history of economic instabilities because their economies depend on  exports of primary production .As a result, changes in the global markets had a negative economic consequences and hence the region was  prone to economic instabilities .For example the 1980s crisis was triggered by falling demand in the export market which created huge balance of payment and fiscal deficits in the region. Also Latin American governments were the main service providers of basic public services such as health care, state benefits, education and subsidies, even though the welfare system became inadequate. However, in some cases government borrowed money from banks other international financial institutions to fund public services provisions till it became clear that the region failed to repay its debt obligations after Mexico defaulted. In this regard IMF `s macroeconomic stabilization policies can not be viewed as a complete failure to promote economic development in the 1980s of adjustments in Latin America. Given the magnitude of the regional recession and falling export revenues such as expansionary public services were detrimental effects on the social security systems became too expensive to finance and virtual covered entire populations (Lago, C.M, 1997).Therefore, economic reforms in Latin America were necessary to encourage economic development but the cost of adjustment could have been   by borrowing countries due to failures of implementing those IMF policies.

Conclusion

The International Monetary Fund`s macroeconomic stabilization policies in Latin America seemed to have further worsened the economic crisis in the region as can be portrayed by deterioration of major social and economic indicators in the region. For example, over a period of 10 years of regional economic reforms there were incidences of poor health, unemployment and shrinking real GDP which had a negative impact on growth and development. In addition to that some the Fund`s macroeconomic policies such as deregulation which in turn led to rising cost of consumer goods and impose direct impact on the poor and the working class. Whilst, there is no enough evidence to proving that all IMF policy prescriptions were fully implemented it seems shock therapy was not to improve regional economic development even if those reforms were necessary. In my view IMF orthodoxy policies could have been accompanied by some kind of   social-democratic or rather social-liberal vision that prevailed in the Czech Republic immediately after 1989 (Lorenstein, M,1995) The Czech social-liberal model was intended to cushion the effects of the economic transformation though a range of socio-economic measures as part of preparing for neo-classical policies. Therefore, if extra measures were adopted in Latin America to cushion the cost of structural adjustments in Latin American countries, the Fund`s macroeconomic stabilization policies might have yield positive economic recovery thereby encourage economic development. There were serous omissions in the IMF policy prescriptions which range from social and political issues to prevent the Latin American crisis to reoccur and hence all economic indicators further deteriorated.

A little biography about me.

Ranganai chiwara was born, grew up and received his education in mberengwa .His main interests lie in the area of economics, politics and social welfare of the City of Mberengwa .Ranganai is currently a shadow member of parliament for Mberengwa South a constituency which  he owes a lot for its hospitality towards human aspirations. Whilst there has been some progress in this City, we are pained by the extent at which mberengwa as a potential economic powerhouse of Midlands  Province with vast mineral deposits got downgraded to a mere rural based economy.

 Mberengwa had a potential to be a modern city and with two airports... (Musume (Kuground and Nyala ) those modern transport facilities are now history. Also Musume high school  served as a Teacher training College prior to 1980 but  was later downgraded to a secondary school and  Mnene School of Nursing which has been training our nurses is seriously underfunded a threat to public service delivery  system in our local community .In addition to that,Energy security is increasingly becoming a major concern, with our local hospitals and clinics left without power, poor communication network and food shortages even though the district is full of promising if local resources are utilized. I want to see a change for the future.

WHAT DO I BELIVE IN FOR THE CITY OF MBERENGWA??
1. Mberengwa `s economic and social infrastructures need re-orientation  in all areas, that’s addressing  issues relating to energy security, transport & communication not forgetting food security. As a strong believer in human capital (education) , I will  campaign form more  “A” Level Schools , City Central Library, Mberengwa School of Economics & Development in partnership with ( UZ and Midlands State University).
2. Commerce is a major problem for  traders in mberengwa largely due to pure communication facilities to effect  exchange of good and services, it is in my belief that mberengwa can do its best if we develop a modern Commodity Exchange which will  link local trading to national markets .
3. I believe, we have the human capital to turn around our local fortune into something tangible because we are a striving community with higher aspirations
4. Mberengwa is one of the richest district in Zimbabwe and has has the capacity to meet its energy needs without relying on the National Grid by  investing  in solar, and hydro power.
5. To address food security problems in my constituency, Irrigation schemes remain a pivotal source of productivity since district is prone to drought, which means more dams and land are need for irrigation and to be built hydro electric power station.
6. Mberengwa was a strategic location for military operation during the wars of independence thousands of our local men and women perished while defending their nation, some of them were thrown into coal mines at Nyala and Rhoda under the Rhodesian government and to this day none of our current MPs have ever talked about this, My promise is I will campaign for the establishment of a 40m statue war memorial at Mataga to honor those who sacrificed their lives for our freedom and the the place will be called the independence square.

