Zimbabwe vs England

Written by Bev Clarke

Friday, 14 March 2008

The hypocrisy in international cricket is mind boggling.

David Miliband, Britain’s Foreign Secretary has joined Flash Gordon in stating that Zimbabwe must not be allowed to tour England in the summer of 2009. Miliband is quoted as saying, “The situation in Zimbabwe is deeply concerning - I think bilateral cricket tours don’t send the right message about our concerns. This is something that needs to be discussed with the ECB and others.”

Now what if we substituted Zimbabwe for Pakistan in this argument?

As recently as July 2006 Pakistan was welcomed with open arms in the United Kingdom. Pakistan is variously described as repressive, violent and a dictatorship. The political opposition in Pakistan is either forced into exile, killed while campaigning, placed under house arrest or they have their rallies violently disrupted. If the England cricket team were scheduled to play in Pakistan it would be the fear of Monty and the gang getting in the way of a suicide bomber that would stop the tour. It wouldn’t be because England dislikes Mr Musharraf’s repressive regime.

Pakistan and Zimbabwe are probably as “bad” as each other. The difference is that Zimbabwe is a light weight in international cricket. Pakistan, on the other hand, with the backing of the Asian cricket heavy weights, would very quickly put England in its place if threatened with a boycott.

I’m completely astounded at the hypocrisy of the British government when it comes to sport and politics. Get your head around this - Britain wants to ban the Zimbabwean cricket team in an effort to send a strong message of rejection and criticism to Mugabe’s totalitarian regime. On the other hand the British Olympic Committee will insist that British athletes sign a gagging order prohibiting them on speaking out on political issues whilst participating in the Olympic Games so that they don’t offend the Chinese government’s sensibilities. Globally there is widespread condemnation of China’s poor human rights record. Olympic Watch cites several key areas of concern including freedom of speech, democratic opposition and torture/death penalty. Both the Zimbabwean and the Chinese regime are subject to strong criticism in these areas. Again, spot the difference. The British government stands accused of out and out hypocrisy and should be held accountable for their fair weather concern for justice. Clearly its a case of trade before fair play when it comes to the Olympic Games in China. Makes you wonder - if Zimbabwe was a strong trading partner of Britain whether Flash Gordon would be kissing Bob’s bum?

Personally I’ve been very supportive of a complete sporting and cultural boycott of Zimbabwe as a non-violent method of isolating the Mugabe regime and drawing attention to the abuse of human rights in this country. I’ve also participated in, and worked towards the boycott of cricket tours to Zimbabwe.

However I do think that its important to criticise Britain’s selective show of concern and their refusal to host the Zimbabwean cricket team.

(Bev Clark is a human rights activist and manages Zimbabwe's civic and human rights web site, www.kubatana.net. When she was a few years younger and more agile she played some social cricket in Harare being a much better bowler than batswoman.)