Foreign Office Advised Regarding Military Action to Topple Robert Mugabe

Recently released papers show 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 "serious option".

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

Internal documents from the then Prime Minister's government indicate officials considered options on how best to deal with the "remarkably robust" 80-year-old dictator, who declined to leave office as the country descended into violence and economic chaos.

Following 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 Not Working

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

Options outlined in the documents were:

• "Seek to remove Mugabe by military means";
• "Go for tougher UK measures" such as freezing assets and shuttering the UK embassy; or
• "Re-open dialogue", the option advocated by the then outgoing ambassador to Zimbabwe.

"We know from Afghanistan, Iraq and Yugoslavia that altering a government and/or its harmful policies is almost impossible from the outside."

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

Cautionary Notes of Heavy Casualties and Legal Hurdles

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

"Barring a severe human and political catastrophe – resulting in widespread bloodshed, large-scale refugee flows, and instability in the region – we judge that no nation in Africa would support any efforts to remove Mugabe forcibly."

The document continues: "Nor do we judge that any other European, Commonwealth or western partner (including the US) would sanction 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

Blair's foreign policy adviser, a senior official, advised Blair that Zimbabwe "could become 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 ruled out, "it is likely necessary that we must play the longer game" and re-open talks with Mugabe.

Blair seemed to concur, noting: "We must devise a way of revealing 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 final diplomatic dispatch, had recommended critical re-engagement with Mugabe, though he recognized the Prime Minister "would likely be appalled given all that Mugabe has uttered and perpetrated".

Robert Mugabe was ultimately removed in a 2017 coup, at the age of 93. Previous claims that in the early 2000s Blair had tried to pressurise Thabo Mbeki into joining a armed alliance to overthrow Mugabe were vehemently rejected by the former UK premier.