SADC sidelines Botswana's position on Mugabe

BAME PIET
Staff Writer | Friday July 25, 2008 00:00

As it turns out, only Tanzania agreed with Botswana; and even then, only on the issue of negotiations being conducted on the basis of the parties being equals. 

In an interview with Mmegi yesterday, Skelemani said Botswana had presented her position to the 10th Meeting of SADC's Organ on Politics, Defence and Security in Durban, South Africa last week, which was to have Zimbabwe suspended from SADC structure meetings.

'That's when we had hoped that the other SADC countries would agree with us,' he said. 'The basis of the suspension was that Mugabe has not been elected.' 

Skelemani maintained that the report of the observer mission was to the effect that there was no election in Zimbabwe and that what happened was in total violation of all the (electoral) rules. 

'Then we found that the other member states were unable to support our position of suspending Zimbabwe,' the Minister said. 'They agree with the observers (that the elections and the presidential run-off were a charade), but they say 'let's help the Zimbabweans negotiate a government'. 

'They don't want to pronounce themselves on the issue of whether the run-off election was free and fair and what are the consequences. Our position is that nobody was elected and there is therefore no government. But no country supported our position.'

While Botswana is not opposed to negotiations, her position is that it would be illogical to recognise any government in Zimbabwe at present when, on the other hand, negotiations for a government were underway.

'We agree on negotiations totally,' Skelemani said, 'but we think if you negotiate on the basis that somebody is President or (that there is) a government, that is wrong.' 
He said only Botswana and Tanzania made it clear that negotiations ought to be between equals while the rest of SADC did not want to pronounce their positions. While acknowledging that the other members were exercising their sovereignty, 'as was Botswana', Skelemani argued that they might have noticed that the situation in Zimbabwe was a serious and grave one.

He warned that if the negotiations currently taking place in South Africa failed to produce a government, there would be serious consequences for the region. 'If the Zimbabweans can't agree on a government, there is going to be a civil war because one of them is going to want to rule,' Skelemani said. 

'What is the end of that? Law and order become the victim and there will be many people fleeing to neighbouring countries.' 
On another aspect, Skelemani said in his view, the two-week period agreed upon is long enough to settle the question of who should become President, but it will take longer to unravel security problems and even longer to put Zimbabwe on the path to economic recovery.

'Two weeks will be enough, provided they deal with the real issue of whether there is a president or who should become President; that is the only issue, really,' he said. 'Everything (else) will then follow. They must agree.'

Skelemani expressed his disappointment that Mugabe had gone ahead with the June 27 run-off presidential election in the face of international condemnation and the withdrawal of opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai, and had proceeded to swear himself in as President of Zimbabwe; Mugabe should have called off the elections.  

One the issue of an arms embargo, Skelemani said it would be improper to allow Zimbabwe to import arms in the current situation. 'For now, no arms,' he said firmly. 'But as soon as they agree that they have a government, the arms may start coming.'
The Botswana government announced its position that it did not recognise Robert Mugabe as President of Zimbabwe on July 4 following the June 27 presidential run-off elections in which Mugabe was the sole candidate.

President Ian Khama also wrote to the SADC secretariat on the country's position.  Skelemani said the SADC secretariat has not responded.
On a positive note, Skelemani pronounced his approval of the conduct of South African President Thabo Mbeki in his mediation role so far; Mbeki had managed the situation before the March 29 elections and he could still do more.

In his view, though they are not unwelcome, the representatives from the African Union and the SADC Organ on Politics, Defence and Security are a superfluity. 'I don't think there is anything fundamentally wrong with one mediator,' Skelemani said. 'But there can be one or two others to make everybody comfortable.'