Foreign Office Cautioned Regarding Military Action to Topple Robert Mugabe

Recently released papers reveal that the Foreign Office cautioned against British military action to remove the former Zimbabwean president, Robert Mugabe, in 2004, stating it was not considered a "viable option".

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

Policy papers from Tony Blair's government show officials considered options on how best to deal with the "remarkably robust" 80-year-old dictator, who refused to step down as the country descended 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, No 10 asked the Foreign Office in July 2004 to develop potential courses of action.

Policy of Isolation Deemed Ineffective

Officials agreed that the UK's strategy to isolate Mugabe and forging an international consensus for change was failing, having failed to secure support from influential African states, notably the then South African president, Thabo Mbeki.

Courses considered in the files were:

• "Seek to remove Mugabe by military means";
• "Implement tougher UK measures" such as freezing assets and closing the UK embassy; or
• "Re-open dialogue", the approach supported by the then departing ambassador to Zimbabwe.

"Our experience shows from conflicts abroad that altering a government and/or its harmful policies is almost impossible from the outside."

The diplomatic assessment dismissed military action as not a "realistic option," adding that "The only nation for leading such a military operation is the UK. No other country (even the US) would be willing to do so".

Warnings of Heavy Casualties and Legal Hurdles

It warned that military intervention would result in significant losses and have "serious consequences" for British people in Zimbabwe.

"Barring a severe human and political disaster – resulting in widespread bloodshed, significant exodus of refugees, and instability in the region – we assess that no nation in Africa would support any efforts to remove Mugabe forcibly."

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

Long-Term Strategy Recommended

The Prime Minister's advisor, a senior official, warned him that Zimbabwe "could become a real spoiler" to his plan to use the UK's presidency of the G8 to make 2005 "the year of Africa". The adviser stated that as military action had been ruled out, "we probably have to accept that we must play the longer game" and re-open talks with Mugabe.

Blair appeared to agree, writing: "We should work out 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 final diplomatic dispatch, had recommended cautious renewed contact with Mugabe, though he understood the Prime Minister "might shudder at the thought given all that Mugabe has said and done".

The Zimbabwean leader was finally deposed in a military takeover in 2017, at the age of 93. Earlier assertions that in the early 2000s Blair had tried to pressure Thabo Mbeki into joining a armed alliance to depose Mugabe were vehemently rejected by the former UK premier.