Why do Western editorial writers often keep getting it wrong about Africa?
We may have a rather long wait ahead of us before South Africa's Thabo Mbeki publicly denounces or scolds a fellow African head of government. Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe may be a villain along the lines that the editorial page of The New York Times specifies (May 17), but he's Africa's villain -- a native son -- and, moreover, a fellow traveler of Mbeki during the long struggle against colonialism and apartheid. Both share a socialist past, and both men enjoy a personal friendship that was forged in the hard years when they were exiles from their respective countries. There's a compact among African leaders not to openly chide one another, regardless of transgressions and travesties within sovereign borders. For Western editorial writers to expect otherwise suggests unfamiliarity with the way much of Africa is governed.
The Times's editorial also suggests a link between Zimbabwe and South Africa in that foreign investors may penalize President Mbeki's country if he doesn't take action against Mr. Mugabe. That isn't the typical calculus of capitalist investors. They tend to go where the financial opportunities are, and there are plenty in South Africa (and in resource-rich Zimbabwe, too, for that matter). Human rights abuses, and violations of democratic principles, rarely figure in that calculus. Messrs. Mbeki and Mugabi understand that all too well.