ABSTRACT
By the year 2000, after a decade of worsening national poverty, Zimbabwe's development crisis had deepened. It outlines the structural conditions established under Rhodesian colonialism and then concentrate on state economic controls under lan Smith, which in the skewed context proved valuable development tools. At Lancaster House, ascendant Western finance wrought a toll on Zimbabwean sovereignty, which ultimately set the road to economic liberalisation. Then turn to the global arena to assess the debate about SAPs with reference to African performance in the 1980s, which is then contrasted with the significant but threatened welfare advances delivered under Zimbabwean state-directed 'macro populism'. From the West, the common view among politicians, diplomats, aid organisations and the media is that Zimbabwe's crisis is due to poor governance. From Robert Rotberg's perspective, which typifies that of the West, resolution of the Zimbabwean crisis simply depends on replacing Mr Mugabe with a leader who respects 'good governance and sensible economic policy'.
