This chapter examines the ways in which the Geneva conference of late 1976, as the culmination of American efforts to push forward with majority rule talks, failed to reach any meaningful results. Part of the failure had to do with the end of President Ford’s administration and the end of Secretary of State Henry Kissinger’s role in the Rhodesia crisis. Much of the chapter analyzes the diplomatic roles of Robert Mugabe and Joshua Nkomo, and how they interacted with American, British, and African diplomats and leaders during the conference. The Zairian leader Mobutu was also involved in assessing the African leaders, and his observations of Mugabe and Nkomo are discussed. The chapter shows how Mugabe managed to make the most of the otherwise failed Geneva talks to solidify his leadership role in ZANU, and how after the conference, he and ZANLA leader Tongogara removed the ZIPA leaders by having them imprisoned in Mozambique in early 1977. The chapter also examines British, American, South African, and Rhodesian views of the future prospects of the Zimbabwean nationalist leaders.

This chapter sets the stage for the diplomatic history concerning the attainment of majority rule and independence in Zimbabwe. From the perspective of the early 1960s, many African nationalists believed that the British would assist them in the transition in ways similar to decolonization in Zambia and Nyasaland, but the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in November 1965 ended that possibility. The white minority government of Ian Smith imprisoned most of the African nationalist leaders in 1964, and it would not be another ten years until they were released to negotiate again. The ZANU–ZAPU split in 1963 was also a factor in the weakness of African nationalists, as was the continued animosity between the two parties as they tentatively commenced the armed struggle in the late 1960s. The rhetorical attacks flung back and forth in each party’s publications are examined, helping to demonstrate the historical animosities between the two factions.

This chapter continues to cover background context for the international diplomacy around Zimbabwe’s decolonization in the early 1970s. The emergence of Bishop Abel Muzorewa as a political leader is described. While Nkomo, Sithole, and Mugabe were still in detention, Muzorewa started a new political organization, the African National Council. Also discussed is the period of South African détente with the African nations of southern Africa, particularly Zambia. Failed Attempts to negotiate between Joshua Nkomo, Ndabaningi Sithole, and Ian Smith in 1974 are discussed, but the release of the nationalist leaders created new opportunities for political action. The attempt by the Frontline State presidentsto create unity between ZANU, ZAPU, FROLIZI, and the African National Council was solidified under the Lusaka Agreement of November 1974. Unity was elusive, however, as leadership battles were accentuated by the real fighting within ZANU’s forces, ZANLA, during the Nhari rebellion in late 1974. The divisions in ZANU were exacerbated by the assassination of ZANU leader in exile, Herbert Chitepo, in April 1975. The impact of these events are discussed, as is the growing concern by the Americans that the Soviets and Cubans would soon be in a position to better support the Zimbabwean liberation movements.

This chapter examines the ways in which the Geneva conference of late 1976, as the culmination of American efforts to push forward with majority rule talks, failed to reach any meaningful results. Part of the failure had to do with the end of President Ford’s administration and the end of Secretary of State Henry Kissinger’s role in the Rhodesia crisis. Much of the chapter analyzes the diplomatic roles of Robert Mugabe and Joshua Nkomo, and how they interacted with American, British, and African diplomats and leaders during the conference. The Zairian leader Mobutu was also involved in assessing the African leaders, and his observations of Mugabe and Nkomo are discussed. The chapter shows how Mugabe managed to make the most of the otherwise failed Geneva talks to solidify his leadership role in ZANU, and how after the conference, he and ZANLA leader Tongogara removed the ZIPA leaders by having them imprisoned in Mozambique in early 1977. The chapter also examines British, American, South African, and Rhodesian views of the future prospects of the Zimbabwean nationalist leaders.

This chapter sets the stage for the diplomatic history concerning the attainment of majority rule and independence in Zimbabwe. From the perspective of the early 1960s, many African nationalists believed that the British would assist them in the transition in ways similar to decolonization in Zambia and Nyasaland, but the Unilateral Declaration of Independence in November 1965 ended that possibility. The white minority government of Ian Smith imprisoned most of the African nationalist leaders in 1964, and it would not be another ten years until they were released to negotiate again. The ZANU–ZAPU split in 1963 was also a factor in the weakness of African nationalists, as was the continued animosity between the two parties as they tentatively commenced the armed struggle in the late 1960s. The rhetorical attacks flung back and forth in each party’s publications are examined, helping to demonstrate the historical animosities between the two factions.

This chapter continues to cover background context for the international diplomacy around Zimbabwe’s decolonization in the early 1970s. The emergence of Bishop Abel Muzorewa as a political leader is described. While Nkomo, Sithole, and Mugabe were still in detention, Muzorewa started a new political organization, the African National Council. Also discussed is the period of South African détente with the African nations of southern Africa, particularly Zambia. Failed Attempts to negotiate between Joshua Nkomo, Ndabaningi Sithole, and Ian Smith in 1974 are discussed, but the release of the nationalist leaders created new opportunities for political action. The attempt by the Frontline State presidentsto create unity between ZANU, ZAPU, FROLIZI, and the African National Council was solidified under the Lusaka Agreement of November 1974. Unity was elusive, however, as leadership battles were accentuated by the real fighting within ZANU’s forces, ZANLA, during the Nhari rebellion in late 1974. The divisions in ZANU were exacerbated by the assassination of ZANU leader in exile, Herbert Chitepo, in April 1975. The impact of these events are discussed, as is the growing concern by the Americans that the Soviets and Cubans would soon be in a position to better support the Zimbabwean liberation movements.

This chapter begins with the case of Zambia under the rule of Kenneth Kaunda, a regime that became increasingly centered on urban consumers as a crucial base of support.As expected by my theory of urban bias in closed autocracies, the Zambian regime pursued a number of cheap food policies, particularly for maize, the staple crop.Yet, as the fiscal costs of these programs began to mount, the government repeatedly proved unwilling to remove such food subsidies, even under increasing pressure from the IMF, culminating in default on Zambia's debt after a major protest triggered by attempts to limit food subsidies.Yet, this over-riding concern for urban consumers is contrasted against the strong state support for rural agriculturalists in the Malaysian case, where the dominant UMNO regime relied on turnout of rural supermajorities to maintain rule in a system of electoral autocracy.While still sensitive to urban costs of living, at no point did Malaysian policy become overwhelmingly biased towards one geographic area; when faced with fiscal crisis in the 1980s, this also eased the ability of the government to reform a series of burdensome state programs and avoid default.