Russia and China destroy Mugabe sanctions bid

The other three nations with veto power – the US, Britain and France – argued that sanctions were needed to respond to the government-sanctioned violence and intimidation against opponents of Mugabe before and after Zimbabwe’s recent presidential election.

Meanwhile Zimbabwe’s opposition party reported yesterday that at least 113 of its members had been killed in political violence since March.

The proposal would have imposed an arms embargo on the southern African nation, an international travel ban and a freeze on the personal assets of Mugabe and 13 other officials. It also called for a UN special envoy for Zimbabwe to be appointed.

In addition to dodging sanctions, Mugabe “will be coming” to the UN General Assembly in September, said Zimbabwean UN ambassador Boniface Chidyausiku.

Russian UN ambassador Vitaly Churkin said sanctions would have taken the UN beyond its mandate by having it interfere in a country’s domestic political disputes and “artificially elevating them to the level of a threat” to international peace and security.

Chinese ambassador Wang Guangya, whose nation is one of Zimbabwe’s major trading partners, also expressed fears of nation-tinkering and said Zimbabwe should be left to conduct its own talks on how to resolve its political crisis.

“The development of the situation in Zimbabwe until now has not exceeded the context of domestic affairs,” Mr Wang said. “It will unavoidably interfere with the negotiation process.”

South Africa, a Zimbabwe neighbour that holds one of the council’s non-permanent seats, led the opposition to the sanctions, arguing that Zimbabwe was not a threat to international peace.

Supporters of the resolution had counted Burkina Faso’s ambassador Michel Kafando as the crucial swing vote. “As a means of exerting pressure, it could help,” he said of the sanctions resolution before the vote.

They also had counted on – and expected – Russia and China to abstain because of the depth of the crisis in Zimbabwe.

“They read the situation wrong,” Zimbabwe’s Mr Chidyausiku said. “It’s the arrogance of the Americans. They think they can rule the world. They can’t.”

US ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad said the vetoes by Russia and China were “disturbing” and he also criticised South Africa for “protecting the horrible regime in Zimbabwe” and helping Mugabe “to fragment the opposition”.

“China and Russia have stood with Mugabe against the people of Zimbabwe,” he said.

“The U-turn in the Russian position is particularly surprising and disturbing. Only a few days ago the Russian Federation was supportive of a G8 statement which said, and I quote, ’We express grave concern about the situation in Zimbabwe’.”

“The Russian performance here today raises questions about its reliability as a G8 partner.”

In London, Foreign Secretary David Miliband said the vetoes “would appear incomprehensible to the people of Zimbabwe”.

Backing the resolution were Belgium, Britain, Burkina Faso, Costa Rica, Croatia, France, Italy, Panama and the US. Voting against were China, Libya, Russia, South Africa and Vietnam. Indonesia abstained.

The dispute between the opposition and Mugabe’s party has grown more bitter since Mugabe claimed victory in a June 27 presidential run-off election in which he was the only candidate.

Opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai pulled out of the race because of widespread violence against his supporters.

The council’s vote put an end for now to efforts to apply more international pressure on Mugabe’s regime and force it to share power with Mr Tsvangirai.

It comes on the heels of a summit earlier this month in Egypt where African Union leaders adopted a resolution calling for dialogue in Zimbabwe, but did not directly criticise Mugabe or the run-off.