zimfinalpush
The use of force by the South African government would have been an option for resolving the Zimbabwean crisis had the former been a properly formed state.
Outspoken political consultant and entrepreneur Moeletsi Mbeki, the brother of President Thabo Mbeki, asserted this during an address on Thursday at the University of Pretoria in the Centre for International Political Studies' Africa Dialogue series.
He was highly critical of South Africa's policy on Zimbabwe, saying the government was contributing to the crisis by insisting that Zimbabwe had a democracy when it clearly had fallen victim to a party dictatorship.
Asked during question time whether armed intervention and/or sanctions by South Africa would work, Mbeki said "no state can rule out the use of force". It would normally have the monopoly over such force and would use it if it was in the national interest.
'No state can rule out the use of force'
It was now in South Africa's national interest to restore democracy to Zimbabwe and rebuild its economy to accommodate its 80 percent jobless, most of whom had streamed into neighbouring countries.
But, African states were neo-states, countries left behind by Western colonial powers that were not proper states. Fully fledged states had a monopoly over the use of force within its borders, over taxation and over the loyalty of its citizens.
This did not apply in most African states, and South Africa too did not have a full monopoly complemented by a social contract for providing security for its interests.
Whether a state should use sanctions or armed intervention was a matter of tactics, Mbeki said.
But he doubted very much that South Africa would divert from its "do-nothing scenario" as its policy on Zimbabwe. The crisis did not affect the ruling African National Congress elite, only the poor of South Africa and international corporations with investments in Zimbabwe, he said.
South Africa's poor were bearing the brunt of the crisis as they had to compete with millions of Zimbabweans for scarce jobs and services. Since this did not threaten black economic empowerment- the prime preoccupation of South Africa's ruling elite - the latter would do little to resolve the Zimbabwean crisis.
It was in their narrow interest to "appear to be doing a lot", but doing nothing in reality, Mbeki said.
Asked about the chances of success for the Southern African Development Community's mediation efforts, he said President Mbeki's mandate was only to bring together the opposition and the ruling Zanu-PF party.
However, the crisis needed mediation in several areas, most notably the crisis of legitimacy, which South Africa was actually fuelling by calling Zimbabwe a democracy, and Mugabe's illegal declaration of himself as Zanu-PF's presidential candidate in next year's elections.
He believed a bigger crisis than the crackdown on the opposition was that in Zanu-PF, where dissidents were talking of toppling Mugabe from power by force.
"There is a great deal that is unknown about the dissidents," Mbeki said. It was not certain that a Mugabe successor who came from Zanu-PF's ranks would not perpetuate the party's repressive rule.
This sentiment was echoed by his co-speaker, Claire Doube, of the international Civicus organisation, who said the challenge would not be to find a successor for Mugabe who would continue in his footsteps, but to rebuild civic institutions and restore democracy.
The silence following his violent crackdown on the opposition "makes the government look invincible, which terrifies people", she said. The electorate was too intimidated to take part in attempts to unseat Mugabe, she added.
Outspoken political consultant and entrepreneur Moeletsi Mbeki, the brother of President Thabo Mbeki, asserted this during an address on Thursday at the University of Pretoria in the Centre for International Political Studies' Africa Dialogue series.
He was highly critical of South Africa's policy on Zimbabwe, saying the government was contributing to the crisis by insisting that Zimbabwe had a democracy when it clearly had fallen victim to a party dictatorship.
Asked during question time whether armed intervention and/or sanctions by South Africa would work, Mbeki said "no state can rule out the use of force". It would normally have the monopoly over such force and would use it if it was in the national interest.
'No state can rule out the use of force'
It was now in South Africa's national interest to restore democracy to Zimbabwe and rebuild its economy to accommodate its 80 percent jobless, most of whom had streamed into neighbouring countries.
But, African states were neo-states, countries left behind by Western colonial powers that were not proper states. Fully fledged states had a monopoly over the use of force within its borders, over taxation and over the loyalty of its citizens.
This did not apply in most African states, and South Africa too did not have a full monopoly complemented by a social contract for providing security for its interests.
Whether a state should use sanctions or armed intervention was a matter of tactics, Mbeki said.
But he doubted very much that South Africa would divert from its "do-nothing scenario" as its policy on Zimbabwe. The crisis did not affect the ruling African National Congress elite, only the poor of South Africa and international corporations with investments in Zimbabwe, he said.
South Africa's poor were bearing the brunt of the crisis as they had to compete with millions of Zimbabweans for scarce jobs and services. Since this did not threaten black economic empowerment- the prime preoccupation of South Africa's ruling elite - the latter would do little to resolve the Zimbabwean crisis.
It was in their narrow interest to "appear to be doing a lot", but doing nothing in reality, Mbeki said.
Asked about the chances of success for the Southern African Development Community's mediation efforts, he said President Mbeki's mandate was only to bring together the opposition and the ruling Zanu-PF party.
However, the crisis needed mediation in several areas, most notably the crisis of legitimacy, which South Africa was actually fuelling by calling Zimbabwe a democracy, and Mugabe's illegal declaration of himself as Zanu-PF's presidential candidate in next year's elections.
He believed a bigger crisis than the crackdown on the opposition was that in Zanu-PF, where dissidents were talking of toppling Mugabe from power by force.
"There is a great deal that is unknown about the dissidents," Mbeki said. It was not certain that a Mugabe successor who came from Zanu-PF's ranks would not perpetuate the party's repressive rule.
This sentiment was echoed by his co-speaker, Claire Doube, of the international Civicus organisation, who said the challenge would not be to find a successor for Mugabe who would continue in his footsteps, but to rebuild civic institutions and restore democracy.
The silence following his violent crackdown on the opposition "makes the government look invincible, which terrifies people", she said. The electorate was too intimidated to take part in attempts to unseat Mugabe, she added.
Yahoo! Mail is the world's favourite email. Don't settle for less, sign up for your free account today.
No comments:
Post a Comment