Foreign Office Advised Regarding Armed Intervention to Topple Robert Mugabe

Recently released documents show that the Foreign Office cautioned against British military action to remove the then Zimbabwean president, the long-serving leader, in 2004, advising it was not considered a "serious option".

Policy Papers Reveal Deliberations on Addressing a "Depressingly Healthy" Dictator

Internal documents from Tony Blair's government show officials considered options on how best to handle the "remarkably robust" 80-year-old leader, who refused to step down as the country fell into violence and economic chaos.

Faced with Mugabe's Zanu-PF party winning a 2005 election, and a year after the UK participated in a US-led coalition to overthrow Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, No 10 asked the Foreign Office in July 2004 to develop potential courses of action.

Isolation Strategy Deemed Not Working

Diplomats concluded that the UK's strategy to isolate Mugabe and forging an international consensus for change was not working, having not managed to secure support from influential African states, notably the then South African president, Thabo Mbeki.

Courses considered in the files were:

• "Seek to remove Mugabe by military means";
• "Implement tougher UK measures" such as seizing finances and shuttering the UK embassy; or
• "Re-engage", the approach supported by the then departing ambassador to Zimbabwe.

"We know from conflicts abroad that changing a government and/or its bad policies is almost impossible from the outside."

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

Warnings of Significant Losses and Jurisdictional Barriers

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

"Barring a major humanitarian and political disaster – resulting in widespread bloodshed, significant exodus of refugees, and instability in the region – we judge that no African state would support any attempts to remove Mugabe by force."

The document continues: "We also believe that any other international ally (including the US) would authorise or join military intervention. And there would be no legal grounds for doing so, without an approving Security Council Resolution, which we would fail to obtain."

Long-Term Strategy Recommended

The Prime Minister's advisor, Laurie Lee, warned him that Zimbabwe "will be 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 appeared to agree, writing: "We must devise a way of exposing the lies and malpractice of Mugabe and Zanu-PF ahead of this election and then subsequently, we could try to re-engage on the basis of a clear understanding."

The departing ambassador, in his valedictory telegram, had recommended cautious renewed contact with Mugabe, though he recognized the Prime Minister "would likely be appalled given all that Mugabe has uttered and perpetrated".

Robert Mugabe was finally deposed in a military takeover in 2017, aged 93. Previous claims that in the early 2000s Blair had tried to pressurise the South African president into joining a armed alliance to depose Mugabe were vehemently rejected by the former UK premier.