UK Diplomats Cautioned Regarding Military Action to Overthrow Zimbabwe's Leader
Newly disclosed documents show that the UK's diplomatic corps cautioned against British military action to overthrow the former Zimbabwean president, the long-serving leader, in 2004, advising it was not considered a "serious option".
Government Documents Show Considerations on Addressing a "Remarkably Robust" Dictator
Policy papers from Tony Blair's government show officials considered options on how best to deal with the "depressingly healthy" 80-year-old dictator, who declined to leave office as the country descended into violence and economic chaos.
Following the ruling party winning a 2005 election, and a year after the UK joined a US-led coalition to oust Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, No 10 asked the Foreign Office in July 2004 to produce potential options.
Isolation Strategy Considered Not Working
Officials agreed that the UK's policy of isolating Mugabe and forging an international agreement for change was failing, having failed to secure support from key African nations, notably the then South African president, the South African leader.
Courses considered in the files included:
- "Attempt to remove Mugabe by force";
- "Implement tougher UK measures" such as seizing finances and shuttering the UK embassy; or
- "Re-engage", the approach supported by the then outgoing ambassador to Zimbabwe.
"We know from Afghanistan, Iraq and Yugoslavia that changing a government and/or its harmful policies is almost impossible from the outside."
The FCO paper dismissed military action as not a "serious option," and warned that "The only candidate for leading such a armed intervention is the UK. No other country (even the US) would be prepared to do so".
Warnings of Significant Losses and Legal Hurdles
It cautioned that military intervention would result in heavy casualties and have "serious consequences" for British people in Zimbabwe.
"Short of a severe human and political catastrophe – resulting in massive violence, significant exodus of refugees, and instability in the region – we judge that no nation in Africa would agree to any attempts to remove Mugabe forcibly."
The document adds: "Nor do we judge that any other European, Commonwealth or western partner (including the US) would sanction or join military intervention. And there would be no jurisdictional basis for doing so, without an authorising Security Council Resolution, which we would fail to obtain."
Playing the Longer Game Recommended
Blair's foreign policy adviser, a senior official, warned him that Zimbabwe "could become a significant obstacle" to his plan to use the UK's leadership of the G8 to make 2005 "the year of Africa". The adviser stated that as military action had been ruled out, "it is likely necessary that we must play the longer game" and re-engage with Mugabe.
Blair seemed to concur, noting: "We should work out a way of revealing the lies and malpractice of Mugabe and Zanu-PF up to this election and then afterwards, we could try to re-engage on the basis of a clear understanding."
The then outgoing ambassador, in his valedictory telegram, had recommended critical re-engagement with Mugabe, though he recognized the Prime Minister "would likely be appalled given all that Mugabe has said and done".
The Zimbabwean leader was ultimately removed in a military takeover in 2017, at the age of 93. Previous claims that in the early 2000s Blair had tried to pressurise the South African president into joining a military coalition to overthrow Mugabe were strongly denied by the former UK premier.