Foreign Office Advised Against Military Action to Topple Robert Mugabe

Recently released documents reveal that the Foreign Office advised against British military intervention to overthrow the former Zimbabwean president, the long-serving leader, in 2004, stating it was not considered a "viable option".

Government Documents Reveal Deliberations on Handling a "Depressingly Healthy" Leader

Policy papers from Tony Blair's government show officials considered options on how best to handle the "depressingly healthy" 80-year-old dictator, who declined to leave office as the country fell into turmoil and financial collapse.

Faced with Mugabe's Zanu-PF party winning a 2005 election, and a year after the UK joined a US-led coalition to oust Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, Downing Street asked the Foreign Office in July 2004 to produce potential courses of action.

Policy of Isolation Considered Ineffective

Officials agreed that the UK's policy of isolating Mugabe and building an international agreement for change was failing, having failed to secure support from key African nations, notably the then South African president, Thabo Mbeki.

Courses considered in the documents included:

• "Seek to remove Mugabe by force";
• "Go for tougher UK measures" such as freezing assets and closing the UK embassy; or
• "Re-open dialogue", the approach supported by the then departing ambassador to Zimbabwe.

"We know from Afghanistan, Iraq and Yugoslavia that changing a government and/or its bad policies is exceedingly difficult from the outside."

The diplomatic assessment dismissed military action as not a "serious option," adding that "The only candidate for leading such a armed intervention is the UK. No other country (even the US) would be willing to do so".

Cautionary Notes of Heavy Casualties and Legal Hurdles

It warned that military intervention would cause heavy casualties and have "considerable implications" for British people in Zimbabwe.

"Short of a major humanitarian and political catastrophe – resulting in massive violence, large-scale refugee flows, and instability in the region – we judge that no African state would support any attempts to remove Mugabe forcibly."

The document continues: "We also believe that any other European, Commonwealth or western partner (including the US) would authorise or participate in military intervention. And there would be no legal grounds for doing so, without an approving Security Council Resolution, which we would not get."

Long-Term Strategy Advocated

The Prime Minister's advisor, Laurie Lee, warned him that Zimbabwe "could become a significant obstacle" to his plan to use the UK's presidency of the G8 to make 2005 "a pivotal year for Africa". Lee concluded that as military action had been ruled out, "we probably have to accept that we must adopt a long-term strategy" and re-open talks with Mugabe.

Blair seemed to concur, writing: "We should work out a way of revealing the lies and malpractice of Mugabe and Zanu-PF up to this election and then subsequently, we could try to re-engage on the basis of a firm agreement."

The then outgoing ambassador, in his valedictory telegram, had recommended cautious renewed contact with Mugabe, though he understood the Prime Minister "would likely be appalled given all that Mugabe has said and done".

The Zimbabwean leader was ultimately removed in a military takeover in 2017, aged 93. Previous claims that in the early 2000s Blair had tried to pressure the South African president into joining a armed alliance to overthrow Mugabe were vehemently rejected by the former UK premier.