SADC Enablers call “emergency summit” on Zimbabwe
posted at 5:25 pm on April 9, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
The South African Development Community, comprising all of Zimbabwe’s neighbors, have called an emergency summit to discuss the standoff over the election they supervised. Unfortunately, the SADC may have just as much credibility as Robert Mugabe in this crisis, considering their role in legitimizing the polling:
Zimbabwe’s neighbours have announced that they will hold an emergency summit to discuss the country’s election crisis.
The gathering of the leaders of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) in Zambia on Saturday is a sign that President Robert Mugabe’s regional allies may fear that his conduct does not reflect well on them in the eyes of the international community.
Why might that be? Well, the SADC has had its lips planted on Mugabe’s backside for so long that it might take a surgeon to remove them. Before the election that created this crisis, Mugabe booted out all of the election observers from the West in favor of SADC monitors. They promptly responded by declaring the election as “peaceful and credible” without waiting for Mugabe to publish the results.
Now the SADC wants to get the stink of Mugabe’s corruption off themselves with this “emergency summit”. If they had the interests of Zimbabweans instead of Mugabe in mind, they wouldn’t have issued an asinine endorsement of the election in the first place. In fact, they would have taken action to press for Mugabe’s long-overdue election years ago, when his destructive policies started resulting in inflation rates above 100%, instead of waiting for them to hit 150,000%.
Now, with reports of hit squads targeting voters in opposition-friendly districts, the disaster of Zimbabwe won’t just fall on Mugabe’s shoulders. When Mugabe falls through resignation or throuh violent overthrow, Zimbabweans will start asking very tough questions of those who enabled Mugabe’s dictatorship to survive. The SADC will be among those who need to provide some answers.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
How come all the freedom loving, save africa hollyweirdos aren’t screaming for the US to step in and defend the integrity of the election process in zimbabwe?
Oh yea, because mugabe hates the US and so do hollyweirdos.
peacenprosperity on April 9, 2008 at 5:31 PM
Hey Ed,
Can you cut it out. The SADC are doing everything they can to resolve the issue in Zimbabwe, and they don’t need people disparaging them for it.
I think you guys need to chill on this bashing. Yes, Mugabe has done some bad things, but that is par for the course in Africa. You have to understand the continent fundamentally before you start moralizing about issues. I’m still wondering why you guys are so interested in Zimbabwe out of all the places in Africa with issues like this.
Chudi on April 9, 2008 at 5:34 PM
peacenprosperity on April 9, 2008 at 5:31 PM
That’s a good point.
samuelrylander on April 9, 2008 at 5:35 PM
Ditto!
Branch Rickey on April 9, 2008 at 5:36 PM
Emphasis mine.
Branch Rickey on April 9, 2008 at 5:41 PM
You’re Not the World, Bono Breath.
mymanpotsandpans on April 9, 2008 at 5:45 PM
Chudi,
Your points are correct, as far as they go. The larger picture is the change in prosperity in Zimbabwe under the latest in Mugabe’s policies.
The direct result of Mugabe’s government action is to ruin an entire nation.
There is now less food, no future for the majority, population diaspora, and widespread poverty. It’s Mugabe’s fault.
Robert
NaCly dog on April 9, 2008 at 5:49 PM
NO!
Les in NC on April 9, 2008 at 5:52 PM
The reason the media isn’t in an uproar is they still haven’t figured out how to blame this on colonialism. After all, SA and Zimbabwe returned to an “authentic” society, didn’t they?
PattyJ on April 9, 2008 at 6:19 PM
The political classes of SADC nations are populated with people whose economic and political philosophies are nearly identical to Mugabe’s. Most of the UN is in the same boat.
That Mugabe’s failures have taken this long to get any attention in the West is a measure of how fake, or perhaps selective, our great humanitarians are when it comes to outrage and being true to their ideals. Obama(s) sound a lot more like Mugabe than they do MLK.
South Africa just adopted a land seizure program like Mugabe’s. They might do some things differently to avoid catastrophe, but it is the same old manure, to be allocated the same old ways.
Birds of a feather do flock together, and petty tyrants, present and future, are careful not to embarass their fellow travelers. The sheep they rule might awaken…
Harry Schell on April 9, 2008 at 6:31 PM
Isn’t it Carter and his fellow travelers who “monitor” these things. Oh yeah, I forgot. It was Carter who inflicted Mugabe on Zimbabwe in the first place. And you probably thought he only gave the world the Ayatollah Khomeini. Nope, Carter is responsible for this second misery. Read on:
Carter’s Role in Zimbabwe
JiangxiDad on April 9, 2008 at 6:52 PM
Many of the people who are criticizing my comments here have a fundamental misunderstanding about Africa. I think you are the ones who are ignorant. I suggest you go study the continent before you start making snide remarks. I lived in Africa for 18yrs…I know what I’m talking about.
