UK Diplomats Advised Regarding Armed Intervention to Topple Robert Mugabe

Recently released documents show that the UK's diplomatic corps advised against British military action to remove the former Zimbabwean president, the long-serving leader, in 2004, advising it was not considered a "serious option".

Government Documents Show Deliberations on Handling a "Depressingly Healthy" Dictator

Internal documents from Tony Blair's government indicate officials considered options on how best to deal with the "depressingly healthy" 80-year-old dictator, who declined to leave office as the country fell into turmoil and financial collapse.

Following the ruling party winning a 2005 election, and a year after the UK joined a US-led coalition to overthrow Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, Downing Street asked the Foreign Office in July 2004 to produce potential courses of action.

Policy of Isolation Considered Ineffective

Officials agreed that the UK's strategy to isolate Mugabe and forging an international agreement for change was failing, having not managed to secure support from key African nations, notably the then South African president, Thabo Mbeki.

Courses considered in the documents were:

• "Seek to remove Mugabe by force";
• "Implement tougher UK measures" such as seizing finances and shuttering the UK embassy; or
• "Re-engage", the approach supported by the then outgoing ambassador to Zimbabwe.

"We know from Afghanistan, Iraq and Yugoslavia that changing a government and/or its harmful policies is almost impossible from the outside."

The FCO paper rejected military action as not a "serious option," adding that "The only candidate for leading such a armed intervention is the UK. No one else (even the US) would be willing to do so".

Cautionary Notes of Significant Losses and Jurisdictional Barriers

It cautioned that military intervention would cause heavy casualties and have "serious consequences" for UK nationals in Zimbabwe.

"Barring a major humanitarian and political disaster – resulting in widespread bloodshed, large-scale refugee flows, and instability in the region – we assess that no African state would agree to any efforts to remove Mugabe forcibly."

The document adds: "Nor do we judge that any other international ally (including the US) would authorise or join military intervention. And there would be no legal grounds for doing so, without an approving Security Council Resolution, which we would fail to obtain."

Long-Term Strategy Advocated

The Prime Minister's advisor, a senior official, advised Blair that Zimbabwe "will be a real spoiler" to his plan to use the UK's presidency of the G8 to make 2005 "a pivotal year for Africa". The adviser stated that as military action had been discounted, "it is likely necessary that we must adopt a long-term strategy" and re-engage with Mugabe.

Blair seemed to concur, writing: "We must devise a way of revealing the lies and malpractice of Mugabe and Zanu-PF up to this election and then afterwards, we could attempt to restart dialogue on the basis of a firm agreement."

The then outgoing ambassador, in his valedictory telegram, had recommended cautious renewed contact with Mugabe, though he recognized the Prime Minister "might shudder at the thought given all that Mugabe has said and done".

Robert Mugabe was ultimately removed in a military takeover in 2017, aged 93. Previous claims that in the early 2000s Blair had tried to pressure Thabo Mbeki into joining a military coalition to overthrow Mugabe were vehemently rejected by the ex-British leader.