Foreign Office Advised Against Military Action to Topple Robert Mugabe

Recently released documents reveal that the Foreign Office cautioned against British military intervention to remove the former Zimbabwean president, Robert Mugabe, in 2004, advising it was not considered a "serious option".

Policy Papers Reveal Considerations on Handling a "Remarkably Robust" Dictator

Internal documents from the then Prime Minister's government indicate officials considered options on how best to handle the "depressingly healthy" 80-year-old leader, who refused to step down as the country descended into violence and economic chaos.

Faced with Mugabe's Zanu-PF party winning a 2005 election, and a year after the UK joined a US-led coalition to overthrow Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, Downing Street asked the Foreign Office in July 2004 to develop potential courses of action.

Policy of Isolation Considered Not Working

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

Courses considered in the files included:

• "Attempt to remove Mugabe by force";
• "Implement tougher UK measures" such as freezing assets and closing the UK embassy; or
• "Re-engage", the approach supported by the then departing ambassador to Zimbabwe.

"We know from Afghanistan, Iraq and Yugoslavia that changing a government and/or its harmful policies is exceedingly difficult from the outside."

The diplomatic assessment rejected 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".

Cautionary Notes of Significant Losses and Legal Hurdles

It cautioned that military intervention would result in heavy casualties and have "considerable implications" 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 judge that no African state would agree to any attempts to remove Mugabe forcibly."

The paper adds: "We also believe 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 Recommended

Blair's foreign policy adviser, Laurie Lee, advised Blair that Zimbabwe "could become a significant obstacle" to his plan to use the UK's presidency of the G8 to make 2005 "a pivotal year for Africa". Lee concluded that as military action had been discounted, "it is likely necessary that we must adopt a long-term strategy" and re-engage with Mugabe.

Blair seemed to concur, noting: "We should work out a way of revealing the falsehoods and misconduct of Mugabe and Zanu-PF up to this election and then afterwards, we could attempt to restart dialogue on the basis of a firm agreement."

The then outgoing ambassador, in his valedictory telegram, had recommended cautious renewed contact with Mugabe, though he recognized the Prime Minister "would likely be appalled given all that Mugabe has said and done".

The Zimbabwean leader was ultimately removed in a military takeover in 2017, at the age of 93. Earlier assertions that in the early 2000s Blair had tried to pressurise Thabo Mbeki into joining a armed alliance to depose Mugabe were vehemently rejected by the former UK premier.