Zimbabwe (Hansard, 14 March 2002)

§ The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Jack Straw)
With permission, Mr. Speaker, I should like to make a statement on Zimbabwe.
Yesterday, Robert Mugabe was declared the official winner in the presidential election. That result should, however, surprise no one. ZANU-PF had long been bent on achieving precisely that outcome by any means and at all costs. The Zimbabwean Government have subjected their electorate to two years of violence and intimidation. They have harassed Opposition candidates and supporters, manipulated the voters' rolls and restricted access to polling stations. They have exploited every instrument of the state—the military, the police, media, youth militias and the bureaucracy—to distort the outcome of the election.
ZANU-PF did its utmost to conceal the extent of its violence and malpractice from the eyes of the world. It excluded European Union election observers, monopolised domestic television and radio, and restricted international media organisations, including the BBC. None of those actions were the actions of a party confident of its ability to win a free or fair election. The elections can be judged only by agreed international standards, not least the declaration signed by Commonwealth Heads of Government, chaired by President Mugabe, in Harare in 1991.
Only three months before the election, in December last year, on the basis of the principles of the Harare declaration, the Commonwealth concluded that the situation in Zimbabwe constitutes a serious and persistent violation of the Commonwealth's fundamental political values and the rule of law". That conclusion was reinforced in January, and again a week before the polls closed. The situation got worse during the election.
A key yardstick by which any electoral process must be judged is impartial electoral administration, but there was nothing impartial about the process in Zimbabwe. Robert Mugabe staffed Zimbabwe's electoral supervisory commission with partisan army officers. The names of who could and could not vote were not settled until just days before the election, amidst allegations of fraudulent practice. During the election itself, the electoral commission reduced the number of polling booths in urban areas to restrict the Opposition vote. In many rural areas, the Opposition say that their polling agents and monitors were prevented from inspecting ballot boxes before voting started. Others were not allowed inside polling stations. Many Opposition workers say they were abducted, detained or arrested by supporters of the ruling party or the security forces.
As the House will know, while European Union and other observers were excluded from observing the electoral process, some groups of election observers were allowed into the country. Earlier today, I received the preliminary report of the Commonwealth observers group, which comes to a number of coruscating conclusions about the conduction of the election. It said: The violence and intimidation created a climate of fear and suspicion. 1032 It said that the police appeared to be high-handed in dealing with the MDC and lenient towards supporters of … ZANU-PF. This failure to impartially enforce the law seriously calls into question the application of the rule of law in Zimbabwe. It said: We were concerned that the legislative framework within which the elections were conducted … was basically flawed. It went on: Limitations on the freedom of speech movement and…association prevented the opposition from campaigning freely. It continued: We … found that thousands of Zimbabwean citizens were disenfranchised".
It concluded: All the foregoing brings us to the conclusion that the conditions in Zimbabwe did not adequately allow for a free expression of will by the electors.
That set of conclusions has been confirmed in a report by parliamentary observers from the Southern African Development Community. It makes similar, very serious criticisms of the process, and concludes that the electoral process could not be said to adequately comply with the Norms and Standards for Elections in the SADC region. I shall place both reports in the House of Commons Library.
Zimbabweans have plainly been denied their fundamental right to choose by whom they are governed. I am sure that I speak for the whole House in expressing my admiration for the people of Zimbabwe—[HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."]—whose faith in democracy was so strong that they queued for days to vote, in the face of police violence. In some cases, they were denied the right to vote. They are the true democrats, but they deserve a great deal better.
What adds to the tragedy is that, until recently, Zimbabwe was the pride of Africa—the bread basket of the continent. Robert Mugabe's disastrous economic polices have severely damaged his own country. Unemployment is running at 70 per cent. and inflation at 112 per cent. Last year, its gross domestic product declined by 10 per cent., and the same decline is expected this year. In the space of two years, Robert Mugabe's prime achievement will have been to contract Zimbabwe's economy by at least a quarter.
The failure of the electoral process in Zimbabwe is a tragedy not just for Zimbabwe, but for the people of southern Africa as a whole. The rand of the Republic of South Africa depreciated by 40 per cent. in the past year. The people of southern Africa deserve better, too. Their Governments will inevitably bear most of the responsibility in helping the region to recover, and we shall of course continue to work with them in that task.
The House will know that, on 18 February. the European Union decided to impose sanctions, which were targeted against the leadership of ZANU-PF. They included a travel ban, an assets freeze and a ban on arms sales. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and I will travel to Barcelona this afternoon, and at the summit to be held in that city we will review the position with our EU partners.
We are also working closely with the United States Government. They have already announced a travel ban on the ZANU-PF leadership and are considering a 1033 possible broadening of sanctions, along the lines of those already enforced by the EU. We will continue to work closely with them, and with our G8 and SADC partners.
The House will know that, at the turn of the year, Her Majesty's Government took the view, on evidence available then, that Zimbabwe should be suspended from the Commonwealth. Events since then have simply confirmed that judgment. Regrettably, Commonwealth Heads of Government decided not to follow that course, but to appoint instead a troika of South Africa, Nigeria and Australia to decide on Zimbabwe's Commonwealth status. We await its conclusions in the light of the strongly worded Commonwealth? observers group report, to which I have already drawn the House's attention, and the more detailed report that the observers group promises.
In the face of the deprivation heaped on them by their own Government, it is crucial that we and the international community stand by the people of Zimbabwe. We will therefore maintain our programme of humanitarian assistance, and our assistance in the fight against HIV-AIDS. However, I tell the House that we will continue to oppose any accessing by the Government of Zimbabwe of international financial resources until a more representative Government are in place.
Robert Mugabe may claim to have won this election, but the people of Zimbabwe have lost. We are faced with a leader who is determined to ignore the international community, to ignore his people and to ignore the grave consequences of his actions. Change will have to come to Zimbabwe. One day—I hope soon—we can look forward to a democratic Government of Zimbabwe, acting in the interests of all their peoples, and taking their rightful place in a modern Africa.
Some have sought to suggest that this is a conflict between Africa and the west, black against white and south against north. I reject that totally. At its heart, this is a matter of the universal worldwide principle of the right of people, wherever they live, freely to determine their own future. That principle has been flouted in Zimbabwe, and all democrats should speak with one voice in condemning what has taken place.

§ Mr. Michael Ancram (Devizes)
I thank the Foreign Secretary for making his statement today on Mr. Mugabe's election result and for letting me see a copy in advance.
I refer to Mr. Mugabe's election result rather than his victory, because the word "victory" has glamorous connotations. Yesterday's result in Zimbabwe contained nothing glamorous at all. It was sordid, dishonest, underhand, undemocratic and wrong. It should not be allowed to stand. President Bush is right to have made it clear that he will not recognise the result, and we should do the same. For all the Foreign Secretary's fine words, I am disappointed that nothing in what he said suggested that that would be the case.
We must avoid the temptation of a emotional reaction. We need to look dispassionately at the evidence of what has happened and to be able to demonstrate that the election was not only flawed, but rigged well in advance of polling and neither free nor fair. It has not been free for months. The long run-up to the elections has been marked by violence, intimidation and the use of terror as a political weapon. The House should not forget that in the 12 months to January this year we had already seen 1034 48 political murders, 329 abductions and 2,245 cases of torture, and there have been many more since. We have seen the media gagged, and reputable international broadcasters expelled and labelled as terrorists. All those are the attributes of fascist regimes through history.
Nor was the election fair. From the outset the process has been corrupted, as the Foreign Secretary set out in detail today and as the reports from the Commonwealth and SADC so clearly and graphically confirm. It is worth remembering that in March last year SADC set out 11 election recommendations that were subsequently endorsed by all SADC members, including Zimbabwe. Not one of the 11 recommendations has been adhered to.
I shall remind the House of some of those recommendations and what happened. They included impartial international and regional election observers at the earliest possible stage—that did not happen; equal access to the media for opposition parties—that was not allowed; impartial policing of the ballot—laughable; presidential candidates to be provided with free and adequate security during the election process—laughable; and unimpeded freedom to campaign and freedom to vote throughout the country—laughable.
The result sets several serious tests in different areas. It is a test for southern Africa of whether the region genuinely adheres to the principles of democracy set out in the Harare declaration. It is a test for the Commonwealth of whether the principles on which it is founded mean anything at all. It is also a test for the Prime Minister, who has spoken about healing the scar … that is Africa to show whether he can, even belatedly, give the leadership to mend what is not just a scar but an open and bleeding wound on the body of that great continent.
I do not believe that what the Foreign Secretary has said today goes nearly far enough—it sounded like just more of what we have heard before. Once again, it is hope against experience. Why does not the Foreign Secretary today make it clear that the Government do not recognise the result or the legitimacy of the Zimbabwean Government and take steps accordingly?

