| The ZIMBABWE Situation | Our
thoughts and prayers are with Zimbabwe - may peace, truth and justice prevail. |
Quiet Non-Cooperation Could Send the Right Message to Oppressive Officials
The Daily News (Harare)
EDITORIAL
August 6, 2002
Posted to the web August 6, 2002
A LOT of people seem to agree that "mass public action" is not the best way out of the mess we are in now. Massing people where they can be more easily beaten up, tear-gassed and shot is not a very intelligent idea.
There are other ways of expressing our rejection of rigged elections and an illegitimate regime. There are many forms of quiet non-co-operation with officials we object to.
One method might be a boycott. This worked in India's independence struggle and in Ireland, where it got its name. Captain C C Boycott was a brutal land agent for a particularly oppressive English landlord. The Irish peasants had tried shooting land agents: six were hanged for every agent killed.
They tried burning down the agents' houses: 10 men were deported to Australia every time this happened. So they acted as if Captain Boycott didn't exist: didn't answer when he spoke to them, the shops didn't have anything his wife wanted, nobody knew where he lived if any stranger asked; in short, they froze him out until he left the country.
Could we show our disapproval of oppressive officials this way? If we did, what would it achieve? Captain Boycott could go back to England when the Irish didn't want him, but our oppressors are Zimbabwean. We should aim for change so that we can live in peace with them, when they stop oppressing us.
A little while ago, I picked up a children's book in one of our political leaders' house. It was written for English children, so the leader probably wouldn't want the children of the peasants to have their minds polluted by it, but I hope they are reading this.
Several of the stories were set in a village, and one character was a policeman very different from the policemen we know. Dear old PC Plod walked his beat every day, knew everyone by name, helped old ladies to cross the road, was always ready to help visitors find their way to where they wanted to go and, if he caught a boy stealing apples from someone else's garden, he wouldn't drag him to court; he'd take the boy to his father, report what his son had been doing, and they would decide together how to punish him so that he would not do it again.
Very different from our experience, isn't it? If I needed to ask someone the way in a strange place, I would never ask a policeman. I might only be going to the bar, or even to church, but I don't want them prying into my business.
If I'm visiting somebody, I might be walking into trouble, or bringing trouble with me to my friend. No: it is best to keep cops' prying noses out of our business as far as possible. They are not the people's friends.
What made PC Plod the people's friend? I doubt whether there ever were many like PC Plod, but I do know that the English police became a lot less like him when they stopped walking or cycling their beat and retreated into cars. PC Plod trudged daily through the same foul English weather as everyone else, greeted everyone he met and they shared complaints about the weather and life in general.
He was one with the people. But once he was given a car, he was cut off from the weather, cut off from the people and, instead of talking with them, he was talking all the time by radio with his officers, who are usually much less pleasant people than ordinary citizens on the street.
So there's a question: should we treat our local police like Captain Boycott or like PC Plod?
Someone started planning a long time ago to isolate our police from us. They live in special camps, with guards at the gates and warning signs to put other people off from even stopping their cars at the gate.
They are already more influenced by their officers than by us, the public, their employers. If we were to boycott them, would we not drive them further into the arms of those jumped-up "war veterans" who pass for police officers nowadays and strengthen the opinion many of them already have - that the people are the enemy?
On the other hand, if we are to talk to them, what should we say? First, only praise them if they deserve it. Secondly, always praise them if they deserve it. If you see a police officer wearing a force number, go out of your way to show your approval. Wearing a number makes them recognisable, reportable and accountable for their actions, so a policeman who wears his number is showing goodwill. Encourage him. You catch more flies with a spoonful of honey than a bucket of vinegar.
Unfortunately, there aren't very many police these days who deserve that spoonful of honey. So we should not be afraid to criticise them. Sometimes we do this by resisting injustice. For example, traffic police threaten to charge you, then offer to forget it if you pay a bribe - apologise politely for not having money with you, and say how ready you are to accept a ticket and pay within seven days or go to court. You follow the law. They stand criticised.
Sometimes you can talk informally with a policeman - on a bus or when he is off duty. If he has done anything that needs criticising, tell him so. He might listen.
Some will not. For people who will not listen, even the Gospel tells us that a time comes to stop talking, to show our disapproval - perhaps by boycotting those individuals.
But let's try the other possibilities first.
From VOA News, 6 August
Aid agencies able to provide only fraction of food needed in Zimbabwe
Harare - Aid agencies say almost 13 million people face the threat of starvation in southern Africa, as many as six million of them in Zimbabwe. Aid agencies are able to provide only a fraction of the food needed by Zimbabwe's hungry population. Many areas have no feeding programs at all. In Mwenezi, 130 kilometers north of the South African border, in Zimbabwe's Masvingo province, most school children receive a daily meal provided by the British government. The children look poor, but are not starving. They receive about one-third of their daily calorie needs from a sweet, highly nutritious porridge. Teachers say school attendance has increased dramatically since the feeding program began. A private aid agency which organized the feeding program, Christian Aid, says the children come from relatively wealthy rural families, but still are in desperate need of food assistance.
Such food programs operate in only some areas of Zimbabwe. For example, in four districts about an hour's drive north of Mwenezi, in the same province, there are no feeding arrangements of any kind for children or adults. No one is even sure how many children and adults might be on the edge of starvation. Christian Aid says non-governmental organizations simply do not have either the money or the logistics to extend their school feeding programs in the province. The charity says Zimbabwe's railways provide an unreliable service for delivery of food, all of which is imported. It says road transport increases the cost by $30 (U.S.) a ton.
In Mwenezi, which has a feeding program, the families are mostly supporters of President Robert Mugabe's ruling Zanu PF party. But in other parts of the province, opposition supporters say they are not allowed to buy maize, which has been bought with taxpayers' money and is distributed by the government's grain marketing board. They charge that they are turned away simply because they are suspected opposition supporters. The government has not responded to the accusations that it has prevented opposition supporters from buying grain. Zimbabwe laws prohibit any organization other than the government's grain marketing board from buying or selling maize. The food shortage in Zimbabwe and throughout much of southern Africa is largely the result of drought. Also in Zimbabwe, the government had not stored grain from previous harvests. Aid agencies say the seizure of thousands of recently productive white-owned farms has contributed to Zimbabwe's food shortage.
From The Daily News, 6 August
GMB withholds maize deliveries to National Foods
Bulawayo - Hundreds of National Foods employees in Bulawayo face unemployment if the Grain Marketing Board (GMB) does not resume maize deliveries to the company. The GMB stopped maize deliveries to the company five weeks ago putting the jobs of hundreds of the milling organisation’s employees in jeopardy. The company’s viability has been affected by this move which has seen a drop in production of maize meal and a drop in the availability of maize-meal on the market in the southern region of the country. The withdrawal by the GMB from providing maize has been viewed as punishment by government after the company was accused of hoarding maize to create artificial shortages. The same company was accused of hoarding salt, which has also been in short supply for weeks. The company denied the charges stating that it had been granted authority to import the scarce commodity by obtaining foreign currency which is also in short supply on the parallel market. The company said that they were awaiting government’s approval for a new price for salt and was not hoarding the commodity.
President Mugabe in a hard-hitting speech at his party’s headquarters threatened to nationalise National Foods following the "discovery" of the hoarded salt. There were reports carried in the State media in June alleging that 100 000 tonnes of maize had been discovered at the Bulawayo National Foods depot. "Obviously someone got their figures wrong because we only had 100 tonnes in stock which we were actually milling," said Ian Kind, the managing director of National Foods. He said after these reports, the GMB and the police visited the depot and found only 100 tonnes. However the GMB has not yet resumed delivering maize to the depot since then despite repeated attempts by National Foods to get supplies. "This has affected staff who were employed mainly for milling purposes. We have had to redeploy them in departments where they are not really needed", said Kind.
The availability of stock feeds, which are a by-product of maize milling, has also been seriously affected. Workers who spoke to The Daily News on condition of anonymity said they are not sure about their fate because of the non-availability of maize. "We fear that the company will retrench us in order for it to remain viable," said one of the workers. Retrenchment has been an on going exercise at the company since last year when some workers were relocated to Harare and others were retrenched as part of the company’s restructuring exercise. However as from March this year, the retrenchments were temporarily suspended. "What the GMB is doing will have serious repercussions on the company and on us the workers. We were now surviving on milling maize since we stopped milling flour last year due to the wheat shortage," said the workers. Efforts to get a comment from the GMB were fruitless.
