Zimbabwe Information Center in North America
A project of the North American Coalition for a Free Zimbabwe (NACFREEZ)
HOME Human Rights Watch Zimsite Independent Standard ZimbDaily Kubatana GoZimbabwe ZimOnline ZimSituation MDC
Letter from America
April 21,2008
Security Council must impose targeted sanctions against Zimbabwe
ZANUPF president, Robert Mugabe, has proved beyond any reasonable doubt that he and his cronies have absolutely no intention of handing over power, even if they lose elections as happened three weeks ago.
Mugabe laid out a long time ago a meticulous plan that was bound to ensure he would stay in power regardless of the results of the elections.
The withholding of presidential election results, and attempts to recount the votes from some disputed areas are a clear evidence that Mugabe ‘s plans were:
Plan A. Rig the elections and win as in previous years.
Plan B. If this fails, create excuses not to release the results immediately, or order a recount.
Plan C. Bring in the military and terrorize people to such an extent that there will be no mass protests.
Mugabe and ZANUPF have now completed, or are in the process of, completing, all the three plans. This will ensure that Mugabe and ZANUPF retain power for another five years.
Conscious of the international protest and pressures on him, Mugabe has resorted to some public relations gimmicks.
He and ZANUPF have included constituencies where ZANUPF won among the so-called contested seats requiring a recount. In two constituencies, MDC victory has been upheld, in one seat with an increased majority.
He has now ordered a recount in which MDC as well as SADC observers have been invited to participate in the recount.
The good news is no one, except ZANUPF, is buying this trick.
The opposition movement had broken the rigging system and won the elections by a wide margin. All that remained was for Mugabe to concede defeat so MDC president Tsvangirai could be declared the new president of Zimbabwe.
The refusal by Mugabe to concede defeat, or to step down, was a blunt message to Zimbabwe and the world that, elections or no elections, Mugabe has absolutely no intention of giving up power.
Mugabe and his top officials have consolidated their stranglehold of the country by sheer force of military power. This means that, theoretically, only military force will dislodge Mugabe and ZANUPF from power.
And there are, indeed, many who are now talking of an armed struggle to defeat Mugabe and ZANUPF.
Mugabe himself, more than anyone or anything else, is provoking a violent confrontation. This will give him the excuse he badly needs to wipe out the opposition. Mugabe is itching to unleash the full power of the military. But he needs an excuse to do so. If only the opposition movement can respond with violence then all hell will break loose. Right now he has earned for himself the image a bully who beats, tortures and harasses innocent people.
However, in this age of diplomacy and economic sanctions, there is an alternative to a violent retribution against Mugabe.
The whole world is now standing up against Mugabe. Condemnations are coming from all corners of the world.
Friends and sympathizers of the embattled Zimbabweans are growing in numbers, strength and action.
Even Thabo Mbeki, the South African president who has proved to be a stumbling block more than a mediator, is facing opposition from his own ranks for the way he has handled the Zimbabwean situation. One of the most significant breaks with Mbeki was the ruling African National Council’s decision to bypass Mbeki and be directly involved in Zimbabwe.
South African civil society and unions are also showing growing impatience with Mbeki.
The 300,000-strong South African Transport and Allied Workers Union (SATAWU) recently refused to unload weapons from a Chinese ship because the weapons were destined for Zimbabwe. This was after Mbeki had cleared the shipment.
Not long ago, Mbeki said there was “no crisis” in Zimbabwe!
Now, fully aware of the genocidal campaign Mugabe is waging against the opposition movement where hundreds of people have been beaten and tortured; at least five people killed and thousands have had their homes destroyed, Mbeki has cleared a ship that is carrying 72 tones of arms. He is well aware that Zimbabwe is not at war against any of its neighbors. The conflict in Zimbabwe is a war Mugabe has declared against Zimbabweans. And Mbeki is alright with the shipment whose weapons will end up killing Zimbabweans!
The greatest irony of it all is the same Mbeki has been mandated by SADC to continue his mediating efforts in Zimbabwe. What exactly is Mbeki mediating? He is fully and squarely on the side of Mugabe.
When he chaired the United Nations Security Council, Mbeki even opposed bringing the Zimbabwean situation on the agenda. At the SADC summit last week Mbeki took a fanatically pro-Mugabe position.
No wonder Mugabe decided not to go to Lusaka. He was confident he was well represented by Mbeki!
