The Tyrant Must Be Removed, Yes… But How?
Graham Reilly writes that it’s time for Robert Mugabe, Zimbabwe’s president, to go. The onetime hero has developed into a bloodthirsty tyrant, whose militias are intimidating, torturing and killing members of the opposition. The only question is, how can Mugabe be removed from power?
As managing editor Jason Steck pointed out recently, the balance of power is in Mugabe’s interest. Simply put; it is not in the West’s interest to start a massive (military) campaign to force Mugabe to step down. Western governments may complain about Mugabe’s conduct, but they are unwilling to step in by, for instance, sending a large (peace) force.
Mugabe knows this as well as anyone, which is why he uses rhetoric like ‘it will take God to get rid of me.’ Although Reilly seems to believe that the West can force him to step down, I agree with Jason that it’s unlikely that they will do so. All the more so because the West, as usual, seems to forget that threats can grow slowly; if the West would have acted against the Taliban, 9/11 would never have happened. But the Taliban were in Afghanistan; who cares about that desert, right?
Reilly suggests ways for the West to take down Mugabe, none of the suggestions is related to military force. His plan relies completely on diplomacy. My question to Reilly is: when was the last time that a tyrant stepped down because of some pesky outside pressure and sanctions? It has never happened, and it will never happen. Tyrants are more than willing to starve their people to death, all that matters to them is their own political survival.
The author’s plan makes even less sense if one realizes that it is very unlikely that South Africa will step in; as long as Mbeki is not willing to do anything about the situation in his neighboring state, even less than nothing will happen.