From The Guardian (UK), 7 August
EU unveils Zimbabwe aid package
Brussels - The EU unveiled a £23m emergency food aid package for Zimbabwe yesterday, despite its deep political differences with the president, Robert Mugabe. Despite the fact that the EU is deeply unhappy about Mr Mugabe's land reform programme and his government's heavy-handed treatment of the media and political opponents, Brussels said that aid could not wait. Poul Nielson, the EU's commissioner for development and humanitarian aid, said: "Direct food aid is urgently needed to improve security and prevent widespread starvation." Alluding to British allegations that Mr Mugabe's regime is doing its utmost to see that opposition supporters are denied food aid, he added: "The government also has a responsibility to help ensure that aid gets to those that need it." EU officials said that the aid was by far the largest amount given to Zimbabwe this year. Mr Mugabe's government remains subject to an EU visa ban and asset freeze, the scope of which was widened last month. The European commission said yesterday: "Zimbabwe's food shortages are due to a combination of an unresolved political and economic crisis, resulting in sharp economic decline, compounded by the undermining of commercial agriculture by the fast track land reform and the drought which has affected southern Africa more widely." The EU money will be used to purchase 90,000 tonnes of maize, but that will not be enough to make good a total shortfall estimated at 1.87m tonnes of cereals.
From Reuters, 7 August
Zimbabwe farmers say goodbyes before eviction
Mutorashanga - White farmers have gathered for what could be final farewells across Zimbabwe as many prepare to pack their bags to comply with a government deadline to quit their land. President Robert Mugabe ordered nearly 3,000 white farmers to stop all production in June and gave them until August 9 to vacate their farms and homes to make way for landless blacks. On Tuesday 60 farmers in Mutorashanga, 100 km (60 miles) northeast of Harare, huddled for a group picture at the local social club and in some cases said their last goodbyes. A burly farmer who declined to be identified said over 70 percent of the group were leaving, and that the majority would seek a new start in neighbouring countries or overseas. "The mood around here is generally depressed. Most of us want to stay in Africa. I want to stay, but my government doesn't want me because of my colour," he told Reuters. "There are neighbouring countries around us which have been very responsive and are actually asking us to come. They are opening their door to us." Mugabe says his "fast-track" land resettlement programme is aimed at correcting imbalances in land ownership created by British colonialism, which left the bulk of Zimbabwe's prime farming land in the hands of minority whites.
Another farmer said while he had not been issued with an eviction notice, he did not see much of a future in Zimbabwe. "The economics of the whole country is collapsing. It's not viable to farm in this country and I think that is going to be basis of my decision," he said. "A lot of farmers – if they do leave Zimbabwe - will never come back, and the expertise of generations that is going to be lost to the country is frightening." Rootle Braunstein said he was leaving for New Zealand within a week to take up a job as a tool-maker, leaving behind a farm that has churned out 850 tonnes of wheat, 220 tonnes of tobacco, 40 tonnes of paprika and 500 tonnes of maize a year. "The reality is I now haven't got a place to farm and my business is basically unable to function any more. I've made my applications to the government and made my objections but nobody has listened so I'm going," Braunstein told Reuters. A lone farm truck briefly pulled off the main Mutorashanga road and the driver said that he was ferrying his employer's furniture from his property. Critics say the land reforms will leave some 250,000 farmworkers unemployed. "A lot of these chaps have been with us 20, 30, 40 years and they are going to get their package but they're basically homeless," one farmer said. Farmers have been ordered to pay their workers redundancy packages. The government says farmworkers can apply for resettlement and has encouraged new resettled farmers to employ some of them. Zimbabwe, facing its worst political and economic crisis in 22 years of independence, is at the centre of a critical food shortage in the southern African region that includes Malawi, Zambia, Lesotho, Swaziland and Mozambique.
From Associated Press, 6 August
White farmers urged to ignore order
Harare - Zimbabwe's white farmers should defy the coming deadline to leave their land because the order was issued by an illegitimate government, civil rights and agricultural groups said Tuesday. President Robert Mugabe's administration has given residents of about 2,000 white-owned farms until Friday to leave their land. Mugabe has earmarked 95 percent of white-owned farms for redistribution to landless blacks. The group Justice for Agriculture urged farmers to resist the eviction orders peacefully. "Farmers should, wherever possible, remain in their homes and on the land among their own people, who are now so much more dependent on them at this time of crisis," group spokeswoman Jenni Williams said. She also implored farmers to establish a fund for assisting anyone arrested for defying the eviction orders.
