Madyamhuru, you can go on eating calves but Zimbabwe is an elephant bull. Ban Ki has already barked “we know the winner”. Does the UN know better than the electorate, SADC, AU with SA taking leading role? The British propaganda knows no boundary. While we want our results NOW hear at home may these politically debilited elite groups (UN) stop exacerbating our already critical situation through their self serving statements. Can the UN get concerned for now about its mandate; if national elections is one of its mandate let it attack britain for not having elections at all while Brown thinks he has answers for the world. There are worse situations on elections that are not getting the attention from UN. The worse scenarios about being discussed are the sanctions that come with such biased opinion. Sanctions will only hit the ordinary Zimbabweans.

I am ashamed of Mbeki. He seems to have forgotten so soon that had it not been for the intervention of the international community he may today be in one of the prisons of south african and no where near the presidency of South Africa.

A Zimbabwean problem is certainly a world problem because when a Zimbabwean dies it means the world has lost a citizen.

In the violence surrounding Zimbabwe's elections, two people are reported to have died; in Tibet, numbers estimated to have been killed by protesters and Chinese forces range from 22 to 140. By contrast, in Somalia, where US-backed Ethiopian and Somali troops are fighting forces loyal to the ousted government, several thousand have been killed since the beginning of the year and half the population of the capital, Mogadishu, has been forced to flee the city in what UN officials describe as Africa's worst humanitarian crisis.

The crucial difference and the reason why these conflicts and violations don't get the deluxe media and political treatment offered to the Zimbabwean opposition or Tibetan separatists is that the governments involved are all backed by the West, compounded in the Zimbabwean case by a transparently racist agenda.

But it's not just an issue of hypocrisy and double standards. It's also that British and US involvement and interference have been crucial to both the Zimbabwean and Tibetan conflicts.

That's most obviously true in Zimbabwe, which was not just a British colony, but also where Britain refused to act against a white racist coup, triggering a bloody 15-year liberation war, and then imposed racial parliamentary quotas and a 10-year moratorium on land reform at independence. The subsequent failure by Britain and the US to finance land buyouts as expected, along with the impact of international monetary fund programmes, laid the ground for the current impasse.

As for Tibet, Britain's role in the former serf-based system was assumed, after the communist takeover, by the CIA, which bankrolled the Dalai Lama's operations for many years. Such arrangements have in recent years passed to other US agencies and Western NGOs, as with the Zimbabwean opposition. And even if there is no prospect of Tibetan independence, for a US administration that has designated China as the main threat to its global dominance, its minorities are still a stick that can be used to poke the dragon.

What has made human rights edicts by the US and Britain since the launch of the "war on terror" even more preposterous is that not only are they themselves supporting governments with similar or worse records, but they are also directly responsible for these outrages themselves: from illegal invasions and occupations to large-scale killing and torture -- along with phoney elections -- in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The best chance of settling the Zimbabwean crisis and of meeting Tibetan aspirations is without the interference of Western powers, which would do better improving the human rights records of their allies and themselves.

In the violence surrounding Zimbabwe's elections, two people are reported to have died; in Tibet, numbers estimated to have been killed by protesters and Chinese forces range from 22 to 140. By contrast, in Somalia, where US-backed Ethiopian and Somali troops are fighting forces loyal to the ousted government, several thousand have been killed since the beginning of the year and half the population of the capital, Mogadishu, has been forced to flee the city in what UN officials describe as Africa's worst humanitarian crisis.

The crucial difference and the reason why these conflicts and violations don't get the deluxe media and political treatment offered to the Zimbabwean opposition or Tibetan separatists is that the governments involved are all backed by the West, compounded in the Zimbabwean case by a transparently racist agenda.

But it's not just an issue of hypocrisy and double standards. It's also that British and US involvement and interference have been crucial to both the Zimbabwean and Tibetan conflicts.

That's most obviously true in Zimbabwe, which was not just a British colony, but also where Britain refused to act against a white racist coup, triggering a bloody 15-year liberation war, and then imposed racial parliamentary quotas and a 10-year moratorium on land reform at independence. The subsequent failure by Britain and the US to finance land buyouts as expected, along with the impact of international monetary fund programmes, laid the ground for the current impasse.

As for Tibet, Britain's role in the former serf-based system was assumed, after the communist takeover, by the CIA, which bankrolled the Dalai Lama's operations for many years. Such arrangements have in recent years passed to other US agencies and Western NGOs, as with the Zimbabwean opposition. And even if there is no prospect of Tibetan independence, for a US administration that has designated China as the main threat to its global dominance, its minorities are still a stick that can be used to poke the dragon.

What has made human rights edicts by the US and Britain since the launch of the "war on terror" even more preposterous is that not only are they themselves supporting governments with similar or worse records, but they are also directly responsible for these outrages themselves: from illegal invasions and occupations to large-scale killing and torture -- along with phoney elections -- in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The best chance of settling the Zimbabwean crisis and of meeting Tibetan aspirations is without the interference of Western powers, which would do better improving the human rights records of their allies and themselves.

To Phiri Your comment has much to say about political immorality. One fact you have overlooked though is that the US provided US$ 47million for the first phase of land distribution. The farms were bought and distributed amongst Mugabe and his elite. So, the UK and US stopped the programme. Mugabe did nothing to restart it. Then he lost the 2000 referendum. Then the farm evictions started. So, he hadn't cared much for his people in the interim. Welcome back to political immorality!

enny

You must be white thing! What is the difference between Mbeki being in prison and obeying orders from devils up there!You should be ashamed of yourself and your kith and kin, he has been used to downtrod his people (South Africans) but he can no longer take it any more. He knows Mugabe is the west number one foe in Africa and they dont want his teaching spread across Africa. Solidarity is what Africans need now, not these puppets (Tsvangirai and the Bitis)who cannot even argue sensibly on their masters'TVs. Africa deserves better leaders!

Mbeki, we salute you,no more imperialism in Africa! Mandela we sorry but you wasted your energies on wrong efforts accomodating white devils!

To you all, Whether you are for the Mugabe's government or against it. One thing is certain,your people are suffering and dying as you write and speak. I am not from Zimbabwe, but l am an African. Infact l am from Nigeria. I am writing out of concern for the ordinary citizen's of Zimbabwe. I have a first hand experience of what it is to be misruled. I was just a young boy, second year in secondary school/high school when Mugabe come to power after arriving from Ghana. I know all that because Nigeria was involved in struggles against white establishments in South Africa in general. I am now in my 50s and Mugabe is still holding on to power, and the country did not even get better. Zimbabwe cannot, must not be the property of one man. All of you must join together to send him into exile to Nigeria. That is where bad rulers run to when they are driven out-------see charles Taylor.

Okonkwo.

I despair at the negative and paranoid comments from clearly biased submissions. If you really want to taste the despair and violance in ZIM...visit this page on Sokwanele..

http://www.sokwanele.com/thisiszimbabwe/archives/928

Dave.