The SADC, the AU and the international forces

of Mugabe. Soon after the events, the SADC responded positively to Mugabe’s resignation, hailing the ‘discipline and peacefulness of the people of Zimbabwe’.110 It should also be noted that early on in the coup, the war veterans had made it clear to the SADC, the AU and the international community that they would ‘once more make the supreme sacrifice’ to stop the restoration and imposition of Mugabe on ‘our nation’.111

The EU and the UK also sent out cautiously optimistic signals to the new regime, with the British government particularly enthusiastic over the new developments. After the 2013 election, which once again kept Zanu-PF in power, the EU was at pains to find a workable means of engagement with the Mugabe regime. This manifested in extensive funding to institutional capacity building and governance in areas such as the judiciary, public finance management, trade facilitation and ease of doing business. In addition, the EU invested heavily in the funding of the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission and supported civil society’s electoral monitoring and educational activities.112

Some form of reform process without Mugabe provided the EU with a new opening for further engagement, as it did for the British government. A statement from the Council of the EU clearly set out the eagerness of the former to engage the Mnangagwa regime:

The ongoing political transition in Zimbabwe creates high expectations among all Zimbabweans. It can open the way to a full return to the Rule of Law, within the constitutional framework, and under civilian rule, allowing for a preparation of much needed political and economic reforms.113

The EU also welcomed the commitment of the authorities to hold elections in line with the constitution and looked forward to an invitation to observe the elections. Finally, the European body committed to supporting the regime ‘in establishing as soon as possible a constructive re-engagement with the international financial institutions based on a clear and time-bound economic and political reform programme’.114 The UK were very quick to respond to the Mnangagwa regime, sending an envoy to the inauguration of the new president in November 2017 and in April 2018, promised that it would strongly support the re-entry of Zimbabwe into the Commonwealth, dependent on the regime conducting a free and fair election. On several occasions since the coup, Mnangagwa promised such an election and that ‘observers from across the globe’ would be allowed to witness the process in 2018.

Western countries as well as China and Russia all ‘tempered their reaction and avoided condemning the military intervention’ because of an international consensus that Mugabe needed to be replaced.115 In March 2018, the US position on Zimbabwe also changed in response to the November events. A Senate

In March 2018, the US position on Zimbabwe also changed in response to the November events. A Senate Bill was introduced to amend the Zimbabwe Democracy and Economic Reconstruction Act (ZDERA), which was passed in 2001 in response to the Fast Track Land Reform Programme and the human rights violations that accompanied the politics of that period.

110 Herald, 2017a 111 Zimbabwe National Liberation War Veterans Association, nd. 112 Zimbabwe Independent, 2018 113 European Union 2018, p 1.. 114 p.1 115 International Crisis Group, 2017, p. 11