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Mr. Denis MacShane)
He did.

§ Mr. Ancram
He did not.
Will the Foreign Secretary urgently consult his European Union counterparts in Barcelona this evening to see whether the targets of the sanctions can be extended in the way that the MDC has called for today? Will he seek the maximum degree of non-recognition of this result and of the Government of Zimbabwe throughout the international community, including suspension from the Commonwealth? Will he and the Prime Minister, together with the United States, take a lead in building an international coalition, including Europe and responsible members of the Commonwealth, to bring real and determined pressure to bear on Zimbabwe for new presidential elections to be held? Mr. Mugabe has got away with this election because the international community in general, and our Government in particular, did not show him months ago that we meant business when we called for free and fair elections. Like all tyrants, Mugabe has fed on the belief that brave statements from 1035 this Government and others were all words and would not be backed up by action. To our shame, for many months, he was correct in that belief.
The time for mere words is now over. There must be no more quiet diplomacy, no more hand wringing and no more supine inaction. They have all failed, and they have failed the people of Zimbabwe in the process. For the sake of the people of Zimbabwe, and for the sake of democracy, the Government must recognise that the time has come to stop talking and to start doing.

§ Mr. Straw
I understand fully the right hon. Gentleman's anger and frustration about what has happened because I share it, but much of his response amounted to tilting at windmills. He asks for us to take action in the Commonwealth. We have sought to do so. I have been in the lead in that regard, but the fact is that the Commonwealth is a free association of 54 countries. There was not a majority—and still less unanimity—in the Commonwealth for suspension before elections took place. I hope that there is now agreement inside the troika, because that would be an important mark of the Commonwealth's disapproval of what has happened.
The right hon. Gentleman asks us to build an international consensus. With respect, that is exactly what we have been doing. He asks for action. That is exactly what has been secured inside the European Union.

§ Mr. Ancram
Does the right hon. Gentleman recognise the result?

§ Mr. Straw
I thought that I had made it palpably obvious that we do not recognise the result or its legitimacy. There is no difference between the position that we have taken and that taken by President Bush.
As the right hon. Gentleman asked for action, I say to him gently that we were able to secure the required unanimous approval of the European Union to impose sanctions. As it happens, those sanctions are being imposed on a broader basis than those that the United States, with which we have been working closely, has introduced up to now. Had the right hon. Gentleman been holding my office, with his party's approach to the European Union, would that unanimity have been achieved?
I regret the tone of the right hon. Gentleman's concluding remarks. Neither Opposition spokesmen nor anyone else should move the blame for what has happened from where it must lie. It cannot be moved to the international community or to the House. The blame and responsibility must lie fairly and squarely on the shoulders of Robert Mugabe and ZANU-PF. Nothing would please them more than if they were let off the hook by the kind of ill-advised remarks that we have heard from the Opposition Front Bench.
I hope that the House will send out its determination that it recognises where the responsibility lies but, equally, that it recognises our responsibility to continue relentlessly to do all that we can by deeds as well as words to ensure that Mugabe and ZANU-PF are accorded neither the international status nor the assistance and recognition that they seek. Instead, we shall strive for a democratic election in Zimbabwe and a democratic Government.

§ Mr. Menzies Campbell (North-East Fife)
I feel constrained to echo the words of my right hon. Friend 1036 the Member for Ross, Skye and Inverness, West (Mr. Kennedy) when the Prime Minister reported after the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting—that if ever there were occasions on which the House should speak with one voice, it is occasions such as this.
The Foreign Secretary said that we should not be surprised by the result. We should not be surprised either by the conduct of the elections, as the behaviour of ZANU-PF during them was entirely consistent with the campaign of violence, abuse and intimidation that characterised its behaviour towards opponents in the period running up to them. The sad and unpalatable truth is that, for all its optimism, it would have taken little short of a miracle for the Movement for Democratic Change to have won the election.
In light of the Commonwealth observers group's trenchant and unequivocal condemnation, would not it be inconceivable for the troika to reach any conclusion other than that suspension was a necessary and inevitable response from the Commonwealth? What hope would there be for the Commonwealth as an institution based on the rule of law and on respect for human rights if its response to these events was seen to be feeble?
The Foreign Secretary is right to put his trust in concerted action, and to engage the European Union. This is an occasion on which we should acknowledge the helpful, even exemplary, support that the United States has shown in these matters, both in the Administration and in the Congress.
Finally, does the Foreign Secretary share my disappointment about the consequences of Mr. Mugabe's re-election? The right hon. Gentleman outlined the terrible domestic conditions in Zimbabwe, which will now continue, but Mr. Mugabe's behaviour has also placed an enormous burden on the whole of the region of southern Africa. Is not it a terrible tragedy that these events may set back, perhaps irretrievably, the renaissance for Africa in which so much hope has been invested?

§ Mr. Straw
May I commend the remarks of the right hon. and learned Member for North-East Fife (Mr. Campbell), and the tone in which they were offered? I agree that this debate should not be an occasion for partisanship in the House. There needs to be unanimity. After all, an important element here is that hon. Members are democratically and freely elected. Some of us have lost quite a few elections, even in the free and fair conditions that apply in this country. I spent 18 years in opposition, so I know about losing elections freely. That is bad enough, but to have an election stolen from one is much worse.

§ Mr. Paul Keetch (Hereford)
Freedom!

§ Mr. MacShane
Just like Israel.

§ Mr. Straw
I will not be drawn down that route.
The right hon. and learned Member for North-East Fife asked whether it would be inconceivable, in the light of the trenchant comments made in the Commonwealth observers' initial report, for the troika not to recommend suspension. I understand the strength of that view. He and the House know very well that, even on the evidence available in December, the Government thought that the Commonwealth ought to suspend Zimbabwe's 1037 membership. Given that the evidence has mounted since then, and given what Commonwealth observers have concluded, we think that still more today.
The right hon. and learned Member for North-East Fife asked about the future of the Commonwealth. I happen to believe that it is a strong organisation. Those of us who have attended some of the Commonwealth celebrations and seen, for example, the breadth of the nongovernmental organisations involved will appreciate the huge contribution that the Commonwealth makes to civic society—and not just to inter-governmental relations—in its 54 member countries. Plainly, however, the Commonwealth's reputation could not but be damaged if no action were taken in the light of the Commonwealth observers' report.
I am grateful to the right hon. and learned Member for North-East Fife for mentioning the exemplary support that the United States has shown. I would add, parenthetically, that, of course, the US has interests in Zimbabwe, but that the United Kingdom's interests there are far greater. I hope that those who say that the US worries only about its own interests, is isolationist and does not consult its international colleagues, will recognise that it has been highly consultative over Zimbabwe, as in so many other matters, and that it has taken action because of its responsibility as a member of the international community rather than for its own, particular reasons.
As to the overall consequences of the election on the region, the right hon. and learned Member for North-East Fife asks whether it will set back irretrievably the chances of a renaissance in Africa. I do not believe so; I do not believe that we should accord Mugabe that power. This is a setback, and it will be even more of a setback if other leaders in southern Africa do not recognise the huge task that they now face to rebuild confidence not only in other southern African countries but in Zimbabwe itself.

§ Mr. Tony Lloyd (Manchester, Central)
My right hon. Friend is right to say that this is no time for narrow party points—the situation is far too serious. One of the most important things that he has told the House is that both SADC and the Commonwealth observers have roundly condemned the election as a total fraud. That is an important message because it gives the lie to those in the Mugabe camp who try to argue that this is a north-versus-south argument, the rich against the poor in Africa. We must establish both in this country and internationally that it is the ordinary people of Zimbabwe who have been robbed in this election. I hope that my right hon. Friend will tell the House that he will take that message to Barcelona. The role of the European Union is not to lead world opinion but to work with our friends in democratic states throughout Africa and elsewhere who recognise that this election is a fraud against democratic principles.
One of the most certain consequences of the election is that the situation in Zimbabwe will continue to deteriorate. It is implausible to say that it will get better or stabilise. Will my right hon. Friend assure the House that we will continue to support people such as Mr. Tsvangirai in the MDC and those who are pushing for democratic change? When one party has stolen an 1038 election, it is legitimate to suspend the normal terms and conditions of impartiality. We should support those in Zimbabwe who will fight for democracy.

§ Mr. Straw
I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for his remarks. He is right to say that the ordinary people of Zimbabwe have been robbed by this election result. One of the many untruths that Mugabe was trying to peddle is that this is a black-versus-white issue. However, if one looks at those who have been the target of the ZANU-PF police state machine, one finds that they are overwhelmingly the blacks of Zimbabwe, particularly the urban blacks and those in rural areas who have dared to express opposition. All the reports overwhelmingly show that to be the case. As far as I know, the SADC parliamentary forum is almost exclusively black—it has condoned the outcome of the elections—and, like the Commonwealth itself, the Commonwealth observers group is multi-racial and is led by a Nigerian.
We will continue to do all that we can to support everybody in Zimbabwe who has at their heart the universal principles of democracy and of free and fair elections.

§ Mr. Nicholas Soames (Mid-Sussex)
The Foreign Secretary is aware, because I have told him, that when my father was the last governor of southern Rhodesia, I visited with him the polling stations on the first day of those remarkable elections, which were not perfect, when tens of thousands of people queued, as they have done in the past few days, to express for the first time their democratic wish. So much bright hope was vested for the future, only for it to be smashed to pieces in the last few days. The message that should go from this House to the people of Zimbabwe is that we feel for them in their great difficulty and in the grief that most of them will be suffering.
May I urge the Foreign Secretary to lobby vigorously, if he is entitled to do so, among the 54 members of the Commonwealth to ensure that the troika does its duty and that the spirit of those reports, which will have been gained with considerable difficulty, is honoured in the only proper decision that the troika could make?

§ Mr. Straw
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his remarks and for their tone. I recall our conversation, in which he recounted with great poignancy his experiences of being alongside his father when an entirely peaceful handover of power took place. Great hope was vested in Mugabe and many others, and there was a free and fair election, which led to an outcome that was not anticipated. The hon. Gentleman is right to say that that bright hope has been smashed to pieces.
The hon. Gentleman asks me whether we shall lobby vigorously within the Commonwealth. Yes, we will. Given all the pressures on the observers, including subtle intimidation—European Union observers were refused admission—and some violence, it is remarkable that they have come out with such strident conclusions. Given those pressures, their conclusions should be treated with greater seriousness.

§ Mr. Peter Pike (Burnley)
My right hon. Friend made a sad statement, but one that came as no surprise to any of us who have watched events in Zimbabwe over recent years. There was an erosion of democracy in the elections and attacks on the freedom of the press and the judiciary.
1039 Should we not be making it clear to people in Zimbabwe, especially to ZANU-PF members and supporters, that the solution lies in their hands? It is for them to wake up before it is too late and before they have destroyed democracy and freedom in their country. They need to change direction now.

§ Mr. Straw
I agree with my hon. Friend. He is right to imply that there has been extraordinary short-sightedness, even for people in ZANU-PF. They will not secure a bright future for their country nor an economic recovery. Instead, by stealing the election, they will make the situation in Zimbabwe worse.

§ Mrs. Cheryl Gillan (Chesham and Amersham)
I welcome the Foreign Secretary's robust words in condemning the farce of an election in Zimbabwe. Has the right hon. Gentleman had the opportunity to read the statement from the SADC parliamentary forum election observation mission, which indicated that even members of the mission were part of the targeted violence in the run-up to the elections?
I know that the right hon. Gentleman is off to Barcelona, and that he will be discussing Zimbabwe in depth with our colleagues in the European Union. Will he tell the House whether he plans to contact the Heads of Government in the SADC region and to support the statement from the head of the SADC observer mission, who is calling for dialogue between the leaders of the SADC Governments and Mugabe, to try to arrive at some reconciliation or a new process that could lead to democracy in Zimbabwe?

§ Mr. Straw
I have seen the SADC conclusions, and I am placing copies of them and those of the Commonwealth observers in the Library. We shall be in touch with relevant Heads of Government within the SADC region. One of the reasons why the SADC conclusions are so powerful is that they come not from Government representatives but from parliamentary representatives.

§ David Winnick (Walsall, North)
In totally condemning Mugabe's tyranny, are not Labour Members being entirely consistent? In the 1960s, we used every opportunity to denounce the tyranny of Smith's illegal regime. I do not remember too many protests from Conservative Members in those days.
Has not the time come, given all that has happened this week, for the majority in the Commonwealth to come off the fence, recognise their democratic responsibilities and suspend Zimbabwe for as long as Mugabe is in power?

§ Mr. Straw
In the spirit of bipartisanship, I shall gently pass over my hon. Friend's earlier remarks.
It is a time for decision by those in the Commonwealth. Commonwealth Heads of Government, meeting in Coolum, Australia last week, decided to set up the troika. They have already had the published report. There will be a further, more detailed report. The view of the House is clear from the observations that Members on both sides have made and would make if they were members of the troika.

§ Mr. Andrew MacKay (Bracknell)
Clearly, it is essential that the House remains united today in its condemnation of this rigged election and the abuse of human rights by Mugabe and his regime. Is the Foreign Secretary comfortable with the role that has been played by President Mbeki, especially bearing in mind this morning's press reports that South African observers have said that the election was free and fair, when clearly it was not? Will he again underline how much damage will be done to South Africa if President Mbeki makes the wrong decision at the troika, and also underline today's run on the rand, which shows that there will be terrific disinvestment in South Africa if it is seen to support the regime in Harare?

§ Mr. Straw
We all recognise that President Mbeki of South Africa bears a very heavy burden of responsibility not only for the economy and prosperity of his country, but, because of South Africa's size and importance, for the prosperity of the entire region and the reputation of Africa as a whole. I am sure that he will read with care the remarks that have been made by the right hon. Gentleman and many others.

§ Mike Gapes (Ilford, South)
Does my right hon. Friend agree that in the history of Africa and especially southern Africa, minority military-backed regimes have inevitably been removed in time? If we look to Zambia, South Africa and elsewhere, we see that the trade union movement has played an important role in that process. In our response to this rigged election, should not we endeavour to reinforce our support for the mass independent trade unions in Zimbabwe as part of the process of democratic change?

§ Mr. Straw
My hon. Friend is absolutely right that one of the many arguments against military regimes is that they are inherently unstable and short-lived and must be replaced by democracies. As to the trade union movement, it is not coincidental that Morgan Tsvangirai himself was a leader of that movement in Zimbabwe. On support for trade unions across Africa and indeed the world, yes, we agree that it is necessary. My hon. Friend may know that the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for Rotherham (Mr. MacShane), has been doing a huge amount of work to ensure that we in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office better support the work of the international trade union movement.

§ Mr. Nicholas Winterton (Macclesfield)
Does the Foreign Secretary accept that not only this House, but the whole civilised democratic world must be united against what has happened in Zimbabwe in recent times? Does he agree that while Mr. Mugabe and ZANU-PF can claim a sordid victory, they certainly cannot claim any democratic legitimacy? Will he indicate to the House what action we can take to seek to protect Morgan Tsvangirai and members of the Movement for Democratic Change, the opponents of Mr. Mugabe and ZANU-PF? Will he also explain how we are going to help the poor people of that country, who were given a foretaste of what Mr. Mugabe would do way back in 1983–84, when he indulged in mass genocide of thousands of Matabele who opposed his Government?

§ Mr. Straw
The hon. Gentleman has played a consistent and commendable role in the matter of 1041 Zimbabwe—and, before that, of Southern Rhodesia—over many years, which I commend. He drew attention to the massacres that took place in Matabeleland in the mid-1980s. That was a shameful episode not only for Zimbabwe, but for the international community, including the United Kingdom, which failed to take action. That is another reason why the remarks of the right hon. Member for Devizes (Mr. Ancram) were so ill judged. One of the things that makes the election results risible—I gather that this is the case from this morning's newspapers—is that it is said that Mugabe got a good vote in Matabeleland, where he is hated for palpable reasons. He could have got a good vote there only by methods that are never recognised in democratic and free countries. We will do all that we can to help people who have been in the lead of democratic movements of all kinds in Zimbabwe. I commend the hon. Gentleman's remarks about helping the poor people of Zimbabwe. The message that must go out from the House is that in everything we do as well as everything we say, we are working for the people of Zimbabwe and against a palpably undemocratic and illegitimate Government.

§ Tony Cunningham (Workington)
I wholeheartedly support the condemnation expressed by my right hon. Friend this morning. Although we have heard condemnation from the American Government and European leaders, we also desperately need condemnation of this rigged election from African leaders. Does he have any plans to discuss this rigged election not only with SADC leaders, but with other African leaders in general?

§ Mr. Straw
My hon. Friend will find that there has been a pretty high degree of condemnation. As I said, there has been condemnation by the Nigerian leader of the Commonwealth observers and by the parliamentary representatives who formed the SADC delegation. Earlier this year, the Ghanaian Foreign Minister condemned what had happened in Zimbabwe up to that point. It would be a huge error that would play into Mugabe's hands if we were to allow the myth to develop that Africa is supporting him while the rest of the world is not. Most of Africa is shamed by what Mugabe has done and is now, thankfully, saying so.

