Fears that the United States, backed by Britain, may be plotting to create a climate for “regime change” in Zimbabwe goaded the South African government into a more “hands-on” approach to its northern neighbour.
Department of Foreign Affairs insiders said they had received, and took seriously, information that Western powers including the US and Britain, might be contemplating removing Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe.
“As you can see, African leaders are taking matters into their own hands,” said a senior government leader.
The meeting between Mugabe and the African presidents earlier this week amounts to their building a bulwark between Mugabe and a Western bloc now turning its attention back to Zimbabwe in the post-Iraq war period.
Both Britain and the US this week scotched rumours of regime change, but emphasised the need for “regime legitimacy”.
Senior British and US ministers are in Southern Africa this weekend and while the Zimbabwean situation is not formally on their agendas, it will undoubtedly be discussed.
But the heightened sense of urgency in Pretoria has not communicated itself to ordinary Zimbabweans.
Gloom descended on the country with the realisation that the African presidents who visited the country this week had been unable to extract a firm undertaking from Mugabe that he was prepared to step down. Political and economic conditions have never been worse.
The country has been agog with reports that President Thabo Mbeki, Nigerian leader Olusegun Obasanjo and Malawi’s Bakili Muluzi were to announce the formation of a transitional government comprising Zanu-PF and the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC).
However, the three leaders issued a lukewarm statement after the talks, stating that Mugabe and MDC president Morgan Tsvangirai were ready to meet. No firm date or venue were announced for the encounter.
South African government officials said this week they feared that once removed from office, Mugabe would be arrested and tried for human rights abuses in the same way as former Yugoslavian premier Slobodan Milosevic.
A government insider said: “It would be dangerous for the region and the African continent if the West started interfering in our governance issues.”
The South African government acknowledged that there had been widespread human rights abuses in Zimbabwe. However, government leaders are alarmed at the possibility that the West could gain a foothold in the region.
Officially, foreign affairs is challenging the “regime change” fear. Representative Ronnie Mamoepa refuted the suggestion that the recent intervention by the three Southern African leaders had been spurred by suggestions of a “regime change” in Zimbabwe by the US or Britain. The Southern African Development Community’s involvement in resolving the Zimbabwean crisis was ongoing.
South Africa’s view on how the Zimbabwean crisis should be resolved (by talks between the ruling and opposition parties) has not altered substantially, though its approach has.
Mamoepa said once Zanu-PF and the MDC get talking, a plan for the country’s economic recovery will be drawn up.
Several South African government ministers have already been involved in efforts to help their Zimbabwean counterparts. There has also been speculation in the Zimbabwean state media that the US and Britain are pushing for regime change in Zimbabwe. This was been fuelled by the arrival in the region of the US Assistant Secretary of State for Africa, Walter Kansteiner.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair has indicated that he wants Zimbabwe discussed at next month’s G8 summit in Evian, France. Britain’s Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs Secretary, Jack Straw, will be visiting South Africa next week.
Speaking to the Mail & Guardian on Thursday, Kansteiner denied the US was pushing for regime change in Zimbabwe.
“We are not interested in a regime change — we are interested in regime legitimacy,” he said.
He said he felt “extremely positive” about the three African leaders’ personal trip to Harare. There seemed to be “real potential” in their visit.
The British High Commission was also dismissive of suggestions of a plot to overthrow Mugabe. Said spokesperson Nick Sheppard: “Claims made in sections of the Zimbabwean press that the UK and the US are discussing a regime change are groundless.
“As the British Prime Minister Tony Blair made clear after his meeting with the Australian prime minister in London on May 7, the issue is how we put the maximum pressure on Mugabe’s regime to change in Zimbabwe for the better, both politically and in humanitarian terms. We want to see a change in the political climate and changes in policy; this isn’t regime change.”
The growing nervousness of Africa and the rest of the developing world over possible Western interference in Southern Africa was visible at the 59th session of the United Nations Human Rights Commission two weeks ago.
South Africa, a commission member, rallied other African and Asian representatives against the European Union-sponsored draft resolution expressing concern about the human rights situation in Zimbabwe.
The commission reported at the end of the session that African and Asian nations, with Cuba, had accused Western democracies of politicising their criticism of other countries’ human rights performances and paying more attention to civil and political rights than to economic and development rights.
The countries had also said that the Western democracies were “trying to impose their own version of democracy on the rest of the world and were more interested in confrontation than in dialogue and cooperation in matters of human rights”.
The Zimbabwean resolution was rejected, together with resolutions on the human rights situation in Sudan and the Chechen Republic of the Russian Federation.
The shift in the South African government’s stance was pronounced at a press briefing addressed by Minister of Foreign Affairs Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma on Tuesday. Instead of coming to Mugabe’s defence, as she has done in the past, Dlamini-Zuma emphasised the prospects for dialogue in Zimbabwe.
She brushed aside media questions about “obstacles”, including Mugabe’s insistence that the MDC recognise him as a legitimate president. Mugabe broke off talks with Tsvangirai last year after insisting that the MDC leader drop a court action challenging his victory in the presidential election last year.
“If we were ready to go into dialogue with the apartheid regime,” Dlamini-Zuma said, “I am sure they will find ways of getting a dialogue to save their own country.”
She said the MDC and Zanu-PF were to meet to decide on the agenda and framework for negotiations.
MDC secretary-general Welshman Ncube told the M&G that the visiting African delegations had put pressure on his party to “break the ice first”.
A South African foreign affairs official remarked: “The point to make is that if we as the African National Congress could negotiate with an illegitimate government, so can they. As Chris [Hani] used to say: ‘For the sake of peace you sometimes have to hug a hyena’.”
Obasanjo, who was the first to arrive in Harare very early on Monday, told journalists after the presidents’ meetings with the Zimbabwean leaders that Mugabe and his government were “very anxious for the resumption of negotiations [with the MDC]”.
Tsvangirai this week welcomed the chance to talk to Mugabe to solve Zimbabwe’s problems but said he would not withdraw his court challenge. Muluzi hinted that the meeting with Mugabe was probably the most frank African leaders had held with him.
“I told Mugabe that bad economies were bad politics,” he said.
Zimbabwean analysts said that while the talks were long overdue, they were unlikely to amount to much because the central bone of contention — Mugabe’s early departure from office or the need for fresh elections before his term is over — was not part of the proposed agenda.
The MDC is expected to travel to Botswana to meet Kansteiner.