I am convinced that Uhuruto will immediately turn back on their word on cooperating with the ICC for these reasons:
-They don't inspire trust: - Ask MaDVD. Then there is all these shenanigans with the Jubilee party elections
-Impracticality of governing from The Hague: - UK and WSR have not expounded on how they are going to do this. I would very much like to hear such a plan, because I have already done quick mental arithmetic, it is a logistic impossibility, ergo there is no plan in the first place.
But suppose they cooperate in full and attend the trial? Perhaps there will be no sanctions, but that does not mean we will be better off. This 'essential contact' business has a dark, foreboding undercurrent about it. However, there will be a power vacuum and a real possibility of an impeachment attempt, or a newly filed chapter 6 suit at the Supreme court. This is a direct threat to Uhuruto power and they are acutely aware of it, hence my
conviction that if they win, bye bye cooperation:
Now if they don't cooperate, this is where things could get dicey. The ICC could escalate and issue arrest warrants and recommend
targeted sanctionsI sought to know more about these targeted sanctions because some seem to think that we could live with them, it will be business as usual. That is a myth. I read about Zimbabwe's targeted sanctions.
The writers of this paper
http://www.ijbssnet.com/...3_No_5_March_2012/8.pdf
assert this ...
Quote:
The argument being that targeted or not, sanctions had far reaching consequences since for over a decade ruined service delivery to Zimbabweans.
Quote:
It is the innocent and the impoverished that have been largely affected by the economic sanctions both directly
and indirectly. This has been the case in Iraq an issue raised by Yaya Jameh, the Gambian president and admirer
of President Mugabe after the invasion of Iraq and hanging of its president in the eyes of the world saying; “today
in Iraq, with all their democracy, oil pipelines are more secure than women and children in the streets of
Baghdad” (Fowale 2010: 10). This verdict serves to show that the strategies being used to ensure an end to human
rights violations leave those to be protected more vulnerable or endangered. Therefore, the progenitors of the
sanction strategy against Zimbabwe need to search for more humane ways of handling the Zimbabwean conflict
without jeopardizing service delivery in education, water and health sectors among other areas hit by sanctions.
Zimbabweans at all levels have been deprived of their rights due to sanctions. The government officials allegedly
targeted by the sanctions, although affected were not dehumanized as did the poor many Zimbabweans. It is
evident from history that sanctions major weakness is that they affect the people they are meant to protect hence
can not be relied upon in securing stability in the international system (Parliamentary Debates 2006: 51). In fact
the sanctions harm the economies of imposers and the targeted state (Kurebwa 2000: 3). Sanctions whether
targeted or not hurt the ordinary people. Boutros-Ghali echoed the same sentiments by noting that “the use of
sanctions raise ethical issues concerning the suffering they inflict on innocent victims…” (Chogugudza 2009: 8).
Make no mistake, the paper slams the EU and US for implementing 'targeted sanctions'. This is because at a superficial level it appears like they will hurt only the leadership, only this is not the
case. The population suffers. Somebody argued that Russia and China block unreasonable sanctions; How come these Zim ones have stood for so long? Methinks in a case of absconding by Uhuruto, Russia and China will not be in our corner blocking targeted sanctions from being slapped on us. There is no country slapped with sanctions of any kind that has thrived.
Any one with illusions that the West will forgive non-cooperation with ICC if this comes to pass?