|
Back to Index
Making
Mugabe laugh
Peter
Godwin
April 18, 2011
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/19/opinion/19godwin.html?_r=2
Barely was Laurent
Gbagbo, wearing a sweat-damp white tank top and a startled expression,
prodded at rebel gunpoint from the bombed ruins of his presidential
bunker in Ivory Coast, than Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton
announced this conclusion: His ejection, more than four months after
he refused to accept electoral defeat, sent "a strong signal
to dictators and tyrants throughout the region and around the world.
They may not disregard the voice of their own people in free and
fair elections, and there will be consequences for those who cling
to power."
Zimbabwe-s
87-year-old president, Robert Mugabe, who began his 32nd year in
power this week, must have chortled when he heard that one.
The parallels
between Ivory Coast and Zimbabwe are striking: both were once viewed
as the singular successes in their respective regions, the envy
of their neighbors. Both Mr. Gbagbo, a former history professor,
and Mr. Mugabe, a serial graduate student, are highly educated men
who helped liberate their countries from authoritarian regimes.
Both later clothed
themselves in the racist vestments of extreme nativism. Mr. Gbagbo
claimed that his rival Alassane Ouattara couldn-t stand for
president because his mother wasn-t Ivorian; Mr. Mugabe disenfranchised
black Zimbabweans who had blood ties to neighboring states (even
though his own father is widely believed to have been Malawian).
The two countries
have also been similarly plagued by north-south conflicts. And when
they spiraled into failed statehood, both leaders blamed the West,
in particular their former colonial powers - France and Britain
- for interfering to promote regime change.
Finally, the
international community imposed sanctions against both countries,
including bans on foreign travel and the freezing of bank accounts,
that have largely proved insufficient.
But here-s
where the stories crucially diverge - why Laurent Gbagbo is no longer
in power, while Robert Mugabe, who lost an election
in 2008, continues to flout his people-s will.
The most important
point of departure was the sharply contrasting behavior of regional
powers. The dominant player in West Africa, Nigeria, immediately
recognized the validity of Mr. Ouattara-s victory in United
Nations-supervised elections, and worked within the regional alliance,
the Economic Community of West African States, to unseat the reluctant
loser. But Zimbabwe-s most powerful neighbor, South Africa,
played a very different role. Instead of helping to enforce democracy,
it has provided cover for Mr. Mugabe to stay on.
Partly this
is due to what is called "liberation solidarity." Most
of the political parties still in power in southern Africa were
originally anti-colonial liberation movements - like those in South
Africa, Mozambique, Namibia and Angola - and they tend to abhor
the aura-diminishing prospect of seeing any of their fellows jettisoned.
It is also because
South Africa eyes the Zimbabwean opposition - which morphed out
of a once-loyal trade union movement - through the suspicious lens
of its own trade union movement-s contemplation of opposition
politics.
As a result,
instead of supporting the Zimbabwean opposition in 2008, Thabo Mbeki,
then the South African president, bullied it into a power-sharing
government of national unity headed by Mr. Mugabe. This democracy-defying
model has threatened to metastasize into the mainstream of African
politics; that same year it was also applied to Kenya, where a unity
government was set up to end post-election bloodshed. When Mr. Mbeki
was deputized by the African Union to broker a solution in Ivory
Coast, that was the Band-Aid he reached for - but it was rightly
rejected by Mr. Ouattara.
Of course, the
other crucial difference is that in Ivory Coast, the dictator-s
ejection came at the hands of men with guns. The northern rebels
moved on Abidjan. The United Nations peacekeepers, trussed by restrictive
mandates as always, nevertheless protected Mr. Ouattara until the
French expanded an airport-securing operation into something altogether
more ambitious. They basically prized Mr. Gbagbo from his bunker,
though to avoid bad postcolonial optics, they brought the rebels
in to make the final move.
In contrast,
for refusing to plunge the country into a civil war, Zimbabwe-s
democratic opposition has been rewarded by the international community
by being largely ignored.
Next month,
a group of southern African nations will discuss Mr. Mugabe-s
continued resistance to agreed-upon reforms intended to pave the
way to free elections. Either South Africa must get Mr. Mugabe to
honor them, or it must withdraw its support for him. If it won-t,
then the international community needs to push South Africa out
of leading the negotiations, and engage more directly.
Zimbabweans
need help if their voices are to be heard. If the United States
wants to prove that Mrs. Clinton-s words were more than empty
rhetoric, it should begin by pressuring South Africa. Otherwise
Zimbabwe-s hopes for freedom will founder, even as Ivory Coast
regains its stolen democracy.
Peter Godwin
is the author of "The Fear: Robert Mugabe and the Martyrdom
of Zimbabwe."
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
|