Skip to main content

After 23 years, UK-ZIM relations thawing

 #SundayMussings 



Prof. Jonathan Moyo


It's International Relations 101 that a penchant for and infatuation with trivialities is not part of diplomacy, it's trivial pursuit.


With this in mind, one does not have to hold a brief for anyone to understand that the coronation of King Charles III was essentially a showcase of an archaic and obnoxious tradition of hereditary rule - frowned upon in most parts of the world now under republican rule of one sort or another, while still a big deal in the United Kingdom of once upon a time, Great Britain - that dates back some 1,000 years ago.


There’s therefore nothing geopolitically significant or even interesting about that primitive culture, where someone called Charles was crowned head of state by virtue of his birth at a ceremony where "His Majesty's Government" had no qualms about displaying the full repertoire of imperial loot like the stolen African Star and majestic gold from former British colonies, many of whose leaders were in attendance and embarrassingly too grateful to witness and applaud in neo-colonial awe as invited very, very important guests.


In contrast, the funeral of King Charles III's mother on 19 September 2022 was a more significant global event than his coronation over the weekend. There is an important symbolic 1776-reason why the President of the United States did not attend the coronation but attended the funeral.


While the question of who sat where and why - especially regarding the sitting of President Mnangagwa- has been hot trivial pursuit among a few Zimbabweans who followed the coronation, it has to be said that the invitation to the President of Zimbabwe was no trivial matter.


It is trite to mention that no invitation would have been extended to the President of Zimbabwe had the coronation occurred when the incumbent was President Mugabe. In other words, if former President Mugabe were alive and in office today, the British Monarch and His Majesty's Government in the UK would not have invited him.


This raises a number of talking points, not necessary to outline or exhaust in full here.


But one of the talking points worthy of mention here is that, it can now be said confidently and even authoritatively that after the “Hondo Ye Minda” fallout in 2000 between Britain and Zimbabwe over land, with Mugabe at the helm and spearheading Zimbabwe's Third Chimurenga under which Zimbabwe's land was reclaimed from colonial dispossession of the indigenous population, there was no way the corridors of faded British colonial power and fallen empire would have forgiven him, and no way Zimbabwe and Britain would have kissed and made up, to restore pre-2000 bilateral relations with Mugabe in office.


Unlike President Mnangagwa's attendance at #COP26 conference in Scotland - a multilateral meeting under United Nations to which members are entitled to attend and at which hosts are obliged to indulge them - the Coronation of King Charles III was entirely a British event where attendees were by the invitation of the British authorities, and them alone.


The King Charles III Coronation invitation to the President of Zimbabwe - the first bilateral invite to the country's head of state in 23 years - was therefore a significant icebreaker in UK-Zim bilateral relations. It was a big deal.


It is notable that the thawing of relations between Britain and Zimbabwe is happening post-Brexit when - because it needs all the friends it can muster around the world following its exit from the EU - Britain's foreign policy is now increasingly prioritising its national economic interests over contentious issues such as human rights in its former colonies, which colonies never enjoyed human rights under British rule.


The thawing of bilateral relations between the UK and Zimbabwe is therefore not to be measured by the photo opportunities or the number thereof that President Mnangagwa had or was left out from at the Coronation of King Charles III; or the number of high profile courtesy calls and visits that he had; or whether the Secretary General of the Commonwealth did in fact use or abuse her courtesy meeting with him to tell him to “reform or no readmission” – something which will be decided by perception and not reality; or where and with whom the President sat at the official event, although it is clear that he sat in the same VVIP area with other heads of state and government such as Zambia’s Hakainde Hichilema and Malawi’s Lazarus Chakwera.


What is important is that the invitation to the President of Zimbabwe by British authorities to attend a major national event of significant importance to their history and governance means that the 23-year-old diplomatic jinx between Britain and Zimbabwe has been broken.


This alone is more than enough to confirm the thawing of bilateral relations between the two countries. A new chapter has opened, and what happens next will depend on praxis.


To understand this – and going forward - the interests of individuals should not be conflated or confused with the interests of the two countries, not least because the interests of individuals are narrow and short-lived as they come and go, while the countries have broad, inter-generational, historic and thus permanent interests!

Comments

  1. This narrative thawing of Uk-zimbabwe relationship is baseless & has no substance.Its far from the truth its just wishful thinking.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It is the beginging of frosty relations on the mend to like minded persons ,who understands relations of Nations.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The invite to Britain by the British to their event and not summit, clearly shows the about change of British foreign policy with regards to Zimbabwe especially after the coming in of the second republic ..
    Well articulated piece prof👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

In defence of Lindiwe Sisulu - SA Constitution not Sacred, Judges not demi-gods

            Professor Arthur Mutambara The SA Constitution is not Sacred and SA Judges are not Demigods.   By Arthur Guseni Oliver Mutambara 13 January 2022   Minister Lindiwe Sisulu penned an opinion piece on 7 January 2022 titled: ‘Hi Mzansi, have we seen justice?’  It was quite a refreshing critique of the challenges confronting South Africa.  Sisulu’s right to express herself and the content of her remarks must be vigorously defended without equivocation or ambiguity. On 8 January 2022, soon after I read the opinion piece, I publicly expressed the following remarks: ‘Wow, what a piece by Lindiwe Sisulu. I am pleasantly surprised that some in the ANC still get it and are prepared to articulate it eloquently. The issue is how to get such incisive thinking to influence the ANC and the country's direction. Is it a lost cause?’ I stand by these utterances. There has been quite several articles and remarks attacking Minister Sisulu. The ba...
LAWYERS DEMO : DELIVERY OF JUSTICE OR PROTECTING THE CASH COW ?   By Hosia Mviringi 31 January 2019 On 29 January 2019 the nation woke up to the news that Lawyers under the banner of the Law Society of Zimbabwe was demonstrating against lack of or misdelivery of justice in the Courts in Zimbabwe. I write this article with a heavy heart knowing that my brother is a loyal member of the fraternity.I will try to be professional and speak my mind. What baffles the mind is the fact that the Lawyers are officers of the same Courts which they have served under the Law Society of Zimbabwe in defence of the accused for many years since independence.They have not seen this so called misdelivery of justice until only yesterday after the violent demonstration of the 14th of January 2019. What has changed now to warrant the demonstration by the Lawyers against the same Courts to which they have served or are serving as officers and partners ? Lets try to unpack the conundrum. Soon...