Foreign Office Advised Against Military Action to Overthrow Robert Mugabe

Recently released papers show that the UK's diplomatic corps advised against British military action to overthrow the former Zimbabwean president, the long-serving leader, in 2004, stating it was not considered a "viable option".

Policy Papers Reveal Considerations on Addressing a "Remarkably Robust" Leader

Policy papers from Tony Blair's government indicate officials weighed up options on how best to deal with the "depressingly healthy" 80-year-old leader, who declined to leave office as the country descended into violence and economic chaos.

Following the ruling party winning a 2005 election, and a year after the UK participated in a US-led coalition to oust Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, No 10 asked the Foreign Office in July 2004 to produce potential options.

Isolation Strategy Deemed Ineffective

Diplomats concluded that the UK's strategy to isolate 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, the South African leader.

Options outlined in the files were:

• "Attempt to remove Mugabe by force";
• "Implement tougher UK measures" such as seizing finances and shuttering the UK embassy; or
• "Re-open dialogue", the option 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 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 military operation is the UK. No one else (even the US) would be willing to do so".

Cautionary Notes of Heavy Casualties and Jurisdictional Barriers

It cautioned that military intervention would result in significant losses and have "considerable implications" for UK nationals in Zimbabwe.

"Barring a major humanitarian and political catastrophe – resulting in massive violence, large-scale refugee flows, and instability in the region – we judge that no nation in Africa would agree to any efforts to remove Mugabe by force."

The paper continues: "Nor do we judge that any other European, Commonwealth or western partner (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 Advocated

Blair's foreign policy adviser, a senior official, warned him that Zimbabwe "will be a significant obstacle" to his plan to use the UK's leadership of the G8 to make 2005 "the year of Africa". The adviser stated that as military action had been discounted, "we probably have to accept that we must play the longer game" and re-engage with Mugabe.

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

The then outgoing ambassador, in his final diplomatic dispatch, had recommended critical re-engagement with Mugabe, though he understood the Prime Minister "might shudder at the thought given all that Mugabe has said and done".

The Zimbabwean leader was ultimately removed in a 2017 coup, at the age of 93. Earlier assertions that in the early 2000s Blair had tried to pressurise the South African president into joining a armed alliance to overthrow Mugabe were vehemently rejected by the ex-British leader.