Government officials were not available for comment Tuesday. They have said the land-seizure program rectifies a long-standing colonial injustice that left whites in control of agriculture after Zimbabwe, then called Rhodesia, gained independence from Britain. The government ordered many white farmers to stop working their fields by June 24 and to leave their homes by Friday. It was unclear how the government would enforce its order or what would happen to farmers and their workers who had nowhere else to go, Williams said. About 4,000 commercial farmers and 1.5 million farm laborers and their families will be affected by the eviction orders. Justice for Agriculture was formed by a group of farmers disgruntled at the decision by the Commercial Farmers Union - Zimbabwe's main farmers' organization - to drop all litigation against the government's eviction plan. The new body met with civic groups Tuesday and they jointly resolved to shun any negotiations that could imply recognition of the legitimacy of the Mugabe government. He was declared winner of March elections that international observers condemned as seriously flawed.
Over the past two years, Zimbabwe has been torn by political violence blamed mainly on Mugabe's ruling party. The nation's economy, already weakened by expensive involvement in the Congo war, has collapsed. Zimbabwe also faces a massive hunger crisis threatening nearly half of the nation's 12.5 million people. The World Food Program blames the crisis on poor weather and the government's chaotic land reform program. Tony Reeler of the human rights group Amani Trust told the farmers the government was using the land seizures to diffuse pressure for democratic reform and as a cover for its campaign of violence against the opposition. Meanwhile, Agriculture Minister Joseph Made warned Tuesday that 54,000 black Zimbabweans who already received seized land had until Aug. 23 to give notice they intended to farm it or lose it to reallocation. Many of those receiving land say they have no idea where their farms are or how to prove they intend to farm it. Many of the largest confiscated farms have been given to top politicians and military officers.
From BBC News, 7 August
UK seeks Libya support
The first British minister to go to Libya since 1983 is due to meet veteran leader Colonel Muammar Gaddafi on Wednesday, Libyan officials have confirmed. Foreign Office Minister Mike O'Brien began his three-day visit with talks with a Libyan counterpart soon after touching down in the capital, Tripoli. Mr O'Brien's visit is publicly aimed at securing the support of Colonel Gaddafi's regime for the international war on terror. But the two countries also have an economic interest in boosting relations after years of animosity. The BBC's Bridget Kendall, who is accompanying the minister, reports that the visit attracted keen interest among the Arabic media. Mr O'Brien was quoted by the Libyan state news agency Jana as saying his visit was part of "strengthening relations" with Libya. After being welcomed by Libyan Ambassador to London Mohammed al-Zwai at the airport, he held talks with Deputy Foreign Minister Saad Mujber. Mr al-Zwai had said ahead of the arrival that he hoped the visit would improve relations with Britain "in every field".
Mr O'Brien will ask the Libyan leadership to help the West by providing intelligence on al-Qaeda. "A Libya which co-operates fully with the international community, including on terrorism, is very much in our interests," he said before leaving Britain. "My message for the Libyan leadership is that we want to see further progress on the outstanding issues between us on terrorism and on weapons of mass destruction." It is thought likely that the possibility of military action against Iraq will also be discussed. Our correspondent says Britain is keen to use the visit to boost ties that have been cautiously improving ever since diplomatic relations were restored three years ago. Libya is keen to re-enter the world economy and Britain does not want to lose out to other European nations already jostling for advantage when it comes to potentially lucrative oil contracts.
Libya's decision to hand over the officials tried for the Lockerbie bombing was seen as a major breakthrough in ties, but Mr O'Brien is due to raise issues still causing concern:
Compensation for the victims of the bombing will be on the agenda, although Mr O'Brien has stressed that it is a matter which must be resolved between Libya and lawyers for the families.
The investigation into the 1984 murder of British police officer Yvonne Fletcher outside the Libyan Embassy in London has yet to be completed. Britain restored diplomatic relations in 1999 only after Tripoli accepted general responsibility for the shooting.
The regime's support for Zimbabwe's President Robert Mugabe is also among the topics likely to be raised by Mr O'Brien.
