Peter Oborne: We have a duty to protect Zimbabwe

Fergus Pickering

It's very simple. There will be no UN intervention in Africa against a black government. Not ever. Or not until we treat black people as equal and therefore equal in guilt. Mugabe should (obviously, obviously) be tried, condemned and executed for war crimes, which (I presume) is what would have happened to Milosevich had not death intervened. Is he worse than Milo? Of course he is.

Hysteria

it's all just so depressing.......

Bradley Silberman

It would be good to hear what Nelson Mandela thinks of the plight of Zimbabwe and its despotic dictator? Does he care? I hope so. It would be great if he would speak out on the injustices in Zimbabwe as so many did on his behalf.

Chuck Unsworth

I often agree with Oborne's views. However this is one occasion where I question his logic. 'We have a duty to protect Zimbabwe'?

Why?

And, more importantly, How?

And, speaking purely pragmatically, What with?

It is time that the African nations grew up and took steps themselves to deal with Mugabe and his ilk. That is, of course, if the African nations are serious about 'Democracy'. If they are not, then we should no longer provide aid.

But I doubt that many politicians are prepared to take such a stance - certainly not this cringing, hand-wringing, grovelling and obsequious excuse for a Foreign Secretary.

George Steiner

You and whose army?

RW

Time to face reality? the former Colonies have consistently shown themselves incapable of self-government. That, of course, is why we took them over in the first place.

Anan

RW we "took them over" (more like invaded, slaughtered and subdued) for their resources and their strategic locations, not because they were finding it hard to govern themselves. How can African "countries" govern themselves when they were mostly collections of mud huts near streams, with no recognised borders except tribal boundaries? What an idiotic statement from a pompous fool.

With regard to Mugabe etc., why is the opposition now planning on withdrawing from the second round? Maybe they are scared they will lose? I don't buy the BBC line on most of the issues they cover, and therefore I am at pains to actually give full support to the opposition. Who knows, he could end up just being Mugabe junior, as usually happens in these failed states.

I agree totally with Chuck. My main focus would be on this part: Why should we?

I think the politicians do realise that the situation in Africa is hopeless with the current Western policies towards the continent. They are stupid idiots mostly, but they aren't that stupid.

However it always sits well with the militant left and ecofascists of the mainstream media and "NGOs" and lobby groups if Western politicians can appear next to some disease-ridden malnourished African village and say that one of their top three aims as leader is to help Africa. And this all makes the population at large also feel that they are nice, caring, kind human beings. Ridiculous.

Tell them to develop themselves, or cut aid. And aid should be purely in the form of infrastructure and education, not money to be transferred directly from our pockets here into the Swiss bank accounts of a few politicians there.

P.S. Then again, that's exactly what happens here with our money and politicians anyway isn't it. I guess we have that in common. Out with Zanu-NuLabour!

Verity

Chuck Unsworth and Anan - I agree with every word you wrote.

The best option for Zimbabwe is for an opposition politician to suddenly remember that he is a second cousin, or similar, of Barack Obama.

Then he should move in for help really fast, during the short window of opportunity of Obama figuring the odds of supporting this "cousin" and then deciding to throw him under the bus.

Frank Pulley

Yes, let Saint Mandela speak and all will be peace, love and light! Pray to St John Lennon and he will smile down upon thee. Wow-wow ... wow-wow-ahh ...

When are you people going to learn what totalitarian communism is all about? How many more major atrocities have to be committed in the name of 'social justice' and 'escaping the yoke of imperialism' before you realise what 'by all means necessary' really entails. Mandela transmogrified into the velvet glove after trying out the 'freedom fighter' gig, Mugabe is the iron fist inside it. Both their countries are now basket-cases. We're such pushovers in this country now. Our forebears created one of the most benign and successful (comparatively speaking) Empires in human history, the postwar generations have pissed it down the drain.

