Written By: - Date published: 6:36 am, June 25th, 2008 - 77 comments
Categories: International -
Tags: defence, Unions, zimbabwe
There is no longer any hope the union-led Movement for Democratic Change can remove Mugabe from power peacefully. Now, his thugs are killing MDC supporters, union leaders have been arrested, and the regime is moving to break the organised labour. This is typical behaviour of a regime moving into totalitarianism the unions represent the largest political organisations outside of the State, as such, they are a barrier to absolute State power and must be eliminated. Things are shaping up to get much worse in Zimbabwe if Mugabe stays in power.
Military action seems to be the only option left. A smart campaign could be conducted relatively bloodlessly but it would have to be led by South Africa, the only country in the region with the standing and the military might to carry out such an action. And South Africa is showing no will to act.
A third of Zimbabwe’s population has left for South Africa, creating social unrest. South Africa’s unions have stood by the people of Zimbabwe against Mugabe; South African workers have refused to unload a shipment of Chinese arms bound for Mugabe’s regime. Yet, the South African government continues to protect Mugabe and refuses to act against him. The ANC is still unwilling to turn against a man who led an African freedom movement against white oppression.
It is time for South Africa’s leaders to face the face that their old ally has become the enemy they once fought against. It’s time for South Africa to remove him from power, and New Zealand should offer its support.
Facebook
Twitter
Scoopit!
Your up early this morning Steve ?
Yep it’s time to get over ‘colonialism’ and take action to protect the innocent.
I’ve been thinking the same thing.
I’d completely support NZ involvement. Doesn’t it require a UN mission to be approved though? China will presumably veto it, as always. What’s the solution?
Pressure China? They’re already in the bad books after conduct in Tibet – if they’re seen to be supporting a violent dictator for the sake of mineral rights then it will make global perceptions heading into the olympics pretty terrible.
Like “boycott” terrible.
Secondary alternative – assassinate Mugabe. He’s an immoral f*ck who’s displaced/killed thousands of people for personal gain, the world would be far better off without him. I guess it might not do much for internal stability…
Actually maybe that’d work. Charge him with crimes against humanity in the international court.
It was interesting to hear Zuma distancing the ANC from Zanu-PF this morning. Mugabe is a madman, and the international community MUST finally do something. I completely agree that South Africa should be at the forefront of any such action – Thabo Mbeke’s indifference to date has not been the response that a leader of his standing should have exhibited.
While we’re at it – let’s look to our own backyard.
Fiji.
where are the so called guardians of social justice the Greens on this issue
oh yes that right its not China America or Israel, its one of their socialist heroes a fighter for black African rights
their silence condemns them
I’ve said my piece about unilateral action over on Poneke, so I won’t repeat it here. Suffice to say that I think unilateral military intervention is a local benefit traded off against a global cost and is ultimately deleterious to world peace. Nothing to do with colonialism.
I entirely agree that all other sorts of pressure should be brought to bear, however, and preventing the importation of arms into Zimbabwe is a good start.
T-rex: Fiji is a difference in kind – not in degree – from Zimbabwe. Which isn’t to say it’s good, just that they can’t be bracketed (yet).
L
Lew – I want international law too, which is why I mentioned the UN above. Positive to see that the security council has finally taken a unanimous stance against Mugabe.
I liked both your and Serum’s posts.
I’m not advocating unilateral action, just NZ’s involvement in multilateral action.
Nor am I advocating going in and shooting everyone. Just going in and overseeing a fair election and the transfer of power thereafter. Although that sounds like Iraq in a way…
What’s the difference in Fiji? I thought it WAS just a matter of degree. Dissenters are imprisoned/killed, no free speech, no democratically elected government. Power siezed by Military coup (Mugabe first came to power in an election characterised by violence and intimidation… 28 years ago… so much for change from within). Foreign journalists arrested and tortured.
So not even really a matter of degree, just scale.
Topical much?
I suggest bringing int he private sector…
Bring on our buddies at blackwater inc.
“The boys cry out for war” Have you lot forgotten the bush wars?
Two wrongs don’t make a right. Which bloodbath do you prefer?
MikeE has the best solution though, contract it out, efficiency at a fixed price. Mercenaries did a much better job of keeping the peace in Sierra Leone than the UN ever did.
