The Debates and Impact of Sanctions: The Zimbabwean Experience
Mediel Hove (Mr.)

Abstract
This study evaluates the impact of the sanctions which were imposed on the Zimbabwean leadership in the new millennium in pursuit of human security and good governance. Using primary and secondary sources it argues that the imposed sanctions caused more harm than good and hence achieved the opposite of what they were designed to accomplish. Despite the debate generated on whether the sanctions are targeted or not the paper asserts that these sanctions further endangered provision of services as leaders neglected service delivery due to the imposition of sanctions which they dubbed an anti-Land Reform Programme strategy. The presentation further asserts that several sectors deteriorated; risking the lives of many Zimbabweans as water supply, education and health delivery systems collapsed. Therefore sanctions served to aggravate the welfare of ordinary Zimbabweans with very little achievement on the objectives of the embargo. Instead of registering improvements, sanctions soured relations between Zimbabwe and the west. Mediators should therefore seek to harmonise relations amongst Zimbabweans, Zimbabweans and other nations through the strategy of engagement. It is my submission that, where sanctions are imposed, it should be after a deeper scrutiny on their wider short and long term repercussions on the ordinary powerless citizens of the targeted country. One may find it fruitful and humane if great players in diplomacy search for flexible strategies of engagement rather than rely on rift widening tactics like sanctions which impact negatively on vital service providing systems such as health, education, water and sanitation.

Full Text: PDF