You'll have to wait for the grim reaper to sort Mugabe, but don't expect a replacement that won't follow the same ultimate path - communism and corruption equals totalitarianism. We surrendered in Southern Rhodesia; now live with it. Let's just make sure that we don't surrender to either Islamism or the EUSSR, because we are on the brink of doing so to both. Think of Mugabe and look ahead at what may be if we surrender yet again. That's where are 'duty' lies. Always supposing anyone can define that word in today's lexicon of crass stupidity.

Verity

PS- For those who haven't been keeping up, the Kenyan "cousin", Raila, is now sharing the space under the bus with Obama's mother and Rev Wright.

Tankus

sod it

Cut all money to Africa , and just sell them our arms cast offs ...at a discount

The bulk of the money just goes into the corrupt regimes pocket's anyways

Just arm the hungry and oppressed

job done ...

and it sorts itself ...eventually

Anan

Benign empire? British? I think you are forgetting some major, brutal slaughters of occupied peoples both in Africa and in Asia by the Brits of the past few centuries. That is probably where the hate and anger comes from now. And successful? Well for the British yes, but not for anyone else in the colonies.

But don't get me wrong, Africa's troubles now are mostly of their own creation. 40 years is more than enough time to sort out your country.

Frank Pulley

Anan

> "Well for the British yes, but not for anyone else in the colonies."<

To the victor the spoils! Moreover all the colonies benefited ultimately from the civil structures and rule of law that eventually replaced the barbarisms of many of the indigenous tribes.

What I'm now suggesting is that we don't become the losers here in our own native land and then have our future generations despising us and feeling 'anger' for not repelling those who would to take over our country and our culture and impose their own. We have returned Africa back to its ancient native populations. That's what they wanted. Let them get on with it; we should not be paying for the perceived sins of our forefathers, nor the manifest weakness of theirs. And certainly not for the wickedness and corruption of a man like Mugabe.

Let's see how Africa fares under the Chinese Empire, which is currently annexing it at an exponential rate of knots. Perhaps ere long they will realise how well off they were under benign nineteenth and twentieth century British rule, notwithstanding the historical incidents to which you refer.
I realise this is a self-interested attitude, but I make no apologies. It seems to me that every other bugger is entitled to self-interest but the English.

Verity

Nothwithstanding a few truly atypical instances, the British Empire was the most benign empire in the history of the human race, and left a rock solid legal infrastructure, an international language for trade and law, and a physical infrastructure in terms of roads, railways and bridges.

I am not trashing your argument, but nevertheless, I have personally been thanked several times in India for the fact that we drew the country together and made it one, that we united them with a universal system of law and left a language which also united them and facilitated international trade. As in, all the major newspapers in India are in English, and most literate people are able to read them. Practically all major advertising is in English.

We also supplied the template for a successful armed forces - and India is second to none today.

Please don't imagine I am denying that any wrongs took place. Of course, I am not. But we left India a more united, and much stronger country than we found it.

If that twerp Mohanandas Gandhi hadn't infiltrated his loopy socialist ideas into Nehru's head, and Indira Gandhi's head, India today would rival the United States in power and wealth. It still will in around another 30 years ... the 30 years the Mahatama and the Gandhis pere et fille wasted.

Verity

PS- I realise Nehru was Nehru, not a Gandhi and that Gandhi was Indira's married name,no relation to the home weaving advocate.

Kiffa

Anand I agree with you that the colonial 'whites' did dehumanise and humiliate Africans.
But what Africans really, really, do have to get their heads round, is that AS WELL as being deeply hurtful (what whites have to take responsibility for) it WAS a reaction to a fault line in Africans (what blacks have to take responsibility for). And that fault line was - AND REMAINS - the absolutist response of Africans to power. The peepol give their leedas far far too much respect and unquestioning loyalty, and the leedas turn into tyrants - with the sole and honourable exception of Sir Seretse Khama of Botswana, in my opinion the best politician Africa has produced (as well as Jan Smuts and Nelson Mandela) - and whose country, suprise: works.
What Western liberals never got, is that absolutist response happens in any position of responsibility: postal worker, nurse, policeman, president (For Life). That isn't the fault of whites [who responded by denying access power completely], it IS the fault of Africans.