Best services for writing your paper according to Trustpilot
Ever since the independence of Zimbabwe in 1980, it has become a violent, chaotic, and unstable country.Zimbabwe's President Mugabe is a tyrannical leader, murdering both black and white farmers while promising a “Commitment to restore the rule of law to the process of land reform.”Before Zimbabwe's independence, however, Britain ruled a pretty-much cooperative land, where violence was only found when the Queen was forced to oppress negative uprisings by radicals that would only hurt their country.The road to Zimbabwe's independence was long and suffering, but to the British government I pose this question:is the aftermath of gaining independence worth all of that?As a concerned Zimbabwean citizen, I believe not, and I think that it would not only be in Zimbabwe's best interest to regain the aide of a stable nation, but Britain would gain the natural resource-rich land in southern Africa.This volatile and self-destructive nation needs reform, something that has been falsely promised to the Zimbabweans since Mugabe became president.Although it is argued that the natives' culture and traditions will be rid of with colonisation, Britain should have no interest in that, only reforming the government and bringing the economy to a stable pace.It is imperative that Britain re-colonise Zimbabwe for major political, economic, and social reasons: Zimbabwe's leader is a tyrant who misleads and mistreats his people, the Zimbabwean economy is less then adequate and needs a boost to support the country, and the natives need reform so they may better their standard of living.
Starting in 1889, the British South Africa Company controlled the colony of Rhodesia under a royal charter.During the 1920's and 30's, labour issues between the white and blacks in Rhodesia led to violent rebellion and the emergence of African political parties.In 1953 the Southern Rhodesia colony became part of the …