First Drafts - The Prospect magazine blog

2 Responses

1. Rob Russell says:

   April 4, 2008 at 5:08 pm

   Stephen Chan, after only 10 days in Zimbabwe, feels that he has the pulse of the current situation. Unfortunately, those of us who have lived there and spent many years observing the tyrant know that the reality is somewhat different. Listen to and read black African stategists and observers who say quite differently. Some of the reasons for him and his henchmen, as well as those in the miliatary and police, who will go to any lengths to stay in power are: fear of war crimes tribunals; absolute power corrupts absolutely; tribal hatred and animosity.
   It would be great to be completely wrong.
2. Michael Holman says:

   April 6, 2008 at 12:23 pm

   Professor Stephen Chan needs a better source for the claims on which he bases his analysis of events in Zimbabwe. (Prospect April 2008)
   “Robert Mugabe … contemplated conceding defeat with a decent grace but was pressurised by his army generals to fight to the end,” he writes.
   Who makes this claim?
   “It is said,” we are told.
   Professor Chan treats his next assertion as a matter of public record, so self-evident that even “it is said” is dropped as a source:
   “Then the generals discussed a coup, meaning that they themselves would ditch Mugabe or make him their puppet….
   “Then word came up, hard and clear from South Africa, that they were not to do that. SA diplomatic pressure has had a huge influence….
   This is fascinating stuff. After years of criticism for what was seen as its ineffectual role, it seems Pretoria is now able to influence events with a “word”.
   Can it be that senior members of the opposition have encouraged the wishful thinking of Professor Chan and other analysts, by releasing a stream of half truths and calculated distortions?
   Robert Mugabe is many things: a corrupt, vain, and brutal dictator.
   But to imply he is a malleable coward undermines our understanding, both of the man and the Zimbabwe crisis.