One of the disadvantages of having my e-mail address printed in the paper is that I get a lot of weird people communicating with me. (I am not referring to the honoured readers of this blog.)

Most of the offers of cheap Viagra are caught in the FT’s capacious spam-filter. But I seem to get an awful lot of people trying to interest me in dubious-sounding business propositions. Most of them I delete without a second thought. But I think this particular communication has an unusual panache to it.

EMERALDS, FOSSILS AND RUBIES: YOUR VERY BEST ACQUISITION AGAINST ECONOMICAL CRISIS
 
GOOD DAY ULTRA-AFFLUENT PARTNER, DEAREST BROTHER:
 

(more…)

In some ways I can sympathise with Thabo Mbeki’s reluctance to throw South Africa’s weight behind a campaign to shove Robert Mugabe out of power in Zimbabwe. The South Africans sometimes complain that the world should understand that Zimbabwe is not a colony of South Africa - which is true enough. Its also true - unfortunately - that there is considerable sympathy for Mugabe among black South Africans. Any South African politician has to take that into account.

But the South Africans should realise that they have a lot at stake in Zimbabwe - and I’m not just talking about the threat of refugee flows and chaos on their borders. Gordon Brown was probably too polite to put it this way when he met President Mbeki, but many people wonder whether - when they look at Zimbabwe - they are looking at a vision of South Africa in 30 years time. Zimbabwe looks like a vindication of every white racist prediction made at the time of independence, that African self-government would end in disaster. It is urgently in South Africa’s interests to help turn the country round.

That is all the more the case when South Africa’s own problems look like they are mounting. The prospect of President Jacob Zuma is not going down well overseas. Crime is still terrible. White flight continues. And now there are daily electricity cuts. One government source has even suggested that foreign investors delay investing for a few years, since the country could not handle the extra power demand new investment would create. As a frustrated South African puts it: “That is shooting a gift horse in the head.”

If Mbeki could help to get Mugabe out, he would be doing his country a favour in more ways than one.

It was predictably depressing to see Robert Mugabe’s first televised reactions to the Zimbabwean election. We don’t cheat, he said - flapping his hands in a weirdly disjointed, faintly camp movement. But, as for the opposition, he shook his head sorrowfully, “lots of irregularities”.

I often wonder, on such occasions, what is really going on inside the head of a dictator like Mugabe. This, after all, is the man who has terrorised opposition politicians and merrily rigged elections for years. Is he just utterly cynical; or does he, at some level, believe what he is saying?

If he were purely cynical, I suppose his internal voice would be saying something like:  “Sure, I used to be a freedom fighter. But now I’m rich and powerful, and I have way too much to lose by stepping down from power. So I’ll do whatever it takes - including murder - to stay in power. And who cares what happens to the country, it’s all about me now.”

That, actually, is what I think it does basically come down to: personal enrichment, personal survival, personal pride - and screw the country. (more…)

Dictators sometimes miscalculate. So I suppose it is possible that Robert Mugabe - failing to realise the depth of his own unpopularity - has just gone down to an electoral defeat in Zimbabwe that is so catastrophic that even he will be unable to reverse the result. But I am pessimistic. Mr Mugabe does not strike me as somebody who is likely to be shamed into doing the right thing. Nor is he the kind of man, who is likely to shrug and say that retirement might not be such a bad option after all. Maybe the army will turn against him? Otherwise, I think he will just dig in his heels and declare victory.

So what happens if Mugabe has indeed been clearly defeated - but decides to cling on to power and to brazen it out? I’ve just been listening to Lord Malloch Brown, Britain’s Africa minister, talking on the BBC World Service. He unequivocally ruled out the possibility of military intervention. Instead, he suggested two courses of action. First, Britain and other western countries should be absolutely clear in condemning a rigged election. Second, we should support African-led attempts at mediation - modelled on Kofi Annan’s efforts in Kenya.

Well, that sounds fine as far as it goes. But those measures don’t sound strong enough to dislodge a determined dictator like Mugabe. (And there is a big question mark - anyway - over whether Zimbabwe’s African neighbours, in particular South Africa, will be willing to get involved. Their record so far is pretty feeble.)

So if the kind of measures that Malloch Brown suggests won’t work, has anybody got any better ideas? What could the outside world do to support democratic change in Zimbabwe?

And - best case scenario - let’s say Mugabe is prevailed upon to step aside, what then? Some of his most damaging economic changes - in particular, the destruction of the farming sector through land redistribution - may be irreversible. So how could the outside world help a new Zimbabwean government?