Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.

 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate


On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.


RSS 2.0

Trade sanctions, dirty money and the children of the damned

By Jocelynne Scutt - posted Wednesday, 4 July 2007

In an interview with Tony Jones of the ABC’s LateLine, Mary Robinson, president of Oxfam, likened the situation in Zimbabwe to South Africa under apartheid, having “got so bad that we have to think of it in terms of something akin to the devastation … apartheid caused in South Africa”.

Yet she was undecided over whether or not Australia’s cricket team should go to Harare to play the Zimbabweans. “Maybe,” she said, “a sporting route is one way of tackling” the “huge human rights travesty … [with] the poorest blacks affected …”

Is there a similar conflict with the children of Zimbabwe’s leaders studying in Australia?


Some protest at this, saying they should be repatriated, their links with the Zimbabwean regime ruling them out from entry, even for study purposes. Yet just as, it seems, Mary Robinson believed Australian cricketers in Zimbabwe might, by their sporting presence, bring about change in the regime, could that possibility lie with educating Zimbabweans here?

Is a non-authoritarian ethos seeping back into Zimbabwe possible through interaction with Australian youth and in Australian tertiary institutions? Could human rights, the values of compassion, empathy, consideration and respect for human life filter in to the psyche of Robert Mugabe and his cohort, through attitudes learned, the ideas and ideals inculcated in their children through an Australian education?

At Cambridge in the 1970s, white students from South Africa noticeably recoiled when they observed black African students on Cambridge streets, in Cambridge pubs, in skiffs on the Cam, or walking along the Backs. White South African students cringed when they shared lecture theatres with their black African sisters and brothers, physically repulsed by their presence.

As a student observing this, I thought what an antidote it was to the white supremacist policies and practices of South Africa, for the white citizens to be obliged to share the space in this way, having to accept the equality of black South Africans, Kenyans, Ugandans and more. What better than to oblige the South Africans to accept a common humanity and equal rights, not white-superior rights, for their black college and classmates. Surely it would make a difference to their assumption of superiority - especially when black students excelled?

Does a parallel lie with Zimbabwean students studying here?

And what of the “Hitler’s children” argument - that they ought not to be, and cannot be, blamed for the sins of their parents? That just as the children of Hitler’s henchmen cannot bear the burden of responsibility for parents who condemned millions to concentration camps, hard-labour and the gas chambers, so Mugabe’s children cannot be blamed for the crimes committed against their fellow Zimbabweans?


Casting out children for the evil done by their parents is repugnant. Yet is this an answer to the receipt of fees paid out of funds stolen from Zimbabwe’s citizens, purloined and extorted? Is it an answer to the inclusion in our GDP of Zimbabwean blood money?

On May 17, 2007 at a doorstop interview, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Alexander Downer, was asked about Zimbabwe:

Journalist: Zimbabwe Information Minister (inaudible) has said Australia is a terrorist nation and accused John Howard of being a war criminal. What is your response to that?

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All

Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

2 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Dr Jocelynne A. Scutt is a Barrister and Human Rights Lawyer in Mellbourne and Sydney. Her web site is here. She is also chair of Women Worldwide Advancing Freedom and Dignity.

She is also Visiting Fellow, Lucy Cavendish College, University of Cambridge.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Jocelynne Scutt

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 2 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy