Margaret Thatcher was right and Thabo Mbeki is right. British-led sanctions against a renegade regime in Central Africa — be it Ian Smith’s when the country was called Rhodesia, or Robert Mugabe’s when it had been renamed Zimbabwe — are a counterproductive response to an unacceptable government.
My family and I lived in Rhodesia from 1958, when I was eight, to 1968, when I was 18. Ian Smith’s unilateral declaration of independence (UDI) was made in November 1965 and we experienced three years in which the economic screw was progressively tightened. Along with much of the black population and a fair few of the white population too, we had vehemently opposed Mr Smith’s election and thought UDI a catastrophic mistake (as it proved to be) but our opposition to Smith could not exempt us from the effects of sanctions.
My father had to try to continue a business selling electric cables, so his commercial life, bound up with making the Rhodesian economy work, was placed in direct opposition to his political beliefs, which were that Rhodesia should be forced to accept the will of Her Majesty’s government.
Get Britain's best politics newsletters
Register to get The Spectator's insight and opinion straight to your inbox. You can then read two free articles each week.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in