Historically, with regard to the Zimbabwe liberation struggle, the ANC had good relations with Zapu and none with Zanu when it broke away from Zapu.
Writing in the privately-owned Zimbabwe Independent on September 25 last year, Wilbert Mukori said: “The best chance the nation has had to end Mugabe’s dictatorship was by far during the Government of National Unity (GNU) when all the nation had to do was implement the raft of democratic reforms already agreed to in the 2008 GPA. However, MDC-T leader Morgan Tsvangirai and other opposition parties, who were tasked with implementing reforms, sold out and joined Mugabe’s gravy train.
“So after four or five years of the GNU, no meaningful reforms were implemented… The people of Zimbabwe failed to recognise the importance of the 2008 GPA reforms and so did not pressure GNU leaders to implement the reforms.”
Regime change in Zimbabwe
There were others in the world, led particularly by the UK, who opposed our approach of encouraging the Zimbabweans to decide their future. These preferred regime change – the forcible removal of Mugabe and his replacement by people approved by the UK and its allies.
This is what explained the sustained campaign to condemn us for conducting so-called “quiet diplomacy”. What was wrong with “quiet diplomacy”, which led to the adoption of the GPA discussed by Mukori, was that it defended the right of the people of Zimbabwe to determine their future, as opposed to the desire by some in the West to carry out regime change in Zimbabwe and impose their will!
In the period preceding the 2002 Zimbabwe elections, the UK and US in particular were very keen to effect regime change, failing which to impose various conditions to shorten the period of any Mugabe presidency.
Our then minister of intelligence, Lindiwe Sisulu, had to make a number of trips to London and Washington to engage the UK and US governments on their plans for Zimbabwe, with strict instructions from our government to resist all plans to impose anything on the people of Zimbabwe, including by military means.
Accordingly it was not from hearsay or third parties that we acquired knowledge about Western plans to overthrow Mugabe, but directly from what they communicated to our government representative.
In its November 11, 2007 edition, the UK Independent on Sunday, reported that in its interview with Lord Guthrie, former chief of defence staff of the UK armed forces, it learnt that “astonishingly, the subjects discussed (with prime minister Tony Blair) included invading Zimbabwe, ‘which people were always trying to get me (Guthrie) to look at. My advice was, hold hard, you’ll make it worse’.”
According to John Kampfner in his book, Blair’s Wars, Blair once told Short “if it were down to me, I’d do Zimbabwe as well – that is send troops.”
In his memoir A Journey, Blair said the reason he could not “get rid of Mugabe” which he “would have loved to” was because “it wasn’t practical (since… the surrounding African nations maintained a lingering support for him and would have opposed any action strenuously).”
SA and the Zimbabwe elections
The 2002 elections in Zimbabwe were observed by two South African observer missions among others. One of these was a multi-party mission deployed by our parliament, not government.
The second was composed of people seconded by civil society organisations.
The government contributed to this latter mission by appointing Ambassador Sam Motsuenyane as its leader.
With no intervention by government, these two observer Missions, like all others, determined that the declared outcome of the elections reflected the will of the people of Zimbabwe.
The same thing happened with regard to the 2008 elections which resulted in the MDC (Tsvangirai) gaining 100 House of Assembly seats as opposed to 99 for Zanu-PF and 10 for MDC (Mutambara). None of the two leading presidential candidates, Mugabe and Tsvangirai, got the required 50% plus one to emerge as outright winner.
The second round of the presidential election was marked by a lot of violence, resulting in the withdrawal of Tsvangirai.
Our view was that the level of violence made it impossible for the people to freely to exercise their right to choose their president. I therefore met Mugabe in Bulawayo to propose the election be called off and conducted afresh.
Mugabe did not accept, arguing it would be in violation of the constitution.
During the 2013 harmonised elections, Zanu-PF won 196 of the House of Assembly seats as opposed to 70 for the MDC (Tsvangirai), and Mugabe was elected in the first round. All the observer missions which actually observed these elections agreed the announced results “reflected the will of the people of Zimbabwe”.
Over the years Zapu, Zanu and, later, Zanu-PF saw it as part of their responsibility to contribute to the victory of our struggle against the apartheid regime and system and the building of the democratic South Africa, and acted accordingly. The ANC took the same position with regard to the struggles of the people of Zimbabwe to defeat colonialism and reconstruct the new Zimbabwe, and acted accordingly.
Throughout these years we defended the right of the people of Zimbabwe to determine their destiny. This included resisting all efforts to impose other people’s solutions on Zimbabwe, which, had they succeeded, would have served as a precursor for a similar intervention in ours.
Consciously we took the position that democratic South Africa should at all costs avoid acting as a new home-grown African imperial power which would have given itself the right unilaterally to determine the destiny of the peoples of Africa!
