Opinion / Columnist
EU sanctions on Zimbabwe lose their sting?
20 Feb 2014 at 11:45hrs | Views
NEARLY 12 years ago, the European Union (EU) imposed "targeted" sanctions on President Robert Mugabe, an inner circle of his Zanu-PF party and several public and private companies linked to the ruling party.
Their intention was to isolate President Mugabe, to the point of decimating his leadership after he ignored human rights concerns and rubberstamped the violent seizure of white-owned farms by war veterans in 2000.
The war veterans are estimated to have displaced nearly 4 500 white commercial farmers during their nationwide seizure of farms.
As if that was not enough, the Zanu-PF government stoked further tensions with the EU and added more fuel to the flames when it refused to compensate the white commercial farmers who lost their farms.
Since the imposition of the "restrictive measures" - which is how the EU has preferred to refer to them as opposed to sanctions - questions have persistently remained over their effectiveness or lack thereof.
Despite being under sanctions from both the EU and the United States, President Mugabe appears to have been flourishing.
He has won three successive election contests, with the latest victory being the July 31 elections held last year.
His Zanu-PF party now wields a majority in Parliament and the opposition, the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC-T) led by Morgan Tsvangirai, is at its lowest point in the party's 15 year-old history.
If the intention was to muscle President Mugabe out of power, the EU sanctions have failed, showing that perhaps a new trajectory of dialogue is necessary between Zimbabwe and the EU.
President Mugabe, who turns 90 tomorrow, appears to have emerged stronger politically and untouched by the sanctions.
Beyond Zimbabwe, President Mugabe's political star has been on the rise in the southern African region and on the continent.
Last month, President Mugabe was elected the deputy chair of the African Union (AU), a position with considerable status that could see him bounce back onto the international stage.
President Mugabe is also the current deputy chair of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and will take over its rotating chairmanship at a SADC summit set for August this year.
Despite debate over how effective the sanctions on President Mugabe are, the EU has shown no likelihood of easing up on the travel and asset embargo on him and his wife.
An official in the EU, Catherine Ashton, gave a hint of the likelihood that the status quo would be maintained in an effort to guarantee that the EU would swiftly move in to harden the sanctions if Zimbabwe lapsed again into political turmoil.
"It does seem a time to move forward and the sense is that Zimbabwe is moving … We need to respond," said Ashton.
"I think we probably are now in the right place to do this on the basis that if things go badly we can move back again."
A member of the European Peoples Party member, Mario David of Portugal, who was in the country last weekend to assess the impact of the sanctions, 12 years later, however, urged the EU to end sanctions once and for all.
"It makes no sense at all in that if you look at the names on the sanctions list, the first is President Mugabe and then his wife; at the same time President Mugabe is invited to the EU-Africa summit in Brussels," said David. "He is the (first deputy chair) of the AU and very soon he will be the chairman of the SADC in August. Maintaining sanctions is hypocrisy in our day."
The different narratives on sanctions emerging from the EU itself are indicative of how opinion is split over the impact of sanctions on intended smart targets. The European bloc is seen to be eager to restore economic ties with Zimbabwe which have been usurped by China over the last decade. China has been the main beneficiary of the government's "Look East Policy".
Last year, Belgium exerted enough pressure on the EU to lift sanctions off the State-owned Zimbabwe Mining Development Corporation, in an effort to tap into the country's Marange diamonds - bringing to the fore the deep divisions in the EU.
One school of thought contends that backing down on the sanctions would be a "low diplomatic point" for the European bloc and a victory for Zanu-PF.
Previous attempts by Zanu-PF to arm-twist the EU into lifting the sanctions have so far hit against a brick wall.
A petition signed by disgruntled citizens in 2011 against sanctions failed to win the sympathy of the EU, while little progress has been made in a lawsuit brought to European Court of Justice by the Zimbabwe government challenging the legality of the sanctions. It is the government's claim that the decade-long sanctions on the country have cost it nearly US$42 billion in lost revenue.
