Predictably, Robert Mugabe has won the electoral farce, passed off as a presidential run-off on 27 June. In the run-up to these polls the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (MDC) had 86 of its supporters killed, 10,000 injured, a further 5,000 missing and 200,000 displaced from their homes by militias loyal to ZANU-PF. In one such incident, the wife of new MDC mayor, Emmanuel Chiroto, was abducted with her four-year old son. He was freed unharmed but she was beaten to death. As a result, five days before the election on 22nd June Mr. Morgan Tsvangirai, the leader of the opposition pulled out of the election stating that he could not ask Zimbabweans to cast their vote, "when that vote would cost them their lives". Despite the withdrawal of Mr. Tsvangirai, Harare continued with the electoral farce with only one candidate - the incumbent Robert Mugabe. Not surprisingly, the African Union (AU) observer mission who monitored the election noted that conditions "fell short of the African Union's standards of democratic elections". Similarly, the 400-strong Southern African Development Community (SADC) observer team noted that the "pre-election phase was characterised by politically-motivated violence, intimidation and displacements". The Pan-African Parliament observer team declared the vote as not being free or fair and called for fresh elections.
The international community's response has been swift in their condemnation. UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon described the election as illegitimate. The European Union (EU) has demanded that opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai must lead a future government in Zimbabwe. The US, meanwhile, proposed punitive measures against Mugabe and his cronies at the UN Security Council. However both Russia and China blocked further sanctions against Harare by using their veto. Moscow's ambassador to the UN, Vitaly Churkin, used the discredited notion of "protecting sovereignty" to protect Mugabe's odious regime whilst Beijing's veto stemmed more from the growing economic relationship between China and Zimbabwe. Other African leaders were also swift in their condemnation. Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga referred to Mugabe's Zimbabwe as "an embarrassment to Africa". In response to Mugabe vowing not to give up power even if beaten in the election, Rwandan President Paul Kagame scathingly noted, "For me the question that it raises is why do you even call for elections?"
However, the longevity (or not) of Mugabe's rule over Zimbabwe is really dependent upon the reaction of fellow Southern African Development Community (SADC) countries. It is they who have experienced the consequences of the implosion of Zimbabwe where unemployment is 80 percent, annual inflation is at more than two million percent and importantly more than three million people have sought refuge in neighbouring countries fleeing both economic meltdown and political repression. It is they, and more specifically South Africa, which has the necessary leverage to force Mugabe to back down and to respect the democratic process. However SADC is an organization deeply divided. Whilst Zambian President Levy Mwanawasa has called Zimbabwe a "regional embarrassment" and Botswana has summoned Zimbabwe's envoy to complain about the violence, countries like Namibia are a keen ally of Zimbabwe and also seek to pursue the disastrous land reform policies of Zimbabwe. President Mbeki, meanwhile, continues in his discredited policy of quiet diplomacy which serves only to reinforce the political status quo in Zimbabwe.
Despite negotiating with Mugabe for some years, Mr. Mbeki, the SADC- appointed mediator can show little for his efforts. Despite this, Mr. Mbeki's government also blocked further sanctions against Harare and Mr. Mbeki was again in Zimbabwe in July where he met with senior officials of the ruling party - the Zimbabwean African National Union-Patriotic Front (ZANU-PF) as well as members of a breakaway faction of the MDC under Arthur Mutambara. Through these talks, Mr. Mbeki seeks to arrive at a government of national unity between ZANU-PF and the MDC. However, Mr. Tsvangirai boycotted the talks. He rejected the notion of a government of national unity saying it would not reflect the will of the people but instead desires a transitional authority which would draw up a fresh constitution ahead of fresh elections. In addition, the MDC leader has set forth three preconditions for mediation:

Immediate cessation of violence against opposition supporters;
The release of more than 1,500 political prisoners and
The expansion of the mediation team to include a permanent African Union (envoy)
The inclusion of the first preconditions is regarded as understandable by much of the international community given the level of violence and intimidation directed at the MDC and its supporters. Just prior to Mr. Mbeki's diplomatic mission to Harare, the police placed seven elected opposition members of parliament on a wanted list. In response, Luke Tamborinyoka, the MDC's Director of Information said, "This tells us that this government is not serious about talks. How can we go to the table when half the leadership is either on the run or in police custody". Those cynical of the success of such talks also point to the fact that immediately after Mr. Mbeki left Zimbabwe on his peace mission, armed militia raided two camps for people fleeing post-election violence in Gokwe, north of Harare and Ruwa near the capital.
The final demand of the expansion of the mediation team is also seen as legitimate by much of the international community. The MDC charges that Mr Mbeki is biased as a mediator. It is Mr. Mbeki's who has continued to protect Mugabe's regime from sanctions despite the spiralling violence directly attributable to ruling party militias. Despite this violence, Mr. Mbeki has refused to speak out against it. It is Mbeki's government which continues to sell arms to Zimbabwe which, in turn, are used against the citizens of this blighted country. The MDC's concerns about Mr. Mbeki as the mediator was also echoed by the Group of Eight (G-8) industrialized countries meeting in Japan when they called for a special envoy to assist in mediation efforts in Zimbabwe. This was viewed by many as a further criticism of the "quiet diplomacy" efforts pursued by Mr. Mbeki. There have also been efforts at the United Nations to appoint a special representative for mediation. Amongst those being considered for the post are former Mozambican President Joaquim Chissano, former Nigerian President Olusegun Obasanjo, current Ghanaian President John Kufuor, and former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan. The latter is credited with helping to broker a power-sharing agreement in Kenya last February. However, ZANU-PF has shot down any expansion of the mediation team, declaring it to be a "non-starter". Indeed, Zimbabwe Information Minister Sikhanyiso Ndlovu stated, "President Mbeki has proved his mettle as an African statesman par excellence".