Thabo Mbeki is former SA president. This is slightly shortened version of his latest piece on thabombekifoundation.org.za
‘Quiet diplomacy’ on Zim unpacked
Writing in the privately-owned Zimbabwe Independent on September 25 last year, Wilbert Mukori said: “The best chance the nation has had to end Mugabe’s dictatorship was by far during the Government of National Unity (GNU) when all the nation had to do was implement the raft of democratic reforms already agreed to in the 2008 GPA. However, MDC-T leader Morgan Tsvangirai and other opposition parties, who were tasked with implementing reforms, sold out and joined Mugabe’s gravy train.
“So after four or five years of the GNU, no meaningful reforms were implemented… The people of Zimbabwe failed to recognise the importance of the 2008 GPA reforms and so did not pressure GNU leaders to implement the reforms.”
Regime change in Zimbabwe
There were others in the world, led particularly by the UK, who opposed our approach of encouraging the Zimbabweans to decide their future. These preferred regime change – the forcible removal of Mugabe and his replacement by people approved by the UK and its allies.
This is what explained the sustained campaign to condemn us for conducting so-called “quiet diplomacy”. What was wrong with “quiet diplomacy”, which led to the adoption of the GPA discussed by Mukori, was that it defended the right of the people of Zimbabwe to determine their future, as opposed to the desire by some in the West to carry out regime change in Zimbabwe and impose their will!
In the period preceding the 2002 Zimbabwe elections, the UK and US in particular were very keen to effect regime change, failing which to impose various conditions to shorten the period of any Mugabe presidency.
Our then minister of intelligence, Lindiwe Sisulu, had to make a number of trips to London and Washington to engage the UK and US governments on their plans for Zimbabwe, with strict instructions from our government to resist all plans to impose anything on the people of Zimbabwe, including by military means.
Accordingly it was not from hearsay or third parties that we acquired knowledge about Western plans to overthrow Mugabe, but directly from what they communicated to our government representative.
In its November 11, 2007 edition, the UK Independent on Sunday, reported that in its interview with Lord Guthrie, former chief of defence staff of the UK armed forces, it learnt that “astonishingly, the subjects discussed (with prime minister Tony Blair) included invading Zimbabwe, ‘which people were always trying to get me (Guthrie) to look at. My advice was, hold hard, you’ll make it worse’.”
According to John Kampfner in his book, Blair’s Wars, Blair once told Short “if it were down to me, I’d do Zimbabwe as well – that is send troops.”
In his memoir A Journey, Blair said the reason he could not “get rid of Mugabe” which he “would have loved to” was because “it wasn’t practical (since… the surrounding African nations maintained a lingering support for him and would have opposed any action strenuously).”
SA and the Zimbabwe elections
The 2002 elections in Zimbabwe were observed by two South African observer missions among others. One of these was a multi-party mission deployed by our parliament, not government.
The second was composed of people seconded by civil society organisations.
The government contributed to this latter mission by appointing Ambassador Sam Motsuenyane as its leader.
With no intervention by government, these two observer Missions, like all others, determined that the declared outcome of the elections reflected the will of the people of Zimbabwe.
The same thing happened with regard to the 2008 elections which resulted in the MDC (Tsvangirai) gaining 100 House of Assembly seats as opposed to 99 for Zanu-PF and 10 for MDC (Mutambara). None of the two leading presidential candidates, Mugabe and Tsvangirai, got the required 50% plus one to emerge as outright winner.
The second round of the presidential election was marked by a lot of violence, resulting in the withdrawal of Tsvangirai.
Our view was that the level of violence made it impossible for the people to freely to exercise their right to choose their president. I therefore met Mugabe in Bulawayo to propose the election be called off and conducted afresh.
Mugabe did not accept, arguing it would be in violation of the constitution.
During the 2013 harmonised elections, Zanu-PF won 196 of the House of Assembly seats as opposed to 70 for the MDC (Tsvangirai), and Mugabe was elected in the first round. All the observer missions which actually observed these elections agreed the announced results “reflected the will of the people of Zimbabwe”.
Over the years Zapu, Zanu and, later, Zanu-PF saw it as part of their responsibility to contribute to the victory of our struggle against the apartheid regime and system and the building of the democratic South Africa, and acted accordingly. The ANC took the same position with regard to the struggles of the people of Zimbabwe to defeat colonialism and reconstruct the new Zimbabwe, and acted accordingly.
Throughout these years we defended the right of the people of Zimbabwe to determine their destiny. This included resisting all efforts to impose other people’s solutions on Zimbabwe, which, had they succeeded, would have served as a precursor for a similar intervention in ours.
Consciously we took the position that democratic South Africa should at all costs avoid acting as a new home-grown African imperial power which would have given itself the right unilaterally to determine the destiny of the peoples of Africa!
Thabo Mbeki is former SA president. This is slightly shortened version of his latest piece on thabombekifoundation.org.za
Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Trending Now
Latest Videos