So it has come to this: the ghost of Robert Mugabe still haunts Zimbabwe’s parliament, and the Commonwealth averts its eyes. This week, a clutch of ZANU-PF lawmakers—many of them relics of the Mugabe era—pushed through legislation that centralises power in the executive, eviscerates judicial oversight, and makes a mockery of the very democratic norms the Commonwealth purports to defend. It is a power grab dressed in procedurally correct robes, but a power grab nonetheless. And where is London, the supposed steward of this post-colonial club? Silent. Calculating. Frightened of offending a government that has already turned its back on the rules-based order.
Let us be plain: the Commonwealth is not a mere talking shop. It exists because of shared values: the rule of law, the sovereignty of parliament, the independence of the judiciary. When a member state’s legislature votes to concentrate power in a manner reminiscent of Mugabe’s constitutional coups of 2008 and 2013, the institution must act. But what have we seen instead? A gentle statement from the Secretary-General, a few diplomatic murmurs. Meanwhile, Zimbabwe’s MPs—many of whom owe their seats to patronage rather than popular will—celebrate their victory over checks and balances.
The irony is bitter. For years, the West lectured African nations on good governance. Now, when an African government openly flouts those principles, the West hesitates. Why? Because Zimbabwe’s gold and lithium are too valuable? Because China and Russia wait in the wings, ready to offer unconditional support? This is the tragedy of the post-liberal order: values become negotiable when resources are at stake.
But this is precisely why Britain must act. Not as a colonial overlord—those days are rightly gone—but as a senior partner in a voluntary association of democracies. The Conservative government, for all its talk of Global Britain, has been curiously timid on Zimbabwe. The Foreign Office mutters about ‘constructive engagement,’ but what has that achieved? The same faces in power. The same broken economy. The same contempt for opposition voices.
Consider the historical parallel: in the 1960s, Britain imposed sanctions on Rhodesia when Ian Smith declared UDI. It was a principled stand, however imperfectly executed. Today, facing an even clearer breach of Commonwealth norms, Britain dithers. Is it fear of being called racist? Fear of upsetting trade talks? These are excuses, not reasons.
The Commonwealth must suspend Zimbabwe from its councils, as it did with Fiji and Pakistan. It must threaten expulsion unless the power-grabbing legislation is repealed. And Britain, as the largest financial contributor and the symbolic head, must lead that charge. Silence is complicity. And complicity in the erosion of democratic norms is a slow poison that will infect other members.
Zimbabwe’s 2013 constitution was flawed, but it offered some hope. Now that hope is being extinguished by the very MPs who swore to uphold it. If the Commonwealth cannot defend its own charter, what is it for? A club for photo opportunities and trade deals? The founders—in London, Ottawa, Canberra—meant more. They meant a community of nations bound by law and liberty.
So, Prime Minister Sunak: stop pretending Zimbabwe’s internal affairs are not your concern. They are the Commonwealth’s concern, and you are its most prominent voice. Condemn the power grab. Demand accountability. And if Harare refuses to listen, show them the door. The ghosts of Mugabe will applaud your inaction. The living democrats of Zimbabwe will despair.
