r32

He needs ousting.................

PeteBrant

Well, slating the West and Britian in itself isn't really a crime I am pleased to say. I mean, I don't think that the UN would sanction an invasion based on the premise that "He keeps saying nasty things about us"



However, they might sanction action based on the horrific levels of malnutrition, disease, corruption, life expectancy being so horribly low and so on.

However, as hutton says, there isn't oil there, plus Israel isn't close by, it isn't an islamic nation, we don't have a history of failed regieme change attempts there and we probably don't fancy our chances.

The best bet would be to support one of Mugabes rival (which we probably already are in some way or other) with an evident show of force.

It makes an absolute mockery of the claim of "world police" you know, fighting wrong whereever we find it and protecting freedom yadda yadda yadda, I mean the US has shown no interest in the Zimbabwe problem whatsoever.

David Lock

Mugabe has a very tight control within his own power base making it difficult for his neighbours to get him out. Difficult to know what sanctions to apply that wouldn't just harm the very people that we would like to help. And it's still a very black/white thing. If Mugabe had been white he'd have been locked up years ago but his colour does mean that UK, USA etc just can't march in. And the fact is that the only people skilled to return the country back to it's agricultural heyday are mostly white farmers who have been ousted.

As said, the West can only hope that he will die soon either naturally or from a bullet and that the opposition will have the ability to gain some kind of democratic power without too much corruption. I think he is probably at least as evil as Saddam.

The example in Sierra Leone offers some hope in that there was a country striven by war and now getting back on its feet, ironically a place where the British are seen as heroes. I know both countries reasonably well and it's heartbreaking to see them disintegrating, especially Zimbabwe. dl

OllyK

Will Zimbabwe itself may be in a shocking mess, I don't think they are a threat to any other nation and so while what Mugabe may be doing is atrocious, I doubt anybody will be going in there with the tanks anytime soon.

vindaloo

What we need is for someone to do a dodgy dosier on Mugabe.

Seriously...
Though Zimbabwe's economy may be in tatters and the average person on the breadline if not actually starved to death, they've got a lot of guns and unfortunately, a lot of people experienced in fighting an irregular war.
IMO no one's going to go in guns blazing and "set them free".

Look at the tribal/political situation and it doesn't get any better. Mugabe's lot are all Bantu types and the main opposition are Matabele. They're not exactly friends with each other. Remove Mugabe and the next genocidal b'stard will probably use it as an excuse to blame everything on the opposition and kill off another few thousand. One of the very few brighter sides is that Mugabe's not overtly doing that himself. Though he had a good go at it shortly after getting into power.

J.

OllyK

Indeed, as a dictator you may get the world condemming your actions, but as long as you keep it within your own borders, nobody is too likely to get involved.

RichardS2005

Not wanting to be a consipiracy theorist..... but does anyone else find the timing of this story a little convenient - financial issues, runs on banks, plunging share prices etc. Suddenly a known issue just happens to become important now?

The issues in Africa should definitely be addressed but the timing just strikes me as a bit odd.....what is happening now has been happening for years with little interest from the west (unless we are going over to play cricket....!)

Rich

Dracoro

I heard the way to go, at least initially, was to implement tight sanctions on any sort of luxury goods, cars, nice foods, expensive clothes etc. Basically anything that most the population don't care for at the moment. There are a load of Mugabe supporters doing very well, target them and they may start to lose support of Mugabe.

Flatcapdriver

Zim was one of the more progressive countries in southern Africa even when Mugabe took over. Initially, his reaction was atypical of this part of the world and all the country's ills were blamed on the whites who were largely kicked out, many of whom deservedly so, being cronies of Ian Smith but many were innocents who got caught up in the political dust ups of the time.

To Mugabe's credit, he did realise that the country needed the skills and expertise that the white minority held and many of them were shown the white umbrella, returning in their thousands from Oz and the UK to set up shop again.

Unfortunately, Mugabe (like Mbeke in the south) has never really got over the fact that the whites can usefully contribute to African societies because they have the skills required. Needless to say, envy and greed sets in and whilst South Africa has suffered from black empowerment (you'd never get away with it if was reversed) Mugabe took it to a whole new level with the land grab initiatives.

The reason why the UK or the Commonwealth won't get involved is threefold:

1. Militarily, even without the burden of Iraq and Afghanistan and other commitments the British forces don't have the capability or the ability to mount an offensive in this part of the world. Before the chest beaters wade in telling us how they're the best in the world, ask yourselves where the logistics chain would originate, what air defence the UK would have in this scenario let alone any halfway decent aircraft carriers.

2. Politically, the UK/Commonwealth would need the support of Mbeke which isn't forthcoming and never will be because for him to do so would undermine his own political support in RSA. Without that, the rest of the African states would never tolerate the perceived white colonialist intervention and the lily livered liberals would never have the ***** to do it anyway.

3. Assasinate Mugabe? Nope. The problem with that scenario is that it would create a power vacuum that potentially could be worse than having no-one at the helm causing even more deaths and starvation. You also have to remember that the ruling elite are firmly behind Mugabe so they're not going to let him go easily otherwise their own gourging at the troughs will be over.

Sadly, this will end when either there's an uprising or Mugabe dies and before that happens thousands more will suffer.

David Lock

Couldn't agree more but that stuff would just come into RSA and straight over the border? I guess if you could somehow curb payment sources but funds from offshore accounts can't be stopped
dl

dpb

According to my zim girlfriend hes now hiring chinese bodyguards cos he doesnt trust any of his fellow nationals - there have been a couple of failed attempts

Even the elders are giving up on him now - i dread to imagine how hes going to treat people come the election

dpb

The funding thro this country could stop overnight surely ? ( probaly ilegal tho )

The feeling im getting is that the queen should intervene because there is still big repect here amongst the populus - quite how i dont know

Luan Pra bang

There is curently no luxury goods available black market importation of dvd players mobile phones petrol etc is already big business and the only way to get those items. In haare electricity is scarce and water is switched on sporadically and people wash at which ever friend has electric that day. With out black market petrol imports the country would have ground to a halt already.
As it is the black population are starving and the food shortage is becoming critical. This is all from one of the richest most advanced of countries in africa before Mugabe came to power.
On the other hand in the past the white population should have done more than live the life of kings with the black population as their slaves. They lived like colonialists and now are paying the price.

dpb

Mugabe started re-distributing the land 15 years too late and in panic ...! ( i belive it was one of his promises on election )

Flatcapdriver

David, where do you think its coming from already? The borders are so porous in southern Africa that everyone's in the game.

Prasius

iTrader: (1)

I don't know what everyone is complaining about. I think he is a fine example of 'native' black governance in Africa. He's democratically elected and everything - 98% of the vote I believe in the last election, and I don't think it is the place of white racist imperialist westerners to interfere in the affairs of an African country.

*ahem*

David Lock

Of course I accept that completely. Some of the "borders" being dirt tracks and a couple of strings of barbed wire - if that.

Did you see those pictures of the luxury houses owned by Mugabe supporters just outside Harare? Could have been St Georges Hill, Weybridge or "Chez Beckham".
dl

Flatcapdriver

Not that naff, surely?

Brendan Hughes

I had a very high profile friend in Botswana who said "why doesn't someone just take him out?"

Comments and info above are all very instructive though, thanks guys.

David Lock

'fraid so. Probably about 9 out of 10 on the Rooney Scale even

Leslie

Billy Boy was quick to use the excuse of illegal regime change when his original lies about WMD were exposed in Iraq, but he was reluctant to say anything at all about illegally removing Mugabe from power!

Les