From this story in the Times of London, it seems that a substantial proportion of Zimbabwe's population is doing just that. The data on life expectancy - 37 for men, dropping from 62 in 1990 and for women from 62 to 34, are just horrific.
The world, the UN, the chattering classes, whoever...continue to shout for intervention in Darfur and Rwanda, while Zimbabwe slips under most of the radar. In other words it gets mentioned, but there's no substantial movement for intervention, however little. The article notes President Mbeke of South Africa's role in keeping Zimbabwe off the agenda in the UN. There's an indication of how difficult it would be to expand the Security Council of the UN - and we sure know it needs it - to get more diversity and representation into its voice, while still assuring that, in the main, you'd get decency and common sense. Sorry, yeah I know, we don't get it now with China as a permanent member.
The story about how the government-controlled press apparently reported President Mugabe's move to make himself President-for-life is a real insight into how dictatorship really works. Having lived in a military dictatorship (Burma and Pakistan) as well as countries with substantial government control of the press and other institutions, this rang true for me. Availability of an open, free and uncensored press is probably the most fundamental right that a people should expect.
Apart from Zimbabwe's former role as a major producer of agricultural products, there doesn't seem to be any other reason to intervene apart from the moral responsibility to its people. Which doesn't seem to count - maybe until the death count becomes too obvious?
I'm not sure about the author, this seems to be him.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment