Blatant disregard for democracy that flies in the face of numerous
pan-African and regional conventions would, in an ideal world, spur African
leaders into action. They are, alas, silent and so free nations are once
again forced to turn to South Africa, the regional superpower, urging it to
do “something.” Unfortunately, South Africa’s President Thabo Mbeki has not
only tolerated the Zimbabwean regime. He has actively helped Mugabe to
maintain his grip on power.Â
Speaking in London over the weekend, Mbeki said, “I must say that we have
been very pleased with the manner in which the elections have gone. For the
first time, the opposition parties had access to everywhere in the country,
including the urban areas.”Â
Of course, implicit in the admission that the victorious opposition Movement
for Democratic Change (MDC) was allowed to campaign throughout the country
“for the first time,” is Mbeki’s acknowledgment that the MDC was not allowed
to campaign freely on previous occasions. That begs a question: If the MDC
was not allowed to campaign freely previously, why did Mbeki’s election
observers proclaim previous elections in Zimbabwe as free and fair?Â
In the past, Mbeki was criticized for not doing enough with regard to the
deteriorating economic and political situation in Zimbabwe. That puzzled
those who feared the negative consequences of Zimbabwe’s collapse on the
regional economy in general and South African economy in particular. Mbeki
claimed that his “quiet diplomacy” would prevent Zimbabwe from descending
into chaos. Today, chaos in Zimbabwe is, if anything, more likely. But Mbeki
has not only tolerated Mugabe’s dictatorship. He has actively promoted it.Â
For example, Mbeki has attempted to legitimize the Zimbabwean regime
internationally. It was on Mbeki’s watch, after all, that the Mugabe regime
stole the 2000 and 2005 parliamentary poll and the 2002 presidential poll.
In all three cases, the Zimbabwean government’s handling of the elections
was excoriated by the international community–except the Southern African
Development Community dominated by South Africa. Similarly, Mbeki’s envoy to
the U.N. Security Council sidelined a debate on Mugabe’s human rights
abuses.Â
Moreover, far from pulling the proverbial plug on Mugabe, South Africa
continues to sell electricity to Zimbabwe at a price that is 36% lower than
the price that the state-run ESKOM charges South African consumers. In fact,
according to South African press reports, South Africa increased its
electricity supplies to Zimbabwe earlier this year–just as South Africa was
being plunged into darkness by economically devastating power shortages.Â
When, in 2003, President George W. Bush chose Mbeki as his “point-man” on
Zimbabwe, he could not have chosen a worse individual for the job. As Mark
Gevisser, author of Thabo Mbeki’s biography The Dream Deferred, notes,
“Because of the history of their relationship … [Mugabe is] not just a
father but a father whom he [Mbeki] sees some allegiance to … Mbeki is
unable to bring enough pressure to bear on Mugabe to force him to some sort
of resolution. The opposition [MDC] doesn’t have any trust in him and the
[Zimbabwean] government doesn’t fear him enough to listen to his hard
words.”Â
As his presidency enters its last year, it is useful to contrast Mbeki’s
performance with that of his predecessor. After 27 years in jail, Mandela
emerged as a man of forgiveness and compassion, and set about to forge a
nation in which his former jailors had an important role to play. Mbeki
never overcame his past and never grew in his post. His views remain that of
a Soviet-schooled Marxist ideologue who sees the world in black and white.Â
That world is split into the oppressor and the oppressed–the West and the
rest. Obsessed with race and colonialism, Mbeki ignored the HIV/AIDS
pandemic in South Africa at the cost of millions of lives of his countrymen.
To him, orthodox science “portrayed black people … [as] victims of a slave
mentality.” Rejection of the HIV/AIDS orthodoxy was necessary in order to
confront “centuries-old white racist beliefs and concepts about Africans.”Â
Similarly, Mbeki refused to confront Mugabe as long as the latter man
skillfully couched his devastating economic policies in terms of his fight
against British plots and other delusions.Â
Zimbabwe’s future hangs in the balance. Few people dare to predict the
outcome of this latest crisis and few doubt that the potential for violence
is very high. If a peaceful transfer of power somehow comes about, it will
not be because of South Africa’s Mbeki, but in spite of him.Â
Marian L. Tupy is a policy analyst at the Cato Institute’s Center for Global
Liberty and Prosperity, which has followed events in Zimbabwe closely
Post published in: Opinions