Zimbabwe: it’s time to go in

Last week, as a result of an article written for The First Post, I was invited by the BBC World Service to argue the merits of using military intervention to topple Robert Mugabe's regime.

Somewhat reluctantly, and with weary awareness of the counter arguments, I called for anything from a military presence to enforce a fair run-off election later this month to a decapitation strike against the Zanu-PF leadership (resulting in arrests, ideally).

I made it clear that, for political reasons, military action would need to be African-led, but Western backed; that to baulk at the possibility of bloodshed was to ignore the reality that bloodshed is already happening in Zimbabwe, with increasing frequency and intensity; and, in summary, that the military option was only to be considered when all else had failed.

I should have been stronger. All else has failed.

It quickly became clear that few involved in the BBC discussion had the first clue what positive, non-violent steps could be taken. Between rehashing the cliche that white people must not get involved, and expressing their unquestioned belief that any kind of military action is de facto illegal, most contributors were really hoping the problem would somehow just go away of its own accord ­ - a view that is costing lives in Zimbabwe every day.

Mugabe's campaign is now being run by the state security forces. Dozens of MDC activists have been sadistically murdered. Thousands have been beaten; some, like the man pictured here, have had their arms and legs broken. And ten times more have been made homeless by Zanu-PF intimidation (making it impossible for them to vote in the run-off on June 27).

At a rally on Monday, Mugabe told his supporters: "We are not going to give up our country because of a mere X. How can a ballpoint fight with a gun?" It is clear that Zanu-PF will use any means necessary to secure an election victory. Yet the international community refuses to ensure a free and fair election, even when Mugabe calls the fight for the presidency an "all-out war".

Refuting the argument for intervention, one commentator piously informed me that "Zimbabweans are their own liberators". Wrong. Zimbabweans were their own liberators but they have long since become their own oppressors. And, hamstrung by our colonial past, we have watched them 'progress' from a system of white tyranny to one of black.

Zimbabwean democracy is not served by pretending Zimbabweans are in a position to sort matters out for themselves. If Gordon Brown seriously believes that "Mugabe must not be allowed to steal the election" then it's time David Miliband and Douglas Alexander stopped sounding off like impotent school prefects, and instead organised support for the only remaining course of action.

The political and diplomatic fall-out (with China, for example, as well as with most African nations) will simply have to be absorbed as the cost of doing the right thing.

"They think they are protected by the British and the Americans," Mugabe claims of the opposition MDC. Well, it's time they were. Without intervention, and soon, it will not be long before there is no opposition.

Who will say we did our best for Zimbabwean democracy then? ·