To our men and women who sacrificed their lives for us.

We are now heading to that day of the year (Heroes day) where we as a nation come together to honour those who perished in the great wars of independence, and those who contributed in one way or the other ( VanaZvibwido (aids) and zvimujibha (military informers and the wide community who provided for food and other service. It will be fair to say Zimbabwe as a nation was brought by collective effort and we want to think there so many Heroes who committed their lives for the benefit of every common man and woman of all races, some of these heroes failed to turn up in 1980 at a time when we raised the national flag so high in the skies.

Ian Smith the Buthcer of Zimabwean in the 1970s

We will remain thankful to the service they rendered to their country which some they failed to see thriving and we also continue to appreciate the presence of serving Heroes who are still amongst ourselves. All these men and women worked so hard to bring down an unjust system in our country,indeed they played a vital part in our national history .As such it will it will need more time in our life time to nature the same principle and values these men and women sacrificed for the cause of this country. They endured one of the very difficult life experience to bring our freedom, the war they fought were based on the fundamental values of our forefathers, those fundamental values which led sekuru and mbuya nehanda to take arms intended to drive away western imperialism, defending our national identity and heritage .This is the dream that our heroes of the 21st century shared, a true sacrifice which was aimed at bringing down the evil and unjust society.


Hebert Chitepo, Josiah Tongogara, Chikerema, J.Z Moyo,Nikita Mangena , Joshua Nkomo and Msika, and the unknown fallen heroes are all history but our hearts are overjoyed by the fresh air they opened to us. They clearly made a foundation for us as the new generation and the future of this country to carry on with the vision and values of safeguarding our national heritage. Whether you agree with me or not the sacrifice of our national heroes must be honoured by all of us today from all political background, never shall we ever forget the birth of our country, it was not easy but we finally raised the flag. Comrades, friends and all Zimbabweans none of us today deserve a national hero’s status other than those and our ageing freedom fighters who are now departing one by one. We as the future, of this country should aim to create a sustainable socio-economic and political climate free from violence, abuse and above all safeguarding our national sovereignty.

I encourage everyone to rise above party politics and put our country first on this day, in very country heroes are honoured and civilians attend to all national events so should we here at home. Those who perished fighting for this country cloud have wanted to live long had they not offered themselves on fire, therefore its something we got to appreciate. We remember the Chimoi and Nyadzonya massacre where thousands lost their lives. President Robert Mugabe and other national heroes achieved their goal of creating the country’s foundation. Zimbabwe`s human development index was above 60% in all indexes up to year 2000, which is we are a striving nation. Now it’s up to us (The new generation) to reignite the Zimbabwean pride. I am now asking you my fellow comrades to rekindle our future, building a new Zimbabwe which resembles a modern way of thinking laced on the same principle of patriotism.

Peace to all of us and lets continues to aspire for better and provide charity wherever its required and maintain the stewardship of our heritage y, our country is confronted by numerous challenges ranging from global warming, neo-colonialism and economic sabotages as we have witnessed in the last decade.

Ranganai chiwara is a young nationalist and his interests lies  in the area of human  development, global diplomatic relations, home affairs  and national security.

Expansion of Capitalism a threat to third world economies.

The economics of IMF and World Bank are based on neo liberal policies which seek to promote free markets and are aimed at limiting government intervention exchange rate stability. Since the collapse of the Bretton Wood Systems in the 1970s we have witnessed an unprecedented number of countries joining the Fund and pulling out of the Washington base institutions because of the perceived harm it causes to developing countries. We must also point out that  IMF was indeed an American foreign policy instrument to deter Soviet expansion across continents by dishing out cash in developing economies such as those in Latin America , Africa and Asia easily. However the situation changed in the late 1980s when it became clear that the Soviet Union was no longer a threat to global order and the US national security.


Authors of Capitalism

The Fund started to change the way it lends money to developing countries as a result  borrowing countries in the early 1990s were now required to adopt free market orthodoxy policies in return for for financial help which is now called technical assistance by IMF economists. Its fair to say , a new global economic-social and political orders are being  promoted on the expense of the poor by these western backed institutions.

