IT seems ironic that the countries that are so keen to meddle in the Middle East do nothing for countries where there is no chance of political or financial renumeration.

This morning I was listening to the results of a survey on Radio 4 where the BBC had asked Iraqis their opinion on the state of their country post Allied invasion. Sorry, emancipation.

Unsurprisingly they were none too happy with the state of their homeland, and tales of friends, colleagues, neighbours and family who have lost their lives thanks to street fighting and suicide bombers.

The mess in Iraq has muddied the waters even further when it comes to the sticky subject of intervention. Some people believe that we shouldn’t be so arrogant as to try and solve all the world’s problems, particularly when we have so many of our own. Others say that as members of the UN, and an example to the world, it is up to countries like England and America to do their utmost to maintain peace and help people across the world live lives free of fear and persecution.

Which brings me to the subject I really want to talk about, but which has received less attention than the oil wealthy Middle East.

In Zimbabwe, opposition politicians, anyone, in fact, who tries to speak out against Robert Mugabe, lives in fear of the state police.

But for the past 10 days the situation in the country has become even more dire.

The current situation was exacerbated by the news that on March 9 - less than two weeks ago - the Zimbabwean central statistical office announced that inflation was at 1,700 per cent.

Two days later, two prominent members of the opposition party The Movement For Democratic Change were arrested and beaten by police following a public meeting.

President Mugabe said that his police (and have no doubt, they are his ) have “a right to bash”, and bashing is exactly what they have been doing.

Mugabe justifies his actions by claiming that the MDC is a puppet of Britain, and if they get into power they will return land to white farmers that was forcibly taken from them.

In an already complicated situation, Mugabe is a live wire, and while plenty of countries have condemned his behaviour, none seem willing to act against him.
Perhaps this is for fear of inflaming the tense situation and causing more needless deaths. Or perhaps it is because Zimbabwe is broke, weak and resource-poor - there is absolutely nothing to be gained from having them on “our side.”

Nothing, that is, but the knowledge that we could prevent hundred, probably thousands, of needless deaths.

The British Government has long been reluctant to involve itself in the political situation in Africa.

While an untimely sneeze in the Middle east will see hordes of ambassadors, diplomats and, quite possibly, troops hurtle out to the desert, we can turn a blind eye to mass genocide in Africa - were it not for the film Hotel Rwanda, most of the country would probably remain ignorant about the 1994 mass murder of Tutsis and moderate Hutus by two extremist Hutu groups.

Zimbabwe is, apparently, on the edge of collapse. But if Mugabe is going down, he will undoubtedly try and take the rest of the country with him - he isn’t a man to make a quiet exit.

The UN needs to act if they are to maintain their self-decreed position as the world’s peacekeepers.

And the British government should make sure that they are thinking about people, not poundsigns, when they decide how they want to be remembered in Zimbabwean history.