Mbeki’s Aids and Zimbabwe policies under scrutiny

Two areas of former president Thabo Mbeki’s term of office are undergoing scrutiny in the international media; his administration’s policies on Aids and Zimbabwe. Neither are going to serve his legacy well.

Mbeki’s achievements have been well documented throughout this blog and it would be unfair and unkind to dismiss them during the course of this exercise. I trust that you will avail yourself of the opportunity to go through some of the posts related thereto.

Notwithstanding we are watching Zimbabwe implode as a direct result of our policies of “quiet diplomacy” and untimely intervention. In the case of the former South Africa afforded Robert Mugabe an open cheque in terms whereof:

South Africa absorbed millions of refugees from Zimbabwe at enormous cost to this country.

Mugabe was allowed to commit atrocities without censure or sanction.

We provided assistance with everything from electricity to maize.

In essence South Africa has propped up the Mugabe regime without which his term and that of his party would have ended at least six years ago.

Worse, when quiet diplomacy was not enough to keep Mugabe in office South Africa then switched over to untimely intervention. Racing to the United Nations to block resolutions and even refusing to give up as the mediator despite repeated allegations of bias. While we are advised that this was the view of the collective we must not lose sight of the fact that Mbeki’s views on Zimbabwe and that of the collective during his term as president and thereafter seem to differ noticeably.

While the world is calling upon the SADC to put pressure on Mugabe it is the view of US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that best sums it up for me. She suggests that the neighbouring states force Mugabe’s hand because they, South Africa in particular, are paying a heavy price for allowing this situation in Zimbabwe to continue.

This has been my major concern from the beginning: as a direct result of our policies on Zimbabwe our government’s ability to deliver to the masses of South Africa has been severely curtailed. Moreover, in addition to the cost of propping up Mugabe and looking after his refugees, we have millions of Zimbabweans competing with our poorest communities for houses and jobs. This, in my opinion, was the major cause of the xenophobia we witnessed earlier this year. Which means that the main underlying cause of that anger is not only still here, but is sure to intensify as even more exiles, some carrying serious illness, are foisted upon them.

Leaving aside the fact that Mugabe has destabilised the entire region, reduced the potential for investment and destroyed what should have been a major trading partner, the human and financial cost of Zimbabwe, much of it as a direct result of our policies, is going to run and run and run.

A self-inflicted nightmare.

On Aids, researchers at Harvard have concluded that the South African government would have spared over 360 000 people premature death had they provided antiretroviral drugs to sufferers. They suggest that the policies not to provide these drugs grew out of Mbeki’s denial of what was scientific consensus of dealing with the problem at the time.

http://aids.harvard.edu/Lost_Benefits.pdf

While the article and study do make for interesting reading and raise some of the questions that were being posed in South Africa previously, we must not lose sight of the fact that in both the case of Zimbabwe and Aids, the impact on the people of this country has been devastating.

With our new health minister dealing with the issue of Aids and cholera in seemingly a highly professional manner we can take some comfort for the future there. Unfortunately with the intransigence of Mugabe and the Zanu-PF and Mbeki the mediator, the Zimbabwean situation will continue to deteriorate. Two or three months down the line we may look back on the days of only worrying about cholera and starvation as the good old days.

The insanity continues.