Conclusion
-
The US Embassy in Harare has identified the potential for Zimbabwe to become a development hub for South Africa.
-
The State Department’s Integrated Country Strategy for Zimbabwe does not understand what it means to be a development hub for South Africa, nor does it explain whether it would be in US national security and foreign policy interests for Zimbabwe to become one.
-
It is unclear what conditions and interventions will be required to transform Zimbabwe into a development hub.
-
The US Embassy in Harare should seek to make Zimbabwe a development hub for South Africa as a mission security interest.
-
Congress should play an active role in the planning process to secure congressional support and resources to achieve this goal.
The Integrated Country Strategy for Zimbabwe (ICS Zimbabwe) states that “Zimbabwe’s strategic importance to the United States is a potential growth hub for South Africa.” This is a remarkable conclusion to draw for a country that is currently near the bottom DHL Global Connectivity Index—an important indicator that measures globalization based on international trade, capital, information, and people flows. This not only begs the question under what conditions Zimbabwe would emerge as a development hub for South Africa, but also whether it would be in the US government’s national interest to help Zimbabwe achieve that outcome. Zimbabwe’s ICS fails to shed light on these questions. The embassy should be encouraged to respond. Below is a list of some possible starting points for achieving this state of affairs.
Recommendation #1: ICS Zimbabwe should be amended to further develop the idea of ​​Zimbabwe as a development hub for South Africa.
In Chief of Mission Priorities, ICS Zimbabwe refers to Zimbabwe as a “potential development hub for southern Africa” ​​and this is described as strategically important to the US government.
Nowhere in the ICS does it appear that Zimbabwe has the potential to become a development hub or why that outcome would be strategically important to Washington.
Furthermore, this is a complicated observation given that Zimbabwe is a landlocked country currently ranked 160th out of 171 DHL countries Global Connectivity Index 2022. This places it below all of its neighbors, as well as poor sub-Saharan African countries such as Sierra Leone and Gabon.
There is a clear and present need to define these terms and their relationships more fully. Luckily, other actors have done just that:
- Network theorists have defined a node as a highly connected node in a group of interconnected nodes.
- The World Bank defines economic development as the increase in the value of goods and services produced by an economy over time.
- The Southern African Development Community (SADC) consists of Angola, Botswana, Comoros, Democratic Republic of Congo, Eswatini, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mauritius, Mozambique, Namibia, Seychelles, South Africa, United Republic of Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe. This group of countries is commonly understood to be South Africa.
The US Embassy in Harare should borrow from these concepts. This would provide a way to conceptualize the ‘development hub for South Africa’ as one A SADC Member State that is highly interconnected with other SADC Member States through linkages that lead to a positive change in the volume of production or in the real expenditure or income of their populations.
Recommendation #2: ICS Zimbabwe should contain a detailed explanation of the circumstances under which it would (and would not) be in US national security and foreign policy interests for Zimbabwe to become a development hub for South Africa.
The Zimbabwean government has strong relationships with major power rivals the United States and other authoritarian revisionist states that have expressed an avowed desire to change the world order.
Zimbabwe’s ICS acknowledges that China has ‘expanded its influence’ in Zimbabwe, and this is providing Beijing with “almost unlimited access to Zimbabwe’s natural resources”, incl base minerals which are critical to the global clean energy transition.
At the same time, the ICS states that Zimbabwe’s economy currently operates “for the benefit of a privileged few, including the president, his family, senior military officials and a small group of elite actors in the ruling party and the private sector”.
In this context, there is a need to clarify the conditions under which the transformation of Zimbabwe into a development hub for South Africa will contribute to, among other things, “local job creation, greater transparency, local economic growth, citizen empowerment, gender equality, climate smart solutions and improved labor and environmental standards”.
At the same time, there is a need to identify the conditions under which turning Zimbabwe into a development hub for South Africa would support the administration’s policy of focusing on the transnational aspects of corruption.
One cannot assume that turning the country into a regional development hub would be of much benefit to ordinary Zimbabweans. It could well fuel the spread of corruption and widen the already huge inequalities that exist across the country.
Recommendation #3: The US Embassy Harare should seek to work with the Government of Zimbabwe to develop an autonomous roadmap for Zimbabwe to become a development hub for South Africa.
In coordination with relevant US government departments and agencies, the US Embassy Harare should develop a road map for US and Zimbabwean policymakers that will outline a strategic path to transform Zimbabwe into a development hub for the South Africa, in a way that simultaneously advances US national and foreign security. political interests and the economic prosperity and opportunities of SADC.
This roadmap should clearly describe the resources, activities, outcomes, short-term goals and long-term goals that would advance a “shared vision for a better, more sustainable, healthier and more prosperous future” through the transformation of Zimbabwe into a development hub for South Africa.
These activities should include specific risk management approaches that will be used to achieve the conditions necessary to transform Zimbabwe into a development hub for South Africa to align with US national security and foreign policy interests in the coming decades.
Recommendation #4: The State Department should engage Congress early in the planning process to secure congressional support and resources to pursue making Zimbabwe a development hub for South Africa as a US national security interest.
The transformation of Zimbabwe into a regional development hub would be a long-term, resource-intensive goal that would require political and fiscal support over a period of time that likely exceeds the lifetime of a single ICS.
The State Department will need to engage relevant congressional committees in the early stages of the planning process to garner the support needed for a vigorous pursuit of this policy goal.
Congress will likely be receptive to innovative approaches to working with a country known to have large deposits rare earth metals used in the manufacture of electronics, batteries and magnets. Members do not want these important resources to fall under the control and direction of competing great powers.
However, Congress would likely be sensitive to the costs and risks of pursuing such a long-term goal with an administration long hostile to US interests.
The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of the Institute for Foreign Policy Research, a nonpartisan organization that seeks to publish well-researched, policy-oriented articles on American foreign policy and national security priorities .