Zimbabwe in its Region
44. Baroness Amos told us that Zimbabwe's neighbours
are concerned, not just about the internal situation in Zimbabwe,
but "about the impact that the situation in Zimbabwe is having
on the region as a whole, in terms of possibilities for investment,
the stereotyping of Africa and the region from those outside,
the kind of Zimbabwe effect." This is a depressing echo of
our Report of last July, in which we noted the huge economic cost
to South Africa of the chaos across its borders. The situation
has deteriorated further since then, but no one has been able
to explain to us why the governments of the region are apparently
helpless, and apparently choose to be supine, when bringing about
a change to stability and prosperity in Zimbabwe is so obviously
in their interests. Baroness Amos thought that her "colleagues
in SADC and in other African countries face very much the same
frustrations as do the British Government." They extract
promises from ZANU-PF, but these turn out to be empty. If they
impose trade sanctions, such as cutting off electricity supplies,
they risk harming innocent Zimbabweans and alienating their own
supporters. Neither is it clear that such sanctions would have
much effect on an economy which is already ruined.
45. However, we do not believe that the regional
powers are entirely helpless. The leading members of ZANU-PF travel
freely within the region, not least to do their shopping. There
remains still a deep bond between the region's leaders, which
dates back to the days of the liberation movements to which most
of them belonged. This durable force which originally united them
may still be stronger than the contemporary disagreements which
could otherwise now divide them. The leader of the African Union
even indicated that if Zimbabwe were not invited to the proposed
EU/Africa summit, AU members would boycott it. This is, as the
Minister said, "deeply disappointing." It also raises
questions about the commitment of African countries to various
international agreements, including the G8 group's New Partnership
for Africa's Development (NePAD) and the EU's Cotonou agreement.
Those countries' governments should not assume that the developed
countries will wish to invest in their economies if they fail
to honour their side of these agreements. And as Peter Longworth
suggested, "South Africa and the other African states...
should be reminded on a regular basis that it is just not good
enough to fall back on arguments which derive from the liberation
struggle." The reality is that competition for scarce international
capital is fierce and the perception of Africa among many private
investors is already negative.
46. On 16 April, the United Nations Commission on
Human Rights narrowly decided on a vote to take no action on a
motion critical of Zimbabwe's human rights record. We are particularly
disappointed that the procedure to block any debate on the motion
was initiated by South Africa, whose representative described
the motion as "biased and politically motivated." This
is another, depressing example of South Africa's failure to act
in the best interests of the people of Zimbabwe, and its readiness
to give notions of solidarity with its neighbour priority over
undertakings made to the G8. It would be surprising if this failure
were not to influence the decisions of the G8 countries when they
gather at Evian in June.
47. The Foreign Secretary visited South Africa on
13 and 14 May. In a communiqué issued at the end of the
visit, Mr Straw and his South African counterpart, Dr Dlamini
Zuma, said that
Both countries agreed on the need to encourage [ZANU-PF
and the MDC] to commit themselves to removing the obstacles to
the negotiations. They underlined that the longer the problems
in Zimbabwe remain unresolved, the more entrenched poverty will
become. They stressed their commitment to an outcome in which
the people of Zimbabwe enjoy independence, freedom, peace, stability,
democracy and prosperity. The [UK/South Africa] Working Group
[on Africa] noted unequivocally, that no lasting solution to the
challenges that face Zimbabwe could be found, unless that solution
comes from the people of Zimbabwe themselves.
This statement shows agreement on the ends, but there
is no sign of agreement on the means. South Africa continues to
pursue its 'quiet diplomacy' and to place emphasis on restarting
the stalled inter-party talks. We doubt that Mugabe is listening.
Nonetheless, the visit to Harare by Presidents Mbeki, Obasanjo
and Muluzi offers a glimmer of hope that the regional countries
are at last beginning to recognise their interest in seeking to
intervene positively in Zimbabwe.
48. We conclude that if Zimbabwe's neighbours
were fully to assume their responsibilities—for example,
by imposing targeted non-trade sanctions similar to those already
imposed by the EU, by some Commonwealth countries and by the United
States—Mugabe's regime would be further isolated, his opponents
would be encouraged and his days would be numbered. We further
conclude that the Government would be entirely right to accept
such a step, if it is taken, as evidence of the intention of the
countries concerned to adhere to the principles to which they
have committed themselves under NePAD and other international
agreements, qualifying them to receive the benefits of those programmes.
We recommend that Ministers take every opportunity to make this
point clear to their counterparts in southern Africa.
|
