It appears some of those nations are either apathetic, fearful, or have motives of gain for not being more aggressive about Mugabe’s dictatorship. If THEY won’t do it, perhaps another organization, such as NATO, the U.N., or the E.U. might step in where the African nations have neglected to.

I praise President Kagame of Rwanda for his courage. He probably knows, from horrific personal experience, exactly how evil crimes of governments against the people can be.

I wish the rest of the freeworld nations COULD help Zimbabwe. In many ways, though, our hands are tied. The U.S. is already called “imperialist” because of Iraq and Afghanistan. Besides, Bush would rather do regime change in Iran next (Brrrr!)

The biggest shame falls on the neighboring nations sharing borders with Zimbabwe. It is THEY who should be initiating and coordinating regime change. Mbeki is particularly shamed for his callousness. You’d think, after having lived through apartheid, he’d know better. But maybe, BECAUSE of his memories of apartheid, he finds secret satisfaction in seeing whites being brutalized next door. It may not explain his total apathy, but could easily be a strong element of it. It would seem he learned that racism is evil against blacks, but stopped short of feeling that way towards ALL humans. He probably has additional reasons, too, however, perhaps reasons of gain of some kind.

It is countries like yours, like Myanmar, like N. Korea and a few others, where regime change really WOULD do a lot of good. But unless those nations have something BUSH wants, he’d never help them. People “of color” mean nothing to that man. He’s the worst obscenity America has ever had.

The only REAL reason to go to war is to protect a helpless population whose own government is preying on them. It’s hard to find nations willing to go to war to help such people, though. It’s worse than sad; it’s pathetic. But that’s how it IS.

Look at the Sudanese genocide in Darfur. The U.N. has had a manifesto to stop genocide from its inception. Have they acted on it? The whole world ignored the first Sudanese genocide, too.

To our everlasting shame.

Going in with military and making a regime change is only the beginning. It’s the aftermath that is likely to determine success or failure.

Without a doubt, the first thing to do after unseating Mugabe is to put him on trial for crimes against humanity. And those of his entourage who are culpable, along with him.

Zimbabwe wouldn’t be entirely like Iraq. Most of the people want democracy. Most have already experienced it, too. They have one “officially,” but not in reality. The trouble is that it appears the population is split, almost 50-50 between Mugabe and MDC – if the last election results were at all accurate. That would make recovery extremely difficult.

So doing a regime change would have to involve dealing with the other half of the population who would still want a Mugabe-type regime.

What do you do then? Purges? For starters, of course, Mugabe’s regime leadership should indeed be imprisoned and their liberty determined later. Probably the entire military structure would have to be disbanded, and all new people put in. The country would need to be protected while its new military are being trained. At least, this would be so if it is true that the existing military is in solidarity behind Mugabe.

The rest of the pro-Mugabe population would certainly want to revolt, to destabilize, etc., and would actively begin doing so.

It wouldn’t be as bad as Iraq; I don’t think even fervent Mugabe supporters could be wazooed into being suicide bombers, so there’s at least that much.

It would be up to those other African nations to help re-establish the shattered pieces of democracy and put them back together. This time, though, with strong new provisions added to the Constitution, that would never allow this to happen again, and any provisions that are weak, or leave room for another Mugabe, revised or deleted. That would have to include the granting of full citizenship and rights to citizens of any color, including the right to own land and farms. The land stolen by Mugabe would have to be given back to its original owners, so that the agricultural potential of this rich land can again produce its impressive bounty, which is so sorely needed even now.

Regime change would work, but Zimbabwe would have to face, at first an insurgency, then later social efforts to remove the hatred of whites from the public, and to try to resettle the people whose prosperity had depended on loyalty to Mugabe – in a way that would preclude participation in the insurgency, but would enable them to restore a semblance of honor and productivity to their lives. After all, you can’t imprison half of the entire population. Then, if they refused to accept the new democracy, they might have to be dealt with further. Preferably without violence.

Zimbabwe will have a “long row to hoe,” even after it regains its democracy. Which I feel certain WILL happen; things are simply too dire to go on this way.

Y’know what scares me silly? It’s that Bush still has almost a half year, and without a doubt he’d simply adore to have the kind of absolute power over the U.S. that Mugabe has now in Zimbabwe. He might yet try for it.

I’m serious. Bush is truly THAT bad. I genuinely fear what he may do.

I’ll keep watching, and dreaming along with the Zimbabweans, for a day of peace, democracy and renewed prosperity. There’s little else I can do, more’s the pity.

But keep on blogging about Mugabe. It is known that repetition of things to the public often sinks into their minds more easily, for some reason. Someone once said if you repeat something 21 times, you’ll believe it. That’s not true, of course, but the principle of it is.

So blog away!