April 8, 2005
Mugabe and Zimbabwe's 'John Paul' Option
By Austin Bay

Zimbabwe dictator Robert Mugabe combines the worst aspects of Cold War and war on terror tyranny.

Think of Mugabe as an African Slobodan Milosevic. When the Cold War closed down, Milosevic morphed from Yugoslav communist to Serb fascist. As time passed in southern Africa, Mugabe adjusted his schtick, moving from Marx-spouting revolutionary to kleptocrat tribal dictator. Both thugs are ethnic cleansers and cynical thieves who murder rivals, silence the media and brutally intimidate domestic opposition.

There is a major difference: Milosevic is under arrest, while Mugabe continues to destroy a once-wealthy nation while hiding behind a slick PR campaign that corrupts classic human rights themes.

Mugabe can give Milosevic lessons in rigging elections. On March 31, Mugabe stole his third election in five years, making Zimbabwe the world's leader in charade democracy.

Mugabe and his thugs tried to steal the last one quietly. As elections approached, Mugabe began denying foreign reporters entry visas. He imposed a law that made "unauthorized demonstrations" a felony punishable by up to 20 years in jail — a law aimed at his opponents in the Movement for Democratic Change, or MDC.

And then there's the food weapon. Mugabe's government controls Zimbabwe's food supplies. Cooperate, and you get your loaf of bread. Oppose Mugabe, and food is denied.

Ah, but those pesky priests won't shut up. Mugabe has had to threaten church leaders he deems responsible for "encouraging" street protests. Catholic Bishop Pius Ncube — a major domestic critic of Mugabe — has been a special target.

Ncube predicted last week's election would be rigged. The "final tally" gave Mugabe's Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front 74 seats and the MDC 40. There's no question Mugabe committed mass fraud — the MDC has refused to accept the results.

Mugabe may get away with it, breaking the democratic pulse surging through Afghanistan, Ukraine, Palestine, Iraq and Lebanon and testing the Bush administration. The man is ruthless, and in the past ruthless has worked.

Though Mugabe's ethnic cleansing of the Mdebele in 1980 brought extensive criticism, it never became international opposition to his regime. Whenever international outrage builds, Mugabe trots out two themes that have been political trumps for too many African tyrants, "combating colonialism" and "fighting racism." This mantra stymies a fossil segment of the human-rights left — a crowd that railed against Milosevic.

Mugabe also appears to have another hole card: South Africa's Thabo Mbeki has not played pro-democracy Poland to the Zimbabwe democrats' would-be Ukraine. In fact, Mbeki looks increasingly weak, ineffectual and churlish — a man who knows he stands in Nelson Mandela's shadow and resents it.

Mbeki declared Zimbabwe's elections "free and fair" before the vote. A few commentators conclude this is Mbeki and Mugabe acting out a form of freedom-fighter solidarity.

What can be done to support the democrats? Any effective military action or political-economic sanctions regimen requires South African cooperation, and Mbeki looks like he's been bought off.

The priests, however, haven't been co-opted. Pope John Paul II's death has kept Mugabe's electoral fraud out of the news, but there is a John Paul option that could benefit peaceful change throughout sub-Sahran Africa. The pope inspired Eastern European resistance to communism and inspired billions with his spiritual and moral leadership. An African pope could do the same for African democrats.

There are signals this could happen. French Cardinal Bernard Panafieu, when asked about electing a Third World pope, replied, "Everything is possible."

An African pope would change the political dynamics in sub-Saharan Africa and put dictators like Mugabe under global scrutiny — the first step to putting them all in jail.

© 2005 Creators Syndicate, Inc.

Send This Article to a Friend