Millions of people are said to be close to starvation in Zimbabwe - a country that used to export food to half the African continent.

Residents of Matabeleland, one of the worst affected provinces, say that elderly people are starving to death, while children have died of poisoning after eating the wrong leaves as a substitute for food.

BBC Journalist Fergal Keane has been banned from Zimbabwe, but he crossed the border to report on the crisis.

What are conditions like in Zimbabwe? How difficult is it for journalists to report on the situation?

BBC correspondent Fergal Keane answered your questions in a LIVE Forum.

Transcript

Newshost:
Hello, and welcome to this News Interactive Forum. I'm Mike Wooldridge. Millions of people are said to be close to starvation in Zimbabwe, a country that used to export food to half the African continent. After years of oppression and land seizure, Zimbabwe appears to be descending into a state of chaos and starvation. BBC journalist Fergal Keane has been banned from Zimbabwe, but he crossed the border to report from some of the worst hit areas in the country.

He's joining us now from Johannesburg to answer some of the many questions you've sent to us. Fergal, how great is the threat of starvation for the people of Zimbabwe? Is it too late to help many people there? That question comes from Floydian in Zimbabwe, and also a similar question from Neil, here in Britain. Do you think that non-government organisations should continue giving aid when it appears that much of it is siphoned off by corrupt public officials and handed out politically?

Fergal Keane:
Well, to answer the first question which is about the scale of the problem. I think it's undoubtedly massive. I have no reason to doubt the word of people like the World Food Programme who talk of an estimated six million people facing starvation in Zimbabwe. Certainly when you drive around the capital, Harare, you see long food queues outside supermarkets. The basic staples like maize and like bread have simply vanished from the shelves. The food that is available is incredibly expensive and that was something that struck me, having spent quite a bit of time visiting Zimbabwe back in the 90s, it is certainly now when you drive through the countryside, a sort of ghostly feeling you get from the farmland. You still see cattle in some fields, you still see crops growing in some fields. But the sort of fields of plenty which visitors to Zimbabwe in the older times would have remembered, simply aren't there.

Now as to the question of food aid. This is clearly going to become a massive political issue over the next few weeks and leading up to the deadline for the expulsion of white farmers on August 10th. You do hear people saying, look if you send food to Zimbabwe it's not going to go to the poor, it's going to be taken by government officials. That's an argument anybody who remembers the crisis in Ethiopia of the early 80s will remember.

But we do come to a fundamental question. When you are confronted with a starving population, with people in desperate need of food, can you in conscience, now this is less a political question than a moral question, can you in conscience deny to send them food because you regard their government as being odious? That is a question of course which the aid agencies have a very simple answer to. They say no you can't. And perhaps the solution to that lies in something Morgan Tsvangarai said to me, he said this aid must be organised, not on a bilateral government to government basis, but must be done through the aid agencies.

And there is a precedent for this. Back in the early 1980s Robert Mugabe imposed a food embargo on Matabeleland when he was trying to crush the political opposition there. He kept that up until the American government threatened to withdraw all food aid and forced a situation where the aid was able to be taken in to the affected region by independent agencies.

Mike Wooldridge:
Well, on that point of international attitude toward Zimbabwe, we have another question from within Zimbabwe from Innocent Sauramba. As the African countries meet to launch the African Union, and they've just concluded that meeting today in South Africa, what are the other heads of states' attitude towards Mr Mugabe, especially considering the fact that his conduct for democracy and good governance is very questionable?

Fergal Keane:
I think there is a degree of embarrassment on the part of people like President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa. Other governments in Africa, when compared to Mr Mugabe, Mr Mugabe comes off rather well. So I think it's a very mixed pattern. One can say that there is a unified degree of opinion about Zimbabwe. What there is however is a very unified reluctance to do anything about the problem.

Robert Mugabe, at a time when his people are facing starvation, when he is excluded from the Commonwealth, was still an honoured guest at the inaugural meeting of the African Union here in Durban in South Africa. There is no willingness that one can see at the moment to tackle the problem of Zimbabwe. In the absence of action from the only people who can really affect change and they are the South Africans, in the absence of really strong action from them I think the crisis is simply going to escalate.

Mike Wooldridge:
Well, we've had quite a number of questions relating to that, one from Vince in the United Kingdom. Sanctions against Mr Mugabe are clearly not making any difference to his long-term goals. Do you think there is enough international pressure being put on Mugabe to change his land reform policy and beliefs and to make Zimbabwe once again a prosperous country? And also another question in the same vein from Chris in Zimbabwe, why has nothing been done to stop Mugabe within Africa or internationally?

Fergal Keane:
I think the answer to that, again, is rather complicated. There is no simple, one factor operating here. Let's look first of all at the international community. From the very early stages of this crisis Robert Mugabe has played it very, very cleverly. He's an extremely shrewd politician, possibly the shrewdest politician in the African continent. He successfully portrayed this in the early stages as a war against the last vestiges of colonialism, a war to restore to the impoverished African peasantry in Zimbabwe their just rights, in other words, the land which was occupied by the white minority. A lot of African leaders bought that and it successfully held off a substantial international action.

The truth about this of course is that it is a battle about political power. Now there is no doubt that there were very, very deep and legitimate grievances about land in Zimbabwe. It is an issue that should have been resolved many years ago. But fundamentally, white farmers are being targeted as scapegoats for the economic problems, but principally because they are a part of his political problem. Most of them are seen as supporters of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change and therefore stand in his way.

Now, as far as Africa is concerned, I think I go back to what I said earlier. There is a reluctance on the part of African leaders, who look at Robert Mugabe and fear that if he is pushed out of the way by international pressure, a combination of international pressure and domestic upheaval, that's the kind of fate which would await many of them. The only person who doesn't have that fear is President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa, and he is also the person who has the most power in terms of Zimbabwe. Without South Africa's logistical support Zimbabwe's economy would completely collapse.

Mike Wooldridge:
Some questioners have asked specifically about the prospects for military intervention. Steve Ward, for example, from the Isle of Man, puts it this way. Given that we in the United Kingdom seem to send our troops into foreign wars where we have little connection, such as Afghanistan, do you believe that more pressure and possibly military pressure should be applied to Zimbabwe to ensure democracy and to protect those British farmers and citizens who live in Zimbabwe?

Fergal Keane:
I think we have to be very, very careful about that. The idea that white soldiers from Britain are going to march into an African country in defence of white farmers is simply a non-starter. That is not going to happen. There would be enormous military difficulties. But the critical problem with that is that it would be seen by most Africans and indeed many people opposed to Mr Mugabe as a new form of colonialism, as revived imperialism. So it's simply not going to happen.

If there is a breakdown of law and order totally in Zimbabwe, if we see tens of thousands of people taking to the streets and what amounts to a bloody civil war, then I think you will see pressure for military action, but it will not be led by Britain, certainly not the former colonial power. It will be led by South Africa and the countries of the Southern African Development Corporation Region.

Mike Wooldridge:
Did you sense while you were inside Zimbabwe that people might feel any different about any military intervention under the United Nations? Peacekeeping, for example, Bill, a questioner from the United Kingdom, asks given that the UN could impose sanctions, but also that this would only hurt the people even more and not Mr Mugabe himself, do you think it time that the UN took military action?

Fergal Keane:
Again, one has to be practical. There is no appetite whatsoever on the Security Council for a military action inside Zimbabwe. The Zimbabwean army is a very formidable prospect. It is not, you know, like dealing with the rebels in Sierra Leone, or the Bosnian Serbs, or people like that. It is an army which is used to fighting a conventional war in the Democratic Republic of Congo. There would be substantial casualties and Zimbabwe is a sovereign country.

There would be huge political problems throughout Africa if any attempt was made by the UN or anybody else to march in there. But again I come back to the caveat, that if you do get a breakdown of law and order and what amounts to a great civil conflagration in Zimbabwe, then there will be acute and probably overwhelming pressure to intervene militarily, either by the UN or the countries of Southern Africa, or a combination of both.

Mike Wooldridge:
Let's move on to other issues that our questioners have raised. Michael Bojang from Britain says I don't believe that Mr Mugabe's motives are in any way honest, but don't you think that the inequality in education, land ownership and salaries between black and white communities gave Mr Mugabe fuel to carry out his reforms?

