Foreign Office Cautioned Against Military Action to Topple Robert Mugabe

Newly disclosed papers reveal that the UK's diplomatic corps advised against British military intervention to remove the former Zimbabwean president, Robert Mugabe, in 2004, advising it was not considered a "viable option".

Policy Papers Show Considerations on Handling a "Remarkably Robust" Leader

Policy papers from the then Prime Minister's government show officials weighed up options on how best to deal with the "depressingly healthy" 80-year-old dictator, who refused to step down as the country descended into violence and economic chaos.

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

Policy of Isolation Considered Not Working

Officials agreed that the UK's policy of isolating 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, Thabo Mbeki.

Courses considered in the files were:

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

"Our experience shows from Afghanistan, Iraq and Yugoslavia that changing a government and/or its bad policies is exceedingly difficult from the outside."

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

Warnings of Heavy Casualties and Legal Hurdles

It cautioned that military intervention would cause heavy casualties and have "serious consequences" for UK nationals in Zimbabwe.

"Short of a severe human and political disaster – resulting in massive violence, significant exodus of refugees, and instability in the region – we assess that no African state would support any attempts to remove Mugabe by force."

The document 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 jurisdictional basis for doing so, without an authorising Security Council Resolution, which we would not get."

Playing the Longer Game Advocated

Blair's foreign policy adviser, Laurie Lee, advised Blair that Zimbabwe "will be a real spoiler" to his plan to use the UK's presidency of the G8 to make 2005 "the year of Africa". Lee concluded that as military action had been discounted, "it is likely necessary that we must play the longer game" 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 afterwards, we could try to re-engage on the basis of a firm agreement."

The then outgoing ambassador, in his valedictory telegram, 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".

The Zimbabwean leader was ultimately removed in a 2017 coup, 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 strongly denied by the former UK premier.