However, in fairness to Mbeki, it has to be acknowledged that Mbeki has no legal or constitutional obligation to help Zimbabweans. But when he agreed to mediate the Zimbabwean crisis, he made himself duty-bound to be a fair broker.
Zimbabweans expected Mbeki to call a spade a spade and use all his diplomatic leverage to bring about a consensus between Mugabe and the MDC. Whether he was going to adopt a loud or quiet diplomacy, Mbeki should have put in place mechanisms for evaluating his strategies as well as a timeline for the realization of his objectives.
If these objectives were not achieved within the given timeline, Mbeki should have reviewed his strategy and looked at ways of improving his diplomatic and mediating efforts.
Or, he should simply have thrown in the towel and told the world he could not continue.
Instead , Mbeki deceived Zimbabweans into thinking all was well in the negotiations, as he always stated. Well, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. When it came to test his diplomatic achievements in implementing the so called agreed provisions for elections, Mbeki fell far short.
Even as recently as last week, and knowing fully well there was a crisis in Zimbabwe, Mbeki merely repeated the same old cliché that there was no crisis in the country.
MDC president, Morgan Tsvangirai, and the Zimbabwean public were justified in asking that Mbeki be relieved of these duties as a mediator.
Given the fact that Mugabe and the army chiefs have clearly stated that they are determined to stay in power regardless of the outcome of the elections, what is the point of holding recounts re-runs or run-offs?
What if Tsvangirai wins? Will Mugabe step down? Why should he? He did not step down three weeks ago when his mandate to rule Zimbabwe ended.
MDC has always hoped that, notwithstanding the rigging of elections, there will come a day when they would at last win. It happened on March 29. That hope is gone now. In any future elections ZANUPF under Mugabe will not give up power regardless of the outcome.
If participating in elections was MDC’s Plan A then MDC needs Plan B. This plan requires a paradigm shift away from the thinking that elections are the only option MDC has.
Time has come to think of the unthinkable or strategies that may have been a taboo in the past.
First, MDC should not wait for Mugabe to concede defeat because that will never happen. MDC knows, and has evidence that was verified by Mugabe’s own polling officials, that it won both the parliamentary and presidential elections.
In the plain language of the democratic theory, legitimacy comes from the people. It follows that MDC is now the legitimate government of Zimbabwe. Tsvangirai is now the legitimate president of Zimbabwe. Mugabe cannot take this fact away.
Mugabe is no longer a legitimate president. When former Bishop Kunonga was removed from office but continued to occupy the Cathedral, the new bishop did not wait for Kunonga to concede defeat. Instead, the new bishop held his inauguration at another venue.
Likewise Tsvangirai should form a government –in-exile and appoint a cabinet that will start work on policy issues as well as lobbying the international community.
With the sympathy of the international community the MDC government-in-exile can open information offices in strategic countries and start to build relationships as well as work on projects that will benefit the post-Mugabe Zimbabwe.
The question of sanctions is a very sensitive subject. But a new debate on this topic should begin.
On Friday, December 23, 1966, the United Nations Security Council imposed sanctions against Rhodesia. The case against the rebel prime minister of Rhodesia, Ian Smith, was he had denied the black majority their right to a one- person- one –vote and that all diplomatic efforts to resolve this situation had failed.
In other words, sanctions were imposed against Rhodesia because the Smith regime had created conditions that triggered their imposition. The sanctions received widespread international support, including among the oppressed Zimbabweans.
Smith’s claim that sanctions hurt blacks more than white was met with scorn and ridicule. Sanctions at the time were seen as one way of fighting against Smith and Zimbabweans were prepared to sacrifice if in the end this would bring about their liberation.
Today Mugabe has created the very same, if not worse, conditions. Zimbabweans are suffering a lot more today than ever before in their history. By refusing to accept the March 29 election results Mugabe has, in fact, denied the majority of the people of Zimbabweans their right to vote for a candidate of their choice. The case for sanctions now is more compelling that ever before.
The argument that sanctions against Zimbabwe would hurt poor people more than Mugabe and his cronies was exactly the argument Smith used. What argument can be made in favor of sanction during the Smith regime and against sanction today under the iron heels of the Mugabe dictatorship?
It is time now that the United Nations Security Council imposed sanctions against Zimbabwe. The Security Council has a variety of targeted or smart sanctions that can be directed at the offending country’s top leadership. They include economic and trade sanctions, arms embargoes, travel bans and financial measures, such as freezing assets.
At least Zimbabweans should be able to discuss this matter as well as weigh other options they can use to be active and effective participants in their liberation.