Comment from The New York Times, 7 August
Zimbabwe's man-made famine
By David Coltart
Harare - In the last two years Zimbabwe has been transformed into a state that increasingly resembles Cambodia under Pol Pot. The government seems set on adding famine to the list of oppressions visited on the nation. In May, a law was passed decreeing that any commercial farmer who continued to farm 45 days after being given notice to stop would face imprisonment. On Friday, that law will be used to evict thousands of commercial farmers and their workers. Fear and desperation pervade the country. All the signs are that President Robert Mugabe is determined to hold on to power at any cost, including the destruction of the nation and the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Zimbabweans. It has been clear for some years that the Mugabe regime is determined to shrink the democratic space to an absolute minimum. The judiciary has been all but destroyed. Independent journalists have been arrested, their presses bombed. In January the regime rammed through Parliament legislation subverting the electoral process, revoking civil liberties and restricting the press. In the same month, the military suggested that only Mr. Mugabe would be acceptable as leader. The political campaign that followed was marked by violence. The presidential election in March was a farce. Mr. Mugabe was proclaimed winner in an election that was widely condemned internationally. The overwhelming majority of Zimbabweans, who were hoping for a peaceful transition to democracy in March, have had their hopes dashed.
For its part, the Mugabe regime, while increasingly irrational and paranoid, knows it must convince the world it is legitimate if it is to survive. For this reason, the regime cloaks its suppression of democracy in what would otherwise be legitimate concerns, primarily the need to redress legacies of colonial injustice. The unresolved land-ownership issue has been exploited very effectively to cover up corruption, poor administration and human-rights abuses. The catastrophic human-rights situation is now complicated by a famine that is, in the case of Zimbabwe, mainly the result of the Mugabe regime's ruinous policies. While a drought did occur at a critical period during the summer, it only affected the dry-land corn crop. The rainy season was just below average and nearly all the irrigation reservoirs are almost full. Had experienced farmers been allowed to plant their crops, Zimbabwe would not have had to import any food at all. As it is, Zimbabwe is now facing a shortage of some 1.2 million tons of corn. The situation is compounded by the fact that only a small proportion of the winter wheat crop has been planted because of threats directed against wheat farmers. If the Mugabe regime goes ahead this weekend with its plans to evict thousands of farmers and their employees, many of their crops will not be properly harvested. The World Food Program recently predicted that as many as 6 million Zimbabweans will soon face starvation. At least 25 percent of Zimbabweans are H.I.V. positive. Experts are agreed that some 20 percent of AIDS sufferers are extremely vulnerable to drops in nutritional levels. Conservatively, one might calculate that 300,000 Zimbabweans could die within the next few months as a result of this combination of famine and AIDS.
The Mugabe regime may be counting on catastrophe for its own salvation. It has already sought to hide behind drought. There is no doubt a calculation taking place that the "CNN factor" (images of starving children) will soon dominate policy decisions in the West and that a flood of aid will pour in. That Zimbabwe and other countries in the region need vast amounts of food and medical aid is beyond doubt. But if the symptom of famine is addressed but not its cause, the international community will only have succeeded in perpetuating the problem. Ongoing food shortages will occur unless a massive irrigated corn crop is planted this November. It can still be planted if the rule of law is re-established - which will only occur with help from Zimbabwe's neighbors and through holding a fresh election that complies with accepted standards. Sadly, there are very few levers left which can be used by the West to restore sanity to Zimbabwe. The new relationship between Africa and the wealthy industrialized countries – as expressed in the recent meetings between representatives of the Group of 8 and the New Economic Partnership for Africa's Development - is one such lever. While Zimbabwe should not be allowed to hold hostage democratic African states that desperately need the new partnership to work, the reality is that, like it or not, Zimbabwe is the partnership's first test. Famine in Zimbabwe is primarily caused by bad governance, which in this specific case is tolerated by many African states and supported by some. The consequences of this man-made famine will become clear in the next few months. Investors the world over will be watching closely to see whether African rulers deal with the cause of this particular famine, not merely its symptoms. If African leaders do not act in these circumstances, what investment in Africa will ever be safe in the future?
Yet there has been very little to indicate that African states have the political will to deal with the crisis in Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe is becoming a police state without so much as a whimper coming from the same African states who heralded a new beginning for Africa at the Group of 8 meeting and the inauguration of the African Union. If leaders in the industrialized democracies are interested in preventing what was once the jewel of Africa from becoming another Somalia - and in preventing future famines in southern Africa - then they must persuade their African colleagues to deal with the real cause of the catastrophe unfolding in Zimbabwe.
