The U.N.’s Opportunity On Zimbabwe

This article is from the archive of The New York Sun before the launch of its new website in 2022. The Sun has neither altered nor updated such articles but will seek to correct any errors, mis-categorizations or other problems introduced during transfer.

The New York Sun

The Zimbabwe crisis presents an opportunity for Secretary-General Ban to buy the United Nations a much-needed commodity: credibility. Mr. Ban is a fan of quiet, effective diplomacy, but will he be able to mediate factions within his own administration and do the right thing for the people of Zimbabwe?

Here is his problem: As Zimbabwe policy increasingly pits London against Pretoria, Mr. Ban’s administration is heavily populated by South African officials, while British international civil servants are fast disappearing from Turtle Bay after decades of controlling the U.N.’s power levers.

With the Security Council’s incompetence being highlighted in headlines around the world — its inability to act Friday on a crisis created by Harare’s strongman, Robert Mugabe, being the latest — the United Nations is being dealt a huge blow to its prestige. The council was so tied up it could not move, and it failed the people of Zimbabwe spectacularly. For an organization held in low esteem to begin with, such public humiliation could prove fatal.

Despite it all, the United Nations could yet emerge as Zimbabwe’s savior, provided Mr. Ban names a credible, high-profile mediator to stand up to President Mbeki of South Africa, who currently leads the Zimbabwe diplomacy. Mr. Mbeki’s “mediation” is clearly designed to assure that his aging pal, Mr. Mugabe, remains president even after he lost an election and resorted to unspeakable violence to maintain his hold on power.

Meeting in Japan last week, the group of the top eight economic powers proposed that a high-profile U.N. mediator be named, and the American-proposed Security Council resolution that was vetoed Friday by China and Russia sought the same. But while some in Mr. Ban’s inner circle see the need for reinvigorating intervention in Zimbabwe, naming a powerful new mediator would be a slap in Mr. Mbeki’s face — and there are too many key U.N. decision-makers who are tied in one way or another to the South African president to do that.

Mr. Ban’s current mediator, Haile Menkerios, is a former U.N. ambassador of the communist-style regime in Eritrea who has become a mid-level U.N. bureaucrat at the political department’s Africa desk. After he fell out with his own government, South Africa was kind enough to issue a passport to Mr. Menkerios, which allows him to travel around the world. This makes him an unlikely candidate to confront Mr. Mbeki, even if he had the stature to do so.

Mr. Menkerios’s role has faded as the Zimbabwe crisis has grown, but Deputy Secretary-General Asha-Rose Migiro told reporters his efforts were “very much welcome” by African leaders. A former Tanzanian foreign minister, Ms. Migiro was warmly recommended for the U.N. job by Pretoria. Oh, and Mr. Ban’s top political adviser is Nicholas Haysom of South Africa. The list may soon be augmented further if Mr. Ban names — as is expected — an International Criminal Court judge, Navanethem Pillay of South Africa, to the high-profile post of human rights commissioner.

South Africa justly carries a special moral aura. Its struggle against apartheid is an inspiring story representing a courageous victory for the good guys. But the role Pretoria plays in Zimbabwe soils the good name of the country’s freedom fighters. It is ridiculous to claim Mr. Mbeki is an honest broker who would usher in the end of the horrors visited on Zimbabwe by his old comrade Mr. Mugabe. As the G-8’s statement made clear, an African personality of high stature needs to take Mr. Mbeki’s place.

“The U.N. still has a key role to play in supporting African efforts to bring an end to this crisis, and we will continue to press for the appointment of a U.N. envoy,” the British foreign minister, David Miliband, said yesterday, after calling the Chinese and Russian council veto “incomprehensible.” But after the recent departure of the security chief, David Veness, only one British official remains among the United Nations’s higher echelons — and the humanitarian coordinator, John Holmes, is outside the political decision-making circle.

Nevertheless, the American undersecretary-general for political affairs, B. Lynn Pascoe, is well aware of the need to change course on Zimbabwe, as are Mr. Ban’s top adviser, Kim Won-soo, and Mr. Ban himself, I am told.

In its current formation, the United Nations is clearly incapable of resolving such crises as Middle Eastern wars. Anyone who believes that dumping North Korea or Iran on Turtle Bay’s lap would remove those threats is living in a 1950s-inspired dreamworld. Zimbabwe, however, is one example where Turtle Bay can make a difference. Will it?

bavni@nysun.com


The New York Sun

© 2024 The New York Sun Company, LLC. All rights reserved.

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. The material on this site is protected by copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used.

The New York Sun

Sign in or  Create a free account

By continuing you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use