Zimbabwe -- Mugabe: I'll quit Commonwealth

The Commonwealth was plunged into disarray last night after President Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe threatened to withdraw his country from the organisation.

This dramatic escalation of the dispute over Zimbabwe's suspension from membership was timed for maximum embarrassment, with member nations gathered for a summit in Nigeria and talks over the issue still deadlocked after two days.

Mugabe's ruling Zanu-PF party voted yesterday for a motion to withdraw unless the talks, which are expected to conclude tomorrow, go his way. 'If we say we are doing this, we will do. We never retreat,' Mugabe said.

His Foreign Minister, Stan Mudenge, said the Cabinet would meet soon to discuss withdrawal and he saw 'no difficulty' in securing its agreement.

The intervention, which successfully hijacked the biannual meeting of Commonwealth Heads of Government, was being seen last night as a last-ditch attempt to blackmail other nations into agreeing that Zimbabwe could be readmitted.

Tony Blair's attempts to prevent the issue overshadowing the summit collapsed yesterday as the Commonwealth Secretary General Don Mackinnon admitted it would take 'significant verbal gymnastics' to agree a deal over Zimbabwe - suspended last March over its appalling human rights record.

Officials said it was unlikely that the group of six leaders charged with producing a blueprint for re-engagement with Zimbabwe would produce their conclusions until tonight. Officials made clear that Blair, due to leave tomorrow afternoon, could stay on if events reached crisis point.

Paul Themba Nyathi, spokesman for the Zimbabwean opposition party, the Movement for Democratic Change, pleaded last night for the six not to submit to pressure. 'If [Mugabe] withdraws from the Commonwealth his status as a dictator will be confirmed,' he said.

The MDC wanted Zimbabwe's suspension maintained, he said arguing that although little appeared to have improved during the 18 months of his suspension, Mugabe was affected by it.

The group of six - leaders of Australia, Canada, Mozambique, South Africa, Jamaica and India - spent yesterday attempting to agree new tests for progress before Zimbabwe could be readmitted and new ways of monitoring events.

Civil society groups meeting formally under the Commonwealth umbrella in Nigeria yesterday accused it of 'double standards' over human rights and turning a blind eye to abuses in favoured countries.

Britain and Australia were heavily criticised for invading Iraq while criticising other countries' abuses.

In a statement issued yesterday, the Civil Societies Meeting warned that the 11 September terrorist attacks on the United States had been used as an excuse by some governments to clamp down on legitimate, peaceful opposition.

Ced Simpson, spokesman for the group, said there was concern about clampdowns in Malaysia and Singapore but that the UK and Australia had also been criticised for military intervention in Iraq.

Last night as the retreat at the Nigerian presidential villa in Abuja broke up, delegates said the group of six had produced a draft statement on Zimbabwe but had failed to secure agreement on it.

Helen Clark, the New Zealand Prime Minister, said the majority of the group favoured Zimbabwe's continued suspension and setting benchmarks which it would have to meet before being allowed back in.

Asked how seriously she viewed Mugabe's threat to leave, Clark said: 'If the decision is for continued suspension he has put himself in a position where he is saying he will go if that happens, so he will look a little silly if he doesn't carry through the threat.'

"There's a lot more to gain from being inside the Commonwealth than outside it," the former New Zealand foreign minister said.

I find it interesting that people might think this. It seems incredible to me that, in this day and age, the Commonwealth still means things to people.

I don't understand why Mugabe didn't tell the Commonwealth to bite him the moment they suspended Zimbabwe's membership. Why he remains a member despite his hatred of the British is bewildering. I realise he does not kow-towing to their demands but why he countenences the organisation at all is a mystery to me.

Empires are not popular any more and this small vestige of empire seems horribly dated. An association of countries who's uniting factor is that they once lived under the iron fist of the evil Brits (of whom I am one) which a land-reforming radical socialist African leader doesn't just tell to bugger off? Perhaps someone could enlighten me.

The people of Britain,Australia,Canada and New Zealand who are pro-commonwealth are usually so because it's a sign of shared heritage,culture,loyalty and recognition of wars fought together,sometimes as a unified army,under the crown and for each other.As for the African nations,i have no idea.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.