Have you asked yourselves why there doesn’t seem to be a sense of urgency about the issue of the results…it’s par for the course. In Nigeria in 1993, the govt cancelled a whole election, after announcing the results cus they didn’t like the winner. The army basically took over within a few weeks. These things happen in Africa, and it’s pretty common.
Let the SADC handle it at their own pace. They will figure it out. They will put enough pressure on ZANU PF to do the right thing. The hardball tactics that you guys are proposing will lead to a very bad outcome, most likely war. This will probably destabilize the whole region, which directly affects the members of the SADC…or do you think you guys here, care more about the people of Zimbabwe than they do.
You guys need to cool it. Elections are cancelled or stolen in many countries around the world all the time, I don’t see why zimbabwe should be a special case unless you guys would prefer to see a war in another African country.
Chudi on April 9, 2008 at 7:30 PM
A couple of months ago we saw something similar in Kenya. The sitting President tried, basically successfully as it turned out, to steal an election he had lost. Kenyans went into the streets to protest…and then it happened. Kofi Annan appeared to “negotiate a solution and to prevent further violence.
Now we see another stolen election, with all the mechanisms of the state being readied to suppress any protest. I am fairly certain that we will see Zimbabweans in the street rioting to stop the theft of their election, if Mugabe maintains his grip on power. this will lead to the SADC and probably, once again, Anna on the scene to negotiate a “solution”.
And so, I am left with the following questions.
1. Why must we intervene to prevent people from fighting for democracy, or to save their existing democracy?
2. Why must democrats compromise with those who seek to steal their democracy?
3. Of what value is negotiation when one party’s only interest is conquest?
4. Is democracy not worth fighting for? Maybe dying for?
5. If democracy is not worth fighting/dying for is this not an implicit admission that, under sufficient pressure, always concede power to those willing to murder us?
Just asking.
Blaise on April 9, 2008 at 7:41 PM
“….The hardball tactics that you guys are proposing will lead to a very bad outcome, most likely war. “
Chudi: This doesn’t make sense to me. Exactly how is a war going to break out in Zimbabwe? If Mugabe and his ruling ZANU-PF elite decide they can ride it out because the neighbors aren’t really pressuring them they can just declare martial law. The ordinary citizens that voted Mugabe out are starving and have no real means of resistance. You don’t get a civil war unless there’s another side able to fight. Do you see any signs that the armed forces under Mugabe’s control are likely to split?
Jill
Jill1066 on April 9, 2008 at 8:26 PM
Been studying the continent structure for longer than you have been living there and working on the cause of rescuing the innocent victims of the the warlord dictators; so watch your snide remarks….
Branch Rickey on April 9, 2008 at 9:01 PM
Branch Rickey,
I bet you don’t know what the hell you are talking about. You have been studying the continent structure…what does that mean. I was born in Africa, I grew up in Africa. I still have half of my family living there. I go back there often, do don’t tell me you have been studying the ‘continent structure and the cause of rescuing innocent victims’. That’s BS.
Jill,
The conditions you described are exactly the conditions that have led to war in other places. That the people are starving doesn’t mean they can’t fight a war, infact it’s these disgruntled people who warlords tend to recruit, give them guns and a little money and they go on rampage. Do you know about Liberia or Sierra Leone. None of these countries had any money…but had very long civil wars. In Congo right now, they have been fighting for more than I can remember…but nobody pays attention to it. The situation in Zimbabwe is very critical and trust me, it can explode at any moment.
Blaise,
Did you just ask…’is democracy not worth fighting for and dying for?’
In most African countries, the answer is NO. Africa has seen enough war and human suffering. We don’t need anymore. It is convenient to sit at home and ask those questions…but the answer is NO. Mugabe is pretty old, and he will probably die soon. I think most people in Zimbabwe and southern Africa would take the alternative to wait him out than to have a civil war. It’s not worth it. During the Liberian and Sierra Leonean wars, ECOMOG which is the west african economic union had to send thousands of soldiers to help the fight. Thousands were killed. The whole region was destabilized with millions of refugees all the over the area.
Africa has seen enough war, and I think that every action of the SADC in this crisis is being taken to prevent the outbreak of war.
Chudi on April 9, 2008 at 9:40 PM
Chudi on April 9, 2008 at 7:30 PM
Chudi, you are the ignoramus, having lived there for 18 years (where in Africa anyhow) does not make you an expert.