Fergal Keane:
Absolutely. There's absolutely no doubt about that. One cannot deny the great deal of resentment that exists on the part of a huge number of black Zimbabweans at the inequalities which exist in that society. That 20 years or more now after independence we have a situation where the most productive sectors of the economy still lay outside the hands of the majority population. But, again, one has to ask the question, who was in power for the last 20 years? Who was ultimately responsible for how things developed and how the riches and land in the country were to be distributed? Robert Mugabe.

And I think that's where the opposition Movement for Democratic Change has been able to make up its support. It has been able to fight against Mr Mugabe's assertion that this is all the problem of the colonial plot by Britain and by the white farmers and to point the finger at him and say, look, you are the government, you are accountable.

Mike Wooldridge:
Two questions about the opposition and its effectiveness, one from Jim Stewart in Britain, how vocal is opposition to Mr Mugabe's government in Zimbabwe, how effective are the opposition? George Barrow, again in the UK, do you think the lack of effective political opposition may eventually lead to an armed struggle and possibly civil war in the longer term?

Fergal Keane:
I think that must be the great fear in Zimbabwe. One has to look at the opposition as not a sort of unified block. But as a broad church which brought together many different factions in Zimbabwean society from white farmers to trade unionists, to business people, to urban intellectuals, there is no sort of unifying force at the head of it.

Morgan Tsvangarai fought a tough election campaign but there is a feeling among certain activists that in the wake of the election, he simply hasn't had a strategy to deal with President Robert Mugabe. That when you compare the two men there is absolutely no doubt who is the tougher and who is the shrewdest in terms of how political battles are fought. And of course there is no doubt about who has the most cards to play in terms of both political and military and police power.

Mike Wooldridge:
This issue of how Mr Mugabe is viewed within the country, and again, you've just been inside Zimbabwe in the past few days, Guy Rothe from Germany asks, with the crisis worsening is there any sign that the general population is beginning to see Mr Mugabe as part of the problem? Or is he still seen by Zimbabweans as the man to save them from the country's colonial past?

Fergal Keane:
I think the answer to that is to look at the election results and the results of the parliamentary elections and the referendum before that. There is certainly a huge feeling on the part of many Zimbabweans that Mr Mugabe is the problem. That is not to say that he doesn't have substantial support in many rural areas and that he has his party pretty solidly behind him at the moment. I don't believe these rumours one hears that Zanu PF is about to split apart, and that the military are about to move.

I don't see that happening, certainly in the short term. Mr Mugabe has things where he wants them at the moment, and that's under control. The critical difference in all of these situations where you have a government which employs massive repression against its people, where you have growing hunger and growing inequality, is at some point people will become so desperate that they lose their fear. And the point at which the people lose their fear is when governments like that of Mr Mugabe are seriously threatened. I think we're some way away from that yet, but I think that point will inevitably come.

Mike Wooldridge:
Returning to the farmers, Alice Coleman from Britain, asks what chance is there for Zimbabwean farmers holding British citizenship getting support or compensation if they are forced to leave, as they are due to leave by August 10th? And is the August 10th deadline for all commercial farmers?

Fergal Keane:
To deal with the issue of compensation first, it's certainly very fraught and one can expect to see in the weeks to come major pressure internationally for some form of reasonable compensation for them. But I think that bypasses the issue. I met a farmer in Zimbabwe, Chris Shepherd, who had been farming, he's fifth-generation Zimbabwean, he and his wife and four children live on the farm, they don't have a passport to go anywhere else.

What compensation do you get? What do you do when you're driven off the land that you and your family have worked for such a long time? When you're forced to sell all your livestock, all your farm machinery? As he put it to me, nothing really makes up for that. And certainly in the context of people who are not free, as many of them are not, to move abroad and start again. I'm afraid, Mike, you'll have to remind me what the second part of the question was.

Mike Wooldridge:
It was whether the August 10th deadline is for all commercial farmers?

Fergal Keane:
Well, the question is, I think that by August 10th President Mugabe wants to see the end of white commercial farming and that represents the majority of commercial farmers in the country. Now, over the past few years, certainly in the last two years, I think many white farmers have kept telling themselves, well, maybe he doesn't mean it, and once the parliamentary elections are over it will be alright. And once the presidential elections are over he'll have what he wants, political power. And I think that it's slowly dawning that President Robert Mugabe really does mean it and that the days of white farming in Zimbabwe are coming to the end. We are living in the closing days of that period.

