Thabo Mbeki went to the United Nations this week on a mission to fix African peacekeeping systems — while the world was focused on Zimbabwe’s stalled electoral process.
Mbeki used the platform afforded by South Africa’s month in the rotating chair of the UN Security Council to secure a commitment from the world body to look at ways to better coordinate peacekeeping by blue-helmeted troops and forces deployed under the banner of the African Union or regional bodies.
Mbeki is anxious to secure his overarching continental agenda at the UN and was insistent this week that the global focus on Zimbabwe, which he regards as disporportionate, should not prevent that. He is absolutely determined that by the end of the year, when South Africa steps down from the council, Africa’s peace-keeping needs will have been addressed by that body.
At issue are both financial resources and matériel, as well as more political difficulties — such as the battle over whether a UN or AU force is best placed to help prevent ongoing violence in Darfur.
”It was very pleasing to hear people from across the world agree that the matter is important, needs to be addressed urgently and we need to act together, because everybody shares this common interest to improve this situation of peace and security on the African continent,” he told journalists.
He then went on to face a barrage of questions from journalists more interested in the peace and security of ordinary Zimbabweans — and not a single one about peacekeeping.
In his responses Mbeki continued to stress the role of SADC in mediating between Zanu-PF and the Movement for Democratic Change, and said any run-off election should be run along the lines of the original poll.
”Even if this second round takes place it needs to be handled as the first one was handled. There was no violence, everybody was allowed and free to campaign everywhere in the country and so on. We would have to sustain this kind of atmosphere”.
Asked about reports of a shipment of Chinese weapons that has landed at Durban harbour, apparently for transportation to Zimbabwe, he offered a typically bland and unconvincing denial of responsibility.
”Well, ask the Chinese ambassador,” he said. ”Durban harbour handles goods for many countries on the continent. If you say there are weapons that have arrived from China in the Durban harbour, I think you should ask the Chinese. There might be a consignment of coal that is being exported to the Congo or something; it is a port, those weapons would have had nothing to do with South Africa. I really don’t know what Zimbabwe imports from China or what China imports from Zimbabwe.”
Foreign affairs spokesperson Ronnie Mamoepa insists that Mbeki’s message was heard by other security council members, despite the furore over Zimbabwe. ”Many of them mentioned Zimbabwe,” he says ”but they also spoke about Somalia, the DRC and Burundi.”
South Africa has direct, and not always comfortable, experience in providing up-front funding for peacekeeping missions, notably in the DRC and Burundi, and of sharing responsibilities with the UN and other international forces.
As Ross Herbert of the South African Institute of International Affairs points out, there is a structural gulf between the desire of African countries to take the lead peace-keeping in Africa, while most funding for these missions comes from the major Western powers, with the United States alone contributing 20%. ”Security Council members are reluctant to hand over the cash and then have no say in the composition of the force,” he says.
Mbeki told journalists at a press conference in New York on Wednesday that he was delighted at the Security Council’s agreement to set up a high-level AU-UN panel within three months to look at improved general cooperation and financing and training initiatives in particular.
But the big Western powers and the international media were much more interested in whether the situation in Zimbabwe would make it on to the council’s agenda — something the South African delegation has resisted.
It argues, as it did last year in the case of Burma, that the stand-off over the presidential poll poses no threat to international security and therefore does not rise to the level required for the council’s consideration.
With South Africa refusing to add Zimbabwe to the agenda, it was left to Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to say he would add it himself.
But it is not clear what the UN can do about Zimbabwe, apart from possibly imposing sanctions if the expected run-off poll for the presidency is stolen. The international community, as one Western diplomat points out, is short of options.
But Mbeki has again done himself no favours. African peace-keeping is a very important matter, which needs to be addressed. By concentrating on it at a moment of supreme crisis in Zimbabwe — and arguing against all logic that Zimbabwe poses no threat to Southern Africa’s peace and stability — he has completed his isolation from almost every other world player on the issue.