China and Russia says no!

The New York Times reported on the happenings at the UN Security Council [SC] on voting for sanctions against Robert Mugabe and other leaders of his Zanu PF party. Both, China and Russia exercised their veto rights against sanctions for these leaders. They argue that these sanctions would go beyond the SC's prerogative powers and China added that sanctions would impede on South Africa's efforts of negotiation between the two opposing parties.

Needless to say, the USA seemed furious at this decision, as it was the one who proposed sanctions against Mugabe in the first place and worked hard to get the backing of other countries in the SC.

Even though China might have a conflicting interest when voting (as they supply Zimbabwe with arms and ammunition) I have to agree with them and Russia. As I have argued in my previous blog, negotiations for a unity government seems as the better option for Zimbabwe's future. Sanctions only serve as a temporary resolution and does not address the violation of human rights effectively in this country.

Yes, violence has erupted in the country preceding the run off election. This can be addressed in the aftermath of the negotiations either by way of criminal trials or by establishing a truth and reconciliation commission. Yes, the run-off election was highly suspicious and reeked of fraud, but this is currently being addressed by the negotiations in Pretoria.

I also have to admit that the USA government's reactions to Zimbabwe has not surprised me at all. They are the first to call for the international community's aid and the SC's help, because according to them Zimbabwe's situation constitutes a serious threat to "international peace and security". However, when it comes to waging the war against terror (which includes invading Afgahnistan and Iraq) and detaining nationals of other countries in Guantanamo Bay (without any charges), they want to circumvent the international community's involvement. Talk about hyprocracy.