The UN is not the Holy See

Wednesday, 25th June 2008

The Spectator on intervening in Zimbabwe

The situation in Zimbabwe is intolerable: on that all decent people can agree. Robert Mugabe has turned the breadbasket of Africa into a wasteland. He has set his militia, his army and his police to beat, rape and kill his own people. He respects neither the results of any democratic ballot nor the norms of human decency. Neither pregnant women nor children are exempted from the brutality of his thugs.

The conclusion that something must be done is obvious. The question of what, precisely, is much trickier. The reports coming out of Zimbabwe have been so awful and the world’s response so feeble that there is an increasing clamour for Britain and America to intervene directly. We can sympathise with the sentiment behind this thinking — but a British- or American-led action would play into Mugabe’s hands. It would, sadly, justify in the eyes of many Africans his assertion that what is at stake in this election is Zimbabwe’s independence, and that the country’s problems are the result of a colonial conspiracy. It is, in any case, hard to see how Britain and America could mount an invasion of a landlocked country without the support of some of Zimbabwe’s neighbours. And Britain and America are already overstretched militarily, immersed in two conflicts that will entangle both nations for some time to come.

Equally, though, sanctions alone are not the answer. Economic penalties have no effect on a regime that has already scandalously squandered its country’s wealth and despises its citizens. ‘Smart’ sanctions targeted at the individuals perpetuating this reign of terror are a morally appealing option. However, they are only effective if these people leave Zimbabwe: the impact upon the relatives of Mugabe’s henchmen living overseas is a minor calculation.

1 | 2 | 3 Next page

Dwight Vandryver

June 27th, 2008 12:30am Report this comment

The situation in Zimbabwe is reprehensible, as all would agree. It's a hateful thing to have to say, but Zimbabwe has no strategic importance, either to the West or the East. Apart from gems and platinum, Zimbabwe does not possess the mineral wealth that most desire: oil. If it were a significant producer of oil, then long before now, it would have been declared part of the "axis of evil" and the troops would have rolled in to achieve "regime change". The Spectator may express high ideals about what should be done by other African states: however, the bottom line is that there is no "dollar value" in it.

leonard

June 29th, 2008 4:31am Report this comment

white man domination is coming to an end.

Roy

August 6th, 2008 10:37am Report this comment

Words, words, and more words, summing up and more summing up. We can almost recite, off by heart all that is said here. Once a country is handed over (like a daughter in past centuries) you take pot luck in how she is handled. A good essay could be written on how different could have been Britain's handing over of its responsibilities with this country, but no help would it be. Without the USA or a determined Britain, restoring order by intervention is out of the question. So we just wait and watch, decrying the uselessness of the UN, and the truculence of China and Russia. Mugabe will eventually pass away and new hope will arise. It will mainly be up to South Africa as the strong (hopefully friendly) neighbour in how that situation will correct itself.

Post comment