Over the past five decades many countries were modelled on either communist or socialist principles including Great Britain and continental Europe .However this had to change when the US started to spread capitalism ideology throughout the world using IMF and the World Bank as instruments for change promoting global economic integration (globalization).These policies such as privatization, contraction fiscal and monetary policy paused a major threat to domestic investments in most participating economies(countries) .I still remember Mrs. Thatcher (British Prime Minister at the time ) started privatize all major British industries including rail and energy forcing inflation to rocket in 1992 and was exacerbated by cuts in government spending all this prompted civil unrest in most deprived areas of London and  the North (Stoke-On-Trent, Manchester and Liverpool) . Mrs Thatcher  saw a seed of her downfall when she adpted this policy and few years later she was seen crying at her annual conservative people’s party conference just after massive  demonstration across the UK. This was a different case in the the US because everyone was prepared for capitalist reforms.
Again in the early 1990s similar events happened to us when President  Mugabe imposed what the rest of the working class at the time regarded as slaughter of human welfare. That was because the president responded positively to IMF`s conditionality program (neo-Liberal manifesto) and the result was harsh among urban communities as people lost the jobs as well as high prices of basic commodities .In those days Tsvangirai was quoted by one western news agency as saying we are now forced to adopt a new life style which is too brutal for all Zimbabweans. After years of civil discontent and strikes among the working class, a new political party (MDC) emerged finally led by Morgan Tsvangirai a party that continued to challenge the governing party (ZANU-PF) up to now. In Britain, Thatcher lost her job and since then British electorate never reconciled with Tory party due to Thatcher`sharsh economic policies of last conservative government.

 
President Mugabe defying workers demands
Elsewhere in Latin America the outcome of the IMF sponsored program brought misery in (1980-1990) as inflation hit a hyper level like the one we witnessed in here in Zimbabwe (2008). There were many incidence of poverty and malnutrition in all participating countries in the region  which resulted in civil wars and coups. The danger of these programs is that governments are being banned from spending on major public services such health care, education and transport as well as other government subsidies. Therefore, such fiscal contraction have a negative impact on the poor and likely to cause civil unrest.

Having said that , I am not totally against (IMF and The World Bank) but there is something wrong with the way they conduct their business.They pose a serious threat to social and political setup of our countries by bringing in  new orders which does not fit well in any part of lives. IMF and the World Bank are the main  instruments for regime change and policy towards the poor. As such Africa will remain under developed if we continue extending all our hands to these institutions,We got to rely on ourselves,  Africa  a rich continent of which if all reasonable policies are implemented (indigenously) everyone will be assured of a better future.

Since the 1980s, the global economy is coming together (globalization) but these pose a serious threat to us in Zimbabwe and elsewhere in developing economies. Surely we do agree that in some way the countries should be member of these International Financial institutions but those powerfully countries of the world should not tell us how we should spend our resources and what policy to take.

The future of a welfare state.

The land reform  continue to receive a lot of criticism from the left wing together with some of our friends in Europe and elsewhere we  entirely believe in what we can do   as a nation. Wealth redistribution exercise could have been carried out at the wrong time and also the violent nature that left some people for dead in my view was very necessary step to address social justice. The land reform will remain in place for sometime if our leaders fail to take decisive measures to fulfil our futures national aspirations of re-claiming economic fortune. This will form part of the future nationalist government’s social policy infrastructures. It is in our beliefs as future generation that when addressing to issues relating to social policy, it must not deviate from the main nation theme of self independence.


As such social policy would be an integral part of a wide economic policy intended to help citizens discover their potential, this will include opening up  various opportunities to zimbabweans through economic empowerments such as handing over more land to the poor, increasing irrigation schemes in up down the country, training and  as well as buildng energy supply chains. These measures are the best for our country as we seek to be a  more defined economic, social and political republic. Ladies and Gentlemen the land reform should be our battle ground for every Zimbabwean, the expansion of the Kalahari Desert into the western (Matabeleland) part of our country can not be ignored by this generation. Desertification already threatening lives in those regions ,particularly in areas of food security, high temperatures and failing rainfall ,etc. We as futures we got to guard ourselves against such threats of which the current government policy trends do not seem to attend to this  (climate change issues)

Proposed policies would be

1. Re-orientation of the Zimbabwean economy, that is both manufacturing and processing industries will be re-located in those hostile environment in Midlands and Matabeleland provinces (region 4-6).
2. People currently in those unfavourable regions (4-6) will be re-settled in regions 1-3, (mashonaland, Manicaland , parts of masving and Midlands provinces) and these regions will form the largest human population in the country.
3. Building more dams, canals and Lakes for irrigation purposes.

 Ranganai chiwara is a young nationalist and his interests lie in the area of human  development, global diplomatic relations, home affairs  and that of nationalism.Ranganai believe in a zimbabwe that is more determined to re-define her future.