Zimbabwe after Mugabe

by Editor · April 11, 2007

Only the most deluded apologists for Robert Mugabe would dispute that his regime is facing several inextricable crises.

At home, hungry and frustrated Zimbabweans have, in the words of their Catholic bishops, an �anger [that] is now erupting into open revolt�. Internationally even those who have hitherto tolerated Mr Mugabe�s antics have come to realise that his regime cannot be sustained any longer. Even within his Zanu-PF there are tensions about the future of the party�s leader, who once was so unfailingly revered.

While recent protests have galvanised the opposition, it is not certain that an uprising against Mr Mugabe will follow. The government�s brutal response to recent protests will likely have some deterrent effect on a traditionally quiescent population.

Indeed, a popular revolution to topple Mr Mugabe, attractive though it may seem, would not be the best resolution to the crisis. It could create the sort of power vacuum that ignites civil wars. This, obviously, would not benefit the already distressed people of Zimbabwe, nor be in the interest of the country�s neighbours.

South Africa�s quiet diplomacy policy, though rightly derided for its long record of conspicuous impotence, presumably took into account the potential consequences of life in Zimbabwe after more than a quarter of a century of Mr Mugabe�s rule.

The Southern African Development Community (SADC) at their meeting last month in Dar es Salaam mandated President Thabo Mbeki to mediate in the Zimbabwean crisis.

While the prospect of some political will by the region�s leaders on Zimbabwe (even if cloaked in a disturbing farce designed to save Mr Mugabe�s face) is to be welcomed, it is shameful that it should have taken the region�s leaders so long to address this humanitarian crisis, one borne out of arrogance, ignorance, greed and plain malfeasance.

It is self-evident, surely even to South Africa�s government, that Mr Mugabe has to go, and soon. The question can no longer be whether he should go, but how his exit can be managed, and what form the next government will take. No doubt South Africa has a plan in mind, formulated over the many years since Mr Mugabe�s regime became indefensible.

There is little time to lose in finding a resolution. The effects of Zimbabwe�s free-falling economy are acute, with a country once regarded as �Africa�s breadbasket� now enduring hunger and starvation.

Already thousands of refugees are escaping the hell of their home country for the sanctuary of South Africa, a country that is however ill-equipped to absorb them.

The longer a settlement to the crisis is deferred, the more strife Zimbabweans will experience, and the greater the detriment to South Africa. If the Mbeki government showed little concern about the rape of democracy and human rights under Mr Mugabe�s direction, then surely the effects of the situation on South Africa should motivate a speedy mediation.

Civil society, including the churches, must not be averse to reminding Mr Mbeki forcefully of his great obligation towards justice and peace in Zimbabwe, regional stability, and the welfare of South Africa.

A negotiated exit of Mr Mugabe would necessarily need to be followed by a government of national unity, which must be tasked with introducing full and accountable democracy to a country long infested with political corruption and factionalism.

South Africa�s committed, constructive and impartial role, and that of other countries, in advancing this long process will be crucial�and a suitable way to make amends for the region�s scandalous betrayal of the people of Zimbabwe.