Region backs away from US plan
Posted: Thursday, August 22, 2002JOHANNESBURG, (IRIN) - South Africa and Botswana have denied they have signed up to a US plan to isolate Zimbabwe's President Robert Mugabe, and said their policy was rather to influence Harare through dialogue.
"There can never be a policy for South Africa to replace any government ... to discuss with anybody about how to replace another government," South African Deputy Foreign Minister Aziz Pahad was quoted as saying on Thursday. He said Pretoria and the region had an obligation to help Zimbabwe find a way out of its economic and political crisis.
Botswana's permanent secretary for foreign affairs, Ernest Mpofu, also rejected any suggestion of working with Washington to sideline Mugabe. "Why would we isolate him? Our policy is to work with Zimbabwe to try and sort out the problems there. If you isolate Zimbabwe what problem are you solving?" the South African news agency SAPA reported him as saying.
US Assistant Secretary of State for Africa Walter Kansteiner said on Tuesday that Zimbabwe's presidential election in March was fraudulent, and Washington did not recognise Mugabe as the country's legitimate leader.
"What we're trying to do is influence those policymakers at the top. And so, in that sense, we're continuing to work with the South Africans and the Botswanans and Mozambicans on what are some of the strategies that we can use to isolate Mugabe in the sense that he has to realise that the political status quo is not acceptable," Kansteiner said.
A Zimbabwe presidential spokesman told IRIN that there was nothing new in Kansteiner's statement. "They stated shortly after the election that they didn't recognise the poll, and we are aware that for quite some time they have tried to influence the sub-region to take a hostile position," the official said.
Ross Herbert of the South African Institute of International Affairs said that regional leaders preferred a policy of quiet diplomacy. But "there is rising concern outside of Africa to want to do something", triggered by Zimbabwe's controversial land reform programme and human rights record.
He said with half the Zimbabwean population facing starvation as a result of drought and land reform, Americans found it hard to understand the Zimbabwean government "saying please give us food while kicking out its white farmers".
The Namibian National Society for Human Rights said in a statement on Thursday that while western criticism of Mugabe seemed related to the government's "persecution of white farmers", they condemned Zimbabwe's human rights record in general.
The society called on African leaders to "subject President Mugabe to the peer review system as envisaged in the Constitutive Act of the African Union and the New Partnership for Africa's Development".
But director of the Pretoria-based Africa Institute, Eddie Maloka, told IRIN that Washington's global policy of pursuing regime change in countries it perceived as "rogue states" was not compatible with "African realities".
"It complicates the policy space available to countries in the region", and would fatally brand any neighbour that publicly lined up with Washington as "a stooge".
Maloka said the region's quiet diplomacy was not aimed at overthrowing the government, but focused on promoting internal dialogue. For the time being, with both the government and opposition remaining "intransigent", there was little sign of progress. But the situation would inevitably change as the economy further deteriorated and food shortages bit harder towards the end of the year.
"The fast-track land reform process is irreversible, but the reality of economic pain is going to be much more pronounced [and Zimbabwe] will need its neighbours," Maloka said.Printer friendly version
Send page by E-Mail
Previous Page | Zimbabwe Watch | Historical Views | Home
NOTICE: All articles are the copyright property of the writers. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C., section 107, some material on this site is provided without permission from the copyright owner, only for purposes of criticism, comment, scholarship and research under the "fair use" provisions of federal copyright laws. Visit: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml for more details. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
