Dealing with the Crisis in Zimbabwe
Dealing with the Crisis in Zimbabwe
The Role of Economics, Diplomacy, and Regionalism
by Logan Cox and Dr. David A. Anderson
Dealing with the Crisis in Zimbabwe (Full PDF Article)
Once, one of the better run economies in Africa, Zimbabwe has descended into one of the worst, above only Somalia and Sudan. Zimbabwe’s history is one common to most of Africa: European colonization, minority rule followed by a war for independence, and subsequent autocratic rule by a leader from the independence struggle. Despite sanctions to oust the white-minority rule, the economy of Zimbabwe (then Rhodesia), was able to grow and to develop import substitution products. After transfer to majority rule, particularly after chaotic land reforms in 2000, the economy of Zimbabwe has been in steep decline, with foreign investment vanishing and a willful dismantling of the commercial agricultural base of the economy. The Southern Africa Development Community was formed to improve the conditions of its member states but has been ineffective in positively affecting the situation in Zimbabwe. The member countries are inwardly focused due to inherent economic weaknesses, and the leaders of the SADC and member countries are institutionally un—to criticize a revolutionary leader from one of the independence movements of the 1970s. Since the SADC finally was able to push a unity government in Zimbabwe, the SADC must assume its declared role as a forum for regional stability and economic progress. The United States and other western countries and international institutions must be —to assist in the rebuilding of Zimbabwe through focused and closely monitored aid, while insisting on political and economic reforms. There may be an enduring role for U.S. AFRICOM to play in the region as well.
