Zimbabwe and sanctions

Cardinal Wilfrid Napier’s call on the South African government to consider imposing “intelligent sanctions” on Zimbabwe’s Mugabe regime is timely. Alas, his appeal will inevitably fall on deaf ears.

It is becoming increasingly evident that the Mbeki government is not only failing to apply pressure on the President Robert Mugabe to restore a culture of human rights in Zimbabwe, but that Mr Mbeki’s African National Congress is colluding with Mr Mugabe’s Zanu-PF party. Recent revelations in the Sunday Times seem to support this view.

It is ironic that South Africa’s accomplishment of a peaceful transition to democracy should be accompanied by the collapse of human rights and democracy in Zimbabwe. Mr Mbeki’s government has exhibited a puzzling degree of tolerance for the degeneration of our neighbouring country, and a callous disregard for Zimbabweans who are subjected to torture, intimidation and starvation.

Mr Mbeki’s “quiet diplomacy” has not only failed to alleviate matters, but has contributed to the country’s political and economic erosion.

All the while, Mr Mugabe’s tactics of torture and intimidation and even alleged murder have succeeded in emasculating the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC), and in unnerving many other political opponents. As a result, the MDC is unlikely to present a formidable electoral threat in next year’s parliamentary elections.

One opponent who shows no sign of letting up is Archbishop Pius Ncube who received death threats from Zanu-PF thugs back in 1999, before the political crisis in his country became acute.

In a sign that Archbishop Ncube’s witness has found favour in the Holy See, Pope John Paul has appointed Bishop Robert Ndlovu as archbishop of Harare.

Bishop Ndlovu succeeds the late Archbishop Patrick Chakaipa, who was seen by many as having been too indulgent of Mr Mugabe. The archbishop-elect of Harare has no reputation of being a political firebrand, and is seen as friend of the powerless. Mr Mugabe reportedly has taken exception to the appointment of Bishop Ndlovu, a Ndebele, to the largely Shona archdiocese of Harare, absurdly accusing Pope John Paul himself of partiality.

Of course, the Church has a mandate to be partial when it observes gross abuses of justice. Those who fail to oppose such abuses risk becoming complicit in them.

Bishop Ndlovu’s appointment therefore must not be seen as a boon to Mr Mugabe’s political opposition, but as a sign from the Holy See that the Zimbabwean Church shall not be regarded as being tolerant of abuses of justice. Likewise, Pope John Paul’s trenchant criticism of Zimbabwe’s government in an address to that country’s ambassador last year served to make clear the Holy See’s concern at the events in Zimbabwe.

Time will tell whether the shift of balance within the Zimbabwean bishops’ conference will result in an invitation to other bishops’ conferences, such as that of Southern Africa, to comment on the crisis directly. Certainly, Bishop Ndlovu’s appointment will have emboldened other bishops’ conferences that their unease with Mr Mugabe has found an echo in the Holy See.

In the meantime, Church leaders in South Africa must continue to speak out, where possible, on the Zimbabwe crisis, and challenge the Mbeki government’s lack of a coherent response to it.

Human rights abuses in Zimbabwe are as intolerable as were those committed under apartheid.