Their intention was to isolate President Mugabe, to the point of decimating his leadership after he ignored human rights concerns and rubberstamped the violent seizure of white-owned farms by war veterans in 2000.
The war veterans are estimated to have displaced nearly 4 500 white commercial farmers during their nationwide seizure of farms.
As if that was not enough, the Zanu-PF government stoked further tensions with the EU and added more fuel to the flames when it refused to compensate the white commercial farmers who lost their farms.
Since the imposition of the "restrictive measures" - which is how the EU has preferred to refer to them as opposed to sanctions - questions have persistently remained over their effectiveness or lack thereof.
Despite being under sanctions from both the EU and the United States, President Mugabe appears to have been flourishing.
He has won three successive election contests, with the latest victory being the July 31 elections held last year.
His Zanu-PF party now wields a majority in Parliament and the opposition, the Movement for Democratic Change (MDC-T) led by Morgan Tsvangirai, is at its lowest point in the party's 15 year-old history.
If the intention was to muscle President Mugabe out of power, the EU sanctions have failed, showing that perhaps a new trajectory of dialogue is necessary between Zimbabwe and the EU.
President Mugabe, who turns 90 tomorrow, appears to have emerged stronger politically and untouched by the sanctions.
Beyond Zimbabwe, President Mugabe's political star has been on the rise in the southern African region and on the continent.
Last month, President Mugabe was elected the deputy chair of the African Union (AU), a position with considerable status that could see him bounce back onto the international stage.
President Mugabe is also the current deputy chair of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and will take over its rotating chairmanship at a SADC summit set for August this year.
Despite debate over how effective the sanctions on President Mugabe are, the EU has shown no likelihood of easing up on the travel and asset embargo on him and his wife.
An official in the EU, Catherine Ashton, gave a hint of the likelihood that the status quo would be maintained in an effort to guarantee that the EU would swiftly move in to harden the sanctions if Zimbabwe lapsed again into political turmoil.
"It does seem a time to move forward and the sense is that Zimbabwe is moving … We need to respond," said Ashton.
"I think we probably are now in the right place to do this on the basis that if things go badly we can move back again."
A member of the European Peoples Party member, Mario David of Portugal, who was in the country last weekend to assess the impact of the sanctions, 12 years later, however, urged the EU to end sanctions once and for all.
"It makes no sense at all in that if you look at the names on the sanctions list, the first is President Mugabe and then his wife; at the same time President Mugabe is invited to the EU-Africa summit in Brussels," said David. "He is the (first deputy chair) of the AU and very soon he will be the chairman of the SADC in August. Maintaining sanctions is hypocrisy in our day."
The different narratives on sanctions emerging from the EU itself are indicative of how opinion is split over the impact of sanctions on intended smart targets. The European bloc is seen to be eager to restore economic ties with Zimbabwe which have been usurped by China over the last decade. China has been the main beneficiary of the government's "Look East Policy".
Last year, Belgium exerted enough pressure on the EU to lift sanctions off the State-owned Zimbabwe Mining Development Corporation, in an effort to tap into the country's Marange diamonds - bringing to the fore the deep divisions in the EU.
One school of thought contends that backing down on the sanctions would be a "low diplomatic point" for the European bloc and a victory for Zanu-PF.
Previous attempts by Zanu-PF to arm-twist the EU into lifting the sanctions have so far hit against a brick wall.
A petition signed by disgruntled citizens in 2011 against sanctions failed to win the sympathy of the EU, while little progress has been made in a lawsuit brought to European Court of Justice by the Zimbabwe government challenging the legality of the sanctions. It is the government's claim that the decade-long sanctions on the country have cost it nearly US$42 billion in lost revenue.
Source - financial gazette
All articles and letters published on Bulawayo24 have been independently written by members of Bulawayo24's community. The views of users published on Bulawayo24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Bulawayo24. Bulawayo24 editors also reserve the right to edit or delete any and all comments received.
