UK House of Lords debate renewal of targetted sanctions in Zimbabwe

By Violet Gonda
9 January 2007

The issue of renewing targetted sanctions against members of the Mugabe regime gained momentum in the UK Parliament’s House of Lords on Monday. The smart sanctions imposed by the European Union expire next month.
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon said: “Since their rollover last February, the situation in the country has only worsened: peaceful demonstrations have been violently disrupted, the economy continues to be grossly mismanaged and the opposition and independent media remain suppressed.”
She said; “Until democracy, the rule of law and full human rights are restored in Zimbabwe, it is right that Mugabe and his regime should continue to be isolated by the international community.”
The debate comes in the wake of renewed efforts by the Mugabe regime to lift the targetted sanctions. A report in the state mouthpice the Herald newspaper on Monday said: “Illegal economic sanctions that were imposed against Zimbabwe, at the instigation of the MDC by some Western countries led by the US and Britain, are hurting the economy and the ordinary man hardest. This is the usual governemnt spin.
The House of Lords urged the British government to propose to the German presidency that additional measures be taken to inform African leaders and the public in African states, particularly in SADC, that there never have been European Union sanctions against Zimbabwe, but that there are sanctions against 126 named individuals whose policies are to undermine human rights, freedoms and the rule of law.
There were also reports that some EU countries such as France and Portugal are in favour of lifting the sanctions. But during the House of Lords debate, another UK peer, Lord Blaker said that if sanctions are abondoned the European Union would be letting down the people of Zimbabwe who have shown enormous courage against the Mugabe regime.”
He asked; “Is it not also true that other countries have subscribed to the sanctions against Mugabe which the European Union has adopted? Does that not mean that if sanctions were to be abandoned, we would be letting down both those countries and the people of Zimbabwe with whom we should have solidarity? The European Union would be letting itself down by spoiling its own reputation and authority in the wider world.”
Regarding the weakening of the European Union position Baroness Royall maintained that the EU stands firmly in agreement on the crisis in Zimbabwe and expects the sanctions to be renewed in February.
The peers also discussed the inconsistencies shown by some EU member states who have in the past granted visas to members of the Mugabe regime despite the travel ban. They urged the British governemnt and the EU to establish a consistent policy on targeted measures against the regime. A peer Lord Kinnock said if Mugabe were to go to Portugal for the EU-Africa conference in the second half of this year, it would hold up the EU policy to derision and give his regime an unwarranted propaganda victory.
Baroness Royall said: “It is extraordinary that such loopholes exist, but they do. The EU Zimbabwe travel ban contains standard exemptions that enable travel to the EU by banned Zimbabweans in a few, narrowly defined cases. We do our utmost to ensure that they are narrowly defined, because to see people such as Grace Mugabe stomping up and down the streets of the Côte d’Azur is an affront to humanity.”
EU sanctions were imposed in 2002 and the travel ban has been tightened four times since then to include others who have supported the regime’s efforts to suppress the people.
Despite the man made disaster unfolding in Zimbabwe the EU maintains it will continue to send much needed humanitarian aid to the country.

Full excerpts of the House of Lords debate can be found here