International Reaction To The 2008 Zimbabwean Presidential Election - United Nations Security Council

United Nations Security Council

The United Nations Security Council has officially met on the issue on several occasions.

On 23 June the Council heard a statement about the deteriorating situation and the restrictions imposed on outside election observers. Then, following an off-the-record meeting, the Council issued a statement condemning "the campaign of violence against the political opposition" and expressing "its concern over the impact of the situation in Zimbabwe on the wider region."

After the election an attempt, supported by the United States and European countries, to have the Security Council declare the election illegitimate was blocked by South Africa, which argued that the Council was not in the business of certifying elections. The US ambassador, who was President of the Security Council for June, told reporters that the holding of elections was "a matter of deep regret".

On 7 July the Security Council was briefed by the Deputy Secretary-General who said that observations "clearly indicate that the electoral process leading to the declared re-election of President Mugabe was seriously flawed. This profound crisis of legitimacy is further compounded by the paralysis of State institutions. There is currently no functioning parliament. Civil society has been silenced and intimidated. The economy is crippled, with annual inflation reaching 10.5 million per cent by the end of June and unemployment being over 80 per cent, and severe shortages of food and basic services exist. There is an urgent need to restore the rule of law and to start building public institutions."

The Zimbabwean mission to the UN said in a letter on July 10 that a proposed resolution drafted by the US would likely leave Zimbabwe in a lawless state like Somalia and cause a civil war if it was passed. According to the letter, Zimbabwe was not a threat to other countries and consequently there was no basis for the proposed resolution; the letter also alleged that the proposed resolution was actually intended as punishment for Zimbabwe's land reform, and it said that the US and the UK were "ignor real, entrenched, fundamental and enduring issues that lie at the heart of Zimbabwe's internal politics". Additionally, the letter blamed the violence on the MDC.

On 11 July, this draft resolution was brought to the Security Council to impose personal sanctions involving finances and travel against Mugabe and 13 of his top associates, appoint a UN mediator, and impose an arms embargo against Zimbabwe. The resolution was vetoed by the negative votes of Russia and China. Belgium, Burkina Faso, Costa Rica, Croatia, France, Italy, Panama, the United Kingdom, and the United States voted in favor of the resolution; China, Libya, Russia, South Africa, and Vietnam voted against it, while Indonesia abstained.

The ambassador for Russia rejected the United Kingdom's interpretation of a recent statement at the G8 meeting that "We will take further steps, inter alia introducing financial and other measures against those individuals responsible for violence" made any reference to actions in the Security Council. He added that such an attempt "to take the Council beyond its Charter prerogatives and beyond the maintenance of international peace and security... illegitimate and dangerous."

The ambassador for China stressed the importance of discussion between the political parties in Zimbabwe and said that the resolution would "interfere with the negotiating process and lead to the further deterioration of the situation".

South African Permanent Representative Dumisani Kumalo criticized the resolution for being biased in favor of the MDC and against ZANU-PF, and he urged the Security Council to give Mbeki's mediation a chance without potentially undermining it by imposing sanctions. He said that, even if sanctions were eventually deemed necessary, they should not be imposed immediately.

US Permanent Representative Zalmay Khalilzad was sharply critical of the positions taken by Russia and South Africa. Describing Mugabe's government as a "horrible regime", he said that Mbeki's mediation efforts were a failure, that no "serious" negotiations were taking place, and that it appeared Mbeki was protecting Mugabe and sometimes even working with him. He criticized Russia for what he characterized as a reversal of its position, noting that Russia had backed the G8 statement a few days prior. Khalilzad also said that the US could have considered an arrangement in which sanctions would only be imposed after the passage of a certain length of time, if those opposed to the resolution had chosen to negotiate. The Russian Foreign Ministry strongly rejected the accusation that Russia had reversed its position. British Foreign Secretary Miliband was also critical of Russia's opposition, saying that it would "appear incomprehensible to the people of Zimbabwe".

Zimbabwe's Minister of Information, Sikhanyiso Ndlovu, expressed satisfaction with the outcome of the Security Council vote, and he thanked "those who helped defeat international racism disguised as multilateral action at the UN". According to Ndlovu, the outcome upheld "the principles of non-interference into the sovereign affairs of a UN member state".