Is a coup the best Zimbabwe can hope for?
James Forsyth 8:00pm
Paul Collier, the noted Oxford economist who used to be at the World Bank, has a thought-provoking piece in The Washington Post today arguing that the best, realistic solution to problems like Zimbabwe is a coup. Here’s the nub of his argument:
So how can the grossly excessive powers of the Mugabes and Shwes of the world be curtailed? After Iraq, there is no international appetite for using the threat of military force to pressure thugs. But only military pressure is likely to be effective; tyrants can almost always shield themselves from economic sanctions. So there is only one credible counter to dictatorial power: the country's own army.Realistically, Mugabe and Shwe can be toppled only by a military coup. Of course, they are fully aware of this danger, and thus have appointed their cronies as generals and kept a watchful eye on any potentially restless junior officers. Such tactics reduce the risk of a coup, but they cannot eliminate it: On average, there have been two successful coups per year in the developing world in recent decades. A truly bad government in a developing country is more likely to be replaced by a coup than by an election:
...
In contexts such as Zimbabwe and Burma, coups should be encouraged because they are likely to lead to improved governance. (It's hard to imagine things getting much worse.)
Collier thinks that what the international community has to work out is some way to guide coups, to create an international trigger mechanism for them. Collier accepts that the United Nations is not likely to be much use in this regard; too many dictatorial regimes would be wary of the precedent it would set. So he suggests that the EU should withdraw recognition from regimes that breach certain basic norms for three months at a time, to provide a window of opportunity for action.
Obviously, a coup is far from ideal solution. Once a country—and particularly, its military—develops this habit it is very hard to break out of it. But in both Zimbabwe and Burma there is no international appetite for intervention and the regimes have such little contempt for the welfare of their own citizens that economic sanctions are not that effective. One wonders what other potential solutions there are.
Previous
Comments
John Page
June 22nd, 2008 8:45pmIsn't there a wee problem with this? We're being told that Mugabe is now the front for a military régime. And Peter Oborne said that armaments from that Chinese ship had arrived, so they have plenty of weapons. Who would instigate this coup?
Trumpeter Lanfried
June 22nd, 2008 9:52pmThe extraordinary thing, to my mind, is that some Zimbabweans, say 20 or 30%, did vote for Mugabe, in the teeth of an obvious melt down. Not all of them could have been coerced. They actually voted for chaos, repression and poverty. And now the country reaps what they have sown.
Water
June 22nd, 2008 10:09pmAs Collier stated “Of course, when we say "the government of Zimbabwe," what we really mean is President Robert Mugabe” hence an initial step would be to have him shot (by means extrinsic or otherwise). Though long term change could only be insured by characters intrinsic to the states make up, short term change on the other hand only requires assassination. A coup is what is required but looking at how things stand it’s not likely to come about. Sever the head and the body will weaken at the very least, such a weakness lays way for potential coups to take place. This said though severing the head might be a good idea coups are things not to be taken on likely for as you state they have a tendency to gestate in the manner detailed.
Anan
June 22nd, 2008 10:11pmOh my god! For the last time James, we don't care about Zimbabwe!!!!!!
Augustus
June 22nd, 2008 11:31pmAccording to the Sunday Telegraph, a coup in Zimbabwe is already under way, as it reports that Britain has named six ruling individuals who took over the running of the bloodstained election campaign to keep Mugabe in power. Two are civilians, and two are military chiefs, together with the police and prisons chiefs. It is also possible that a handover of power is on the cards, as Emmerson Mnangagwa, one of the above civilians (the other is Gideon Gono, the governor of the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe) and who is head of the Joint Operational Command (JOC), is reputed to be Mugabe's favoured successor as President.
This may not be a coup in the full military takeover sense, but it is a coup in so far as the country has been, and is being, run under a military exercise rather than under a civilian process.
No doubt this strategy will remain in place for some time, and this network of cronies appears to all intents and purposes so rigidly in control of the country that, in Zimbabwe's case at least, a coup from within by other ranks in terms of a power struggle would need a tremendous effort of clandestine planning if it ever were to get off the ground. As far as an outside takeover by force is concerned, this is the least likely of all scenarios because (a) colonialism is dead, and (b) Communism prefers to negotiate commercially and prop up rogue regimes that way in Africa, rather than by direct intervention.