Mugabe and the ANC where in the same camp during their struggle. It does not matter how wrong Mugabe is. The ANC cannot forsake him because it will weaken their own position. Mandela/Mbeki and next Zuma will protect and take the side of Mugabe does not matter what happens. There is no hope for Zimbabwe and for that matter S.A. It may take more than 30 years but S.A. will follow the same path. THAT IS WHAT AFRICA IS ABOUT !
SIJ6141 on April 9, 2008 at 10:24 PM
SIJ,
‘THAT IS WHAT AFRICA IS ABOUT’..That statement is exactly the problem with people like you and your ilk. Africa doesn’t need the paternalism that you ‘smart’ people like you.
I just wonder why this site is full of Zimbabwe bashing stories everyday, when Africa is a useless continent. How moronic.
Chudi on April 9, 2008 at 10:52 PM
As was pointed out, the liberals and left forced SA & Rhodesia to go back to Africa “in the good old days.” Well with all our modern communications we see how the good old days are and were. Black killing blacks, racial/tribal hatred rekindled and mass graves all over (your misunderstood continent). Rwanda still reeks from the almost million killed, not by white moralists but by black people with the vilest of racial animosity. Now, that country was “mean” quoting MS Obama. Yes, Chudi, things do move slow on that continent (progress, governability, racial accord,etc). The only thing that has moved fast is the absolute destruction by black bigots of great civilized infrastructures in countries like Kenya, Uganda, South Africa, Rhodesia and on and on. You chill out you closed mind dummy.
wepeople on April 9, 2008 at 11:36 PM
Based on the above statement, i don’t think I’m the close mind person. Don’t worry, we don’t need white people like you helping to fix our problems, which goes back to my original question…why is there a post here everyday bashing Zimbabwe and the SADC, with morons like you moralizing on your high and mighty throne.
Chudi on April 10, 2008 at 12:17 AM
Don’t worry, we don’t need white people like you helping to fix our problems,
ooh.
Sonosam on April 10, 2008 at 12:35 AM
Sonosam,
I assume you didn’t have a problem with the hate-filled vile in the post above mine.
Chudi on April 10, 2008 at 12:47 AM
Chudi,
I don’t need to have lived in Africa, studied Africa, or travelled in Africa to know that Mugabe is an old-style despot.
President for life, if you will. And yes, there will be blood. All that needs deciding is how much.
Perhaps someone will remind him that he’s only President for life…
I R A Darth Aggie on April 10, 2008 at 9:29 AM
The point is that we want to see democracy in all countries possible, and Zimbabwe is one of those. No one should tolerate stolen elections, martial law, and starvation anywhere. Zimbabwe is but one of several countries discussed here, where leftist ideas carried out have proven to become totalitarian states. Note the discussions on Venezuela just last week. We discuss Zimbabwe now, because it is the latest failed socialist state – and there is a chance for them to escape it, now that Mugabe has lost his latest election, despite all his attempts to thwart democracy.
Think_b4_speaking on April 10, 2008 at 9:31 AM
I’m sorry, Chudi, but when you made that statement you just threw away any credibility you had.
I would think, Chudi, that rather than bashing us for talking about Zimbabwe, you would appreciate us talking about it. America has been criticized for so long for not caring about Africa. Well, this group of Americans does. And what do we get? “Don’t worry, we don’t need white people like you helping to fix our problems”
We talk about Zimbabwe in part because it was a fairly prosperous nation, and Mugabe destroyed it. And he is propped up in part by his fellow dictators in Africa. Far from “fixing your problems,” countries like South Africa under Thabo Mbeki and groups like SADC will likely help perpetuate it, as they have done in the past, by propping up Mugabe and allowing him to continue to murder his own people and drive the country further into ruin.
We are not the problem. Mugabe is the problem. We are doing what we can to publicize Mugabe’s despicable acts to get him removed from power. For some reason, for someone who allegedly cares about Africa so much, removing this thug does not seem to be high on your list of priorities.
Pro Cynic on April 10, 2008 at 9:54 AM
Chudi: Just a couple of points in response.
1. The questions I asked, though they arise out of recent events in Africa, are not only about Africa. We see the same thing happen when people try to stand up for democracy in Tibet, Myanmar/Burma and the list goes on. In the end, people who have tried to stand up are made to sit down, and those who try to steal the democracy continue in power.
2. Events belie your your assertion that people are too tired to defend their democracy. Granted I wasn’t there, but unless every news channel was making it up, Kenyans went into the street to defend the democracy that they had thought they had solidified in the last elections. And if Zimbabweans too decide they want to defend their democracy, then it is arrogant and paternalistic to tell them they should not.
Blaise on April 10, 2008 at 11:18 AM