§ Angus Robertson (Moray)
I fully associate both the Scottish National party and Plaid Cymru with the Foreign Secretary's statement and fully endorse the efforts that he is undertaking. In addition, I endorse entirely what has been said about the necessity of strong action and reaction through the European Union. Does he share with me the concerns illustrated in papers previewing the Barcelona summit, which show that common foreign and security policy questions are 25th out of 25 in order of importance on the agenda? Will he make every effort in Barcelona to try to force the issue higher up the agenda? Will he also try to push for European Union colleagues to increase targeted measures against leading ZANU-PF members, and make every effort to secure a tougher sanctions regime that is aimed solely at the governing elite and not the ordinary people of Zimbabwe?

§ Mr. Straw
I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for the support that he expressed on behalf of the SNP and Plaid Cymru. He asked about Barcelona. The reason why common foreign and security policy appears low on the 1042 agenda is that the summit is principally about the economic reform agenda that was set in place two years ago at Lisbon. I assure him that that does not mean for a second that Zimbabwe is low on the overall agenda of the European Union, which has acted commendably and swiftly in all that it has done, from moving back in the autumn from article 8 to article 96 of the Cotonou agreement, through to its decisions on 18 February to impose the sanctions. We will consider whether we can take other targeted measures and toughen up the sanctions regime, but as he said, in everything we do, we will ensure that such measures are targeted at the illegitimate leadership of the Government and not the people of Zimbabwe.

§ Mr. Malcolm Savidge (Aberdeen, North)
This murderous tyrant is not only wreaking terrible damage in Zimbabwe, but seeking to provoke dangerous divisions in Africa and the Commonwealth. Will my right hon. Friend ignore the irresponsible, bellicose bluster of his shadow and continue to use careful diplomacy to try to encourage the neighbouring states to recognise that this is an issue not of race or colonialism, but of universal human rights and democracy?

§ Mr. Straw
Yes.

§ Mr. John Wilkinson (Ruislip-Northwood)
Could there not be at least one benefit from this sad tragedy that has befallen Zimbabwe and its people, namely that we may lose for ever any residual illusions about the nature of ZANU-PF and its Marxist dictator leader, Mr. Mugabe, who has acted entirely predictably, and whose actions could to some degree perhaps have been forestalled? That having been said, will Her Majesty's Government concert with the highest intensity with the United States Government, who have a good track record in dealing with rogue states in an appropriate manner?

§ Mr. Straw
With regard to the hon. Gentleman's first point, leaving aside ZANU-PF's ideological baggage—it is not the only party in the world to have ideological baggage—as the hon. Member for Mid-Sussex (Mr. Soames), who spoke so movingly about his experience witnessing his father's role as the last Governor-General of that country, said, for quite a long period ZANU-PF had some hope and expectation behind it. It is a huge pity that it has failed to meet that expectation. As to working with the United States, the answer is yes. We are, and will continue to be, in close touch with the United States Government.

§ Mr. Hugo Swire (East Devon)
May I press the Foreign Secretary on a point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Macclesfield (Mr. Winterton) that I did not feel received a suitable answer? Will he assure the House that when he speaks to his colleagues in Barcelona and elsewhere, they will discuss as a priority how they can guarantee the immediate and long-term safety of all those men and women in Zimbabwe who have had the courage to stand up to Mugabe and his thugs during the past few months?

§ Mr. Straw
I apologise to the hon. Member for Macclesfield (Mr. Winterton) if he feels that I did not deal with that point. The answer is yes, we shall raise the issue 1043 of Zimbabwe not only at Barcelona, notwithstanding the constraints on the agenda, but also in the Foreign Ministers Council and at the European Heads of Government summit on a wider range of issues that will take place in Seville later this year.

§ Norman Lamb (North Norfolk)
Particularly in the light of the inability of South Africa, and President Mbeki in particular, to show greater leadership in the region, what future does the Foreign Secretary see for NEPAD and what role in particular should the G8 play in pushing that forward in the light of the election result?

§ Mr. Straw
NEPAD is about—[Interruption.] With great respect, it is not a laughing matter. If the right hon. Member for East Yorkshire (Mr. Knight) does not know what the initials stand for, it shows a lack of information about a strategy for Africa, which I greatly regret.
The new partnership for Africa's development initiative is designed to try to turn round Africa's economic prospects and to lift Africa out of poverty. Africa is a continent which, uniquely out of all the continents in the world, has a declining, not growing, economy, and that is why the new African partnership is so crucial. The people of Africa should not be punished by the misbehaviour of one man, Mugabe, nor of his party. It is my great hope that what has happened in Zimbabwe overnight does not undermine the prospects of NEPAD, and, because of the way in which Mugabe is helping to reduce still further the prosperity of Africa, the paradox is that it becomes all the more urgent.

