Deadlock over Zimbabwe government continues -- for good reason

The latest from Johannesburg, host of the latest Zimbabwe power-sharing talks sponsored by the South African Development Community, is that opposition leader Morgan Tsvangirai has rejected a compromise suggested by the SADC to end weeks of deadlock. The compromise, under which Tsvangirai's Movement for Democratic Change and President Robert Mugabe's ZANU-PF party would share control of the powerful Ministry of Home Affairs, had been proposed by the SADC to help resolve months of uncertainty following Zimbabwe's disputed presidential election. Tsvangirai's latest rejection came Monday at a SADC summit, according to CNN, which cited a report from the Associated Press. Tsvangirai's rejection of the proposed compromise is perfectly understandable and appears well-justified. Mugabe, Zimbabwe's president since its independence from Great Britain nearly 30 years ago when it was called Rhodesia, is not willing to surrender any power, as his disgraceful efforts to hold onto power following the March election demonstrated. It is an exercise in wishful thinking to believe that a settlement along the lines of Kenya's power-sharing is possible in this case. In fact, it's difficult to understand how it is working in Kenya, either. But in Zimbabwe, where the government encouraged intimidation and violence to subvert the will of the people, any reasonable settlement would appear to preclude Mugabe's continuation in office. It is Mugabe who had been blocking any settlement, likely because once in power, the MDC would be better able to unravel the layers of corruption and deception that has plunged Zimbabwe into poverty and food shortages. In the end, Mugabe will probably be willing to trade it all for some kind of amnesty and protection -- perhaps as an asylum seeker in another continent.