The limits of engagement

British foreign policy and the crisis in Zimbabwe

Bibliographic Data

ID3723217
AuthorsIan Taylor (0000-0002-8721-3759, University of Botswana), Paul D Williams (0000-0002-9716-1294, University of Birmingham), Paul Williams (0000-0001-6259-0390)
Year2002
Volume78
Issue3
Pages547-566
Publication date2002-07-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueInternational Affairs (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0020-5850 • E-ISSN: 1468-2346
PublisherOxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1111/1468-2346.00266
OpenAlexW2108686336
LanguageEN
Citations received17

This article examines how the British government has responded to Zimbabwe's ongoing crisis. This case raises several wider issues for British foreign policy, most notably the question of how much leverage London can exercise on the international scene in general, and over relatively small and weak states like Zimbabwe in particular. Zimbabwe's crisis also raises profound questions about the appropriate balance between bilateral and multilateral policies, and between engaging in public criticism and conducting so–called ‘quiet diplomacy’. While bilateralism clearly has not worked, multilateralism has revealed its own frustrations, especially given the reluctance of many African elites within a number of organizations to criticize President Mugabe's policies. This reluctance threatens to unravel the British Labour government's stated objectives in Africa while at the same time raising important doubts over the credibility of the New Partnership for Africa's Development (NEPAD), and whether an ‘Africa moment’ can be discerned in the manner articulated by prime minister Tony Blair

Bilateralism · Credibility · Criticism · Diplomacy · Foreign policy · Government (linguistics) · Multilateralism · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Prime minister · Sociology · African studies and sociopolitical issues · Law · Public Administration

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub