Foreign Office Advised Against Military Action to Overthrow Robert Mugabe

Newly disclosed papers show that the Foreign Office advised against British military intervention to overthrow the then Zimbabwean president, Robert Mugabe, in 2004, stating it was not considered a "viable option".

Government Documents Reveal Deliberations on Handling a "Depressingly Healthy" Dictator

Internal documents from the then Prime Minister's government show officials considered options on how best to deal with the "remarkably robust" 80-year-old dictator, who refused to step down 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 oust Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein, No 10 asked the Foreign Office in July 2004 to produce potential courses of action.

Isolation Strategy Considered Ineffective

Diplomats concluded that the UK's policy of isolating Mugabe and building an international consensus for change was failing, having not managed to secure support from influential African states, notably the then South African president, the South African leader.

Courses considered in the files were:

• "Seek to remove Mugabe by force";
• "Implement tougher UK measures" such as freezing assets and shuttering the UK embassy; or
• "Re-engage", the approach advocated 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 diplomatic assessment rejected military action as not a "realistic option," adding that "The only nation for leading such a armed intervention is the UK. No other country (even the US) would be willing to do so".

Warnings of Significant Losses and Jurisdictional Barriers

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

"Short of a major humanitarian and political catastrophe – resulting in massive violence, large-scale refugee flows, and instability in the region – we assess that no nation in Africa 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 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."

Playing the Longer Game Recommended

The Prime Minister's advisor, Laurie Lee, advised Blair that Zimbabwe "will be a significant obstacle" 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, "we probably have to accept that we must adopt a long-term strategy" and re-open talks with Mugabe.

Blair appeared to agree, writing: "We should work out a way of exposing the falsehoods and misconduct of Mugabe and Zanu-PF up to this election and then subsequently, we could attempt to restart dialogue on the basis of a clear understanding."

The then outgoing ambassador, in his valedictory telegram, had advocated cautious renewed contact with Mugabe, though he understood the Prime Minister "might shudder at the thought given all that Mugabe has said and done".

Robert Mugabe was finally deposed in a military takeover in 2017, at the age of 93. Earlier assertions that in the early 2000s Blair had tried to pressurise the South African president into joining a armed alliance to depose Mugabe were vehemently rejected by the ex-British leader.