What if Robert Mugabe was white?

I want you to close your eyes and imagine for a moment that Zimbabwe was being ruled by Robert Mugabe, the duly elected white, rather than black, president. Everything else must remain exactly the same as it is right now.

The overwhelming majority of Zimbabwe’s population remains black, the murder and torture continues, the destroyed economy with its 100 000% plus inflation, the 80% unemployment, the average lifespan of 37 years, the ban on the media, the election rigging and the total onslaught on the population is all still there, but done in the name of a white, instead of a black president.

In other words I’m asking you to leave everything the way it is except that all the indescribably despicable acts, currently being perpetrated against an overwhelming majority of black people is being carried out by a white president.

Let’s accept that Zimbabwe is now considered to be one of the most violent regimes in Africa’s history. This is a country wherein the disregard for black lives can almost be described as breathtaking in its arrogance. No consideration is given to their health, living standards or future, save as it affects the ruling elite.

A few weeks ago an election was held wherein this white president refused to allow the opposition to campaign without fear of murder or torture. Candidates were arrested, the electoral commission was being controlled and only monitors or peacekeepers of his choice were allowed into the field. He then refused to release the results when he realised that he had lost.

Then, in contemplation of a run-off, he instituted a campaign of butchery and intimidation that Human Rights Watch speaks of as unprecedented in the history of this violent country. Simultaneously, a de fact coup takes place wherein the message is sent out that whoever wins, the president stays.

In those circumstances, under this white president, what would have been the response?

A UN Security Council that is nervous to intervene?

SADC grudgingly acknowledging the seriousness of the situation and deciding on mediation that allows this brutality to continue?

Mediation that slowly grinds on its way and makes no effort to stop the violence and contemplates keeping this white president who has committed these atrocities?

Allows a de facto coup to have taken place with a poorly kept secret that if Tsvangirai wins the run-off this white president has no intention of handing over power?

An entire planet stands back and watches as soldiers, war veterans, police and intelligence pummel the electorate into oblivion?

Allows anywhere between a third and a quarter of the population to go into exile rather than tell this white president to behave?

Allows an entire region to become destabilised and called the author of its destabilisation a liberator?

The answer to all this is that the white president would have had his backside handed to him a long time ago. In addition he would have been styled a butcher, not a liberator. He would be facing a future along the lines of Saddam Hussein rather than president in a government of national unity.

That is, of course, my opinion and one that I sincerely hope that the bulk of the planet shares.

Which brings me to my next question: Why should a population that is overwhelmingly black be at a disadvantage simply because their leader is black? Why are their lives considered forfeit simply because the planet is scared to be called racist if they clamp down hard on their oppressor?

How can the planet ever listen to Africa when it comes to removing its dictators? Our history confirms that the millions and millions of Africans who don’t have access to sophisticated communications, through choice or by design, are being denied rescue, for that is what this is, by the elite few who scream racism every time the world wants to take concrete steps against their abuse.

What the planet has to do is ask itself this: If this African president was any other race but black, how would we respond?