Question: What are your plans as a mediator in Zimbabwe? And how will this be different from previous attempts?
Answer: The SADC (Southern African Development Community) summit said there are three major areas of concern to the region about Zimbabwe. One is the political situation, the second is the economic situation and the third is Zimbabwe's international relations. The region had to address all three matters and therefore decided with regard to the political issues the critical intervention it needs to make it is to encourage the ruling party and the opposition to enter into the necessary dialogue to find the necessary solution.
With regard to economic ones it directed the secretariat of SADC so that as a region we can say what needs to be done. Thirdly with regard to the matter of international relations the feeling of the region was that since sanctions are not . . . helping to solve the problem that it would be better that the rest of the world acted in support of what the region would try to contribute to find the solution. So in that context they ask us to continue to engage the Zimbabweans both the opposition and the ruling party to encourage them to engage in what was described as a dialogue to find these political solutions. Unfortunately the summit met a day ahead of the meeting of the central committee of Zanu-PF. That matter was noted because everybody knew that one of the things the central committee would address would be whether there should be a reconciliation of these parliamentary and presidential elections, that if indeed they confirmed that position, then the next question would be when those elections would be, whether in 2008, the year scheduled for presidential elections, or they take place in 2010 . . . that was somewhat of a limitation . . . because if the summit knew the decision was then taken on Friday that the election was next year for both . . . [it] would be more specific . . . because obviously those elections are very important for the solution to the political challenge . . . So we have to facilitate this dialogue to find a solution to the problem. We have never had a mandate from anybody to intervene in Zimbabwe. It has entirely been a matter that we are a neighbour, that we can't stand aside when all these problems manifest themselves. ' It is actually the first time that we have been mandated by anybody. This time we are acting for the region . . . as I said we have engaged Zimbabwe over the years because we are a neighbour, we can't ignore that.
We had already been in contact with both the opposition and ZANU-PF. Last week Friday the two secretaries general of the two factions of the MDC [the opposition Movement for Democratic Change] came and had a long discussion with our people about their view about what needs to happen. At the end of that discussion they said they would then go back to Harare and give us a document which would reflect the official view, the combined view of both factions of the MDC which would then open the way for us to interact with ZANU-PF. This was before the Dar as Salaam (SADC) summit. So they are in the process of finalizing that document. And when it is finalised we will interact with ZANU-PF.
There was an expectation that this would be the decision and therefore the principal challenge that will face all Zimbabweans will be what should be done between now and those elections to create a climate that will be truly free and fair elections for an outcome that will not be contested by anybody . . .
This will be a major challenge. Normally the Zimbabweans hold their elections in March so if they stick to that we will have 11 months for these combined elections to take place. So the climate will have to be created in that period . . . We will await the finalisation of this document. I am quite clear from previous interactions with the MDC we have had they will raise questions . . . like legislation affecting the media, legislation about holding of public meetings . . . I imagine they will raise questions . . . so as I say we will get that document, I am quite sure this week, finalised and immediately we will then engage ZANU-PF saying it is necessary to respond to all of these. We may very well come to a stage later when they will have to sit together to agree on what has to be agreed which will focus principally . . . given there will be elections in 2008, what will they do to create a climate conducive to free and fair elections.
Qn: At what point does Mr Mugabe and his actions become difficult for South Africa?
Ans: The region believes there are political problems and in the course of the meeting people said quite openly they are very disturbed to see these pictures of people beaten up. That is a manifestation of the problem. So we have to, and the region believes in that context that the only way to deal with these problems and the only way to achieve results, is if we encourage the Zimbabwean political parties to engage with one another . . . That is the view of the region' whether this succeeds or not it is up to the Zimbabwe leadership.. It is they who will agree about the future of Zimbabwe, so to the extent that they don't agree, and therefore the conflict continues, maybe violence escalates which the region is very much against, sure that may be damaging but what can you do about it except to say we don't like this . . . We have intervened because we don't like it and we think this is the route to go But none of us in the region has any power to force the Zimbabweans to agree. We can persuade them to try, assist, persuade, whatever, but in the end like all these situations you know the situation of Northern Ireland, better than I, an enormous effort has gone into that process that for a very long time..
Qn: But that is really interesting that you should raise that parallel. There has been someone babysitting the process?
Ans: Maybe I shouldn't have mentioned that. To draw parallels will maybe get us into trouble. The British government has certain constitutional responsiblities to Northern Ireland that none of us have to Zimbabwe. You have a particular leverage to Northern Ireland that none of us have here. So in that context you can't transpose the two situations.. The only point I was making is that in the end'. Maybe I should have dwelled on our situation here'[a reference to how South Africans negotiated the end of aparthed]... The region is quite clear the region is really quite keen that this should be resolved.. The region is clear that such is the level interdependence in the region that inevitably negative developments in one country will affect the whole region as will positive developments. The best we can do is that we can hope the whole thing works.
Qn: Is this a trial for you?
Ans: We have been engaged with the Zimbabweans for a very long time. Historically the first liberation movement to emerge in Zimbabwe was the ANC directly out of here' a lot of that leadership came out of the South African ANC.. Robert Mugabe was a student at Fort Hare in his youth'. We have a long history with Zimbabwe. When it gets its independence in 1980 Part of what inspired our thinking here was the position they took in 1980 A lot of opinion in SA at the time, certainly as reflected in the media then was that you were gong to get a very negative approach towards the white minority at independence. And the first thing he said was we want national reconciliation, yes we have had war, the Selous Scouts, the Grey scouts' We confirmed Gen Walls as head of defence force, Ken Flower' They were all Smith's people. It encouraged the adoption of a similar position.. So we have this history (in common) So when things go wrong in Zimbabwe naturally even from that point of view' we will feel that. I am not talking about refugees coming in here of one sort of another' I am talking about marching in step.
Qn: Would Mr Mugabe stand down?
Answer : I think so. Yes sure. You see for President Mugabe and that leadership of Zanu-PF believes that they are running a democratic country . . . a democratic system. That's why you have an elected opposition, elections, that's why it is possible for opposition to . . . municipal government in both these big cities are MDC . . . and that it is in the interest of Zimbabwe to maintain a democratic system' which means that people must on a regular prescribed basis subject themselves to elections' That was one of the points he (Mugabe) made. Since independence in 1980 we have without fail held elections as scheduled. That's what they will say. They (dispute) the notion that there could be an attempt to hold on to power outside of the political processes. You might question whether these elections are genuinely free and fair . . . The point we reached we have to get the Zimbabweans talking so we do have elections that are genuinely free and fair. The matter of holding electios as scheduled is not in dispute . . . They will see, sure if we lose elections as we lost municipal lections, the mayor of Harare is not ZANU the Mayor of Bulawayo is not Zanu-PF.. There are MPs in parliament that are not ZANU-PF but MDC . . . because our candidates are defeated. That's what they say. So they would contest a view that the ZANU-PF continues in power through other than democratic means. ' The Financial Times.
