UK Diplomats Advised Against Military Action to Overthrow Robert Mugabe

Newly disclosed documents show that the Foreign Office advised against British military action to overthrow the then Zimbabwean president, the long-serving leader, in 2004, advising it was not considered a "viable option".

Policy Papers Reveal Considerations on Handling a "Depressingly Healthy" Leader

Internal documents 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 fell into violence and economic chaos.

Faced with the ruling 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 produce potential courses of action.

Isolation Strategy Considered Ineffective

Officials agreed that the UK's strategy to isolate Mugabe and building an international agreement for change was not working, having failed to secure support from influential African states, notably the then South African president, the South African leader.

Courses considered in the documents were:

• "Attempt to remove Mugabe by force";
• "Go for tougher UK measures" such as seizing finances and closing the UK embassy; or
• "Re-open dialogue", the option supported by the then departing ambassador to Zimbabwe.

"Our experience shows from conflicts abroad that changing a government and/or its harmful policies is exceedingly difficult from the outside."

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

Warnings of Heavy Casualties and Legal Hurdles

It cautioned that military intervention would cause 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 regional instability – we assess that no African state would agree to any attempts to remove Mugabe forcibly."

The paper adds: "We also believe that any other international ally (including the US) would sanction or join military intervention. And there would be no jurisdictional basis for doing so, without an authorising Security Council Resolution, which we would fail to obtain."

Long-Term Strategy Recommended

Blair's foreign policy adviser, a senior official, advised Blair that Zimbabwe "will be a significant obstacle" to his plan to use the UK's leadership of the G8 to make 2005 "a pivotal year for Africa". Lee concluded that as military action had been discounted, "we probably have to accept that we must adopt a long-term strategy" and re-engage with Mugabe.

Blair appeared to agree, noting: "We must devise a way of exposing the falsehoods and misconduct 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 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 uttered and perpetrated".

The Zimbabwean leader was ultimately removed in a 2017 coup, aged 93. Earlier assertions 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.