President Cyril Ramaphosa this week finally responded to the beatings and torture of innocent civilians in Zimbabwe by dispatching Sydney Mufamadi and former National Assembly speaker Baleka Mbete to Harare to talk some sense into President Emmerson Mnangagwa.
One doesn't know much about Mufamadi's diplomatic skills, but one has to suppress a giggle at the thought of Mbete as an envoy. Could she negotiate her way out of a paper bag?
The mission seems dead on arrival. Perhaps that's the intention. But then what is Naledi Pandor for? Why not send her to Harare to read them the riot act? Or better still, Ramaphosa can get Mnangagwa on the line and tell him to behave himself or else. But I guess that'd be expecting too much of our president. Bangbroek is his second name.
SA has enormous influence over Zimbabwe. It's about time it changed tack and pulled rank. Apart from humanitarian concerns, SA cannot divorce itself from the internal affairs of its northern neighbour. The two countries are joined at the hip. In fact, for SA, Zimbabwe has become a domestic issue. Millions of Zimbabweans running from economic hardship and the tyranny of their government live in this country.
Which is why it was a bit silly of some people, ecstatic at the fall of Robert Mugabe, to have raucously advised SA to keep its tentacles out of their country's affairs. They were certain Mnangagwa had turned over a new leaf, and they celebrated as if the Messiah himself had landed.
Well, the Messiah has turned out to be the old monster. He's reverted to type. We should not be overly harsh, though. South Africans fell for a similar gimmick. When Ramaphosa took over from Jacob Zuma we also thought we'd got ourselves a saviour. The fact that he had been part of Zuma's inner circle all along was conveniently overlooked.
I wonder what these latter-day exclusionists would have said had SA responded to their call to keep out by closing its borders. They would, I'm sure, have screamed bloody murder and complained about the inhumanity of it all. Maybe that's what SA should do.
John Vorster sealed SA's border with Rhodesia, leaving it with less than 20 days' supply of oil, warning Ian Smith that SA could no longer support him economically or militarily. That single act drove Smith to the negotiation table that produced the Lancaster House agreement. An all-race election brought Robert Mugabe to power.
In reality, Zimbabweans have never tasted freedom. They merely exchanged one set of oppressors for another
In reality, Zimbabweans have never tasted freedom. They merely exchanged one set of oppressors for another. Mugabe got into power, crushed the opposition, manacled the media and the judiciary and corralled every sector of society to march in lockstep to the ruthless instructions of the ruling Zanu-PF. What seemed like a nirvana under the African sky turned into a nightmare.
With Mugabe's downfall, Zimbabweans thought their ordeal was about to end. But despots don't act alone; they have courtiers and enablers who invariably have an interest in the perpetuation of the system. Mnangagwa was among Mugabe's ablest and most enthusiastic henchmen.
He was in charge of the horrific Matabeleland massacre, which left thousands of civilians dead. The butchery led to the decimation of Joshua Nkomo's opposition Zimbabwe African People's Union as a political force in Matabeleland, and the consolidation of Mugabe's one-party rule.
Perhaps Mnangagwa's new-found admirers may have thought that during his escape from Zimbabwe to SA via Mozambique - with Mugabe's goons in hot pursuit, we're told - their hero had undergone some sort of Damascene conversion.
He was certainly speaking a different language by the time he was installed as president days later, promising his own version of a New Dawn. But he's still the same old Crocodile.
The spectacle of gun-toting police and soldiers mercilessly whipping defenceless women has been nauseating to watch. It is cruel and primitive. How anything can sanction such brutality simply boggles the mind.
All eyes are now on SA to intervene. But the country's foreign policy, especially when it comes to relations with other African countries, can be described as one of being nice. Don't offend, is its motto. It's also loath to take an independent, principled stand even where its interests are at stake.
It's happier and more comfortable being lost in the crowd. But Zimbabwe is within its own sphere of influence - in its backyard. SA should be leading international efforts to solve the crisis. It cannot shirk that responsibility. Because what happens in Zimbabwe has a direct impact on SA internally.
Zimbabweans already make up the largest group of foreigners in this country. And that has brought its own challenges.
SA is probably now at its weakest standing diplomatically and is preoccupied with numerous problems. Corruption has not only impoverished it, it has also eroded its international credibility.
Covid-19 is not only killing its people, it's draining resources it doesn't have. The pot is empty. And in Ramaphosa, the country has probably the weakest leader in its history. One even forgets that he's the current chair of the African Union.
Thabo Mbeki, who has become a useful scapegoat for the Zimbabwe debacle, was not wrong to get involved in the crisis. Where he erred was in doing Mugabe's bidding. He was not a neutral mediator. Zuma didn't lift a finger.
SA has no option but to get in there and do the right thing. But for that to happen, we'll have to wait for a change of heart in Pretoria, or perhaps even a change in political leadership.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.