EDITORIAL – Mugabe reigns freely, U.S. hands tied

“Fed up” doesn’t quite capture the sentiment of the people of Zimbabwe regarding their current… “Fed up” doesn’t quite capture the sentiment of the people of Zimbabwe regarding their current administration. It does, however, illustrate the rationale behind their recent decision to support a boycott of the last election that could have possibly ousted President Robert Mugabe from his sixth term.

Morgan Tsvangirai, Mugabe’s opposition, led this boycott shortly after Mugabe decided to reinstate the senate – which would play a major role in re-electing the president. After several of Mugabe’s supporters were conveniently positioned for senate seats, it soon became clear that the people of Zimbabwe had no hope for a fair election. Preliminary votes confirmed this, as the senate was in favor of Mugabe 47 out of 66.

While the people of Zimbabwe can be clear of conscience this year because they are not directly responsible for contributing to a vastly corrupt electoral process, there are greater problems that need to be addressed if their nation is to survive for much longer.

Mugabe took over in 1980 – after assassinating the then current president – and Zimbabwe has been in trouble ever since. Twenty-five years later they have reached the bottom of Mugabe’s downward spiral, and they haven’t been in such a deleterious state since they freed themselves from Britain.

In 2003, the yearly inflation rate reached an all-time high of 600 percent, and it was recently reported that Zimbabwe had the highest rate of HIV infection in the world. Even in dire straits throughout Mugabe’s reign, they have always found money to finance a war with The Republic of Congo. And then there is the famine.

In earlier years, Zimbabwe had a significant amount of fertile land. Instead of Mugabe dispersing the land to farmers, who were willing and able to till the land and contribute the fruits of their labor to what could have been a burgeoning economy, he disseminated the property to his supporters so they could accumulate wealth.

To boot, Mugabe’s personal lifestyle harshly contrasts with the poverty of his starving people. He and his cronies are surrounded by luxuries: cars, clothes, land, women and frequent trips to foreign countries where he spares no expense.

While Zimbabwe is receiving some aid from China, the International Monetary Fund refused to help them out of their desperate state because of their “refusal to meet budgetary goals.” The United States has recently imposed sanctions on those who support Mugabe, ceasing all financial dealings with Zimbabwe until it appears to be moving in a more democratic direction.

But considering we have more to lose than to gain if we disrupt China’s arrangement with Zimbabwe, it is doubtful that much will be done to actively reform Zimbabwe’s electoral process.

A military coup or Mugabe’s eventual death will be the reality for Zimbabwe long before democracy is ever fully established. And it’s even more depressing to contemplate the fact that Mugabe is not alone among autocratic corruptors who have plagued Africa for decades.

With China exploiting Zimbabwe for what little they have left and the IMF’s approach that helps to keep them impoverished, the future is bleak for this country. And it’s unfortunate that all too often this is the story of interaction between the First world and the Third world: corrupt leaders draining hundreds of millions of dollars from the economy in the Third World, and the First World’s response being, “Our hands are tied.”