Why South African treads softly, softly with Mugabe

SOUTH AFRICA: South Africa is unwilling to criticise Zimbabwe as it approaches elections that are likely to be flawed, Bill Corcoran reports from Johannesburg

One of South Africa's longest-serving Zimbabwean correspondents, Jan Raath, slipped out of the country last week following an intimidation campaign and a warning that he was about to be arrested on trumped-up charges.

He was one of three journalists who fled the country after their Harare offices were raided by police, who confiscated computer equipment on the grounds they might be involved in espionage.

As President Robert Mugabe and his ruling Zanu-PF party set out on the road to win the March 31st general election under an anti-Western mandate, international powers question how best to ensure a free and fair election.

Previous elections in 2000 and 2002 were marred by political violence, and many are sceptical about the validity of the victories that were recorded by the Zanu-PF party. Also, the role of South Africa as Zimbabwe's dominant neighbour has become increasingly complex because of both countries' common past.

That Zimbabwe is in a state of turmoil is undisputed by most observers. A US-funded organisation, Famine Early Warning Systems Network, warned recently that about 5.8 million of the country's 12 million population would need food aid until next April's harvest. The average life expectancy is 39 and the annual income per capita is $1,900 (€1,430).

President Thabo Mbeki of South Africa has repeatedly pointed to the use of "quiet diplomacy" as the best way to ensure free and fair elections, but a recent events have prompted western observers to question if President Mugabe is prepared to listen to the region's most powerful man.

In January, President Mbeki issued a statement highlighting an urgent need to deploy independent observers "to go there [ to Zimbabwe] and observe, to be able to intervene, to help and to create a situation for fair elections"

Effectively, he wanted a Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) monitoring delegation to enter Zimbabwe 90 days before the election.

However the delegation was not invited until last Thursday - leaving the mission just over a month to carry out its task.

Last week alone agents of President Mugabe committed a string of offences that run contrary to the electoral principles his government signed up to in August as a member of SADC.

Zimbabwean police arrested opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) elections director Ian Makone for allegedly convening an illegal meeting, and 14 members of the National Constitutional Assembly, an MDC ally, for staging a protest for a free and fair election.

As stories of alleged intimidation and harassment begin to emerge, fears there will be a repeat of the country's previously widely discredited elections have increased simultaneously. The EU renewed its selective sanctions policy against the country last week. In conjunction, the US put President Mugabe in their list of the world's top six tyrannical leaders.

Although most Africans consider such actions as nothing more than a parting swipe by their once colonial oppressors, the alleged abuses in Zimbabwe would suggest the West's view is not without merit.

Ironically, the reported incidents occurred at the same time South Africa's foreign minister, Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, said she was satisfied Zimbabwe was taking steps to ensure free and fair elections under the SADC guidelines.

While the violence and intimidation has yet to reach the levels recorded during previous elections, why would South Africa's government turn a blind eye to events that could potentially destabilise the region?

According to one respected Western regional analyst, who requested anonymity, the primary reason relates to the link that exists between Mebki's ANC and Mugabe's Zanu PF party, in terms of both groups' involvement in the struggle for liberation.

"People outside the region fail to realise how bonding being in a sister liberation movement is, and how long these organisations go back.

"They are a product of 700 years of colonialism, which creates a mind-set and a bond that is very difficult to break.

"You always see African solidarity from Mbeki. But I also think he is a pragmatist: he believes there isn't much he can really do to change the situation. Mugabe has shown he will do whatever he wants to when it comes to national politics.

"While I think Mbeki could do more in terms of putting pressure on Zimbabwe, the idea he could change the situation overnight is something you often hear from the West - Well, to be honest I don't think he can do that," he told The Irish Times.

South African international relations expert David Monyae shares some of his Western colleague's views but believes President Mbeki has no choice other than the "quiet diplomacy" approach.

"South Africa is not going to advance Western interests in Zimbabwe. The government is trying to use a multilateral foreign policy approach to the region - and this takes time to bare fruit. These elections will use common regional norms for the first time ever.

"There is a lot of baggage attached to this situation and blunders and been made in London and Harare. South Africa is saying I don't want to be the one that has to clean up the mess," he said.