The only hope for democratic regime change remains a chipping away at the Zanu-PF mismanagement by the MDC, who must endeavour to use every political opportunity to convince enough Zanu-PF politicians to put their country before their party, and not let it become a pawn of Chinese exploitation.
molesworth 1
June 23rd, 2008 12:05amI think the Chinese turned Zimbabwe 'Burmese' some time ago, and it has only just now become apparent to us, the General Public. It is just another current political friction that throws up the ubiquitous watershed query "Well, what do we do about the Chinese?"
To which policy areas does this not apply?
Water
June 23rd, 2008 4:17amAugustus I noticed this as well though according to the below site they were stopped, thus it wasn't succesful. Only a full aggressive ensaulght seems to be the effective route.
http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/7200,features,zimbabwe-coup-nipped-in-the-bud
Sally S
June 23rd, 2008 4:28amAugustus that didn't work, it would need to be successful before I'd call it a coup in the sense context mentioned. Water, as much as I hate to admit it, killing him maybe the only way.
Jo
June 23rd, 2008 6:13amGun boat diplomacy is a bit dated, isn't it?
If Britain intends to be a world power broker, it has to show that it understands all sides of a conflict.
A genuine apology from Britain would go a long way to restore its relationship with Africa.
Fergus Pickering
June 23rd, 2008 8:46amSorry, Jo. What is Britain apologizing about, exactly? And to whom?
Paul L
June 23rd, 2008 11:21amStill nothing from Mandela? Tut tut. Even Peter Hain has had his say (which was as rich as his tan).
TomTom
June 23rd, 2008 11:31am"A genuine apology from Britain would go a long way to restore its relationship with Africa."
You are so right...if only we had not de-colonised these people could have proper government and economic prosperity....and we would not be such a mess in Britain because we would have pride.
If only the hand-wringing liberal elites had not delivered Africans into tribal tyranny...yes, British liberals should apologise on their bended knees
Augustus
June 23rd, 2008 11:43amWater, if you look again at the article which you mention in First Post you will see that it was dated (at the end) June 7, 2007. In fact I was referring to the 'top brass' military takeover of the country designed to smooth the way for a Mugabe victory, not an attempt at insurrection as that attempt seems to have been.
However, most people would agree that you are right to say that agression should be met with agression. The question is though, who polices Africa if not the Africans themselves?
Water
June 23rd, 2008 1:24pmAugustus
The first post article states that the actions then "resulted in the arrest of three senior military officers. Another 400 junior soldiers are believed to have been detained" thus the top brass were involved, if you class senior officers as top brass as I do.
But you are right about the date at 4:17am this was not noticed. Though I'm glad you see most people would agree with me. I would say that the Africans need to police Africa. Indeed they do at the moment, it’s a question of who policies in Zim. Though, like a lamb trapped in barb wire certain things may need to be snipped before they can control freely and righteously.
Ted Tedford
June 23rd, 2008 1:41pmAugustus: I doubt there is much appetite in ZPF for putting country before party. There's little evidence that they view public service in the way that would be necessary for such an appeal to work. Plus if they stand down, they'll be arrested, tried and, if they're lucky, executed. If they're unlucky, they'll get all of the above plus a really long kicking beforehand.
Guy Incognito
June 23rd, 2008 1:48pmJo: "Britain's relationship with Africa"? Good point. Maybe we could summon the African ambassador to King Charles St and hand the apology over in person. Or we could send a diplomatic mission to the African ministry of foreign affairs. And we could ask the African government what we should write about. I expect their foreign secratary could tell us. They might even have a website we could consult: like www.mfa.gov.afr/imperialistapology
Sarcasm might be the lowest form of wit, but it's also the most obvious when confronted with such silly comments.
Roy
June 23rd, 2008 4:19pmAssassinate him and let the henchmen die fighting each other.
jeanrenoir
June 24th, 2008 4:11pmJohn Page is right. There's about as much chance of a successful coup against Mugabe as there was against Stalin or Mao. No, the world will simply have to watch in agonized disbelief at the bottomless evil of African elites and dictators, as in Rwanda, the Congo, Sierra Leone, Darfur, the list goes on. On a per capita basis, human evil has never been greater anywhere than in African dictatorships, considering the relatively tiny populations they control. Naipaul got it right on the heart of African darkness, as they prove on the ground, day after agonizing day.