Mike Wooldridge:
John Clarke, again here in Britain, asks do you think this situation in Zimbabwe will lead to the mass evacuation of British passport holders? It sounds from what you were just saying as if you think possibly not.

Fergal Keane:
I'm always very, very wary of making alarmist predictions. I think it's dangerous territory. Let's look at the objective facts. There are a substantial number of British passport holders who live on the land and there are also a great number of white Zimbabweans who don't have the ability to go anywhere else. The pressure on them will be first to move into the urban areas.

Now if when they move to the urban areas the campaign continues against them, it starts then against white business, and Indian business, and there have been many threats about that since the presidential elections, then I think you will see a situation where the government could be faced, the British government could be faced with an influx of people from Zimbabwe. The one thing that does strike one driving around the rural roads that go through the country is the sight of removal vans. Now most of them that we could see were from South Africa, going up to collect people's belongings and bringing them down south.

I think people's first option, probably, rather than go to cold and rainy Britain would be to move to either South Africa or on to Australia. While I was in Zimbabwe I heard there was an Australian, on reliable evidence, an Australian immigration consultant in town who was seeing large numbers of people every single day, desperate to get out.

Mike Wooldridge:
Emma, in the United Kingdom, asks can you see an end to Mr Mugabe's regime prior to his death? Now, as you will know, there were reports that having got back into power in the elections recently that he might then have handed over to somebody else. Again, inside the country in these past few days what did you sense about his intentions?

Fergal Keane:
It's full of rumours, people saying, you know, in a few months' time he might step down and hand over to one of his deputies. I personally don't think that's likely. I think this is a man who is still politically very much in the whole of his health, very, very determined to continue fighting what he sees as his war against the political opposition and the forces of the old colonialism. I don't see any sign of him going just yet.

A point I want to come back to because we've had quite a lot of questions about white farmers and the affect on them. Let us not forget that this is critically and principally a problem faced by the black majority in Zimbabwe. They are the people who are suffering most as a result of the misrule and the corruption and the terror that is taking place in Zimbabwe now. Certainly it is absolutely right to be concerned with the problems faced by white farmers. And one going around the farms and talking to them cannot be but impressed by the dire straights that they are in.

But remember that there are people being arrested in the dead of night and vanishing, there are people being tortured in secret detention centres who have nobody to speak out for them. Who don't have any government who can come to their rescue and most of those people are black.

Mike Wooldridge:
Ros Coffey, again in the United Kingdom, says in most of your reports, Fergal, no matter how dire the situation there is always a thread of hope which people can follow to extricate themselves from the crisis. Can you glean such a thread in Zimbabwe and if so what is it?

Fergal Keane:
I think anybody who knows Africa as you and I do, Mike, and we've both seen the continent in the direst of circumstances, knows that there is an incredible capacity for regeneration and for endurance. The people of the African continent are capable of the most magnificent endurance in the face of adversity. We saw it here in apartheid South Africa. I've seen it in many parts of the continent. People do fight back and they do come back. And that is particularly true of the people of Zimbabwe. There are very hard times to come, there is a major crisis coming in Zimbabwe, but do I believe that the country can rebuild itself, that the people there have the spirit to do it? Of course I do.

Mike Wooldridge:
Fergal, I'll just ask you this briefly if I may to finish. What do you feel are the risks of reporting in Zimbabwe today? And I'm thinking there of course of Zimbabwe journalists as well as somebody like yourself, with whatever difficulties, able to go in under cover.

Fergal Keane:
It is dangerous for us to some degree. But nothing like the problems faced by the Zimbabwean journalists. I go in and out of the country, I was personally warned along with another BBC journalist that if I was found in the country again after my last visit I could face a long term of imprisonment. One doesn't go into Zimbabwe to cock a snook at the government, or to say aren't we wonderful and brave, what we're doing. But we go in because the story needs to be told.

But the people we really need to bear in mind are those very brave Zimbabwean journalists who do the story day in and day out and who don't have the kind of protection that I have, the diplomatic protection which I would be able to call on if I were arrested and the power of the BBC behind me. These people face the threat of the secret police and the army every day of their lives that they keep telling the story. Fair dues to them.

Mike Wooldridge:
That's all that we have time for now on this interactive forum. My thanks to Fergal and to all of you who sent e-mails, I'm sorry if we didn't manage to answer all of your questions. From me, Mike Wooldridge, good bye.