Back to Index

Grounds for direct SADC intervention in Zimbabwe
Dewa Mavhinga
April 08, 2011

Following an unusually and refreshingly strong statement on Zimbabwe at the recently ended SADC Troika Summit in Livingstone, Zambia, there has been highly emotional responses from certain elements who are falsely claiming that the amorphous concept of State Sovereignty precludes SADC from directly intervening in the internal affairs of Zimbabwe. Perhaps some SADC leaders, in the face of this bullying response by ZANU-PF are bulking at the prospect of transforming their stern words into resolute action. I wish explore the various grounds that justify SADC-s direct intervention in the domestic affairs of Zimbabwe.

The debate on whether or not SADC can intervene in the affairs of Zimbabwe without infringing state sovereignty is merely academic because SADC is already intimately involved in Zimbabwe-s domestic affairs. SADC and the African Union are the guarantors of the GPA and the resultant governance arrangement. After widespread electoral violence that rendered the June 2008 presidential runoff election illegitimate leaving Zimbabwe without an effective government, it was SADC and the AU that came to the rescue, leading a mediation process that resulted in an uneasy marriage between ZANU-PF and the two MDC formations.

It was on this basis of direct SADC involvement that South Africa was appointed mediator to help SADC, the GPA guarantor, to ensure that the inclusive government that had been set up implements critical agreed reforms in order to pave way for Zimbabwe to hold democratic elections where violence and intimidation play no part. Outside of this SADC guaranteed arrangement and GPA framework Zimbabwe there is no legitimate government to talk of that can lay claims to state sovereignty.

In the spirit of finding African solutions to African problems the two African institutions - SADC and the AU - are fully within their mandate of guarantorship to continue to directly intervene to assist the people of Zimbabwe to find a lasting solution to the continuing and festering political conflict. Under the international doctrine of the responsibility to protect (R2P), SADC and other regional and international institutions have a right to intervene in the affairs of member states in the interests of human security.

The first and sacred duty of the government of Zimbabwe is to protect its citizens and to advance their interests. However, when a state turns predator on its citizens external intervention becomes legitimate for the purpose of restoration of peace and human security. Sovereignty does not give any State the right to abuse and harm its citizens; rather, genuine sovereignty is premised on the sacrosanctity of the security of person.

To plead state sovereignty as an excuse to butcher citizens while the rest of the international community looks on is akin to an abusive husband telling relatives and members of the community that they cannot interfere with his right to abuse his wife and children! The correct legal position is that sovereignty is limited and conditional to a state-s willingness and capacity to provide protection to its citizens.

SADC and the AU through its Peace and Security Council should closely monitor events in the region in order to anticipate and prevent conflict. Zimbabwe is one such case where all indicators are pointing to a disaster in the making, to a political cataclysm if proactive action is not taken to guide Zimbabwe through the implementation of critical reforms necessary for democratic elections where the military is completely removed and separated from political and civilian affairs. Now is the right time for SADC and the AU to be firm with Zimbabwe and to demonstrate commitment to human rights, democracy and good governance so as to forestall a catastrophe. SADC should have learnt from the upheavals in north Africa the dangers of waiting for rivers of blood to flow on the streets before taking action. If Zimbabwe is left to its own devices, it is most likely to go over the precipice, plunging the entire southern Africa region into crisis.

There is need for SADC now to take firm, decisive steps to implement all the Communiqué resolutions to pave way for democratic elections that are without violence or intimidation. The SADC Troika must now urgently appoint, with concrete terms of reference, the promised team of officials to join the Facilitation Team and work with the Joint Monitoring and Implementation Committee (JOMIC) to ensure monitoring, evaluation and implementation of the GPA. We expect the appointed SADC Team to be composed of eminent Africans who are fully independent, professional and have extensive experience in the area of democratic governance, regional elections and security sector governance reform. The appointed SADC Team must be fully empowered to recommend appropriate, decisive action in the event of failure to implement all GPA provisions.

We expect that the SADC Troika will broaden the process of drawing up with Zimbabwe-s elections roadmap making it as inclusive as possible - taking on board a wide range of views from various stakeholders including civil society groups. The democratization and future of Zimbabwe is too important to be left just in the hands of three political principals and their six negotiators.

*Dewa Mavhinga is the Regional Coordinator, Crisis in Zimbabwe Coalition (South Africa)

Please credit www.kubatana.net if you make use of material from this website. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License unless stated otherwise.

TOP