Foreign Office Advised Against Military Action to Overthrow Robert Mugabe

Newly disclosed documents reveal that the Foreign Office cautioned against British military intervention to remove the former Zimbabwean president, the long-serving leader, in 2004, stating it was not considered a "serious option".

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

Internal documents from the then Prime Minister's government indicate officials considered options on how best to deal with the "remarkably robust" 80-year-old dictator, 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 options.

Policy of Isolation Considered Ineffective

Diplomats concluded that the UK's policy of isolating 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.

Options outlined in the files included:

• "Seek to remove Mugabe by military means";
• "Go for tougher UK measures" such as seizing finances and shuttering the UK embassy; or
• "Re-engage", the option supported by the then departing ambassador to Zimbabwe.

"We know from Afghanistan, Iraq and Yugoslavia that altering a government and/or its bad policies is almost impossible from the outside."

The diplomatic assessment rejected military action as not a "realistic option," and warned that "The only nation for leading such a armed intervention is the UK. No one else (even the US) would be prepared to do so".

Cautionary Notes of Heavy Casualties and Legal Hurdles

It cautioned that military intervention would cause significant losses and have "considerable implications" for UK nationals in Zimbabwe.

"Short of a major humanitarian and political catastrophe – resulting in massive violence, significant exodus of refugees, and instability in the region – we judge that no African state would support any efforts to remove Mugabe by force."

The paper adds: "Nor do we judge that any other international ally (including the US) would sanction or participate in military intervention. And there would be no legal grounds for doing so, without an approving Security Council Resolution, which we would fail to obtain."

Long-Term Strategy Recommended

Blair's foreign policy adviser, Laurie Lee, warned him that Zimbabwe "could become a real spoiler" to his plan to use the UK's presidency of the G8 to make 2005 "the year of Africa". The adviser stated that as military action had been ruled out, "we probably have to accept that we must play the longer game" and re-engage with Mugabe.

Blair appeared to agree, writing: "We should work out a way of revealing the lies and malpractice of Mugabe and Zanu-PF up to this election and then subsequently, we could try to re-engage on the basis of a clear understanding."

The departing ambassador, in his final diplomatic dispatch, had advocated cautious renewed contact with Mugabe, though he understood the Prime Minister "would likely be appalled given all that Mugabe has said and done".

The Zimbabwean leader was finally deposed in a military takeover in 2017, aged 93. Previous claims that in the early 2000s Blair had tried to pressurise the South African president into joining a military coalition to depose Mugabe were strongly denied by the ex-British leader.