However, other African heads of state such as Senegalese President Abdoulaye Wade have questioned Mr. Mbeki's underlying objective of a government of national unity believing that it undermines the democratic will of Zimbabwe's people. Similarly, President Ernest Bai Koroma of Sierra Leone called for the isolation of Zimbabwe, "The people of Zimbabwe have been denied their democratic right. We should, in no uncertain terms, condemn what has happened". Botswana's government, urged its neighbours not to recognize Robert Mugabe's government, echoing calls for Zimbabwe to be suspended from SADC.
Despite this wave of international condemnation, it is only Pretoria which has the necessary leverage to force change in Harare. In 1965 when Ian Smith declared a Unilateral Declaration of Independence from Britain of the then Rhodesia and perpetuated white minority rule; Britain, the United States, United Nations and the Commonwealth countries imposed sanctions on his regime but he refused to budge. It was only when London and Washington pressurized South African Prime Minister John Vorster to take action and when he threatened sanctions against Smith's regime that Ian Smith went to Lancaster House and conceded to black majority rule. Landlocked Zimbabwe continues to be as dependent on South Africa as the former Rhodesia ever was. It is dependent upon South Africa's ports through which its oil is transported. It is dependent upon South Africa for its electricity which it receives at a discount of 36 percent. It is no exaggeration to conclude therefore that if President Mbeki wishes, he could force regime change overnight. However, this is what President Mbeki refuses to do.
Understanding Mr. Mbeki's reluctance to cut off Harare's lifeline, Mugabe has grown more belligerent and more arrogant. Attacks on the political opposition have intensified since his presidential inauguration. In addition, Mugabe told a group of supporters that only God could remove him from office!
However, there is hope yet that South Africa's stance towards Mr. Mugabe might well change given the changing nature of South Africa's domestic politics. Following his resounding defeat at the hands of rival Jacob Zuma at the ruling African National Congress' (ANC) party conference in Polokwane last year, Mr. Mbeki has been steadily losing his grip on both the ruling party and his reins over government policy. The new post-Polokwane ANC leadership understands full well that South Africa suffers a tremendous credibility crisis in the eyes of the world. This crisis of credibility arises from the gap between promise and performance - the gap between the high-minded principles South Africa claims to follow in foreign affairs and the sordid reality of its intimate ties with the likes of Robert Mugabe. As such, whilst Mr. Mbeki refuses to condemn Mugabe outright, the ruling ANC says it is, "deeply dismayed by the actions of the government of Zimbabwe, which is riding roughshod over the hard-won democratic rights of the people of that country." In addition, notwithstanding Mr. Mbeki being the SADC mediator, this did not stop the ruling ANC from sending its own delegation to meet with both ZANU-PF and the MDC in Harare. Change is afoot in South Africa's foreign policy towards Zimbabwe and it is this change which Mugabe and his cronies fear the most.
Such a change in Pretoria's foreign policy is not only essential if positive change is to be effected in Zimbabwe, but also in the SADC region as a whole. In the process South Africa could once more be the bastion of hope and freedom for a region known for its authoritarian leadership and poor governance. Moreover, decisive South African leadership is necessary if SADC is to function as a coherent regional bloc especially in areas of conflict resolution.
The current confused SADC response to the Zimbabwean crisis is not unique. In 1998, for instance, Angola, Namibia and Zimbabwe militarily intervened in the war in the Congo whilst countries like South Africa and Botswana were pushing for a negotiated settlement. If SADC is to function as an effective body for conflict prevention and resolution in southern Africa then it needs to act as one cohesive unit. However, the major impediment for this lack of cohesion is a dearth of common values. This assertion might sound surprising to the outside observer. After all if one examines SADC's 1992 Treaty and its espoused agenda one would comes across noble goals such as entrenching democracy, human development and common security. It needs hardly be mentioned that there is a large gap between this rhetoric and practice. Swaziland's King Mswati III runs a feudal fiefdom; Angola's ruling MPLA is a rapacious, kleptocratic elite not to mention Zimbabwe. All these pay lip service to fine treaties but largely observe them in breach.
If there is a tremendous need for shared or common values, it does raise the question of who drives this process of achieving value sharing. According to the epigenesist theory of political community put forth by Amitai Etzioni, it is the most powerful nation in a regional grouping that "guides" such a process. Within, SADC, that nation is South Africa. However a recent statement from President Mbeki's office suggests that South Africa is more comfortable in arriving at the lowest common denominator in formulating a response on Zimbabwe than assuming a more assertive role as its size and economic muscle would suggest. For instance, in response to media reports of Pretoria, recognizing Mugabe's electoral victory, President Mbeki's office stated: "South Africa will consider the reports of the SADC and other observer teams which monitored the elections and adopt a position together with member states".
Without South African leadership, and the resultant dearth of common values, SADC is bound to flounder as it lurches from crisis to crisis. It is only hoped that the leadership emanating from Pretoria after next year's election understands this and adopts a more assertive posture in defence of the region's peoples against the likes of the Mugabes.

[1]Professor Hussein Solomon lectures in the Department of Political Sciences, University of Pretoria where he is also Director of the Centre for International Political Studies (CiPS).