Mbeki has shat in his own nest. He supports one of the anti-colonialism heroes of yesteryear, despite the blazingly obvious, and the recent riots in South Africa have shown what a great idea it is to support a neighbouring tyrant.
Hopefully that will spur him into action, nothing else has.
SP: New Zealand should offer its support. Not it is support.
MikeE – why not send in the Gurkhas for some real irony?
Clinton
I agree 100%.
Sadly I expect the relevant powers (UN, SADC and South Africa) to spend several months wringing their hands and putting out press releases while Zimbabwe descends further into chaos.
A tragedy that a country which was once relatively wealthy, vibrant and served as the bread basket of southern africa is being raped by a man who appears to be either insane or perhaps just plain evil.
I have had the opportunity to discuss Zimbabwe with a high profile NZ’er with more than a passing interest in Human rights issues regarding that part of the world. I will not name him for his own privacy and because the comments made were not for the public. Suufice it to say he is well known and often contacted by the media on this issue.
This person would be regarded as a liberal, left leaning gentleman. In his opinion, Mugabe needs a bullet.
If you can, there are 2 books that anyone interested in Zimbabwe and the politics of the country should read. Both are by the same author, Peter Godwin. They are ‘Mukiwa, a white boy in Africa’ and ‘When a Crocodile eats the Sun’
So multilateral military action to remove a dictatorial, murderous, oppressive, corrupt regime that operates at the expense of its own citizens who are fleeing the terror, is justified?
I happen to agree. It’s a pity that you, Steve, aren’t consistent. Because Saddam was many degrees worse than Mugabe. Yet you were opposed to multilateral military action in Iraq.
T-rex: Dinosaur Comic for the win!
I think Fiji could turn into a Zimbabwe, but it isn’t there yet. There are as yet only isolated reports of military or police brutality and in general it’s not clear it’s sanctioned – it could simply be the result of a lack of oversight of the forces. I tend to take a cautious line on such things – yes, abuses are bad, but overreaction tends to be worse. Let’s see how things slice after election day. Happily, multilateral diplomatic and political pressure is being brought to bear on Fiji in a way it hasn’t been in Zimbabwe.
Matthew: I agree entirely about Mbeki. He missed his chance to join the political first world.
L
skeptic
The largest mistake on the Iraq front was that the coalition didn’t remove (assassinate) Saddam during/just after the Kuwait conflict.
Disagree that Saddam was worse than Mugabe.
He was an evil dictator absolutely, but the Iraq economy wasn’t the basket case that Zimbabwe is, the population was educated and there was reasonable healthcare and food for the population.
slightlyrightly – CL is correct on the bullet front
coge. That some military actions are wrong does not mean all military actions are wrong.
I think Fiji would be another kettle of fish to Zimbabwe as a military campaign. Fiji has a very experienced army, thanks to it’s practice of having 1000 on UN peacekeeping duty (paid for by us and Aussie) at any one time (until the recent coup). The army is the size of New Zealand’s and it’s an island. Plus any invading force would be mostly white.
Zimbabwe is land-locked so military supplies can be cut off for an extended period to bleed the military, which is only 35,000 strong and has out-dated equipment. A campaign of bribery and intimidation could be used to turn individual commanders and units, or at least persuade them not to fight – that worked very well in Iraq against Saddam’s army, something like 80% didn’t fight. Any actual invasion would be led by South African units comprised primarily of troops from regions near Zimbabwe and would be cast as an aid mission for the Zimbabweian people with the ability to protect itself.
UN approval under the responsability to protect would be preferable.
I see Zuma has turned on Mugabe, finally.
I too disagree that Hussein was worse than Mugabe. His abuses were arguably as brutal, but his economy was functioning and what shortages existed were largely due to sanctions. Which doesn’t excuse his regime, of course.
L
Skeptic.
I don’t think the two are the same. The initial military action in Iraq was
1) Unilateral
2) Specifically NOT authorised by the UN
3) Based on a premise that had little/no supporting evidence, and turned out to be a load of sh*t
4) In a more difficult area
I’m trying to come up with a useful response to your points on borrowing for infrastructure btw. It’s an interesting debate. I’m a huge believer in technology, unlike Lynn, but I don’t think it’s a good idea to get mired in debt buying the latest and greatest, or that such action is necessary to remain competitive. I bought my laptop with cash, not credit, and I didn’t buy the latest and greatest one. Technology (especially power and communications) is evoloving too fast these days to invest in something like a 10 year plan to put in fibre optics. It’d probably be redundant before they were halfway complete. Change by small increments.
As to borrowing in general… actually I’m getting off thread and ahead of myself, will reply when I’ve got time.
[lprent: I will intrude directly on the comment here as I must have missed this earlier.
I'm a great believer in technology. I'm just skeptical about relying on vapourware. That is technology that you don't have in your hand right now at the right cost. Relying on vapourware is a sign of terminal optimism.]
Clinton
Not so sure that military supplies could be easily cut off with China able to ship arms via friendly states such as Mozambique.
Slightly righty – $10bucks on Gareth Morgan.
Maybe not. However I’m sure he’d feel the same way.
Though I seriously doubt he’d be shy about it!
Skeptic. I would have been all for removing Saddam from power if it hadn’t been blindingly obvious that the invasion would descend into the mess we have now. Hundresd of thouands dead, endless terrorism, a civil war in waiting, and a strategic power shift towards Iran were simply not worth the gain of getting rid of Saddam.
Zimbabwe still has a State structure indpendent of ZANU-PF and an organsied civil society, including unions. That means there would be no need for an invading force to impose it’s own government, and would lessen the liklihood of ethnic strife.
where are the so called guardians of social justice the Greens on this issue… their silence condemns them
You fool. The Greens have been speaking out on Zimbabwe for years – and unlike the other parties they didn’t sit on their hands and wait for Mugabe to start shooting people en masse before speaking up.
http://www.greens.org.nz/searchdocs/other8529.html
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA0507/S00339.htm
Steve: “That some military actions are wrong does not mean all military actions are wrong.”
Absolutely. People like Mugabe only understand military force.
Lew – on Fiji.
I think it could to. Would prefer intervention before then, but like Clinton says it could well be a lot harder. I’m not so sure though.
As much as I agree that Mugabe needs to be removed from power, once again I find the left to be hypocritical in terms of a call for war. How many people have this sicko Mugabe killed compared to that sicko Saddam?
They are both bad men, but the left cant see that.
Zimbabwe – I’d prefer threat of force rather than force to begin with. International force holds fair election.
And yes, Mugabe is either insane or evil – in either case shoot him first. Might be able to reason with whoever’s to follow.
Steve, I sense we can both be arm-chair generals in this situation.
Would you wish to send your son to this confused & uncertain situation?
Mugabe, like it or not is a very accomplished guerilla strategist & leader. The tasks demanded of any invasion would be unclear, as would the situation on the ground.
Sadly, I can see no easy solution, military or otherwise. It’s funny how some western leaders are expecting SA to sort it out. Those leaders wish to be seen doing something, when all they offer are words. As the Chinese say, they wish to kill with a borrowed sword.
Maybe the best way would be to wait for Mugabe to keel over, & then seize the moment.
They are both bad men, but the left cant see that.
Brett you retard. Try reading the comments before you open your mouth and let the wind blow your tongue around.
Imo military intervention is a bad idea.
My prediction would be another Afghanistan or Iraq (a power vacuum that is filled by yet another warlord).
coge: “Maybe the best way would be to wait for Mugabe to keel over, & then seize the moment.”
This was my position on Hussein. I think the case for Zimbabwe is stronger, but not so much stronger as to justify invasion. That said, if a police action to uphold rule of law were sanctioned by the UN in Zimbabwe, I think it would work, where it wouldn’t have done in Iraq.
L
Brett. We all know Saddam was a bad man. Unfortunately, in the real world that can’t be the only basis for deciding whether overthrowing him by force is the right decision. You have to consider what other effects your actions will have – look at Iraq now, all the deaths an destruction, look at the shifting strategic balance in the Middle East – the invasion inevitably caused these things, and that is the reason many on the left opposed the invasion, not any lack of ill-will towards Saddam.
Trex: Thanks for sharing.
My point being, the left wants Mugabe gone, and some are suggesting military action, but they seem to be fine with Castro, Saddam and certain other dictators in power.
Brett, the operative word in your sentence is “seem”. You are mistaken. The Left (or at least the Left I am part of) don’t support dictators – socialism is about democracy – we just don’t have your simplistic, black and white view of the world.
I must say that, Brett’s trite partisan politicking aside, I’m heartened to see such consensus and reasoned debate on this issue from folks on both sides. I guess it’s easy to unite in the face of such crimes.
L