§ Mr. Charles Hendry (Wealden)
The Foreign Secretary will be aware that many hon. Members have constituents whose relatives have had farms seized in Zimbabwe or who have been threatened. Some of them have been killed and some of their innocent farm workers have been killed or brutally beaten. He will also be aware that those people are more worried than ever that Mugabe's thugs will believe that they can run rampant because they are unchallengeable and above the law. Does he therefore accept that this is no longer the time for lengthy discussion but for urgent action, as each passing day brings additional threats to people's livelihoods and safety? Will he therefore tell us the time scale for the troika to make its recommendations and for the Commonwealth to react to them? Will he ensure that the views of the House are relayed in terms not just of the unanimity of action that we believe needs to be taken, but also of its urgency?

§ Mr. Straw
On the hon. Gentleman's first point, our concern, like that of the House, is for everybody in Zimbabwe, regardless of the colour of their skin, citizenship or nationality. It speaks volumes for that concern that no one this afternoon has directly raised the issue of all the British citizens who are there, but I should make use of the opportunity of the hon. Gentleman's question to say that we have particular responsibilities to them and we shall ensure that those are carried out. I completely understand the anxieties of the white community in Zimbabwe, but in recent months the main violence has overwhelmingly been against the black community there. One should not have to make that point, 1044 but we hope that everybody, whatever their racial origins, colour or citizenship, if they are resident in Zimbabwe, can, notwithstanding the tragedy, still look forward to a future in Zimbabwe.
As to the time scale for the troika, my understanding is that it is intended that the troika should meet next week, and as soon as I have more detailed information I shall make it available to the House.

§ Hugh Robertson (Faversham and Mid-Kent)
The Foreign Secretary is correct to say that the consequences of Mugabe's victory will not be confined to Zimbabwe but affect surrounding countries. What plans are the Government putting in place to deal with the poverty and famine that flow directly from Mugabe's policies?

§ Mr. Straw
My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for International Development has already put in place humanitarian assistance programmes in Zimbabwe. It is extraordinary that here is a country that was exporting large quantities of agricultural produce across southern Africa which now has people starving, not because of any natural disaster but because of the man-made, Mugabe-made, disaster, by which he has taken power illegitimately and, in the course of his misuse of power, has managed to collapse the Zimbabwe economy and much of the economy of the rest of southern Africa. That is his appalling legacy. I know that I speak for my right hon. Friend when I say that, within the resources available to her, she will continue to do all that she can to provide humanitarian aid across southern Africa where it is needed and assistance in fighting HIV/AIDS.

§ Mr. Andrew Turner (Isle of Wight)
My e-mail inbox, like that of many of my hon. Friends, has been heavy with e-mails from constituents and direct from Zimbabwe, reflecting the concern about all communities in that country. But are we not all guilty of having looked for many years through rose-tinted spectacles at dictatorships in Africa? Were not the Government whom I supported responsible for turning their face away from the intimidation in Matabeleland in the early 1980s? Have we not all patronised the Africans as somehow being undeserving of the same quality of democracy as we would expect for our people? Should we not admit those things? Will the Foreign Secretary press for a ban on international travel for any of the adherents of the Mugabe dictatorship and ensure that it is made clear that any aid that goes to Zimbabwe—aid will be greatly needed in future weeks and months—comes from those democracies that Mugabe so much reviles?

§ Mr. Straw
The hon. Gentleman's opening remarks are very wise and we all have lessons to learn here. He is particularly wise to say that it is and has been patronising of the international community somehow to imply that other standards should operate in Africa. A universal principle is at stake and, in so far as it needs spelling out, the great paradox or irony of the situation is that it was spelled out for the Commonwealth at the Harare meeting of Commonwealth Heads of Government in 1991 chaired by none other than Robert Mugabe.
On the ban on travel, the European Union and United States sanctions impose travel bans on 20 or so leading members of ZANU-PF. We are of course open to representations and shall consider whether those bans should be extended.
1045 On aid, we shall make it clear that aid comes from the democracies that Mugabe so despises. We need democracy because it applies a universal principle of freedom; one of the other truths about democracies is that they are almost always much more prosperous than dictatorships.