Almost all those who call for the departure of Comrade Mugabe are bound by the same argument of the precariousness of the state of affairs of the country, in terms of the suffering his people are enduring.

Then, there is also this uncharted issue of overstaying that some people tend to cling onto, although this is not quite a plausible point to bicker on. Regarding this last point, the common counter argument is that if the constitution provides for an unlimited term of office, so be it. Needless to say that there is absolutely no point arguing on that basis. And about the sufferings of Zimbabweans, have we ever asked who is behind it?

Anyway, if Comrade Mugabe’s departure means relieving Zimbabweans of their predicament, the noblest decision he can take today is to call it quits. This, in fact, is what would be expected of any leader who has their people at heart. No leader in their right mind would want to starve the people they are supposed to be serving. If the fate of the entire nation rests on one individual, the best decision is to do away with the latter in the best interest of the general populace.

Do not get us wrong, this is by no means an attempt to tow the line of the detractors of one of Africa’s most revered statesmen. It’s just that the situation in Zimbabwe is getting out of hand. We have arrived at a stage that warrants the involvement of institutions like the African Union.

Indeed, the root cause of the problem has already been exhaustively debated; and for the most part, the influential nature of the powerful Western media means that information that reaches the greater part of Africa is distorted; and, therefore, the heat has successfully been turned on Mugabe and his men. Guilty or not, they are responsible, as they are supposed to be in charge of the fate of the millions of Zimbabweans. However, the question still remains, how many people have attempted to dig through for the real cause of what Zimbabweans are going through? This might not be of any significance today, given the current situation, but it might help dictate our approach for an amicable resolution.

The African Union operates under a policy that prohibits it from interfering in the "internal" affairs of states. This has been exclusively responsible for its indifferent attitude to the boiling problem. Unfortunately, this has served as a license for external forces to influence it, setting the people up against one another.

The unfortunate announcement that the beleaguered opposition leader is withdrawing his candidature seems set to aggravate the whole issue. Already there is talk of taking the issue to the United Nations. The tone of international diplomacy has changed drastically.

Already the Mugabe government is being labeled as "illegal"; too heavy an expression for a government that was elected in one of the most democratic of manners.  Our worry, however, is that the only thing the UN is likely to resort to is to consider sanctions. But are sanctions the right idea for an already disturbed people?

Surely, the solution to Zimbabwe’s crisis is not Tvangirai. Nor is any decision that might be driven by the policy of anti-Mugabe, because anti-Mugabe means killing the spirit of African nationalism. And that Africans would never condone.