Comment from The Christian Science Monitor, 6 August
The Rhodesian plan
Grant Newsham
Tokyo - Three times during the 1990s, the world stood by while heart-rending - and preventable - African tragedies unfolded in Liberia, Rwanda, and Sierra Leone. President Robert Mugabe's ongoing assault on human rights and democracy in Zimbabwe offers the latest test of whether the world community, and the West in particular, will act aggressively to avert tragedy. Mr. Mugabe's behaviour does not surprise people familiar with his record. In 1982, less than two years after being elected as newly independent Zimbabwe's first prime minister, Mugabe unleashed his North Korean-trained 5th Brigade against "dissidents" in the province of Matabeleland. Conservative estimates reckon 15,000 Matabele were murdered. Mugabe has subsequently intimidated the opposition, stolen elections, and squandered his country's vast natural wealth. He is destroying the economy and creating a famine.
On human rights abuses in black Africa, one simply hasn't seen the same manifestations of protest and pressure by Western governments and private organizations directed against tyrants on other continents - or even like those used against South Africa's apartheid regime. The European Union has enacted sanctions against Mugabe, but they're too narrow and too late. Ironically, the template for dealing with him is the one used to bring about regime changes in Rhodesia (as Zimbabwe was called before independence), and later, in South Africa. In both cases, wide-ranging economic and financial sanctions were crucial. Sanctions don't work quickly, but they are more or less effective, depending on the degree the regime is willing to use repression to survive. The broader the sanctions, the better.
A plan based on the Rhodesia model would include the following:
Financial sanctions: Because the basic source of power in any tyrannical regime is access to finances, an effective sanctions campaign against Mugabe must target his money. Impose strict controls on financial transactions involving Zimbabwe. The countries dominating the global banking system are quite capable of financially isolating a country and tracking fund movements. Even if multilateral cooperation is difficult, the US Treasury's controls against designated countries are an effective device, and the US can bring along many of its allies in an effort against Mugabe. Compared with elusive drug dealers and terrorists whose finances are now targeted, going after a clearly identified target is a far simpler task.
Hold financial institutions accountable: Targeted regimes will strenuously seek to evade sanctions by using proxies and front operations to move funds. Thus, it is essential to require financial institutions and other intermediaries such as lawyers and accountants to vet the source of funds they accept. A concerted intelligence effort to track down Mugabe's money is essential. In addition to an impressive global ability to monitor telecom and computer network systems, most competent foreign intelligence services are capable of penetrating the ruler's inner circle to uncover details of his finances and evasion methods. Aggressively seize assets when violations, or suspect money, are detected.
Trade sanctions: Extremely strict trade sanctions are vital. A certain amount of "leakage" will occur, but the economy will slowly atrophy. Rhodesia is a prime example of how effective these can be. A Rhodesian involved in evading the oil embargo commented once, "In 1965, Rhodesia was 20 years ahead of South Africa economically, but by 1975 we were 20 years behind." Five years later the country yielded to majority rule.
International ostracism: Combine financial and trade sanctions with a scheme to shut the Mugabe regime out of international society. Expel Zimbabwe from the UN and other international organizations, and institute a near-complete travel ban on the country's nationals, and on everyone connected with the ruling elite. Victims of this sort of social exclusion naturally play down its importance, but it is surprisingly wearing over time.
No 'targeted sanctions': Accept that the average Zimbabwean will suffer from the sanctions. Targeted or so-called "smart" sanctions don't work. As long as the ruling elite has access to resources, they will use them for themselves.
A positive component: Give moral support to the people. Supply funding and other assistance - covertly if necessary - to the opposition. Lay out a clear concept of what the sanctions are to accomplish. Win the public relations game both domestically and internationally, and put Mugabe in the position of defending corruption and repression. Despite his crudely racist appeals to Zimbabwean nationalism, a majority still voted against him in the March election. Show the opposition that it has the world's support. Eastern European dissidents noted how helpful this was psychologically, as did Nelson Mandela in South Africa. Encourage nongovernmental organizations and human rights groups to take up the cause of the opposition.
Be willing, as a last resort, to intervene militarily. Most tyrants resort to violence because they think they can get away with it.
Complete international cooperation in this multipart plan is unrealistic, but the leading Western nations are capable of acting and having immense influence. Previous African tragedies were usually followed by Western leaders solemnly declaring that "we mustn't let this happen again." Zimbabwe will tell us if they were serious.
Grant Newsham is a former US Foreign Service officer with long experience in Southern Africa. He is a vice president of a US investment bank.